Hey all, want to correct some of my information in the video that has been generously pointed out in the comments: 1. The B235R will need internal upgrades to reach 500hp, but 500hp is easily attainable when done properly. 2. the updated 9-3 interior started in 2007, not 2008 3. The 9-5 Aero bumper was for 2004 and 2005 models, not 2003-5.
Wonderful comparison between the two types. As a former 99, 900, and current 9000 Aero user I feel the 4 cylinder turbo is THE classic characteristic of the breed. B234R is an awesome mill and to me the ultimate expression of Saab automotive art...but that's just me😎
B235R max is really 350hp before pistons give up and thats really pushing it, 325 is more a safe zone, have to do turbo and injectors to get there and keep your EGTs down. Stage 3 is 300hp because the 15T is out of puff and injectors are nearly at the limit most tuners would be comfortable with
wössner pistons, forged con rods, hybrid turbo, exhaust, injectors,fuel pump and cam and youre good to go for 400+ with b235r, best saab engine for tuning will always be b204l , i had 2.0t dynoed for 465Hp in daily driver, now driving with 352Hp 2011 aero with also wössners + con rods + hybrid turbo + injectors + exhaust&downpipe + E85
I like your choice. Mine too. As for sludge, the breather system was to me more of a GM corporate excuse. I worked on these at the SAAB dealer from day 1. The sludge was caused by the new scheduled maintenance program of "free" services. The problem was that these were at 10k mile intervals on crap Saab oil that I would not have put in my lawn mower. It seriously was not even good for 3K miles; and new SAAB owners often waited till 14K miles before they brought their car in for the first service....these became the infamous "sludge" cars. Later, Mobil 1ended up being the real solution, allowing for the new market driven extended service intervals without damaging the engine.
The 9-3 is most definately most popular in my area of Cincinnati as I feel likethe only one who owns a 9-5 Aero.. everything i see is a 9-3 variation.. (about to buy another 9-5 to match for $500 because it won't "idle" ... lol ) can someone say Vaccum leak or Throttle body?--lol
I have a track 9000. 360bhp, stripped out to 1000kg. Good power to weight ratio! Raw. Probably faster than my 500BHP saab 9-5 daily drive sleeper!! Kev SOULFIRER UKSaabs Scotland UK 🏴
The best of them all? T5 900/9-3s - strongest least amount of electronics Viggen - T7 weakness pistons, but the viggen are cool 99-01 9-5s - are the "better" built 9-5s, interior parts and quality control was some of Saabs best 04-05 9-5s - Quality control lacks, definitely not as tight of drum like earlier 9-5s, more electronics to fail 08+ 9-3s - no fiber optic stereo (07 too), better body lines 03-07 9-3s - meh I own a 99 9-5 Wagon and an 04 9-5 Aero. GM completed the purchase of Saab in 99. How can you tell when GM parts are used more in a Saab? the ones with Green dot matrix screens inside and they are the ones with most quality issues. I've built b235s by my own two hands, I've touched every bolt on the 9-5s. 9-5s are the better choice.
@@dannyjr7997 the earlier (before 03) 9-5s had problems with oil sludge, didn't they? Personally I think the older ones look better but Saab fixed the issue with the oil sludge one the post 03 models.
I have a 00 9-5 Aero "stock". 9-3 is different(better at cornering etc.). The sludge issue: with the latest oil development there seems to be no issue. I just had my engine torn apart this year. Just to let you know: it's not a cheap car to maintain :D There are a few glitches etc. But the thing is...It's a keeper.
As a saab technician for twenty years. Id go with the 9-5,no torque steer and more power unless it was the viggen in the 9-3,the 9-5 aero was a beast,250bhp to the front wheels,great car and in manual only for my preference!!im talking 9-3 up to 2003,new 9-3 had two aero options 2.0litre with 220 bhp and 2.8 v6 variant was a great engine but still would sway to the 2002-2005 9-5
SGT TECH I didn't not recommend it,its a fabulous power plant,I just prefer the 2.3 t in the 9-5 aero,the 2.8 is very reliable,great engine provided its been looked after youll have no problems
SGT TECH if its been looked after then no,but ignition coils have a habit of failing and because its a v6 can be a little difficult to identify a minor misfire but other than that no,but like I said only if its been well looked after,maybe listen for t chain noise even though ive never had an issue with one,just check for any sludge on the dip stick or under the oil cap but id say itll be ok if its been well serviced,good luck
Ivan Tobias It is a good car, had one of those but inswitched back to the 2005 model, cause the central console of the new model is so ugly. And the plastics on tge dash are just not that nice anymore. Plus i found a 300hp hirsch performance 9-5 from 2005, with special seats and trim and i just couldn't resist. But otherwise the 2006 on 9-5 is a good car, but is the car with wich in my opinion saab showed us that they lost it.
I vote 9-5 Aero and recently have put my money on a ‘03 model. At 14 years old, it has had its mechanical issues: gas lid button wire unplugged, stereo system flaking out at times and needing Tech2 tool to pair with car, 4-wheel realignment, 4 tires, plugs, air filter, and oil change, and most recently the sudden stalling caused by a failing crank position sensor. Still, I love this car for its overall handling feel, performance, comfort, safety and Euro design. Even with repairs it is a great value.
No arguments with your choice there buddy ;-] the 2004 - 2005 9-5 AERO Manual is also my overall choice, partly due to the revised front & rear body styling (as you've already mentioned) + superior build quality... but mainly it's due to the improved B235R engine (no more sludge problems thanks to the revised breather system) and its tunebility potential ( Stage 1 map = 275 BHP & masses of torque) although I have to admit I'm completely bias as I have one B-] (my second one) a 2004 MY 9-5 AERO Manual 4 door. The reason the interior fit & finish feels so much better (less plasticky) in the 9-5s over the 9-3s is manly because it was developed by SAAB before GMs take over so it had very little of GM's accountants involvement. I've owned a 2006 9-3 SportsWagon so I've personal experience of the "cheep & creaky" GM plastics + paper thin leather. ATB and keep up the great SAAB content.
@@chadm9944 - K&N are the junkiest filter ever. Will NOT filtering the air from small particle. Actually K&N already have plenty of lawsuits. It is better to have good quality of Air Filter which will filtering more better the air which going in the engine. SAAB🌷🇸🇪 have already enough Power, don't ruin what it is good. Good Luck to You !
SAAB 95 never had an Aero. Aero started with 9000. Also some people would like to call the 900 SPG an Aero, but still that's way newer model than the 95. You obviously speak of 9-5, but please be precise, otherwise you leave impression of a WV fan.
2004 9-5 Aero....my car. Keeps alot of more expensive cars honest. Stage one ECU makes a huge difference. Yes, and the seats are really comfortable.... I've driven later model SAABs, and they don't compare. Stage 3 tune down the track.
I bought an ‘07 9-5 2.3T as my first car and it is absolutely fantastic. I look forward to driving it every day and I can’t wait for more days to come. It came with a factory optional rear lip spoiler, it pulls like crazy and it’s just an amazing car to drive. Definitely worth the money and I couldn’t have bought a better car.
The 9-5 at 2:30 in is called a Hirsch Troll edition. Very rare. It was basically a tuning exercise by Hirsch and Saab; they threw all of Hirsch's kit at it, plus a bigger Garrett TB 28 turbo. It got a Hirsch stage 3 tune, Hirsch exhaust (check out the exhaust tips on that car at 2:30), Hirsch discs and pads, Hirsch pedals and carbon fibre dash/sill plates, Hirsch front and rear bumper, Hirsch alloys etc. It made 305bhp and around 420lb ft of torque. I had one of only two in Australia, and like an idiot I sold it. I really miss that car.
Thanks for review. Had 2 9000 CSE;s and preferred them to my 2008 9-5 Aero. They all had 2.3L, very reliable. They handled better and hauled more with a hatch back. The 9-5 is safer and roomier than 9-3 so my vote is 9-5.
