V6

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48C3996C.C515AE79@hotmail.com...
>
>
> Lawrence Kohut wrote:
>
>> I've driven nothing but SAAB's for the last 15 years, loved all of them,
>> mostly 4 cylinder turbos except for the '93 9000 cse. We're looking for
>> a
>> second car, don't have much to spend, maybe $7000. I found a few 9-5's
>> for
>> sale, '99-2002, all under 100,000 miles, clean, clean carfax reports,
>> perhaps
>> priced too low re Kelly bluebook. My mechanic says I should avoid the
>> V6's
>> like the plague. Anyone have any sage advice or experience regarding
>> these
>> engines? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks, LK
>
> The V6s were never a 'genuine' Saab engine. Many give trouble. Your
> mechanic's no
> fool.

the bad rep comes from cambelts needing to be replaced every 40K, otherwise
big trouble. Apart from that they're OK....
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

>"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:48C3996C.C515AE79@hotmail.com...

>> The V6s were never a 'genuine' Saab engine. Many give trouble. Your

To nitpick here, probably the only "genuine" SAAB engine was the 3-cyl
2-stroke, and even that was clearly of DKW ancestry. The 2-cyl 2-stroke
was pretty clearly a DKW clone, the V4 came out of the Ford Taunus, the
various permutations of the 1850-2000cc slant-4 all started as the engine
Ricardo did for Triumph and developed from there..

The V6 was clearly a GM job, but no less SAAB than the first 2-strokes,
the V4s or the single-cam slant fours.

--
Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

My understanding is that the V6 in my 2001 SE was made by Mashushita.
Plus the Cam belt is on a 60k replacement schedule not a 40.

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 23:29:45 +0100, azb RemoveThis @aber.ac.uk (Andrew Robert
Breen) wrote:

>>"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:48C3996C.C515AE79@hotmail.com...
>
>>> The V6s were never a 'genuine' Saab engine. Many give trouble. Your
>
>To nitpick here, probably the only "genuine" SAAB engine was the 3-cyl
>2-stroke, and even that was clearly of DKW ancestry. The 2-cyl 2-stroke
>was pretty clearly a DKW clone, the V4 came out of the Ford Taunus, the
>various permutations of the 1850-2000cc slant-4 all started as the engine
>Ricardo did for Triumph and developed from there..
>
>The V6 was clearly a GM job, but no less SAAB than the first 2-strokes,
>the V4s or the single-cam slant fours.
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

john wrote:

> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Lawrence Kohut wrote:
> >
> >> I've driven nothing but SAAB's for the last 15 years, loved all of them,
> >> mostly 4 cylinder turbos except for the '93 9000 cse. We're looking for
> >> a second car, don't have much to spend, maybe $7000. I found a few 9-5's
> >> for sale, '99-2002, all under 100,000 miles, clean, clean carfax reports,
> >> perhaps priced too low re Kelly bluebook. My mechanic says I should avoid
> the
> >> V6's like the plague. Anyone have any sage advice or experience regarding
>
> >> these engines? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks, LK
> >
> > The V6s were never a 'genuine' Saab engine. Many give trouble. Your
> > mechanic's no fool.
>
> the bad rep comes from cambelts needing to be replaced every 40K, otherwise
> big trouble. Apart from that they're OK....

I heard some leak fluids a lot too.

Just to confuse the issue Saab have used 2 different V6s IIRC as well. The
later one may be better.

Graham
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

Andrew Robert Breen wrote:

> >"Eeyore" wrote
>
> >> The V6s were never a 'genuine' Saab engine. Many give trouble. Your
>
> To nitpick here, probably the only "genuine" SAAB engine was the 3-cyl
> 2-stroke, and even that was clearly of DKW ancestry. The 2-cyl 2-stroke
> was pretty clearly a DKW clone, the V4 came out of the Ford Taunus, the
> various permutations of the 1850-2000cc slant-4 all started as the engine
> Ricardo did for Triumph and developed from there..
>
> The V6 was clearly a GM job,

The initial ones in the 9000s (and possibly some others) were IIRC the Vauxhall
design (ok part of GM but it wasn't a widely used engine).


