Saab 93 or Honda Accord

Intensive Care Bear

I have been looking at the 06/07 models of both these cars (diesel). Anyone want to offer their opinion as to which is the better car or what i should look out for in either model, cheers.

shinkansen

Honda Accord would be better IMO, if it has a fsh which is crucial as it does have specific issues that prop up.

also Saab is defunct so why would you put your hard earned euros into a manufacturer than went down the pan.

If you can get a EX trim in the accord with fsh you would not look back.

randy hickey

Have a 07 Accord 2.2 iCDTI Executive since last May,and the novelty still hasn't worn off!

shinkansen

randy hickey wrote: »

Have a 07 Accord 2.2 iCDTI Executive since last May,and the novelty still hasn't worn off!

cant agree anymore.

with executive trim expect to find most of the below standard in a face lift 7th gen

Auto Self Leveling HIDs w/washer jets
Heated Leather Seats, with multi way electronic control
Electric Folding Heated Mirrors
Sat Nav w/touch screen
Hands Free
Cruise Control
Dual Climate Control
17" Alloys

Intensive Care Bear

It looks like the Accord is coming out on top, just had a look on Autotrader and there is some nice examples for small enough money, wouldn't mind something like this..

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201303075663773/sort/pricedesc/usedcars/fuel-type/diesel/price-to/5000/model/accord/make/honda/onesearchad/used/onesearchad/nearlynew/onesearchad/new/radius/1500/postcode/e58jy/page/4?logcode=p

00833827

honda! honda! honda!

shinkansen

66k miles on that car sounds iffy.

if its legit could be good. would ask him to email all the honda stamps on the log book first and do a reg check.

then take it from there.

Saab Ed

Honda all the way. Pre 07 9-3's are very soft. Not an old skool Saab at all. Here's a curve ball though. Same year Saab 9-5 is a great car and a lot cheaper than the Honda.

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Saab/9-5/1.9-TIDS/34013625840087360/advert?channel=CARS

Ardennes1944

Saab Ed wrote: »

Honda all the way. Pre 07 9-3's are very soft. Not an old skool Saab at all. Here's a curve ball though. Same year Saab 9-5 is a great car and a lot cheaper than the Honda.

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Saab/9-5/1.9-TIDS/34013625840087360/advert?channel=CARS

Even the 93 aeros? I'm fairly tempted by them

Saab Ed

Ardennes1944 wrote: »

Even the 93 aeros? I'm fairly tempted by them

Post 07's are better but the Japs wont be sh!ttin themselves all the same.

Ardennes1944

By soft I presume you mean in terms of reliability Ed?
There's no 07 93 aeros for sale in Ireland afaik, there's one 06 on dd that looks nice though
I saw a 07 for sale at some stage but it didn't even have the gen2 interior

Saab Ed

Ardennes1944 wrote: »

By soft I presume you mean in terms of reliability Ed?
There's no 07 93 aeros for sale in Ireland afaik, there's one 06 on dd that looks nice though
I saw a 07 for sale at some stage but it didn't even have the gen2 interior

A mate of mine has a 08 one. 2.8 V6 turbo and its Aero X so its four wheel drive. Two problems A) its not that quick. Okay its quick but not as quick as you expect it to be. It eats diffs and has a constant hankering for software upgrades.

Even with the new interior, the plastics are just not up to scratch. Lovely machine at 80 on a motorway all the same.

Ardennes1944

Acceleration in 3rd and 4th are meant to where it shines though not 0-60 wise. Or was it just not fast full stop?
I think the gen1 interior is growing on me, kinda quirky. And it's better than a cooper s interior which is another choice

unkel

Saab Ed wrote: »

the Japs wont be sh!ttin themselves all the same.

The Japs at Honda were sh1ttin themselves big time trying to make their first ever diesel engine. The result was ok for a first effort in fairness to them, but not great. Maybe going forward they should spend more effort in research & development rather than copy & paste? The Chinese and Koreans have mastered the latter at this stage...

JohnBoy26

unkel wrote: »

The Japs at Honda were sh1ttin themselves big time trying to make their first ever diesel engine. The result was ok for a first effort in fairness to them, but not great. Maybe going forward they should spend more effort in research & development rather than copy & paste? The Chinese and Koreans have mastered the latter at this stage...

You do realise that saab couldn't even attempt to make their own diesel engine and in turn had to rely on gm to source them an engine from fiat, which itself is nothing to write home about reliability wise.

However im not saying the first diesel accords were great or anything, they gave their fair share of problems too, but for a first attempt i think they are not bad and the car itself is certainatly very nice imo.