I know that I'm seeing this 5 years later, but I have a chance to buy a late 2003 9-5 Aero (with the shark tooth bumper) with only 106,000 miles here in the UK. This video has confirmed that I should buy it.
The 9-5 is much more comfortable, better quality, better “feel”, quieter inside, and a real sleeper. Because of their reputation among boy racers as “grandpa’s car”, they are generally available for less money than the 9-3 in the US. The early 1998-2003 3.0t was fun to upgrade but rarely done. The manual tranny acceleration of the 2.3T in 2nd gear used to make me stop, turn around, repeat until grinning from ear to ear. It had legendary ability to walk away from V8 powered muscle at traffic signals, toll plazas and the line. Seeing the look on the face of another driver when I left them in the dust with my 4 cylinder, 4 door sedan (black), and my gray hair was always a rewarding feeling!
Last time I had the sump dropped, it was completely clean....as long as you get your oil and filter changed regularly ( for me, every 5000 km ), no chance of sludge. Just look after your car, there's less of these beasts around, now.
I know you didn’t cover it but, I just purchased a 2010 9-3 2.0T XWD, 6 speed automatic, and love it! I also still own a 2007 2.0T, with 216,000mi, original head gasket, fuel pump,exhaust, wheel bearings, timing chain, power steering rack and pump,etc.. all original! Saab made a great car!
I had a 2004 Saab 9-5 Aero. The B235R does not handle extra power well. It is already tuned within an inch of its life stock. They're prone to blowing up if you tune them to anything more than about 300 hp without beefing up the internals. Ask me how I know. But, I also think that the 9-5 is also a much nicer car than the 9-3. If i had to pick between a stock 9-3 Aero or a stock 9-5 Aero I'd go for the 9-5. Quality wise, the 9-5 is a much better built car than the 9-3.
one of the best Saab comparison vids one can find 👍 but comparing a 9-5 to a 9-3 is like trying to compare a BMW 3-series with 5-series. Both cars are not really in the same class.
I'm a huge fan of 86 900 Saab, and I am a proud Owner of a 2002 Saab 9-3, I love the car for it's comfort, and handling, somehow I found it sportier than the 9-5, wider tires all around it gives the car a more stoning look, and after modifying the exhaust for better sound....Man ...what can I tell you.... I am totally sold to Saab cars.... They most bring them back on the Market.... I believe they would be a Success!!!
I'd go with first gen 9-5. My dad had this car, and it was upped to almost 400bhp. My 9-3 as you say is more plastic and the 9-5 had leather seats, nice wooden panels and all that quality stuff.
Last year I bought a 2001 9-5 Aero from co-worker for $175.00! (said it was smoking BAD when running).. after he parked it for 5 years (running on occasion to keep oil in top of engine,etc though). Was gonna "junk it" figuring the Turbo was going out, same as happened in his 2006 9-5 before it blew up on way to trade it in for his new dodge charger).. For the past year+ now I have driven it daily to 184K+ miles with no issues of smoke at all.. (this car still has original clutch in it!--Highway miles!) Just did back brakes n rotors and had to replace an Air bypass valve for $26.00 online plus a set of plugs (he had put e3's in it!---yuck!--now with NGK's back in it fine!) My first SAAB, and I loved it so much I just bought a 9-3 Linear vers. for $800.00 with it;s Issues... (alot).. LOL with EXCELLENT body, but needed timing chain set because it no longer runs... :( I do all my own engine work of course--so no problem when i find bent valves etc in it on tear down.. I know it will as compression reads (in PSI cyls 1 thru 4 as) 0,30,0,90psi.. lol Likely more issues also, BUT my point is--SAAB built EXCELLENT motors and cars as could be expected from a company who built Military Aircraft!! (before GM tried to "save them".. I don't blame GM as I also like my old school chevy's (not so much newer junk). But before the US went to shit on quality in cars.. Even if SAAB went back into making cars today--I couldn't afford a new one. But would like to buy those old ones! LOL Glad to see atleast our aftermarket still supports them pretty well.. Hope they continue to or you may see the first RWD SAAB 9-5 Aero with an LS1 motor in it! (or maybe like my old school 1986 S10 pickup a 1967 327 v8 motor rebuilt with modern technology in it.. lol) ... I love that car that much that I will save them BOTH now as long as I can do so economically before transplanting "my engines" in them.. :) To the Swedish folks who originally built my 9-5, thank you, and please go back and consider doing it again with your original QUALITY!! Solo!!! These cars are awesome--and glad to have finally been able to afford experiencing one of them! --Your quality definately showed in your product in my 2001 9-5! Shes running 184,400 on her and still on original clutch!!! (a testament for highway vs city miles for sure, but also quality in production!) Love SAAB folks!
I can only go by those SAAB's being 'Collected' here in Australia, and it strongly appears that it is the first generation 9.5's from 1998 to 2000, or 'chrome grill' as their called, that are sought after. 9.3's are not that desirable, and are sadly disappearing here. The 900 'classic' is the preferred choice in the '3' segment.
I had a 2002 2.3t 9-5 sedan in high school that i put nearly 100K miles on before buying my moms '07 2.3T 9-5 SportCombi. I will have to admit I have only ever been a passenger in a 9-3, but it was the 9-5's interior that always made me feel some type of way. The 9-5's design language is timeless. Yes, post '05 interiors are a KISS less unique, but satellite radio & AUX in makes up for that. I run Michelin pilot super sports in the summer & can throw the 9-5 around the hills of western MA as I would an E-Class with the same confidence. The engine in the 9-5 is a bit much for the chassis to handle at times, but I think that is part of the fun. I will always have a 9-5 in the driveway, though the V90 will most likely be my future daily driver.
I ran a '05 9-3 for 200K (gave to son), and I've recently purchased a '06 9-5 Aero 5MT. So far I like the 9-5 better. More room, better revving, better handling (wider tires), and geared better for highway travel. Interior is a push but i like the ventilated seats and double din for aftermarket head unit option that I now have are nice. Appearance: front end better now, back end not as good now. Enjoyed the video. thanks
I find that my 9-5 Aero has a lot of body roll, but the more I push the car, the more stable and planted it feels. It's a real unique feeling car in the handling department.
9-3 V6 is often tuned, check the 2.8 alliance on Facebook, lots of options out there and people running 400bhp+, basic remap takes the V6 to 300bhp or 320bhp if you don't care about clutch or coils. 9-3 V6 early models can suffer cam chain stretch 9-3 V6 also suffer from weak coils and are sensitive to plug type and gap 9-3 V6 XWD has issues with haldex 4WD and eLSD reliability 9-3 2.0T Aero was available from 2003-2011 9-3 2003-2007 interior has optical bus infotainment and cannot be upgraded or replaced without major hassle
You should check how much potential the 2.8T V6 have. With a stage 1 you get 320 hp and 400 lb-ft. The internals can handle over 450+ hp. The F40 gearbox is also a lot better than in the 9-5:s. Great video as always!
As for me i prefer the 9-3 over the 9-5. Reason being i think 9-5 looks somewhat old-fashioned. That together with the better handling made me choose the 9-3. My first by the way at already 63 of age. Used to be a Volvo enthusiast for years. I'd love a 9-3 with the 2.3 out of the 9-5, that would be the optimum.
The Saab 9-5 had a massive suspension upgrade in 2002. I got a 2003 9-5 for $250 and it handled so good compared to the earlier models....especially my 2005 9-5 wagon
You know I’m going to say my 2009 9-3 Aero XWD reigns supreme here. Handling, Performance, Mods, and look. Comfort and such goes to 9-5...owned my 09 Aero since new and loved it. 85k on the clock ten years later and still turning heads. Maybe one day soon I’ll be selling it to get a NG 9-5 at 6’4 and 240lbs it’s getting harder to squeeze into the aero these days.
I had 2 9000s and those were the most comfortable seats ever. Long road trips were a pleasure. Only thing I didn't like was the rather heavy clutch. Looking to replace my 06 automatic Outback with a 9-5 manual. I miss driving a stick.
