2.0 just because its my daily but i have mine running at 310 to the wheel an my engines holding up well now i cant say the same for my tranny but ill get it fixed till that motar blows
Greetings from Finland. First of all thank you for this great channel. It’s a pleasure to follow your videos. Here is my views to this comparison. I use to have 9-5 with with E235 Aero engine and Biopower modification. It was great car and very flexible engine. My 9-5 had a lot of miles behind and in Finnish winter conditions I was missing “better traction” so I searched 9-3 XWD. I admit that I had dilemma whether to have B284 or B207R. I was actually almost purchasing TurboX and/or V6 Aero XWD but finally I selected 2.0T XWD. The price difference was not so significant but 2.0 was more reasonable because I use this car for daily drive and also fuel cost have some importance too. Second reason is that B207 is is very “E85 friendly engine”. Finland have rather wide distribution network of E85 fuel (locally ethanol is produced from industial waste, recycled biofuel). Due lower CO2 taxation E85 is about 30-35% cheaper per litre than gasoline and have minimum 104 octanes. Engine burns some 20% more ethanol but it’s still good option. High octane level is naturally very very attracting for Saab Turbo owner ;) Comparison between e85 consumption and gasoline is not straightforward due software can be optimizied to utilize ethanols higher octanes, advanced spark timing, smaller engine temperature and lower tendency for engine knocking. With E85 oils have to be changed a bit more often but I ‘m not “afraid of ethanol” after using it 8 years without problems for every Saab I have got. So I ended to to compromise solution between power and some economical aspects: ym 2009 Saab 9-3 2.0T XWD AT6 B207R. Car is modied to Biopower (with added ethanol sensor), larger E85 compatible Bosch E14 injectors, 3” downpipe, modified OEM Turbo (upgraded) and modified software. I have otherwise stock engine and AT6 transmission so power is “limited to” 300hp/450nm. With E85 optimized software (flexfuel) maximum torques is available with quite wide range of rpm i.e. this E85 B207 setup is kind of closer to B284 than with “gasoline only setup”. Not the fastest car on the road but it actually accelerates very smoothly. Also on ice ;) Aero V6 and TurboX were also very interesting options because B284 has very nice low rpm torque (like a diesel) and naturally higher maximum absolute capacity for tuning. But actually B207R gets higher comparative benefit when tuned. For B207R it’s rather easy to increase close to 50% power and torque. Naturally also fuel consumption goes up but not so much. When tuning is made for gasoline setup 300hp and (450nm AT transmission/500nm manual) is kind of maximum without making internal mechanical changes to motor (like forged pistons etc.). Saab specialist guided me also that MAF and MAP sensors and air intake have to be changed/modified after 300 hp. I have been told also that its quite safe to go up to 340hp with stock engine with E85 (even with B207E) but for AT transmission its more risky to increase torque much higher than 450 nm. If someone wants to really modify B207, it is naturally possible to go up to 400+ hp (with manual or enforced automatic trans) but then quite many engine elements are replaced . These GM engines are not like Saab 9000 engine which was probably planned to tolerate 500 hp from the very beginning :) I have spoken with some (Stage1) TurboX owner and fuel consumption of B284 is roughly same with 98 octane gasoline than with tuned B207R XWD AT with E85/ethanol (both engines have around 300 hp). Ethanol has lower energy density so practically this means that real fuel consumption of B284 are approximately 20% higher compared to B207 in mixed drive conditions. Here some other notes: - Besided YM 2003, SAI pipe is also in B207 engines ym 2009-2011 (unfortunately) - B284 engine is somewhat heavier so in slippery conditions lighter B207 may have some benefit with handling. - B207R with dual exhaust (with 3” downpipe+ original cat back) sounds clearly more rough and has lower tone of voice than single exhaust. But I have to admit that it’s still not so good than V6 and especially TurboX exhaust sound :) - Very latest 9-3 (ym 2012) has different engine: It is A20NFT with direct injection (not Port Fuel Injection). - Also B284 is possible to modify to E85 but not so easility to flexfuel (to use gasoline and or ethanol freely). At least in Sweden BSR Växjö has offered B284 stage 3 E85 with 384hp and 520nm. This is naturally not the real upper limit for the power, it’s just safe mode tuning :)
I’ve had both 4 and 6 cyl Saabs and i’ve always found the sound of the 4cyl quite diesel-like, very clonky, I really don’t like its sound, but the 6 cyl, even the stock aero with the stock exhaust has a beautifull V6 sound
@@TheRealSliX just a ecu tune on a 2.0T with VVT and DI you can get about 330-340 hp and 380 lb-ft of torque. It is a very robust engine as long as you run Dexos1Gen2 oil for keeping carbon build up contained.
@@normt5463 i plan on putting methonal into it eventually im coming for auto autopsy. an the scary part about is im not jokin. i wanna race every one who thinks the 9-3 is slow cause 310 hp to my wheel seems small but like i said in the past vids i sleepwalk modified 5.0s and most other muscle cars. i had a close call w an srt. idk who won that race it was to neck an neck the whole time. but i do know this i have one of the fastest 9-3s rn maybe someone has a faster one but mines definitely in the top ten of fastest in the usa. an i can only prove it one way and probably will show it mid next year at a saab meet. I live far away rn and have work but i plan on coming to a meet next year.
I have a 2008 saab 93 2.0T I get 33 mpg and never had a problem except the dreaded fuel pump issue but I had it replaced and it's been a dream. Fast and very efficent. Can't believe they discontinued the saab brand
Super sad they discontinued it gm did all they could to shut it down Also I have a 06 2.0T wagon 06-09 gm used cheaper materials for the engine internals and bends valves so watch that issue I replaced mine with a 03 engine when my valves went
I have two 2.0Ts and one 2.8T. Enjoy 2.8T's exhaust notes a lot. Best music while driving. But 2.0T is fairly good enough for highway passing/over-speeding and great fuel economy for daily use. So I keep both. :D
As someone who owns both I can easily say the 4 banger wins for me. The v6 is such a pain to work on, and I’m starting to forget how many expansion tanks I’ve gone through. The placement of the turbo in the v6 is sooo annoying. “let’s heat up all of the terrible GM era plastics and hoses until they all crack!” Im pretty sure that was the thinking when the shoehorned that v6 into that space. The 2.8 IMO belongs in caddies. Currently looking for a clean 2.3 95 combi with a manual, once I find that the ‘07 aero is a goner for sure. (Also the way boost comes on in the v6 is boring cause twinscroll)
I'm forever a fan of the 2.3 R motors but, I will say, the first time I drove a 2.8 Aero it knocked my socks off. Any Saab engine will put a smile on your face, but that 2.8 is most certainly a special beast
225k miles on my 2006 2.8 and only had to replace the expansion tank once because the float valve stopped working not because it cracked! It's been tuned for over 100k of those miles too! Apart on tyres and servicing it's had rear suspension arms, drop links, front springs and the fuel evap valve on 7 years. It's been amazing.
I used to own a 2005 SS 2.0T, but recently I bought a 2006 SC 2.8T V6. Both were/are stage 1 tuned with upgraded exhausts. While the 2.0 was kind of fast, the 2.8 V6 is brutal. I love it.
Good on you, I'm looking to get my hands on a 2.8t with the manual transmission in the very near future. My friend had an auto one and it would torque steer your shoulder into next Thursday.. any road you were on he could double the speed limit so quickly, he lost his licence with it needless to say.
Compared to the competition it had to take on the V6 was already a dog when it was introduced. Hp per litre was not spectacularly high, fuel consumption was. If I remember well Top Gear rated the driving capabillities with the X-drive system very high, second only to BMW. But back to the engine, I prefer the 4 cylinder, which was more on par with comparable engines from the competition. And of course the best Saab engine ever is the B234. No other Saab engine managed up to 450-500 Bhp on stock internals. If only GM had allowed Saab to use the 4wd system they had developed for the 9000. I am quite sure they would have swept the floor with Audi and the world would be a different place today.
Saab was always years ahead of what everyone else was doing. I didn't know the WXD was, well a dog? I was aware it was under powered for what it was. But, that was applied to the 9000 series as well. The introduction of the 9-5, which I brought bought renewed life to the brand. I fell in love with the original 900T black on black with the Louvre! SMH Saab made black quite desirable when nobody did! The last 9-5, I thought was a jewel, even being a GM based product. GM ruined them.
@@jamiesmith6838 XWD was brilliant but it came at least ten years too late. When the engines came in the 200+ hp class it became difficult to get the power on the road for off the line acceleration. I dare say that Saab's faith was sealed when GM refused to bring an AWD 9000 on the market. Then things only got worse when the OG 9-5 didn't get it either.
@@browserrr1 the Opel based Regal Sportback 2.0T with torque vectoring AWD can send 100% to a single wheel. The Active Torque Vectoring was not offered on the Haldex system.
GMs marketing of Saab was terrible, I think they feared it being too much of a competitor with their own top brands, but in the end they got a lot of patents from Saab the bastards. I can't even remember a TV add for Saab from 90's to the end in 2011. My first was a 1974 99LE then after over 30 years of grief in having American cars I finally found Saab again a 2006 93 SC 2.0T, I see a lot of Saab owners around.
