I like iconic cars. There's a nice Saab up for sale on here but I've also been kinda thinking about the previous generation classic Turbo convertible or Viggen, just kinda keeping my eyes open for rust free examples.
How hard are these things to work on? I like the fact that they are sort of weird. But, I've about had enough dealing with the 1st gen new Mini Cooper S. Compared to German products are these things easier to deal with? Or is it just another form of frustration? It seems parts availability is pretty decent. Just don't know if these are another car that requires a $2000 investment in special tools or if its mostly just standard car stuff and can use normal tools.
My 1999 Saab 9-3 turbo has been mostly easy. Things that are silly:
- Cheapest hardware ever. Very little body rust under the car, but every single hose clamp is so rusty it needs to be cut off.
- It's starting to be clearly a co-engineering exercise. I.e. GM stuff is poorly thrown at the car making some maintenance much harder than it should be.
- Stuff is half done. For example, the headlights have easy little knobs for adjusting side to side. But to adjust up or down, go get your 12 inch extension, hex drive, and ratchet. Why make one easy and tool free but not the other?
If you are talking about GM Saabs they are just like any other FWD turbo car and the packaging that entails. On the ones I have owned/worked on there are a few stupidly-placed components just like any FWD car but nothing out of the ordinary.
Pre-GM Saabs are the ones that are "unique" to say the least. You could probably do a clutch in about the same time as an accessory belt.
I don't think working on classic 900s is all that hard, with a few exceptions: steering rack and crank pulley, because they are right up against the firewall, are a PITA.
The thing about these cars is that they are really differently designed, and so it can be easy to be frustrated when you expect to be able to fix something, but discover that that thing is unlike what you're used to, e.g., double wishbone front suspension that requires little shims to work on, an alternator that, unintuitively, can only be removed by removing both it and its mount from the engine block, or a clutch cover that often takes three hands and much gnashing of teeth to re-install.
Except for transmission rebuild tools, there aren't any special tools that you couldn't make yourself (though the clutch install tool you can buy is much better than your own DIY version).
Saabnet.com is not the prettiest site but has the best signal to noise ratio. Bentley manual, an abridged version of the factory manual, is mandatory.
In reply to procainestart:
I think OP is referring to GM Saabs, as he uses "classic" in the context of a Viggen.
To OP, "classic Saab" means a pre-GM Saab in the community, which is very different than a GM Saab as previously noted. You might want to clarify what exactly you're looking at.
stan_d
SuperDork
2/12/17 1:49 p.m.
Setting it up where you don't have to remove the transmission to change the clutch brilliant.
I've had c900s, 9000s, and dabbled a bit with family members 9-5s.
C900s are very unconventional, but not really hard to maintain. Maybe one day I'll get mine to the challenge, with a T5 engine management conversion.(featuring parts robbed from a ng900)
9000s can seem hard until you learn the tricks and short cuts, (and which years to avoid completely). I came to really enjoy 9000s and would jump at chance for a clean,late 9000 aero m/t.
The 9-5 didn't do anything for me, but it was also a low-pressure turbo AT car. I didn't like working on it particularly either.
I could maybe give a well kept 9-5 aero/manual/wagon a shot, but I wouldn't go far out of my way to find one, I'd rather invest my efforts into unfinished business with RWD turbo Volvo wagons.
stan_d wrote:
Setting it up where you don't have to remove the transmission to change the clutch brilliant.
Yes it is, and the split subframe on the 9000 is pretty convenient too.
pointofdeparture wrote:
In reply to procainestart:
I think OP is referring to GM Saabs, as he uses "classic" in the context of a Viggen.
To OP, "classic Saab" means a pre-GM Saab in the community, which is very different than a GM Saab as previously noted. You might want to clarify what exactly you're looking at.
Umm, I didn't realize the Viggen was actually a GM era car... ooops :-O I'm kind of trying to survey both the 900 and the GM era ones and get a feeling for them. The Mighty Car Mods 900 kind of got me thinking about these again.
Problem is googling it turns up opposite ends of the spectrum...threads on forums saying they are the easiest car ever invented to work on, and Yahoo Answers things saying even pro mechanics won't touch them because they are such a PITA. Trying to understand what the reality is. Seems like cheap speed with, in some cases, iconic looks, and enough quirkiness to be interesting to drive and not another boring car.
Have come across some pretty scary pics out there of rust issues with the 900's. The 9000's kind of don't move the needle for me. The 900 turbo convertible looks are just classic/iconic to me. The Viggen I guess is from the beginning of the GM era? Then there is the 2003+ 9-3's which I guess are 2nd generation GM? 3rd generation?, not as iconic in the looks department, but price-to-speed ratio seems attractive.
My "96" was the easiest to work on any car ever.
In reply to nullcell:
The GM cars began way before the Viggen; 1994 to be exact. I'm still not really sure what you're looking for so I'll clear up the differences:
This is a pre-GM Saab 900 (known as a C900 or "classic" 900), which went extinct in 1993. They have longitudinal FWD engines and are really goofy. These are the ones that break transmissions and rust out at the front passenger side frame rail. Great cars but parts are starting to get really hard to find.
If it looks like this it is a GM Saab (known as the GM900 or NG900, NG meaning "new generation"). They were still called the 900 until '98 but share virtually nothing with the earlier pre-GM cars. These are transverse FWD and not really all that different than any other FWD car. They don't really have any rust issues in my experience either. You can make them very fast for pretty cheap but the chassis is a wet noodle and needs a lot of bracing to handle and put power down effectively.
I agreed with all above. I have owned both a GM900 turbo and my current Classic 900 Turbo. The GM was fast and pretty bulletproof, but trying to keep the wheel straight while accelerating deep into boost will build up your arms.
The classic 900s are very easy to work on.. once you figure out their logic
In reply to nullcell:
After reading your post on the Mini, I think you'd be much better off with a Saab.
Coming from a guy that has owned a NA C900 for a year and hasn't had to do anything to it other than basic maintenance.
What everyone else has said. The "GM" 900 and 9-3 are no harder to work on than any other FWD turbo car and the classic 900 is not bad like mad-machine said, you just have to think like a Swede.
I'll chime in here just to say how much I love working on Classic SAABs (per pointofdeparture's definition). I've worked on many, many cars over the years, and I just can't get rid of my '85 C900 because it is so easy to keep running.
As others have mentioned above, SAAB did things their own way. If you come to the C900 with an expectation of how a car should be built, you may be setting yourself up for some frustration. Things are very different, but different doesn't mean difficult or impossible. Just means you might need to check the Bentley book before you start or until you're familiar.
I'll wrench on a C900 over all the Honda, Mercedes, Toyota, GM, Mopar, etc. that I've serviced in the past.
I have to say that the Classic 900 has THE easiest heater valve to replace. You pop the driver's side speaker out of the top of the dash and it is right below it. 4 torx screws later, and you have replaced it.
yes, the Swedes love Torx, get used to them, buy the wrenches and drivers, and learn to love them
