By on November 9, 2015

1988 Saab 900 SPG

The contrast was so stark, it was breathtaking.

Dad was driving his company car, some sort of GM A-Body, as we pulled into the parking lot of a golf course north of Columbus. Golf, of course, is another hobby my dad introduced me to that is as sure as car collecting to drive me into debilitating debt. Anyhow, we were meeting a friend of his for a weekend round, and we parked next to his new Saab.

I was blown away. Of course, I read all of the car magazines, so I knew what a Saab was, but dad’s buddy had a 900 SPG — the high-performance, limited edition hot Swede. Black, with grey three-spoke wheels just like the car shown above. The buff book photos did not do the car justice. It’s such a vivid memory of a not-that-exotic car that is so overwhelming.

This 1988 Saab 900 SPG is being sold by the original owner, and it looks to be nearly perfect. There are a few bubbles on the glovebox door, and the cloth covering the moonroof is sagging a bit, but considering how clean the rest of the car is, these are minor complaints.

The black paint gleams like the new car I recall. The lower-body cladding doesn’t appear to have faded or cracked, like so many Pontiacs. The grey leather interior looks sumptuous, and barely creased, considering 143,000 miles on the odometer. It’s $7,000 asking price seems like a bargain.

I haven’t yet had the pleasure of driving an SPG. It’s probably another situation where one should never meet their heroes, as 175 horsepower in a nose-heavy, torque-steering beast is likely not as entertaining as it sounds. But I can’t help but dream of flying into Seattle and driving this pristine car home cross-country. And it looks like there’s even plenty of room in the hatch for a few sets of clubs.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

70 Comments on “Digestible Collectible: 1988 Saab 900 SPG...”


  • avatar
    RideHeight

    Goody, another chance to open up my canned Saab Question. Eventually someone’s gonna have a knowledgeable answer:

    Can any Saab cognoscenti tell me why the aircraft-inspired, wrap-around windshield found on Saabs of the ’70s and ’80s is no longer used by anyone?

    Was curving the vertical plane of those relatively upright windshields deemed aerodynamically inefficient compared to just putting more and more lean into a flatter windshield? Or did pedestrian safety issues intervene?

    I’d sure rather have a taller, curvy windshield than these 30⁰ wonders of today where even pickups have the RVM right in my line of sight.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Glass costs, as well as restricting design I should think (not cognoscenti). Your doors have to be pushed back if the windshield comes back that far. I’m sure it complicates side impact designs for today’s testing.

      • 0 avatar
        RideHeight

        In my idle moments I draw things like this with way more cab-forwarding but the same A-pillars and glass height.

        In the ’80s nothing but nothing told me that some guy was of a smarter, richer, healthier and sexier species than by seeing one in these 900s. Or he dealt coke/browser code/securities.

        God, their attraction was absolutely space-alien.

    • 0 avatar
      jhefner

      Directing the airflow over the windsheild/roof/rear window kept it laminer and generated less drag than allowing the airflow to flow down the sides of the car; where the glass frames, door seams, mirrors and trim all created turbulance and hence drag.

      So yes, it was considered less “draggy” to have a flat windshield that directed airflow over the top of the car rather than a rounded one that directed airflow down the sides. Some of the cars with clamshell doors like the first two generations of the Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable, the second generation Dodge Durango, and the Mercedes W126 and W140 had forward extensions to the A pillar to channel the airflow over the top rather than allowing it to flow down the sides; you can barely see it in these pictures:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mercedes-Benz_S-Class_W140.jpg

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2nd-Dodge-Durango.jpg

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1st-Mercury-Sable-sedan.jpg

      Both my Taurus and Durango still generate a lot of wind noise; I know in the case of the Taurus and I also think with the Durango it comes from the shape of the rear view mirrors. I would imagine this Saab generates a lot of wind noise as well as turbulance shears off the top and the then the bottom of the side mirrors and repeats again over and over; the turbulance drums on the side glass, and you can actually see it in the drops that form when driving in the rain.

    • 0 avatar
      carve

      Curved windshields seem like a good solution to all the DLO fail you see on cars these days.

  • avatar
    heavy handle

    I’ve had a chance to “drive my hero,” it was awesome. The car was between owners at the time, so I was able to drive it hard.

    It’s not at all torque-steery: the suspension is all sorted-out, and the engine runs lengthwise (thus the long hood).

