Are Saab's generally reliable cars?

[krunchykrome]

Im going to go test drive a used Saab 9-3 this weekend. It's the linear model and it's a 2003. I really don't know anything about Saab's, hell, I've never even sat in one. Are they generally reliable cars? Any owners or former owners here?

 

[imported_Mike]

I've heard they arn't.

 

[DougK62]

2003 - that's a GM Saab then, right? With an ecotec engine? The GM Saab cars are reliable - I wouldn't say the same about the earlier ones.

 

[iamwiz82]

If you trust JD Powers, Saab was #2 least dependable for 2003 model year after 3 years of ownership.

MOST TROUBLESOME VEHICLES
Land Rover (438)
Saab (326)
Suzuki (318)
Kia (310)
Volkswagen (299)
Source: JD Power
(problems per 100 vehicles)

 

[K1052]

Various people in my family have them, 9-3s and 9-5s. Given the number of times I've had to provide transportation to and from the dealer's service dept I think I will be staying away.

 

[purbeast0]

Considering I hardly see any Saab's on the road and they aren't "luxury" cars per se, I would take that as a sign that they aren't the best of cars.

 

[dug777]

From the one person i know who owns one, not particularly.

But that's hardly a great sample size, and he flogs it.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
Considering I hardly see any Saab's on the road and they aren't "luxury" cars per se, I would take that as a sign that they aren't the best of cars.

That's not an entirely logical argument...have you ever considered that there just might not be that many on US roads, in proportion?

By the same token, i could assume that the Z06 is a pile of dogsh1t, because they're not 'luxury' cars per se, and i've never seen on on the road...

 

[PricklyPete]

From my research, no...they are not particularly reliable, although the newer 9-3 model is MUCH better than older Saabs. If reliability is your only/main concern...then Saabs are not for you.

The car is comfortable and quirky...both things that I like. I like the way it looks and it has had cool little touches like a refrigerated glove box for a long time. To me the biggest plus is that the car is very safe (has gotten very good crash test ratings from both federal and insurance testing. The 4 cylinder turbos put out decent power and get good gas mileage (my friend regularly got well over 30mpg on the highway out of a 210hp engine.

If I were buying a new one these days, I'd certainly go with the turbo'ed V6 model. It is very likely that a used Saab 9-3 or Audi A4 will be my wife's next car if I can't convince her that the upcoming Pontiac G8 would make a great car (I lust after that thing).

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
Considering I hardly see any Saab's on the road and they aren't "luxury" cars per se, I would take that as a sign that they aren't the best of cars.

Depends where you live. I could nuke downstate IL and not bag one but there are a bunch up here in Chicago.

I'll grant that they are generally nice looking cars but not worth their pricetags. Several of the Japanese companies offer a lot better for less.

 

[Nyati13]

Originally posted by: PricklyPete
From my research, no...they are not particularly reliable, although the newer 9-3 model is MUCH better than older Saabs. If reliability is your only/main concern...then Saabs are not for you.

If you want a reliable SAAB, buy a SAAB 9-2X. It's a Subaru under a thin veneer of SAAB luxury. It will be reliable.

 

[UDT89]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
If you trust JD Powers, Saab was #2 least dependable for 2003 model year after 3 years of ownership.

MOST TROUBLESOME VEHICLES
Land Rover (438)
Saab (326)
Suzuki (318)
Kia (310)
Volkswagen (299)
Source: JD Power
(problems per 100 vehicles)

can you link this?? cause i found this.

http://www.insurance.com/quotes/Article...st_and_Least_Dependable_Cars/artid/148

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: UDT89

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
If you trust JD Powers, Saab was #2 least dependable for 2003 model year after 3 years of ownership.

MOST TROUBLESOME VEHICLES
Land Rover (438)
Saab (326)
Suzuki (318)
Kia (310)
Volkswagen (299)
Source: JD Power
(problems per 100 vehicles)

can you link this?? cause i found this.

http://www.insurance.com/quotes/Article...st_and_Least_Dependable_Cars/artid/148

Here you are: http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2006133

 

[rivan]

Here's what Consumer Reports has to say about the 9-3

Edit: That's a WHOLE lot of black. I wouldn't buy that car.

Here, on the other hand, is what it shows for a highly reliable car.

 

[R Nilla]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: UDT89

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
If you trust JD Powers, Saab was #2 least dependable for 2003 model year after 3 years of ownership.