500 on stock internals of a B235 is false. Anywhere after 300 CRANK you start risking it blowing up, starting with melting pistons. This is why the generic "stage 3" tunes consisting of exhaust (3in dp minimum), intake, 3.5bar fpr and optional intercooler was regarded as the "safest" to go before things start breaking. The B284 can handle modifications very well, infact it's gains more power through smaller modifications (vtuner st0 ups it to 330 hp 410ft lb all to the crank). I have an 03 9-5 aero manual and an 08 9-3 aero manual and I prefer my 9-3, although the 9-5 is much easier to work on given the engine isn't cramped in like the 2.8T V6.
And the 03-06 had that ugly interior but the 07, year before the facelift, had received the newer updated interior. It's a step up from my 9-5 aero interior in my opinion, however I must admit the 9-5 aero seats are much better.
I still don't think 500 is "easily attainable" there's only a certain few that have pushed anywhere near that power, and everything's been touched on em (i.e. John Chag in the US & the Uhr's at Nordic in Sweden). Matt Daul also had a fast "viggen-afied" ng900 with a b235r iirc that didn't hit 500 crank. Plus you won't be getting far with the stock turbo and people don't realize how much fab work is needed to get a healthy running setup on a GT2871/3071 or HX35 that's commonly used.
saab 9-5 wagon just like i have with the b235r engine 280bhp as my run around . also have saab 9000 with the b234r engine running 490bhp with standard internals.
My 07 Saab 9-3 2.0T and my dad’s 07 Aero have the updated interior as in the 08’s. In the video you said 06-07 have the “less appealing” interior. All in all great video and love to see videos on Saabs.
Going from a 06 93 aero sedan to a 04 95 arc wagon was insane, threre's more room, better interior quality, better on gas (lol), and I prefer having a tape deck and the orange screens personally
Great comparison! Currently own an 06 aero v6 and a 2004 95 aero. Was debating on which one to drive and which to give to my girlfriend. After driving the 93 for a few years, the 95 gives a meaner, more exciting feeling than my tuned 93. There's just something about it that gives it that spark. Both are absolutely amazing cars and for comfort I would go for 93 but for fun and power I'm going to have to go 95!
I have driven and roadtripped both the 9-5 and 9-3, i bought a 9-5 Aero wagon yesterday for a reason. Better quality, and as a roadtrip car its better in every thinkable way. That being said the 9-3 still rocks
I have just bought my 3rd Saab my first was a manual 2.2 tid diesel wagon then I bought a 2.2 automatic 9-3 aero petrol and now I have a 2.3 9-5 automatic aero and for me it’s got to be the 9-5
The Arc does not come with the B235R, but rather the B235E/L (E=170/185HP, L=220Hp).The R variant was ONLY used in the 9-5 AERO and the 9-3 Viggen. The B235E was used in pretty much all trims (As an option of course). The R variant came with a bigger turbo than the E (Mitsubishi TD04HL-15t replacing the Garrett GT1752S) and also slightly different exhaust valves. There was also a limited Troll R by Hirsch variant with 305HP using a Garrett TB28 turbo.
I own a 2006 non areo wagon and turn out to be my better choice. Its rare and special. With 2007 features. How did that happen? Best Saab 9-5 2008 Areo wagon ice snow anniversary. WOW. Btw love your hard work. SPACESHIP...
I'm potentially getting a 2007 9-5, idk if it will be a bad choice since i imagine it's difficult to get parts and servicing since they went out of business and they weren't the most popular car in new zealand. probably why it's the cheapest car on the lot :/ i just want something powerful and that looks nice, will get an ecu, fluid change and some nice new black rims
I’m not sure about New Zealand, but in the US, parts are still easy to get. There is likely a New Zealand Saab club on Facebook that you could join and get some better insight on parts availability
I have two 9-3's, an '03 2.0t and an '06 2.8t. The v6 aero is a beast and my favorite, but a very rough & painful time changing those rear plugs and coils.
I have a 9-3 Aero 2.8 V6 convertable 2008 mod. true lots of plastic i must admit but wow what a car, i have it now for 4 years no major problem just the coolant res that broke cause the previous owner didn't bother to bring the car back to SAAB for the recall. I'm in Italy so had my share of FIAT, Alfa, Renault, Peugeot and BMW but must say my 9-3 is by far the best in all aspects
I have and do prefer the 2005 aero 9-3 convertable. It gets 42 mpg highway. It's a dream to drive and the interior is still very stylish. Great information. Thanks for the post.
I have to agree with him, I'm even upgrading my 2002 9-5 aero to a 2004-05 aero front bumper. But I'm also eyeing a 2008 9-5. I did own a couple of 9-3 aeros - they just lack that something that makes you want to find excuses to go for a drive. Maybe too "corporate" feeling?
Had 03 95 linear wagon and now a 07 95 arc wagon. I only dislike the squeaky plastic on the doors interior on the 07. I agree that 03-05 saab 95s are the best models.
I have the 2004 9-5 aero, and i lovee it. Agree with you the front is sexyyy, just about to replace oil pressure sensor (pcv valve issue) using sae 0w-30 mobile 1, gonna remove the stage 2 tune though, want her to last longer
I have a 08 95 aero and a 03 93 ragtop. I love both car, however the 95 is the better highway car on long trips. I just got back from Colorado driving the mountains and the turbo was fantastic.
Great presentation and comparo! I don't own a 9-5 Aero, but do own a 2008 9-5, Snow Silver Metallic. My car was fixed after a tree fell in front of us on a 2-lane Parkway. I elected to fix it because it was just front body parts, lights and a fender. During my decision-making on whether I would keep the car, I looked at a 2010 9-3 Aero Combi V6...no XWD. I loved the Combi. What a great car. Definitely more modern than the 9-5 Gen 1. Also had side curtain airbags, which the Gen 1 didn't have. I also liked the window controls on the door. I happen to love the look of the 06-09 front end. I understand that the Dame Edna headlight bezels are polarizing, but if you have a silver one, they blend-in and look great. The 9-5 Aero is a totally different ride than the 9-3 Aero...more of a cruiser than a carver. When I originally was shopping for my 9-5, I wanted the Aero. Then I drove it on Manhattan streets, which resemble the lunar surface. I instantly started shopping for a regular 9-5. That said, I recently put on new Sachs front struts, BIlstein B6 rear shocks, and new subframe bushings. Boy oh boy did that transform the handling and ride quality. The 2010 9-3 Aero V6 I drove was an absolute ball. That engine is a masterpiece...powerful, reliable, and pulls all day long. My SAAB-only mechanic loves that engine, and states that it is very reliable. If you put a 2008 9-5 Aero and a 2008 9-3 V6 Aero Combi in front of me, I would actually chose the 9-3 Combi. I love the look, utility and that engine. It's just a little more modern. Most of my driving is in Manhattan and highway. For my driving style, the 9-5 is the better choice because of its smooth, quiet ride. Both awesome cars and a great video.
95 based on 9000 but 93 was a whole new model in every way. I love 95 but I'd say 93 anyway, I like it better like I like 93 facelifts than 95 faceliftis. But 95 ng is different i like it lot!
The only problem with the 9-5 235R is that it's too soft and needs strut brace and harder bushing. The fact that it is not possible to get 6 shifted is a problem when 9-5 red rpm at 165 mph. I just love them. P.s Nice Chanel ;-)
you said your 9-5 arc or linear has a B235R, and i might be wrong but i think the R indicates an aero so it would have been a regular B235 without the R at the end
You know I was deciding between two cars recently as I was shopping for my first car. And I was lucky enough to be able to try both a 9-3 and 9-5 of the same year, 2005, and for me oddly enough I felt a lot more comfortable in the 9-3 than I did in the 9-5, in the 9-5 my feet kept having an issue when I was switching between gas and break which it didn't have with the 9-3. I all around just felt less comfortable with the 9-5 but I think that's just a personal preference then. But I am proud to say I'm happy 2005 9-3 ARC owner!
