I worked at Saab dealers from 1988 to 2002 as a sales manager. and trainer. I personally sold, new and used, many, many thousands of Saabs, and personally owned 11, all old type 900s, all turbos. The Saabs of that era were about as fragile as anvils, absurdly strong and safe, and a car that, if driven properly, startlingly guick, particularly on bad roads/rain/snow..I would go out on stormy days looking for BMW fans to torment.... Not throwing shade...if new style Saabs please you, by all means enjoy them.
Not me, they would just be as disappointing as all other modern cars. This way Saab lives in our memories, unsullied by the realities of modern car design. Just imagine it, some wide fat ass and high suv-esque monstrosity with loads of screens and crap in it... No thanks I don't want that.
I have owned 2 Saab 900 Turbo's 16v S models - a hatchback with whale tail and a 2 door hardtop and they were both fantastic - especially the 2 door that I had from 9000 miles. The reason I bought my first one was from following one in an XR3i and getting blown away when the Saab driver put his foot down! The way the turbo lagged was great! Miss them both to this day! Only sold the last one to buy a 9000 when the kids came along - nothing like the 900!
I love the fact that for so many years Saab went their own way. Back in the mid 80s when I was working for a leasing company there was a certain section of the blue chip customer driver population that would choose this above an E30, Audi 80 or even Merc. Understated, classy without being showy, superbly built and safe, the appeal is clear!
Hell yes! I’m a mechanic in Australian & apart from some rust issues. they were built & over engineered in a Swedish way. Such a shame they don’t exist anymore
I've owned SAABs for 30 years and drive a convertible similar to the one here. I use it every day during the summer, weather permitting. Allow me a couple of comments: 2:58: Many upmarket cars had this style of cruise control. It is a vacuum operated Heath Robinson design, but works well - if it works at all. If it doesn't, fault tracing can be a lot of fun. 5:36 make that a "triple layered" convertible top. It's not as quiet as the steel roof ones, but the temperature insulation is just as good, if not better. 6:45 You don't need a seat belt butler. You get used to reaching for the seat belt in no time. 7:00 Scuttle shake: There is no denying it. The old 900 does it a lot. It's something that one must simply accept. 7:25 SAAB had to abandon the old Triumph engine, it wasn't nearly good enough. Saab own design may be similar in layout, but otherwise, there is NO comparison at all... 7:30 SAAB 900 turbo engines put out between 145 and 185 horsepower (PS), depending on configuration. 9:30. I absolutely do NOT agree. Are the newer ones better than the old SAAB's? Perhaps. Depends on how you compare them: Against each other directly, or against the competition of their day. Only the latter is a fair fight. Even so, while the newer may be better overall, the old car fights back when it comes to driving pleasure and roadholding. The newer ones are bland, at best. At worst, they are terrible. Ever try a 1994-1998 900? Yikes. Having had about 40 SAABs of nearly all models, I do not like the newer ones. You get all the OPEL disadvantages of GM parts without the benefits. What I mean is: Back in it's day, the 900 - even though it was an old design rooted in the 1960's - offered something that the other brands didn't have. When the 9-3 and 9-5's were new, SAAB was simply behind the contemporary competition in so many ways, and no longer offered any true personality to compensate. That includes the NG 9-5. I've driven a few, and it simply wasn't good enough, compared to other luxury cars in 2010-11. You'd want to try a 1992-1993 SAAB 900 Turbo (but not the low pressure one). Three door hatchback. Try that for roadholding 😀 It gives a 1998.2010 9-5 something to think about...
I had a 900 T16S convertible with the Aero body kit for 7 years, used it as a daily driver and towed a Caravan with it, they are built from girders and have a certain feeling of solidity which I bloody love, too! The only criticism of mine was, being an auto, it sometimes felt as if it wasn't quick enough off the line at roundabouts etc because of the turbo lag, but when it picked up, it brought a smile every time! Lovely car, I only sold it because it was coming up to 200k miles and I told myself its value would drop, so I bought a GM 900 V6, which I kept for another 7 years, before buying a Viggen, which I kept for... another 7 years! Loved them all, still own a 9-5 Aero estate (my 3rd) can't think what I would rather have except maybe a lower mileage Saab! Thanks for the video!
Test drove a friend's 1994 or 1995 2.3 liter turbo 9000 CSE hatchback/liftback years ago in the US. It was much better than I expected. I can imagine it must be a nice performance sedan back in the day. SAAB really had its style and character.
The 2001 SAAB 9-5 we had when I was a teen was really good. Before that my parents had a 1990 Volvo 740. The upgrade was like night and day. Eventually they got a 2007 V50 but the SAAB was the best.
Exactly all the things you listed end of the video are some of the important reasons why a car can be defined worse or better than another. Bad materials that don’t last or give issues bring a person away from that car. Unfortunately GM was like Stellantis nowadays: it kills what it touches.
Yeah it's true. But on the positive side for the newer cars - they are safer and have modern tech that is really useful. And they actually have a few more interesting Saab-like quirks that even the old cars don't have.
Yes. Just don’t forget to put back the insulator after you reinstall the battery. It keeps Mr Garrett the turbo from turning the battery into a blob of molten wax.
