2000 SAAB 9-3 Reviews - Page 11 of 12

2000 SAAB 9-3 2.0 from North America

Model year2000
Year of manufacture2000
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 2.0 Automatic
Performance marks 1 / 10
Reliability marks 1 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 0 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 2 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
1.8 / 10
Distance when acquired60000 miles
Most recent distance90000 miles
Previous carVolvo 240

Summary:

Sucks

Faults:

My engine seized at 80000 miles. Got a letter from Saab on recall due to engine sludge. After several weeks negotiating with Saab and locating service records they agreed to replace the engine free of charge. I still had to pay $250.00 diagnosis fee to the dealer and over $900.00 for rental car for two months. The problem was their fault, but it still cost me a lot of time and money. The only reason Saab probably replaced the engine is my husband is an Attorney. Seemed to be the key to getting them to respond.

Now the car won't start unexpectedly for several hours, then magically starts again - no explanation. Dealer can't locate the problem- no surprise.

General Comments:

This car is unreliable and Saab service is terrible.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 25th January, 2006

4th Apr 2006, 18:28

A common problem with the Saab 9-3 automatic is a bad contact in the neutral safety switch which will keep the car from starting in anything other than park or neutral. It's location in the engine compartment causes the continuity of the contact to decrease once the engine warms. After letting it set for a while the switch will wake up again allowing the car to start. The real unfortunate part is the price of the switch which is about 4 times the cost of one for any other vehicle about $350-$400.

2000 SAAB 9-3 SE 2.0 turbo from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2000
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 2.0 turbo Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.0 / 10
Distance when acquired113000 miles
Most recent distance115000 miles
Previous carVauxhall Frontera

Summary:

Absolutely awesome!!!

Faults:

Oil pump went at 114,000 miles.

Computer display has started to play up.

General Comments:

205bhp under your right foot makes this baby fly, there is not another car that I have found that can out accelerate this car - yet!!

Comfortable enough to be classed as an executive car, but punchy enough to be rated as a serious contender as a sports car - definitely the ultimate 'hot hatch' with all the toys that the guys love. Everything available at the touch of a steering column control stalk i.e. cruise control, stereo, 6 stack CD with the heated seats and A/C controls centimetres away on the dashboard, with the power to take on an M3 and an SLK200 and beat both.

Not for the faint hearted as you get serious amount of torque steer when accelerating heavily and the steering becomes light and wanders immensely, tend to use the power in 3rd,4th and 5th only to eliminate this problem as 1st and 2nd disappear in a blur when booting it anyway.

Spacious interior at the front although I would not recommend a strapping 6' get in the back as he/she may be somewhat cramped.

Unique ignition position in the centre console with the reverse gear lock attached to the ignition so that all 4 wheels are locked when parked, certainly eliminates somebody towing it away, whether legally or illegally.

Oil pump blew at 114,000 miles and took the engine with it, fortunately it was under warranty and the garage replaced it with an engine of 65,000 miles and to be honest there is no difference in power at all.

One downside is that it will 'eat' front tyres with all that power so expect a heavy tyre bill quite often.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 12th October, 2005

15th Nov 2005, 08:43

Good review and I can understand beating an SLK 200 as it's slow, but an M3. A Saab 9-3 aero cannot beat an M3 period.

7th Dec 2005, 11:01

I must agree. You are telling porkies about beating an M3.

If you beat an M3 from lights or something, its unlikely - but none-the-less possible that it was being driven by some old lady borrowing her sons car to run down to the shop for a tin of Horlicks; or a new set of knitting needles. She almost certainly would not have been aware that she had c. 100 horse more than you PLUS rear wheel Drive, and therefore would not have tried to show you rubber - which you would have seen had I been driving (the M3). Siigh!

Average review marks: 5.6 / 10, based on 30 reviews