RC18B 911 turbo
New member
I actually don't find the Porsche too uncomfortable on long journeys so I must be an odd one out then.
New to Porsche, the forum so hi
- Thread starter Guest
- Start date
RC18B 911 turbo
New member
I've just noticed that my thing says Non member but not that long ago it was saying joint membership what's happened?
georgethackray
New member
I think I read something a while ago that your membership number needs to be in your profile. Might be wrong though!
RC18B 911 turbo
New member
I have already filled that bit out with me number that's on me card I just think it's kind of strange that not so long ago it was saying I was a member and now it says I'm not
Neil Haughey
New member
I don't either except the 944 is vastly more noisy then the 9-5 and its mostly tyre roar from the rear tyres. I find I stay comfy all day long in the seats as long as it isn't hot because my 944 doesn't have aircon. I also find that the ventilation without a pollen filter like me 9-5 tends to mess with me hayfever.
I managed to live with the S2 as my only car for 4 years so it can do long journies just that now I have something much more suitable for that sort of driving.
xenon
New member
ORIGINAL: RC18B 911 turbo
I drove someones V70R that was putting out 480BHP but they had uprated a lot of other things to so seemed to be quite reliable and madly fast I loved it absoloutly amazing car (still would rather have me Porsche though [])
480bhp hahahahahahahahahahaha
I'm not denying it, but 480bhp, through the front wheels! Must have been hilarious!
xenon
New member
Unfortunately I bought a brand-new 2004 Saab 9-3 Convertible, 1.8t. I knew that i could make it into a 2.0T for a couple of hundred quid and a remap. On a long drive down to the south of France it was perfect. It was (and still is) one of the nicest looking convertibles around and knocks the A4 and the E46 into a cocked-hat looks wise. Unfortunately I was dreadful to drive on the twisty stuff. I bought that car for £28000 and sold it 14 months later for £16k. I know, I know.....[:'(]
I believe the V70R is 4WD Ian.
I drove a Saab convertible as I nearly bought a 2.3t, but it was slightly more flexible than if it had a hinge in the middle. The A4 knocks it into a cocked hat in every way IMO but if to your eye it doesn't for looks then that's still the only advantage - that was not the current Saab, but then the new one is outright ugly although I believe it has got some chassis rigidity.
I drove a Saab convertible as I nearly bought a 2.3t, but it was slightly more flexible than if it had a hinge in the middle. The A4 knocks it into a cocked hat in every way IMO but if to your eye it doesn't for looks then that's still the only advantage - that was not the current Saab, but then the new one is outright ugly although I believe it has got some chassis rigidity.
RC18B 911 turbo
New member
Indeed they are 4WD although I think the older ones are FWD.
It's quite sad that Volvo aren't going to make any more R models[] although the new V8 cars mostly the S80 are very good
It's quite sad that Volvo aren't going to make any more R models[
] although the new V8 cars mostly the S80 are very good
andymorris
New member
I Believe you will need to speak to a lady at PCGB HQ,its not something that can be done by yourself through your profile.
xenon
New member
Ah 4WD - I didn't know that. As far as the latest (current) 9-3 convertible, I do think it's a great looking car although the current A4 would give it a run for its money. Beauty is, as you say, in the eye of the beholder. Overall, I liked the car (the hood mechanism was perfect and very fast, encouraging its use) but the torque steer and general handling was so so. The interior plastics were incredibly flimsy, nowhere near BMW / Audi standard (think CD cases...). Seats were very good.
Depreciation was [>:]
As for the 944, I find the seats very supportive and very comfortable. Mine has the same leather seats as a 911 of the same era (do they all??) and I think they're brilliant.
My experience of Saabs was in the driving of a hard-topped 9-3, with a view to a purchase for my parents. That struck me as not quite borderline dangerous, but it really inspired absolutely no confidence whatsoever on anything other than a completely straight, flat, dry road. Introduce a corner, camber or water and you suddenly had to slow everything right down to stay shiny side up. I was shocked that it was so bad (and made my feelings quite well known to the dealer who loaned it to us.) If that was a saloon, I dread to think what the ones without a roof are like ... shame, 'cos they are (as has already been said) very very pretty cars. (With lovely interiors too!)
