The Saab Network Now Mailing List FAQ
| |
|
[ Prev by Date ] Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
Re: Buying Advice: Used 1990-92 9000
Posted by John Edward Miller (more from John Edward Miller) on Wed, 17 Nov 1999 13:19:21
In Reply to: Buying Advice: Used 1990-92 9000, Masur, Joshua M, Tue, 16 Nov 1999 14:26:05
> engine. As I understand it, 1990 saw the introduction of direct fuel
> injection and a new turbo; 1991 (or 1990.5?) brought the 2.3; and 1992
> brought Trionic. (Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of these dates.)
'Direct fuel injection'? Do you mean direct ignition?
Trionic did not come along until at least '93 ('94?) Our '92 9000T auto
5-door is still LH 2.4.2.
'92 Turbos at least got traction control and electronic 'drive-by-wire'
throttles - some feel they're troublesome, ours had some glitches early on
but has been fine for the past 80K miles.
The auto cars got throttle-only traction control, the 5-speeds got real
Bosch ASR with brake application. Unless you live where it gets icy, the
throttle-only TCS is not particularly useful and can be intrusive
(unpleasant to have it back off the throttle just because you accelerated
over a wet crosswalk stripe.) The ASR setup is far more effective but also
more complex.
The '92 Turbo hatches were what I refer to as 'pre-Aeros' - they had 16x6.5
3-spoke wheels, 205/50-16 tires, slightly tighter suspension, but not the
Aero seats. They do ride more harshly, but the steering response is great.
The CD (sedan) models did not get the 16' wheels.
There are comparatively few brands of 205/50-16 tire available (though a
quick search at Tire Rack shows more than I expected) - ours now has PZeros
and likes them a lot (they ride better than Yoko AVS Intermediates and
stick far better than anything else we've ever had on the car.) You will
pay $140/tire for something decent (e.g. PZeros, P7000s, AVS
Intermediates.) The 9000s through '92 had very small front fenderwells -
205/55-16 will *not* fit - they will cut themselves to ribbons on the
fender-lip molding mounting studs, and if you trim the studs back they will
still rub.
'92s had a little extra structural reinforcement in the floorpan and rear
shock-tower areas. There are a few detail differences between '91 and '92
- easiest to spot from the outside are the fender-lip moldings ('91s are a
bigger, molded piece; '92 had a flat strip.)
Did '91s get glass moonroofs? By '92 the 5-door cars got steel to save $.
> What about personal experiences with the variations, especially the 2.3
> vs. 2.0 in turbo and normal configurations, and 5spd vs. auto (in terms of
> reliability/longevity more than the personal choice of stick vs auto)?
The 2.3 turbos - auto or manual - are amazingly quick off the line -
they're torque motors, not high-RPM screamers (6000 RPM redline) though
they're smooth all the way up.
The auto cars are geared pretty short by modern standards - 3000 RPM no39sdcx6spamx782
70mph, or redline at the car's nominal 140mph top speed. Our 540i is
turning 2000 RPM at that speed. The later Aeros were geared taller and had
taller tires, so are slower off the line. Due to short gearing and a lot
of time spent at 80mph+ ours averages 21.5mpg (according to the onboard
computer) and has never topped 23mpg.
The 2.0 turbo automatics are slugs.
The 2.3 automatics shake a lot at idle in gear, despite the balance shafts.
I know this cost Saab a lot of buyers. The ZF automatic is just not a very
smooth device - part-throttle downshifts are fairly harsh, and lifting
during an upshift can sometimes result in a nasty 'thump'. Interestingly,
this latter characteristic is still there in our ZF-slushbox-equipped '98
BMW 540i...
The ZF autos are also reputed to be fragile but ours is closing in on 120K
miles (and our car has the old Group 6 APC/LH tweaks, and we do not drive
it gently) without incident thus far.
Ours has had most of the usual failures (crank damper, DI cassette, cooling
fan resistor, thermoswitch, early TCS glitches) but overall it's cost less
to get to 120K miles than most everything else we've owned (only exception
is an '88 Celica.)
Conventional wisdom says buy the '91 to avoid the TCS and buy a 5-speed to
avoid the ZF automatic. Were I buying another I probably would, or maybe a
'92 5-speed, largely so I could put a Quaife diff in it ($1600 or so, plus
installation, but a wondrous piece of hardware.)
IMO a perfect 9000 would be the '91-92 5-door body style (which I like
quite a bit better than the later fat-rump hatch design), manual transaxle
w/Quaife, but with the '93-up bigger fender wells and Aero seats (when
going from our 540i w/the sport seats to the comparatively flat Saab seats,
I really miss the support of the Bimmer's seats.)
John.
Posts in this Thread:
StateOfNine.com
 |
SaabClub.com
 |
Jak Stoll Performance
 |
M Car Covers
 |
Ad Available
 |
  
This is a moderated FAQ - Posting is a privilege, not a right.
Unsolicited commercial postings are not allowed (no Spam). Please, no For Sale or Wanted postings, SERIOUSLY.
Classifieds are to be listed in The Saab Network Classifieds pages.
This is a problem solving forum for over 250,000 Saab owners, so expect to see
problems discussed here even though our cars are generally very reliable. This is not an anything goes
type of forum. TSN has been a moderated forum since 1988. For usage guidelines, see the
TSN Mission and Purpose Page. Please remember that you are
not anonymous
Your address is: 18.117.232.150 - Using Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; ClaudeBot/1.0; +claudebot@anthropic.com) - Logged.
|
