The good, the bad and the unknown for Saab in the US today
The good: XWD
The first bit of good news for Saab purveyors in the US today is - in case you missed it - that XWD is officially available for the 2.0T, for the 2009 model year. Do not underestimate how good this news is - it’s fantastic!
This is news that I brought to you some time ago, but it’s always nice to see the official confirmation.
The bad: XWD
The bad news is that the 2.0T with XWD will apparently not be available with the eLSD (the part of the XWD system that splits power between the rear wheels). The eLSD will not even be an option for the 2.0T. Given that that engine’s got so much character and is a favourite with buyers, I can’t help but think that SaabUSA are shooting themselves in the foot here.
The unknown: A smaller engine for Saab 9-3?
The headline of that 2009 Saab 9-3 article listed a “2.0t sPort” model as well as the Aero and 2.0T versions. The large ‘T’ denotes a high output turbo engine whereas the lower-case ‘t’ - in Australia at least - means a 175hp (or 129kW) version of Saab’s four-pot. Given the fuel-conscious times we live in, the addition of the 2.0t would be a great idea for the US market.
However, whilst it was mentioned in the headline, it was left out of the rest of the press release. As was BioPower.
Questions have been asked and I’ll let you know what I find out.
The bad: another dealer lost?
According to Dan, in comments, Lehman Saab has been changed from a stand-alone Saab dealer (alongside a franchise Volvo dealership as well) to become a Cadillac-Hummer dealership. Not a Saab-Cadillac-Hummer dealership, but C-H only.
And this was apparently at GM’s request. And they’re in PA, which is not quite MA but it’s in the NEUS and I’d assume hasn’t been completely FUBAR recently.
A click on the Lehman URL diverts to SutliffeSaab, which times-out and doesn’t load. Not good.
Another one bites the dust? Let’s hope not.
The bad: Aero Academy gone
True to their word, SaabUSA have indeed removed all references to the Aero Academy from their website. That whole program has gone from existing to wiped-from-the-face-of-SaabUSA’s-existence within a week. Remarkable.
but…..
The unknown: Euro Delivery
….references still exist to the European Delivery Program:
Thanks for your interest in the Saab European Delivery Program. The program will be up and running in the near future.* Please submit your contact information below and we will be sure to send you updates as they become available.
If you’re feeling cynical like me, you probably think that asterisk links to a footnate saying the near future could be as far as 2015 or something 
. I’m pleased to say it doesn’t, though. It just says it’s for the 9-3 and 9-5 only.
So there’s hope for this essential program. If Saab want to position themselves against the Euro premium players then this is the sort of thing they need to maintain.
-
More from this category
- If you’re in the market for a Saab, now’s the time
- News from the 2008 Saab Owners Convention
- GM Employee Discount for Everyone coming back this week
- Saab improves in JD quality study (which sucks, by the way)
More from this author
- A Quick Thankyou
- Automotive Rites of Passage
- Friday Snippets (well, it’ll be Saturday when you read them)
- Edmunds provide puzzling Saab Turbo X road test
Subscribe to this author
Recent Comments
- 1985 Gripen on If you’re in the market for a Saab, now’s the time
- papluh on Automotive Rites of Passage
- Mag-X on A Quick Thankyou
- SaabKen on A Quick Thankyou
- Mag-X on EnG Weekend Snippets
- Mag-X on A Quick Thankyou
- ELBOBO on A Quick Thankyou
- eggsngrits on A Quick Thankyou
- eggsngrits on A Quick Thankyou
- Jeff on A Quick Thankyou
“Given the fuel-conscious times we live in, the addition of the 2.0t would be a great idea for the US market”
Swade, this engine has some pretty bad figures in real world driving… to date I haven’t seen less than 12.9/100km on the display which is pretty well in line with the Viggen.
Richo,
All engines run through fuel when new, I have done aroun 3500km now and it is starting to get run in, most of my driving is done around the city and last night it dropped to 9.8l/100km. On the Highway I have had it down to (average) 6.5l/100km, and I am not a totally fuel effiecent driver, I like to have fun sometimes while driving.
I’m with Trent there Richo, cane it around the city only and the consumption can be high. On the highway it can easily get it down to 6.5/7.5, manual/auto.
Funny that the 2.0T is about to be deleted here in favour of the 2.0t Biopower as the only petrol compatible 4-cyl in the 9-3.
That will bring the line-up to 2.0t Bio, 2.8T, 1.9TiD and 1.9TTiD.
Although it will almost certainly be a newer engine, I know my younger brother has a automatic 2.0t 2004 9-3 (175 Hp ? I believe) and he gets great mpg… averaging 30 in the city driving he does. That said, he’s making a concerted effort to get that mileage.
Which is much better than my automatic 2002 9-3 SE (210 hp). I’m only getting around 20mpg.
The car I’m referring to is a 2006 Anniversary, it’s run in….
The car I’m referring to was driven 80kms uphill slope to work this morning 65km highway/15km town, AC on, caned at the lights when in town, peeing down rain, and got 8.5km/100 (28 U.S. MPG/ 33 U.K.) and it’s an “auto combi”=”heavy and inefficient”.
^^^^ Should read 8.5l/100km
So what does the capital ‘P’ in sPort represent?
There will be no smaller engine for US. THat´s just typo. You can see this on the engine list, there´s no 129kW two liter turbo.
But the good thing is that finally, at least in USA you can get “aero” with 2.0T engine. Assuming that it´ll have front/rear bumpers from Aero and the suspension of your choise.
Ricko, do you have automatic? My previous SC ´06 1.8t manual (two liter turbo + BSR 220hp software) got average consumption of 8.2l/100km at 45000km. And that´s calculated, not from the SID. I keep records of all the fill ups and always calculate the accurate consumption. And btw, for now my SC TTiD Aut. 10000km / 7.6l/100km. Not bad for powerful car with automatic transmission.
No eLSD with 2.0T just stupid marketing. The only real-world condition where I can think if eLSD to be useful is in really slippery and bad weather conditions. But this marketing idea shows that it´s meant for track driving mainly
I dunno, Marko. It’s a very big and deliberate typo if that’s the case. And it’s not my typo, either. I cut and pasted the thing from GM themselves.
It wouldn’t be the first time GM have let something slip in a press release. The plug-in capability of the Hybrid Convertible was a case of a cover-up gone wrong. Also, the reason why we knew about the 2008 9-3 being such a big makeover is that SaabUSA let it slip in one line of a press release.
Wait and see, I guess. I’ve asked a question of SaabUSA but have just received an automated reply telling me that my usual guy there is on holidays. Figures
I don’t why it gets called a smaller engine, it’s just a lower boost version. Saab tried some BS and called it a 1.8 for a while and that didn’t work.
In fairness, Mark, the word “smaller” is mine and is intended only to denote lower output. The assumption was that people will see the 2.0 on both designations and if they’re regulars here, they’ll know what I mean (which you did).
The 1.8t was indeed actually 2 litres in size, but only ran at 110kW. I have a feeling that the 1.8t and 2.0t were just software dependant, but the 2.0T actually has some different hardware, too (but I could very easily be wrong on that).
The old (MY01) 2.0t I have in my car is beautiful. More than enough power for me, while 6.5-7.0/100km with AC on the highway is standard consumption. In town without too much traffic light, I usually get around 8-9/100 km.
“Saab tried some BS and called it a 1.8 for a while and that didn’t work.”
1.8t version of this engine is still available for most of the European countries. Just like Swade said, it´s lower boost version of 2.0t. MY07 they replaced the smaller turbo of 1.8t/2.0t with Mitsubishi found on 2.0T, so for now there´s even less mechanical differencies. Intake & exhaust cams are different, I´ve heard.
Anyways, in my opinion it´s very good to have these lower output versions available, as they have lower consumption and CO2 figures - for those who care. Not everyone needs more than 10secs 0-100 & 200kmh top speed.
Like I´ve said before, 1.8t is very neat version of this engine. And if you´d regret your choise, there´s always Hirsch, BSR and others to help.
Swade, I picked up that typo from GM site too, and it was the one I mean up there. On the GM site you can download a list of engines and the only two liter is 210hp 2.0T, for this I think 2.0t was just a typo as “sPort” follows it..
I don’t know why they just didn’t call the 110Kw version LPT like the previous model?
1.8t just confused people. I met one guy who was adamant he had a 1.8 litre engine. I suggested he read his handbook.
MarkoA is right. 1.8t and 2.0t are the same engines with only different software.
However I don’t know why Hirsch claim to go to 195 hp for the 1.8t and to 200 for the 2.0t.
As for the fuel consumption: I have an automatic 1.8t SE/SC and it has done 50.000 km now at an average of 9,5 l/100km. To reach the 12,9 as mentioned by Richo I have to hook up the caravan (1.300 kg) and drive it rough (in our flat country it reaches normally around 12,0 l/100km with the caravan).
12,9 l/100km with 2.0t ? There must be something seriously wrong with the car (or the driving).
(A cousin to my mother used to think her Citroen BX was quite noisy. She thought her car only had three gears…)
My 2.0t (2003 SS, 5-spd manual) uses 6,5-7 l/100 on highway and average is about 9,5 l/100 (roughly the same as Alberts). That includes a lot of cold starts and short trips. With more sensible tyres it would easily use another 0,5 l less on highway.
The worst I have managed is 18 l/100 on a racetrack., which is about half less I was expecting.
I don’t think there is enough difference from the big-T to motivate introducing 2.0t (let alone 1.8t) in the U.S. Where is the direct-injection turbo four ??
Some statistics digging about European (mostly German ) consumption can be done here :
)
You can import/export the stuff so you don’t need to be online.
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/overview/43-Saab/0-All_models.html?fueltype=2&page=9 (will preopen on gasoline SAABs
Its a page where you can track your fuel usage based on fuelings. You can put there lot of different information, if you have the patience
I track my fuel costs anyway so I just mark the odo when paying and after taking the batch of them from car, I just type them here also
Oh, one turbo x already there http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/270680.html
The 1.8t and 2.0t aren’t necessarily more economical than the 2.0T. Any small difference is likely due to the 2.0T having bigger tires and more standard equipment.
The only reason why the 1.8t and 2.0t exist at all is that some markets provide tax incentives for less powerful cars.
Swade, did you get to test the new TTiD Aero? I’m really intrigued to hear the results, even if we dont get it YET in the US.
For the Swedish market the following is confirmed.
Aero - true cars: 2.8 and the 1.9 TTiD; but an Aero-package will be as an option among several cars.
2.0T (210hp - no biopower) is to re-enter among the engine choices. Available with aero-package, and XWD.
2.0t (biopower) - Available with Aero-package, no XWD.
Jimmey, where did you get this info? And more importantly, what about 1.8t + XWD, or Diesel + XWD?
Albert: “I don’t know why Hirsch claim to go to 195 hp for the 1.8t and to 200 for the 2.0t.”
This goes only for 2008 as far as I know. There´s something different in 2008 2.0t vs earlier versions. Also MY07 (actually already MY06/b) had changes allowing more hp´s as BSR claims (for 1.8t) pre-06 204hp, MY06 215hp and MY07 220hp.
Riku1100s, yes I´m also waiting for direct injection turbo-4 and what more is double clutch transmission like DSG of VAG. Though these will probably not come on 9-3 mkII.
I got the info from Saab Ana in Trollhattan (largest saab-dealer in Sweden).
He had no info about the 1.8t + XWD. And all he could says about the Diesel was “probably with the TTiD but not from start” (production starts late september).
Thanks Jimmey! It´s exactly what dealers tell me here as well, “probably”. I think it´s in their own wish-list, so they like to give this answer.
I’d really like to see the EDP back for 2009. The 2.0T SC (6-speed) would be my choice. I have 150 hours vacation available for the trip.