Prev: Rearing my ugly head
Next: My dork is almost done
From: Higgins on 15 Jun 2010 16:54
SteveH wrote:
> Lozzo <lozzo(a)lozzo.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> Right, what petrol one to go for then?
>
> 9-5 with the 2.3 HOT.

Agreed, but not if fuel consumption's an issue

>
> The 2.3t (LPT) has issues with oil sludging.

Yep, you need to be absolutely sure it's been run on fully-synth but
only those in the know will have done so. Saying that, it's only a
couple of hundred quid to get the sump dropped to clean the strainer and
it can be a good bargaining point if the previous owner hasn't done it.
>
> The 2.0 is just a turbocharged Vauxhall lump.

Post-2002, yes, but they seem to do the job well enough.

From: Lozzo on 15 Jun 2010 16:54
SteveH wrote:

> Hog <sm911SPAM(a)CHIPShotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > Right, what petrol one to go for then?
> >
> > The 2.0T that Saab have perfected over a long period of time.
> > That's half the point of buying a Saab. Non Aero spec is fine for
> > general legwork and will give your lead foot 30mpg. My Aero does
> > 27.5
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong - but, as I said in my other post - the 2.0T
> is a Vauxhall engine with a Turbo strapped to it - not a proper Saab
> lump.

Since when have Saab ever produced their own lump since they stopped
making the 2-strokes? The 96s used Ford V4s and the 99s and 900s all
used modified Dolomite engines, didn't they?

--
Lozzo
Versys 650 Tourer, CBR600F-W racebike in the making, TS250C, RD400F
(somewhere)
From: Higgins on 15 Jun 2010 16:57
Hog wrote:

<SAABs>

>My Aero does 27.5
>

My Aero does 19, 24 if I've done any motorway driving.
From: TMack on 15 Jun 2010 18:25
The Older Gentleman wrote:
> SteveH <italiancar(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> the Saab badge comes with a worse
>> reputation than anything that has come out of Italy in recent years.
>
> Harsh but maybe fair.
>
> I'd *still* like another Saab - we've had two - but it would have to
> be an updated version of a pre-GM Saab, not anything they've produced
> since.
>
> Interestingly, I received a questionnaire from Subaru last week, which
> suggests they're desperately trying to figure out how to re-position
> the brand.
>
> I thought this was a particularly telling uestion:
>
> STARTS/
>
> Which statement most closely reflects your view of Subaru?
>
> Subaru make top quality well specified cars that are better than
> German competitors but priced below because they are not as well
> known or understood.
>
> Subaru make superbly engineered cars, better than most, if not all
> competitors, but priced below because they are not as well known or
> understood.
>
> Subaru is only for people who need off-road and 4WD vehicles and suit
> those people well.
>
> Subaru make cars that are not quite as good as their rivals but are
> priced accordingly.
>
> Subaru cars are not as good as their rivals but are unfortunately
> priced higher
>
> /ENDS

They forgot:

Subaru is popular with baseball-cap-wearing young scrotes

--
Tony
'04 Ducati ST3, '08 DL650GT,
97 TW200, '87 semi-rat LS650, OMF#24


From: The Older Gentleman on 16 Jun 2010 02:44
TMack <tonyREMOVECAPSmackin(a)REMOVECAPS.dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

> Subaru is popular with baseball-cap-wearing young scrotes

Troo. There again, so are Suzukis.


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes!
Try Googling before asking a damn silly question.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Prev: Rearing my ugly head
Next: My dork is almost done