difference in ride/power 9-3

Ginny Wong wrote:
> I have year 2000, 93 -low pressure autobox and love it. Goes like stink when
> called to perform! Looking for newer 93, perhaps the anniversary edition
> with premium upgrades.
> Is it worth it?
> What are SAAB peoples opinions on the differences between low and high
> pressure turbo engines? Gas needs to be a better grade in the high pressure
> but is the extra expense worth a more powerful turbo engine?

I had a 2000 9-3SE 5-speed convertible for a short time. The SE was the
loaded version with the HOT engine. I bought it used as a project car
and fixed it up. I ended up hating it. The engine had tons of power,
but the turbo lag was significant, the shifter was mushy, the chassis
flexed like crazy (cowl shake) and the fly-by-wire engine control that
year had the annoying habit of holding the rpms up when you released the
accelerator to shift. I ended up selling it and buying a BMW Z3 for a
toy car instead.

Fast forward to this year. Sold the toy car as it was not getting used
enough. When the sun is shining I'd rather be on 2 wheels and when it's
not that car (Z3) was useless. Started looking for another car to stick
in the garage and test drove some 9-3 Sport Sedans. Wow. HUGE
difference compared to the older style 9-3s.

I was looking at MY2003's mostly because these are what is coming off
lease (and I never buy new cars). I would have settled for a Linear
(185HP) with a 5 speed but ended up getting a Vector (name for an Aero
that year) with the HOT 210HP 2 liter engine and a 6 speed manual.
Once I drove the Vector I knew I had to have the full package. It does
everything superbly, is a freeking blast to drive and gets > 30mpg in
the process.

Do yourself a favor and drive a few of these (tyhe newer Sport Sedans)
before you make up your mind. Also, the Cabrios in '03 - '05 were all
the older body style still and did not update until MY '06, so if it
were me I would either wait for the new style or forgo the ragtop.

YMMV
--
-Fred W