I had a new 9-3 V6. It was my 4th Saab and I hated it. The front end was too heavy, making it hard to throw into curves, and the loud exhaust was most annoying. Ive had a 2004 9-5 since 2008, and it's such a comfortable and practical wagon. I didn't realize how much until I recently drove a 2008 9-3 Sport-Combi 2.0 @ 210hp. I was a lot more fun to drive, but not as comfortable
Both great cars, but i prefer the 95 Aero. Its a turbo 4 cylinder, which is truly Saab, and the 95 feels more solid to drive in my experience. Currently own a 93 aero, as i wanted a change from a string of 3 95 aeros. But the 95 is on my radar when i sell the 93.
I've driven a 2004 9-5 2.3 aero manual sedan for many years. I know drive a 2008 9-3 2.0 aero auto wagon. The old / big one was more planted, faster and more responsive. The new / smaller one is much nicer (inside n out) but slower (220km/h instead of 260) and less confident. Like it sits higher or something like that. The v6 would be really interesting I'm sure
I have an 07 9-3 Aero S/C with the B207R engine and a facelift dash. This replaced my 06 9-5 Vector Sport Wagon. It took me a while to get used to the change in quality. The 9-5 oozed quality, the doors closed with a "thunk" and if you tapped a panel you could tell it was thicker than those on the 9-3. My 9-3 Aero is the best all round car ive ever owned and ive had RX7's, GTI's and a 944 at one point. I truly loved the 9-5 but rather than have one over the other i'd prefer to have both. Lol
Must be different in Europe. Most of the Aero's you come across have the B207R. The B284 was available but much rarer. I think the reason being is the B207R (in my opinion) is a better all round engine. Mine has no tune so just 210hp but i get 38 to 40 imp MPG. Perfect combination of performance and economy.
I've drove an 2011 9-3 turbo Edition (current daily) and a 2008 9-5 Vector Sport. Preferred 9-5 for comfort and extra boot space. But the 9-3 looks sportier and people don't think I drive an "old man car" as much. Plus facelift 9-3's are pretty damn mean looking.
I wish there was included some info on og 9-3 aero or viggen. I used to have og 9-3 aero and I really, really loved that car. Also comparing specifications, og 9-3 aero 2.0T is supposed to be faster than the new v6, and the og was much lighter, although people say it handles bad.
nice video! i have 2006 9-3 aero convertible 20th anniversary and i came with one full key and extra was just a actual metal key without a black fub. My question is, if I buy black fub on ebay and just still the metal key inside, will it work or It will need to be programmed? Thanks
Nope the key will need to be programmed. You just need to find someone who has a tech2 with security access. If you happen to be in Arizona, I can help. My contact info is in the description box!
I had the 900 turbo talladega, og 9-3 2.0t 1999 The 9-5 aero 9-3 aero in total i had 6 Saabs. The 9-5 is comfortable and u can drive easy 10 hours nonstop.
Auto Autopsy Here in Sweden u have 9-5 running 500-700 HP MY favorite engines are the b204 and b234 those old trionic 5 engines can make 500hp on stock internals. Many Saab 9-5 owners in Sweden builds with the old engine block b204/b234 and use the cylinderhead from the b205/b235 TRIONIC 7.
Hey all, want to correct some of my information in the video that has been generously pointed out in the comments:
1. The B235R will need internal upgrades to reach 500hp, but 500hp is easily attainable when done properly.
2. the updated 9-3 interior started in 2007, not 2008
3. The 9-5 Aero bumper was for 2004 and 2005 models, not 2003-5.
the seats also fold flat in both 9-3 and the 9-5 wagons :)
but they to not in either the 9-5 or the 9-3 sedans :)
Wonderful comparison between the two types. As a former 99, 900, and current 9000 Aero user I feel the 4 cylinder turbo is THE classic characteristic of the breed. B234R is an awesome mill and to me the ultimate expression of Saab automotive art...but that's just me😎
B235R max is really 350hp before pistons give up and thats really pushing it, 325 is more a safe zone, have to do turbo and injectors to get there and keep your EGTs down. Stage 3 is 300hp because the 15T is out of puff and injectors are nearly at the limit most tuners would be comfortable with
wössner pistons, forged con rods, hybrid turbo, exhaust, injectors,fuel pump and cam and youre good to go for 400+ with b235r, best saab engine for tuning will always be b204l , i had 2.0t dynoed for 465Hp in daily driver, now driving with 352Hp 2011 aero with also wössners + con rods + hybrid turbo + injectors + exhaust&downpipe + E85
Former models had saab T5 engine 1993-2000 which had stronger pistons, and those could really handle the 500hp
9-5 Aero for me :)
Cant argue with that :)
I like your choice. Mine too. As for sludge, the breather system was to me more of a GM corporate excuse. I worked on these at the SAAB dealer from day 1. The sludge was caused by the new scheduled maintenance program of "free" services. The problem was that these were at 10k mile intervals on crap Saab oil that I would not have put in my lawn mower. It seriously was not even good for 3K miles; and new SAAB owners often waited till 14K miles before they brought their car in for the first service....these became the infamous "sludge" cars. Later, Mobil 1ended up being the real solution, allowing for the new market driven extended service intervals without damaging the engine.
Wow, I only use Mobil1 :)
I use 0w-40 euro mobile1 :)
Every 3,000..... " Come on Man!" - Sleepy Joe
I bet more people own 9-3s and that's why they voted 9-3. Of course the 9-5 is better.
Good point! The 9-3 did sell better!
The 9-3 is most definately most popular in my area of Cincinnati as I feel likethe only one who owns a 9-5 Aero.. everything i see is a 9-3 variation.. (about to buy another 9-5 to match for $500 because it won't "idle" ... lol ) can someone say Vaccum leak or Throttle body?--lol
Are you dumb or something
the 9-3 is better!
9-5 all the way
As a fan of SAAB, I liked the 900. But if I had to choose I'd go with the 9-5 with the turbo four. To me that's a SAAB.
Yep, I'm also considering doing a comparison between the 900 and 9000, or old 900 and new (GM) 900
me too
I have an 04 9-5 aero 5 speed sedan and I LOVE it. You should absolutely get one of you have the opportunity.
I have a track 9000.
360bhp, stripped out to 1000kg.
Good power to weight ratio!
Raw.
Probably faster than my 500BHP saab 9-5 daily drive sleeper!!
Kev
SOULFIRER
UKSaabs
Scotland UK 🏴
Four pot with a BIG turbo is the SAAB way ;-]
If you would have been a salesman for Saab during production, they would have not gone out of business. Great video
Haha, thank you Bryan :)
The best of them all?
T5 900/9-3s - strongest least amount of electronics
Viggen - T7 weakness pistons, but the viggen are cool
99-01 9-5s - are the "better" built 9-5s, interior parts and quality control was some of Saabs best
04-05 9-5s - Quality control lacks, definitely not as tight of drum like earlier 9-5s, more electronics to fail
08+ 9-3s - no fiber optic stereo (07 too), better body lines
03-07 9-3s - meh
I own a 99 9-5 Wagon and an 04 9-5 Aero. GM completed the purchase of Saab in 99. How can you tell when GM parts are used more in a Saab? the ones with Green dot matrix screens inside and they are the ones with most quality issues. I've built b235s by my own two hands, I've touched every bolt on the 9-5s. 9-5s are the better choice.
Thanks for sharing your opinion
DaveVQ
I own a 1999 Saab 9-5. Agree she's well built. 219k and still going strong.
@@dannyjr7997 the earlier (before 03) 9-5s had problems with oil sludge, didn't they? Personally I think the older ones look better but Saab fixed the issue with the oil sludge one the post 03 models.
I have a 00 9-5 Aero "stock". 9-3 is different(better at cornering etc.). The sludge issue: with the latest oil development there seems to be no issue. I just had my engine torn apart this year. Just to let you know: it's not a cheap car to maintain :D There are a few glitches etc. But the thing is...It's a keeper.
And the last part is the most important; good man!
As a saab technician for twenty years. Id go with the 9-5,no torque steer and more power unless it was the viggen in the 9-3,the 9-5 aero was a beast,250bhp to the front wheels,great car and in manual only for my preference!!im talking 9-3 up to 2003,new 9-3 had two aero options 2.0litre with 220 bhp and 2.8 v6 variant was a great engine but still would sway to the 2002-2005 9-5
Good thinking!
Why would you not recommend the v6 2.8 06 i am buying one this weekend
SGT TECH I didn't not recommend it,its a fabulous power plant,I just prefer the 2.3 t in the 9-5 aero,the 2.8 is very reliable,great engine provided its been looked after youll have no problems
papa shango ok thank you 🙏🏼 is there anything i should feel/look for when test driving this bad girl 06 93 aero v6 140k
SGT TECH if its been looked after then no,but ignition coils have a habit of failing and because its a v6 can be a little difficult to identify a minor misfire but other than that no,but like I said only if its been well looked after,maybe listen for t chain noise even though ive never had an issue with one,just check for any sludge on the dip stick or under the oil cap but id say itll be ok if its been well serviced,good luck
2007 9-5 Aero with manual transmission - which is the one that I have :)
Nice!
Ivan Tobias 2004 Aero SportWagon for me, manual transmission, Stage 3 tune from John of JZW in Colorado ... perfect sleeper 😏
Ivan Tobias I have that too. I think it's beautiful. I put a 3inch exhaust on mine. And it uncorked my turbo. Fwd burnouts like butter on dry tar
Ivan Tobias It is a good car, had one of those but inswitched back to the 2005 model, cause the central console of the new model is so ugly. And the plastics on tge dash are just not that nice anymore. Plus i found a 300hp hirsch performance 9-5 from 2005, with special seats and trim and i just couldn't resist. But otherwise the 2006 on 9-5 is a good car, but is the car with wich in my opinion saab showed us that they lost it.
Cool. I have an 02 9-5 aero
My daughter has a 2008 9-5 Aero. I love that car! One previous owner well cared for and drives like a dream!
Wow awesome!
9-5 Aero 7 days a week 👍🏻👍🏻 i myself owe a 2004 9-5 Aero Sport Combi 👍🏻👍🏻
Nice! I'm jealous
9-5 SC Aero for me - bought a 2007 just a couple of weeks ago and I'm loving it :)
Cool!
I vote 9-5 Aero and recently have put my money on a ‘03 model. At 14 years old, it has had its mechanical issues: gas lid button wire unplugged, stereo system flaking out at times and needing Tech2 tool to pair with car, 4-wheel realignment, 4 tires, plugs, air filter, and oil change, and most recently the sudden stalling caused by a failing crank position sensor. Still, I love this car for its overall handling feel, performance, comfort, safety and Euro design. Even with repairs it is a great value.
No car is perfect but it's clear you love your Saab. Happy for ya!
No arguments with your choice there buddy ;-] the 2004 - 2005 9-5 AERO Manual is also my overall choice, partly due to the revised front & rear body styling (as you've already mentioned) + superior build quality... but mainly it's due to the improved B235R engine (no more sludge problems thanks to the revised breather system) and its tunebility potential ( Stage 1 map = 275 BHP & masses of torque) although I have to admit I'm completely bias as I have one B-] (my second one) a 2004 MY 9-5 AERO Manual 4 door.
The reason the interior fit & finish feels so much better (less plasticky) in the 9-5s over the 9-3s is manly because it was developed by SAAB before GMs take over so it had very little of GM's accountants involvement. I've owned a 2006 9-3 SportsWagon so I've personal experience of the "cheep & creaky" GM plastics + paper thin leather.
ATB and keep up the great SAAB content.
Yep exactly! Thank you :)
I just love the first gen 9-5 with the pointier headlights. Look so much more aggressive and cool!
I see what you're saying, but the 2003-2005 9-5 just looks better to me!
Great video. I'll take 2005 9-5 Aero Wagon with Hirsch Performance :)
Nice!
I need help I’m looking at 04 9-5 aero manual or the O5 9-3 aero automatic
The 9-5 had 178k and the 9-3 has 130k
The Saab 95 aero is what I started with. My first car, and what started my love for Saab
Nice!
And I absolutely love your channel man. I'm trying to build my Saab up, got the K&N filter and looking for a bigger turbo
Awesome :) I appreciate your support! Have fun
@@chadm9944 - K&N are the junkiest filter ever. Will NOT filtering the air from small particle. Actually K&N already have plenty of lawsuits.
It is better to have good quality of Air Filter which will filtering more better the air which going in the engine. SAAB🌷🇸🇪 have already enough Power, don't ruin what it is good.
Good Luck to You !
SAAB 95 never had an Aero. Aero started with 9000. Also some people would like to call the 900 SPG an Aero, but still that's way newer model than the 95. You obviously speak of 9-5, but please be precise, otherwise you leave impression of a WV fan.
2004 9-5 Aero....my car. Keeps alot of more expensive cars honest. Stage one ECU makes a huge difference. Yes, and the seats are really comfortable.... I've driven later model SAABs, and they don't compare. Stage 3 tune down the track.
I've owned 2 '01 9-5 Aero but not a 9-3. The interior space is what I needed and the lines of it had me smitten!
Nice! Can't go wrong with that
I bought an ‘07 9-5 2.3T as my first car and it is absolutely fantastic. I look forward to driving it every day and I can’t wait for more days to come. It came with a factory optional rear lip spoiler, it pulls like crazy and it’s just an amazing car to drive. Definitely worth the money and I couldn’t have bought a better car.
nice! Congrats on the purchase :)
The 9-5 at 2:30 in is called a Hirsch Troll edition. Very rare. It was basically a tuning exercise by Hirsch and Saab; they threw all of Hirsch's kit at it, plus a bigger Garrett TB 28 turbo. It got a Hirsch stage 3 tune, Hirsch exhaust (check out the exhaust tips on that car at 2:30), Hirsch discs and pads, Hirsch pedals and carbon fibre dash/sill plates, Hirsch front and rear bumper, Hirsch alloys etc. It made 305bhp and around 420lb ft of torque. I had one of only two in Australia, and like an idiot I sold it. I really miss that car.
Wow!!!
Thanks for review. Had 2 9000 CSE;s and preferred them to my 2008 9-5 Aero. They all had 2.3L, very reliable. They handled better and hauled more with a hatch back. The 9-5 is safer and roomier than 9-3 so my vote is 9-5.
Fair enough!
Uh 1997 9000 Aero please!! Those front seats!!
9000 is a great buy too!
@@AutoAutopsy 9000T one of the finest roadcars every built, have owned 900T, 9000 Aero & my current 9-5 so I know!
I know that I'm seeing this 5 years later, but I have a chance to buy a late 2003 9-5 Aero (with the shark tooth bumper) with only 106,000 miles here in the UK. This video has confirmed that I should buy it.
The 9-5 is much more comfortable, better quality, better “feel”, quieter inside, and a real sleeper. Because of their reputation among boy racers as “grandpa’s car”, they are generally available for less money than the 9-3 in the US. The early 1998-2003 3.0t was fun to upgrade but rarely done. The manual tranny acceleration of the 2.3T in 2nd gear used to make me stop, turn around, repeat until grinning from ear to ear. It had legendary ability to walk away from V8 powered muscle at traffic signals, toll plazas and the line. Seeing the look on the face of another driver when I left them in the dust with my 4 cylinder, 4 door sedan (black), and my gray hair was always a rewarding feeling!
yeah, they're not bad
Last time I had the sump dropped, it was completely clean....as long as you get your oil and filter changed regularly ( for me, every 5000 km ), no chance of sludge. Just look after your car, there's less of these beasts around, now.
I know you didn’t cover it but, I just purchased a 2010 9-3 2.0T XWD, 6 speed automatic, and love it! I also still own a 2007 2.0T, with 216,000mi, original head gasket, fuel pump,exhaust, wheel bearings, timing chain, power steering rack and pump,etc.. all original! Saab made a great car!
That is awesome!
I had a 2004 Saab 9-5 Aero. The B235R does not handle extra power well. It is already tuned within an inch of its life stock. They're prone to blowing up if you tune them to anything more than about 300 hp without beefing up the internals. Ask me how I know. But, I also think that the 9-5 is also a much nicer car than the 9-3. If i had to pick between a stock 9-3 Aero or a stock 9-5 Aero I'd go for the 9-5. Quality wise, the 9-5 is a much better built car than the 9-3.
I corrected that in the pinned comment, thanks for sharing
I LOVE the old 9-5 with the b235
Me too!
one of the best Saab comparison vids one can find 👍 but comparing a 9-5 to a 9-3 is like trying to compare a BMW 3-series with 5-series. Both cars are not really in the same class.
I'm a huge fan of 86 900 Saab, and I am a proud Owner of a 2002 Saab 9-3, I love the car for it's comfort, and handling, somehow I found it sportier than the 9-5, wider tires all around it gives the car a more stoning look, and after modifying the exhaust for better sound....Man ...what can I tell you.... I am totally sold to Saab cars.... They most bring them back on the Market.... I believe they would be a Success!!!
I'd go with first gen 9-5. My dad had this car, and it was upped to almost 400bhp. My 9-3 as you say is more plastic and the 9-5 had leather seats, nice wooden panels and all that quality stuff.
Wow nice! All Saabs had leather seats by the way
Last year I bought a 2001 9-5 Aero from co-worker for $175.00! (said it was smoking BAD when running).. after he parked it for 5 years (running on occasion to keep oil in top of engine,etc though). Was gonna "junk it" figuring the Turbo was going out, same as happened in his 2006 9-5 before it blew up on way to trade it in for his new dodge charger).. For the past year+ now I have driven it daily to 184K+ miles with no issues of smoke at all.. (this car still has original clutch in it!--Highway miles!) Just did back brakes n rotors and had to replace an Air bypass valve for $26.00 online plus a set of plugs (he had put e3's in it!---yuck!--now with NGK's back in it fine!) My first SAAB, and I loved it so much I just bought a 9-3 Linear vers. for $800.00 with it;s Issues... (alot).. LOL
with EXCELLENT body, but needed timing chain set because it no longer runs... :( I do all my own engine work of course--so no problem when i find bent valves etc in it on tear down.. I know it will as compression reads (in PSI cyls 1 thru 4 as) 0,30,0,90psi.. lol Likely more issues also, BUT my point is--SAAB built EXCELLENT motors and cars as could be expected from a company who built Military Aircraft!! (before GM tried to "save them".. I don't blame GM as I also like my old school chevy's (not so much newer junk). But before the US went to shit on quality in cars.. Even if SAAB went back into making cars today--I couldn't afford a new one. But would like to buy those old ones! LOL Glad to see atleast our aftermarket still supports them pretty well.. Hope they continue to or you may see the first RWD SAAB 9-5 Aero with an LS1 motor in it! (or maybe like my old school 1986 S10 pickup a 1967 327 v8 motor rebuilt with modern technology in it.. lol) ... I love that car that much that I will save them BOTH now as long as I can do so economically before transplanting "my engines" in them.. :) To the Swedish folks who originally built my 9-5, thank you, and please go back and consider doing it again with your original QUALITY!! Solo!!! These cars are awesome--and glad to have finally been able to afford experiencing one of them! --Your quality definately showed in your product in my 2001 9-5! Shes running 184,400 on her and still on original clutch!!! (a testament for highway vs city miles for sure, but also quality in production!) Love SAAB folks!
lol nice! good to hear you've "saved" a couple of saabs!
9.5 hands down! No comparisson. I've worked on Saabs for the last 40 years. The 9.5 is a real Saab.
Anything with a Saab badge is a real Saab, thanks for sharing :)
9-5 gang all day I have an 04 9-5 for my winter car and a 03 five speed 9-5 for a summer car wouldn’t take any other Saab
Nice!
I can only go by those SAAB's being 'Collected' here in Australia, and it strongly appears that it is the first generation 9.5's from 1998 to 2000, or 'chrome grill' as their called, that are sought after. 9.3's are not that desirable, and are sadly disappearing here. The 900 'classic' is the preferred choice in the '3' segment.
I had a 2002 2.3t 9-5 sedan in high school that i put nearly 100K miles on before buying my moms '07 2.3T 9-5 SportCombi. I will have to admit I have only ever been a passenger in a 9-3, but it was the 9-5's interior that always made me feel some type of way. The 9-5's design language is timeless. Yes, post '05 interiors are a KISS less unique, but satellite radio & AUX in makes up for that. I run Michelin pilot super sports in the summer & can throw the 9-5 around the hills of western MA as I would an E-Class with the same confidence. The engine in the 9-5 is a bit much for the chassis to handle at times, but I think that is part of the fun. I will always have a 9-5 in the driveway, though the V90 will most likely be my future daily driver.
Nice!
I ran a '05 9-3 for 200K (gave to son), and I've recently purchased a '06 9-5 Aero 5MT. So far I like the 9-5 better. More room, better revving, better handling (wider tires), and geared better for highway travel. Interior is a push but i like the ventilated seats and double din for aftermarket head unit option that I now have are nice. Appearance: front end better now, back end not as good now. Enjoyed the video. thanks
thanks for sharing your thoughts, Brian :) glad you enjoyed
I find that my 9-5 Aero has a lot of body roll, but the more I push the car, the more stable and planted it feels. It's a real unique feeling car in the handling department.
9-3 V6 is often tuned, check the 2.8 alliance on Facebook, lots of options out there and people running 400bhp+, basic remap takes the V6 to 300bhp or 320bhp if you don't care about clutch or coils.
9-3 V6 early models can suffer cam chain stretch
9-3 V6 also suffer from weak coils and are sensitive to plug type and gap
9-3 V6 XWD has issues with haldex 4WD and eLSD reliability
9-3 2.0T Aero was available from 2003-2011
9-3 2003-2007 interior has optical bus infotainment and cannot be upgraded or replaced without major hassle
Thanks for sharing, but the Aero was a V6 beginning in 2006
You should check how much potential the 2.8T V6 have. With a stage 1 you get 320 hp and 400 lb-ft. The internals can handle over 450+ hp. The F40 gearbox is also a lot better than in the 9-5:s. Great video as always!
Thank you!
At 550 hp the rods will fail.
As for me i prefer the 9-3 over the 9-5. Reason being i think 9-5 looks somewhat old-fashioned. That together with the better handling made me choose the 9-3. My first by the way at already 63 of age. Used to be a Volvo enthusiast for years. I'd love a 9-3 with the 2.3 out of the 9-5, that would be the optimum.
interesting, thanks
Great video and comments, I have 3 Saabs / 2002 Wagon Aero/2004 9-3/ 2007 9-3 love them all
Wow awesome!
The Saab 9-5 had a massive suspension upgrade in 2002. I got a 2003 9-5 for $250 and it handled so good compared to the earlier models....especially my 2005 9-5 wagon
2005 is after 2003 tho? Might have had aftermarket suspension; to my knowledge they were never changed but i could definitely be wrong lol
You know I’m going to say my 2009 9-3 Aero XWD reigns supreme here. Handling, Performance, Mods, and look. Comfort and such goes to 9-5...owned my 09 Aero since new and loved it. 85k on the clock ten years later and still turning heads. Maybe one day soon I’ll be selling it to get a NG 9-5 at 6’4 and 240lbs it’s getting harder to squeeze into the aero these days.
Agreed! (I've since changed my opinion, lol)
I had 2 9000s and those were the most comfortable seats ever. Long road trips were a pleasure. Only thing I didn't like was the rather heavy clutch. Looking to replace my 06 automatic Outback with a 9-5 manual. I miss driving a stick.
do it! haha ;)
500 on stock internals of a B235 is false. Anywhere after 300 CRANK you start risking it blowing up, starting with melting pistons. This is why the generic "stage 3" tunes consisting of exhaust (3in dp minimum), intake, 3.5bar fpr and optional intercooler was regarded as the "safest" to go before things start breaking. The B284 can handle modifications very well, infact it's gains more power through smaller modifications (vtuner st0 ups it to 330 hp 410ft lb all to the crank). I have an 03 9-5 aero manual and an 08 9-3 aero manual and I prefer my 9-3, although the 9-5 is much easier to work on given the engine isn't cramped in like the 2.8T V6.
