Worst of the Worst, Really?

[100%Saab]

Consumer Reports in their Annual Best and Worst Car Issue has listed the 2008 Saab 9-3 on the Used Car Worst of the Worst list. Really? I certainly don't agree. At this time I can't come up with a single new car that I want to replace my 9-3. At 70,000 miles I'm not having any major problems. So, what gives?

[AVguy]

Maybe they have caught wind of the intake valve issue that seems to be affecting more and more 2007+ 9-3's as they age?

[100%Saab]

The intake valve issue is noted on a few 9-3s listed on TrueDelta but does not seem to be a universal complaint. I will ask my Saab Service Center this week when my 9-3 gets its intermediate service about their experience. I don't seem to be having this issue in Texas.

[100%Saab]

In for service today. My local Saab Service Center has not noted a problem with the intake values.

[Dave T]

I'm shocked to hear the 2008 is the worst of the worst. The 2005 that I had was the best of the best, IMHO.

[MI-Roger]

In my opinion Consumers' Reports has zero credibility for reviewing cars.

1. In the early 1990's the Pontiac GrandAm was the top selling car in that size category in the US. When Consumer's Reports did a side-by-side comparison of vehicles in that size category they did not include the GransAm. Their reason was that not enough of their customer based owned GrandAm to justify this car's inclusion. Say what?? And your justification for the existence of your magazine is to be a reference guide for ALL consumers?

2. Consumer's Reports awarded their Best Pick-up title to the Toyota Tacoma(?) in this truck's first year of being offered in the marketplace. One of their written tennents regarding vehicle testing is that NO VEHICLE will be considered for Vehicle of the Year during its first year of production. They don't even follow thier own written rules!

Yes, both of these examples are old, maybe even ancient, but they justify my refusal to believe any and all of their vehicle testing and evaluation.

Anyone ever try to purchase one of the household appliances which received high ratings? My experience is that the models they test are all obsolete and no longer being sold by the time the magazine is published.

[100%Saab]

The intake valves do seem to be the most common single online complaint about the 2008 9-3. So, I went to cars.com today. There are 916 used 9-3s listed for sale. 135 9-3s are 2008. 44 of them have 100,000 miles or more. I reviewed all free Carfax reports for 2.0T 9-3s starting at 99,588 and above. Which totals 15 reports. A 9-3 with 159,303 miles had its "engine checked at 87,138 and 159,294 miles. One with 155,382 miles had the "engine checked" at 125,995 and 155,391 miles. A 9-3 with 149,685 miles had "engine compression checked" at 148,605 miles. The following 9-3s have no mention of engine problems or checking at all: 148,939, 147,320, 142,533, 125,237, 118,000, 116,272, 106,691, 106,343, 104,169, 103,901, 101,000, and 99,588 miles. None of these 9-3s are listed by Carfax as having the intake valves replaced. In general these 9-3s are priced between $5,000 and $10,000. Some have been in minor and major accidents. The 3 highest mileage 9-3s starting at 188,961 miles did not have free Carfax reports.
I have concluded that there are a lot of 2.0T 9-3s getting to 100,000 miles without having the intake values replaced. This does not make me want to go out and trade in my 2008 9-3 with 71,000 miles on it. If I were going to buy a used high milage 2008 9-3 I might have the intake valves checked. If I have intake valve problems on my 9-3 in the future I'll replace the valves because I bought the car new.

[davmac]

I'll happily jump on this bandwagon. It is a Saab forum after all. I've cared for a 2004 Saab 9-5 for 4-5 years and have recently purchased a 2008 9-3 for myself. I like the style, performance, reliability and safety that these cars provide. No car is perfect and these have and will certainly need to be repaired. But, worst of the worst is definitely undeserved.