1999 Saturn SL Reviews from North America - Page 5 of 13

1999 Saturn SL 1.9 SOHC

Model year1999
Year of manufacture1998
First year of ownership2007
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 1.9 SOHC Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 1 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.0 / 10
Distance when acquired125000 miles
Most recent distance127000 miles
Previous carFord Taurus

Summary:

A basic transportation car. Better cars available for not much more $$$

Faults:

Rear defogger button, horn, various switches and trim panels have failed. A lot of squeaks and rattles. The car is somewhat low in mileage, but the seat (drivers) is worn out worse than my old Taurus (and the Taurus has close to 300,000 miles). Just before I bought it, the shift linkage failed (very common). Almost everything I've had trouble with, I can go to Saturn fourms on the internet and find many examples of people who had the many of the same issues with their Saturn.

The 1.9L has been well maintained, but has developed a lifter tick that is very pronounced upon start-up (I now run Motorcraft Synthetic Blend 5W30 which has helped from whatever the prev. owner had in it). However, the car does not seem to be using much oil and otherwise runs well. The trans sometimes does not like to be downshifted into 4th gear from 5th (Overdrive).

General Comments:

Overall, it's a decent car to drive, with a few annoying quirks unbecoming of a car of this mileage and age. My other car is a 1992 Ford Tempo with almost 170,000 miles. The Tempo quieter, quicker, smoother, more comfortable, and although its never had major work done, the engine doesn't knock like the Saturn's. The Saturn has a lot more NVH from everywhere.

On a more positive note, it is very frugal (gets about 400 miles on a tank if I drive conservatively) and so far it has not given me any mechanical trouble other than a failed O2 sensor.

I bought the Saturn to use as a daily driver/commuter/gas-saver. For that purpose, it does well, just don't expect much more.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 23rd December, 2007

1999 Saturn SL SL1 1.9

Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 1.9 Automatic
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.3 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance147100 miles

Summary:

Perfectly designed for me

Faults:

I'd had to replace both front bearings.

It burns a some oil, noticeable only after long trips.

General Comments:

Awesome car overall!

On the highway this car still gets nearly 40 miles per gallon and 31-32 in the city. True, it has very little power, but I'm perfectly comfortable sacrificing power for economy.

At 147,000 miles I replaced the original front brake pads which still had probably 30-40% usable life still in them. None of my friends believed me until they saw the pads themselves.

Unless you buy a small hybrid, you're not going to find a more fuel efficient vehicle.

God bless the Saturn engineers for designing this car!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 27th October, 2007

1999 Saturn SL SL2 1.9L Twin Cam

Model year1999
Year of manufacture1998
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 1.9L Twin Cam Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.6 / 10
Distance when acquired19000 miles
Most recent distance121000 miles
Previous carToyota Celica

Summary:

If you're one who believes that name isn't everything, then it's the perfect inexpensive car

Faults:

The brake master cylinder had a slight leak after around 70,000 miles. It cost me about $70 dollars including labor to fix.

Due to the Florida humidity, the headliner is beginning to fall after almost nine years.

That's all!

General Comments:

While not the fastest or most luxurious car I've ever owned, it is certainly the best in terms of reliability, owning and maintenance costs, and general livability.

The car is very basic; e.g. no cruise control, crank-up windows, etc., but everything still works like new and is very easy to drive.

Over 40 mpg on highway!!!

Decade-old styling still looks decent.

Dent-resistant doors means it doesn't matter where you park it.

Seemingly as good or better than any of my friend's Japanese-built cars. Much cheaper too.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 31st August, 2007

1999 Saturn SL 1.9L

Model year1999
Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership2007
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 1.9L Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired92000 miles
Most recent distance94000 miles

Summary:

Excellent mode of transportation

Faults:

Nothing so far. When I bought it, it had a salvage title because the person I bought it from had just repaired it from a recent accident.

General Comments:

Not the greatest with comfort... I have a bad back and it isn't feeling very well after a 30 mile drive to/from work.

Excellent gas mileage!! With gas prices these days, this car is a MUST! I am a truck guy, but decided to buy this car because of the ever increasing fuel prices. The car had a 10+ gallon fuel tank, it takes me $30 to fill it, and it easily gives me 40 miles to the gallon!!

Very quick right out of the gears.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 26th June, 2007

Average review marks: 7.2 / 10, based on 47 reviews