944 on a long distance is OK for me. I did find the seat to be agonisingly uncomfortable, but I dismantled it and re-profiled the back with some orthopaedic foam (believe you me, 32-year-olds shouldn't have to know how to spell phrases like "orthopaedic foam" unless they are doctors) and they are much more comfortable now.
Noisy? Compared to other cars I have owned it seems fine. (But then my '89 S2 is one of the newest cars I have ever owned, so that's not hard!)
Oli.
944 on a long distance is OK for me. I did find the seat to be agonisingly uncomfortable, but I dismantled it and re-profiled the back with some orthopaedic foam (believe you me, 32-year-olds shouldn't have to know how to spell phrases like "orthopaedic foam" unless they are doctors) and they are much more comfortable now.
Noisy? Compared to other cars I have owned it seems fine. (But then my '89 S2 is one of the newest cars I have ever owned, so that's not hard!)
Oli.
Neil Haughey
New member
Was this a new or recent model 9-3? The recent 9-3 has a superbly capable chassis no matter what some magazines and ppl say about them, the rear wheel steering tends to put some ppl of because they are so used to cars where the back end is being dragged around rather then following the line of the front of the car. I am often staggered about how ppl will bang on about how great this BMW or this Audi is when in reality the differences are usually down to feel and have very little to do with the ability to go cross country on british roads quickly. Some of the Saab models such as basic 9-3's do have a problem with the tyres they choose to fit but then again my gf's mk5 golf also has bakalite tyres. Car feels like it has great handling but will actually corner slower then my 9-5!
BTA I don't think Saab have ever made a car with handling as awful as mk3 and mk4 golfs.
Even on the Saab forums everyone slags of the 9-3 interiors.
BTA I don't think Saab have ever made a car with handling as awful as mk3 and mk4 golfs.
Even on the Saab forums everyone slags of the 9-3 interiors.
Neil,
Interesting ... it was a new 9-3. I'm pretty sure. About 3 months ago. Make that 5. We actually drove a saloon, although they wanted an estate, because the demonstrator was a saloon.
Scenario was a car for my folks (both >60) to replace their 230,000 mile Mk3 Golf TDi Estate. Has to be diesel and estate, have comfortable seats and fit grandchildren in (my nephews and nieces.)
They went to an Audi dealer, where they were insulted by a salesman and went off in a huff. VW Dealer offered them a Passat which they didn't like. Volvo dealer offered them a car which my mother took a violent dislike to the dashboard and also didn't like.
I suggested Skoda Octavia, Saab 9-3 and Ford Mondeo.
Drove Octavia. Excellent in all respects. Truly brilliant car. Great to drive. Great inside and out. Great engine. Dealer was spartan but friendly and helpful.
Drove the Saab. I wanted to love it, but couldn't as soon as I started driving it. It really did handle like a cow on wet grass. I'll take your point about passive RWS, but it felt very very uninspiring on the road. Realy didn't give any form of confidence whatsoever, and on a slightly wet road in the New Forest with negative camber I felt positively dangerous. Against that the inside was excellent (I thought), and the front seats deliciously comfortable. (Compared with the rears, which were bench-like.) Also seemed quite expensive for what it was. Oh, and the engine was a 150bhp Turbo Diesel with a powerband narrower than a letterbox. It may have delivered 150bhp but that was between 3,500 and 3,501rpm and nowhere else.
Then the mondeo, which was thrown in as a makeweight. And was very very good. I was surprised what a good car it was - it felt large and imposing, but taught and brisk on the road, and a great drive. Engine was lovely, interior was pretty good, comfort pretty good. And pretty good value. The letdown here was the dealer, who was surly and rude and wondered out loud whether my father could afford a £13,000 second-hand car (which we won't go into.)
And the one they chose?
They didn't. They still have the Golf! I would have bought the skoda on the spot! They felt particularly frugal and decided that they weren't mad keen to change after all, and are going to try and get another 100,000 miles out of the golf. (Which it will manage, I have no doubt, but not in any kind of style!)
Agree about the Mk3 and 4 golfs. Dire machines. I had a mk3 GTi and it was the worst car I ever owned. Awful awful awful.
