SAAB vs Mercedes

celica1994

OK, currently driving a 03 passat t(di), lovely car and all that, had it 2 years and want to move onto something new and heres what i had in mind

2003ish saab 93 1.8 turbo

or

2003ish mercedes c180 kompressor..

anyone know the mpg on the 2 cars? reliability etc?

Saab Ed

I'm probably the wrong person to ask

The 1.8t is actually a 2.0 litre light presure turbo where as the car badged 2.0t is the same engine just with more boost. I'm not a huge fan of the current 9-3 tbh. They're a bit creaky and scratcy inside compared to Saabs of old. That said a C Class aint much better.

If I was you I'd go for a similar year 9-5. Same running costs in what I consider a far better package.

PS - Dont buy the C Class if only to buck the trend. They're not a good car and they're obvious as hell.

celica1994

dunno why but i fancy getting a turbo petrol, dont even ask me why! lol

Saab Ed

Well all I say is coming from a Daysul you're gonna be in for a shock both bad and good. As someone who runs 3 Saabs ( all petrol ) I can tell you that they aint the easiest on fuel. Our daily driver is an 02 9-5 with the 2.o litre engine. Its doing an average of about 27 mpg. ( Not as bad as my latest project which is down to 19mpg :eek: )

The flip good side is that they're super smooth motors with lovely power delivery and they dont sound like a massey ferguson. Just be warned, if you do big mileage then be ready to fill up often

mickdw

Why not get a 1.8T from vw/audi. Lots of different power outputs available

colm_mcm

Neither car is noticeably better than what you're driving to be fair. Aim higher

celica1994

id spend more on a car but i just wana sell the passat and go with something in the similar price range!

dwaned

On my first Saab, 9-3 1.9 TID. I like it, 120 hp delivers the power well and when you want to conserve and drive easy I'm getting 5l/100km!! Pretty good, so if you want my advice go with an Audi!! Sorry..last car was an A6 Quatro 180hp and it was brilliant!! loved it but did suffer from pretty bad turbo lag. Not a huge fan of the c180 at all, was strongly advised against them by my old mechanic but that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with them.

Fishtits

The Saab's a glorified Vectra, rough as a bag of nuts engine wise and now with dubious company survivability. It will depreciate like a lead anchor.

The Merc is dated at probably their most unreliable product year ever - plus its a Merc so it will be dirty (if you're a Greeny), underpowered and sloppy vs the equivelant from Audi/BMW/VW...

Take yer pick

Saab Ed

Fishtits wrote: »

The Saab's a glorified Vectra, rough as a bag of nuts engine wise and now with dubious company survivability. It will depreciate like a lead anchor.

Gloridied Vectra in the same way an A3 Audi is a glorified Octavia, a Volvo S80 is a glorified Mondeo and the original Range Rover was a glorified defender ( or 109 as I think they were called back then) Not all bad, you've been watching far too much Jeremy Clarkson.

As regards to the engine, are you sure its a Saab you're talking about. They have their flaws but thats not one of them.

And last but not least, you should buy a good 2001 9-5 for 1500 quid or less, drive it for two years and sell it for 800 quid. The stuff of lead anchor legend

166man

Fishtits wrote: »

The Saab's a glorified Vectra, rough as a bag of nuts engine wise and now with dubious company survivability. It will depreciate like a lead anchor.

The Merc is dated at probably their most unreliable product year ever - plus its a Merc so it will be dirty (if you're a Greeny), underpowered and sloppy vs the equivelant from Audi/BMW/VW...

Take yer pick

And I presume you have owned one with that engine then to make that kind of comment. As for the depreciation the OP is buying a used car which will have lost most of it's value anyway so it won't depreciate that badly.

celica1994

celica1994 wrote: »

dunno why but i fancy getting a turbo petrol, dont even ask me why! lol

the merc doesn't have a turbo

166man wrote: »

And I presume you have owned one with that engine then to make that kind of comment. As for the depreciation the OP is buying a used car which will have lost most of it's value anyway so it won't depreciate that badly.