Tbh also I don't know what you mean by "copy&paste koreans"? What did they copy? You also can't put the korean cars in the same sentence as chinese cars. Korean cars are now on par with many major car brands and have surpassed some imo. Their quality is outstanding at the moment and they just can't be compared to some cheap low end chinese sh*t box.

shinkansen

anyone who compares Honda to korean cars really has no idea.

Honda have several variety of cars, The Accord has superior handling to a civic, likewise a Honda legend is a different league entirely.

people who say Jap $hit boxes really dont have a clue, the rattly tinny cars of the 90s are no more. Honda had loads of problems with early gen diesels but for a company first entry into this market it was not at all bad. Also Honda have in most cases covered people with a warranty to rectify known issues in said cars for gratis.

The 8th gen diesel i am quite sure is very good indeed and they have improved and learnt from mistakes made, it is also pretty expensive and most people who have them cars dont sell and hence the cars retain price well.

A well kitted out Accord is a very nice place to be indeed and they just eat up the miles without even knowing it.

JohnBoy26

shinkansen wrote: »

anyone who compares Honda to korean cars really has no idea.

Honda have several variety of cars, The Accord has superior handling to a civic, likewise a Honda legend is a different league entirely.

people who say Jap $hit boxes really dont have a clue, the rattly tinny cars of the 90s are no more. Honda had loads of problems with early gen diesels but for a company first entry into this market it was not at all bad. Also Honda have in most cases covered people with a warranty to rectify known issues in said cars for gratis.

The 8th gen diesel i am quite sure is very good indeed and they have improved and learnt from mistakes made, it is also pretty expensive and most people who have them cars dont sell and hence the cars retain price well.

A well kitted out Accord is a very nice place to be indeed and they just eat up the miles without even knowing it.

No you actually have no idea from reading your post. You can't just say All hondas are better than all korean cars. This is just not true. A current gen Hyundai I30 is a better car than a current gen civic imo. A current gen accord on the otherhand is better than an i40 imo.

shinkansen

you are comparing apples with dragonfruit, so of course one is better than the other.

Saab Ed

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

No you actually have no idea from reading your post. You can't just say All hondas are better than all korean cars. This is just not true. A current gen Hyundai I30 is a better car than a current gen civic imo. A current gen accord on the otherhand is better than an i40 imo.

Jayzus. Freeze to death or burn to death, great choices :pac:

unkel

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

You do realise that saab couldn't even attempt to make their own diesel engine and in turn had to rely on gm to source them an engine from fiat, which itself is nothing to write home about reliability wise.

You do realise that FIAT invented the common rail diesel engine?

Tragedy

unkel wrote: »

You do realise that FIAT invented the common rail diesel engine?

Untrue!

Saab Ed

Tragedy wrote: »

Untrue!

Well kinda true.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_rail#section_1

As a side note with regards to the who's who of diesel engines. Saab used GM & Fiat diesels, that's true. But then again Honda once used (not that long ago) Isuzu (GM so ) & Rover diesels. Fcuking Rover! Volvo used Renault along with others. BMW used Toyota who also once used Peugeot.

Mercedes currently uses Renault, Suzuki used both Renault & Fiat, Mitsubishi uses VW, GM still uses Fiat in everything let's not forget all the PSA motors in Fords.

The fact that Saab used one of the best available i.e. the Fiat motor , says it all.

mad m

shinkansen wrote: »

66k miles on that car sounds iffy.

if its legit could be good. would ask him to email all the honda stamps on the log book first and do a reg check.

then take it from there.

TBH, we have a 07 S-Type Accord(petrol) with only 62k on clock...I know I know what your going to say its under used, but its very comfortable to drive plus the only issue I had with with it was the clutch(wife has one foot longer than the other:) )

unkel

Tragedy wrote: »

Untrue!

Care to elaborate? Afaik FIAT developed it as early as the 60s but couldn't quite get it right for mass production. Bosch could get it ready, after buying the rights. The first car in the world with a common rail diesel engine was the Alfa Romeo 156 2.4 5-pot (Alfa is part of the FIAT group)

To this day every common rail diesel car engine manufacturer in the world (yes including Honda) is paying Bosch for the pleasure of using their patents for common rail. I believe this was the reason Volkswagen held onto their antiquated PD system for so long, they didn't want to pay expensive royalties...

shinkansen

mad m wrote: »

TBH, we have a 07 S-Type Accord(petrol) with only 62k on clock...I know I know what your going to say its under used, but its very comfortable to drive plus the only issue I had with with it was the clutch(wife has one foot longer than the other:) )

Im talking about a diesel here, petrol's are a different kettle of fish.

Tea 1000

unkel wrote: »

The Japs at Honda were sh1ttin themselves big time trying to make their first ever diesel engine. The result was ok for a first effort in fairness to them, but not great. Maybe going forward they should spend more effort in research & development rather than copy & paste? The Chinese and Koreans have mastered the latter at this stage...

The Honda diesel is one of the most reliable modern diesels out there. The manifold issue was covered out of warranty, and they don't walk through injectors or EGR valves like nearly all other modern diesels do. So I'd say its a better than OK result for their first diesel.
And everyone copies and pastes these days!

Tea 1000

unkel wrote: »

Care to elaborate? Afaik FIAT developed it as early as the 60s but couldn't quite get it right for mass production. Bosch could get it ready, after buying the rights. The first car in the world with a common rail diesel engine was the Alfa Romeo 156 2.4 5-pot (Alfa is part of the FIAT group)

To this day every common rail diesel car engine manufacturer in the world (yes including Honda) is paying Bosch for the pleasure of using their patents for common rail. I believe this was the reason Volkswagen held onto their antiquated PD system for so long, they didn't want to pay expensive royalties...

Fiat have great engineers, but they hired chimps instead of electricians for the wiring. Build quality was another weak point, hence their poor rep in many countries. VW proved that you can build a lemon, but so long as you build it well it'll sell!

shinkansen

Volkswagen are a bit like Apple, selling the same and same and same over priced cars like golfs with hardly any changes (and under specced) for vastly inflated prices compared to other marques.

But it seems they have a die hard fan base just like the Apple fan boys.

Tea 1000

shinkansen wrote: »

Volkswagen are a bit like Apple, selling the same and same and same over priced cars like golfs with hardly any changes (and under specced) for vastly inflated prices compared to other marques.

But it seems they have a die hard fan base just like the Apple fan boys.

True, although I always think Audi are more like Apple.

Tragedy

unkel wrote: »

Care to elaborate? Afaik FIAT developed it as early as the 60s but couldn't quite get it right for mass production. Bosch could get it ready, after buying the rights. The first car in the world with a common rail diesel engine was the Alfa Romeo 156 2.4 5-pot (Alfa is part of the FIAT group)

To this day every common rail diesel car engine manufacturer in the world (yes including Honda) is paying Bosch for the pleasure of using their patents for common rail. I believe this was the reason Volkswagen held onto their antiquated PD system for so long, they didn't want to pay expensive royalties...

It was (briefly) tested in the 60's but no commercial applications could be found. I thought it was Cummins who had toyed with it in the 60's, but wiki says it was a Swiss scientist/enginner. Fiat were the first to have it in a production passenger car, but they didn't invent it

I'm also led to believe that some early submarines used (mechanical) common rail technology.

bazz26

Saab Ed wrote: »

Jayzus. Freeze to death or burn to death, great choices :pac:

Harsh considering Honda and Hyundai are still in business making plenty of money while Saab are now only a memory of their loyal fans.

Saab Ed wrote: »

Well kinda true.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_rail#section_1

As a side note with regards to the who's who of diesel engines. Saab used GM & Fiat diesels, that's true. But then again Honda once used (not that long ago) Isuzu (GM so ) & Rover diesels. Fcuking Rover! Volvo used Renault along with others. BMW used Toyota who also once used Peugeot.

Mercedes currently uses Renault, Suzuki used both Renault & Fiat, Mitsubishi uses VW, GM still uses Fiat in everything let's not forget all the PSA motors in Fords.

The fact that Saab used one of the best available i.e. the Fiat motor , says it all.

I don't think Saab had the luxury of choice to be honest, their parent company GM had a deal with Fiat to supply Multi-jet diesel engines so I'd say Saab acquired them as part of that agreement rather than Saab going out and getting the best. If GM continued to use their own diesel engines then chances are they would have been sold in a Saab right up to it's demise.

Saab Ed

bazz26 wrote: »

Harsh considering Honda and Hyundai are still in business making plenty of money while Saab are now only a memory of their loyal fans.
.

It's a double edged sword answer to that. Saab went bang because of the lack of vision and investment by its US overlord GM. The funny irony being that, as an independent manufacturer , it could never make money. Why? It's cars were too good, over engineered. Even more ironic now given the amounts of money people will outlay these days for a boggo A4 diesel.

Sad to say but people just wanted cheap shoite or a badge, they still do. Nobody wants a regular car that actually last forever anymore. Modern Saabs were neither unique or quality, that's what the yanks left behind. You won't see me defending a last off the line 9-3 though. An original 900 on the other hand will be around post apocalypse :-)

We can only hope as a species that this won't be the case for Hyundai

unkel

Tragedy wrote: »

Fiat were the first to have it in a production passenger car, but they didn't invent it

They invented it. They owned the rights - that's the proof

Sold it to Bosch who "completed" it...

The Pontiac

Honda Accord is in a different league.

unkel

The Pontiac wrote: »

Honda Accord is in a different league.

A different league indeed. Pricewise. It will cost about twice what a same year / mileage / condition Saab would cost

The Pontiac

unkel wrote: »

A different league indeed. Pricewise. It will cost about twice what a same year / mileage / condition Saab would cost

That is the view I took too, when I bought my 9-3.

Do I regret it? Yes.

shinkansen

The Accord is a superior car. /thread

unkel

The Pontiac wrote: »

That is the view I took too, when I bought my 9-3.

Do I regret it? Yes.

You might as well tell us all the bad things - it could help the OP and others to make their minds up. So what went wrong?

Tea 1000

bazz26 wrote: »

Harsh considering Honda and Hyundai are still in business making plenty of money while Saab are now only a memory of their loyal fans.



I don't think Saab had the luxury of choice to be honest, their parent company GM had a deal with Fiat to supply Multi-jet diesel engines so I'd say Saab acquired them as part of that agreement rather than Saab going out and getting the best. If GM continued to use their own diesel engines then chances are they would have been sold in a Saab right up to it's demise.

Good job too that GM used Fiat diesels. GM diesels were pure muck. The Fiat diesels are quite good.

Saab Ed wrote: »

It's a double edged sword answer to that. Saab went bang because of the lack of vision and investment by its US overlord GM. The funny irony being that, as an independent manufacturer , it could never make money. Why? It's cars were too good, over engineered. Even more ironic now given the amounts of money people will outlay these days for a boggo A4 diesel.

Sad to say but people just wanted cheap shoite or a badge, they still do. Nobody wants a regular car that actually last forever anymore. Modern Saabs were neither unique or quality, that's what the yanks left behind. You won't see me defending a last off the line 9-3 though. An original 900 on the other hand will be around post apocalypse :-)

We can only hope as a species that this won't be the case for Hyundai

I'd agree, last 10 years of Saab were GM ruined muck. A good 900 or even the 9000i were proper Saabs (with a bit of italian in the 9000!)

The Pontiac

unkel wrote: »

You might as well tell us all the bad things - it could help the OP and others to make their minds up. So what went wrong?

Where do I start?

Have the 9-3 eight months. So far 2 front shocks replaced, water pump (and then timing belt), thermostat, flywheel and clutch and now there's a wheel bearing gone.

The build quality is like something out of British Leyland of the 70's. The interior rattles and squeaks like no other car I've owned. It makes my previous 2000 Focus seem like a Bentley. Not a rattle in the Focus with 160k on the clock. If you're ever in a 9-3, then just pull out the ashtray and give it a wiggle. You'll see what I'm taking about. Fisher Price stuff here!

Ride and handling is truly shocking. You can feel every minor imperfection on the road.

The 1.9tid 150 is a lovely engine though. I should have test drove the 9-5 with the same engine and considered that. Or a Volvo S60.

I did my research and then ignored it, just saw the very tempting prices. Bad move.

MrPoker

http://www.southsidemotorgroup.ie/used-cars.php

(apologies ad is about half way down the link. Cant get precise link from website)

I was going to take a wander out and have a look at this 9-3 aero until I read the post above. Seems like decent value and is a good looking car (imo of course). Hard to know what you are going to get with a Saab. Seems like a mixed bag in all the reviews with the above post being the worst Ive read online.

Anybody else have experience of the 9-3? Maybe worth the gamble for the price although re-sale in a years time could be a major problem.

Drift

I have a diesel 93 for the past 3 years (08 model). In that time the only thing that has gone is the alternator.

Due to replace the timing belt at the next service but that's par for the course with all diesel cars.

There's no doubt that the Aero spec has stiff suspension. When you add 18 inch alloys the speed bumps can definitely be felt. I spend most of my time on main roads and motorways though and it's a joy to drive on them.

I guess I've been lucky to have a very different experience to "The Pontiac". Pretty happy with mine and I'm going to keep it for a few years yet hopefully.

I'll have to investigate the ashtray later!!!

Tragedy

unkel wrote: »

They invented it. They owned the rights - that's the proof

Sold it to Bosch who "completed" it...

Any patents made in the 60's would have been long since expired by the time Fiat and Denso restarted research into common rail in the 80's. Also, the foundation for Bosch's patents around CR technology is actually the use of an ECU to control it = something that couldn't have existed prior to the 80's.