Saab 9-4X Aero 330HP - kurwa311 - Russia

[kurwa311]

did 5000km so break-in is done.. so i can say now, car is pretty slow. I will measure 0-100 and 402m soon.

[packardv8]

car is pretty slow

car is really heavy.

jack vines

[kurwa311]

weight is not the problem: Porsche caynne turbo S, X5/6M, M-AMG.. even jeep grand cherokee SRT8

[rpiereck]

Those SUVs have more power than the 9-4x, power mitigates weight.

[kurwa311]

yeah and better gearboxes

[packardv8]

Those SUVs have more power than the 9-4x, power mitigates weight.

Very true; so does a Saturn V and a SpaceX Falcon 9, but there are always tradeoffs. Rockets, including the Porsche Cayenne Turbo S, X5/6M, M-B AMG, even Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8; are all extremely fast, extremely capable special purpose vehicles. Some might say the rockets are more for putting rich guys in orbit than a cost-effective every-day all-purpose vehicle.

Bottom line - if first cost and operating cost were not a consideration, yes, I might drive a Cayenne Turbo S and take a few orbits on the space station. However, it does, so I won't be doing either. Your opinions may vary.

jack vines

[kurwa311]

the problem is that 2.8T can't be tuned to much car's weight..

But hope SAAB do better after reborn

[kurwa311]

Ok measured today:
0-100km/h = 7.7sec
1/4 mile = 15.4 @ 149km/h

with 1 foot start 0-100 was 8.0 sec
damn slow.

Another thing i found while high speeding 1500+ wind noise (whish) like there is a hole somewhere. that is bad bug

[nordwulf]

I got about 8 seconds from 0-100 km/h with my 3.0i. 2011 Saab 9-4X 3.0i V6 0 - 60 mph - YouTube

I expected much better with your 2.8T and 330 hp. I am curious to know how much hp you have at the wheels compared to the base 3.0i engine.

[kurwa311]

I test drove caddi srx 3.0 AWD - that thing was hellish slow. I know XWD system eats a lot. I did not measure HP (i do not know exact weight, i do not know exact transmission loss) on the wheels but i suspect it will be about 260.