@@extremeskierx528 GM just gave Saab support for marketing and to maintain old, outdated tech. Saab shot itself in the foot and missed the SUV craze when Audi was last to join.
Thank you for making this - I've been eyeing both a V6 and 2.0 aero, and you definitely helped narrowing it down to the 2.0 - pretty much all I need for a fun daily
Haven't had the pleasure of driving the 2.8 so I can't really say which I prefer. But I loved my 2006 2.0T, and when I sold it, it had 280k miles on it. I recently picked up a 2003 Vector with 213k and so far I like it.
I've owned the 2,0T and 2,8T. Atm I've a 2,8T, but I'm thinking about downsizing to a 2,0T (B207R). Mainly because of fuel economy, but also because the 2,0 is easier to do work on. It's more videos and guides on that motor. Also I don't feel the 2,8T stock 250 hp, being that much faster than the 2,0T 209 hp. I'd also love when the turbo kicks in on the 2,0. It's nothing like the 2,8 that's much smoother and not the same feeling. Feels more like a diesel engine with all low rpm torque.
@@La-yt1wr For long drives when not pushing it to much, it's really good. Like 0,75 liters/10 kilometers. That should be like 31 miles per gallon. However when I drive in citys and in more heavy trafic it goes up to like 1,3 liters/10 kilometers. That should be 18 miles per gallon. Here in sweden the gasoline is expensive, so it makes a big difference compared to the 2.0
The Ecotec 2.0T from 2006 has direct injection and VVT. With a ECU tune, down pipe, and intake on 2.8T and 2.0T, the 2.0T will carry torque longer into the rpms.
Both great, and very different. B207 is probably the most reliable, with the B284 having chain issues. However regarding ability to be tuned, pretty much all the guys doing hardcore race tuning of NG9-3's over here in Sweden (the large tuning companies, independent racers etc.) use B207's.
My vote unquestionably goes to the 2.8T WXD beautifully done. I would be quite happy with it being stock. But a simple reprogram to 300+ hp could easily be welcomed.
If I recall correctly, the turbo x has a lighter flywheel compared to other Aero V6s, which probably contributes to a rougher drive. Out of all the cars I've driven, I hardly come across an engine that is as smooth as the B284. It may also be due to the 60 degree angle of the V, which is better for vibration than a 90 deg. The B207 might be the more logical choice, but the V6 certainly drives more like a premium luxury car, and sounds way better.
This! I come from driving BMW M57, N57, and N54’s. Had my 9-3 NG SC for about 2 months now, overall really Impressed by the chassis in a Saab. But also like you mention, the b284 really does feel if not more, but atleast as smooth and agile as a Bm straight-six. Too bad FWD, or AWD was the option..
B207R has "high boost" turbo which takes more time to spool and because of that at low rpm it does not feel fast. The B207L feels "torquier" in everyday driving because of the smaller (medium pressure) turbo. What's more, B207R turbo gives the same pressure as the one on the most powerful V6, and since it achieves similar power with smaller displacement and two cylinders less, it is normal not to have high low-end torque. But with a tune B207R gets a lot of low-end torque. It is significant to mention that B207 is also much, much easier to work on than V6. Just compare simple work as spark plugs replacement...
I have a rare (apparently) B207 Aero Biopower but with the small turbo 175/200hp with Hirsch 200/220. The spool up is super quick, but it looses boost at more then 5000 rpm. It feels very torque low down compared to the engine size yes.
@@larsjrgensen5975 yes it is the smallest turbo available in b207 and with a tune it is quite powerful at low end... B207R - with high boost turbo, stock, doesn't have that much low end torque, but on the other hand, it doesn't "die" at high RPM. O ne good example is the b207 (stock 150hp) with hirsch tune at 196hp has much better acceleration times than the powerful stock B207R (210hp)
@@larsjrgensen5975 You lose boost at after 4500rpm because you are at capacity of that turbo. It dont have any 'breathing room' left.. its spooled out. LArger turbo would give you less low end spool up, but at highway speed you can punch it doing 75 and rip up to over 100 in no time.
Here in The Netherlands a 2008 9-3 Estate B207 300HP 400Nm factory ordered. Grey import by ANA Trollhättan. Kicks all 9-3 TurboX. In tradition a real Porsche killer. :-) In my opinion the best engine. More flexible and versatile than the Holden 2.8 B284.
The 2.0 has the aftermarket support of the Cobalt SS/ LSj motors. If you are a hardcore modder the 2.0 has far more support. The 2.0 is much easier to upgrade to bigger Turbo's.
I have a 2005 93 Arc Vert about to turn 200K miles, avg. 26-27 mpg combined. I've had the car 11 yrs. bought it with 24K on the odometer. It's been the best car I've ever owned, very few problems, none major. Right now I'm struggling to find a small oil leak, replaced the valve cover gasket twice but apparently that's not where it's coming from. The search continues.
Im probably going to be buying a 08 9-3 tuesday and for myself only looking at maybe a tune for bit more power and maybe a slightly louder exhaust as want to keep as close to stock as possible for longevity.
At 72 I own a 2001 Saab 9-3 Turbo Convertible in red with tan leather interior and black top. It is plenty fast for driving needs although I have memories of a 1968 butternut yellow Chevelle SS 396 from the time of your age range! I like my Saab 9-3 very much but I still remember my MonoChromatic Saab 900 that was so adaptable that I moved in it. Today I drive automatic, but still remember the advantage of a four speed. Top down cruising in Florida is a favorite past time. For serious travel, I will let Momma drive her Highland AWD and a passenger I will be. Thanks for Auto Autopsy young man!🤠👍🙏✝️
Owned a 2006 9-3 with the 2.0L turbo. Loved that car. Sold it two years ago with about 190,000 on it and still original equipment everything but the alternator. Now the new owner has had it almost for two more years and it is still running, now with 220,000 miles on it. That engine if nothing else is indestructible.
We've owned 9 2.0 9-3s, 13 2.8 (11 9-3s, 2 NG 9-5s) and 1 2.3 9-5. The 2.3 is pretty new to us so I can't speak on that engine. In our experience, the 2.8 engine has been the most reliable. We've had one 2.8 fail at 151k miles. The JZW tune corrupted making the car lean out. Cracked two of the piston heads. Other than that, we had an 06 9-3 Aero running great at 292k miles. We've had a 2.0 shoot a rod through the block. Both engines are great, I just prefer the 2.8. The 2.0 gets great fuel economy. The one low compression turbo 2.0 we had got 35mpg, the high compression turbos got about 33mpg. Our FWD 2.8s get around 29-31mpg and the XWD 9-5s get 28-30 mpg (all highway mpg) In the city the 2.0 is far superior. 24mpg roughly city, our 2.8s get like 15-16mpg city 🤣
That 2.0 turbo is a garden variety engine from GM but that 2.8 is an amazing engine it sounds amazing in the quieter Saab variants like my 9-5 Aero and 9-4x but the TurboX is nice as well it’s sad that GM no longer makes that powertrain and at one point I was thinking about getting the Chevy Blazer RS and Buick Regal GS those two would’ve been amazing with that engine
I had an '88 C900 coupe 5sp for 15 years. Loved that unique car. When I lost coolant from blown hose and head, piston cracked, I got a '15 VW Golf Sportwagen, brand new. SE 1.8 tsi turbo 6sp auto. Paddle shifters, sport mode, fender premium audio, panoramic sunroof, push button start, full tint, clear bra, Yakima rack, 17" alloys. Totally love the car! Audi lite..lol Have gotten 39 mpg on road trip. 170hp and 200 torque as stock, 87 octain. No desire to tune. Amazing stock vehicle. Joy Everytime I drive it. Tons of power and amazing acelleration, handling. Love the performance, practicality and economy. Loved my Saab but after I couldn't find a low miles aero 9-3 or 9-5 aero wagon I went for the VW. 44k miles later and no repairs aside from some parts recalls. My 900 was breaking every month at that point. Had just had repaired front ball joints, did heater control valve myself. Had an amazing custom stereo, added a vent dash for right hand, no sure why 900 had it too far from left. Indigo gauges, 17" Ronal RTs, still one of my fav rims. Koni adjustable shocks, heavy load springs, jumbo optima deep cycle batt, 9000 115 amp alternator, rebuilt 5 speed with larger pinion, Wish I had a place to park it and I would have kept it and slowly worked on it. Selling house and was at aunt's till I found a fixer house after divorce. Now I'm married again and have lots of parking at new house. Maybe it is better that I don't have the c900 anymore some so I can focus on fixing up my fixer. Cheers and wish GM didn't kill off Saab. VW is ending the Golf Sportwagen in USA after 2020 so get a used one. Get the 1.8. I like less weight and maintenance of fwd but the 4 motion and Alltrack are cool. The ultimate sleeper car could be a 6 sp manual 4 motion tsi and these cars have lots of tuning options.
@@AutoAutopsy I had a Saab and since Saab is out of business, there are other good newer cars out there. Not all us have the time, money to wrench on older cars. I have my whole life until the VW, what I was able to do myself. Like watching your projects. Cheers
I e just got myself a v6 and I love it. Love your channel what’s the best way to talk to you and pick your brain on Saab stuff. Thanks Lee. Stay safe🤙🏻
Currently running 300hp on a B207R with a maptun stage4 biopower tune. The B284R/L is much stronger, but the problem is that the cars with that engine usually cost from 3-4 times more than a car with B207. And of course they come pre equipped with at least 314mm brakes, and a stronger 6-speed manual, which some of the B207R cars lack.