MOST TROUBLESOME VEHICLES
Land Rover (438)
Saab (326)
Suzuki (318)
Kia (310)
Volkswagen (299)
Source: JD Power
(problems per 100 vehicles)

can you link this?? cause i found this.

http://www.insurance.com/quotes/Article...st_and_Least_Dependable_Cars/artid/148

Here you are: http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2006133

Just three years prior they were above the industry standard (2000 model year vehicles, as shown in the 2003 VDS). That's a huge drop!

 

[UDT89]

i was actually set to get a 2003 saab 9-3 next week.

its certified so my warranty is 7 year/100k miles. and the car only has 30k.

but now im second guessing.......

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: R Nilla

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: UDT89

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
If you trust JD Powers, Saab was #2 least dependable for 2003 model year after 3 years of ownership.

MOST TROUBLESOME VEHICLES
Land Rover (438)
Saab (326)
Suzuki (318)
Kia (310)
Volkswagen (299)
Source: JD Power
(problems per 100 vehicles)

can you link this?? cause i found this.

http://www.insurance.com/quotes/Article...st_and_Least_Dependable_Cars/artid/148

Here you are: http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2006133

Just three years prior they were above the industry standard (2000 model year vehicles, as shown in the 2003 VDS). That's a huge drop!

Interesting that it coincides with the full takeover by GM

 

[R Nilla]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: R Nilla

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: UDT89

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
If you trust JD Powers, Saab was #2 least dependable for 2003 model year after 3 years of ownership.

MOST TROUBLESOME VEHICLES
Land Rover (438)
Saab (326)
Suzuki (318)
Kia (310)
Volkswagen (299)
Source: JD Power
(problems per 100 vehicles)

can you link this?? cause i found this.

http://www.insurance.com/quotes/Article...st_and_Least_Dependable_Cars/artid/148

Here you are: http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2006133

Just three years prior they were above the industry standard (2000 model year vehicles, as shown in the 2003 VDS). That's a huge drop!

Interesting that it coincides with the full takeover by GM

You're right, that is too funny.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I guess I don't get the appeal of Saabs. I have a close friend, who is female and a bit of an eccentric, who will only drive Saabs, but generally they are not especially reliable, nor especially thrilling to drive, yet they are comparable in price to brands that offer a lot more fun and prestige. They basically leave me cold.

 

[UDT89]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: R Nilla

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: UDT89

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
If you trust JD Powers, Saab was #2 least dependable for 2003 model year after 3 years of ownership.

MOST TROUBLESOME VEHICLES
Land Rover (438)
Saab (326)
Suzuki (318)
Kia (310)
Volkswagen (299)
Source: JD Power
(problems per 100 vehicles)

can you link this?? cause i found this.

http://www.insurance.com/quotes/Article...st_and_Least_Dependable_Cars/artid/148

Here you are: http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2006133

Just three years prior they were above the industry standard (2000 model year vehicles, as shown in the 2003 VDS). That's a huge drop!

Interesting that it coincides with the full takeover by GM

but 2 of the top 5 are GM........

 

[krunchykrome]

The other car I will be test driving this weekend is a 2003 Subaru WRX wagon. It's an automatic. We'll see how it goes tihs weekend. From the comments in this thread, I dont think I will be putting much consideration into the Saab anymore.

 

[spaceman]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
The other car I will be test driving this weekend is a 2003 Subaru WRX wagon. It's an automatic. We'll see how it goes tihs weekend. From the comments in this thread, I dont think I will be putting much consideration into the Saab anymore.

the saab 92x aero i think is the same car as the wrx.
(not totally sure on this)
the wrx is nice for a sport compact.

 

[sdifox]

Not reliable, especially the electrical.

 

[judasmachine]

I don't know about now, but I had '89 900 Turbo with over 149000 miles on it be the ex destroyed it. At over 140MPH it's like driving sex.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
The other car I will be test driving this weekend is a 2003 Subaru WRX wagon. It's an automatic. We'll see how it goes tihs weekend. From the comments in this thread, I dont think I will be putting much consideration into the Saab anymore.

The Subaru is a lot more reliable than the Saab (Subaru is among CR's Top 3 most reliable makes). I've owned an 03 WRX myself since new. However, the auto in that one is going to negate a good deal of the sportiness.