Great video again! I know it's not as simple as that, but I've often toyed with an idea that SAAB might still be in business had they built a modern retro coupe in style of the old 96. ;-)
The last generation of 9 3 SAABs are brilliant cars. I own two of them, a low milage 9 3 aero convertible with the 2.8 turbo V6 and a Sedan TTID diesel. I’ve owned two 900 turbos in the past. Fantastic cars for its time but of course they are inferior tho the last 9 3 gen. The latter was up to 80% rebuild from its doner Opel/Vaxhall doner vehicles. The best car of this generation of European vehicles.
I bet I would like to have car like this. I have an old MB CLK Cabrio and it's not that great car to drive either, but quite fun still cruising around top down. Really nice review as well.
Original "Old'' SAAB's are the best by a country mile! And are in reality the only SAAB's!! Following the absolute travesty of the GM takeover they became badged over Vauxhalls, I owned one a GM 93 for 14 years! Yes it took me that long to get over that SAAB Image!!!
I got used 9000 3 years ago, I thought I just wanted to know what it's like, I was very skeptic about it at first. But the more I drive it, the more I fixed stuffs and know the car more, the more I love it, despite its sluggish handling by today's standard, it's so comfortable, has enough power and always feel in control when driving. This combination of characteristic is unusual, only 80s-90s Saab do this. The 900 is something I really wanted to try too, but there are so few of them in my country it is so expensive. 9000 is still cheap, for now.
The Saab 900 turbo in the video has the same specs as one someone owns in my town (besides the steering wheel being on the other side), super nice looking car but I’ve only seen it parked in a restaurant parking lot and never driving
Hey mate, my CLK Bro in the UK 😆 I don't know an awful lot about SAABs, only what I've seen on Wheeler Dealers. But man am I a sucker for electric antennas and interior courtesy lighting, so an instant hit with me. My boss had a SAAB convertible like this one for years. She complained a bit about parts and maintenance, plus when the electric top started playing up, she traded it :( But this is Australia JJ, so maybe she just didn't have a decent service shop to turn to. I gotta ask... how does the SAAB compare to your CLK? I know its apples and oranges, but I'm curious. Another cracking video my friend! I watch everything you produce, you're a legend!! When you come out to OZ, I have five cars for you to review... just sayin!!
Hi Mark, CLK Bro 😄 As you say, apples and oranges! I couldn't compare the 900 Turbo to the CLK really as they're from totally different generations. But what I can tell you is the 900 Turbo is faster than the 200 Kompressor 😂 (my 163hp version, 184hp might fare better) The later 9-3 convertible is more comparable to the CLK and I like them both and would be happy with either. They had both solved the scuttle shake problem by then! The SAAB was a bit more affordable when they were new, but the interior of the Merc is of a higher quality and you get rear wheel drive. But with the SAAB you get all the cool quirks (although the CLK is not without its own quirks to be fair). I suspect it's even harder to source bits in Aus vs Europe or the US! I'll be sure to message you if I ever make it to Aus :)
@@JJonCars Awesome analogy and yes I did hear about the scuttle shake, but didn't realise they'd solved it 👌The rear wheel drive is a biggie for me - not sure why, it just "feels" better. The style of the SAAB is cool though and I think they will be collectable in great condition. That was a very nice example you reviewed!
I remember when I were a lad working in a local bank and we had a customer that got a loan for a Saab Turbo of some sort. All the guys there were insanely jealous, me included. He pulled into the bank car park in it one day and I swear about 6 of us swarmed around it like ants in honey. Ridiculous really but these were the days when your Dad drove about in a Cortina or at best a Sierra or Vauxhall Cavalier.
My parents owned Saab's from the early 70's up to the late 90's. In early '95 my Mum bought a new GM 900 2.0 S 3dr (the first GM Saab). It was bloody awful, a real disappointment. It felt very 'dead' to drive as far as ride, handling & steering were concerned, along with poor fuel consumption. It was replaced by an Audi A3 a couple of years later. However through my used car business I have since owned a few later GM Saab's ranging from 1995 to 2007. The impression I get is one of steady improvement throughout that period, as though Saab's engineers rebelled against GM's accountants, which they were right to do. Last year I had a 2007 'Dame Edna' 9-5 2.3t auto saloon. This came not long after a 'old Saab' '92 900 turbo 16v auto 4dr sedan. Both were exceptional low mileage examples and it made for an interesting comparison as they were both medium output turbo automatic turbo sedans that would have occupied the same position in the model line up. I thought the 9-5 might be a let down after the 900 but it wasn't, it felt like a natural progression from the 900. The ergonomics and dashboard design were typically Saab (excellent) and the seats were the best I have ever sat in, and I've owned many exec and luxury cars. The engine was a traditional Saab 4 pot and power delivery was exactly like the 900's albeit there was more of it (180 bhp v 160 bhp) with strong mid range performance and the auto box was 6 speed rather than 3. The only noticeable negative was the interior plastics were nowhere near as good as the 900 (early 9-5's are better in this respect) and you always got the impression that the steel was not as thick as the early Saab. Both of these cars were great and I would happily use either. It's a shame that I owned these cars about 2 weeks apart from each other as a back to back comparison would have made for a very interesting video on this channel.
