Re: $aabs

[Igor Kessel <e6941tb@ix.netcom.com>]

Charles Schwartz wrote:
 
> Igor,
> 
> No offense, but you don't know Saab 900's from dirt.  I own one.  An 89
> Turbo in fact.
> 
> "An aquaintanance (sic) of mine once owned an '89 900T 5sp.

Well, given the fact that my old Netscape 2.01 does not have a spell checker and 
that the English language is not my mother-tongue, I feel that I am doing 
reasonably well.

On the other hand, the fact that my esteemed opponent resorts to picking on my 
misspelling of words on this International, strictly technical forum is itself 
curious and might indicate a dire lack of arguments. 

> > That thing was so quick we called it a *Mad Hare*. Exhibited a horrendous 
> > torque steer, tho, if you rev it up"

> The 900 has a longitudinal engine design, like an Audi.  Yes, there is a
> great turbo rush beginning at 2000 rpms, but I have noticed no more torque
> steer than on my Audi.  Maybe the one you drove needed bushings.

That thing exhibited classical torque steer, no ifs or buts. Ah, and the bump 
steer too. Besides, such a well designed car could not possibly have had bad 
bushings @ 30kmi, could it? ;)
The phenomenon of torque steer has nothing to do with the orientation of the 
engine. It has everything to do with which wheels are driven.
On a front driver the same wheels that do steering are getting the torque from 
the drive shafts. If one wheel breaks loose, the second wheel grabs and steers 
the car sideways. A textbook stuff. 
That's why Audi installed less potent engines/brains on the FWD 200T, and that's 
why it only pays to chip up an AWD 200TQ.
 
> > The tranny is mounted to the BOTTOM of the oil pan. In case of a minor
> > repair, like of the oil pan gasket leak, one has to drop the tranny!"
> 
> The oil pan gasket is located between the engine and the trans.  They are
> sealed together.  I have NEVER heard of a leak in this area, nor has one
> ever been mentioned on any Saab mailing list.

OK, let's say you need  to get in there for any reason, to clean up the sump or 
whatever. When an engineer makes something unaccessible in a hope for that unit 
not to need attention ever, it usualy constitutes a flawed design. Good examples 
are plentiful: the dumb construction of Audi's Brake MC or Pressure Accumulator, 
for one.

 
> > The belts and pulleys are on BOTH sides of the engine. Mostly on the
> > rear side.
> > The water pump is there also. The gap between the pulleys and the firewall is
> > hardly more than 20mm. Got a water pump leak? Too bad, now you've gotta
> > drop the engine and the tranny."
> 
> There are NO belts on the rear of the engine.  That is where the bell
> housing is located.  I changed my water pump this summer, an easy job that
> require only moving the air con compressor out of the way (2 bolts).

Since then you have corrected yourself:

> That was the front of the motor which faces the firewall.  The rear of the
> motor faces the front of the car.

The water pump statement was the only one where I was incorrect, my apologies for 
that. I was using my memory rather than the facts. Yesterday in the interests of 
the truth I took some time to take a good look on Saab's internals. 
The water pump is indeed a stand alone unit, very accessible. OTOH, I was still 
right about the belts being placed between the engine and the firewall. And this 
design is still dumb, in my *personal* opinion, since for every 10 belt and 
associated parts replacements you will hardly do one clutch replacement, so the 
relative easiness of access to the bell housing, which is placed in front of the 
engine is negated by the inconvenience of doing any routine maintanance.
 
> > Saab has the hood that opens like on a BMW, leaving you only two sides
> > for access. Any medium sized repair forces you to take the hood off. When
> > afterwards you put it back on you have to realign the gaps. PITA."
> 
> One of the nicest features on the Saab is the great hood and access that it
> gives.  You only need to remove the hood (2 bolts) to change the clutch (2
> hour job) or remove the radiator.  The hood does not need to be realigned
> at all.

Maybe my arithmetic skills are getting rusty with age, but I still believe that 
3/4-open engine bay is exactly 1/4 more accessible than the 1/2-open bay, be it a 
Saab with an easy clutch or a Quattro with a nightmare clutch.
Why remove the hood when you can simply lift it up, everything else being equal? 
Still beats me :)

> Stick to Audi's Igor.  You don't seem to be able to appreciate more than
> one kind of car at a time.

Not until they bring to the US market a sedan which is even remotely capable of 
challenging an Audi w/ a turbo and a quattro. Ok, I might check out the C70 AWD 
turbo, if the safety-image-conscious geniuses at Geteborg finally decide that 
some of us like to drive sticks, just like the Canadians do, to whom they've been 
delivering the 5-sp 850 turbo for years now.

I can tell what I do appreciate though, Charles. It's a constructive yet polite 
way of conversing on the list. Alas, one could hardly derive such an impression 
from a statement like this:

> > If you're standing in front of the car and wave the driver to open the
> > hood, it jumps at you by no less than 1 ft forward, hitting you in the area
> > of...hmm...reproductive organs. I still remember my surprise, when it
> > happened to me for the first time."
> 
> That is done on purpose to control the birth rate of certain populations.

Huh? Sorry, you got me puzzled with such a piece of frivolous wisdom.

What also puzzles me is that you cross-posted my message to the members of the 
Saab List and to my sheer surprise I have received only one rude letter so far.

I consider your action to be indecent. The Saab owners are just as passionate as 
the Quattro ones. Their respective cars are just as quirky. The Saabisti might 
not like Audis. The Audisti might not like Saabs. That's normal.
To walk in the *Saab house* and post a message of an Audisti, without his 
consent, which was never meant to be posted anywhere outside the Quattro List -- 
that's abnormal. And very impolite to the Saab list at that. Obviously if I were 
a Saab freak, I would've been on that list. But I am an Audi freak so I am here. 

Yes, I don't like Saabs. But I had no intention to insult the Saab fans, 
especially on their own turf.
OTOH, I bet there are many Saab owners out there who think that Audi is an 
overpriced, unreliable Nazi-mobile, and that's OK with me. I would be the first 
one to admit that they are partially right. But if they started to post 
Audi-bashing messages to the Quattro List I would be insulted, coz this is our 
turf and it would be impolite. I regret that you made me look such an impolite 
person before the people whom I don't know and had no intension to offend.

BTW, that *aquaintanance (sic) of mine* has totalled his Saab two years ago. 
The reason? A jerk in the opposite direction decided that she could turn left in 
5m in front of him in the pouring rain.
He tried to avoid, but without the benefit of the AWD quattro it was in vain. He 
T-boned the heap of metal, which used to be an Accord.
The damage? The believed-to-be-so-strong Saab became 1/2 shorter, the left front 
fender bit into the wheel, rendering it undrivable.
How did we get the car home, 2 blocks away? I towed it with my monster 200TQ, 
which did not even feel the 1.5 tons of steel, dragging behind. Try to do that on 
a FWD car, even if it is as powerful as that 900T was. You'll spin one wheel, 
while the other one would sit there doing nothing. 
The Saab smoked the dragging jammed wheel, and the 200 still did not care. Not 
that we cared much for that weel either.
What does that *aquaintanance (sic) of mine* drive now? You guessed it, a Laser 
Red A4 2.8 quattro. No more FWD, thank you.

Regards,

-- 
Igor Kessel
'89 200TQ - 18psi (TAP)
'98 A4TQ - on order...again. For the third time and counting.
Philadelphia, PA
USA