Last year I bought 180tkm automatic non turbo NG900 for 600€ here in Finland. You can get these NG900 very cheap at least here and for that money very excellent value and safe everyday car. I have seen that these coupe models are better with outer body rust, with basic 5door sedan you can see rust from rear arches where two metal plates are bonded together and I think it is condensation between these two metal plates makes it rusting from that specific area. This is just my observation but it is good to keep in mind when buying this 5 door sedan.
Hi yeah it tends to be salt corrosion wearing out those wheel arches here - very common as the roads are over salted here in Sweden during winter - it kills cars !!! Anyway thanks for watching and don't forget to subscribe if you haven't yet !
I have to counterpoint your video! 8^) Yes, I love my classic 1989 Saab. Still, I feel that my 1998 900s is a better built car overall. It is quieter, stronger and more solid. It is less likely to rust than a classic Saab. My 98 has had some rust issues which were minor in comparison to my 1989. Most classic 900s are major rust buckets for those who wish to restore. By just opening the hood of a NG900 you'll see how better engineered the car is. The engine bay does not have wide open spaces such as in a classic Saab. That is efficient use of space. I love the quirky feel and styling of my classic. Still, for longer trips, I feel much safer in my 1998 900s. The interior doesn't look cheap to me. For its age, unlike my 1989, the dash has not cracked nor has the glove box buckled. On my 1989 some of the trim on the dash dried out, broke and has started to peel off. I understand that the initial 1994-1995 NG900s had some issues. By 1997-8 those issues were resolved. My 98 has been fairly dependable overall. It has close to 300k miles on it now! It does not leak whereas my antique does. I could go on and on! 8^)
I totally disagree but I guess it's subjective. I guess it also depends where you're based because in the UK we got all the Opel platform cars and you can see the immediate parts bin solutions GM used with the NG900 - I've owned many OG900s as a few NGs and for me the comparison is a no-brainer - maybe the NG to many has the eye-candy of a newer look etc but in terms of engineering it's pretty clear it was a step down - more a generic build like the Opel cars of the time - yes of course Saab put a little extra in but their hands were more tied than with the OG. A better overall car in some respects? Maybe but certainly not a better Saab. But each to their own - I'm glad you enjoy both your cars
@@theclassicsaabguy236 One additional plus to the NG900s non-turbo here in the US is they had the 2.3L engine. The European equivalent did not. So, it was an upgrade from the classic 900 in power. Plus, it was more powerful than the European equivalent. The standard engine, turbo or non-turbo, in Europe was the 2.0L which is underpowered without the turbo. Another plus to the NG900 vs. the classic 900 is the automatic transmission finally became a four speed. The three speed auto trans in the classics were way behind the technology of the era. The only good classic Saab is a five speed manual. Otherwise, it was a slug! 8^)
It's an ongoing debate apparently Special equipment or Sport Edition seem to be interchangeable on the Saab forums. On a non Saab car that was designated SE it stood for Sport Equipe 🤷♂️
In our market they had three levels: 900, 900S and 900SE. Meaning of the lettere unknown, but the level of equipment increased "with the number of letters".
I have just bought a v6 900 convertible nice car to be fair still runs well
Last year I bought 180tkm automatic non turbo NG900 for 600€ here in Finland. You can get these NG900 very cheap at least here and for that money very excellent value and safe everyday car. I have seen that these coupe models are better with outer body rust, with basic 5door sedan you can see rust from rear arches where two metal plates are bonded together and I think it is condensation between these two metal plates makes it rusting from that specific area. This is just my observation but it is good to keep in mind when buying this 5 door sedan.
Hi yeah it tends to be salt corrosion wearing out those wheel arches here - very common as the roads are over salted here in Sweden during winter - it kills cars !!! Anyway thanks for watching and don't forget to subscribe if you haven't yet !
I have to counterpoint your video! 8^) Yes, I love my classic 1989 Saab. Still, I feel that my 1998 900s is a better built car overall. It is quieter, stronger and more solid. It is less likely to rust than a classic Saab. My 98 has had some rust issues which were minor in comparison to my 1989. Most classic 900s are major rust buckets for those who wish to restore. By just opening the hood of a NG900 you'll see how better engineered the car is. The engine bay does not have wide open spaces such as in a classic Saab. That is efficient use of space. I love the quirky feel and styling of my classic. Still, for longer trips, I feel much safer in my 1998 900s. The interior doesn't look cheap to me. For its age, unlike my 1989, the dash has not cracked nor has the glove box buckled. On my 1989 some of the trim on the dash dried out, broke and has started to peel off. I understand that the initial 1994-1995 NG900s had some issues. By 1997-8 those issues were resolved. My 98 has been fairly dependable overall. It has close to 300k miles on it now! It does not leak whereas my antique does. I could go on and on! 8^)
I totally disagree but I guess it's subjective. I guess it also depends where you're based because in the UK we got all the Opel platform cars and you can see the immediate parts bin solutions GM used with the NG900 - I've owned many OG900s as a few NGs and for me the comparison is a no-brainer - maybe the NG to many has the eye-candy of a newer look etc but in terms of engineering it's pretty clear it was a step down - more a generic build like the Opel cars of the time - yes of course Saab put a little extra in but their hands were more tied than with the OG. A better overall car in some respects? Maybe but certainly not a better Saab. But each to their own - I'm glad you enjoy both your cars
@@theclassicsaabguy236 One additional plus to the NG900s non-turbo here in the US is they had the 2.3L engine. The European equivalent did not. So, it was an upgrade from the classic 900 in power. Plus, it was more powerful than the European equivalent. The standard engine, turbo or non-turbo, in Europe was the 2.0L which is underpowered without the turbo. Another plus to the NG900 vs. the classic 900 is the automatic transmission finally became a four speed. The three speed auto trans in the classics were way behind the technology of the era. The only good classic Saab is a five speed manual. Otherwise, it was a slug! 8^)
please tell me what the SE stands for.
It's an ongoing debate apparently Special equipment or Sport Edition seem to be interchangeable on the Saab forums. On a non Saab car that was designated SE it stood for Sport Equipe 🤷♂️
Thank you Classic Saab Guy!
SE means Something Extra! That gave you standard leather, turbo, and possibly a different style of alloy wheels.
In our market they had three levels: 900, 900S and 900SE.
Meaning of the lettere unknown, but the level of equipment increased "with the number of letters".