Thinking about a 900 convertible

[rushdriver]

Gaz,

My wife has a 1995 2.3 Convertible. The four cylinder engines are supposed to be the best, avoid the V6 like the plague. As for running costs, Lorna does about 15K miles a year and it costs about £200 p/a in servicing and regular oil changes. It's done 100,000 miles now and it's never missed a beat in all the time we've had it, it doesn't leak or get cold etc etc.

However, it's not a sports car, the skuttle shake is terrible and it's not that quick, but you can get four people sat in it and luggage for a whole week's holiday with ease

I'm biased but I'd do it!.

Cheers

John

[Mustard]

Take it we are talking the 'GM' shape circa '94 on?

Power corrupts as they say!, the high output turbo models are somewhat wayward in the handling department, combination of FWD, Turbo power and the roof sliced off for good measure doesnt help matters. Not sure what Matt can do to help!

Buy a nice one and they are good value for money, but I cant really see you in one mate

[900T-R]

If driving pleasure is anywhere up the priority list, I'd strongly suggest going for a late model Classic 900 convertible, and keep the spare change for some careful modding. It's not as good as the tintop version, but close enough - whereas the road behaviour of the GM-era version is compromised by the lack of a solid roof to a far bigger extent (and then the NG900 suspension wasn't up to much to begin with...).

[nicecupoftea]

A lot can be done to the ng900 (94-98) to make it better to drive - the Viggen Rescue Kit comprises new bushes, strut brace, and a steering clamp, and is well worth the money by all accounts.

However, it takes a lot of work to make a ng900 decent to drive, and it's still a way short of the classic IMHO.

Having said that, as a cruiser (and a cheap convertible one at that) it takes a lot of beating. Good equipment level, quick in 2.0 Turbo and V6 trim, classy understated looks, and reliable to boot.

A couple of things : try to avoid the first 2 years of them, lots of teething problems that were sorted by the 96 model year, so N-plate and later are much better cars. Also, a lot of people complain about the V6 model. IMHO it is really underrated. It was brought in because of the Yanks' distrust of anything 4 cylinder, and is a GM V6. It uses a cambelt as opposed to a chain, and when it lets go generally takes the engine with it. As long as you make sure they get changed regularly they should be fine.

Go for it!