> but no less SAAB than the first 2-strokes,
> the V4s or the single-cam slant fours.

Oh come on. The B204 family was unique to Saab. Good engine too.

Graham
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

humma.TakeThisOut@hummahumma.com wrote:

> My understanding is that the V6 in my 2001 SE was made by Mashushita.
> Plus the Cam belt is on a 60k replacement schedule not a 40.

Tsssk @ cam belts.

Graham
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

azb.RemoveThis@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Robert Breen) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

>>> The V6 was clearly a GM job,

>>The initial ones in the 9000s (and possibly some others) were IIRC the
>>Vauxhall design (ok part of GM but it wasn't a widely used engine).

> OK, I'm pretty unfamilar with the GM-SAABs.

To be fair, the 9k isn't a GM-Saab. It's a Fiat-Saab. With a GM engine,
in the case of the V6.
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

In article <48C730DB.E914BAEA RemoveThis @hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Andrew Robert Breen wrote:
>
>> >"Eeyore" wrote
>>
>> >> The V6s were never a 'genuine' Saab engine. Many give trouble. Your
>>
>> To nitpick here, probably the only "genuine" SAAB engine was the 3-cyl
>> 2-stroke, and even that was clearly of DKW ancestry. The 2-cyl 2-stroke
>> was pretty clearly a DKW clone, the V4 came out of the Ford Taunus, the
>> various permutations of the 1850-2000cc slant-4 all started as the engine
>> Ricardo did for Triumph and developed from there..
>>
>> The V6 was clearly a GM job,
>
>The initial ones in the 9000s (and possibly some others) were IIRC the Vauxhall
>design (ok part of GM but it wasn't a widely used engine).

OK, I'm pretty unfamilar with the GM-SAABs.

>> but no less SAAB than the first 2-strokes,
>> the V4s or the single-cam slant fours.
>
>Oh come on. The B204 family was unique to Saab. Good engine too.

That's the twin-cam slant-four with the balance shafts, nyet? It's still
based on the Ricardo job, in a grandfather's axe sort of way.

--
Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

In article <6ipiipFramq9U3.DeleteThis@mid.individual.net>,
Adrian <toomany2cvs.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>azb@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Robert Breen) gurgled happily, sounding much like
>they were saying:
>
>>>> The V6 was clearly a GM job,
>
>>>The initial ones in the 9000s (and possibly some others) were IIRC the
>>>Vauxhall design (ok part of GM but it wasn't a widely used engine).
>
>> OK, I'm pretty unfamilar with the GM-SAABs.
>
>To be fair, the 9k isn't a GM-Saab. It's a Fiat-Saab. With a GM engine,
>in the case of the V6.

I was thinking more of having been unaware that the later GM-SAABs used a
different V6.

I'm rather more familiar with the 9000 than I'd really like to be - having
owned one for a couple of years now - and its FIAT ancenstry shows plain
(generally over bumps, when it rattles in a way that the 95/96 or
99/900/90 series just didn't). Mine has the (distantly) Ricardo-derived
slant-four, though, and it's by far the nicest thing about the car.

It's the subsequent n900s and onwards that I don't know much of.

--
Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 03:25:39 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>john wrote:
>
>> "Eeyore" wrote
>> > Lawrence Kohut wrote:
>> >
>> >> I've driven nothing but SAAB's for the last 15 years, loved all of them,
>> >> mostly 4 cylinder turbos except for the '93 9000 cse. We're looking for
>> >> a second car, don't have much to spend, maybe $7000. I found a few 9-5's
>> >> for sale, '99-2002, all under 100,000 miles, clean, clean carfax reports,
>> >> perhaps priced too low re Kelly bluebook. My mechanic says I should avoid
>> the
>> >> V6's like the plague. Anyone have any sage advice or experience regarding
>>
>> >> these engines? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks, LK
>> >
>> > The V6s were never a 'genuine' Saab engine. Many give trouble. Your
>> > mechanic's no fool.
>>
>> the bad rep comes from cambelts needing to be replaced every 40K, otherwise
>> big trouble. Apart from that they're OK....
>
>I heard some leak fluids a lot too.
>
>Just to confuse the issue Saab have used 2 different V6s IIRC as well. The
>later one may be better.

well i have a V6 diesel in a 2003 9-5 - i suspect you have all been
going on about the petrol ones so far.

i got it because at the time the 4 cyl Jap import diesel was noisy

this one has done 105k miles in 5 years - so far so good.....
>
>Graham
>
--
Regards

stephen_hope RemoveThis @xyzworld.com - replace xyz with ntl
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

Andrew Robert Breen wrote:

> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Andrew Robert Breen wrote:
> >> >"Eeyore" wrote
> >>
> >> >> The V6s were never a 'genuine' Saab engine. Many give trouble. Your
> >>
> >> To nitpick here, probably the only "genuine" SAAB engine was the 3-cyl
> >> 2-stroke, and even that was clearly of DKW ancestry. The 2-cyl 2-stroke
> >> was pretty clearly a DKW clone, the V4 came out of the Ford Taunus, the
> >> various permutations of the 1850-2000cc slant-4 all started as the engine
> >> Ricardo did for Triumph and developed from there..
> >>
> >> The V6 was clearly a GM job,
> >
> >The initial ones in the 9000s (and possibly some others) were IIRC the Vauxhall
> >design (ok part of GM but it wasn't a widely used engine).
>
> OK, I'm pretty unfamilar with the GM-SAABs.
>
> >> but no less SAAB than the first 2-strokes,
> >> the V4s or the single-cam slant fours.
> >
> >Oh come on. The B204 family was unique to Saab. Good engine too.
>
> That's the twin-cam slant-four with the balance shafts, nyet? It's still
> based on the Ricardo job, in a grandfather's axe sort of way.

The balance shaft versions were the B205 and B235. By then they possessed little
similarity to any Triumph angine.

I had a hot 9000CSE LPT with a B205 and I swear it must beeen chipped. It FLEW.

Graham
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

Adrian wrote:

> azb.DeleteThis@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Robert Breen) gurgled happily, sounding much like
> they were saying:
>
> >>> The V6 was clearly a GM job,
>
> >>The initial ones in the 9000s (and possibly some others) were IIRC the
> >>Vauxhall design (ok part of GM but it wasn't a widely used engine).
>
> > OK, I'm pretty unfamilar with the GM-SAABs.
>
> To be fair, the 9k isn't a GM-Saab. It's a Fiat-Saab. With a GM engine,
> in the case of the V6.

Why bring in Fiat ? Sure, they used the same chassis too but the Saab
version was enhanced far beyond any of the others. Still one of the greatest
Saabs ever IMHO.

Graham
 >> Stay informed about: V6 

Stephen wrote:

> Eeyore wrote:
> >john wrote:
> >> "Eeyore" wrote
> >> > Lawrence Kohut wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I've driven nothing but SAAB's for the last 15 years, loved all of them,
> >> >> mostly 4 cylinder turbos except for the '93 9000 cse. We're looking for
> >> >> a second car, don't have much to spend, maybe $7000. I found a few 9-5's
> >> >> for sale, '99-2002, all under 100,000 miles, clean, clean carfax reports,
> >> >> perhaps priced too low re Kelly bluebook. My mechanic says I should avoid
> >> >> the V6's like the plague. Anyone have any sage advice or experience
> regarding
> >>
> >> >> these engines? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks, LK
> >> >
> >> > The V6s were never a 'genuine' Saab engine. Many give trouble. Your
> >> > mechanic's no fool.
> >>
> >> the bad rep comes from cambelts needing to be replaced every 40K, otherwise
> >> big trouble. Apart from that they're OK....
> >
> >I heard some leak fluids a lot too.
> >
> >Just to confuse the issue Saab have used 2 different V6s IIRC as well. The
> >later one may be better.
>
> well i have a V6 diesel in a 2003 9-5 - i suspect you have all been
> going on about the petrol ones so far.

Yes. Didn't even know there was a V6 diesel now.


> i got it because at the time the 4 cyl Jap import diesel was noisy
>
> this one has done 105k miles in 5 years - so far so good.....

You know about the guy with the 900 who covered 1,000,000 miles on the original
engine ?

Graham
 >> Stay informed about: V6