1985-1998 [Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
First off, the 2.0 16V engine is every bit as durable (many would say even more so) as the 2.3l. Many of them make it to 300k without ever being opened up, 112k is truly a baby. Only thing to really watch out for, is to make sure it has the updated chain tensioner. I believe these were standard since '88, so this car should have it.
As to the automatic, 50k is a bit low unless it was abused, but it is quite typical for them to last in the 100k-120k mile range. So, if this is the original one, expect it to be going out soon, I'd give it maybe another 30k max. Replacement cost can be $2300-3000 or so.
As for the turbo - one isn't more good than the other. The older turbo, a Garrett T3, is actually bigger than the newer one. This gives it a longer spool up time (more lag) than the new turbo, but also means it can flow more air at it's maximum efficiency, so theoretically, you could upgrade a 2.0l turbo farther than a 2.3l turbo, on the stock turbocharger, compared to stock output. My car has been dyno'd with 196 HP at the wheels, which is roughly 60 more HP than stock, and I'm still on the stock turbo.
The two major differences between the 2.0l and 2.3l engine is the point in the RPM range where you get full torque and boost, and the overall smoothness of the engine. The 2.3l reaches max torque under 2000 rpm, 2.0l (before upgrading!) makes you wait until 3000. The 2.3l has balance shafts, which makes it overall a much smoother and more transparent engine.
Hope this helps,
Aaron Gilbert
1987 9000T 264k miles (not on the original engine or trans)
posted by 207.202.17...
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.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
