Date: 27 Jun 1998 00:03:37 GMT From: meliadornopsamract.com (Adam Steele) Subject: Re: GM vs Saab
In article <3592B277.5902nopsamnet>, Justin VanAbrahams <jvanabranopsamnet> wrote: >Sounds like a line to me... But I *would* be cautious of a '95 Saab >whether convertible or not... '95 was *much* better than '94 in terms >of getting bugs worked out of the new design, but they still weren't >perfect... > >Also, I wouldn't screw around with an S model at all. The convertibles >(especially the 1994 and earlier ones) weigh well over 3000 pounds, >and a non-turbo engine doesn't do so well moving that kind of weight >around... My wife (before she was my wife) had a '94 900 SE. Before handing it back to her company it had 5 recall notices (we missed the last one and ended up here in Chicago, but that is another story). The 900 SE, although a very nice car, had barely enough power with the normally aspirated six. Steer clear of the S, a normally aspirated four. We just recently purchased a 9-5. Couldn't be more pleased. The manual turbo four is a pleasure to drive, although at the dealer where I got the 9-5 the seem to be having a problem getting rid of the other manual. Everyone seems to want an automatic - that's too bad. I hope SAAB has success with this car, but I wonder if it won't turn out like the Mac (great computer, but not popular with the herd). Adam -- ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ Adam Steele meliadornopsamract.com (Internet) 312-987-9714
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |