2.3 (4) Aero v/s 2.8 (V6) Aero...?

[Job38]

Something that's long confused me......

The comparatively old 2.3 (4) Aero and the 2.8 (V6) Aero, have, similar power and torque, but (as well as additional 0.5L displacement) presumably the V6 is larger and heavier (especially not good for FWD).

So, am I missing something, what is the point/advantage.....discuss......

[Gribs]

The 2.8 v6 was a GM lump so probably cheaper and probably met later emmisions standards. That and a 4 cylinder doesn't really cut it in the premium sector.

[Cosworth750]

IMO the 2.3 4cylinder turbo is the better engine.

Lower emissions at 214c02, noticeably better fuel consumption.

Both have very similar power so no real difference there...

[loko]

but obviously not in GM,s opinion

IMO i,ve had both and the 2.8 V6 is far superior

[Job38]

So, the 2.8 is less efficient, less power/displacement, and heavier, yet 'far superior' - how does that work then.....?

[dave stew]

I'm a big fan of turbo engines - off boost they are quite economical, on boost you get the power. There's a nice kick when Saabs spool up!

[stevoknevo]

Job38 said:

So, the 2.8 is less efficient, less power/displacement, and heavier, yet 'far superior' - how does that work then.....?

Quite a few of the bods on UKSaabs who have/had high power 9k's, C9-3's, 9-5's etc have switched to the 2.8 V6. They all seem to love the engine, especially in a Turbo X.

[bungle]

Currently weighing up a 9-3 2.8 vs 9-5 2.3, and have 2 (stupid?) questions:

1. Are they chain or belt driven? I assume the 2.8 V6 is chain, but there is some conflicting advice on the 2.3!

2. Autotrader stats seem to say that the boot is bigger on the 9-3? (estate). 416 litres (9-5) vs 419 litres (9-3). Surely that can't be right? Even visually the 9-5 looks loads bigger.

Any help appreciated. Thanks.

[Job38]

Pretty sure the 2.3 is a chain (happy to be corrected).

Can't imagine the 93 has a bigger load volume, they look even smaller in the back than my old 93 Coupe (again, happy to be corrected).

There are a lot more 93 Aero estates available than 95 - ask me how I know

[loko]

the 2.8 is chain driven

[stevoknevo]

loko said:

the 2.8 is chain driven

As is the 2.3. The chains can stretch on both engines, but far cheaper, and quicker, to rectify on the 2.3.

[bungle]

Is there a recommended replacement interval for the chain?

[loko]

the 2.8T should be good for 100k but theres been a fair few vec vxr,s that have gone at 20-40k vauxhall are qouting £2,500 as an average to repair them when they have stretched, they can obviously be done cheaper

[bungle]

loko said:

the 2.8T should be good for 100k but theres been a fair few vec vxr,s that have gone at 20-40k vauxhall are qouting £2,500 as an average to repair them when they have stretched, they can obviously be done cheaper

If they're only good for 100k, then I assume there's a recommended change interval for them? Otherwise the repair bill would be more than a lot of these cars are worth if they went!

I'm specifically looking at 2.3 Aeros, rather than the 2.8. Thanks.

[mywifeshusband]

Go for a 4 pot engine. There's a wealth on knowledge available in the UK compared to the V6.

I always thought that a V6 was put in Saabs from the 9000 onwards to increase their appeal to the US market.