Kudos to your parents mate! I need to try one of the early GM cars. My dad had a 1996 900 for a short while, a cheap runaround at the time but I liked it as it was so different. If you do get any SAABs in do let me know, cheers Zak :D
The trouble with the new generation Saabs is they do not have that timeless style of the OG Saabs nor the quality, the Saab 900 is simply a masterpiece and very iconic and also a great driver's car, I grin from ear to ear every time I drive my old Saabs. such a great loss for the evolution of the car industry!
In the early 90’s, my boss at the time had an identical 900 Turbo Convertible which I lusted after. He once took me to a meeting in it and whilst it seemed to go like stink, the scuttle shake was off the scale. Never meet your heroes 😢
After daily driving my 900 turbo between May and October (put it away before the hated road salt makes an appearance) I definitely have to catch myself from putting the keys down the center console instead of the opposite.
I had two og 9-5 cars, a 2.0 SE and then an Aero. Bought them as a safe family car. Had a serious RTA back in 2008 in the Aero (I was totally not at fault) and my wife and my 2 children got out of the car with not so much as a bruise. All the emergency crews attending remarked on how safe Saabs were, and they should know. It took six weeks to repair my Aero, but I did have a supposedly like-for-like courtesy car deal with my insurance brokers. The car they came up with was a six month old Mercedes C class Avantgarde diesel. Very nice, but just goes to show that Saabs of the era were held in high regard as being quality cars.
They are safer beyond the mere safety star ratings I believe, as they were tested in real scenarios. Got to love Saab for that, and I'm really pleased to hear it saved you and your family.
@@JJonCars There is the Top Gear episode where they dropped a BMW and a Saab on their roof to test the survivability of the occupants. It was no contest.
I'd suggest the convertible (regardless of engine) was only the most desirable Saab of the 80's if you were more interested in cruising and/or posing than driving. The convertible lost way too much structural rigidity for it to be otherwise. As a drivers car, the 2 door T16S with the later smaller turbo (same power, less lag) was the most desirable because it had the stiffest body and was the lightest. Are the old cars better than the newer ones?. Depends on what you want from a car, but IMO yes, emphatically so. I worked at a Saab dealer when the first GM 900's first appeared and I didn't think they were a patch on the older ones.
You said it yourself in the video. With the classic 900, it was completely individual, there was nothing else built like it. Now that has its good and bad points obviously but, when G.M took over, and the G.M 900 and later the 9-3 took the place of the 900, they were built in the same way as everything else. They stopped being Saabs and instead became Saab flavoured cars. Again, that has its good and bad points but purists will argue that the true individuality faded. The worst thing that happened was the intoxicating exhaust note of the 900 turbo, disappeared completely. That was little short of criminal. Those 900 turbos sounded absolutely wonderful. But even I will admit that from a convertible standpoint, the easiest car to live with and the ‘nicest place to sit’ was in the mk1 9-3 convertible. So it really is swings and roundabouts. However, the two best cars Saab ever built were the 1985 900 turbo 16 valve ‘S’ and the 1998 9000 Aero. Those two cars sum up Saab for me. But it’s the 85 t16s which I consider my favourite car in the world. Nothing else looks like it, drives like it, feels like it, smells like it and sounds like it. They’re bloody wonderful.
This looks like it was cut from a different cloth than the newer Saabs. Not to take anything away from the newer Saabs (which I don't know very well), but this one felt especially solid and full of character.
I owned C-plate '86 turbo 16S 3-door and G-plate '89 T16S convertible. The convertible is far too wobbly. You will notice quite severe scuttle shake. The 3-door, however, was fantastic and went like stink. You could also get a massive amout in the boot.
I would love to be able to afford a "proper" Saab but sadly I can't justify the cost. I've owned my 2010 Tid Sportwagon for six years and i cost me £2250 including a new belt and water pump. Its now done 190k miles and I've replaced brake calipers, discs and pads, springs, drop links, ARB bushes and the clutch which were all relatively inexpensive bits, even the Brembo discs and pads. One thing though, the interior is rock solid, lovely black leather which show zero signs of wear and all of the buttons are legible and work. The handling is good and the engine pulls very well (in fact I think it may have been mapped by a previous owner). If people genuinely believe these cars to be crap because they are Vauxhalls, I wonder if they've just had a bad experience with a lemon, because my sons 2006 Tid convertible is just as good, apart from the handling and performance. Still would love a 900 though.
The gm ones are still built in sweden in the same factory, not a vauxhall ,solid cars and would rather be in a crash in a mk 2 saab convertible than an old one ,check out the ncap side inpact ,stronger than saloons plus they drive great
saab has to be the only company that managed to make gm products such as cavalier and vectra rival bmw in the market. Even if not as good dynamically. Had a 99 93 convertible and a 05 93 both were great felt special.
Yes, great point :) People see it as Saab being downgraded by GM, but really it was the inverse - Saab were an upgrade of GM - to go up against much more premium brands.