Oli.
After having one as a hire car about 9 months ago I feel much the same about the Mundano power band as you describe the Saab's, so it must have been especially bad. I'm pretty convinced that all the recent "high output" 4 cylinder diesels have a power plot like Mont Blanc. Smoke and mirrors - much like direct injection petrols which can make good economy or high(ish) power but never both at the same time.
My appliance delivers what's left of it's 90bhp across what must be nearly 1,000rpm because it's a generation before VAG went totally vertical with the outputs (probably the same engine your 'rentals Golf has). The 530d had a proper power band of 2,500rpm or so.
My appliance delivers what's left of it's 90bhp across what must be nearly 1,000rpm because it's a generation before VAG went totally vertical with the outputs (probably the same engine your 'rentals Golf has). The 530d had a proper power band of 2,500rpm or so.
Fen,
Agree all the way. The only snag is that those modern TDi's do seem to make pretty good progress when not really trying. The 130bhp Golf I had in Provence the last couple of times I went really did clip along quite briskly, without seemingly even breathing that hard. (Certainly not enough drama for SWMBO to even look at the speedo.) Although when you really wanted to go, you realised how lacking the engine was. When giving it 60% beans, it felt like it had a lot more to go. However, this was just a good pretence ...
Interesting your comments about the DI petrols. Never driven one, but they do get good write-ups.
Folks TDi Golf is a P-reg, and was not as peaky as the modern ones. Perhaps that's a better way of saying that actually the engine is one big flat spot. (Strange how things change. When I was driving a 1300cc Mk1 Golf their TDi Mk3 felt like a rocketship. Maybe it's got slower. Maybe my expectations have changed. Hmmmm.)
One thing I did come away from the Skoda/Saab/Mondeo test-drive with was a profound respect for the 944 chassis. Driving it over the same roads as we took the other cars over, 4 or 5 hours later, I really wondered what those manufacturers had been doing for the last 20 years when an F-reg Porsche could knock them all into cocked hats, quite effortlessly. But then, you drive a 944 for the first time and realise that this was where Porsche spent the money - on the chassis. They didn't spend it on the engine, and they sure as hell didn't spend it on the interior.
Oli.
Agree all the way. The only snag is that those modern TDi's do seem to make pretty good progress when not really trying. The 130bhp Golf I had in Provence the last couple of times I went really did clip along quite briskly, without seemingly even breathing that hard. (Certainly not enough drama for SWMBO to even look at the speedo.) Although when you really wanted to go, you realised how lacking the engine was. When giving it 60% beans, it felt like it had a lot more to go. However, this was just a good pretence ...
Interesting your comments about the DI petrols. Never driven one, but they do get good write-ups.
Folks TDi Golf is a P-reg, and was not as peaky as the modern ones. Perhaps that's a better way of saying that actually the engine is one big flat spot. (Strange how things change. When I was driving a 1300cc Mk1 Golf their TDi Mk3 felt like a rocketship. Maybe it's got slower. Maybe my expectations have changed. Hmmmm.)
One thing I did come away from the Skoda/Saab/Mondeo test-drive with was a profound respect for the 944 chassis. Driving it over the same roads as we took the other cars over, 4 or 5 hours later, I really wondered what those manufacturers had been doing for the last 20 years when an F-reg Porsche could knock them all into cocked hats, quite effortlessly. But then, you drive a 944 for the first time and realise that this was where Porsche spent the money - on the chassis. They didn't spend it on the engine, and they sure as hell didn't spend it on the interior.
Oli.
Guest
New member
Wow, we are off topic...i am currently running an S60 D5 SE 2004 MY 163bhp stock with a Rica engineering sport tune on it @ 210bhp. I hate diesels but that is almost liveable.
The porker failed its MOT today in spectacular style, 3 pages of little silly things, clips broken etc for brake lines and cracked headlight lense. It has sprung a water leak though, i think its split a water hose, or the rad
I will be dealing with that at the weekend
The porker failed its MOT today in spectacular style, 3 pages of little silly things, clips broken etc for brake lines and cracked headlight lense. It has sprung a water leak though, i think its split a water hose, or the rad
I will be dealing with that at the weekend
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
