Saab 9-5 HOT estate Vs Volvo V70 t5?
Discussion
Hi all,
Just sold my MR2 and need an estate. Want a fast one and have narrowed it down to the aforementioned, both 2000 models with similar mileage and both manuals.
Does anyone have any pros and cons of either?
Saab from a trusted source and full service. Volvo from a dealer I don't know and needs a cambelt service costing c.£500k. Both cars are the same price too (£6k), and both well specified.
Eventually, I would like to remap whichever one I get.
Confused!
Andy
Just sold my MR2 and need an estate. Want a fast one and have narrowed it down to the aforementioned, both 2000 models with similar mileage and both manuals.
Does anyone have any pros and cons of either?
Saab from a trusted source and full service. Volvo from a dealer I don't know and needs a cambelt service costing c.£500k. Both cars are the same price too (£6k), and both well specified.
Eventually, I would like to remap whichever one I get.
Confused!
Andy
pennrolls said:
Hi all,
Just sold my MR2 and need an estate. Want a fast one and have narrowed it down to the aforementioned, both 2000 models with similar mileage and both manuals.
Does anyone have any pros and cons of either?
Saab from a trusted source and full service. Volvo from a dealer I don't know and needs a cambelt service costing c.£500k. Both cars are the same price too (£6k), and both well specified.
Eventually, I would like to remap whichever one I get.
Confused!
Andy
Well, I'm biased - go for the Saab. I don't honestly know much about the potential for tuning Volvos, but there is a well established Saab tuning market.Just sold my MR2 and need an estate. Want a fast one and have narrowed it down to the aforementioned, both 2000 models with similar mileage and both manuals.
Does anyone have any pros and cons of either?
Saab from a trusted source and full service. Volvo from a dealer I don't know and needs a cambelt service costing c.£500k. Both cars are the same price too (£6k), and both well specified.
Eventually, I would like to remap whichever one I get.
Confused!
Andy
Both brands have suffered from the influence of their "parent" companies quality-wise to some extent however. I suspect (but don't know) that the Saab will be the better drive.
tali1 said:
Not sure saab will be better drive with that vectra chassis and difficulty coping with 200bhp+ thru front wheels
Oh FFS - it is NOT a "Vectra" chassis - its a GM epsilon floorpan (used on Vectras as well as all sorts of other GM cars). You'll fine the Saab has very different dynamics to a Vectra.As for coping with 200+bhp through the front wheels - have a look at Ylee Coyote's 9000...
pennrolls said:
Hi all,
Just sold my MR2 and need an estate. Want a fast one and have narrowed it down to the aforementioned, both 2000 models with similar mileage and both manuals.
Does anyone have any pros and cons of either?
Saab from a trusted source and full service. Volvo from a dealer I don't know and needs a cambelt service costing c.£500k. Both cars are the same price too (£6k), and both well specified.
Eventually, I would like to remap whichever one I get.
Confused!
Andy
There's really not much in it if both are a similar spec.Just sold my MR2 and need an estate. Want a fast one and have narrowed it down to the aforementioned, both 2000 models with similar mileage and both manuals.
Does anyone have any pros and cons of either?
Saab from a trusted source and full service. Volvo from a dealer I don't know and needs a cambelt service costing c.£500k. Both cars are the same price too (£6k), and both well specified.
Eventually, I would like to remap whichever one I get.
Confused!
Andy
The one big drawback I found when I was looking at the S60/V70's was the appallingly bad steering lock which may or may not be a problem.......
On the other hand, the Volvo will be a lot cheaper and easier to tune than the Saab. There are only a few Saab specialist tuners that really know what they are doing and so Saab tuning costs can be a lot more. Especially with the B235R engine in the 9-5 Aero, as a remap on it's own is pretty much a pointless exercise as the stock hardware can't really support that much more hp than stock before Trionic will start knocking back the performance levels due to rapidly increased intake temps and EGT's.
This means that to get any real benefilt from a remap you need the expense of a full 3" exhaust and downpipe with sports or race cat, a better I/C and a bigger turbo intake pipe and maybe a 3.5bar FPR depending on who's software you use.
This makes tuning an Aero a LOT more expensive than a remap on a Volvo T5.
Thanks for your help- especially on the remap.