Meh, pluses and minuses. I had over the years two classic 900 Turbos, a convertible and a 3dr, an NG900SET 3dr, two 9-5 wagons, and a 9-3 SportCombi. The newer they were, the more reliable they were, and it wasn't even close. The newer ones were FAR more rust resistant too. The NG900 had, IMHO, the highest quality interior though. Better materials than what came before or came after, if not nearly the cargo area of the C900 3dr, more front seat room. The worst interior was the 9-3SC - too plasticy and obvious cost-cutting, plus it was an '08 with the GM stereo which just looked out of place even if the functionality was great. The C900Ts were FUN to drive, but they also were noisy and didn't ride particularly smoothly. They were also by far the slowest (though with the old-school turbo lag they FEEL fast), with only 160hp vs. 205 for the NG, 200 and 250 for the 9-5s (V6T and Aero), and 220hp for the 9-3. The two 9-5s were automatics, the rest manuals. The 6spd 9-3 was certainly overall the fastest over the road - the best handling and not much slower than the Aero automatic. Ease of working on them varied wildly depending on what you had to do. Some things are really easy on the C900, some things suck. Same with the newer ones - but the newer ones needed less doing over the miles. BOTH C900Ts had transmission failures at relatively young ages - 120K for one, 170K for the other. Transmissions are the Achilles heel of the C900, especially the turbos. No engine issues with any of them. All are fine cars, really just a matter of taste. Good C900s are hard to come by and EXPENSIVE in the States at this point - CRAZY expensive. And at this point, the newest of them are 30 years old - they all have old car dilemmas. But they are still very cool and unique cars, and I would have another one as a toy. Not as a daily driver at this point. I would daily drive another 9-5 wagon V6T though (good luck finding a good one of those though). That was a really good all-round car, even if it wasn't all that "fun". Just quiet and smooth and competent. Overall, my favorite of them all was the 3dr NG900SET oddly enough. I fitted the "Viggen Rescue Kit" subframe and chassis braces which cured the handling ills, and it was just a great and fun car to drive. But I really liked all of them. The C900CVT and 9-3SC are still owned by friends of mine and still going strong at 275K and 230K miles respectively, though the 900 had another transmission crap out at 225K and the 9-3 needs a cylinder head rebuild due to the typical valve issues those engines have. The 9-3SC I bought new, the rest were used though relatively low miles when I bought each other than the 9-5 Aero - that one had 125K on it.
Have to disagree with you , the gearboxes were a positive shift , occasional problem with synchros or pinion bearings if used for constant very short trips ,
The biggest mistake Saab did was to stick to the 2-stroke engine far too long. Even in Sweden most people didn't like it. The Saab 93 came with a newly developed 3-cylinder 2-stroke engine. If they instead had invested in a 4-stroke they could have sold a lot more cars. Saab:s problem has always been too low production volumes..
Worse then GM is only Fiat (= Fix It Again Tony). They were also interested in buying SAAB. The Swedish state should have saved the company. GM just drops costs...
You can't sell a SAAB as a premium brand if it is not more than an Opel/Vauxhall in other clothes. Don't really know what they were thinking in Detroit. But the biggest mistake they made at SAAB was to keep the 2-stroke far to long. Even in Sweden many people didn't buy it because of the 2-stroke engine.
I worked at Saab dealers from 1988 to 2002 as a sales manager. and trainer. I personally sold, new and used, many, many thousands of Saabs, and personally owned 11, all old type 900s, all turbos.
The Saabs of that era were about as fragile as anvils, absurdly strong and safe, and a car that, if driven properly, startlingly guick, particularly on bad roads/rain/snow..I would go out on stormy days looking for BMW fans to torment....
Not throwing shade...if new style Saabs please you, by all means enjoy them.
Old Saab, newer Saab, non-Saab...whatever JJ, your videos never disappoint.
Thanks for another great one.
Cheers John!
This is a brand I'll love to see come back.
Not me, they would just be as disappointing as all other modern cars. This way Saab lives in our memories, unsullied by the realities of modern car design. Just imagine it, some wide fat ass and high suv-esque monstrosity with loads of screens and crap in it... No thanks I don't want that.
I have owned 2 Saab 900 Turbo's 16v S models - a hatchback with whale tail and a 2 door hardtop and they were both fantastic - especially the 2 door that I had from 9000 miles. The reason I bought my first one was from following one in an XR3i and getting blown away when the Saab driver put his foot down! The way the turbo lagged was great! Miss them both to this day! Only sold the last one to buy a 9000 when the kids came along - nothing like the 900!
I love the fact that for so many years Saab went their own way. Back in the mid 80s when I was working for a leasing company there was a certain section of the blue chip customer driver population that would choose this above an E30, Audi 80 or even Merc. Understated, classy without being showy, superbly built and safe, the appeal is clear!
If somehow I was an '80s businessman, that would totally be me 😆
Hell yes! I’m a mechanic in Australian & apart from some rust issues. they were built & over engineered in a Swedish way. Such a shame they don’t exist anymore
Do you know if it's tough to find parts out in Australia?
@@JJonCars it is getting harder to find some of the more obscure bits & pieces.
I've owned SAABs for 30 years and drive a convertible similar to the one here. I use it every day during the summer, weather permitting. Allow me a couple of comments:
2:58: Many upmarket cars had this style of cruise control. It is a vacuum operated Heath Robinson design, but works well - if it works at all. If it doesn't, fault tracing can be a lot of fun.
5:36 make that a "triple layered" convertible top. It's not as quiet as the steel roof ones, but the temperature insulation is just as good, if not better.
6:45 You don't need a seat belt butler. You get used to reaching for the seat belt in no time.
7:00 Scuttle shake: There is no denying it. The old 900 does it a lot. It's something that one must simply accept.
7:25 SAAB had to abandon the old Triumph engine, it wasn't nearly good enough. Saab own design may be similar in layout, but otherwise, there is NO comparison at all...
7:30 SAAB 900 turbo engines put out between 145 and 185 horsepower (PS), depending on configuration.
9:30. I absolutely do NOT agree.
Are the newer ones better than the old SAAB's? Perhaps. Depends on how you compare them: Against each other directly, or against the competition of their day. Only the latter is a fair fight. Even so, while the newer may be better overall, the old car fights back when it comes to driving pleasure and roadholding. The newer ones are bland, at best. At worst, they are terrible. Ever try a 1994-1998 900? Yikes.
Having had about 40 SAABs of nearly all models, I do not like the newer ones. You get all the OPEL disadvantages of GM parts without the benefits. What I mean is: Back in it's day, the 900 - even though it was an old design rooted in the 1960's - offered something that the other brands didn't have.
When the 9-3 and 9-5's were new, SAAB was simply behind the contemporary competition in so many ways, and no longer offered any true personality to compensate. That includes the NG 9-5. I've driven a few, and it simply wasn't good enough, compared to other luxury cars in 2010-11.
You'd want to try a 1992-1993 SAAB 900 Turbo (but not the low pressure one). Three door hatchback. Try that for roadholding 😀 It gives a 1998.2010 9-5 something to think about...
I had a 900 T16S convertible with the Aero body kit for 7 years, used it as a daily driver and towed a Caravan with it, they are built from girders and have a certain feeling of solidity which I bloody love, too! The only criticism of mine was, being an auto, it sometimes felt as if it wasn't quick enough off the line at roundabouts etc because of the turbo lag, but when it picked up, it brought a smile every time! Lovely car, I only sold it because it was coming up to 200k miles and I told myself its value would drop, so I bought a GM 900 V6, which I kept for another 7 years, before buying a Viggen, which I kept for... another 7 years! Loved them all, still own a 9-5 Aero estate (my 3rd) can't think what I would rather have except maybe a lower mileage Saab! Thanks for the video!
I can imagine the auto would detract a little from the experience, especially an 80's box. Thanks for watching :)
Test drove a friend's 1994 or 1995 2.3 liter turbo 9000 CSE hatchback/liftback years ago in the US. It was much better than I expected. I can imagine it must be a nice performance sedan back in the day. SAAB really had its style and character.
The 2001 SAAB 9-5 we had when I was a teen was really good. Before that my parents had a 1990 Volvo 740. The upgrade was like night and day. Eventually they got a 2007 V50 but the SAAB was the best.
Volvo is better.
Exactly all the things you listed end of the video are some of the important reasons why a car can be defined worse or better than another. Bad materials that don’t last or give issues bring a person away from that car.
Unfortunately GM was like Stellantis nowadays: it kills what it touches.
Yeah it's true. But on the positive side for the newer cars - they are safer and have modern tech that is really useful. And they actually have a few more interesting Saab-like quirks that even the old cars don't have.
Yes.
Just don’t forget to put back the insulator after you reinstall the battery.
It keeps Mr Garrett the turbo from turning the battery into a blob of molten wax.
Haha!
Loved this 900 convertible, this and the BMW E30 convertible were absolute dream cars when I grew up in Sweden
Great video again! I know it's not as simple as that, but I've often toyed with an idea that SAAB might still be in business had they built a modern retro coupe in style of the old 96. ;-)
Thanks Janne! yes, it's nice to dream that it could have happened :)
The last generation of 9 3 SAABs are brilliant cars. I own two of them, a low milage 9 3 aero convertible with the 2.8 turbo V6 and a Sedan TTID diesel. I’ve owned two 900 turbos in the past. Fantastic cars for its time but of course they are inferior tho the last 9 3 gen. The latter was up to 80% rebuild from its doner Opel/Vaxhall doner vehicles. The best car of this generation of European vehicles.
I have a 2006 95 Aero Combi with around 87,000 miles on it and it's DEVINE! Had it 11 years and it's going lovely 👍.
I have had several SAAB Cabs ...my favorite is the 91 Monte Carlo and the latest 93. The OG (86-93) models will remain classics.
I bloody love a Saab as well JJ. I’ve also never driven a classic 900 but would really like to have a go
I've had 2 900s and would love another
I bet I would like to have car like this. I have an old MB CLK Cabrio and it's not that great car to drive either, but quite fun still cruising around top down. Really nice review as well.
Exactly, it's not all about cornering as fast as you can :)
Original "Old'' SAAB's are the best by a country mile! And are in reality the only SAAB's!! Following the absolute travesty of the GM takeover they became badged over Vauxhalls, I owned one a GM 93 for 14 years! Yes it took me that long to get over that SAAB Image!!!
I got used 9000 3 years ago, I thought I just wanted to know what it's like, I was very skeptic about it at first. But the more I drive it, the more I fixed stuffs and know the car more, the more I love it, despite its sluggish handling by today's standard, it's so comfortable, has enough power and always feel in control when driving. This combination of characteristic is unusual, only 80s-90s Saab do this.