    It’s very direct, stable and tossable. The FWD allows you to get back on the gas 30 feet sooner than a contemporary BMW, and the turbo maintains that advantage all the way down a straight.

    The car has a very modern feel, unlike an Audi Coupe, which has aged tremendously.

  • avatar
    ltcmgm78

    Wow. That SPG qualifies as lightly-used! If I needed another SAAB, I sure would consider this one. I loved that aircraft-inspired windshield on the 900 Turbo Sedan I used to own. Wish I still had it.

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    C900s don’t really have torque steer, as they have equal length axle shafts and a very nice upper and lower A-arm front suspension. They are also much faster than their 0-60 time would have you believe, as they have about the worst, most obstructive manual transmission known to man (the automatics are 10x worse). But the in-gear acceleration is superb. Really unique cars with highly logical if somewhat left-field design. There is actually not THAT much difference between an SPG and a regular Turbo, I actually prefer the non-SPG suspension and have never been a fan of the added plastic cladding.

    I’ve owned two C900ts. The first was a black on tan ’85 that was something of a moneypit at 225K, but still a lot of fun. The second was a ’92 Turbo Convertible that was one of the best and most reliable cars I have ever owned, and continues to be a reliable summer driver for a friend of mine even at a quarter million miles and counting.

    • 0 avatar
      Chris Tonn

      How does the soft-top hold up over the years? Wouldn’t mind a ragtop that can haul the entire family, and there aren’t many good options beyond a Mustang that I can think of.

      Note that I said “good.” Rules out LeBaron, TC, and Sebring immediately.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Wrangler.

        • 0 avatar
          Chris Tonn

          Pass. I prefer to keep my cars on the road, and the Wrangler just isn’t a great on-road vehicle, IMHO.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Pfft. Cutlass Supreme!

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Then maybe Volvo C70, Audi A5 convertible, or Mercedes E-Class convertible? As far as volume brands, the list includes pony cars, the 200/Sebring (NO!), and the Bettle/Eos (run away).

            I think the right answer is used C70. It’s not that big though.

            You could always go RR Phantom Drophead. :)

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Cannot forget Solara either. Fits family, is reliable. Is also ugly, but that’s a small price to pay.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Yes. Solara too. Also, the E-Class convertible is expensive. The 2012s are still going for $30K+.

      • 0 avatar
        Dingo

        I had a 1988 soft top for over 6 years. I never had any trouble with the top operating. However compared to modern convertibles they arent exactly water tight. Look for rotten floorboards when you consider buying one. Theyre great cars

      • 0 avatar
        seth1065

        I have/ had 2 saab verts a 86 turbo vert out and I have an 04 9-3 arc vert as a summer car now, both have a stick which is a plus, not much of an issue with parts and being in the ny metro area plenty of indies to work on them, while I like the 86 styling better and it was much much rarer with only about 300 made the 05 is a better car as a 20 year difference should make it. They are dirt cheap to buy but it takes a file to find a good one, no issues with the top but I think the mid to late 90’s had some top motor issues , it does function as a manual top but it is a handful, all is all for what they sell for they are a great car, the folks I know who have had a Volvo c70 hated theirs as to much cowl shake.

      • 0 avatar
        stevelovescars

        I have a ’94 E320 Cabriolet (A124 Chassis, for the Benz geeks). It’s a fantastic heirloom-quality car. These cost almost $90k new in 1994 and one with over 100k miles today can be had well under $10k.

        Mechanically, these are great cars and parts are readily available and not as expensive as one would think. A well maintained E320 should last for your grandkids to enjoy.

        Convertible-specific parts, on the other hand, are nearly unobtainable. There are 8 hydraulic cylinders that operate the top, these can be rebuilt if needed but the control module that operates them are not available new any longer, I found out the hard way. It took me 6 months to track down one from a wrecked car and then I had to pay up and hope it still worked. Oh, and there is no way to lower the top manually, so cheaping out on the repair wasn’t an option. It can be raised manually if one has tools and about 30 minutes should it fail during a rain storm. Fortunately, I never had to try that in anger.

        Interior trim pieces unique to the cabriolets are also impossible to find and they didn’t tend to hold up well over time. Ironic, because the rest of the interior was of incredibly high quality and still looks like new in my car with 112k miles, including the leather seats. Be warned, even the rear-view mirror and sun visors were unique to the convertibles and their limited production (perhaps 6k examples, IIRC) means salvage cars don’t come up too regularly.

        The E320 was considered quite safe in its day, with both ABS and dual front airbags along with pop-up roll bars behind the rear seats. Heady stuff in 1994… but Mercedes didn’t yet believe in cup-holders.

        That said, I am a huge fan of Saab 900 Convertibles. They are fun, comfortable, and much sportier than the E-class, which is a very heavy and stately car to drive.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Very nice, and thanks for the warning on spare parts. I’d rather have the coupe-only myself.

          If one must go euro on the convertibles I’m thinking SL or later Jags (last XJS, later XK8) or just good ol’ Mustang.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        The tops last pretty well, 10 years or so. My old car had a new one when I bought it about 10 years ago, and just got a new one put on by my friend last summer. Cost $1200 or so, parts and labor, which was a really good deal. They are NOT a particularly great design as far as wind noise and water sealing though, and they have about a bazillion adjustments between the top and the windows. My friend has no garage but keeps it under a good cover, and at his parent’s garage through the winter.

        Lots of nice Saab Convertibles out there, many of them only got summer use. They still come out to play in the summer here in Maine.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    Such a classic body style. My eyes trace over a 900 every time I see one (which is of course not often). And Saab could do aero wheels better than anybody else!

    -Might have some water issues with the door seals looks like, particularly around the driver’s door, near where the seat belt rests.
    -Is missing some SPG trim indicator on the back? Doesn’t even say 900.
    -Looks like it’s about to start losing paint under the spoiler.

    Whenever I look at old Saabs, I question the interior material choices. It looks almost like a kit car in there, even if the leather isn’t cracked. And pretty as it is, I would always worry about getting it serviced properly for the inevitable many breakdowns and special parts it needs.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      I love the greenhouse on these. SO MUCH VISABILITY. Nowadays, A-pllars are [email protected] near a foot across.

    • 0 avatar
      ZT

      SPGs didn’t have the standard 900 badging, i.e. they were debadged from the factory.

      As for parts on these cars, not much is unobtainium and what there is (maybe some gearbox parts) can easily be sourced from Goldwing or the other parts houses. There were enough of these cars on the road and the fanbase is strong enough that you can find just about anything you need.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        Ah, thanks.

        The other day I was driving in a part of town I normally don’t see, and must have passed by a Saab specialty shop. There were six or seven older Saabs sitting there waiting for repair, it looked like. Only caught a glance or I’d have slowed down a bit to see all the 900/9000 pr0n.

    • 0 avatar
      vvk

      1. Mine had the same seal misalignment. Did not cause any problems or water leaks.
      2. “Whenever I look at old Saabs, I question the interior material choices.” This was the most expensive vehicle to manufacture in the world. Interior materials were superb! When I sold my 1986 in 2006 with 315k+ miles on it, it was almost like new inside, except for some minor dash cracks. Everything worked like new.
      3. “And pretty as it is, I would always worry about getting it serviced properly for the inevitable many breakdowns and special parts it needs.” Yes, people who are not familiar with them always say that, especially Japanese car owners. In the last 5 years of its life mine required absolutely no repairs of any kind, other than regular oil/coolant/brake fluid changes. It had 315k+ miles, original engine, original clutch, original gearbox, etc. Even the catalytic converter was still fully functional, passed dynamometer emissions tests with flying colors every year. It participated in hundreds of autox events, was driven across the country several times (once to the arctic ocean,) was still supremely comfortable and got 30 mpg on long trips. And the exhaust note was fantastic with the stock turbo exhaust. I had the “factory roadholding kit” suspension that was terrific. I miss it so much! The kid I sold it to totalled it within a week.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        I have yet to own any of these “breakdown all the time” European cars. Despite having owned about 30 of them. Crappy cars break down regardless of make. Well maintained cars do not. Maintenance is not just changing the oil once in a blue moon.

        I disagree about the interior quality of C900s. While better than anything Japanese or American of the era (which were generally much cheaper cars), they don’t hold up as well as many other European cars. And they were pretty rattley even when brand new. The leather in particular didn’t last at all unless you were religious about it, and almost nobody was. Then the typical falling headliners and the cloth on the door inserts, and old cracking plastic.

  • avatar
    CaptainObvious

    Loved the look back then – still do today.

  • avatar
    chuckrs

    I had the previous generation – a 99EMS. Loved the visibility and the 3 door hatch configuration could carry a lot of stuff. The author could take 3 friends and a golf bag for each to the course in either a 900 or 99. Plus, you sat on honest to god chairs, nice, supportive and comfortable ones. The 99 was a torque monster though, which was occasionally amusing.
    I’d trade a few percent decrease in fuel economy for the panoramic view of the road through that windscreen.

  • avatar
    threeer

    You’re feeding the fires here…lol. One of my favorite ways to kill time in the evening is to type in “1980-1990” and “manual transmission” on eBay and see what pops up! I’m never looking for the stalwart 911 or the like, but the more “obscure” sporty-type cars that I grew up seeing on the road (mostly) in Germany. It’s fun to imagine…

  • avatar
    Wtdoor

    My mother had one of these towards the tail end of my high school. I was going to buy it from her after college — and about 6 months before I graduated she rammed it into guardrail (in retrospect, she was and is a nervous, terrible driver and should not have been behind the wheel of this beautiful car). Thankfully she was okay, but the SPG was a goner. Still makes me sad to this day. I got to drive it once or twice, but my car had a front bench seat that made dates a little more … convenient than this little beauty.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    This car is tempting just for the sake of childhood nostalgia. Dad had a second-hand 1979 with a fairly rough exterior, and the sheet metal changed little for this 1988 example and the interior even less. The pictures of the gauge cluster, dashboard, and glovebox door takes me back 25 years.

    $7000 is a lot to spend to indulge that memory, however. I have little knowledge about maintaining a 27-year old car from a defunct automaker short of paying a specialist whatever he would like. Comments above suggest reliability and parts are not a large issue, but 27 years old is still 27 years old. I hope whoever buys this example will care for it properly.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      At this point you pretty much have to be a masochist to want to drive anything this old as a daily driver. This car needs to be a pampered toy, garaged for high days and holidays, and polished with a soft diaper regularly.

      These days $7K is nothing, and you absolutely cannot make an average one nice for this money (since the average C900 is a pile of rust at this point), so you might as well spend the money on a really good one.

  • avatar
    CincyDavid

    I have a 2000 C70 convertible…between the astounding scuttle shake and the electronic/electrical/ETM gremlins, I doubt I’ll ever own another FWD Volvo. My ’97 V90 wagon is rock-solid, I’d hop in and drive it to Florida without batting en eye. The C70, on the other hand, may or may not get me to Dunkin DOnuts and back without incident. Owned 2 900s, a ’91 3 door NA hatch that was a neat car, and a ’96 900s convertible that was a nightmare. I still remember the color combo on the older 900…Malachite Green with Puma velour.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I might take a FWD Volvo of the period for free, and then again I might not.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        I actually saw a gen 1 C70 the other day, and it was VERY tidy. Gold metallic with gold top. Caught my eye because I haven’t seen one in so long.

        Other than that, FWD 00’s Volvo won’t do you no good. Cant hold onto their transmissions or door panels! x.x

      • 0 avatar
        Ryoku75

        Even if its free, you’re still looking at $8000+ to keep your FWD Volvo on the road.

        Thankfully they’re very safe, so if you decide to crash it and see what insurance will give you, you’ll come out in one piece.

  • avatar
    Ashy Larry

    That sweet, hollow, burbly exhaust tone is, by itself, almost worth the price of admission.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    The 3-spoke wheels and up-to-the-minute plastic cladding did a good job of masking the age of the basic design by the late ’80s.

    I’ve never driven a SPG, but the regular 900 Turbo I drove once (which was about this vintage) may be the single laggiest turbo vehicle I’ve ever experienced. The interior was really nice, though.

  • avatar
    craiger

    I had a 1989 900 non-turbo, pretty stripped down. A lovely car that got me hooked on Euro iron. I remember two things: First, racing an E34 through the twisties until the driver gave up at 115. Second, was how the car behaved in the snow. Onc winter day after an overnight storm, I saw all kinds of other FWD cars unable to keep moving, but even with the stock tires, the Saab went through snow like it wasn’t even there. Uncanny.

    I’ll always have fond memories of that car.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    So much want, so little garage space.

    One nit on the original assessment – the driver seat is pretty tired out. Pictures generally provide a 10 foot view, you can see the leather is deeply creased along the thigh support area, and one of the last pictures reveals the cushioning under it is pretty tired out.

    Overall the car is in great shape.

    So much want…

  • avatar
    TW5

    Petrolicious did an episode about the Saab 900 SPG. Check it out on youtube if you’re interested.

  • avatar
    oldowl

    Still miss my 99L and 900.

  • avatar
    olddavid

    After chasing incremental improvements in my game buying every new so-called “improvement” in club tech and funding many golf shops retirement plans, I have found that the 1978 Hogan Apex with Legend shafts I purchased almost 40 years ago to be the best I ever used. SAAB vehicles of the same vintage have that familiar feel that seemed so unique when they were new. Go ahead and drive one. It will be like hearing that familiar sound when grooving a persimmon wood – it won’t go as far as titanium, but it sure feels good doing it.

  • avatar

    I used to have a Saab 90 – that’s the front end of a Saab 99 glued to the two-door style rear end of the 900. It featured turbo wheels, an Aston Martin sort of metallic green and the plush seats of the turbo. It was plain gorgeous. Didn’t mind the workout involved with steering the car and the mediocre performance. What did bother me were the leaking carburetors. The gasoline vapor that leaked into the passenger compartment nearly poisoned me.

  • avatar
    tsoden

    I grew up seeing these Saabs in the late eighties. I honestly could not see the appeal of these cars. I realize styling is subjective, but honestly, I never understood the design language of these cars back then. I just found them to be too odd.

    I actually appreciate the design of the more modern SAAB’s…especially once GM took SAAB under their wing. The 2005 9-3 convertible and 9-3 Vector Sport Sportwagon, to me, are sex on wheels!!!!

  • avatar
    davefromcalgary

    Yet another cult car I dont get…

    Can someone post an 86 Cutlass or something?

  • avatar
    NoGoYo

    Never been a 900 guy, but I love me some 9000. Especially the later CS/CSE models.

  • avatar
    Superdessucke

    I like these but be careful. Saab enthusiasts are very cheap and do not pay a lot for cars, meaning resale values of most Saabs are pretty stagnant. $7k is virtually unheard of for a 900, even an SPG. I doubt you’d be able to easily get more than 5k for this if you decided to sell it in a year, and parts are very expensive, so fixing a few deferred maintenance items would throw you deep into the red in a big hurry.

    I’d more seriously consider this car if it was 3k cheaper. But I’d run away from it at this ask.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      Times they are a changing. I would call $7K for a decent condition SPG to be nice price at this point. Lower mileage ones are changing hands for $10K+.

      You can’t make an average one nice for this price, and the average SPG is a rust bucket at this point.

      • 0 avatar
        Superdessucke

        I’ll believe that when I see it. Can you cite some sources? Enthusiasts of Swedish cars are in general cheap, and the ones who aren’t know most others are. That’s why prices are low.

        This is also why maintenance of older Saabs and Volvos tends to be more lax and, shall we say, creative, than you’ll tend to see of older cars owned by typical enthusiasts, which means expensive catch ups and corrections if you are at all conscientious. All in my humble experience of course.

        • 0 avatar
          Paddan

          In 2013, I sold my pristine 48k mile 1980 900 turbo 5 door for $7500. I am still sorry that I sold that car. But space constraints forced me. Agreed Saab folks are cheap and like to hold down the prices of the cars for some reason that I will never understand. The drawback on this one is the motorized front seat belts which are awful to live with. I bought a new ’88 turbo with these and they were troublesome back then and always knocked off my glasses when my head was turned to the left in the drivers seat.

        • 0 avatar
          Ryoku75

          I dont mind the cheap prices, it means that more people get to appreciate these fine older cars.

          That being said you do see some truly nasty ones from time to time:

          90’s Volvo 240 sedan: Okay shape, rear struts were completley shot.

          Volvo 940 sedan: Interior was literally a trash can everywhere, owner couldnt even be bothered to carry their car key inside with them.

          Another 90’s Volvo 240: Outside was missing bumper covers and many trim bits, but the engine still sounded good!

          I rarely ever see nasty Saabs, either they’re in good shape or they’re in the junkyard. They dont appeal to the “Camcord internet crowd” like Volvos.

  • avatar
    stroker49

    I just must tell you that I’m working for Saab. I was working for Saab when we still made cars in Trollhättan, but I always worked for the aircraft division in Linköping. But we no longer make cars, as you know. This is from today’s news:
    http://aviationweek.com/dubai-air-show-2015/uae-saab-strike-127-billion-erieye-deal

  • avatar
    Yankee

    I was a SAAB technician at one point in my misspent youth (something I don’t admit to very many people) and the best thing I can say about these cars was that they held up so well in a collision their owners were always at the counter the day after the accident whining about how long it would take to get the car fixed rather than waiting in line for corrective surgery like my counterparts in the kinds of Hondas and Toyotas I used to drive.

    That being said, these were simply not good cars. The automatic chain-driven transmissions would fail so often we joked that replacement should be part of the regular service intervals. The front emergency brakes seldom worked for more than a week after taking the seized components apart, grinding them on a wire wheel, and greasing the hell out of everything so that it would last that long. The oil pumps (front of the engine, near the firewall on these backwards-mounted engines) were always leaking. Ball joints looked great until you inserted the special tool to take the pressure off the lower control arm and lift them up, at which point you wondered how they were even still attached with that much play. Water leaks from sunroofs – let alone convertible tops – were common. The console-mounted ignition switch was mounted in a depressed recess that was perfect for funneling dirt, food crumbs, and associated other residue that would fall into the lock and result in a tow to the dealership.

    Driving position and ergonomics were horrible with the high expanse of cheap plastic they called a dashboard. The “S” in the 900S cars stood for slow, and the turbo cars were also pokey off the line, with no power in traffic until the tach hit 3500 rpm and you felt like someone hit you in the kidneys with a 2×4, just in time to brake for the next light. To say the manual shift linkages had an agricultural feel would be an insult to John Deere. They were no fun to drive, regardless of what special edition badges the Vikings slapped on the trunk (SPG, Aero, etc.).

    Sorry, I just never understood the appeal of these cars other than being different and giving architects and math teachers something to drive. Even less fun to work on.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      You must have been a Saab tech waaay back, as the last cars with front hand brakes were in ’86. The later turbos with the small Mitsubishi turbines are plenty sprightly off the line, but I actually preferred the older kick up the backside ones – more fun. The manual transmission got a lot better too, though they never rose beyond just OK. The automatics are complete and utter trash, and yes, most of the issues that you mention are pretty common. But so what? They are a great driving car with a lot of character, and immensely practical. I would not want even a perfect one as a daily driver today, time has marched on, but I suspect one will be a toy in the toybox again at some point.

      • 0 avatar
        Poncho

        Yankee is correct. I had an 84 900 and remember the joy of the front emergency break calipers. I kept a small hammer in the back for when a tech would pull the emergency break and then had to pound on the breaks to get them unstuck. Finally someone redesigned them and I replaced both calipers. I drove mine to 200k but it was falling apart. The best thing about it was that the body was a tank and it took a lot of damage from other drivers. I called mine the bondo car☺.

        I did drive a 86 turbo and the lag was crazy but when the turbos kicked in it really took off.

        They were different cars but between the gold plated parts and finding qualified people to work on them I would never get one of this vintage.

  • avatar
    Ryoku75

    Nice shape, but for $7K I’d rather buy an old Volvo 120-series, and use the rest on some basic upgrades.

  • avatar
    Autoboy

    I currently own a 2008 SAAB 9-5. Except for my 1991 Toyota Cressida, this is the most reliable car I’ve ever owned. Also had a 1985 900 Turbo, black over tan leather. Never gave me a bit of trouble. That replaced a 1982 Volvo GLT Turbowagen, silver over blue velour. Still on the road today as a chicken delivery vehicle in Manhattan.

    I agree about newer Volvo’s electrical issues. That’s why I bought my 9-5 over a Volvo S80 or V Wagon.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Mike-NB2: This is a beautiful car. Because it isn’t a truck (CUV, SUV, etc) it won’t sell well in North...
  • Jo Borrás: I feel like “yes”.
  • kcflyer: Seems like a lot of car for 19 grand. Congrats twotone.
  • VWGolfGuy: Ugly rear end. Vehicle style will not age well.
  • EBFlex: Hopefully FaceBook and Twitter follow suit.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber