SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
And when I say Saab 9-3, more specifically the 05 2.0T Aero 5M and also the 06/07 Aero 6M that comes with the larger 2.8T?

Anyone ever look and the pros and cons of those cars vs. the S60 T5M's?

I find it to be an interesting comparison after reading about those cars on the other respective forums, or maybe that's just me....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,306 Posts
i dont know too much about them...

BUT i will say they look pretty good. well, better than s60s(non Rs)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Re: (Impulse922)

They do have a good look about them, yes. I really hadn't seen any or much of these on the road until just recently, so I did a little research on them. Not bad cars.

But when I got to thinking, it seemed like a good comparison with the S60's....

The volvo crowd is somewhat similar to the Saab crowd, so I imagined some that bought S60's may have considered the 9-3's too...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Re: (DGBibo)

That's a good point actually, the S40.

The 2.8T aero pumps out quite a bit more ponies over the S40 T5's.

I think I only say the S60 because of the sizing/appearance of the 9-3's.... they're in between an S40 and an S60, and engines are comparable though with both the S40 and S60, depending on whether you're looking at the 2.0T/t or 2.8T.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Re: (DGBibo)

Quote, originally posted by DGBibo »
true true.

sorry just not a Saab fan.

Audi, go for it! maybe even VW. but Saab? no thanks.

Just doesn't work for you, huh?

I'm not sure I would have bought a mid 90's and back Saab ever, but the later gen's have caught my attn, but not as much as I like the Volvo from what I gather.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,674 Posts
06 Saab 9-3 Aero is pretty darn quick, my friend might be getting one soon and its almost as nice as an R.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Re: (s140s)

A lot of the guys on that forum say the 2.0T feels faster, but it's truly not over the 2.8T, because it's actually faster based on numbers, not seat of the pants. The 2.8T has a more linear tq to it, so it doesn't have that snappy 2.0 turbo boost feel to it. Still, the 2.8T is faster. The 2,8T will pull harder in a lower RPM, basically having to shift less. It's also fairly detuned from the factory at only 250hp.

The biggest issue I've read about on the 2.8T was the leaking coolant tanks. They were defective. I also read on edmunds (user reviews) that 2.8T owners for 06 had a lot of little issues and into the shop a lot. I can't find much on the 07. I'm assuming it has more of the bugs worked out. If I were your friend, I would have him look at the 07's instead. The 06's doesn't seem to sell and I personally wouldn't want that year based on the reviews I saw, way too much negativity, but it was still a fairly small sample group, but still too negative for my tastes. Only thing is, the 06's had the cooler dashes/instrument panel, etc. 07 they got cheaper looking, more like GM.

BSR makes some nice tunes for these too....and I'm certain you can easily get the 2.8T into the 300 range, like that of the S60 T5's.

Not bad at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Re: (ryboj)

Has anyone went head to head with the 2.0T or 2.8T 9-3 Saab in their Volvo S60's? I've watched a few youtube vids of the Saabs and Volvos going at it....and some were surprising to say the least, and not always in Volvo's favor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,674 Posts
My friend just started looking for some wheels and we came up with IS300MT , TL3.2 MT, R - not likely cuz I got one, 9-3 Aero MT

I'm searching the net for reliability of 9-3s so he gets a nice ride

Quote, originally posted by ryboj »
Has anyone went head to head with the 2.0T or 2.8T 9-3 Saab in their Volvo S60's? I've watched a few youtube vids of the Saabs and Volvos going at it....and some were surprising to say the least, and not always in Volvo's favor.
Very close to an R, but might of had some tune software
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,017 Posts
both are great cars..but you CANT compare the T5 with the saab, there is almost 47-50 hp of difference if the saab is the 200 hp version, there is a 220 i think...dont remember. But def. the T5 will make a huge difference, one more cylinder and much more power with the HPT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Re: (volvos60t5x)

Good stuff guys.

Yeah, I know the 2.0T is not exactly the best match up to the T5 HPT. However, but with a tuned ecu 2.0T, it's right there or moreso?

The 2.8T is a solid match up. Just wanted to get your guys overall impression of the 05-07 9-3 Aeros in comparisons to the tried and true S60.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
781 Posts
ive always liked saab along with volvo but i fell off the saab wagon when GM took them. i cant say from personal experience but ive heard that since gm took them over the changes in platforms and engines caused too many reliablity issues? now i bet they have it figured out, but also now gm is in the bucket.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,055 Posts
From what I heard and read when I was doing research on buying an '06-07 9-3 Aero with the 2.8T just a few weeks ago, the '07 model year is actually *more* reliable--esp. wrt. the restyled dash and corporate GM radio. The electronics in '06 and older models are known to be a bit flaky by comparison.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
416 Posts
The saab 9-3 does look really good from the outside, but i think it looks just the opposite inside. I have driven a friend's 2.4t vs. a 9-3 2.0T and the volvo seems/feels faster (both were auto's). The saab was a 2004 and the interior looked horrible and the seats were crap. S60 (even base seats compared to R seats) seats were much more comfortable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Re: (Dextrobrick)

Quote, originally posted by Dextrobrick »
From what I heard and read when I was doing research on buying an '06-07 9-3 Aero with the 2.8T just a few weeks ago, the '07 model year is actually *more* reliable--esp. wrt. the restyled dash and corporate GM radio. The electronics in '06 and older models are known to be a bit flaky by comparison.

Dextro..... so, somewhat confirming what I discovered too when researching. What does "wrt" stand for by the way? Are you still looking into the 07's?

03 was a terrible year for saab electrical gremlins. I believe the first year for their fiber optics electrical system. 04 was better, but not great, and 05 was the best year for that system, but likely not as good as the 06+ regular 2.0T. Aero 06 like you mentioned, not the most reliable by any means.

Miha.. thanks for the example. Good to know on that. I know the autos suck on the saab, no one seems to love them. The stick shifts are good/adequate at reasonable power levels beyond stock, but not as stout as the volvo units, from what I read.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Re: (kentis19)

I would say no on this only because GM totally changed SAAB and the 9-3 is basically the same car as the Cobalt but with a better engine and different interior.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Re: (kentis19)

Quote, originally posted by kentis19 »
go a little retro and get a VIGGEN (9-3) b-e-a-utiful

(from when reliablilty wasnt as much of an issue)

So true my friend. What a car. Lots of potential. Few things not so good though. TREMENDOUS torque steer and suspension is very dated. The second one can be addressed for the most part, but not the first. The amenities are good, but not that of the newer gens, along with comfort.

But I tell ya, it's the way to go for a pure saab sports driver enthusiast! They make some insane numbers and the performance traits in real world.

Heck, even my wife said they looked cool, and she won't let me have a boxy 850R or S70 T5M because it's too dated looking, so the Saab got the nod from the wifey.... haha
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top