Saab 9-3 2.2TiD. Thoughts?

[fomb]

I've had an interesting 9-3 pop up near me that looks like an option for me who needs a family car that's good on gas, but can also tow a caravan every now and then.

Problem, I seem to have lived my entire life with zero experience of Saab, so therefore know bugger all about them.

Therefore, are they a good choice? What are the downsides?

The car in question is a 2004, with just under 90k on the clock.

[Grantmo7]

well, ive just bought the saab 9-3 150bhp 1.9tid vector sport and i have to say its amazing, great quality car, id recommend the 1.9 16v like mine as i was in the same situation as you but started to hear a lot of dodgy things regarding the 2.2 engine, and was advised the 1.9 (150) was a far better engine, only minor problems like egr valve has sometimes flagged up on forums sayin it occasionally has to be changed, but i think the 2.2 has more issues like bad cambelts and stuff..not 100% sure on this, but reading up on it made me change my mind and i went for the 1.9 tid instead...

great car tho, excellent quality and very reliable by the sounds of it,..

time will tell.

good luck

grant

[bakerstreet]

Grantmo7 said:

well, ive just bought the saab 9-3 150bhp 1.9tid vector sport and i have to say its amazing, great quality car, id recommend the 1.9 16v like mine as i was in the same situation as you but started to hear a lot of dodgy things regarding the 2.2 engine, and was advised the 1.9 (150) was a far better engine, only minor problems like egr valve has sometimes flagged up on forums sayin it occasionally has to be changed, but i think the 2.2 has more issues like bad cambelts and stuff..not 100% sure on this, but reading up on it made me change my mind and i went for the 1.9 tid instead...

great car tho, excellent quality and very reliable by the sounds of it,..

time will tell.

good luck

grant

How can the 2.2TID have issues with cambelts when it hasn't got one!!! The 2.2 is chain driven and is considered to be less refined than the BELT driven 1.9

If you read enough on the internet you will find some horror stories on the 1.9 as well!

The 1.9 is smoother and the economy is about the same. I get around 40-44mpg out of mine and that has been over the last 2100 miles and I have only had it a month! I don't believe the 50mpg average claims.

If you can stretch to a later 2007 onwards model, I would advise it because the stereo system is a lot simpler and you can update it. The multi component fibre linked items on the 02-07s are a pain and very expensive if they go wrong. Be aware that the bluetooth in the infotainment package is data only and no good for phones.

Also the satnav in the 02-07 cars is just pants. It really is ancient. Its quicker to pick up signal in built up areas compared to my phone of tomtom, but that is its only saving grace. I use it as a last resort.

Practicality wise they are fantastic. Folding seats and a massive boot. Very comfortable to do miles in. Not lot of room in the back, but I dont really care about that.

The handling is not great IMO. The ride is very crashy and the steering is vague. The brakes are powerful enough but the pedal is very spongy.

Mine is a 2005 car and has done 122k and is as tight as a drum. It shows no signs of oil leaking anywhere. The trim also shows no sign of its 122k on the clock

Thanks to the iffy state that Saab are in, they are a used bargain. I got a 2005 car with sat nab, leather electric everything, CD changed, dual zone AC and lots of airbags for £3500

I'm hoping to solve a few few those issues with polybushing the ARBs, adding braided lines and fresh brake fluid.

I've all ready started tweaking mine with a set of Aero alloys and a bluetooth kit