The Saab Network Now Mailing List FAQ
| |
|
[ Prev by Date ] [ Next by Date ] Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
RE: 87 900T Vs. 87 9kT
Posted by Swede Boy (more from Swede Boy) on Tue, 11 Apr 2000 09:27:15
In Reply to: 87 900T Vs. 87 9kT, Joe Krepps, Sat, 8 Apr 2000 19:41:33
as far as a few points on the 9000 vs 900...
it was written:
>900T's with 5 speeds eat transmi$$ions.
so do 9000's. i certainly wouldnt look to buy a 9000 to escape the plague
of SAAB transmissions. (Thank god airplanes dont need transmissions, or
else SAAB would never have it passed airplanes to cars.) My 9000 is working
on its third transmission and I come across at least two a month that need
a transmsission.
i cant believe that the 900 holds as much as the 9000 in back. I guess the
measurements in cubic feet are close, but the 9000 is so much wider , isnt
it ? I had (separately ) a fridge and a little couch in the back of my
9000. i think because of the window's angle, there is an advantage for
being able to carry things that are taller.
i have never driven a classic 900 that is as fast as the 9000 T 5 speeds of
1986, 1987. i think it's the gearing. and really, the 9000 in these years
isnt really that heavy of a car.
as well, i love my 9000 bc it is easy to do routine maintenance. when i
bought it, i had NO mechanical ability. however, because of the
maintenance-friendly arrangement of most basic components under the hood, it
was easy for me to learn. i mean basic things like spark plugs, air
cleaner, fuel filter, ignition cap and rotor, raditor flush, thermostat
change, oil change, brakes. In more general terms, there is also a fair
amount of room to reach components (like hoses, wires, even the transmission
fluid opening). I think most of these items are a lot harder to reach/work
on/manipulate in the 900. Sometimes you may have to move a things or two
out of the way, but i believe SAAB worked hard to make the 9000 much easier
to work on than the 900.
and space inside the car is not comparable. sit in the back seat of a 900
and then of a 9000. the 9000 back seat has more space then the pontiac
bonneville and the toyota avalon...models that are much bigger. if you
carry a few people with you (even three people in the back seat), the 9000
is much nicer.
another point is safety. i think the 9000 is more advanced in its
protection of occupants. certainly it is bigger and there is
much more survival space between you and the inside of the car. you simply
sit farther away from points that could become secondary points of impact
(i.e., points in the car *U* hit/bounce off).
ofcourse if you are buckled in, it is most unlikely that you will be
slamming into anything in any SAAB...but in a massive accident, being
farther from the winshield, roof pillars, doors, etc. can be an advantage.
the 900 must be one of the strongest cars ever built, but the 9000
incorporates newer design elements... like much stronger sides and thicker
doors that put much more soft padding between you and the metal; or like the
seat belt pyrotechnic pre-tensioners in front. im sure SAAB took advantage
of the opportunity to use other newer safety elements when they had a chance
to build their first new car since the 900 evolved many years before.
You know, the 9000 has the lowest fatality rate of cars measured in the USA
in the last ten years, EXCEPT for the volvo 240. and think about that: how
many volvo 240's of the last ten years can go 138 mph (like my 9000 ;-)...in
other words, its a lot easier to power yourself into trouble in the 9000 and
it *STILL* comes out quite nearly as safe as the 240, which probably has
many more less aggressive drivers.
(in europe, SAAB used to advertise 'VOLVO IS A NICE CAR, BUT WHY NOT TRY
SOMETHING SAFER. saab 9000' because volvo stopped making the 240, saab
could say it made the car with the lowest fatality rate.)
the 900 is great, but i think the 9000 is a more modern car in many ways.
it should be, because it is a much newer design...but maybe some of us
prefer the 900 for its other virtues, but not me.
the 900 looks way cool, but the 9000's other virtues outweigh the looks for
me.
jay
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Posts in this Thread:
- 87 900T Vs. 87 9kT, Joe Krepps, Sat, 8 Apr 2000 19:41:33
- Re: 87 900T Vs. 87 9kT, Joe Krepps, Tue, 11 Apr 2000 21:44:41
- Re: 87 900T Vs. 87 9kt, David Prantl, Tue, 11 Apr 2000 12:13:53
- RE: 87 900T Vs. 87 9kT, Swede Boy, Tue, 11 Apr 2000 09:27:15
- RE: 87 900T Vs. 87 9kT, Bonds, John, Mon, 10 Apr 2000 12:06:23
- Re: 87 900T Vs. 87 9kT, Derek Shaffer, Sun, 9 Apr 2000 09:01:41
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: 18.221.211.66 - Using Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; ClaudeBot/1.0; +claudebot@anthropic.com) - Logged.
|
