Driving my ’93 SAAB classic 900 through the main downtown stretch of our town in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, I spotted another c900. It being the first c900 I’ve seen up here, this was quite the unicorn sighting.
I left a note under the windshield wiper, letting the owner know we are in the process of moving. I have a small parts cache, and he could pick through and take whatever he fancied.
The fellow saabista, Matt, is a kindred soul. He offered (well, I asked) to take his turbo for a spin, since I’d never driven the turbo variant. His car is a 1990. The 2 liter turbo produces 165 hp (net) @ 5,500 rpm and 188 ft-lbs of torque at 3,000 rpm. My 2.1 liter n/a has 140 hp (net) @ 6,000 rpm and 133 ft-lbs at 2,900 rpm. Both are 5-speed manuals. The gear ratios feel identical.
Driving Matt’s SAAB was enjoyable. Actually, I had a Cheshire Cat grin on my face, whenever the turbo was in boost. But, it also left me feeling a bit underwhelmed. I expected the turbo to be… more. It certainly didn’t have rocket like acceleration I was expecting. Boost builds slowly, and below 3,000 rpm, it actually felt more lethargic than my n/a.
This is probably due to my car’s naturally aspirated motor having a higher compression ratio, better designed fuel rail and injectors, higher pressure fuel pressure regulator, and better breathing head and intake manifold (swapping the 2.1’s head and intake onto a turbo motor is a common mod).
Around 4,000 rpm, the turbo pushed me back in the seat, and the turbo whine is fun. The 100cc difference in reciprocating mass also makes the turbo creamier when revving. It would be nice for passing on grades, or driving at elevation. But, having now driven both, I don’t feel as though I’m really missing out on much. However, and this is a big however, Matt’s car does have 533,000 miles on it, yes, over half a million, so it is likely that a few ponies went astray over that distance.
My biggest take-away was how much turbo technology has improved. I owned a 2015 Ford Fiesta ST with the 1.6L ecoboost producing 197 hp @ 6,000 rpm and 202 ft-lbs of torque at 4,200 rpm. 32 more horsepower, from a engine 400 cc smaller (premium fuel required).
My mom drives a 2016 F150, with the 3.5L ecoboost. Prior to that, my parents owned a 2013 Escape with the 2.0L ecoboost. Both those vehicles have/had a steady diet of 87 octane. It is astounding how much lower in the rev range the Fords build boost, and how linear the power band feels. The trade off being, the smaller/quicker-spooling turbos run out of steam earlier in the rev-range. But, how many drivers want to rev the piss out of their vehicle to hit the power band?
The F150 has a bit of turbo-lag, off the line. Accidental chirping of the tires can happen, when it hits boost. Though, in comparison, the SAAB’s turbo feels positively obtrusive.
These old-school Saabs have their motors mounted backwards, right? I’ve always wondered how hard it was to change a fan belt on one of those foreign jobs.
The fans are electrically driven, against the radiator, at the “back” of the engine. The belts are against the firewall, and they are a knuckle-buster to swap. But, at least the clutch is easy to service.
It‘s same with Citroën DS and its water pump abutting the firewall. Going through the whole repair or replacement without spewing ear-splitting blue language would be an epic feat!
I once had to use a SawzAll to replace my alternator in my 1992 900 2.1. The bolt hits the firewall. To reinstall, I pulled the oil filter mount (its up high so draining the oil is not necessary), sent the new bolt the other direction, and reinstalled the oil filter mount
You remove the top and left bolt on the alternator bracket first then swivel the alternator with the bracket any-clockwise and the bolt comes out without cutting the bolt.
I drove one once and I suspect it was lightly modded bevmcause it span the wheels in the first for gears on a damp road. I was actually surprised by the power.
The first Saab Turbo (heck, the first Saab altogether) that I drove was a 1979 5-door turbo around 1986, it belonged to a high school friend’s family. Yes there was lag at the outset but it still seemed faster off the line than my Mazda at the time but then once the turbo kicked in, wow, it just rocketed off with a marvelous whistle and a big rush of torque. It converted me to a turbo fan for decades to come. Then eventually I owned the big Audis in turbo form and learned all about tuning them and how to get even more power out of the engines etc. Volvos, Audis, and my own Saabs eventually followed that initial drive with turbos being the favorites hands down. None of them ever had a failure even remotely related to a turbo and some of them had significant mileage on them. Curious that I don’t own a turbo at all currently but that may change again eventually.
Should be called ‘Turbo LAAG’…
What will we call it when someone puts a Sabb marine diesel in one of these? Laagg?
This is what I think of when I read LAAG
I love the 1.4 turbo in my Cruze. The only turbocharged car I had before that was a ’87 Subaru XT, and this car feels so much more powerful than the 112hp/143 ft. lbs from the XT’s 1.8 turbo. I’m so used to driving slow Nissan econoboxes that the thrust the Cruze gives me on the highway when I need to pass surprises me still. No lag that I can feel and I can’t hear any turbo whine.
Turbo lag is something I don’t miss much. I owned an ’88 900 SPG, followed by an ’88 Mazda 323GTX, both small-displacement 1980s turbos, and both imbued with lots of lag. The Saab, of course, had torque steer on top of the turbo lag, which made keeping control under hard acceleration somewhat of a challenge.
Back then, I thought it was really neat, and plus, the Saab was a whole lot faster than the 100-hp Audi Coupe I’d had previously, so I didn’t really mind. But I have a feeling if I drove one today, I’d be less than impressed. And would probably feel like you do… that the normally-aspirated 900 was just fine.
The only non-turbo 900 that I’ve driven was an automatic, which was awful. My ideal 900 these days would probably be one much like yours.
Glad you got to meet up with another 900 owner!
The owner of the GM dealership I worked for in the early 00’s had a Grand National and a GNX. Both 100% identically equipped, except for the powertrains. Being someone who was extraordinarily cautious with other people’s vehicles, it wasn’t an issue with me, except for a single afternoon spent with the service manager sorting the cars out after being in storage all winter. After changing fluids, replacing plugs and basically getting the cars road ready, we went out for a burn. First the GN, and when the boss told me to walk on it (he was a man you definitely listened to the first time) I had a “Holy Shit” moment, after a very pregnant pause before the turbo spooled up. After about an hour, we both decided that the car was fit to be put back into use.
Next came the GNX, and he warned me to make sure I had it straightened out and both hands on the wheel. I did, and then tried to “push the loud pedal through the firewall”, exactly as instructed. There was another pregnant pause, and I momentarily believed that I truly had things under control. Time came to a halt as the giant, swirling beast atop that ancient 3.8 came to life, and swallowed the earth’s atmosphere like a black hole. I actually saw the entire existence of the dinosaur being fed to the fuel rail, in an attempt to stave off detonation that rivaled the Halifax Explosion. My eyes were the first things to go, pressed back into their sockets and not able to process the images. The seat of my pants translated the pleadings of the lowly GM rear axle, struggling not to hop, grenade, squirm and run away all at the same time. I managed to overcome the unnatural forces and look at the boss in the passenger seat, swearing that I could see tiny beads of sweat on his forehead as he wore a nonchalant grin.
It was a religious experience, similar to my first time opening up a C4 ZR1, or driving a big block A Body. I have driven infinitely faster cars, better sorted out and bred to handle unnatural horsepower. Nothing on this planet will prepare you for a 400+ horsepower G-Body, wearing a set of 60 series Radial T/A’s, with turbo lag that can be tracked on weather radar.
I want to read more road tests from you!!!
A Saab Turbo gave me my introduction to turbo lag. Or is it Turbo LAG. Stomp the pedal, yawn for a second or three and then Yippee! It was like a carnival ride and I desperately wanted to drive one home.
This makes me think of the incredible variety in powerplants in “enthusiast” cars back in the mid 80s. You had small, high strung Turbo 4s like this, rough bigger Turbo 4s from Ford and others, normally aspirated 4s of all kinds, V6s (with some turbos from Buick), old fashioned V8s with their gobs of off-the-line torque, and even the occasional turbo diesel.
As well as 5s, turbo 5s and inline 6s
…let’s not forget the Daihatsu Charade TX Turbo, inline-3!
Back to the 21st century, is the Audi RS 3 Sportback the only car these days with an inline-5? (turbocharged, of course)
The RS3 is only available as a sedan over here (with the 5 as well), but there’s also the TT (RS)
I worked for a Lincoln/Mercury dealership selling cars in the mid ‘80’s. I drove many different Merkur XR4ti’s, Cougar XR7 Turbo Coupes and even a few SVO Mustangs. I know very well of the turbo lag that you are all talking about. My latest daily driver is a 2015 Mercedes-Benz B250. It’s 2.0 litre turbo 4 cylinder makes 208 hp@ 5,500rpm and 258 lb-ft. of torque at a diesel like 1,200 rpm on premium fuel. With the 7 speed dual clutch transmission there is essentially no turbo lag.
I had a ‘95 9000 Aero for a quite a few years. (And a typical Saab “best car/worst car I ever owned” story to go along with it.) Being a pilot, I loved the turbo lag, it was like a road going version of a high powered tail dragger prop plane! When you hit the throttle hard, you had to be ready to dance on the rudder pedals to keep the machine on the centerline of the runway. Any pilots who’ve flown similar craft know what I’m talking about. You learned to anticipate, compensate, and have a blast! Then again, maybe it was just me, lol.
For years…decades…I thought that I wanted a turbocharged Corvair…until I drove several.
Big disappointment.
The much more popular 110 hp model with the automatic transmission is a more Real World” enjoyable model.
The 2.0 T (250 up/295 lb ft) Eco-tech in my TourX has a bit of lag but that’s a combo of a transmission programmed for fuel economy and a torque plateau of 2000-3000 rpm. There’s also a “hard stop” in the throttle at about 75% travel that you have to stomp through to get full power.