Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
I didn't realise our Accy knew the lady mayor.
One For Classic Car Fans.....
- Thread starter Alex H
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I didn't realise our Accy knew the lady mayor.
DRM
Guru
- Location
- West Yorks
The V6 260 Estate I had did about 20 mpg at best, I think on a long run I managed to squeeze about 23 mpg once, I dread to think what it was doing towing the caravan
raleighnut
Legendary Member
- Location
- One of the 'Elite'
The 245 wasn't much better, that 1800cc engine wasn't really up to it so consequently used a lot of fuel but then I'm biased as a youth I worked at a SAAB main dealer, far better cars. All the 'safety' innovation Volvo supposedly came up with were actually the company trying to keep up with SAAB.
I don't remember Volvo winning any world rally events whereas SAAB won the Monte Carlo rally more than once (3 times) and when they were rallied the 96 and 99 didn't need a secondary 'roll cage' fitted..................It was built into the standard bodyshell in fact Eric Carlsson was known as 'On The Roof' for the number of times he'd rolled the cars and then went on to finish the event if not win it
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
The 1800 was the 145, neat little push rod unit.
The 245 went OHC in 2.0, 2.1 and 2.3 four pot form.
As a point of prder, I don't recall SAAB entering any competitive estate cars in BTCC either. Volvo have never bothered entering a factory team in the Monte Carlo rally, so thats a pretty moot point.
Im not sure about Volvo following SAAB in their safety wake. Volvo beat SAAB to the punch with crumple zones (PV444 in 1944, pre dating MB's patent by a decade), three points seatbelts in 1959, safety cell 1944, lamimated windsdreen 1944, DRLs a year ahead of SAAB in 1976, energy absornjng bumpers to all models 1974, ad nauseum.
To be fair to SAAB they beat Volvo to market with dual circuit brakes (1963) and boron steel in some safety structures 1984, and the first single model of SAAB with energy absorbing bumpers was 1971, so Volvo didnt have it all their own way.
The talk of SAABs not "needing" a roll cage for competition is also moot, because they all had to have one anyway. That being the case the point can never be proven or disproven - its mere lore. Motorsport of many classes is rife with cars ending up on their roof to go on to finish and even sometimes win an event, from Minis through to, er, Volvos.
What can be proven is that no one has ever died in the UK while travelling in a mkI or mkII Volvo XC90. No other mass manufacturer has a single model that can claim that (Audi comes closest, some model years of the Q8 can say the same) and Volvo have two. Definitely no SAAB model, as safe as they may have been, can claim the same.
Its certainty apocryphal to suggest Volvo were trailing behind in safety when in numerical terms of innovations they are clearly well ahead. Count 'em.
I like SAABs, particularly the older models, but being hampered by an engine developed from a Triumph unit in the seventies didnt do them any favours and the transmission-ahead-of-engine layout was a hilarious joke.
Last edited:
Reynard
Guru
- Location
- Cambridgeshire, UK
Jameshow
Guru
Sorry but Volvo took over when Saab wet south...
900 and 9000 weren't anything special.
The 850 and 940 were better
Then came v70 including the T5 and v70r
Not to mention the XC60 xc70 and XC90.
raleighnut
Legendary Member
- Location
- One of the 'Elite'
Where do you get these ideas from, the engine was developed by Ricardo for both SAAB and Triumph with Triumph throwing a spanner in the works by wanting the cylinder head suitable for use on both banks of the V8 hence the different angle cylinder head studs/bolts.
Where is the idea that the gearbox is in front of the engine from, the clutch is on the front of the engine but from there the power goes through a triplex chain* to a gearbox underneath the engine with the casing forming the sump although separate oil is used for the gearbox.
SAAB suffered from poor management, with the last true model being the 900 which was simply a revamped 99, the 9000 was a joke an utter rustbucket which despite using thicker steel than it's Fiat/Lancia sister model was hopeless and to then be bought out by General Motors and be making re-engineered and re-badged Vectras an insult as was the re-worked Subaru.
When I worked on them in the late 70's the SAAB was simply the better car, faster and better handling with much better fuel economy than the 'brick' due to the aerodynamics and then when they launched the first turbocharged saloon car (due to the merging with Scania and their expertise) I was there at the Donnington Park launch with Stig Blomqvist driving his rally car. (BTW where do you think 'Top Gear' got the name 'The Stig' from, they'd never have named the mystery driver 'the Turkington')
* SAAB toyed with the idea of using a gear drive to drop the power down to the gearbox but having seen the problems BMC had with the Mini and the power limitations as the engine tried to 'climb' off the gearbox due to this a triplex chain running in oil was a better solution.
