Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 21:27:22 GMT From: Paul Halliday <pjghnospamyonder.co.uk> Subject: Re: Lifetime of Saab
in article 4561f5c9$0$2446$db0fefd9nospam.zen.co.uk, DervMan at thedervmannospaml.com wrote on 20/11/2006 18:16: > "johannes" <johsnospamnospam-efitter.com> wrote in message > news:4560BC6F.A3ED4AC7nospamnospam-efitter.com... >> >> >> DervMan wrote: >>> >>> "john" <jsmith1456nospamo.com> wrote in message >>> news:yj08h.56259$r4.1932nospamfe3-gui.ntli.net... >>>> >>>> "Greg Farris" <farrisnospam.org> wrote in message >>>> news:ejpt5n$8tc$1nospamoron.nerim.net... >>>>> In article <1163823344.249474.46450nospam2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, >>>>> smaartaassaabrnospaml.com says... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What country, Finland, Sweden? When was it retired from the police? >>>>>> >>>>>> If it is in good shape then it is. The engines last forever. . . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No they don't. >>>>> SAAB engines are no different from other engines in the category, and >>>>> are >>>>> subject to the same wear and failure modes as their counterparts. If >>>>> anything, >>>>> the turbocharged models run at typically higher IMEP and specific >>>>> output, >>>>> and >>>>> should thus be subject to greater wear. >>>>> >>>>> I believe the reason behind the SAAB reputation for longevity is the >>>>> pride in >>>>> ownership that leads many owners to take excellent care of them, and >>>>> as >>>>> well to >>>>> boast of their achievements in long-lasting reliability. After all, >>>>> the >>>>> 96 >>>>> generation already had a reputation for fantastic longevity, yet they >>>>> had >>>>> a >>>>> demonstrably inferior body design, leading to massive rust problems, >>>>> and >>>>> their >>>>> engine was nothing other than a Ford V4, the same as used in the >>>>> Taurus >>>>> models, >>>>> which did not benefit from any particular cult reputation. The >>>>> gearboxes >>>>> were >>>>> notoriously short-lived, a tradition SAAB has unhappily managed to >>>>> perpetuate >>>>> through the model-years! >>>>> >>>> >>>> Well OK. volvo and saab were very solid long lasting vehicles in the >>>> 70's >>>> compared to most stuff. especially when the alternative was english or >>>> italian... >>>> >>>> If you bought one new you could expect 15 years of decent >>>> motoring....with a Fiat you'd be getting the filler out after 5.... >>> >>> Months in many cases. >> >> Dunno, FIAT also uses galvanised rust free bodies these days. > > We're discussing old ones, though, innit? > >> Fiats may >> brake down from mechanical reasons, however. My Croma (1987) was quite >> durable for 10 years. But window frames rusted and a clutch repair seems >> impossible to get right, Possibly due to incompetent main dealership. >> (Competent servicing means a lot for durability). Interior plastics was >> crappy as it warped and rattled, speedo and odometer stopped working. > > By the same token my Dad bought a Fiat in '75 about two weeks after I was > bought. Said it was a great engine, strange handling, but fell apart inside > a couple of years. FIATs have come a long way since those dark days ... Our '99 Punto Sporting just refuses to do anything wrong or show signs of failing. True, it's getting on a little now but we've done nothing but normal maintenance and it's bailed us out a couple of times when the old SAAB has been a little reluctant :) That said, our son has one of those MK2 Selespeed time bombs (you know, with the Ferrari paddles) :( On the face of it, it seems okay, but it's going to go horribly wrong one day ... Paul 1989 900 Turbo S http://saab.go.dyndns.org/
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