In Europe the B207R is modified constantly and you can get an estimated 330hp on stock internals (something I may look into). Incidentally on a 300 mile run I had 46mpg (imp) with a 6 speed box. I’d love to have either to be honest. But I’ll reserve judgement until I do what you’ve done and add a Turbo X to the garage as well.
I have a 2.0T b207r, with 2.5 inch full exhaust catback system welded/ cold air custom air intake, Forge motorsport BPV, do88 intercooler big pack kit, pushen 240hp, it's perty fast able to beat 350z, charger 3.6l, lexus IS300, mustang 4.6l and infinity g35 so far. Not bad for a 2.0
top recommended upgrades for a 2006 9-3 aero convertible v6. I just did front suspension since original was pretty beat. going to do rear suspension, want to upgrade breaks and then look into other after market upgrades. Your pointers would be appreciated.
Pretty much hit the nail on the head. I have a daily driver 2002 9-5 wagon (Linear) w/2.3 and 165k on the clock and a 2006 9-3 Aero wagon (2.8} w/120k. Both manuals and both awesome! However, can't see ruining the 9-3 with daily driving. It wants it's space and is not happy around town. The 9-5 is a bit more refined and helps me remain calm in traffic. (Sort of).
Here in the UK I have 9-3 2.0 Aero diesel estate. It feels more powerful than any other 2 litre car I have driven before and I have owned a lot of cars.
I swear by my 1.9tid.... 11 years of ownership, still ploddin on nicely with over 172k on it. Still sports the original turbo, kicking out more bhps than standard, has been at least last 10 years with no unwanted problems
I own a 2006 Saab V6 aero estate (sport combi in America) with Vtuner Stage 0 so 320BHP however I have a full custom Quad upturned (DTM) exhaust with race cat fitted and no mufflers. Its in black and looks amazing with 4 huge pipes sticking out the back and just sounds amazing! I get 26 mpg I did get 28 mpg before the exhaust. Only issue was a coil pack. I have michelin pilot sport 4's fitted which are essential for minimizing torque steer. Its a 6 speed manual.
Great video -- having a lot of issues with AAA in Austin getting support on an '06 2.0T convertible. Any advice here? It's definitely OK, got it from the SAAB convention a few years ago, but there just isn't a lot of support here
There's a pretty large Texas Saab Facebook group. I would recommend joining that and seeking out what local resources are available. they're pretty easy to work on!
@@AutoAutopsy th-cam.com/video/3NLw2P8qiwM/w-d-xo.html Look at this car. B207r with forged engine and big Turbo = almost 500 horse power, , vmax from GPS is over 300 km/h
I always wanted to own a 2.8. I finally got one here in the uk with not bad miles on 82,000. I’ve had a misfire for about 6 month now that I just cannot fix. Also seen others with same problem of misfires that just don’t seem to go away even after changing lots of parts. Hope I soon figure it out cos at the moment I wouldn’t buy one with this engine again. It’s a shame but it’s really put me off and stopped me going forward with all the plans I had for this car. Instead all my time is spent trying to find the cause of a misfire. New coils, new plugs, some new vac pipes. Changed ecu, cleaned and tested vvt selonoid, changed maf,
I have the 2.8 in my OPC Insignia and that engine is... smooth and sophisticated power. Would love to get some tips on where the hell do you get aftermarket parts for it. I live in Cz on border with Ger but finding something other than on eBuy is not easy.
This video might help you a bit, as there’s some parts sharing between the two brands when it comes to that platform: th-cam.com/video/bjV78gxPoKw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=VvEXpTums1KwCQX0
2.0T is good enough to nip thru traffic . My 2008 sedan has been worry-free for 2.5 years since I got it from auction. Keeping up with the oil change . I like it quiet. For exhaust ‘noise’, I drive my Audi TT mark 1 - unmodified..
The best quarter mile times are from a 2.0 and if your an extremist it is in my opinion the better option. The potential is endless, it is the lighter car comparing weight, and you can rebuild your engine to the new age 2.3 by adding. 5 per piston or full swap to the old school 2.3. Also if you want AWD or "XWD" That option is on the table as well. But like said before this is for extremist. People who are willingly ready to open up a full project. For me I am eventually going to rebuild my 207r and switch to flex fuel. Maybe a 20t upgrade down the line. As of now I run do88 intercooler, krona full turbo back exhaust, and do88 intake on stage 3 tune. The tune is brew city boost because maptun is ridiculous on pricing. (the az performance body kit is currently killing me in the pocket XD) Anyway I daily my man on low boost just to keep the pressure down on my guy. (160000 miles at the moment) I'll dyno when I am completely done with my project and we'll see! 👊
I have a 06 9-3 2.0t Thanks your awesome had the car since 2013 my ex wife had it now I do always kept up just leaks some oil driver window works sometimes but not most says break lights failure and gas gauge doesn’t work po420 code after it warms up after taking it to a shop. Any help would be much appreciated
V6 all day for me. Those things MOVE I tell you. They aren’t crazy fast by any means but they are so fun to drive and fast enough that you actually feel it
Well I own a 2004 9-3 linear. After 2 years of owning it I'm happy with it. The only issue I have a small oil leak and an evap leak. Just wondering where can I get a tune for it?
I've had 3 2.0t Aeros now and still fancy a 2.8, however I'm starting to wonder whether the fuel cost, insurance costs and extra tax on it makes it worth it, front wheel drive cars, and the Saab chassis in general have pretty low limits when it comes to putting your foot down. They are really just cruiser cars.
I have three Saab 9.5 Aero's. I have often wondered why the 9.3's didn't come with the 2.3 motor. The High Output Turbo 234R motor pumps out ... they say, 255 HP but I am sure they underestimate that, as my daily driver at least, out performs my friend's Audi 4.2 V8. I have thought about getting something newer, but to match the performance, comfort and safety I would need to spend $30k plus. Did I mention the comfort ? Try sitting in a Nissan or Toyota for a bit and then get into a Saab.
I have a 9-3 2001 Aero and think it is better than any of the newer models. The 5-door model is such a useful and flexible design. And unlike the newer 9-3, it has a lot more standard components which allow for after-market upgrades. I have a nice DAB+ radio with Apple Carplay and everything connecting to the latest smarthpones, TomTom with live road info and WiFi updating. The older car is the more modern one.
Nice. I don’t think I agree with the older one being more modern, though. The hatch is definitely a plus, but the NG 9-3 has a better chassis overall, more features (especially on 07+), and is available in a combi. The older 9-3 definitely has more of the traditional Saab feel, though. Both are great!
We have 6 saabs frm 03 to 08 linear,arc,vector,2.0t &2.0T areo ,areo 2.3hot igot punched to 300 I run 2.8 I personally love 2.3 areo best ,we enjoy ur videos ,and help
Dude you should consider 93 oct fule in the 9-3 if you can find it. Try a BP gas station. I never run my 9-3 Sport Combi Aero without 93 oct. It's a beast to this day.
@@AutoAutopsy just get a bottle of octane booster they are available at almost every gas station I've been too run 91 and add that you'll be set up good at 93, I run 91 from Kwik Trip here up north in minnesota where I drive mine only because its blue planet that is better for the cold, and the octane booster otherwise I use BP so either way you can always getr to 93 octane.
I got a stock 9-3, bought for $500 from a friend in early 2017. Haven’t driven it more than 40 miles because of its linear solenoid that I will be changing in due time, but I’ll love to get my hand on a AWD for sure.
Try not to put 93 octane in a remapped car. .....forget about saving a couple of bits of change Fill it with 99 Ron vpower and enjoy the smoother engine and the better performance. Even if it's not remapped The higher the octane the smoother the engine will run.
Yeah, I'm right there with you Krappyappy. I drive my bone stock '07 9-3, 2.0T (only has 55K total miles) daily and I get about 20mpg combined. Mostly freeway miles and I use 91 octane gas, driving 75-80mph. Maybe my foot is too heavy?
I have a 2.0T Aero sportwagon. I drive it like it is stolen usually carrying at least 250kg of work stuff. It does 36mpg on a long drive and never breaks despite making loads of weird noises and generally being neglected, it's had 11 previous owners, has 150k miles on it and zero service history. It's like the T-1000 terminator.....it just doesn't want to die.
I have a 04 9-3 Aero, I absolutely love the car it's my first European vehicle and I do all of my own work to it. I wanna know what I need to make it quicker off the line? It is my daily but sometimes I want that lower without the lag. What can I do?
I h ave the 2.8T and it puts a smile on me everytime, very powerful, supersmooth, and very fast. And the sound is heaven, like the old sonorous inline 6 baritone BMWs. Wonderful car that I still use. SAAP convertible Aero with the 2.8T.
I’ve read mixed opinions online, some people saying that the 2.0T feels like a slug when compared to the v6 and other saying the 2.0T actually feels faster. Would appreciate any insight from those who have driven both. Thanks.