The 900 is something I really wanted to try too, but there are so few of them in my country it is so expensive. 9000 is still cheap, for now.
I'd love to drive and review/film a 9000!
The Saab 900 turbo in the video has the same specs as one someone owns in my town (besides the steering wheel being on the other side), super nice looking car but I’ve only seen it parked in a restaurant parking lot and never driving
Hey mate, my CLK Bro in the UK 😆 I don't know an awful lot about SAABs, only what I've seen on Wheeler Dealers. But man am I a sucker for electric antennas and interior courtesy lighting, so an instant hit with me. My boss had a SAAB convertible like this one for years. She complained a bit about parts and maintenance, plus when the electric top started playing up, she traded it :( But this is Australia JJ, so maybe she just didn't have a decent service shop to turn to. I gotta ask... how does the SAAB compare to your CLK? I know its apples and oranges, but I'm curious. Another cracking video my friend! I watch everything you produce, you're a legend!! When you come out to OZ, I have five cars for you to review... just sayin!!
Hi Mark, CLK Bro 😄
As you say, apples and oranges! I couldn't compare the 900 Turbo to the CLK really as they're from totally different generations. But what I can tell you is the 900 Turbo is faster than the 200 Kompressor 😂 (my 163hp version, 184hp might fare better)
The later 9-3 convertible is more comparable to the CLK and I like them both and would be happy with either. They had both solved the scuttle shake problem by then! The SAAB was a bit more affordable when they were new, but the interior of the Merc is of a higher quality and you get rear wheel drive. But with the SAAB you get all the cool quirks (although the CLK is not without its own quirks to be fair).
I suspect it's even harder to source bits in Aus vs Europe or the US!
I'll be sure to message you if I ever make it to Aus :)
@@JJonCars Awesome analogy and yes I did hear about the scuttle shake, but didn't realise they'd solved it 👌The rear wheel drive is a biggie for me - not sure why, it just "feels" better. The style of the SAAB is cool though and I think they will be collectable in great condition. That was a very nice example you reviewed!
I would love one of those, although I do like my 1974 Saab 95.
Cheers for this nice review👍
No problem :)
As I understand Saab modified and improved the GM suspension parts to improve handling.
I remember when I were a lad working in a local bank and we had a customer that got a loan for a Saab Turbo of some sort.
All the guys there were insanely jealous, me included. He pulled into the bank car park in it one day and I swear about 6 of us swarmed around it like ants in honey.
Ridiculous really but these were the days when your Dad drove about in a Cortina or at best a Sierra or Vauxhall Cavalier.
My parents owned Saab's from the early 70's up to the late 90's. In early '95 my Mum bought a new GM 900 2.0 S 3dr (the first GM Saab). It was bloody awful, a real disappointment. It felt very 'dead' to drive as far as ride, handling & steering were concerned, along with poor fuel consumption. It was replaced by an Audi A3 a couple of years later. However through my used car business I have since owned a few later GM Saab's ranging from 1995 to 2007. The impression I get is one of steady improvement throughout that period, as though Saab's engineers rebelled against GM's accountants, which they were right to do. Last year I had a 2007 'Dame Edna' 9-5 2.3t auto saloon. This came not long after a 'old Saab' '92 900 turbo 16v auto 4dr sedan. Both were exceptional low mileage examples and it made for an interesting comparison as they were both medium output turbo automatic turbo sedans that would have occupied the same position in the model line up. I thought the 9-5 might be a let down after the 900 but it wasn't, it felt like a natural progression from the 900. The ergonomics and dashboard design were typically Saab (excellent) and the seats were the best I have ever sat in, and I've owned many exec and luxury cars. The engine was a traditional Saab 4 pot and power delivery was exactly like the 900's albeit there was more of it (180 bhp v 160 bhp) with strong mid range performance and the auto box was 6 speed rather than 3. The only noticeable negative was the interior plastics were nowhere near as good as the 900 (early 9-5's are better in this respect) and you always got the impression that the steel was not as thick as the early Saab. Both of these cars were great and I would happily use either. It's a shame that I owned these cars about 2 weeks apart from each other as a back to back comparison would have made for a very interesting video on this channel.
Kudos to your parents mate!
I need to try one of the early GM cars. My dad had a 1996 900 for a short while, a cheap runaround at the time but I liked it as it was so different.
If you do get any SAABs in do let me know, cheers Zak :D
@@JJonCars Thanks JJ. I actually have a 1990 900i 16v manual 4dr sedan in prep at the moment. Would you like to do a vid when its done?
@@zm321 Yes please! Can you email me some photos?
@@JJonCars Done!
had a 93' model year 900s 4door, loved it
sadly it crashed and bent the chassis frame too much it was too expensive to repair....
Well perhaps, but they were very space confining. I had a 9000 and a 9-5 early models which lasted a long time but required alot of maintenance.
The trouble with the new generation Saabs is they do not have that timeless style of the OG Saabs nor the quality, the Saab 900 is simply a masterpiece and very iconic and also a great driver's car, I grin from ear to ear every time I drive my old Saabs. such a great loss for the evolution of the car industry!
In the early 90’s, my boss at the time had an identical 900 Turbo Convertible which I lusted after. He once took me to a meeting in it and whilst it seemed to go like stink, the scuttle shake was off the scale. Never meet your heroes 😢
After daily driving my 900 turbo between May and October (put it away before the hated road salt makes an appearance) I definitely have to catch myself from putting the keys down the center console instead of the opposite.
Easily done 😄
I had two og 9-5 cars, a 2.0 SE and then an Aero. Bought them as a safe family car. Had a serious RTA back in 2008 in the Aero (I was totally not at fault) and my wife and my 2 children got out of the car with not so much as a bruise. All the emergency crews attending remarked on how safe Saabs were, and they should know. It took six weeks to repair my Aero, but I did have a supposedly like-for-like courtesy car deal with my insurance brokers. The car they came up with was a six month old Mercedes C class Avantgarde diesel. Very nice, but just goes to show that Saabs of the era were held in high regard as being quality cars.
They are safer beyond the mere safety star ratings I believe, as they were tested in real scenarios. Got to love Saab for that, and I'm really pleased to hear it saved you and your family.
@@JJonCars There is the Top Gear episode where they dropped a BMW and a Saab on their roof to test the survivability of the occupants. It was no contest.
I own a GM era Saab and plan to purchase a Saab Saab next week. I cannot wait for this mechanical vehicle with old school turbo lag and SOUL.
You need to test the 99 3dr turbo from 1978 and the 99 2dr from 1980 .
I'd suggest the convertible (regardless of engine) was only the most desirable Saab of the 80's if you were more interested in cruising and/or posing than driving. The convertible lost way too much structural rigidity for it to be otherwise.
As a drivers car, the 2 door T16S with the later smaller turbo (same power, less lag) was the most desirable because it had the stiffest body and was the lightest.
Are the old cars better than the newer ones?. Depends on what you want from a car, but IMO yes, emphatically so. I worked at a Saab dealer when the first GM 900's first appeared and I didn't think they were a patch on the older ones.
You said it yourself in the video. With the classic 900, it was completely individual, there was nothing else built like it. Now that has its good and bad points obviously but, when G.M took over, and the G.M 900 and later the 9-3 took the place of the 900, they were built in the same way as everything else. They stopped being Saabs and instead became Saab flavoured cars. Again, that has its good and bad points but purists will argue that the true individuality faded. The worst thing that happened was the intoxicating exhaust note of the 900 turbo, disappeared completely. That was little short of criminal. Those 900 turbos sounded absolutely wonderful.
But even I will admit that from a convertible standpoint, the easiest car to live with and the ‘nicest place to sit’ was in the mk1 9-3 convertible. So it really is swings and roundabouts. However, the two best cars Saab ever built were the 1985 900 turbo 16 valve ‘S’ and the 1998 9000 Aero. Those two cars sum up Saab for me. But it’s the 85 t16s which I consider my favourite car in the world. Nothing else looks like it, drives like it, feels like it, smells like it and sounds like it. They’re bloody wonderful.
This looks like it was cut from a different cloth than the newer Saabs. Not to take anything away from the newer Saabs (which I don't know very well), but this one felt especially solid and full of character.
Had an SAAB 96 EMS, the best I ever owned.
Saab never made a 96 ems 😂 , an ems was a 2dr 99 from 1974 with electronic injection, the later ones 1976on had mechanical injection system
So beatiful car😮💨 is it rear wheel drive?
Front wheel drive, despite the engine being positioned as if it is rear wheel drive!
I owned C-plate '86 turbo 16S 3-door and G-plate '89 T16S convertible.
The convertible is far too wobbly. You will notice quite severe scuttle shake. The 3-door, however, was fantastic and went like stink. You could also get a massive amout in the boot.
These were very expensive back in the day. I think they were more than twice the price of an XR3i.
I would love to be able to afford a "proper" Saab but sadly I can't justify the cost. I've owned my 2010 Tid Sportwagon for six years and i cost me £2250 including a new belt and water pump. Its now done 190k miles and I've replaced brake calipers, discs and pads, springs, drop links, ARB bushes and the clutch which were all relatively inexpensive bits, even the Brembo discs and pads.
One thing though, the interior is rock solid, lovely black leather which show zero signs of wear and all of the buttons are legible and work. The handling is good and the engine pulls very well (in fact I think it may have been mapped by a previous owner).
If people genuinely believe these cars to be crap because they are Vauxhalls, I wonder if they've just had a bad experience with a lemon, because my sons 2006 Tid convertible is just as good, apart from the handling and performance. Still would love a 900 though.
Yeah man, I personally think all Saabs are 'proper Saabs', but not everyone will agree. You've got a nice car regardless of what anyone says.
You should have got a Saab instead of that Audi, as, just like you, I bloody love 'em!
It has to happen eventually doesn't it 😁
@@JJonCars I daresay someone (a follower of your channel, perhaps) will offer you their Saab at a price that you'll find hard to turn down! 🙂
Lovely car 👌
My 1991 900 SPG 16v turbo with 205,000 miles says ‘Yes!’
I want one ❤
My old Boss in London had the 900 Turbo it was bloody awesome
A nice slab of saab.
