Saab 9-3 2.0T vs. 2.8T - Which is Better?

[@AutoAutopsy]

Which do you like more or prefer? Make sure to vote in the poll above!

[@TheRealSliX]

2.0 just because its my daily but i have mine running at 310 to the wheel an my engines holding up well now i cant say the same for my tranny but ill get it fixed till that motar blows

[@amelat373]

Greetings from Finland. First of all thank you for this great channel. It’s a pleasure to follow your videos. Here is my views to this comparison. I use to have 9-5 with with E235 Aero engine and Biopower modification. It was great car and very flexible engine. My 9-5 had a lot of miles behind and in Finnish winter conditions I was missing “better traction” so I searched 9-3 XWD. I admit that I had dilemma whether to have B284 or B207R. I was actually almost purchasing TurboX and/or V6 Aero XWD but finally I selected 2.0T XWD. The price difference was not so significant but 2.0 was more reasonable because I use this car for daily drive and also fuel cost have some importance too. Second reason is that B207 is is very “E85 friendly engine”. Finland have rather wide distribution network of E85 fuel (locally ethanol is produced from industial waste, recycled biofuel). Due lower CO2 taxation E85 is about 30-35% cheaper per litre than gasoline and have minimum 104 octanes. Engine burns some 20% more ethanol but it’s still good option. High octane level is naturally very very attracting for Saab Turbo owner ;) Comparison between e85 consumption and gasoline is not straightforward due software can be optimizied to utilize ethanols higher octanes, advanced spark timing, smaller engine temperature and lower tendency for engine knocking. With E85 oils have to be changed a bit more often but I ‘m not “afraid of ethanol” after using it 8 years without problems for every Saab I have got. So I ended to to compromise solution between power and some economical aspects: ym 2009 Saab 9-3 2.0T XWD AT6 B207R. Car is modied to Biopower (with added ethanol sensor), larger E85 compatible Bosch E14 injectors, 3” downpipe, modified OEM Turbo (upgraded) and modified software. I have otherwise stock engine and AT6 transmission so power is “limited to” 300hp/450nm. With E85 optimized software (flexfuel) maximum torques is available with quite wide range of rpm i.e. this E85 B207 setup is kind of closer to B284 than with “gasoline only setup”. Not the fastest car on the road but it actually accelerates very smoothly. Also on ice ;) Aero V6 and TurboX were also very interesting options because B284 has very nice low rpm torque (like a diesel) and naturally higher maximum absolute capacity for tuning. But actually B207R gets higher comparative benefit when tuned. For B207R it’s rather easy to increase close to 50% power and torque. Naturally also fuel consumption goes up but not so much. When tuning is made for gasoline setup 300hp and (450nm AT transmission/500nm manual) is kind of maximum without making internal mechanical changes to motor (like forged pistons etc.). Saab specialist guided me also that MAF and MAP sensors and air intake have to be changed/modified after 300 hp. I have been told also that its quite safe to go up to 340hp with stock engine with E85 (even with B207E) but for AT transmission its more risky to increase torque much higher than 450 nm. If someone wants to really modify B207, it is naturally possible to go up to 400+ hp (with manual or enforced automatic trans) but then quite many engine elements are replaced . These GM engines are not like Saab 9000 engine which was probably planned to tolerate 500 hp from the very beginning :) I have spoken with some (Stage1) TurboX owner and fuel consumption of B284 is roughly same with 98 octane gasoline than with tuned B207R XWD AT with E85/ethanol (both engines have around 300 hp). Ethanol has lower energy density so practically this means that real fuel consumption of B284 are approximately 20% higher compared to B207 in mixed drive conditions. Here some other notes: - Besided YM 2003, SAI pipe is also in B207 engines ym 2009-2011 (unfortunately) - B284 engine is somewhat heavier so in slippery conditions lighter B207 may have some benefit with handling. - B207R with dual exhaust (with 3” downpipe+ original cat back) sounds clearly more rough and has lower tone of voice than single exhaust. But I have to admit that it’s still not so good than V6 and especially TurboX exhaust sound :) - Very latest 9-3 (ym 2012) has different engine: It is A20NFT with direct injection (not Port Fuel Injection). - Also B284 is possible to modify to E85 but not so easility to flexfuel (to use gasoline and or ethanol freely). At least in Sweden BSR Växjö has offered B284 stage 3 E85 with 384hp and 520nm. This is naturally not the real upper limit for the power, it’s just safe mode tuning :)

[@rikiorikio9368]

I’ve had both 4 and 6 cyl Saabs and i’ve always found the sound of the 4cyl quite diesel-like, very clonky, I really don’t like its sound, but the 6 cyl, even the stock aero with the stock exhaust has a beautifull V6 sound

[@normt5463]

@@TheRealSliX just a ecu tune on a 2.0T with VVT and DI you can get about 330-340 hp and 380 lb-ft of torque. It is a very robust engine as long as you run Dexos1Gen2 oil for keeping carbon build up contained.

[@TheRealSliX]

@@normt5463 i plan on putting methonal into it eventually im coming for auto autopsy. an the scary part about is im not jokin. i wanna race every one who thinks the 9-3 is slow cause 310 hp to my wheel seems small but like i said in the past vids i sleepwalk modified 5.0s and most other muscle cars. i had a close call w an srt. idk who won that race it was to neck an neck the whole time. but i do know this i have one of the fastest 9-3s rn maybe someone has a faster one but mines definitely in the top ten of fastest in the usa. an i can only prove it one way and probably will show it mid next year at a saab meet. I live far away rn and have work but i plan on coming to a meet next year.

[@chrisharrison5162]

I have a 2008 saab 93 2.0T I get 33 mpg and never had a problem except the dreaded fuel pump issue but I had it replaced and it's been a dream. Fast and very efficent. Can't believe they discontinued the saab brand

[@Driftinnick_Aquatics]

Super sad they discontinued it gm did all they could to shut it down Also I have a 06 2.0T wagon 06-09 gm used cheaper materials for the engine internals and bends valves so watch that issue I replaced mine with a 03 engine when my valves went

[@AC-dk3ve]

I have two 2.0Ts and one 2.8T. Enjoy 2.8T's exhaust notes a lot. Best music while driving. But 2.0T is fairly good enough for highway passing/over-speeding and great fuel economy for daily use. So I keep both. :D

[@AutoAutopsy]

same here! lol

[@andrewgannon4530]

As someone who owns both I can easily say the 4 banger wins for me. The v6 is such a pain to work on, and I’m starting to forget how many expansion tanks I’ve gone through. The placement of the turbo in the v6 is sooo annoying. “let’s heat up all of the terrible GM era plastics and hoses until they all crack!” Im pretty sure that was the thinking when the shoehorned that v6 into that space. The 2.8 IMO belongs in caddies. Currently looking for a clean 2.3 95 combi with a manual, once I find that the ‘07 aero is a goner for sure. (Also the way boost comes on in the v6 is boring cause twinscroll)

[@chinchy111]

206,000 miles on the 2.8 and nothing overheats on mine. I drive 5 hours a day for work

[@AutoAutopsy]

haha, less lag, but more torque.

[@goldeneagle99]

​@@chinchy111greenland? 😂

[@MyJarrus]

simple none of those the 2.3 turbo engine in the 9000 and 9-5 are the best stock and modified

[@houseking9211]

Yes, this guy knows what's good

[@ereseminole]

I have 2.0 ..and 2.3 older, 2.3 is much stronger than newwer 2.0

[@tim1polman]

My favorites are still the b204 and b234's. Brilliant engines

[@BallisticStigmata]

When my 2.0 goes, I'll drop the 2.3 in it if I can still find one.

[@normt5463]

@@ereseminole there are a couple Twin turbo Ecotec 2.0T with 700+ horsepower.

[@browserrr1]

Compared to the competition it had to take on the V6 was already a dog when it was introduced. Hp per litre was not spectacularly high, fuel consumption was. If I remember well Top Gear rated the driving capabillities with the X-drive system very high, second only to BMW. But back to the engine, I prefer the 4 cylinder, which was more on par with comparable engines from the competition. And of course the best Saab engine ever is the B234. No other Saab engine managed up to 450-500 Bhp on stock internals. If only GM had allowed Saab to use the 4wd system they had developed for the 9000. I am quite sure they would have swept the floor with Audi and the world would be a different place today.

[@jamiesmith6838]

Saab was always years ahead of what everyone else was doing. I didn't know the WXD was, well a dog? I was aware it was under powered for what it was. But, that was applied to the 9000 series as well. The introduction of the 9-5, which I brought bought renewed life to the brand. I fell in love with the original 900T black on black with the Louvre! SMH Saab made black quite desirable when nobody did! The last 9-5, I thought was a jewel, even being a GM based product. GM ruined them.

[@browserrr1]

@@jamiesmith6838 XWD was brilliant but it came at least ten years too late. When the engines came in the 200+ hp class it became difficult to get the power on the road for off the line acceleration. I dare say that Saab's faith was sealed when GM refused to bring an AWD 9000 on the market. Then things only got worse when the OG 9-5 didn't get it either.

[@normt5463]

@@browserrr1 the Opel based Regal Sportback 2.0T with torque vectoring AWD can send 100% to a single wheel. The Active Torque Vectoring was not offered on the Haldex system.

[@extremeskierx528]

GMs marketing of Saab was terrible, I think they feared it being too much of a competitor with their own top brands, but in the end they got a lot of patents from Saab the bastards. I can't even remember a TV add for Saab from 90's to the end in 2011. My first was a 1974 99LE then after over 30 years of grief in having American cars I finally found Saab again a 2006 93 SC 2.0T, I see a lot of Saab owners around.

[@normt5463]

@@extremeskierx528 GM just gave Saab support for marketing and to maintain old, outdated tech. Saab shot itself in the foot and missed the SUV craze when Audi was last to join.

[@saabross3171]

I'm forever a fan of the 2.3 R motors but, I will say, the first time I drove a 2.8 Aero it knocked my socks off. Any Saab engine will put a smile on your face, but that 2.8 is most certainly a special beast

[@AutoAutopsy]

Agreed!!

[@saabross3171]

@@AutoAutopsy Sub for a sub?

[@vladimirbubnovich6349]

We love Saab too!!! Hello from Belarus! I have Saab 9-5 aero 2.3t

[@AutoAutopsy]

:)

[@ArtyI]

I used to have one of those! Unfortunately totalled it a month back in icy conditions.

[@nophuxgarage4145]

As someone in the market for a 9-3, I greatly appreciate the insight from an owner of both!!!

[@AutoAutopsy]

glad you found it helpful :)

[@destchaos9732]

I used to own a 2005 SS 2.0T, but recently I bought a 2006 SC 2.8T V6. Both were/are stage 1 tuned with upgraded exhausts. While the 2.0 was kind of fast, the 2.8 V6 is brutal. I love it.

[@declan2775]

Thank you for making this - I've been eyeing both a V6 and 2.0 aero, and you definitely helped narrowing it down to the 2.0 - pretty much all I need for a fun daily

[@AutoAutopsy]

thanks :)

[@goldeneagle99]

E.c.u common issue on the 2.0l Hard to find them amywhere !

[@maikelnait4495]

2.8 every time. Have one and absolutely love it. Drive it on weekends and fix everything myself.

[@AutoAutopsy]

:)

[@srowell3]

225k miles on my 2006 2.8 and only had to replace the expansion tank once because the float valve stopped working not because it cracked! It's been tuned for over 100k of those miles too! Apart on tyres and servicing it's had rear suspension arms, drop links, front springs and the fuel evap valve on 7 years. It's been amazing.

[@AutoAutopsy]

Awesome :)

[@camdvrk0]

Brew City Boost stage 2 tune got me 34mpg in my arc 6spd

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice

[@adrianleon1731]

I literally googled for a video with this question last night. Lmao Thanks for the upload

[@AutoAutopsy]

Lol :)

[@bjrnsandholdt4775]

the 2,0 4 cylinder are 100 time better then the v6 i had them both and the v6 engine sucks it's a trash motor to compair with the 2,0 engine

[@Crazy5711]

Haven't had the pleasure of driving the 2.8 so I can't really say which I prefer. But I loved my 2006 2.0T, and when I sold it, it had 280k miles on it. I recently picked up a 2003 Vector with 213k and so far I like it.

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice

[@ShiveringSwe]

I've owned the 2,0T and 2,8T. Atm I've a 2,8T, but I'm thinking about downsizing to a 2,0T (B207R). Mainly because of fuel economy, but also because the 2,0 is easier to do work on. It's more videos and guides on that motor. Also I don't feel the 2,8T stock 250 hp, being that much faster than the 2,0T 209 hp. I'd also love when the turbo kicks in on the 2,0. It's nothing like the 2,8 that's much smoother and not the same feeling. Feels more like a diesel engine with all low rpm torque.

[@La-yt1wr]

What is your fuel economy because my 2011 9-5 Aero most times beats my 2015 Kia Optima SXL turbo they both are amazing on long trips for fuel economy

[@ShiveringSwe]

​@@La-yt1wr For long drives when not pushing it to much, it's really good. Like 0,75 liters/10 kilometers. That should be like 31 miles per gallon. However when I drive in citys and in more heavy trafic it goes up to like 1,3 liters/10 kilometers. That should be 18 miles per gallon. Here in sweden the gasoline is expensive, so it makes a big difference compared to the 2.0

[@La-yt1wr]

ShiveringSwe Ah ok 👌

[@houseking9211]

If you have a 2.8T 9-5 aero it's actually slower than the 02 9-5 aero with the holy grail of engines, the 2.3T

[@normt5463]

The Ecotec 2.0T from 2006 has direct injection and VVT. With a ECU tune, down pipe, and intake on 2.8T and 2.0T, the 2.0T will carry torque longer into the rpms.

[@smoothflying]

I own a 2005 9-3 2.0 aero manual. I have to say I´m very happy with it as my first car. No problem servicing it when living 1 hour from the factory ;)

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice!

[@luigicornelio7510]

If I recall correctly, the turbo x has a lighter flywheel compared to other Aero V6s, which probably contributes to a rougher drive. Out of all the cars I've driven, I hardly come across an engine that is as smooth as the B284. It may also be due to the 60 degree angle of the V, which is better for vibration than a 90 deg. The B207 might be the more logical choice, but the V6 certainly drives more like a premium luxury car, and sounds way better.

[@AutoAutopsy]

Agree!

[@chesterchowskonnerud3186]

This! I come from driving BMW M57, N57, and N54’s. Had my 9-3 NG SC for about 2 months now, overall really Impressed by the chassis in a Saab. But also like you mention, the b284 really does feel if not more, but atleast as smooth and agile as a Bm straight-six. Too bad FWD, or AWD was the option..

[@excitingstuff420]

The 2.0 has the aftermarket support of the Cobalt SS/ LSj motors. If you are a hardcore modder the 2.0 has far more support. The 2.0 is much easier to upgrade to bigger Turbo's.

[@AutoAutopsy]

both aren't terribly difficult; plenty of great 2.8 aftermarket options that are direct/near direct fits

[@excitingstuff420]

@@AutoAutopsy can you buy an aftermarket exhaust manifold for the V6?

[@jamiesmith6838]

My vote unquestionably goes to the 2.8T WXD beautifully done. I would be quite happy with it being stock. But a simple reprogram to 300+ hp could easily be welcomed.

[@houseking9211]

2.3

[@AutoAutopsy]

Yep!

[@milosrog]

B207R has "high boost" turbo which takes more time to spool and because of that at low rpm it does not feel fast. The B207L feels "torquier" in everyday driving because of the smaller (medium pressure) turbo. What's more, B207R turbo gives the same pressure as the one on the most powerful V6, and since it achieves similar power with smaller displacement and two cylinders less, it is normal not to have high low-end torque. But with a tune B207R gets a lot of low-end torque. It is significant to mention that B207 is also much, much easier to work on than V6. Just compare simple work as spark plugs replacement...

[@meme-yc4ks]

This man knows his B207's.

[@larsjrgensen5975]

I have a rare (apparently) B207 Aero Biopower but with the small turbo 175/200hp with Hirsch 200/220. The spool up is super quick, but it looses boost at more then 5000 rpm. It feels very torque low down compared to the engine size yes.

[@milosrog]

@@larsjrgensen5975 yes it is the smallest turbo available in b207 and with a tune it is quite powerful at low end... B207R - with high boost turbo, stock, doesn't have that much low end torque, but on the other hand, it doesn't "die" at high RPM. O ne good example is the b207 (stock 150hp) with hirsch tune at 196hp has much better acceleration times than the powerful stock B207R (210hp)

[@meme-yc4ks]

@@larsjrgensen5975 You lose boost at after 4500rpm because you are at capacity of that turbo. It dont have any 'breathing room' left.. its spooled out. LArger turbo would give you less low end spool up, but at highway speed you can punch it doing 75 and rip up to over 100 in no time.

[@AutoAutopsy]

Great points, ShoX. I completely forgot to mention maintenance. 2.0 is definitely easier to work on!

[@markonikitovic6530]

Saab for life 💪

[@AutoAutopsy]

[@jimjones5236]

@@AutoAutopsy MY MODDED/TUNED 2000 B205R WILL RIP THE SKIN OFF YOUR V6'S NUT SACK

[@normt5463]

Look at a Opel/ Regal Tourx 2.0T with torque vectoring AWD to fulfill that fantasy today.

[@Buffalobulltofta]

Both great, and very different. B207 is probably the most reliable, with the B284 having chain issues. However regarding ability to be tuned, pretty much all the guys doing hardcore race tuning of NG9-3's over here in Sweden (the large tuning companies, independent racers etc.) use B207's.

[@tony_5156]

Damn that’s good to know I’ve always been told that the T5 engines where somehow better

[@pederfallbom]

​@@tony_5156 In stock form the T5 engines was definetely better but the B207 is great

[@princecharlie3217]

I have the 2.0 vector convertible auto it has a enough power for,I love the kickdown power it has but would consider going for a v6 as it sounds great

[@AutoAutopsy]

Thanks for sharing!

[@petergriffin-kr1wp]

I have 234 000 miles on my 2007 B207 Wagon, Still works great!

[@AutoAutopsy]

awesome

[@wyattfamily8997]

Worth noting that the V6 motor in these was manufactured in Australia for SAAB.

[@tomjonese8852]

B204 B234 , i haven't touched anything over 1999 yet.

[@AutoAutopsy]

👊🏼👍🏼

[@darrencrook7954]

I have the 2.8 v6 sports wagon and it’s done 220000 miles with no problems whatsoever. Excellent car had it for 11 years 👍🏻

[@AutoAutopsy]

Awesome!

[@goldeneagle99]

Great to know!

[@ernstig01]

Here in The Netherlands a 2008 9-3 Estate B207 300HP 400Nm factory ordered. Grey import by ANA Trollhättan. Kicks all 9-3 TurboX. In tradition a real Porsche killer. :-) In my opinion the best engine. More flexible and versatile than the Holden 2.8 B284.

[@AutoAutopsy]

Put a simple stage 1 or 0 on that TX and it'll spank the 2.0, lol

[@atx-cvpi_99]

The 2.8 is known for timing chain issues because it’s related to the 3.6 V6 that the Car Wizard said don’t buy.

[@La-yt1wr]

That 2.0 turbo is a garden variety engine from GM but that 2.8 is an amazing engine it sounds amazing in the quieter Saab variants like my 9-5 Aero and 9-4x but the TurboX is nice as well it’s sad that GM no longer makes that powertrain and at one point I was thinking about getting the Chevy Blazer RS and Buick Regal GS those two would’ve been amazing with that engine

[@AutoAutopsy]

yeah! thanks for sharing

[@AlbanianGoose]

That 2.0 has been a saab engine since 1974. Obviously its different but it based off of a saab engine

[@dimmacommunication]

The best engine is the 1.9 tid when mapped. 180-190hp and torquey (matter of fact you may limit torque to preserve gearbox ). it gets 40mpg costantly

[@pillrex4402]

B234R all the way

[@AutoAutopsy]

nah

[@pillrex4402]

Auto Autopsy why?

[@AutoAutopsy]

2.8 is better in my opinion

[@boostedsaab2757]

Auto Autopsy whhhaaaaaattttt

[@alexstromberg7696]

@@boostedsaab2757 he is super fanboy of the 2.8t. the b234/5 is a better engine.

[@peterk4134]

2.0T is good enough to nip thru traffic . My 2008 sedan has been worry-free for 2.5 years since I got it from auction. Keeping up with the oil change . I like it quiet. For exhaust ‘noise’, I drive my Audi TT mark 1 - unmodified..

[@edgarzuniga8504]

I have a 2.0T b207r, with 2.5 inch full exhaust catback system welded/ cold air custom air intake, Forge motorsport BPV, do88 intercooler big pack kit, pushen 240hp, it's perty fast able to beat 350z, charger 3.6l, lexus IS300, mustang 4.6l and infinity g35 so far. Not bad for a 2.0

[@AutoAutopsy]

you should definitely make more than 240 with all of those mods. Get a better tune!

[@msanseverino78]

2.3 in the aero needs more maintenance. I had both . The 2.3 eats coils it’s to hot and personally I had better time with the 2.0. My 2.0 last up to 235k the 2.3 I dumped it at 145k was just casting me to much to fix and was not even close to reliable as my 2.0.

[@AutoAutopsy]

2.3 is in the 9-5/OG 9-3! Not NG 9-3

[@DontEatTheAnimals]

I have three Saab 9.5 Aero's. I have often wondered why the 9.3's didn't come with the 2.3 motor. The High Output Turbo 234R motor pumps out ... they say, 255 HP but I am sure they underestimate that, as my daily driver at least, out performs my friend's Audi 4.2 V8. I have thought about getting something newer, but to match the performance, comfort and safety I would need to spend $30k plus. Did I mention the comfort ? Try sitting in a Nissan or Toyota for a bit and then get into a Saab.

[@a88888888a]

Thanks for the video. I'm thinking of buying my cousins 2007 93 aero 2.8t with 33k miles. I just have to make space. I already have 7 cars all under 40k miles 😂

[@peterk4134]

Recently I opted for regular fuel and have not noticed any power loss for daily commuting.

[@williamnewmann670]

both engine suck, because they are Opel Engine, only the 2.3T is from Saab and its the best to work on.

[@Krappyappy]

you're all like 'i'm happy with 24 mpg on the 2.0T' and i'm here getting 19 combined. is my foot that heavy??

[@handon11]

Krappyappy hmm.. I get 24 combined with a lead foot. If I drive conservatively I get around 27.

[@TheAndrey222]

Put 93 oct fule in the whip. Trust me it will bump it up to 24 mpg or better yet 27 mpg.

[@AutoAutopsy]

^

[@caractacusbrittania7442]

Try not to put 93 octane in a remapped car. .....forget about saving a couple of bits of change Fill it with 99 Ron vpower and enjoy the smoother engine and the better performance. Even if it's not remapped The higher the octane the smoother the engine will run.

[@SkootrH]

Yeah, I'm right there with you Krappyappy. I drive my bone stock '07 9-3, 2.0T (only has 55K total miles) daily and I get about 20mpg combined. Mostly freeway miles and I use 91 octane gas, driving 75-80mph. Maybe my foot is too heavy?

[@rmt5820]

Hi where located automatic Transmission module or TCm on 2.8t on B207 is exactly next to battery!

[@brutus85vette]

Looking for a mechanic in SoFlorida, FTL. I really love my 9-3 Aero 2.8T conv, Would hate to sell it!

[@AutoAutopsy]

Join some saab facebook groups and seek help there

[@casketman14]

If you lived in Orlando I would’ve helped

[@herbweichmann803]

I had an 09 V6 AWD 6 speed with stage 0 from Vermont tuning. Thing was quick! Wish I hadn't got rid of it.

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice! Should have kept it :(

[@electronicadam7616]

Good and informative! I know nothing about these engines... Driving a 1999 SAAB 9-5 B235 :)

[@AutoAutopsy]

Haha, nice :)

[@saabross3171]

Yeaaa baby, that's what I'm talking about! The "og" OG9-5 😍

[@multinjok]

B235R thats it... The B284 is a nice cruiser and smooth engine for highway drive... but it lacks the punch and fuel economy is average at best.

[@AutoAutopsy]

B284 has more punch than the B235, that's for sure!

[@Mister0707]

Can you work properly on the 2.8? Looks like you don't have a lot of space in that engine bay.

[@vazza7504]

Great video buddy. Two lovely saab's you have there. To me the four pot sounds the best, V6 is a beast though. Thanks for upload. :-) vinny.

[@AutoAutopsy]

Thanks for voting

[@drekethearguy6654]

You can send the Saab 2.0 to zzp since it’s the same as the cobalt ss engine

[@alternator6193]

Hi, in Poland b207 engines reach 320-355 horsepower. many such cars drive here with such power.

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice!

[@alternator6193]

@@AutoAutopsy kzbin.info/www/bejne/aX-vqGWGbdacra8 Look at this car. B207r with forged engine and big Turbo = almost 500 horse power, , vmax from GPS is over 300 km/h

[@tarasvstarheim7100]

Greetings from Sweden, got one question for you pal, what wheels do you have on your V6? It looks amazing!

[@AutoAutopsy]

variant xenon, thanks!

[@MarkIrwin02]

Im probably going to be buying a 08 9-3 tuesday and for myself only looking at maybe a tune for bit more power and maybe a slightly louder exhaust as want to keep as close to stock as possible for longevity.

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice

[@chrisharrison5162]

I have an 08 and I love it I got it at only 82,000 miles I adore this car

[@Dpunks]

top recommended upgrades for a 2006 9-3 aero convertible v6. I just did front suspension since original was pretty beat. going to do rear suspension, want to upgrade breaks and then look into other after market upgrades. Your pointers would be appreciated.

[@AutoAutopsy]

I have a video discussing top mods to do here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mJu5aGudrbWigdk

[@geylanmulla817]

Where I can run up my 2008 Saab aero 2.8 turbo is anybody know

[@Sid3300]

2.0T is definitely a better all rounder imo, as much as the V6 is cool.

[@austin8607]

We've owned 9 2.0 9-3s, 13 2.8 (11 9-3s, 2 NG 9-5s) and 1 2.3 9-5. The 2.3 is pretty new to us so I can't speak on that engine. In our experience, the 2.8 engine has been the most reliable. We've had one 2.8 fail at 151k miles. The JZW tune corrupted making the car lean out. Cracked two of the piston heads. Other than that, we had an 06 9-3 Aero running great at 292k miles. We've had a 2.0 shoot a rod through the block. Both engines are great, I just prefer the 2.8. The 2.0 gets great fuel economy. The one low compression turbo 2.0 we had got 35mpg, the high compression turbos got about 33mpg. Our FWD 2.8s get around 29-31mpg and the XWD 9-5s get 28-30 mpg (all highway mpg) In the city the 2.0 is far superior. 24mpg roughly city, our 2.8s get like 15-16mpg city 🤣

[@AutoAutopsy]

haha, thanks for sharing!!

[@rsobrevinas]

I h ave the 2.8T and it puts a smile on me everytime, very powerful, supersmooth, and very fast. And the sound is heaven, like the old sonorous inline 6 baritone BMWs. Wonderful car that I still use. SAAP convertible Aero with the 2.8T.

[@AutoAutopsy]

👊🏼👍🏼

[@kenruffner1124]

I have a 2005 93 Arc Vert about to turn 200K miles, avg. 26-27 mpg combined. I've had the car 11 yrs. bought it with 24K on the odometer. It's been the best car I've ever owned, very few problems, none major. Right now I'm struggling to find a small oil leak, replaced the valve cover gasket twice but apparently that's not where it's coming from. The search continues.

[@AutoAutopsy]

Good luck with the fix!

[@xNeuker]

I have the 2.8 in my OPC Insignia and that engine is... smooth and sophisticated power. Would love to get some tips on where the hell do you get aftermarket parts for it. I live in Cz on border with Ger but finding something other than on eBuy is not easy.

[@AutoAutopsy]

This video might help you a bit, as there’s some parts sharing between the two brands when it comes to that platform: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mJu5aGudrbWigdksi=VvEXpTums1KwCQX0

[@PierreColombo900]

To me, a true saab has a turbo 4 cyl, but hey, wouldn't spit on a V6 !

[@AutoAutopsy]

;)

[@sonofrobert]

Agreed and I love the 1.8 turbo tsi in my VW Golf Sportwagen. Performance, utility and economy of 4 cylinder Saabs and not the crappy GM parts bin interior..lol :)

[@JonathanJames18]

The best quarter mile times are from a 2.0 and if your an extremist it is in my opinion the better option. The potential is endless, it is the lighter car comparing weight, and you can rebuild your engine to the new age 2.3 by adding. 5 per piston or full swap to the old school 2.3. Also if you want AWD or "XWD" That option is on the table as well. But like said before this is for extremist. People who are willingly ready to open up a full project. For me I am eventually going to rebuild my 207r and switch to flex fuel. Maybe a 20t upgrade down the line. As of now I run do88 intercooler, krona full turbo back exhaust, and do88 intake on stage 3 tune. The tune is brew city boost because maptun is ridiculous on pricing. (the az performance body kit is currently killing me in the pocket XD) Anyway I daily my man on low boost just to keep the pressure down on my guy. (160000 miles at the moment) I'll dyno when I am completely done with my project and we'll see! 👊

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice! Sounds like fun

[@roncolangelo3264]

i really apprecaite your love for a saab!! I have owned saab for over 25 years! on my 4th

[@AutoAutopsy]

thanks for your support :)

[@FlyLikeRedBull]

100$ tune on my 2.0 little t and it's making 300hp and 300lb lol cant beat that for a $3k car

[@AutoAutopsy]

Without any mods? I hate to say it, but that’s a little hard to believe

[@FlyLikeRedBull]

@@AutoAutopsy cold air and an 20 dollar ghetto exhaust. Brew city boost stage three tune spins tires in 3rd when its wet out XD other cars a 06 g35 and she barely gets driven because cho cho noises lmao

[@69FOSTER]

Many years ago, I test drove a 2.0T, then a 2.8 6 cyl. Maybe I got the wrong impression, but I found the 2.0T had more low end torque and punch from a starting position. I was disappointed in the 2.8 6 cyl.

[@AutoAutopsy]

Interesting, because the 2.8 is really what has the great low end torque haha 😅

[@gonzalodequesada1981]

I would argue that the 2,3 turbo was the best engine

[@evanhutchings1032]

B234 > B235 > B284 > whatever the engine code for a 2.0t is

[@AutoAutopsy]

Evan! NO!

[@evanhutchings1032]

Auto Autopsy hehehehehe

[@WillRobinsonDanger]

B207

[@zoran487]

I think that v6 is from opel.Real Saab's engine are 4 cyl,turbo petrol 🇸🇪🇸🇪🇸🇪

[@alexstromberg7696]

the v6 is GM's "high feature v6", the 4 cyl is also from GM. the last saab engine was the B235 in the OG-95

[@zoran487]

@@alexstromberg7696 Yes,i know...V6 engine ist great,i drive in vectra c...I have b207 engine in my Saab 9-3 my03 and next Saab is 9-3 sport kombi V6 😉

[@La-yt1wr]

The 2.8 has more personality than the 3.0 and 3.6 but I will say if you drive the new Chevy Blazer with the V6 it sounds great

[@bobdavid343]

The B207R and the V6 2.8T are GM engines

[@granttraxler6129]

The b205 and b235 are the last of the all Saab engines in the US if you do lots of reading about it

[@RealAxe8ion]

Exactly the vid I needed. Have the 2.0 but entertaining the idea of the v6. Hahaha verbage 😂 great vid.

[@AutoAutopsy]

glad it helped!

[@alexpn_]

I've had 3 2.0t Aeros now and still fancy a 2.8, however I'm starting to wonder whether the fuel cost, insurance costs and extra tax on it makes it worth it, front wheel drive cars, and the Saab chassis in general have pretty low limits when it comes to putting your foot down. They are really just cruiser cars.

[@AutoAutopsy]

The 2.8’s are pretty capable without much work.

[@liamsmith1565]

i have a 2007 cobalt ss 2.0 s/c same engine lol

[@jamesford9811]

O3 2.0 turbo Saab arc convertible❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

[@bawsome9754]

Below is a copy and paste of an add of a car I’m looking at. Price is 3,200 obo. I know 200,000 miles is very high, miles but with the maintenance that has been done do you think it has some life left in it? Is it worth it. I should mention I’ve done some Facebook stalking and he is a mechanic and does have receipts for the parts…of course not the work since he did himself. This would be my work car and maybe short road trips say 300-400 miles. When I don’t want to drive my truck. I used to own a 9-5 and have always wanted another Saab. Any help would be appreciated it appears you know Saabs well! Lol TIA I have for sale a 2005 Saab 9-3 Aero. It has the 2.0L Turbo 4-cylinder engine, with Auto transmission with manual shift override & 197k miles. Trac. control, front wheel drive, power windows and locks, power moonroof, heated leather seats, AM/FM CD player. Rear defrost. Back seats fold down. Have original owners book. The driver’s seat bottom has some rips in it, is why there’s seat covers. The buttons on the dash controls are worn off. Tires decent. Paint is almost flawless. All windows are good. Hot heat & cold AC. About 35+ mpg highway. Runs great!! I drove it to work and back for 2 years. I replaced the turbo cartridge, turbo coolant hose, thermostat, water pump, balance & timing chains w/ tensioners, rebuilt transmission valve body w/ new harness and solenoids, trans cooler lines, oil cooler lines, new battery, new headlights, new temp sensor. New windshield washer hoses & jets. New sway bar links IT NEEDS FRONT STRUTS. Would be a great school or work car!! CLEAN TITLE IN HAND!! Read Less

[@AutoAutopsy]

That sounds like a 2k car to me

[@ThomasPatrickHolden]

Great video -- having a lot of issues with AAA in Austin getting support on an '06 2.0T convertible. Any advice here? It's definitely OK, got it from the SAAB convention a few years ago, but there just isn't a lot of support here

[@AutoAutopsy]

There's a pretty large Texas Saab Facebook group. I would recommend joining that and seeking out what local resources are available. they're pretty easy to work on!

[@ThomasPatrickHolden]

@@AutoAutopsy Not so sure about that. Austin seems really slim when it comes to Saab issues. And/or people don't want to deal with them.

[@barrycondon3259]

Pretty much hit the nail on the head. I have a daily driver 2002 9-5 wagon (Linear) w/2.3 and 165k on the clock and a 2006 9-3 Aero wagon (2.8} w/120k. Both manuals and both awesome! However, can't see ruining the 9-3 with daily driving. It wants it's space and is not happy around town. The 9-5 is a bit more refined and helps me remain calm in traffic. (Sort of).

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice!

[@AnnMarieL-c5f]

I just bought a 2008 Saab 2.8 Aero. When I accelerate and at higher speeds it has a slight wobble!? Any idea what causes it???

[@AutoAutopsy]

Sounds like a misfire. Probably bad plugs or coils, but it’s hard to say for sure

[@richarddisman8451]

Vector sounds a bit different

[@heimerblaster976]

Ya great car I have the 2.8 convertible / standard...ya fast ! AND a great low cost fast car.

[@AutoAutopsy]

👍🏼😃

[@EthanolEnthusiast]

B204 better

[@AutoAutopsy]

L O L

[@juanmuller6519]

2.8 v6 aero was fwd and turbo x was 4wd it also came in 1.9tid diesel motor.

[@AutoAutopsy]

XWD* ;)

[@Evocati-Augusti]

im looking to buy a 2007 SAAB 93 4 door ,he has it listed as an Aero...but I dont know how to find out without driving 50 miles..are all the 2007 4 doors have the 2.8lt t?

[@AutoAutopsy]

no. 2006-09 aeros are 2.8's. otherwise, it'll be a 2.0

[@laptopsman]

I HAVE AN 05 SAAB 93 LINEAR WITH 2 ERROR CODES P0033 AND P2257.....I RESET THR COMPUTER THE CAR WORKS PERFECTLY FOR A WEEK ...AFTER THAT, IT BOGS DOWN ON 1ST AND 2ND GEAR BUT NOT ON 3RD AND FORTH.....SO FAR I LIVE ON RESETTING THE COMPUTER EVERY FEW DAYS WHICH MEANS I STILL HAVE THE PROBLEM....PLEASE TELL ME WHAT TO DO OR LOOK FOR TO FIX THE PROBLEM AND THANK YOU......

[@AutoAutopsy]

google should have some thread on those codes. if not, i would ask in saab facebook group!

[@mariuszmaxankazuya3170]

V6 for long distance trips ( burn allmost the same amount of fuel as 2.0T), 2.0T for beating crap of it and daily driving xd

[@AutoAutopsy]

interesting

[@DarksideGT7]

I don't think the 2.0l is a worthy comparison to the 2.8l . The real comparable would be the 2.3l in the Saab 93 Viggen.

[@AutoAutopsy]

yeah but those are different platforms so its a little bit like apples to oranges imo!

[@tommasomoncini]

I love my saab 93 cabrio v6 2.8 second edition 2007

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice!

[@mercm4924]

I actually picked up a 2007 saab 93 2.0t yesterday dor 800 bucks canadian awesome deal!

[@AutoAutopsy]

congrats!

[@mercm4924]

Hey i just have a quick question.. i bought a quick release hub for my momo steering but i am not too sure if the universal hub that i bought will fit

[@Java_NG]

2.0T all day. Mostly because of one thing. One Word, BioPower.

[@La-yt1wr]

Jonathan Andersson I never driven a 4 cylinder Saab but BioPower was Saab’s marketing terms to lure customers thinking that it was very efficient just like Ford’s EcoBoost or FCA’s MulitAir there was literally a report that said that Saab couldn’t afford engineer a hybrid powertrain like its competitors at the time so they used the BioPower name I’m not hating on Saab that was just facts

[@Buffalobulltofta]

@@La-yt1wr what are you on about? What was your facts? It is certainly efficient, and never intended as a competitor for hybrid cars. Cutting tax to 1/3, and lowering mileage cost at about 20-30%, adding 30bhp with only slight modifications to an existing much older platform. My two 9-3's have been driven 120k and 190k on E85 only. I say i drive on gluten, just a load of weat pretty much.

[@Buffalobulltofta]

Oh yeah, 120 and 190k without ANY engine issues.

[@papagambit]

Yo BioPower all the way 😍🔥 but quick question. How much power (HP) do the BioPower Saab engines have?

[@Buffalobulltofta]

@@papagambit switching gas to E85 the B207 175 gets 200, B205 150 gets 180, B235 185 gets 210.

[@adamtaylor910]

Got 1996 900 turbo we bigger cooler and turbo fitted and even the audi boys can't keep up

[@AutoAutopsy]

Haha nice!

[@prorace_type_r]

WTF 91 Octane fuel? Never heard about that lol. Here in Spain we only have 95 and 98

[@AutoAutopsy]

that's the same as our 91. the ratings are different in US/Europe for whatever reason

[@austinralf5150]

My 08 6 speed 9-3 SC gets 35mpg I’m not a lead foot but these are damn good cars on fuel with the 2.0T

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice!!

[@0510wa]

How?? Yours a aero 2.0t and is it stock, hows the service maintenance??

[@therucha]

Well i used to drive the older aero 250 hp and managed 33 mpg so i don't know what you are doing

[@AutoAutopsy]

Literally no one gets that mpg with a V6 so don’t blame me lmfao. I’ll get 23-24 on a good day. If I’m “hypermiling” I’ll get upwards of 29-30.

[@therucha]

@@AutoAutopsy according to the owners manual it says it should be doing 36.75 mpg 🤔 This car had the 2.3l, i4 with the 5 speed manual transmission, and 16" rims Nice video anyway

[@AlaZenH]

B235r for the win

[@JohnThomas-gl4qu]

You should have compared the 255hp Aero V6 and not the 280hp in the Turbo X.

[@AutoAutopsy]

They’re literally the same minus a factory “tune” for more power

[@fooleyfolks0tray9]

i have a 2009 Saab turbo that is stuck in Limp Mode..Do i have a big problem??

[@AutoAutopsy]

you'll need to be more specific; i cant help with that information provided. i would recommend posting about this on a Saab Facebook group and getting whatever codes you have scanned

[@finnsullivan4398]

How do I program “All Systems Go” into my startup display? Tech 2?

[@AutoAutopsy]

It was a feature of the eSID i had installed in the car

[@MattiLatti1]

Currently running 300hp on a B207R with a maptun stage4 biopower tune. The B284R/L is much stronger, but the problem is that the cars with that engine usually cost from 3-4 times more than a car with B207. And of course they come pre equipped with at least 314mm brakes, and a stronger 6-speed manual, which some of the B207R cars lack.

[@AutoAutopsy]

Nice! and yep ;)

[@richsackett3423]

My 2001 Viggen has the B234R 2.3T. Noticeable faster than the 2.0 motor. I've seen way too many broken SAAB V6s to ever want one.

[@AutoAutopsy]

2.8 is a very reliable engine, not sure where you’re looking!

[@richsackett3423]

@@AutoAutopsy Wrecking yards. That's where cars go after their engines blow up.

[@holasupermercado7318]

The 2002 or 2003 V6 models (not sure about the year) had some issues, but all the later V6 engines were/are reliable when taken care of.

[@SuperDougiedoo]

In Europe the B207R is modified constantly and you can get an estimated 330hp on stock internals (something I may look into). Incidentally on a 300 mile run I had 46mpg (imp) with a 6 speed box. I’d love to have either to be honest. But I’ll reserve judgement until I do what you’ve done and add a Turbo X to the garage as well.

[@AutoAutopsy]

yeah, which is why i said v6 is still better for modding. you can still get almost 330hp and way more torque without any mods on a v6 lol

[@jeldibye]

1:20 "...2011-2012, when they stopped making the car." Read: When Saab kicked the bucket and stopped making much of anything.

[@rogersmith9133]

I own a 2002 9-3 convertible. I love the car and enjoy it so much. by far I think its the best looking convertible out there, but I'm a bit bias.

[@AutoAutopsy]

nice!

[@sonofrobert]

I also think those are some of the best looking convertibles. I don't like the back end of the c900 convertibles. Cheers