My Father is looking for a nearly-new diesel automatic. The choice has boiled down to one of 2 cars (nothing else under consideration, not even a Mondeo TDCi...):
Saab 9-3 saloon, Vector Sport finish, 1.9tdi with 150bhp;
or
Volvo S40 D5 SE Geartronic, 2.4D with 180bhp.
Both are around 6 months old with broadly similar specs. Will be sourced from main dealer stock.
There are fewer Volvos around, and so prices are correspondingly higher. Cost to change is UK£2-3k more for the Volvo. Saab diesel automatics seem plentiful in comparison!
He does about 15k miles/year and will keep the car at least 5 years.
Which would you choose?! And why? I said to him that it simply boils down to personal preference - both with the car and the dealership..!
|
|
Anecdotal evidence on these boards is that Saabs are far less reliable. I can back that up with no figures though, so might be worth your own trawl through the archive.
|
|
|
Ive driven a V70 with that D5 lump & geartronic box.
Very nippy & still did nearly 40 mpg for a large estate & my heavy right foot.
The engine & box seemed to work very well together as a package.
|
My brother has Saabs regularly as Company Cars (his choice is 93 or Vectra) and he has nothing but trouble with them - he usually drives diesels as well (although the manual version).
IMO the Ford group are far more advanced at building reliable cars than GM are so would expect the Volvo to give better reliability.
As these are the only 2 makes under consideration it would be a Volvo IMO.
(Does he actually know that he is looking at re-badged Fords and Vauxhalls - I ask because he probably thinks he is getting some super Swedish quality that no longer exists like it used to - relatively)
|
Volvo (5cyl) and Saab both use the Aisin-Warner autobox, in common with Toyota and Vauxhall.
Since the Volvo S40 is based on the Focus and the Saabs are based on the Vectra, two different size cars/platforms are being considered which makes comparison difficult.
|
Ruperts - your point about the auto box is interesting because I always though Toyota and Honda made their own gearboxes (auto and manual).
I wonder why Toyota and Honda do not produce a diesel auto then - do you know ?
When I asked previously HJ suggested it was because they did not have auto boxes for diesels that were strong enough - yet you say Volvo and Saab already use these ?
|
Aisan were originally set up by Toyota to make their auto transmissions. They have subsequently been 'spun off' and have supplied other vehicle manufacturers for many years (including GM and Volvo going back a long way).
Honda do make their own 'boxes, but often use other people's technology.
Toyota have made automatic diesels for many many years. There is no problem in making a box 'strong enough' (whatever that means) for a diesel engine!
|
|
|
The Vectra V6 diesel produces 184PS / 295lbft and works fine with an Aisin-Warner autobox. I know that torque capacity defines autobox limitations but just how much power / torque are Toyota and Honda producing from their diesels?
The Aisin-Warner autobox is used globally by GM front-wheel drive cars so Saab's use is natural, particularly as the 9-3 and 9-5 are Vectra derived. Volvo have used the Aisin-Warner since their independent days. Whether Ford can provide a high-torque front-wheel drive autobox for future use across all their brands remains to be seen.
|
So now I can truthfully claim that my Astra was built in Germany, has engine designed by Cosworth, suspension tuned by Lotus and auto gearbox built by Toyota.
British cars aren't like they used to be!
|
|
It's still an astra though.
|
sorry, that post needs a smilie
;)
|
Toyota have made automatic diesels for many many years. There is no problem in making a box 'strong enough' (whatever that means) for a diesel engine!
Aprilla - this is what was said:-
"Can't take the torque characteristics of the diesel engine and fit in the car. The Japs make a lot of diesel auto vans, buses and SUVs, but not cars."
HJ
Which auto diesels in Toyota cars were you referring to out of interest ?
|
"Can't take the torque characteristics of the diesel engine and fit in the car. The Japs make a lot of diesel auto vans, buses and SUVs, but not cars."
Whatever HJ says, it can't be a technical restriction (Toyota's Aisin-Warner autoboxes are already widely used with diesels). More likely it's a marketing restriction that Toyota are concentrating on selling to the premium priced part of the market where cost per mile is less important.
|
If so I would suggest that Toyota have got their marketing strategy totally wrong in europe then where diesel autos would be popular.
I know a number of people at work with diesel auto BMW's that what gladly swap them for a Lexus IS 220d if it had the auto box.
I wonder why they choose not to do it.
|
"It's still an astra though."
And none the worse for that. Mine's done 87k on routine servicing, Mot emissions were 0.00% CO and 0ppm HC so little engine wear. It's got all the space and equipment that we need and I don't want others to be impressed.
Image and reputation count for very little if the best aren't much better than average.
|
Back to the OP. I wouldn't go for the 9-3, not that there's anything wrong with the (Fiat derived) 1.9CDTi or the autobox.
If you look at the saabscene website or carsurvey.org you will find loads of owners who are unhappy with these cars. The materials used for trim just aren't up to an acceptable quality, let alone for a brand that positions itself as upmarket . I was considering a 9-3 diesel myself and reading on these websites put me right off. When I actually visited the dealer, I thought the dash was very airfix and the the wheel nuts on the 6 month old car I was looking at were rusted.
I do like SAABs design wise but wouldn't buy one with my own cash. Buy a Vectra 1.9CDTi (150) Elite auto instead, it's better built believe me.
Re the V40/V50 - it's basically a reshelled Focus as someone has already pointed out - therefore not a lot of space in the back.
|
|
I have a Saab - I'm switching to a V50 - enough said?
|
Got to agree with all the above. Drove a 9-3 last week and thought it felt very cheap and basic inside. The plastics on my Xsara have more of a quality feel about them. Also found the driving position very strange, felt far too close to the dash for my liking and just seemed to be a big wall of grey plastic in front of me, and quite claustrophobic.
Are Saab still trying to compete in the premium sector with this car? To my mind flet no more luxurious than a Mondeo or Vectra, in fact, think they would probably feel more like the prestige mark compared the interior.
I took the car out for a spin wanting to love it, as have always liked Saabs, but was seriously disappointed by how cheap and basic it felt. Car itself was smooth enough, and drove pleasantly, but was just a little bit boring.
Of course, these are only my views, and I think the car was a poverty spec model. But Brother in laws poverty LS spec Vectra is much nicer inside.
|
|
Toyota cars are available with Diesel engine + auto transmission, and have been for many years. They have not been sold in the UK though. Toyota Corolla is available with 2.2D and auto and is a popular car in many markets. Most of the taxis in Singapore and many in Tokyo are Toyota Diesel autos. A fair number of the old Carina Diesel auto's came to the UK and Ireland during the 1990s (as grey importsb from Japan). They still pop up from time to time on eBay. A friend of mine had one and I serviced it for him on a few occassions - very good it was too..
|
|
Well, he doesn't read this forum but has come to a decision which seems to concur with many of you. He's bought the Volvo; picks it up next Wednesday!
|
|
|
|
