Saxos not that bad are they?

nick · Unread post by **nick** » 02 Apr 2005, 22:31

Yes, not a patch on the original 900 really. I always liked Saabs, but since GM took over they seem to have lost the plot somehow.

nick · Unread post by **nick** » 02 Apr 2005, 22:35

...I was particularly impressed with the 1981 900 that my neighbour used to own. He had heavy 5-bar gates on his driveway and used to drive the Saab through them every day, without bothering to stop and open them first [:D] It never seemed to do the car any harm, but the gates got quite distorted after a while!

dillosk8ter · Unread post by **dillosk8ter** » 02 Apr 2005, 22:44

My grandad had a 70's 900 5dr from new very light brown/dark beige colour with brown velour seats and that typical '70s fake wood. Great car, built like a tank.....but about as thirsty. My gran had a bright orange Saab 96 at around the same time.
Volvo lost plot as well with there reasonable cr*p S40 model. My parents had one to replace the last of a long line of the (much mocked) 340/360's, the S40 was slow, poor handling, loud, poor riding and had worse build quality than my ZX.
Think that 340/360's are far better cars than people think, very safe for there time with crumple zones, roll cage and impact bars.....in fact if I had to crash in an older car I'd choose one of those!!

nick · Unread post by **nick** » 02 Apr 2005, 22:55

Volvo and Saab were the first to take passive safety seriously. Most other manufacturers still seemed to be working under the theory that "safety doesn't sell cars" until very recently.

pantherd90 · Unread post by **pantherd90** » 03 Apr 2005, 00:50

Indeed, Volvo have always been big on the safety front, they had airbags fitted quite early on (with a nasty tendancy to fire when driving..) and I think I'd rather be driving a volvo than any other old car simply for the safety factor..

dillosk8ter · Unread post by **dillosk8ter** » 03 Apr 2005, 01:53

Think they may have had front seat belts from the early 1950's...someone correct me if Im wrong. Rover 2000 was another very safe car for its time also.

dillosk8ter · Unread post by **dillosk8ter** » 03 Apr 2005, 01:56

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by nick

Most other manufacturers still seemed to be working under the theory that "safety doesn't sell cars" until very recently.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
True, just look at the NCAP results for the Rover 100, even made the national news, police stopped using them and they were very quickly discontinued.

Forth · Unread post by **Forth** » 03 Apr 2005, 02:28

"the (much mocked) 340/360's"
Never understood why these were so negatively imaged; direct descendants of the DAF cars.... I had a 44 for a few years, and they were actually pretty agile and much better cars than a lot of their contemporary poser-mobiles, especially if given electronic ignition instead of the original 6 volt system... in the earlier 1980s I got pulled up for accelerating through a red light at 75mph (not altogether my fault, so was let off) but the police were bewildered a DAF 44 could be so nippy -- 'course it could.... and the "Volvo" badged offerings from Holland were also solidly made with the automatic 343 being variomatic, and the top 360 model actually quite good, imho.

nick · Unread post by **nick** » 03 Apr 2005, 02:42

I suppose part of the 340's image problem was down to the fact that most of them were the bog standard 1.4 DL version. Not a particularly good performer, but then the people who bought them weren't really after performance. My uncle had an early 343 for ages and was quite happy with it. It did start to go a bit rusty after a few years , but no worse than most cars of that era.

dillosk8ter · Unread post by **dillosk8ter** » 03 Apr 2005, 02:46

I don't know why they were made fun of either, Jeremy Clarkson types; if it doesn't fly round airfield at 1000 mph and look like diablo etc its crap.....meanwhile in real world 300 series Volvos were decent to drive, safe, built well and in 360 2ltr mode....quick. We had three in succession, '84/5 360 GLE hatch in met light green/grey with leather interior, '83 340 DL 3dr in BEIGE!! and finally 360 GLE saloon in dark met grey. Don't see many at all now, perhaps even fewer than BX.....then again they did rust quite badly!!
DAF's are interesting little cars, haven't seen one for years.....used to be a cream coloured 33 dumped locally.

yangreen · Unread post by **yangreen** » 03 Apr 2005, 19:40

But 300 series Volvo's are seriously ugly! I've just seen a Y reg with 20k on the clock. Only £1195 if you're interested!
I thought we were on about Saxo's anyway? Back to an earlier point about the amount sold, they sold over 21 million VW Beetles and they definitely aren't good cars!

pantherd90 · Unread post by **pantherd90** » 03 Apr 2005, 21:52

Ah but what defines a good car? Price has to come somewhere in what makes a good car, the cheaper the price tag the better. I think people still put the cost first when buying a car, that means the cheaper cars are always going to do fairly well.

TomH · Unread post by **TomH** » 04 Apr 2005, 03:25

If no-one has previously mentioned, The Sun probably were quoting this weeks Auto Express survey, in which the Saxo came bottom (100th)
On the subject of the Volvo 340, I have a soft spot for them since my parents owned a string of four of them in the 80s-90s when I was growing up (one 1.7 and the rest 1.4). But having driven one (1.4) they are very slow and heavy, and thirsty!
They are safe though. My mum was in a head on with a transit van and the car proved very tough and she walked away unharmed!
The saloons are ugly though, if you see one up against a modern vehicle there is really nothing that looks as square and dated!
The 3 door is better though... I really like the 360 GLT but they are very rare now!

mattpc · Unread post by **mattpc** » 04 Apr 2005, 03:27

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Rostami

Reliability is just one of the aspects to qualify qhen you look at a car. How about saftey? comfort? robustness?
For sure the saxo doesnt score well in most of these characteristics.
Furthermore, the car is pretty old now...clios and corsas have both been re-designed at least once each while as the saxo has remained the same.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
They can't all be bad marty. I know a guy who had his from new and did 190k in it without any MAJOR work. It was the 1.5D and he only got rid of it because the gearbox was dieing and he wanted a larger car.

tomsheppard · Unread post by **tomsheppard** » 06 Apr 2005, 23:07

The 3 series Volvo was expensive for what it was and had dubious road manners. The Saxo is a generic Peugeot hatchback which is ordinary to the point of boredom and poky with it.
A Post '84, pre '88 Saab 900 is a bit like a Concorde flight.
Bloody expensive but never regretted.