Just watched this because I am considering one or the other. Looking for a 9-3x, test drove a 4 cyl. but not a 6 yet. Have read/heard the 6 cyl. has a much stiffer ride. Is that true? I thought the 4 cyl. had a very nice ride. If the 6 cyl. is much stiffer I might want to go with the 4 cyl. for everyday comfort. Thanks!
the v6 has stiffer suspension because it's the aero/sportier model. if that's your only concern, the non aero would make more sense. both are very comfortable cars for what they are, imo
I was a member on the Trionic tuning forums for years (years ago) and all of these cars are fun to tune and drive. That forum developed a lot of the original groundwork .bin files for Trionic 5,7, and 8 along with diesel Saabs and a lot of the tunes that BCB or others use today were molded from the .bin files and parameters that we tested and trialed in those forums years ago. With a bit of number manipulating per car of course. Obviously the V6 has more power and all wheel drive. Which is a HUGE factor. Ive owned a few Saabs including a 01 Viggen, 00 and 05' 2.0's Ill be honest I wouldnt want a turbo x. They are great cars, but to me its got more of GM's dirty hands into the vehicle. And if you ever have a transmission problem in that needs major work or replacement watch out. Cost to replace would almost be 3/4 fair market value.
@@normt5463 Yep completely possible. You can go even further than that with upgraded hardware. What my point was is after 300hp the 2.0T Saab your really stretching the limits of what those engine internals can handle and what that stock gearbox will handle.
@@normt5463 As over seas engines are different that US gets. I do know on American *Saab 2.0T engines* 300hp is basically max engine hp without changing internals. We are talking bout 2 differnt motors and specs here. LK9 vs LHU.
I have a 2008 1.8t which is the same 2..0l with a smaller turbo, I have fitted a hybrid turbo, 630cc injectors and bigger intercooler and its running just over 300hp and 430nm on a dyno but had it set at 280hp for reliability but still runs 430nm. I can say it's very fast and tourqy in top gear. And I still get around 24mpg and pay tax and insurance for a 1.8 instead of a 2.8
@@AutoAutopsy comparing to the 2.0 and the 2.8. I see people in the comments saying the 2.3 is a better engine than both the engines that came in the 9-3
Looks like you put screw-type hose clamps on the X's two tank hoses? Might mention that to everyone. I just converted from the stock plier-clamp type which were allowing them to weep and almost blew off altogether after only being installed new a year ago. Those stock clamps are just undersized imo.
I myself think that saab biopower engine is a good alternative to modify. 180 horsepower original with E85 and 150 horsepower with gasoline. with another exhaust pipe and downpipe as well as a large turbo other intercooler and new injector, you can come up with 345 horsepower, however, I recommend changing the Clutch at the power increase. Of course, you have to have custom tune to get up to these horsepower. sorry for bad english
@@AutoAutopsy sorry! missed so bad that they were just the engines in the US that I could choose. but still think they are a damn good engine to tune, otherwise I would take the 2.0T. because in sweden there are only 175 manufactured (2.8T) so if i should go for your logic then i can not choose 2.8T since it is barely in sweden. you know that you can export cars from other countries to your country? it is because they were exported over Saab 2.8T from Sweden to the US. it was about 500 Saab 2.8T came from sweden to US. it's so strange that you in the US got engines that were strong in your Saab that they demanded a market. while the Swedish market wanted a Saab that went on the E85 do you think they sound strange? sorry if you thought they were weird that I was thinking for a big purpose still sorry if bad english
2.3 in the aero needs more maintenance. I had both . The 2.3 eats coils it’s to hot and personally I had better time with the 2.0. My 2.0 last up to 235k the 2.3 I dumped it at 145k was just casting me to much to fix and was not even close to reliable as my 2.0.
I have a 2009 9-3 aero xwd with the 2.8T 6speed manual and I love it. I’ve had 2 different 2000 9-5 Aeros too. But where did you get your intake for the turbo X? And where do you think I should get my parts from?
I have a 01 Saab viggen not sure what size is the engine is. But she can get up and go. I can really feel that turbo kick in. Love this car. Can you tell me about the viggen?
Which do you like more or prefer? Make sure to vote in the poll above!
2.0 just because its my daily but i have mine running at 310 to the wheel an my engines holding up well now i cant say the same for my tranny but ill get it fixed till that motar blows
Greetings from Finland. First of all thank you for this great channel. It’s a pleasure to follow your videos.
Here is my views to this comparison. I use to have 9-5 with with E235 Aero engine and Biopower modification. It was great car and very flexible engine. My 9-5 had a lot of miles behind and in Finnish winter conditions I was missing “better traction” so I searched 9-3 XWD. I admit that I had dilemma whether to have B284 or B207R. I was actually almost purchasing TurboX and/or V6 Aero XWD but finally I selected 2.0T XWD. The price difference was not so significant but 2.0 was more reasonable because I use this car for daily drive and also fuel cost have some importance too. Second reason is that B207 is is very “E85 friendly engine”. Finland have rather wide distribution network of E85 fuel (locally ethanol is produced from industial waste, recycled biofuel). Due lower CO2 taxation E85 is about 30-35% cheaper per litre than gasoline and have minimum 104 octanes. Engine burns some 20% more ethanol but it’s still good option. High octane level is naturally very very attracting for Saab Turbo owner ;)
Comparison between e85 consumption and gasoline is not straightforward due software can be optimizied to utilize ethanols higher octanes, advanced spark timing, smaller engine temperature and lower tendency for engine knocking. With E85 oils have to be changed a bit more often but I ‘m not “afraid of ethanol” after using it 8 years without problems for every Saab I have got.
So I ended to to compromise solution between power and some economical aspects: ym 2009 Saab 9-3 2.0T XWD AT6 B207R. Car is modied to Biopower (with added ethanol sensor), larger E85 compatible Bosch E14 injectors, 3” downpipe, modified OEM Turbo (upgraded) and modified software. I have otherwise stock engine and AT6 transmission so power is “limited to” 300hp/450nm. With E85 optimized software (flexfuel) maximum torques is available with quite wide range of rpm i.e. this E85 B207 setup is kind of closer to B284 than with “gasoline only setup”. Not the fastest car on the road but it actually accelerates very smoothly. Also on ice ;)
Aero V6 and TurboX were also very interesting options because B284 has very nice low rpm torque (like a diesel) and naturally higher maximum absolute capacity for tuning. But actually B207R gets higher comparative benefit when tuned. For B207R it’s rather easy to increase close to 50% power and torque. Naturally also fuel consumption goes up but not so much. When tuning is made for gasoline setup 300hp and (450nm AT transmission/500nm manual) is kind of maximum without making internal mechanical changes to motor (like forged pistons etc.). Saab specialist guided me also that MAF and MAP sensors and air intake have to be changed/modified after 300 hp. I have been told also that its quite safe to go up to 340hp with stock engine with E85 (even with B207E) but for AT transmission its more risky to increase torque much higher than 450 nm. If someone wants to really modify B207, it is naturally possible to go up to 400+ hp (with manual or enforced automatic trans) but then quite many engine elements are replaced . These GM engines are not like Saab 9000 engine which was probably planned to tolerate 500 hp from the very beginning :)
I have spoken with some (Stage1) TurboX owner and fuel consumption of B284 is roughly same with 98 octane gasoline than with tuned B207R XWD AT with E85/ethanol (both engines have around 300 hp). Ethanol has lower energy density so practically this means that real fuel consumption of B284 are approximately 20% higher compared to B207 in mixed drive conditions.
Here some other notes:
- Besided YM 2003, SAI pipe is also in B207 engines ym 2009-2011 (unfortunately)
- B284 engine is somewhat heavier so in slippery conditions lighter B207 may have some benefit with handling.
- B207R with dual exhaust (with 3” downpipe+ original cat back) sounds clearly more rough and has lower tone of voice than single exhaust. But I have to admit that it’s still not so good than V6 and especially TurboX exhaust sound :)
- Very latest 9-3 (ym 2012) has different engine: It is A20NFT with direct injection (not Port Fuel Injection).
- Also B284 is possible to modify to E85 but not so easility to flexfuel (to use gasoline and or ethanol freely).
At least in Sweden BSR Växjö has offered B284 stage 3 E85 with 384hp and 520nm. This is naturally not the real upper limit for the power, it’s just safe mode tuning :)
I’ve had both 4 and 6 cyl Saabs and i’ve always found the sound of the 4cyl quite diesel-like, very clonky, I really don’t like its sound, but the 6 cyl, even the stock aero with the stock exhaust has a beautifull V6 sound
@@TheRealSliX just a ecu tune on a 2.0T with VVT and DI you can get about 330-340 hp and 380 lb-ft of torque. It is a very robust engine as long as you run Dexos1Gen2 oil for keeping carbon build up contained.
@@normt5463 i plan on putting methonal into it eventually im coming for auto autopsy. an the scary part about is im not jokin. i wanna race every one who thinks the 9-3 is slow cause 310 hp to my wheel seems small but like i said in the past vids i sleepwalk modified 5.0s and most other muscle cars. i had a close call w an srt. idk who won that race it was to neck an neck the whole time. but i do know this i have one of the fastest 9-3s rn maybe someone has a faster one but mines definitely in the top ten of fastest in the usa. an i can only prove it one way and probably will show it mid next year at a saab meet. I live far away rn and have work but i plan on coming to a meet next year.