Almost sounds like a supra or a crispier 280 z. I dont mind an inline 6 engine just as long as it's a reliable one. And a strong one.
The funny thing is, its not swedish, its finnish. They also made a V8 Saab.
The gm ones are still built in sweden in the same factory, not a vauxhall ,solid cars and would rather be in a crash in a mk 2 saab convertible than an old one ,check out the ncap side inpact ,stronger than saloons plus they drive great
Yes, this is something worth considering for sure
Old SAABs where actually SAABs
Wonder if that dealer will make some sales due to these presentations
I hope so!
jerry sienfeld comes to mind
saab has to be the only company that managed to make gm products such as cavalier and vectra rival bmw in the market. Even if not as good dynamically. Had a 99 93 convertible and a 05 93 both were great felt special.
Yes, great point :) People see it as Saab being downgraded by GM, but really it was the inverse - Saab were an upgrade of GM - to go up against much more premium brands.
Rival BMW 😂😂😂😂
@@appelsapman434more than what Volvo was capable of I am afraid to say..
What❗
Meh, pluses and minuses. I had over the years two classic 900 Turbos, a convertible and a 3dr, an NG900SET 3dr, two 9-5 wagons, and a 9-3 SportCombi. The newer they were, the more reliable they were, and it wasn't even close. The newer ones were FAR more rust resistant too. The NG900 had, IMHO, the highest quality interior though. Better materials than what came before or came after, if not nearly the cargo area of the C900 3dr, more front seat room. The worst interior was the 9-3SC - too plasticy and obvious cost-cutting, plus it was an '08 with the GM stereo which just looked out of place even if the functionality was great. The C900Ts were FUN to drive, but they also were noisy and didn't ride particularly smoothly. They were also by far the slowest (though with the old-school turbo lag they FEEL fast), with only 160hp vs. 205 for the NG, 200 and 250 for the 9-5s (V6T and Aero), and 220hp for the 9-3. The two 9-5s were automatics, the rest manuals. The 6spd 9-3 was certainly overall the fastest over the road - the best handling and not much slower than the Aero automatic. Ease of working on them varied wildly depending on what you had to do. Some things are really easy on the C900, some things suck. Same with the newer ones - but the newer ones needed less doing over the miles. BOTH C900Ts had transmission failures at relatively young ages - 120K for one, 170K for the other. Transmissions are the Achilles heel of the C900, especially the turbos. No engine issues with any of them. All are fine cars, really just a matter of taste. Good C900s are hard to come by and EXPENSIVE in the States at this point - CRAZY expensive. And at this point, the newest of them are 30 years old - they all have old car dilemmas. But they are still very cool and unique cars, and I would have another one as a toy. Not as a daily driver at this point. I would daily drive another 9-5 wagon V6T though (good luck finding a good one of those though). That was a really good all-round car, even if it wasn't all that "fun". Just quiet and smooth and competent.
Overall, my favorite of them all was the 3dr NG900SET oddly enough. I fitted the "Viggen Rescue Kit" subframe and chassis braces which cured the handling ills, and it was just a great and fun car to drive. But I really liked all of them. The C900CVT and 9-3SC are still owned by friends of mine and still going strong at 275K and 230K miles respectively, though the 900 had another transmission crap out at 225K and the 9-3 needs a cylinder head rebuild due to the typical valve issues those engines have. The 9-3SC I bought new, the rest were used though relatively low miles when I bought each other than the 9-5 Aero - that one had 125K on it.
gearbox was weak and notchy on these and I owned lots... OK on n/a but turbos killed it..
Have to disagree with you , the gearboxes were a positive shift , occasional problem with synchros or pinion bearings if used for constant very short trips ,
?? Are there any NEW ones??
GM and Saab is like daimler chrysler
This is the Saab. Every 900 cabriolet was made in Finland
9000 is the best preGM SAAB
Hopefully reviewing one soon :)
They were a lot cooler back then
Yes, I think I can see where you're coming from. The newer ones don't quite have the same cool factor. As much as I do like them.
100% better when Sweden owned them. But the GM Saabs had a few select good years and models
The biggest mistake Saab did was to stick to the 2-stroke engine far too long. Even in Sweden most people didn't like it. The Saab 93 came with a newly developed 3-cylinder 2-stroke engine. If they instead had invested in a 4-stroke they could have sold a lot more cars. Saab:s problem has always been too low production volumes..
Gangster Motor
Worse then GM is only Fiat (= Fix It Again Tony). They were also interested in buying SAAB. The Swedish state should have saved the company. GM just drops costs...
You can't sell a SAAB as a premium brand if it is not more than an Opel/Vauxhall in other clothes. Don't really know what they were thinking in Detroit. But the biggest mistake they made at SAAB was to keep the 2-stroke far to long. Even in Sweden many people didn't buy it because of the 2-stroke engine.
No, . handling and scuttle shake and yes I have owned and driven both
no it isn't as quiet ... even if they did suggest so
engine actually came from Ricardo who designed it for Triumph and SAAB
My 2009 93 Combi was not a great car. Had it for 11 years, problems from the start. I still have my 2000 93 Viggen, a much better car
Old Saab is a Saab. GM Saab is a GM Saab