 |
|
|
[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
A few basic comments:
* We're talking about a 2.0 liter engine in a 4/5 seater saloon car weighing somewhere between 2,800-3,000 lbs. That fact alone alters the whole game. Big, lazy engines make a happy couple with automatics. Small, hardworking ones do not.
* The B-W three speed automatic dates back from the Sixties and was never meant to be installed in something like a Saab turbo. Problem is, there never was any room for a more modern, electronically-controlled, four-speed slushbox - preferably with a lock up on top gear- given the drivetrain configuration in a c900. My feeling is: if you gotta go with an auto, think 9K or 9-3/9-5.
* The particular B-W unit used in the c900 can take less torque than any c900 manual gearbox. Back in the Eighties, we did not get the 16vT with an automatic because Saab found the 175 hp/273 Nm of Euro-spec, non-catalyst 900T16's was too much for the 'box to take. Reasons: see above. Sorry.
* Comparing dragsters to a street Saab is like comparing apples and oranges, really. Although some on this board try to make a drag racer out of their Saab ;-) Most people who take their driving seriously over here would agree an auto detracts from fully experiencing a good engine. Think of it as a big rubber band connecting your engine and the front wheels. With a manual box, you have so much more control over the drivetrain. I see it this way: when you're entering a bend, would you depress the clutch pedal and _coast_ into it? Well, that's what an auto does as soon as you lift the throttle. Then you give it some power coming _out_ of the bend, at first the engine doesn't feel like reacting at all (so you're likely to poot your foot down a bit more), then it goes into kick down. Hopefully the course wasn't wet, slippery, tightening or off-camber the very moment your box decided to drop a cog... ;-)
Modern, computer-controlled, 'adaptive' automatics have come a long way in being more empathic towards the driver (although IME they still get confused rather quickly in some cases). Sadly, none of these things apply to anything you will likely get to work in a c900. I'd say the effort would be more wisely applied to improving the shift quality of manual c900's - which, if everything is how it's supposed to be, not half as bad as hearsay will have it. Of 200 new cars I've driven over the past three years, only a handful were better in this respect than both of my c900T's. Notchy, yes. Vague or baulky, no. They need a firm hand and getting into reverse can be a chore, but the shift throws themselves are relatively short and precise.
Standard disclaimers apply :-)
Good Luck,
Eric
posted by 213.116.116....
, Sun, 30 Dec 2001 23:14:55
, Sun, 30 Dec 2001 18:43:03, Sun, 30 Dec 2001 12:13:38
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