I have a 2008 saab 93 2.0T I get 33 mpg and never had a problem except the dreaded fuel pump issue but I had it replaced and it's been a dream. Fast and very efficent. Can't believe they discontinued the saab brand
Super sad they discontinued it gm did all they could to shut it down
Also I have a 06 2.0T wagon
06-09 gm used cheaper materials for the engine internals and bends valves so watch that issue I replaced mine with a 03 engine when my valves went
I have two 2.0Ts and one 2.8T. Enjoy 2.8T's exhaust notes a lot. Best music while driving. But 2.0T is fairly good enough for highway passing/over-speeding and great fuel economy for daily use. So I keep both. :D
same here! lol
As someone who owns both I can easily say the 4 banger wins for me. The v6 is such a pain to work on, and I’m starting to forget how many expansion tanks I’ve gone through. The placement of the turbo in the v6 is sooo annoying. “let’s heat up all of the terrible GM era plastics and hoses until they all crack!” Im pretty sure that was the thinking when the shoehorned that v6 into that space. The 2.8 IMO belongs in caddies. Currently looking for a clean 2.3 95 combi with a manual, once I find that the ‘07 aero is a goner for sure. (Also the way boost comes on in the v6 is boring cause twinscroll)
206,000 miles on the 2.8 and nothing overheats on mine. I drive 5 hours a day for work
haha, less lag, but more torque.
@@chinchy111greenland? 😂
I'm forever a fan of the 2.3 R motors but, I will say, the first time I drove a 2.8 Aero it knocked my socks off. Any Saab engine will put a smile on your face, but that 2.8 is most certainly a special beast
Agreed!!
@@AutoAutopsy Sub for a sub?
225k miles on my 2006 2.8 and only had to replace the expansion tank once because the float valve stopped working not because it cracked! It's been tuned for over 100k of those miles too! Apart on tyres and servicing it's had rear suspension arms, drop links, front springs and the fuel evap valve on 7 years. It's been amazing.
Awesome :)
As someone in the market for a 9-3, I greatly appreciate the insight from an owner of both!!!
glad you found it helpful :)
2.8 every time. Have one and absolutely love it. Drive it on weekends and fix everything myself.
:)
I used to own a 2005 SS 2.0T, but recently I bought a 2006 SC 2.8T V6. Both were/are stage 1 tuned with upgraded exhausts. While the 2.0 was kind of fast, the 2.8 V6 is brutal. I love it.
Good on you, I'm looking to get my hands on a 2.8t with the manual transmission in the very near future. My friend had an auto one and it would torque steer your shoulder into next Thursday.. any road you were on he could double the speed limit so quickly, he lost his licence with it needless to say.
Compared to the competition it had to take on the V6 was already a dog when it was introduced. Hp per litre was not spectacularly high, fuel consumption was. If I remember well Top Gear rated the driving capabillities with the X-drive system very high, second only to BMW. But back to the engine, I prefer the 4 cylinder, which was more on par with comparable engines from the competition. And of course the best Saab engine ever is the B234. No other Saab engine managed up to 450-500 Bhp on stock internals. If only GM had allowed Saab to use the 4wd system they had developed for the 9000. I am quite sure they would have swept the floor with Audi and the world would be a different place today.
Saab was always years ahead of what everyone else was doing.
I didn't know the WXD was, well a dog? I was aware it was under powered for what it was. But, that was applied to the 9000 series as well.
The introduction of the 9-5, which I brought bought renewed life to the brand.
I fell in love with the original 900T black on black with the Louvre! SMH
Saab made black quite desirable when nobody did!
The last 9-5, I thought was a jewel, even being a GM based product. GM ruined them.
@@jamiesmith6838 XWD was brilliant but it came at least ten years too late. When the engines came in the 200+ hp class it became difficult to get the power on the road for off the line acceleration. I dare say that Saab's faith was sealed when GM refused to bring an AWD 9000 on the market. Then things only got worse when the OG 9-5 didn't get it either.
@@browserrr1 the Opel based Regal Sportback 2.0T with torque vectoring AWD can send 100% to a single wheel. The Active Torque Vectoring was not offered on the Haldex system.
GMs marketing of Saab was terrible, I think they feared it being too much of a competitor with their own top brands, but in the end they got a lot of patents from Saab the bastards. I can't even remember a TV add for Saab from 90's to the end in 2011. My first was a 1974 99LE then after over 30 years of grief in having American cars I finally found Saab again a 2006 93 SC 2.0T, I see a lot of Saab owners around.
@@extremeskierx528 GM just gave Saab support for marketing and to maintain old, outdated tech. Saab shot itself in the foot and missed the SUV craze when Audi was last to join.
Thank you for making this - I've been eyeing both a V6 and 2.0 aero, and you definitely helped narrowing it down to the 2.0 - pretty much all I need for a fun daily
thanks :)
E.c.u common issue on the 2.0l
Hard to find them amywhere !
Brew City Boost stage 2 tune got me 34mpg in my arc 6spd
nice
Haven't had the pleasure of driving the 2.8 so I can't really say which I prefer. But I loved my 2006 2.0T, and when I sold it, it had 280k miles on it. I recently picked up a 2003 Vector with 213k and so far I like it.
nice
I own a 2005 9-3 2.0 aero manual. I have to say I´m very happy with it as my first car. No problem servicing it when living 1 hour from the factory ;)
nice!
We love Saab too!!! Hello from Belarus! I have Saab 9-5 aero 2.3t
:)
I used to have one of those! Unfortunately totalled it a month back in icy conditions.
simple none of those the 2.3 turbo engine in the 9000 and 9-5 are the best stock and modified
Yes, this guy knows what's good
I have 2.0 ..and 2.3 older, 2.3 is much stronger than newwer 2.0
My favorites are still the b204 and b234's. Brilliant engines
When my 2.0 goes, I'll drop the 2.3 in it if I can still find one.
@@ereseminole there are a couple Twin turbo Ecotec 2.0T with 700+ horsepower.
I have 234 000 miles on my 2007 B207 Wagon, Still works great!
awesome
I've owned the 2,0T and 2,8T. Atm I've a 2,8T, but I'm thinking about downsizing to a 2,0T (B207R).
Mainly because of fuel economy, but also because the 2,0 is easier to do work on. It's more videos and guides on that motor.
Also I don't feel the 2,8T stock 250 hp, being that much faster than the 2,0T 209 hp.
I'd also love when the turbo kicks in on the 2,0. It's nothing like the 2,8 that's much smoother and not the same feeling. Feels more like a diesel engine with all low rpm torque.
What is your fuel economy because my 2011 9-5 Aero most times beats my 2015 Kia Optima SXL turbo they both are amazing on long trips for fuel economy
@@La-yt1wr For long drives when not pushing it to much, it's really good. Like 0,75 liters/10 kilometers. That should be like 31 miles per gallon.
However when I drive in citys and in more heavy trafic it goes up to like 1,3 liters/10 kilometers. That should be 18 miles per gallon.
Here in sweden the gasoline is expensive, so it makes a big difference compared to the 2.0
ShiveringSwe Ah ok 👌
If you have a 2.8T 9-5 aero it's actually slower than the 02 9-5 aero with the holy grail of engines, the 2.3T
The Ecotec 2.0T from 2006 has direct injection and VVT. With a ECU tune, down pipe, and intake on 2.8T and 2.0T, the 2.0T will carry torque longer into the rpms.
I literally googled for a video with this question last night. Lmao Thanks for the upload
Lol :)
Both great, and very different. B207 is probably the most reliable, with the B284 having chain issues. However regarding ability to be tuned, pretty much all the guys doing hardcore race tuning of NG9-3's over here in Sweden (the large tuning companies, independent racers etc.) use B207's.
Damn that’s good to know
I’ve always been told that the T5 engines where somehow better
@@tony_5156 In stock form the T5 engines was definetely better but the B207 is great
My vote unquestionably goes to the 2.8T WXD beautifully done. I would be quite happy with it being stock. But a simple reprogram to 300+ hp could easily be welcomed.
2.3
Yep!
If I recall correctly, the turbo x has a lighter flywheel compared to other Aero V6s, which probably contributes to a rougher drive. Out of all the cars I've driven, I hardly come across an engine that is as smooth as the B284. It may also be due to the 60 degree angle of the V, which is better for vibration than a 90 deg.
The B207 might be the more logical choice, but the V6 certainly drives more like a premium luxury car, and sounds way better.
Agree!
This! I come from driving BMW M57, N57, and N54’s. Had my 9-3 NG SC for about 2 months now, overall really
Impressed by the chassis in a Saab. But also like you mention, the b284 really does feel if not more, but atleast as smooth and agile as a Bm straight-six. Too bad FWD, or AWD was the option..
B207R has "high boost" turbo which takes more time to spool and because of that at low rpm it does not feel fast. The B207L feels "torquier" in everyday driving because of the smaller (medium pressure) turbo. What's more, B207R turbo gives the same pressure as the one on the most powerful V6, and since it achieves similar power with smaller displacement and two cylinders less, it is normal not to have high low-end torque. But with a tune B207R gets a lot of low-end torque. It is significant to mention that B207 is also much, much easier to work on than V6. Just compare simple work as spark plugs replacement...
This man knows his B207's.
I have a rare (apparently) B207 Aero Biopower but with the small turbo 175/200hp with Hirsch 200/220.
The spool up is super quick, but it looses boost at more then 5000 rpm.
It feels very torque low down compared to the engine size yes.
@@larsjrgensen5975 yes it is the smallest turbo available in b207 and with a tune it is quite powerful at low end... B207R - with high boost turbo, stock, doesn't have that much low end torque, but on the other hand, it doesn't "die" at high RPM. O ne good example is the b207 (stock 150hp) with hirsch tune at 196hp has much better acceleration times than the powerful stock B207R (210hp)
@@larsjrgensen5975 You lose boost at after 4500rpm because you are at capacity of that turbo. It dont have any 'breathing room' left.. its spooled out. LArger turbo would give you less low end spool up, but at highway speed you can punch it doing 75 and rip up to over 100 in no time.
Great points, ShoX. I completely forgot to mention maintenance. 2.0 is definitely easier to work on!
I have the 2.8 v6 sports wagon and it’s done 220000 miles with no problems whatsoever. Excellent car had it for 11 years 👍🏻
Awesome!
Great to know!
Here in The Netherlands a 2008 9-3 Estate B207 300HP 400Nm factory ordered. Grey import by ANA Trollhättan. Kicks all 9-3 TurboX. In tradition a real Porsche killer. :-) In my opinion the best engine. More flexible and versatile than the Holden 2.8 B284.
Put a simple stage 1 or 0 on that TX and it'll spank the 2.0, lol
The 2.8 is known for timing chain issues because it’s related to the 3.6 V6 that the Car Wizard said don’t buy.
i really apprecaite your love for a saab!! I have owned saab for over 25 years! on my 4th
thanks for your support :)
The 2.0 has the aftermarket support of the Cobalt SS/ LSj motors. If you are a hardcore modder the 2.0 has far more support. The 2.0 is much easier to upgrade to bigger Turbo's.
both aren't terribly difficult; plenty of great 2.8 aftermarket options that are direct/near direct fits
@@AutoAutopsy can you buy an aftermarket exhaust manifold for the V6?
I have a 2005 93 Arc Vert about to turn 200K miles, avg. 26-27 mpg combined. I've had the car 11 yrs. bought it with 24K on the odometer. It's been the best car I've ever owned, very few problems, none major. Right now I'm struggling to find a small oil leak, replaced the valve cover gasket twice but apparently that's not where it's coming from. The search continues.
Good luck with the fix!
Restoring my 2007 9-3 2.0t convertible. I've learned a lot from your videos
glad i can help!
B204 B234 , i haven't touched anything over 1999 yet.
👊🏼👍🏼
Im probably going to be buying a 08 9-3 tuesday and for myself only looking at maybe a tune for bit more power and maybe a slightly louder exhaust as want to keep as close to stock as possible for longevity.
nice
I have an 08 and I love it I got it at only 82,000 miles I adore this car
Saab for life 💪
@@AutoAutopsy MY MODDED/TUNED 2000 B205R WILL RIP THE SKIN OFF YOUR V6'S NUT SACK
Look at a Opel/ Regal Tourx 2.0T with torque vectoring AWD to fulfill that fantasy today.
I had an 09 V6 AWD 6 speed with stage 0 from Vermont tuning. Thing was quick! Wish I hadn't got rid of it.
nice! Should have kept it :(
At 72 I own a 2001 Saab 9-3 Turbo Convertible in red with tan leather interior and black top. It is plenty fast for driving needs although I have memories of a 1968 butternut yellow Chevelle SS 396 from the time of your age range! I like my Saab 9-3 very much but I still remember my MonoChromatic Saab 900 that was so adaptable that I moved in it. Today I drive automatic, but still remember the advantage of a four speed. Top down cruising in Florida is a favorite past time. For serious travel, I will let Momma drive her Highland AWD and a passenger I will be. Thanks for Auto Autopsy young man!🤠👍🙏✝️
Wow, sounds like a fantastically fun time! 👍🏼
I have the 2.0 vector convertible auto it has a enough power for,I love the kickdown power it has but would consider going for a v6 as it sounds great
Thanks for sharing!
Owned a 2006 9-3 with the 2.0L turbo. Loved that car. Sold it two years ago with about 190,000 on it and still original equipment everything but the alternator. Now the new owner has had it almost for two more years and it is still running, now with 220,000 miles on it. That engine if nothing else is indestructible.
Wow nice!
We've owned 9 2.0 9-3s, 13 2.8 (11 9-3s, 2 NG 9-5s) and 1 2.3 9-5. The 2.3 is pretty new to us so I can't speak on that engine. In our experience, the 2.8 engine has been the most reliable. We've had one 2.8 fail at 151k miles. The JZW tune corrupted making the car lean out. Cracked two of the piston heads. Other than that, we had an 06 9-3 Aero running great at 292k miles. We've had a 2.0 shoot a rod through the block. Both engines are great, I just prefer the 2.8. The 2.0 gets great fuel economy. The one low compression turbo 2.0 we had got 35mpg, the high compression turbos got about 33mpg. Our FWD 2.8s get around 29-31mpg and the XWD 9-5s get 28-30 mpg (all highway mpg) In the city the 2.0 is far superior. 24mpg roughly city, our 2.8s get like 15-16mpg city 🤣
haha, thanks for sharing!!
That 2.0 turbo is a garden variety engine from GM but that 2.8 is an amazing engine it sounds amazing in the quieter Saab variants like my 9-5 Aero and 9-4x but the TurboX is nice as well it’s sad that GM no longer makes that powertrain and at one point I was thinking about getting the Chevy Blazer RS and Buick Regal GS those two would’ve been amazing with that engine
yeah! thanks for sharing
That 2.0 has been a saab engine since 1974. Obviously its different but it based off of a saab engine
I had an '88 C900 coupe 5sp for 15 years. Loved that unique car. When I lost coolant from blown hose and head, piston cracked, I got a '15 VW Golf Sportwagen, brand new.
SE 1.8 tsi turbo 6sp auto. Paddle shifters, sport mode, fender premium audio, panoramic sunroof, push button start, full tint, clear bra, Yakima rack, 17" alloys.
Totally love the car! Audi lite..lol
Have gotten 39 mpg on road trip.
170hp and 200 torque as stock, 87 octain. No desire to tune. Amazing stock vehicle. Joy Everytime I drive it.
Tons of power and amazing acelleration, handling. Love the performance, practicality and economy. Loved my Saab but after I couldn't find a low miles aero 9-3 or 9-5 aero wagon I went for the VW. 44k miles later and no repairs aside from some parts recalls.
My 900 was breaking every month at that point.
Had just had repaired front ball joints, did heater control valve myself. Had an amazing custom stereo, added a vent dash for right hand, no sure why 900 had it too far from left. Indigo gauges, 17" Ronal RTs, still one of my fav rims.
Koni adjustable shocks, heavy load springs, jumbo optima deep cycle batt, 9000 115 amp alternator, rebuilt 5 speed with larger pinion,
Wish I had a place to park it and I would have kept it and slowly worked on it. Selling house and was at aunt's till I found a fixer house after divorce. Now I'm married again and have lots of parking at new house. Maybe it is better that I don't have the c900 anymore some so I can focus on fixing up my fixer.
Cheers and wish GM didn't kill off Saab.
VW is ending the Golf Sportwagen in USA after 2020 so get a used one. Get the 1.8. I like less weight and maintenance of fwd but the 4 motion and Alltrack are cool.
The ultimate sleeper car could be a 6 sp manual 4 motion tsi and these cars have lots of tuning options.
nice, but i'm not entirely sure how this is related to the video lol!
@@AutoAutopsy
I had a Saab and since Saab is out of business, there are other good newer cars out there. Not all us have the time, money to wrench on older cars.
I have my whole life until the VW,
what I was able to do myself.
Like watching your projects.
Cheers
I e just got myself a v6 and I love it. Love your channel what’s the best way to talk to you and pick your brain on Saab stuff. Thanks Lee. Stay safe🤙🏻
thank you! enjoy the car!
Currently running 300hp on a B207R with a maptun stage4 biopower tune. The B284R/L is much stronger, but the problem is that the cars with that engine usually cost from 3-4 times more than a car with B207. And of course they come pre equipped with at least 314mm brakes, and a stronger 6-speed manual, which some of the B207R cars lack.
Nice! and yep ;)
In Europe the B207R is modified constantly and you can get an estimated 330hp on stock internals (something I may look into). Incidentally on a 300 mile run I had 46mpg (imp) with a 6 speed box.
I’d love to have either to be honest. But I’ll reserve judgement until I do what you’ve done and add a Turbo X to the garage as well.
yeah, which is why i said v6 is still better for modding. you can still get almost 330hp and way more torque without any mods on a v6 lol
Worth noting that the V6 motor in these was manufactured in Australia for SAAB.
I have a 2.0T b207r, with 2.5 inch full exhaust catback system welded/ cold air custom air intake, Forge motorsport BPV, do88 intercooler big pack kit, pushen 240hp, it's perty fast able to beat 350z, charger 3.6l, lexus IS300, mustang 4.6l and infinity g35 so far. Not bad for a 2.0
you should definitely make more than 240 with all of those mods. Get a better tune!
I actually picked up a 2007 saab 93 2.0t yesterday dor 800 bucks canadian awesome deal!
congrats!
Hey i just have a quick question.. i bought a quick release hub for my momo steering but i am not too sure if the universal hub that i bought will fit
top recommended upgrades for a 2006 9-3 aero convertible v6. I just did front suspension since original was pretty beat. going to do rear suspension, want to upgrade breaks and then look into other after market upgrades. Your pointers would be appreciated.
I have a video discussing top mods to do here: th-cam.com/video/bjV78gxPoKw/w-d-xo.html
1:20 "...2011-2012, when they stopped making the car." Read: When Saab kicked the bucket and stopped making much of anything.
Pretty much hit the nail on the head. I have a daily driver 2002 9-5 wagon (Linear) w/2.3 and 165k on the clock and a 2006 9-3 Aero wagon (2.8} w/120k. Both manuals and both awesome! However, can't see ruining the 9-3 with daily driving. It wants it's space and is not happy around town. The 9-5 is a bit more refined and helps me remain calm in traffic. (Sort of).
nice!
The best engine is the 1.9 tid when mapped.
180-190hp and torquey (matter of fact you may limit torque to preserve gearbox ).
it gets 40mpg costantly
Here in the UK I have 9-3 2.0 Aero diesel estate. It feels more powerful than any other 2 litre car I have driven before and I have owned a lot of cars.
that's nice!
Mazda did a 626 in the '90's with a supercharged 2.0 deisel, torque redefined :)
I swear by my 1.9tid.... 11 years of ownership, still ploddin on nicely with over 172k on it. Still sports the original turbo, kicking out more bhps than standard, has been at least last 10 years with no unwanted problems
Recently I opted for regular fuel and have not noticed any power loss for daily commuting.
I own a 2006 Saab V6 aero estate (sport combi in America) with Vtuner Stage 0 so 320BHP however I have a full custom Quad upturned (DTM) exhaust with race cat fitted and no mufflers. Its in black and looks amazing with 4 huge pipes sticking out the back and just sounds amazing! I get 26 mpg I did get 28 mpg before the exhaust. Only issue was a coil pack. I have michelin pilot sport 4's fitted which are essential for minimizing torque steer. Its a 6 speed manual.
Nice!!
Great video -- having a lot of issues with AAA in Austin getting support on an '06 2.0T convertible. Any advice here? It's definitely OK, got it from the SAAB convention a few years ago, but there just isn't a lot of support here
There's a pretty large Texas Saab Facebook group. I would recommend joining that and seeking out what local resources are available. they're pretty easy to work on!
@@AutoAutopsy Not so sure about that. Austin seems really slim when it comes to Saab issues. And/or people don't want to deal with them.
Hi, in Poland b207 engines reach 320-355 horsepower. many such cars drive here with such power.
nice!
@@AutoAutopsy th-cam.com/video/3NLw2P8qiwM/w-d-xo.html
Look at this car. B207r with forged engine and big Turbo = almost 500 horse power, , vmax from GPS is over 300 km/h
I always wanted to own a 2.8. I finally got one here in the uk with not bad miles on 82,000. I’ve had a misfire for about 6 month now that I just cannot fix. Also seen others with same problem of misfires that just don’t seem to go away even after changing lots of parts. Hope I soon figure it out cos at the moment I wouldn’t buy one with this engine again. It’s a shame but it’s really put me off and stopped me going forward with all the plans I had for this car. Instead all my time is spent trying to find the cause of a misfire. New coils, new plugs, some new vac pipes. Changed ecu, cleaned and tested vvt selonoid, changed maf,
What codes? Have you tried looking for answers on some of the Saab Facebook groups?
I have the 2.8 in my OPC Insignia and that engine is... smooth and sophisticated power.
Would love to get some tips on where the hell do you get aftermarket parts for it. I live in Cz on border with Ger but finding something other than on eBuy is not easy.
This video might help you a bit, as there’s some parts sharing between the two brands when it comes to that platform: th-cam.com/video/bjV78gxPoKw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=VvEXpTums1KwCQX0
2.0T is good enough to nip thru traffic . My 2008 sedan has been worry-free for 2.5 years since I got it from auction. Keeping up with the oil change . I like it quiet. For exhaust ‘noise’, I drive my Audi TT mark 1 - unmodified..
Miss my 2.8l, manual 6-speed. Nicest car I ever owned. Ran it for 11 years, no major issues.
Awesome. They’re fantastic cars
I own a 2002 9-3 convertible. I love the car and enjoy it so much. by far I think its the best looking convertible out there, but I'm a bit bias.
nice!
I also think those are some of the best looking convertibles.
I don't like the back end of the c900 convertibles.
Cheers
Good and informative! I know nothing about these engines...
Driving a 1999 SAAB 9-5 B235 :)
Haha, nice :)
Yeaaa baby, that's what I'm talking about! The "og" OG9-5 😍
The best quarter mile times are from a 2.0 and if your an extremist it is in my opinion the better option. The potential is endless, it is the lighter car comparing weight, and you can rebuild your engine to the new age 2.3 by adding. 5 per piston or full swap to the old school 2.3. Also if you want AWD or "XWD" That option is on the table as well. But like said before this is for extremist. People who are willingly ready to open up a full project. For me I am eventually going to rebuild my 207r and switch to flex fuel. Maybe a 20t upgrade down the line. As of now I run do88 intercooler, krona full turbo back exhaust, and do88 intake on stage 3 tune. The tune is brew city boost because maptun is ridiculous on pricing. (the az performance body kit is currently killing me in the pocket XD) Anyway I daily my man on low boost just to keep the pressure down on my guy. (160000 miles at the moment) I'll dyno when I am completely done with my project and we'll see! 👊
nice! Sounds like fun
This is a great video, very informative and straight to the point
I have a 06 9-3 2.0t
Thanks your awesome had the car since 2013 my ex wife had it now I do always kept up just leaks some oil driver window works sometimes but not most says break lights failure and gas gauge doesn’t work po420 code after it warms up after taking it to a shop. Any help would be much appreciated
V6 all day for me. Those things MOVE I tell you. They aren’t crazy fast by any means but they are so fun to drive and fast enough that you actually feel it
B234R all the way
nah
Auto Autopsy why?
2.8 is better in my opinion
Auto Autopsy whhhaaaaaattttt
@@boostedsaab2757 he is super fanboy of the 2.8t. the b234/5 is a better engine.
Looking for a mechanic in SoFlorida, FTL. I really love my 9-3 Aero 2.8T conv, Would hate to sell it!
Join some saab facebook groups and seek help there
If you lived in Orlando I would’ve helped
Well I own a 2004 9-3 linear. After 2 years of owning it I'm happy with it. The only issue I have a small oil leak and an evap leak. Just wondering where can I get a tune for it?
awesome; plenty of good tuning sites out there. Maptun, BCB, vtuner, and a few more i'm definitely missing
I've had 3 2.0t Aeros now and still fancy a 2.8, however I'm starting to wonder whether the fuel cost, insurance costs and extra tax on it makes it worth it, front wheel drive cars, and the Saab chassis in general have pretty low limits when it comes to putting your foot down. They are really just cruiser cars.
The 2.8’s are pretty capable without much work.
Great video, I have the GM/Vauxhall Vectra with the 2.8T... Spent loads on it as it’s a project, can’t wait to get back behind the wheel!
Awesome 👏🏼
Is it still alive? Also got the Vectra 2.8t with around 340hp currently.
I have three Saab 9.5 Aero's. I have often wondered why the 9.3's didn't come with the 2.3 motor.
The High Output Turbo 234R motor pumps out ... they say, 255 HP but I am sure they underestimate that, as my daily driver at least, out performs my friend's Audi 4.2 V8.
I have thought about getting something newer, but to match the performance, comfort and safety I would need to spend $30k plus.
Did I mention the comfort ? Try sitting in a Nissan or Toyota for a bit and then get into a Saab.
I have a 9-3 2001 Aero and think it is better than any of the newer models.
The 5-door model is such a useful and flexible design.
And unlike the newer 9-3, it has a lot more standard components which allow for after-market upgrades. I have a nice DAB+ radio with Apple Carplay and everything connecting to the latest smarthpones, TomTom with live road info and WiFi updating. The older car is the more modern one.
Nice. I don’t think I agree with the older one being more modern, though. The hatch is definitely a plus, but the NG 9-3 has a better chassis overall, more features (especially on 07+), and is available in a combi. The older 9-3 definitely has more of the traditional Saab feel, though. Both are great!
We have 6 saabs frm 03 to 08 linear,arc,vector,2.0t &2.0T areo ,areo 2.3hot igot punched to 300 I run 2.8 I personally love 2.3 areo best ,we enjoy ur videos ,and help
glad you enjoy the content; thanks so much for the support!
Dude you should consider 93 oct fule in the 9-3 if you can find it. Try a BP gas station. I never run my 9-3 Sport Combi Aero without 93 oct. It's a beast to this day.
