This morning on the way to work, I was in my mk1 vRS pulling away from a standing start behind a Saab 93 (04 reg, Aero with a boot not a hatchback) We both 'made good progress' through the gears and it was level pegging all the way up to the legal speed limit....

What spec could it have been? There were no markings to indicate what engine it was. I do know it wasn't a diesel as there wasn't any smoke pouring out from his car. He seemed most surprised that the Skoda that he thought he had left at the lights was still there.

I'm interested purely in the technical spec of this encounter so I can decide if I should be proud of my little Skoda, or should I be mourning the fact that it didn't perform very well?

Cheers.

It would either be the 250bhp 2.8T or the 210bhp 2.0T, I suspect it would be the latter...

it could have been these petrols

1.8i 125bhp 0-60 11seconds 124mph

1.8t 150bhp 0-60 9seconds 131mph

2.0t 175bhp 0-60 8seconds 137mph

but only these in AERO trim

2.0t 210bhp 0-60 7.4seconds 143mph

2.8 250bhp 0-60 6.5seconds 155mph

Wouldn't it be nice to think it was the 2.8. Either way, the Octavia did well to even keep up. I'll settle for being proud then.

if driven properly the saab should just pull ahead in 210bhp but should be little in it.

as far as the 2.8, it would beat you but still no shame in that

If it was 04 reg it will have been the 2.0T Aero, which has 210bhp..... which is very disapointing for a Saab Areo. Probably weights a dam sight more than the Octy so I'd imagine they should be quite evenly matched, asuming your car is standard.

2.8V6 only came out this year.

Saab's a much nicer car though. I love them.

Saabs were until vauxhall bought them.

Now they just fall aparts as the brothers, g/f's father is finding out.

Perhaps he didn't pull ahead of my standard vRS for two reasons,

1. I am skinny and he was quite a portly middle aged gent by the looks of it, (weight advantage to me perhaps)

2. I am on my second tank of Shell V Power and as Tescos say 'Every little helps'.

Saab's a much nicer car though. I love them.

nah i would have an octy over a saab 93 anyday

nah i would have an octy over a saab 93 anyday

I love the 93 - would have one if they did a decent diesel.

It wont be the 2.8 as they only came out on a 55 plate.

Besides which it would have left you standing, they are quite quick. The 210hp Aero however is probably an even match as it is a heavier car than the vRS.

I love the 93 - would have one if they did a decent diesel.

we have been disappointed with the 9-3. build quality and meterials are knowhere near as good. stereo is terrible in them :(

stereo is terrible in them :(

It's a damn sight better than the crud BMW call a hifi system

I had the Harman Kardon in my old Z3 and it was not much better.

Last weekend's Vectra had a CD70 (Whatever that is) Vauxhall stero/sat nav system and it was fantastic.

I love the 93 - would have one if they did a decent diesel.

The same diesel engine which maps to 200+bhp in the Astra is avilable in the 9-3

I miss my 9-3, with its brilliant: stereo, suspension set up, sillky smooth turbo :(

I miss my 9-3, with its brilliant: stereo, suspension set up, sillky smooth turbo :(

That looks like a really nice car. I think that shape looks great, but I'm not sure about the new models with the chrome surrounds on the headlights & indicators. I considered one before I got the vRS, but couldn't come anywhere near in terms of purchase price.

I miss my 9-3, with its brilliant: stereo, suspension set up, sillky smooth turbo :(

did you have the stereo etc upgraded?

we have been very disappoint with certain aspects and wont get another tbh. lovely looking car but falls short of the A4 drive and interior

did you have the stereo etc upgraded?

we have been very disappoint with certain aspects and wont get another tbh. lovely looking car but falls short of the A4 drive and interior

I did yes... to be honest one of the main complaints on the Saab forum I used was the quality of the standard stereo, its all or nothing, standard is very standard, the upgrade is a major jump in terms of quality

I'd imagine that the A4 (never driven or experienced one) is probably a better all round package, but part of the beauty with the Saab was it was a little different than the norm... you see 1000's of A4's, 3-Series, C-Class (which with every face lift look more and more alike) on the roads.

The Saab is more distinctive, just that little bit more classy in terms of looks and road presence (IMO), however the GM influance seems to be slowly eroding away this factor... probably the only one which has kept Saab going over the past 10-15 years :(

That looks like a really nice car. I think that shape looks great, but I'm not sure about the new models with the chrome surrounds on the headlights & indicators. I considered one before I got the vRS, but couldn't come anywhere near in terms of purchase price.

Thanks, it was a nice car till someone reversed in to it in a car park, did a significant amount of damage, and left the scean without leaving their details..:( Lost my NCB (Didn't have protected) and come renewal time (a week after I had the car returned to me back to new) was quoted silly money, hence why I had to sell it

If you want one DON'T even consider getting a new one.... best value is an ex-demo or a 1-3 year old one with a few thousand miles on it, your getting a real bargin then

Funny you sould say that about the shape, its what got me hooked.... its the most coupe looking non-coupe (if you get my drift) out there!

Liked the look of the Saab, something a little different, although the fuel consumption on the aero models did worry me a bit.The new dame edna headlights surrounds do spoil the facelift model.

The new dame edna headlights surrounds do spoil the facelift model.

This is only on the 95 (the A6/5 Series size model) not the 93.......... the 93 has evaded the chrome over load (for now... thank god)

from memory of driving my ex-boss' Saab 93 Aero (210 2.0T) it was a huge hunk of metal. Not sure on the kerb weight, but it felt like a good 1.6 tons - probably was lighter. It never felt as fast as even a standard octy vRS. It made progress in a fair subdued manner. I also didn't like the 20mpg average, but then it wasn't my fuel going in it thankfully.

I did yes... to be honest one of the main complaints on the Saab forum I used was the quality of the standard stereo, its all or nothing, standard is very standard, the upgrade is a major jump in terms of quality

I'd imagine that the A4 (never driven or experienced one) is probably a better all round package, but part of the beauty with the Saab was it was a little different than the norm... you see 1000's of A4's, 3-Series, C-Class (which with every face lift look more and more alike) on the roads.

The Saab is more distinctive, just that little bit more classy in terms of looks and road presence (IMO), however the GM influance seems to be slowly eroding away this factor... probably the only one which has kept Saab going over the past 10-15 years :(

ah now i understand, i do like the saab 9-3. it looks brilliant. its a nice car and as you say its a nice change from the normal A4, 3 series or merc.