He's a mechanic so I have no doubt he has experienced the engine, he doesn't need to have owned one

CianRyan

The Merc has a super charger though, right? You wouldn't be stuck for power.

Edit: just looked it up, 141hp new and probably less now. That's not going be anything amazing in a car that size.

Have you thought about a Lexus IS or a Nissan Skyline V35/V36? Nissan would be harder to come by though.
For me, I'd be lookIng for an R34.

Yep, the merc is supercharged, still not a turbo, a c180 would be a tad faster than the is200.

CianRyan

True and true but there are pro's and con'w for both the turbo and the super charger.

Also, you'd get an IS250 for not mch more than a c180k. Or an IS220 if you're into burning dirt. But seeing as the dirt can push 175bhp it ain't that bad.
I'd have that over an old Merc anyway.

furtzy

There'll be a big price difference between the 03 Saab & the 03 Merc. Saab prices have collapsed. Was looking at few recently and you will get a 06 9-3 for the price of a 03 C180

Wouldn't be bothered about the Vectra references. It is essentially a Vectra underneath but that isn't a bad thing. I had several Vectra's and they were a grand car...also means that the parts are cheap and plentiful.

There's massive value in the used larger engined petrol market at the moment as everyone, rightly or wrongly, jumps on the diesel band wagon

coolbeans

I wouldn't like either for various reasons. A Volvo S60 is a much nicer car than either, especially the T5 version. The Benz isn't renowned for reliability and the SAAB looks like a 1996 Seat Toledo with fancy alloys.

steelboots

Stay well away from Mercs post 2000.

Guy:Incognito

CianRyan wrote: »

True and true but there are pro's and con'w for both the turbo and the super charger.

Also, you'd get an IS250 for not mch more than a c180k. Or an IS220 if you're into burning dirt. But seeing as the dirt can push 175bhp it ain't that bad.
I'd have that over an old Merc anyway.

If we're compaing it to bigger engined cars he could just go with a C240 then.

166man

RoverJames wrote: »

the merc doesn't have a turbo



He's a mechanic so I have no doubt he has experienced the engine, he doesn't need to have owned one

You can be a mechanic fine but to say it's a rough engine, I couldn't agree having been driving a car with the same engine for the past year, I reckon I would be better placed to comment on the refinement of the engine.

Edit: As to what car the OP should look at I think a nice Volvo S60 2.0t would be nice

Tea 1000

Any engine is smooth coming from a 1.9 TDI!
I'd go for a 9-5 far quicker than a 9-3, and I'd cross that C-Class off the list, and probably add the S60 as was mentioned. There are many options in petrols of that age group though.

166man

166man wrote: »

You can be a mechanic fine but to say it's a rough engine, I couldn't agree having been driving a car with the same engine for the past year, I reckon I would be better placed to comment on the refinement of the engine.

Edit: As to what car the OP should look at I think a nice Volvo S60 2.0t would be nice

You're really not well placed at all to comment as fishtits was on about the petrol engine the OP is considering the diesel engine you're on about is hardly the pinnacle of refinement either since you mention it.

166man

RoverJames wrote: »

You're really not well placed at all to comment as fishtits was on about the petrol engine the OP is considering the diesel engine you're on about is hardly the pinnacle of refinement either since you mention it.

I thought fishtits was on about the diesel in the post above his. Apologies. It isn't the pinnacle of refinement you're right but it isn't as rough as a bag of nuts.

CianRyan

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

CianRyan wrote: »

True and true but there are pro's and con'w for both the turbo and the super charger.

Also, you'd get an IS250 for not mch more than a c180k. Or an IS220 if you're into burning dirt. But seeing as the dirt can push 175bhp it ain't that bad.
I'd have that over an old Merc anyway.

If we're compaing it to bigger engined cars he could just go with a C240 then.

I'm comparing by price.
Hell, if we're forgetting about the money and just going by car size, the op should buy an IS F.