The B284 absolutely loves higher octane fuel, so trying to find 93 is definitely a good idea. Especially when it's tuned.
we don't have 93, only 91
@@AutoAutopsy just get a bottle of octane booster they are available at almost every gas station I've been too run 91 and add that you'll be set up good at 93, I run 91 from Kwik Trip here up north in minnesota where I drive mine only because its blue planet that is better for the cold, and the octane booster otherwise I use BP so either way you can always getr to 93 octane.
I got a stock 9-3, bought for $500 from a friend in early 2017. Haven’t driven it more than 40 miles because of its linear solenoid that I will be changing in due time, but I’ll love to get my hand on a AWD for sure.
nice!
Auto Autopsy hopefully I can get my hands on a 2.8
you're all like 'i'm happy with 24 mpg on the 2.0T'
and i'm here getting 19 combined. is my foot that heavy??
Krappyappy hmm.. I get 24 combined with a lead foot. If I drive conservatively I get around 27.
Put 93 oct fule in the whip. Trust me it will bump it up to 24 mpg or better yet 27 mpg.
^
Try not to put 93 octane in a remapped car. .....forget about saving a couple of bits of change
Fill it with 99 Ron vpower and enjoy the smoother engine and the better performance.
Even if it's not remapped
The higher the octane the smoother the engine will run.
Yeah, I'm right there with you Krappyappy. I drive my bone stock '07 9-3, 2.0T (only has 55K total miles) daily and I get about 20mpg combined. Mostly freeway miles and I use 91 octane gas, driving 75-80mph. Maybe my foot is too heavy?
I have a 2.0T Aero sportwagon. I drive it like it is stolen usually carrying at least 250kg of work stuff. It does 36mpg on a long drive and never breaks despite making loads of weird noises and generally being neglected, it's had 11 previous owners, has 150k miles on it and zero service history. It's like the T-1000 terminator.....it just doesn't want to die.
2.8 v6 aero was fwd and turbo x was 4wd it also came in 1.9tid diesel motor.
XWD* ;)
I'm very interested in the 2.8L 4x4 version with 160k mileage. What would be the first parts to change/repair?
Do you mean XWD? Saab does not have a 4x4 car. I would recommend doing a XWD service when you get it
The 2.8 V6 is known for timing chain failures. The 2.8 V6 is based off the GM High Feature V6/Alloytec V6 family of engines.
I have a 04 9-3 Aero, I absolutely love the car it's my first European vehicle and I do all of my own work to it. I wanna know what I need to make it quicker off the line? It is my daily but sometimes I want that lower without the lag. What can I do?
see here: th-cam.com/video/bjV78gxPoKw/w-d-xo.html
I h ave the 2.8T and it puts a smile on me everytime, very powerful, supersmooth, and very fast. And the sound is heaven, like the old sonorous inline 6 baritone BMWs. Wonderful car that I still use. SAAP convertible Aero with the 2.8T.
👊🏼👍🏼
I’ve read mixed opinions online, some people saying that the 2.0T feels like a slug when compared to the v6 and other saying the 2.0T actually feels faster. Would appreciate any insight from those who have driven both. Thanks.
well this video should answer your question, lol..
Greetings from Sweden, got one question for you pal, what wheels do you have on your V6? It looks amazing!
variant xenon, thanks!
Hi where located automatic Transmission module or TCm on 2.8t on B207 is exactly next to battery!
Just watched this because I am considering one or the other. Looking for a 9-3x, test drove a 4 cyl. but not a 6 yet. Have read/heard the 6 cyl. has a much stiffer ride. Is that true? I thought the 4 cyl. had a very nice ride. If the 6 cyl. is much stiffer I might want to go with the 4 cyl. for everyday comfort. Thanks!
the v6 has stiffer suspension because it's the aero/sportier model. if that's your only concern, the non aero would make more sense. both are very comfortable cars for what they are, imo
I was a member on the Trionic tuning forums for years (years ago) and all of these cars are fun to tune and drive. That forum developed a lot of the original groundwork .bin files for Trionic 5,7, and 8 along with diesel Saabs and a lot of the tunes that BCB or others use today were molded from the .bin files and parameters that we tested and trialed in those forums years ago. With a bit of number manipulating per car of course.
Obviously the V6 has more power and all wheel drive. Which is a HUGE factor. Ive owned a few Saabs including a 01 Viggen, 00 and 05' 2.0's
Ill be honest I wouldnt want a turbo x. They are great cars, but to me its got more of GM's dirty hands into the vehicle. And if you ever have a transmission problem in that needs major work or replacement watch out. Cost to replace would almost be 3/4 fair market value.
We were putting 390 lb-ft of torque through a 2013 ATS 2.0T AWD with ecu and down pipe on 92-93 RON/MON octane.
@@normt5463 Yep completely possible. You can go even further than that with upgraded hardware. What my point was is after 300hp the 2.0T Saab your really stretching the limits of what those engine internals can handle and what that stock gearbox will handle.
@@meme-yc4ks we are running 33-34 lbs/min or 330-340 horsepower as hp is not what kills gearboxes on GM LHU 2.0T
@@normt5463 As over seas engines are different that US gets. I do know on American *Saab 2.0T engines* 300hp is basically max engine hp without changing internals. We are talking bout 2 differnt motors and specs here. LK9 vs LHU.
@@meme-yc4ks yes, LSJ with a turbo and no DI like LNF.
I like the V^ because it sounds more agressive and i like more power and it has it without anyn mods,so thats a plus for me
Just got a '06 2.8 Aero Sportcombi...heavy nose but let's see how she manages
I have a 2008 1.8t which is the same 2..0l with a smaller turbo, I have fitted a hybrid turbo, 630cc injectors and bigger intercooler and its running just over 300hp and 430nm on a dyno but had it set at 280hp for reliability but still runs 430nm. I can say it's very fast and tourqy in top gear. And I still get around 24mpg and pay tax and insurance for a 1.8 instead of a 2.8
Nice!
Can you do a part 2 of this with the 2.3 that came in the 9-5?
it's only one motor, so how could it be a comparison lol
@@AutoAutopsy comparing to the 2.0 and the 2.8. I see people in the comments saying the 2.3 is a better engine than both the engines that came in the 9-3
might be a good idea then; i would still pick the 2.8 tho
@@TJ_Hack3r He doesn't do 9-5 videos. I don't think he owns one.
Looks like you put screw-type hose clamps on the X's two tank hoses?
Might mention that to everyone. I just converted from the stock plier-clamp type which were allowing them to weep and almost blew off altogether after only being installed new a year ago. Those stock clamps are just undersized imo.
I did; when i got the new hose last second before SOC i double clamped it to be safe
I myself think that saab biopower engine is a good alternative to modify. 180 horsepower original with E85 and 150 horsepower with gasoline. with another exhaust pipe and downpipe as well as a large turbo other intercooler and new injector, you can come up with 345 horsepower, however, I recommend changing the Clutch at the power increase. Of course, you have to have custom tune to get up to these horsepower. sorry for bad english
biopower wasn't available in US!
@@AutoAutopsy sorry! missed so bad that they were just the engines in the US that I could choose. but still think they are a damn good engine to tune, otherwise I would take the 2.0T. because in sweden there are only 175 manufactured (2.8T) so if i should go for your logic then i can not choose 2.8T since it is barely in sweden. you know that you can export cars from other countries to your country? it is because they were exported over Saab 2.8T from Sweden to the US. it was about 500 Saab 2.8T came from sweden to US. it's so strange that you in the US got engines that were strong in your Saab that they demanded a market. while the Swedish market wanted a Saab that went on the E85 do you think they sound strange? sorry if you thought they were weird that I was thinking for a big purpose still sorry if bad english
2.3 in the aero needs more maintenance. I had both . The 2.3 eats coils it’s to hot and personally I had better time with the 2.0. My 2.0 last up to 235k the 2.3 I dumped it at 145k was just casting me to much to fix and was not even close to reliable as my 2.0.
2.3 is in the 9-5/OG 9-3! Not NG 9-3
Hola que tal soy de México y me interesa saber si en USA venden la transmisión para un saab 2.8 turbo ya que en México son muy escasos
I had a 2003 9-3 Arc. I loved every minute of that car. Unfortunately, my car dealer did too...
rip :(
I have a 2009 9-3 aero xwd with the 2.8T 6speed manual and I love it. I’ve had 2 different 2000 9-5 Aeros too. But where did you get your intake for the turbo X? And where do you think I should get my parts from?
Do88! Check out esaab for anything stock that you need
Have never driven a V6 X. Sounds like fun. I have an ‘06 9-3SC with a JZW stage one tune. For a 2Liter plenty of zzzzzzip
nice!
You should try the vtuner
I love my 2.0T aero I've had it for about 5 years and it's been perfectly reliable but I'd like to snag a 2.8 cross wheel for sure
👍🏼
I have a 01 Saab viggen not sure what size is the engine is. But she can get up and go. I can really feel that turbo kick in. Love this car. Can you tell me about the viggen?
The early 2000s and 99 viggen/aero cars have a 2.3T. One of the best engines ever imo
@@houseking9211 Very sturdy internals on the Viggen. Can achieve much more HP without changing pistons, etc.
Yeah, bigger has the 2.3T (B235), same as most OG 9-5's
Did they changed the nasty oil pickup strainer who caused on the pre 2004
petrol engines many engine break downs?
yes, all engines from 2003 onward are modified. Pretty reliable engines.