And the 03-06 had that ugly interior but the 07, year before the facelift, had received the newer updated interior. It's a step up from my 9-5 aero interior in my opinion, however I must admit the 9-5 aero seats are much better.
I was thinking false too when I heard stock internals lol
Yes, max 300 crank. Wössner pistons is the answer, and after that a T5 head. The B207 and B283R can take more tune on stock internals.
Thanks for sharing, it's been corrected in the pinned comment.
I still don't think 500 is "easily attainable" there's only a certain few that have pushed anywhere near that power, and everything's been touched on em (i.e. John Chag in the US & the Uhr's at Nordic in Sweden). Matt Daul also had a fast "viggen-afied" ng900 with a b235r iirc that didn't hit 500 crank. Plus you won't be getting far with the stock turbo and people don't realize how much fab work is needed to get a healthy running setup on a GT2871/3071 or HX35 that's commonly used.
saab 9-5 wagon just like i have with the b235r engine 280bhp as my run around . also have saab 9000 with the b234r engine running 490bhp with standard internals.
Wow nice!
9000 engine strong
Take on track and gearbox is a consumable though!!
What box you running?
Kev
SOULFIRER
UKSaabs
Scotland 🏴
I have a 2002 9-5 linear 4cyld stickshift with leather seats and heated seats fully loaded, bought it 1 year ago with 83k I love this car
Nice!
My 07 Saab 9-3 2.0T and my dad’s 07 Aero have the updated interior as in the 08’s. In the video you said 06-07 have the “less appealing” interior. All in all great video and love to see videos on Saabs.
Right. Starting in 07 they got the updated interiors. Exterior facelift was in 08
Going from a 06 93 aero sedan to a 04 95 arc wagon was insane, threre's more room, better interior quality, better on gas (lol), and I prefer having a tape deck and the orange screens personally
thanks for sharing!
Great comparison! Currently own an 06 aero v6 and a 2004 95 aero. Was debating on which one to drive and which to give to my girlfriend. After driving the 93 for a few years, the 95 gives a meaner, more exciting feeling than my tuned 93. There's just something about it that gives it that spark. Both are absolutely amazing cars and for comfort I would go for 93 but for fun and power I'm going to have to go 95!
very interesting; most would say the opposite. The V6 definitely has a higher ceiling than the B235
The 9-3 Aero isn't V6-only. It came with either a 210 HP/300 Nm 4cyl, or 230-280 HP/330-400 Nm V6.
I stated in the video that I’m only referring the V6 9-3 aero
I have driven and roadtripped both the 9-5 and 9-3, i bought a 9-5 Aero wagon yesterday for a reason. Better quality, and as a roadtrip car its better in every thinkable way. That being said the 9-3 still rocks
both are amazing!
I had both, I prefer the 9-3 aero, mine was a 2005, 2 liters, I loved that car.
nice
I have just bought my 3rd Saab my first was a manual 2.2 tid diesel wagon then I bought a 2.2 automatic 9-3 aero petrol and now I have a 2.3 9-5 automatic aero and for me it’s got to be the 9-5
Nice!
The Arc does not come with the B235R, but rather the B235E/L (E=170/185HP, L=220Hp).The R variant was ONLY used in the 9-5 AERO and the 9-3 Viggen. The B235E was used in pretty much all trims (As an option of course). The R variant came with a bigger turbo than the E (Mitsubishi TD04HL-15t replacing the Garrett GT1752S) and also slightly different exhaust valves. There was also a limited Troll R by Hirsch variant with 305HP using a Garrett TB28 turbo.
Yep, but I assumed everyone knew what I meant. It's nearly the same engine
I own a 2006 non areo wagon and turn out to be my better choice. Its rare and special. With 2007 features. How did that happen? Best Saab 9-5 2008 Areo wagon ice snow anniversary. WOW. Btw love your hard work. SPACESHIP...
thanks; 2006 with 2007 features..?
I'm potentially getting a 2007 9-5, idk if it will be a bad choice since i imagine it's difficult to get parts and servicing since they went out of business and they weren't the most popular car in new zealand.
probably why it's the cheapest car on the lot :/
i just want something powerful and that looks nice, will get an ecu, fluid change and some nice new black rims
I’m not sure about New Zealand, but in the US, parts are still easy to get. There is likely a New Zealand Saab club on Facebook that you could join and get some better insight on parts availability
@@AutoAutopsy great idea 💡💡
I have two 9-3's, an '03 2.0t and an '06 2.8t. The v6 aero is a beast and my favorite, but a very rough & painful time changing those rear plugs and coils.
Yes! I have heard that is quiet a job...that job on a B207R is about as easy as it gets!
I have a 9-3 Aero 2.8 V6 convertable 2008 mod. true lots of plastic i must admit but wow what a car, i have it now for 4 years no major problem just the coolant res that broke cause the previous owner didn't bother to bring the car back to SAAB for the recall. I'm in Italy so had my share of FIAT, Alfa, Renault, Peugeot and BMW but must say my 9-3 is by far the best in all aspects
I agree with you!
2002 Saab 9-5 aero with a PCV update and Do88 hoses and intercooler. Been as reliable an old Toyota ever since.
Nice!
I have and do prefer the 2005 aero 9-3 convertable. It gets 42 mpg highway. It's a dream to drive and the interior is still very stylish. Great information. Thanks for the post.
Nice!
Thumbs up for that blip of a pegged speedometer.
lol
I have to agree with him, I'm even upgrading my 2002 9-5 aero to a 2004-05 aero front bumper. But I'm also eyeing a 2008 9-5. I did own a couple of 9-3 aeros - they just lack that something that makes you want to find excuses to go for a drive. Maybe too "corporate" feeling?
Not sure; since I made this, I changed my mind ;)
Had 03 95 linear wagon and now a 07 95 arc wagon. I only dislike the squeaky plastic on the doors interior on the 07. I agree that 03-05 saab 95s are the best models.
:)
I have the 2004 9-5 aero, and i lovee it. Agree with you the front is sexyyy, just about to replace oil pressure sensor (pcv valve issue) using sae 0w-30 mobile 1, gonna remove the stage 2 tune though, want her to last longer
if its a tune from a reputable tuner, there's no reason to remove it; car should be able to handle that fine with no issues!
I have a 08 95 aero and a 03 93 ragtop. I love both car, however the 95 is the better highway car on long trips. I just got back from Colorado driving the mountains and the turbo was fantastic.
Wow, I'm jealous! Nice cars
So hard to choose, I'd go with a 9-5 wagon if I could find a clean one
It's a tough choice!
Great presentation and comparo! I don't own a 9-5 Aero, but do own a 2008 9-5, Snow Silver Metallic. My car was fixed after a tree fell in front of us on a 2-lane Parkway. I elected to fix it because it was just front body parts, lights and a fender.
During my decision-making on whether I would keep the car, I looked at a 2010 9-3 Aero Combi V6...no XWD. I loved the Combi. What a great car. Definitely more modern than the 9-5 Gen 1. Also had side curtain airbags, which the Gen 1 didn't have. I also liked the window controls on the door.
I happen to love the look of the 06-09 front end. I understand that the Dame Edna headlight bezels are polarizing, but if you have a silver one, they blend-in and look great.
The 9-5 Aero is a totally different ride than the 9-3 Aero...more of a cruiser than a carver. When I originally was shopping for my 9-5, I wanted the Aero. Then I drove it on Manhattan streets, which resemble the lunar surface. I instantly started shopping for a regular 9-5. That said, I recently put on new Sachs front struts, BIlstein B6 rear shocks, and new subframe bushings. Boy oh boy did that transform the handling and ride quality.
The 2010 9-3 Aero V6 I drove was an absolute ball. That engine is a masterpiece...powerful, reliable, and pulls all day long. My SAAB-only mechanic loves that engine, and states that it is very reliable.
If you put a 2008 9-5 Aero and a 2008 9-3 V6 Aero Combi in front of me, I would actually chose the 9-3 Combi. I love the look, utility and that engine. It's just a little more modern. Most of my driving is in Manhattan and highway. For my driving style, the 9-5 is the better choice because of its smooth, quiet ride. Both awesome cars and a great video.
Thank you for sharing! Sorry to hear about the car
Auto Autopsy Thanks. Getting it back next week.
95 based on 9000 but 93 was a whole new model in every way. I love 95 but I'd say 93 anyway, I like it better like I like 93 facelifts than 95 faceliftis. But 95 ng is different i like it lot!
Agreed!
9-5 Aero is the Best
I have one 9-5 Aero SportCombi blue color with black window on the back 2003 is awesome
Nice!
The only problem with the 9-5 235R is that it's too soft and needs strut brace and harder bushing. The fact that it is not possible to get 6 shifted is a problem when 9-5 red rpm at 165 mph. I just love them.
P.s Nice Chanel ;-)
Thanks Lars :)
uh fancy win i have a 9-5 Aero 2005 with navi prestige one :D with the 2,3L engine but the newer faceliftet 9-3 aero would be nice too
nice
you said your 9-5 arc or linear has a B235R, and i might be wrong but i think the R indicates an aero so it would have been a regular B235 without the R at the end
You're right, but Arc still has the B235R. Linear has the B235E or L I think
Auto Autopsy ahh ok i see 👍
Saab Forever!!!
no, its dead
I own a 2007 Saab 9-3 2.0T and a 2008 Saab 9-5 2.3T and as far as quality, the 9-5 is way better built than the 9-3. My vote is for the 9-5 Aero.
Thanks for sharing, but those cars should have near identical interiors
You know I was deciding between two cars recently as I was shopping for my first car. And I was lucky enough to be able to try both a 9-3 and 9-5 of the same year, 2005, and for me oddly enough I felt a lot more comfortable in the 9-3 than I did in the 9-5, in the 9-5 my feet kept having an issue when I was switching between gas and break which it didn't have with the 9-3. I all around just felt less comfortable with the 9-5 but I think that's just a personal preference then. But I am proud to say I'm happy 2005 9-3 ARC owner!
Awesome :)
I had a new 9-3 V6. It was my 4th Saab and I hated it. The front end was too heavy, making it hard to throw into curves, and the loud exhaust was most annoying. Ive had a 2004 9-5 since 2008, and it's such a comfortable and practical wagon. I didn't realize how much until I recently drove a 2008 9-3 Sport-Combi 2.0 @ 210hp. I was a lot more fun to drive, but not as comfortable
loud exhaust? I assume it was modified. Also, i (and most) believe the 9-3's handle much better than the 9-5's
@@AutoAutopsy nope 100% stock. It had a boy racer type exhaust note that I found extremely annoying
I have a Saab aero 95 2005 2.3 liter turbo .love it so much best car ever made
:)
Own a 05 9-5 Aero wagon. Agreed.
I have since changed my opinion ;)
Both great cars, but i prefer the 95 Aero. Its a turbo 4 cylinder, which is truly Saab, and the 95 feels more solid to drive in my experience. Currently own a 93 aero, as i wanted a change from a string of 3 95 aeros. But the 95 is on my radar when i sell the 93.
Fair point!
The 9-3 2.8 after 2006 had problems with stretched timing chain.
Not a super common issue from what I’ve heard!
I've driven a 2004 9-5 2.3 aero manual sedan for many years. I know drive a 2008 9-3 2.0 aero auto wagon. The old / big one was more planted, faster and more responsive. The new / smaller one is much nicer (inside n out) but slower (220km/h instead of 260) and less confident. Like it sits higher or something like that. The v6 would be really interesting I'm sure
its a lot of fun!
If i not are missinformed the 9-3 aero v6 is only available in north america
It was sold in many other European and Asian markets as well
I prefer both. The 2.8L, 9-3 Aero-X 🏁🏁🏁🎬👍
I have an 07 9-3 Aero S/C with the B207R engine and a facelift dash.
This replaced my 06 9-5 Vector Sport Wagon. It took me a while to get used to the change in quality. The 9-5 oozed quality, the doors closed with a "thunk" and if you tapped a panel you could tell it was thicker than those on the 9-3.
My 9-3 Aero is the best all round car ive ever owned and ive had RX7's, GTI's and a 944 at one point. I truly loved the 9-5 but rather than have one over the other i'd prefer to have both. Lol
Wow nice! If it's an 07, it should have the B284 (V6).
Unless you're in europe; might be different then
Must be different in Europe. Most of the Aero's you come across have the B207R. The B284 was available but much rarer. I think the reason being is the B207R (in my opinion) is a better all round engine. Mine has no tune so just 210hp but i get 38 to 40 imp MPG. Perfect combination of performance and economy.
I forgot to add, great channel!! Regular watcher.
Your last comment I am totally agree with you. That's why I bought model year. Lol
:)
2003 9-5 Aero for me too!!!
great car
The 2004 Saab 9-5 Aero and The 2008 Saab 9-3 Aero-X 🏁🏁🏁👍
I've drove an 2011 9-3 turbo Edition (current daily) and a 2008 9-5 Vector Sport. Preferred 9-5 for comfort and extra boot space. But the 9-3 looks sportier and people don't think I drive an "old man car" as much. Plus facelift 9-3's are pretty damn mean looking.
They do look badass!
Jamie Budge lol, I get some flack for driving an 'old man's car' until they get behind me ... see ya (2004 9-5 Aero SW, Stage 3) 😉
I fell for my saab 9-5 after driving & just getting to know more about it, Although there are 9-3 saabs that I would Love to have (TurboX)
I agree!
There is an upgrade avail for the PCV system on the first 9-5, and 9-3 too
correct
9-5 because of its looks and how rare it is. 9-3 is actually very popular in comparison, still cool though.
True, but it's still not a common car by any means
I wish there was included some info on og 9-3 aero or viggen. I used to have og 9-3 aero and I really, really loved that car. Also comparing specifications, og 9-3 aero 2.0T is supposed to be faster than the new v6, and the og was much lighter, although people say it handles bad.
Yeah I was referring only to newer ones since that's on an entirely different platform. Maybe in another head to head in the future!
nice video! i have 2006 9-3 aero convertible 20th anniversary and i came with one full key and extra was just a actual metal key without a black fub.
My question is, if I buy black fub on ebay and just still the metal key inside, will it work or It will need to be programmed? Thanks
Nope the key will need to be programmed. You just need to find someone who has a tech2 with security access. If you happen to be in Arizona, I can help. My contact info is in the description box!
@@AutoAutopsy im in fort Lauderdale Florida. My Saab mechanic is very expensive. Because he is only one around lol
I had the 900 turbo talladega, og 9-3 2.0t 1999
The 9-5 aero 9-3 aero in total i had 6 Saabs.
The 9-5 is comfortable and u can drive easy 10 hours nonstop.
Nice!
Auto Autopsy
Here in Sweden u have 9-5 running 500-700 HP
MY favorite engines are the b204 and b234 those old trionic 5 engines can make 500hp on stock internals.
Many Saab 9-5 owners in Sweden builds with the old engine block b204/b234 and use the cylinderhead from the b205/b235 TRIONIC 7.
2003 9-5 aero one of the best years of Saab
I'd buy an 04-05 personally
@@AutoAutopsy I've had no real issues with the 03 and I've owned it for almost 5yrs. Out of curiosity why the 04-05 years
I'm sure someone already suggested this, but why not put the Viggen in this comparo? Also, the 03-05 Aeros are such unicorns.
Mostly because of the year range. I might do a comparison between the Viggen and something like the SPG next
The B235R can not handle 500hp on stock internals - the real number is around 300hp.