Can you start a separate thread for the Saab 9-3 Aero Turbo4?
Can you start a separate thread for the Saab 9-3 Aero Turbo4?
Ummmmm....NO. I thought my request was obvious...guess not...
You DO have a 9-3 AND a 9-5 Workshop form.......BUT it is broken down further into 9-5 (2010+) BUT you fail to move the 9-3 past the forum "9-3 (2003+)" and there has been MAJOR CHANGES in 2010-2011 for the 9-3 (MUCH MORE than the 9-5, which you started a NEW forum for the 2010+ models). PLUS you even started a forum for the NON-SAAB model 9-4x (2011+)! Visit Saab - Saab and look at ALL the 9-3 2011 models compared to the 9-5 and the non-Sweden-built 9-4, and then ask me what I am asking for you to add to the "workshop forum"......PLEASE ADD a NEW SAAB 9-3 (2011+) forum to MATCH the 9-5 and "9-4" additions.........thanks!!!!!!
Check your CarFax...is the SAAB you are thinking about buying built in the ONLY REAL SAAB PLANT in Sweden...or does the export country/state say "Japan" or "Mexico" or "Ohio".......IF YOU HAVE A 2010+ 9-5 workshop form, you HAVE to add a 9-3 (2011+) forum....
Am I the only one out there driving a 2011 Saab 9-3 Aero Turbo4 XWD??? Am I the only one that thinks that the new line of 2011 9-3's deserve the same attention that the "2010+ 9-5's" and the "2011+ 9-4's" currently have herein??? Man...and I thought this was a SAAB forum......
I think you are a little confused.
The 2010+ 9-5 is a NEW car ... there are no shared components from the previous gen 9-5. The 9-4X is a NEW vehicle, not a carry over from something else.
The 9-3 03- is one car, albeit with a ton of changes to it ... but it is not a new car as it was when the old 9-3 -02 was replaced with the new 9-3 03-.
You are in a Saab forum ... and I would be careful of the comments you throw around.
Last edited by SaabScott; 09 November 2011 at 12:12.
President, The Saab Club of Canada
The 2004-2010 Saab 9-3 convertible was manufactured in Austria by a different company. Is that a real Saab? The Saab 90 was manufactured in Finland. The 2nd generation Saab 9-5 and 9-4X are very similar when it comes to GM development but they are very different from their GM counterparts. The only difference is the 9-5 is assembled in Sweden and the 9-4X in Mexico. But both have been designed and partly engineered by Saab.
Your 2011 Saab 9-3 has a GM radio, climate controls and many other parts which can be found in many other GM models. Does that make it less of a Saab? There are so many other examples of different brands. Take BMW for example. Is the X5 not a real BMW because it is manufactured in the USA? VW has a factory in Poland, BMW in South Africa and so on.
I actually used to have the same opinion as you when it came to the place of assembly. There are just so many different parts on car that are made all over the world and the assembly is just where they put everything together. The 9-2X and 9-7X where much different than the 2n gen 9-5 and 9-4X though.
The 2003+ Saab 9-3 lifeline is something like this:
2007: dash redesign
2008-2011: exterior redesign
2012: minor exterior redesign
But as Scott mentioned, they are basically all the same when it comes to engines, technology and chassis.
I didn't mean the 9-4x is a carry-over, I know it's a NEW vehicle... I was saying it's Saab's CROSSOVER vehicle (mix between a car and SUV), just a term.
I also was not asking the questions or making the statements with any "poor tonality", as text posts can connote...
I have been a non-stop Saab owner since the late 1980's, including the non-Saab 9-2xAero for 5 years, so I think I can pretty much be considered a complete Saab fan (only 28 strait years owning most every model...not counting the 9-7 I leased (can't say I owned that model, but leased it for 3 years)).
My point is that if you're going to start a new forum thread for the new 9-5 you really should start one for the new 2011 9-3 line as there are the same amount of changes.
If I list out the differences between the 2009 9-3's vs. 2011 9-3's compared to the differences in the 2009 9-5's and 2011 9-5's you would see why I am requesting that a 2011- 9-3 forum thread be opened (rumors on the 2011 9-5 sedans versus the 2010 9-5 sedans have it that they re-Saab'ed it). Just the back emblems on my 2011 9-3Aero XWD Sedan should show the difference between the 2011's and the 2009/10's (i.e. 9-3 AERO...XWD...TURBO4...). As a previous 9-5 owner, the 2011 9-5 felt and tasted like the old ones (and different than the 2010's i test drove)...just like the new 9-3...but the other models (no offense to 9-4 or 9-7 or 9-2 owners) Smell like a Saab, look somewhat like a Saab, but don't feel like a Saab. There's just something about driving a "Saab Saab" that makes one "Sob" when getting into a Saabaru (not that I don't think it was worth the sticker price as my company does advertising for GM so i got employee discount and special sale)!
@Frank - I pulled the radio out and it was etched SAAB AUDIO, maybe it was an upgrade from some of the first ones that may have used GM left-over radios from back when GM still owned Saab?
Here's is what I know from my months of research while awaiting for the insurance check for the *cough cough* tree that killed my 9-2xAero:
-Yes, the convertible version of the 9-3 was manufactured in Austria by Magna Steyr until 2010, when it was MOVED to Trollhättan Sweden plant ("true Saab plant")
-The 9-3 shares its GM Esp platform and the Cadillac BLS platform, which was made on the same assembly line up until 2009 in Trollhättan Sweden (was it a chicken or the egg?), either way it was only shared through 2009
-The 2010- 9-5 was the first Saab to be launched under Spyker Cars' ownership (it was already in production when GM still owned Saab, and it was developed almost completely under GM's ownership). It is rumored that it was retro-converted in 2011 to de-GM it more...the inability for me to validate the rumors is why I went with the 9-3Aero Sedan, but they are both consistently churned out of the Sweden plant
Anyway...I need to get to the parking garage and get in my 9-3 to get home at a decent hour since it's 7PM here!
OVERALL...is it a fair assessment that the 9-3 sedans and 9000/9-5 sedans are the "most Saab" out of all the other models over the past 15 years? The 9-2x was a fluke...after 2 years the griffin circle emblem on the front and the hatch flaked off from normal washing! It was fun to drive for the price I got it for, but it was pure Japanese-built Subaru engineered...GM was a 20% shareholder of Fuji Heavy Industries (i.e, Subaru) at the time the 9-2X was designed. In October 2005, however, GM decided that it would sell 8.4% of the company to Toyota and dispose of its remaining 11.4% as a share buy-back to Fuji. The 9-2X was discontinued when Fuji and GM broke up. It's cool that I bought it in may when it was highly incentivised and GM discounted to me...and that it was one of about 3,800 total ever built (you can part one out for mega-bucks...I tried to buy the salvaged car from Allstate and they wanted almost $5000 for it!!!).
Crap...getting later.....bye for now.....
OK, so let me say this again ... the 9-3, beginning in 2003, has evolved into what it is today. The underlying chassis and drive train are the same. The engine is the same, tuned to produce more power, but the same. The transmissions are the same. The addition of XWD in 2008 is just that, an addition to the model.
The ONLY thing the 2010- 9-5 shares with the previous model is the name. Period.
Unlike the 03- 9-3, unlike all of the 9000's ever built, unlike the changes in the NG900 to the 9-3 -02 (should have been an evolved 900, but with the GM purchase, they wanted a name change as well).
So no, it does not make sense to have a "new" forum for the 9-3, regardless of the flavour. Should we also have a Turbo-X forum? Then we would also need a 9-3 V6 FWD forum and another for the XWD version ... where does it end?
As for where a Saab is manufactured or what components are in it, who cares? Saab started out using Triumph engines ... they were no less a Saab than the current 9-5 is (which by the way, many people, myself included, say is the best Saab ever made). What works for you doesn't necessarily work for everyone. Yes, my Saab was built in Trollhatten, but the transmission wasn't ... the engine wasn't, the turbo? Certainly not. To me, it comes down to the whole package, that is what Saab put together. My 9-5 now has over 213,000 miles on it and runs as well today as it did the day I got it (just over 3 years and 100,000 miles ago). The seats, still the best in the business. The overall package ... people who get in my Saab can't believe the mileage it has.
Sorry ... I'm ranting now ... I'm tired and stressed out and I'm done for a bit. Good night all.
President, The Saab Club of Canada
Well if you say Saab of this era you say turbo by default. But you ask does anyone here have .... ??
Well, yeah kind yes and no if you are splitting hairs I guess. We have a 2008 Aero 280 Turbo 6 XWD and a 2009 Sport Pack Turbo 4 XWD that has the same motor as the 210.
I think it would be over kill to sift out the posts and take that much time to create a new slot. Heck, the one there sees little traffic. Bang for the forum buck and all that. I don't think we need to separate the XWD's from the Aero or whatever. Wifey has a non Aero but with all the same XWD gear as the Aero XWD; she has the mirror mine does not but has the wheels, suspension and dual exhaust only lacking the power passenger seat and turning lamps.
Semper ubi sububi in caput tuum
The 03 through the current car is built on GM's global Epsilon platform, which underpins everything from Saabs to some Chevys to Vauxhall's and Opels. Under the sheetmetal, your 2011 is almost identical to my 2007. Aside from XWD, introduced on the 2008 MY 9-3, there are no major mechanical differences.
The 9-5 and 9-4X are brand new platforms, granted they are also shared with GM and it's subsidiaries, but they all-new models built on all-new platforms. If Saab survives and the new 9-3 comes to market in 2013 -2014, that will be a new model and a new platform.
Regardless of the validity of the request, I'm not sure you'll get that far with that attitude ScotHibb
@SaabBoon - don't tell me you're one of *those* forum readers...the ones that read "attitude" or "tonality" into plain-text-base posts. That's a pet peeve of mine. I even said in my 3rd reply that I wasn't typing with bad tonality...
The problem with texting, Facebook, forums, etc, is that 95% of the time someone reads tonality into the way something is keystroked...for instance, some may look at how I "quote" and think it means I'm quoting a verbatim statement (how it should be), while some think I'm "air quoting" and others even take it as I'm "mocking" with the quotation marks...OR YELLING when caps come on...
Either way, there's no attitude in this post. Through research and through what I was told during a very trying 2-years of dealing with GM, Saab, who-know-who with my 3rd blown engine, and what I learned from very trusted and long-term resources at Saab, the changes to the drive train, differential, newer XWD technology, etc made the 2011 a "not official next generation" and that "the plans to redesign the 9-3 for 2013 are getting flushed as soon as GM dumps us" is what I based my request on.
I guess I was misled by 2 very trusted and long-term Saab sales managers when I went in to buy a new 2011 model. They sold me on the 9-3 Aero as a new generation of pure-Swedish engineering. They had a laundry list of the differences in the 2011 9-3 over the 2009-10 including new suspension, locking/limited-slip differential, "new turbo4 engine", and even an improved EPS system that takes into account everything from differences in tire pressures and brake wear when stabilizing the car. I even asked if i should pay $800 LESS for the 9-5 Sedan with the Turbo4, and they both told me, in so many words, "no, the 9-5 is a GM, Saab is turning it back in the next year or two". These 2 guys (one manager from JMK Saab the other from Princeton Saab where I bought 3 cars) are usually 'in the know' and many times tell me things they shouldn't (which is how i got Saab to replace 90% of the 3 blown engines on my Sabbaru due to their knowledge that synth-oil spins bearings at high RMPs).
So is the 9-5 all GM, just assembled in Sweden? I mean just like the 9-2x aero, when I pulled up to a WRX Wagon they looked like the same car, the 9-5 next to a Opel Insignia does look like the same car...but is it actually the same frame or is it Saab built from the DESIGNS? From my investigations on the Saabaru, my 3 blown engines in 3 years was NOT happening to the MANY Subarus with "the same" boxer pan-4's in them, running Mobile-1 synth...it was an issue with GM taking the design from Subaru and "doing something wrong"... So what is it?
Although, with regards to the differential and traction control...I have to say that 2 weeks ago when we got SLAMMED with that freak snowstorm, the sides of the roads were littered with AWD cars/SUVs and my new 9-3 drove completely different that any previous Saab I've owned...traction control hardly limited acceleration on slush/now-covered ice, it was beautiful.
If you're telling me the same engine is in all the models that come with a Turbo-4, that means I paid $6,500 more for an emblem that says AERO and the only difference between the 9-3 Turbo4 Sedan and my 9-3 Aero XWD Sedan is: 1-sport seats with 8-way adjustable memory seats (rather than the bucket seats), 2-upgraded stereo system (6-disk changer, 11 brand speakers, upgraded amp, full bluetooth...well the 9-3 stock stero did kinda suck...), 3-instead of regular halogen headlights, directional adaptive high-intensity low-beam, bi0xenon lights and front fogs), 4-"new express" sunroof, 5-the locking/ultra-limited-slip differential, 6-17" alloy's, and a handful of other add-ons like rear-assist, "sport interior", etc, etc????
IMHO GM almost destroyed Saab...ALMOST. Please don't disillusion me by telling me that out of the only 2 remaining "Sweden Saab" models, one is all GM!!! The body is one thing...but how do you call it a new generation due to the metal that wraps the heart and soul?
I do have to say that the tire-pressure reader is fun to watch, especially when cornering off a jug-handle off-ramp at 75MPH...
Now that my engine has properly been broke-in (what a LENGTHY process, and can't take advantage of Saab free oil/filter changes until it's done), I had to test the governor...so far I haven't found it...at 140 with ~2.5K left on the Tach before first redline...did they take limitors off the models or did they move them higher? My 9-2x Aero was limited at 140 (139 it would kick in)...why the heck do they have to make so many 2011 9-3 models with so many differences? It used to be (thinking back 25 year or so) "Mecedes limits their cars at 135MPH, BMW at 130MPH, Audi at 140, Saab does not limit" and so on (don't quote me on my quote....I was remembering a Car and Driver article i read in the mid 90's)?
Take the 900/9-3 for example. The 9-3 supposedly had over 1,100 changes from the 900, including the suspension and engine. But they are still generally considered more-or-less the same car. One is just a tweaked (and not necessarily for the better) version of the other.
We don't mean to hinder your requests or suggestions; member input is very important to us, and we try to take all suggestions into consideration.
Thanks and hope to see you around on the forums!
Now how about some pictures of that Saab (feel free to throw in pictures of Saab of years past).
The 2.0 liter engine is a GM engine and has been used in the Opel Vectra as well. Same goes for the 2.8T V6 which has been used in even more different cars and trucks. The Turbo4 engine the 9-5 is basically the same as in the 9-3 but tuned differently. There is no difference in the engine of the Turbo4 and Aero models for MY 2011. GM Family II engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Saab 9-3 and Opel Vectra are on the same platform as well and just as much GM as the 2010+ 9-5 and 9-4X are. However, all these 3 models have completely different exteriors, interiors and driving characteristics. The 9-2X and 9-7X were different as most of the exterior and interior was the same as their GM/Subaru parent vehicles, as well as they way they drive. However, Saab did make quite some modifications to the 9-7X chassis for a better driving experience.
The 9-4X and 9-5 are very similar when it comes to the way they were developed, difference from their matching GM models (SRX/9-4X and Insignia/Lacrosse/9-5). The major difference is the 9-5 is assembled in Sweden and the 9-4X in Mexico.
Yeah, pretty much. The 2.0T 4cyl is the same across the brand. It might be tuned differently in the 9-5 for more power, but I could be wrong on that. I'm pretty sure the 2.8T V6 is still available in the new 9-5.If you're telling me the same engine is in all the models that come with a Turbo-4, that means I paid $6,500 more for an emblem that says AERO and the only difference between the 9-3 Turbo4 Sedan and my 9-3 Aero XWD Sedan is: 1-sport seats with 8-way adjustable memory seats (rather than the bucket seats), 2-upgraded stereo system (6-disk changer, 11 brand speakers, upgraded amp, full bluetooth...well the 9-3 stock stero did kinda suck...), 3-instead of regular halogen headlights, directional adaptive high-intensity low-beam, bi0xenon lights and front fogs), 4-"new express" sunroof, 5-the locking/ultra-limited-slip differential, 6-17" alloy's, and a handful of other add-ons like rear-assist, "sport interior", etc, etc????
If it helps, the 2003MY 9-3 was brand new and hailed as a much better car than the previous generation 9-3/900.
It's not just your opinion, it can almost be asserted as fact. But don't be disillusioned, your car was designed and built in Sweden. The 2.0T 4cyl is a damn good engine and you can get a Hirsch tune at your Saab dealer now.IMHO GM almost destroyed Saab...ALMOST. Please don't disillusion me by telling me that out of the only 2 remaining "Sweden Saab" models, one is all GM!!! The body is one thing...but how do you call it a new generation due to the metal that wraps the heart and soul?
I knew what I was buying when I bought my car. But my Saab station wagon looks way cooler than any family hauler that GM was selling on American soil in 2007.