I think that the Saab is slightly smaller in terms of load carrying, as the back slopes, as opposed to the square backed Volvo, but other than that they seem pretty equal, although I think the Volvo is a bit nicer to look at from the front.
Does anyone know how they will dpereciate in comparison? There are lots of T5's around and I can gauge them, but manual 'hot' estates seem a bit rarer.
Thanks once again
Andy
I think that the Saab is slightly smaller in terms of load carrying, as the back slopes, as opposed to the square backed Volvo, but other than that they seem pretty equal, although I think the Volvo is a bit nicer to look at from the front.
Does anyone know how they will dpereciate in comparison? There are lots of T5's around and I can gauge them, but manual 'hot' estates seem a bit rarer.
Thanks once again
Andy
pennrolls said:
Does anyone know how they will dpereciate in comparison? There are lots of T5's around and I can gauge them, but manual 'hot' estates seem a bit rarer.
I think at the age you are looking (already 8 years) depreciation from now on in isn't going to be a lot different between the two.The Volvo probably does have a bit more load capacity, but, I guess I'm biased but I prefer the Saab's styling, and interior, and the B235R engine in the Saab is sweeter.
The other factor that may or may not sway you is what do you have in your area in way of Volvo or Saab specialist for servicing/maintainance or main dealer access if you are intending using them instead.
For example having a close known reputable Saab specialist closer to you than a Volvo one may sway you in the Saab's direction and vice-versa.
Thanks Areopilot. I have both Volvo and Saab main agents within 5 miles of me, and a renowned Volvo specialist (Phil Whitaker) a few doors down from the Saab main dealer, so am spolit for choice.
As far as I know, there are no Saab specialists in South Bucks.
I was only after a basic remap which I think boosts engine power from 230bhp to 270ish. Is that what you were referring to? I have seen this as being available from the Phil Whitaker 'site, but fully appreciate that there are other people who specialise in remapping Saabs.
As far as I know, there are no Saab specialists in South Bucks.
I was only after a basic remap which I think boosts engine power from 230bhp to 270ish. Is that what you were referring to? I have seen this as being available from the Phil Whitaker 'site, but fully appreciate that there are other people who specialise in remapping Saabs.
Edited by pennrolls on Wednesday 2nd April 13:24
pennrolls said:
Thanks Areopilot. I have both Volvo and Saab main agents within 5 miles of me, and a renowned Volvo specialist (Phil Whitaker) a few doors down from the Saab main dealer, so am spolit for choice.
As far as I know, there are no Saab specialists in South Bucks.
I was only after a basic remap which I think boosts engine power from 230bhp to 270ish. Is that what you were referring to? I have seen this as being available from the Phil Whitaker 'site, but fully appreciate that there are other people who specialise in remapping Saabs.
Aah, your not far from me then.As far as I know, there are no Saab specialists in South Bucks.
I was only after a basic remap which I think boosts engine power from 230bhp to 270ish. Is that what you were referring to? I have seen this as being available from the Phil Whitaker 'site, but fully appreciate that there are other people who specialise in remapping Saabs.
Edited by pennrolls on Wednesday 2nd April 13:24
There used to be BPV Saab in Ely Ave, Slough, but not sure if they are still there or not.
I wouldn't risk using that Race-Tune remap on a Saab TBH. Saab Trionic is very complex (and still one of the most advanced in the automotive world) and you really do need to go to one of the Saab specialist tuners, but even then a remap only on an Aero is just not worth the money as the hardware can't really support any realistic increase. You'll get 250-255 tops and then Trionic may still knock you back to stock on a warm day when it detects the temps getting too high.
You also need to know that that 230hp is a bit conservative and is really closer to 240, and that remap only on that Phil Witaker site will not get you 270 at all
despite what the tuner will tell you, the stock hardware just will not support it.Prof Beard said:
tali1 said:
Not sure saab will be better drive with that vectra chassis and difficulty coping with 200bhp+ thru front wheels
Oh FFS - it is NOT a "Vectra" chassis - its a GM epsilon floorpan (used on Vectras as well as all sorts of other GM cars). You'll fine the Saab has very different dynamics to a Vectra.As for coping with 200+bhp through the front wheels - have a look at Ylee Coyote's 9000...
Please note i do not have any anti-saab agenda and i do like them
I've been driving a Volvo V70 T5 manual estate for a few years - it's got 120K on clock and still going strong. I went for the Volvo as it had extra seats in the boot which I sometimes need for children's friends and the secondhand Volvo I found at those fitted, plus it had factory fitted sat nav/tv option and factory fitted phone, leather etc - so not much I could add to it.
I have it main dealer serviced paying between £200 and £400 a time (regardless of which service it is!), and nothing to report in terms of things going wrong or falling off. I drive it pretty hard, so it does go through tires, brake pads a bit quick, but no quicker than my previous Lexus LS400 or Jaguar XJS used to.
Final thing that prompted me to buy Volvo, is my wife has always had them, and they've all put over 100K miles on clocks before we sold them so I'm probably just more comfortable with the Volvo.
Igg
PS. Had a look at having engine uprated, but in view of mileages I do I'm not convinced it would be such a good idea - oh, and yes, the turning circle is really poor, but only irritates when doing 3-point turns - it's fine in multi-story car parks (whereas my XJS really was poor).
I have it main dealer serviced paying between £200 and £400 a time (regardless of which service it is!), and nothing to report in terms of things going wrong or falling off. I drive it pretty hard, so it does go through tires, brake pads a bit quick, but no quicker than my previous Lexus LS400 or Jaguar XJS used to.
Final thing that prompted me to buy Volvo, is my wife has always had them, and they've all put over 100K miles on clocks before we sold them so I'm probably just more comfortable with the Volvo.
Igg
PS. Had a look at having engine uprated, but in view of mileages I do I'm not convinced it would be such a good idea - oh, and yes, the turning circle is really poor, but only irritates when doing 3-point turns - it's fine in multi-story car parks (whereas my XJS really was poor).
tali1 said:
It is based on an extended Vauxhall Vectra chassis.As for driving experince my friend had an 07 plate for test drive he described it as "completely unacceptable for a car in the 20th century , never mind 21st"
Please note i do not have any anti-saab agenda and i do like them
NO - the Vectra ALSO uses the Epsilon floorpan/chassis - it is NOT specifically a Vauxhall part but a generic GM one - there is even a Cadillac that uses it. (The point I was trying to make is that it would be just as valid to say the Vectra is based on Saab chassis - it fact, in the case of the Caddy, people DO describe it as based on a Saab - JC did that on Top Gear) I'm quite happy to concede it may have its faults! (However the bits that connect the car and wheels etc to the floorpan in the Saab ARE different from the Vauxhall)Please note i do not have any anti-saab agenda and i do like them
After having both an 850R and currently owning a 95 aero I hope I can provide a good perspective for you :-)
The V70 has a great engine and the Saab's is nowhere near as enjoyable to listen to. It has great load carrying ability and is very well built. The engine is THIRSTY, or was on the R.
Neither the Saab OR the Volvo "handle" as they're FWD Estate cars - set your expectation as a result. I am more than happy with the way the 95 handles and believe it copes with general bombing around and cornering better than the Volvo. Neither car puts its power down 'that' well but I find this with all FWD cars and its your driving style that will dictate FAR more than the cars chassis.
The Saab is definitely a better looking car and the interior is FAR nicer. The Saab definitely feels and looks classier than the Volvo although both have faired reasonable well age-wise.
Saab engine can be a bit clattery on tick over but will be more economical and I have to say despite the sound the Saab delivers its power in a way that feels much faster than the T5 - I've not checked torque to see if figures back that up.
Saab and volvo both have some reliability foibles - Saab DI cassettes, oil leaks, breather mods, check thee things and others or at least be aware. Volvo air-con can be very expensive to fix if there's a problem and I remember a few engine issues you MUST check to ensure they're ok so both as bad/good as each other on that front. Saab doesn't need cambelt changes.
Don't buy either with a view to using main dealers. If that's the only option then buy the other one as they're not economical at that age.
Saab 95 was designed by SAAB and was well put together even though it uses some GM parts so it's a better bet than the newer 93s.
Forget all this stupid nonsense about vectra chassis - the chassis used is GM parts bin but this makes it no worse than Volvo using the same chassis throughout their range too. The aero's suspension is far better than the equivalent T5 - V70R probably not. Both can be upgraded, aero's hirsch kit known to be fantastic.
Personally I'd go for a slightly newer 95 aero to ensure you get the 250bhp option as this one can then be tuned, more so than the 230bhp version I own.
My recommendation would be; get a 250bhp version Saab 95 aero and make sure you get all the toys on it. If you want to upgrade it then do so in brakes and suspension, don't bother with engine. You're driving a performance estate that already beats most things on the motorway, anything that'll come close you'll want more than an extra 30bhp to see it off. I've surprised a number of people with the aero when it lifts its skirts and drops a couple of cogs in "sport mode" - even better when I've got the mountainbike in the back grinning at the BMW coupe/audi TT I'm pulling away from ;-)
The V70 has a great engine and the Saab's is nowhere near as enjoyable to listen to. It has great load carrying ability and is very well built. The engine is THIRSTY, or was on the R.
Neither the Saab OR the Volvo "handle" as they're FWD Estate cars - set your expectation as a result. I am more than happy with the way the 95 handles and believe it copes with general bombing around and cornering better than the Volvo. Neither car puts its power down 'that' well but I find this with all FWD cars and its your driving style that will dictate FAR more than the cars chassis.
The Saab is definitely a better looking car and the interior is FAR nicer. The Saab definitely feels and looks classier than the Volvo although both have faired reasonable well age-wise.
Saab engine can be a bit clattery on tick over but will be more economical and I have to say despite the sound the Saab delivers its power in a way that feels much faster than the T5 - I've not checked torque to see if figures back that up.
Saab and volvo both have some reliability foibles - Saab DI cassettes, oil leaks, breather mods, check thee things and others or at least be aware. Volvo air-con can be very expensive to fix if there's a problem and I remember a few engine issues you MUST check to ensure they're ok so both as bad/good as each other on that front. Saab doesn't need cambelt changes.
Don't buy either with a view to using main dealers. If that's the only option then buy the other one as they're not economical at that age.
Saab 95 was designed by SAAB and was well put together even though it uses some GM parts so it's a better bet than the newer 93s.
Forget all this stupid nonsense about vectra chassis - the chassis used is GM parts bin but this makes it no worse than Volvo using the same chassis throughout their range too. The aero's suspension is far better than the equivalent T5 - V70R probably not. Both can be upgraded, aero's hirsch kit known to be fantastic.
Personally I'd go for a slightly newer 95 aero to ensure you get the 250bhp option as this one can then be tuned, more so than the 230bhp version I own.
My recommendation would be; get a 250bhp version Saab 95 aero and make sure you get all the toys on it. If you want to upgrade it then do so in brakes and suspension, don't bother with engine. You're driving a performance estate that already beats most things on the motorway, anything that'll come close you'll want more than an extra 30bhp to see it off. I've surprised a number of people with the aero when it lifts its skirts and drops a couple of cogs in "sport mode" - even better when I've got the mountainbike in the back grinning at the BMW coupe/audi TT I'm pulling away from ;-)
Just read that again... £6k for a 2000 95 aero estate is too much money. More bang for your buck available in the Saab world, my 2000 cost 4k over a year ago. Don't be shy with mileage :-)
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/447193.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/442663.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/438747.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/390166.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/431615.htm
There's more there but 2002 easily in your reach for £6k then you can get a maptun done if you're insistent on ECU remap.
Looking at the Volvos the model change 2000 model is better than the 850/V70 as it's completely new and not boxy but generally flicking through the T5 models they look no different to the bog standard naff ones.
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/447193.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/442663.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/438747.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/390166.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/431615.htm
There's more there but 2002 easily in your reach for £6k then you can get a maptun done if you're insistent on ECU remap.
Looking at the Volvos the model change 2000 model is better than the 850/V70 as it's completely new and not boxy but generally flicking through the T5 models they look no different to the bog standard naff ones.
look tali1 you've stated you're not anti-saab but you continue to troll about the Vectra floorpan! Go and drive a Vectra and a Saab and assess for yourself.
I've owned several Volvos and currently have a 2000 Saab 9-5 Estate 2.3LPT, just coming up to 180k miles of which we've done 173k of them. Personally I'd rather be in a Saab than the Volvo, but 6k for a 2000 Aero is having a laugh.
Don't worry about the milage they are more than capable
davidy
I've owned several Volvos and currently have a 2000 Saab 9-5 Estate 2.3LPT, just coming up to 180k miles of which we've done 173k of them. Personally I'd rather be in a Saab than the Volvo, but 6k for a 2000 Aero is having a laugh.
Don't worry about the milage they are more than capable
davidy
DavidY said:
look tali1 you've stated you're not anti-saab but you continue to troll about the Vectra floorpan! Go and drive a Vectra and a Saab and assess for yourself.
I've owned several Volvos and currently have a 2000 Saab 9-5 Estate 2.3LPT, just coming up to 180k miles of which we've done 173k of them. Personally I'd rather be in a Saab than the Volvo, but 6k for a 2000 Aero is having a laugh.
Don't worry about the milage they are more than capable
davidy
I can assure you i am not trollingI've owned several Volvos and currently have a 2000 Saab 9-5 Estate 2.3LPT, just coming up to 180k miles of which we've done 173k of them. Personally I'd rather be in a Saab than the Volvo, but 6k for a 2000 Aero is having a laugh.
Don't worry about the milage they are more than capable
davidy
LOL - You SOOO are :-)
However, to answer the question it uses 0% of the Vauxhall Vectra chassis. They do BOTH however use their own variation of the GM Epislon platform. This is a similar arrangement to that used by any and every major manufacturer.
Are they similar - damn right they are. Is it the best chassis since sliced bread? Damn right it isn't!!! It has always had a problem with skittling under power mid corner but Saab have worked to iron out most of that issue to the point now where you could no more compare the chassis with a Vectra one than you could compare the Volvo's with a Mondeos.
Getting this kind of back to answering the original question about which is better. My belief is that the sum of the parts is more important and the Saab is more dynamic and enjoyable to drive even with the achilles heel (well strapped by Saab).
Let's be honest though... we're talking about 6-8 year old estates, not Ferraris, so let's not get carried away with this daft chassis nonsense.
However, to answer the question it uses 0% of the Vauxhall Vectra chassis. They do BOTH however use their own variation of the GM Epislon platform. This is a similar arrangement to that used by any and every major manufacturer.
Are they similar - damn right they are. Is it the best chassis since sliced bread? Damn right it isn't!!! It has always had a problem with skittling under power mid corner but Saab have worked to iron out most of that issue to the point now where you could no more compare the chassis with a Vectra one than you could compare the Volvo's with a Mondeos.
Getting this kind of back to answering the original question about which is better. My belief is that the sum of the parts is more important and the Saab is more dynamic and enjoyable to drive even with the achilles heel (well strapped by Saab).
Let's be honest though... we're talking about 6-8 year old estates, not Ferraris, so let's not get carried away with this daft chassis nonsense.
dubbs said:
Just read that again... £6k for a 2000 95 aero estate is too much money. More bang for your buck available in the Saab world, my 2000 cost 4k over a year ago. Don't be shy with mileage :-)
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/447193.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/442663.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/438747.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/390166.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/431615.htm
There's more there but 2002 easily in your reach for £6k then you can get a maptun done if you're insistent on ECU remap.
Looking at the Volvos the model change 2000 model is better than the 850/V70 as it's completely new and not boxy but generally flicking through the T5 models they look no different to the bog standard naff ones.
Have to say I aree - £6k for a 2000 seems silly money. I have to declare and interest, as ne of the listed cars above is mine, which I paid a good deal less than £6k for. It was the fourth Saab I took over 100k, and the second I took over 150k, yet it's still on the original exhaust and clutch. Incredible cars. http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/447193.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/442663.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/438747.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/390166.htm
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/431615.htm
There's more there but 2002 easily in your reach for £6k then you can get a maptun done if you're insistent on ECU remap.
Looking at the Volvos the model change 2000 model is better than the 850/V70 as it's completely new and not boxy but generally flicking through the T5 models they look no different to the bog standard naff ones.
I considered both S60 and V70 T5s at various points over the years yet kept coming back to the 9-5 Aero - yes the Volvo had the bigger loadspace, but the Saab had more passenger and driver room, more logical cockpit, far superior seats for long motorway jaunts, and I agree with one of the above posts: likewise I haven't checked the figures, but the Aero always felt it had more low-down torque than the T5, yet would return 35mpg+ on a run (in manual form) which isn't too shabby for a 1800kg 250bhp wardrobe on wheels!
Gassing Station | Saab | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff