Junkyard Find: 1987 Saab 900S

Murilee Martin
by Murilee Martin

About five years ago, the Saab 900 was a relatively common sight in American self-service wrecking yards, but now examples of this Saab 99 descendant are getting rare.

Here’s a non-turbo 900S that I spotted not long ago in a Denver yard.

Almost 200,000 miles, but this Swedish steel will go to The Crusher just 1,390 miles short of that milestone. A weekend road trip from Denver to Des Moines and back would have done the trick.

The interior has some sun-bleaching, but looks good for a 28-year-old car.

The naturally aspirated 16-valve four-cylinder engine in this car made 125 horsepower, which was pretty good for an engine based on the Triumph Slant-4, of TR7 fame.

Of course, Saab had made many improvements to the engine design since the British Leyland days.

How many of us have been burned by a junkyard radio that needs an unobtainable security code to function?

Not rusty, not smashed. Maybe this car developed some expensive mechanical problem (i.e., any mechanical problem) that wasn’t worth fixing, or maybe it was a trade-in that no dealer could sell.

Here’s the complete Saab lineup for 1987 or 1988, including the Viggen airplane (which went out of production a few years later).

Does Geely make jets? HELL NO.






Murilee Martin
Murilee Martin

Murilee Martin is the pen name of Phil Greden, a writer who has lived in Minnesota, California, Georgia and (now) Colorado. He has toiled at copywriting, technical writing, junkmail writing, fiction writing and now automotive writing. He has owned many terrible vehicles and some good ones. He spends a great deal of time in self-service junkyards. These days, he writes for publications including Autoweek, Autoblog, Hagerty, The Truth About Cars and Capital One.

More by Murilee Martin

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 69 comments
  • Kmars2009 Kmars2009 on Nov 24, 2015

    SAAB began it's slow decline once GM took over in the 90's. Switching everything to GM platforms and parts resulted in simply a restyled Malibu...with equal poor GM quality. Then when times got tough, GM killed them off. Probably a good thing. Who wanted to pay a premium price for a redone Malibu? Certainly not a premium car shopper!

    • See 1 previous
    • Dave M. Dave M. on Nov 27, 2015

      @krhodes1 Great analysis and very true - much to my dismay, GM extended Saab's life for at least 10 years. You're right though - in all their internal troubles GM did starve Saab of new product...until it was too late. I love my '04 9-3 Aero convertible, but no way would I count on it as a daily driver. Parts and repairs are expensive with limited availability of parts and knowledgeable mechanics, but no worse than a typical European car. Here's a great read.... http://www.steadysaabin.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Who-killed-Saab-Automobile.pdf

  • Kmars2009 Kmars2009 on Nov 29, 2015

    I would rather SAAB die with some dignity, than part of the GM junkpile. They almost killed Suzuki too, fortunately, after GM ruined their reputation and sales here...they chose to back out. Saving their lives. Anyway...RIP SAAB!

  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I'd rather they have the old sweep gauges, the hhuuggee left to right speedometer from the 40's and 50's where the needle went from lefty to right like in my 1969 Nova
  • Buickman I like it!
  • JMII Hyundai Santa Cruz, which doesn't do "truck" things as well as the Maverick does.How so? I see this repeated often with no reference to exactly what it does better.As a Santa Cruz owner the only things the Mav does better is price on lower trims and fuel economy with the hybrid. The Mav's bed is a bit bigger but only when the SC has the roll-top bed cover, without this they are the same size. The Mav has an off road package and a towing package the SC lacks but these are just some parts differences. And even with the tow package the Hyundai is rated to tow 1,000lbs more then the Ford. The SC now has XRT trim that beefs up the looks if your into the off-roader vibe. As both vehicles are soft-roaders neither are rock crawling just because of some extra bits Ford tacked on.I'm still loving my SC (at 9k in mileage). I don't see any advantages to the Ford when you are looking at the medium to top end trims of both vehicles. If you want to save money and gas then the Ford becomes the right choice. You will get a cheaper interior but many are fine with this, especially if don't like the all touch controls on the SC. However this has been changed in the '25 models in which buttons and knobs have returned.
  • Analoggrotto I'd feel proper silly staring at an LCD pretending to be real gauges.
  • Gray gm should hang their wimpy logo on a strip mall next to Saul Goodman's office.
Next