Which Saab 900 Version Should You Buy?
Choosing a Saab 900 from these catalogue specifications comes down to two distinct generations. The 1 generation Cabrio spans 1978–1994 and contains 39 versions, while the 2 generation Cabrio spans 1993–1998 and contains 24. The earlier cars offer Gasoline engines of 1,985 or 2,119 cc, outputs from 107 to 175 hp, and either turbocharged or naturally aspirated configurations.
Choosing a Saab 900 from these catalogue specifications comes down to two distinct generations. The 1 generation Cabrio spans 1978–1994 and contains 39 versions, while the 2 generation Cabrio spans 1993–1998 and contains 24. The earlier cars offer Gasoline engines of 1,985 or 2,119 cc, outputs from 107 to 175 hp, and either turbocharged or naturally aspirated configurations. The later generation broadens the range to 1,985, 2,290, and 2,498 cc, with 131–185 hp. Every listed Saab 900 is FWD, but the engine orientation, transmission choices, performance, fuel-tank capacity, and available cylinder layouts differ between generations.
Saab 900 generations: what changed?
The 1978–1994 1 generation is a Cabrio with 39 catalogue versions. In the versions shown here, its engine is Front, longitudinal. Manual cars have 5 gears, while Automatic versions have 3. Most listed engines are Inline units with 4 cylinders, although valve count, boost, and fuel system vary. Outputs represented here run from 107 hp and 161 Nm to 175 hp and 273 Nm. Depending on the version, fuel-tank capacity is 58 or 63 litres.
The 1993–1998 2 generation is also a Cabrio, with 24 catalogue versions. Its engine changed to a Front, transverse position. The 5-speed Manual remained, while the Automatic gained 4 gears. This generation includes naturally aspirated and Turbo Inline 4-cylinder engines as well as a naturally aspirated V-shaped 6-cylinder engine. Listed output ranges from 131 hp and 177 Nm to 185 hp and 263 Nm, and every shown version has a 68-litre tank.
Saab 900 engine and transmission specs
Repeated version names are separated by power because the database contains several distinct configurations named 2.0 MT and 2.0 AT.
| Generation and exact version | Power | Torque | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders and layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 generation 2.0 MT, 107 hp | 107 hp | 161 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1 generation 2.0 MT, 126 hp | 126 hp | 170 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1 generation 2.0 AT, 126 hp | 126 hp | 170 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 3-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 1 generation 2.1 MT, 136 hp | 136 hp | 175 Nm | 2,119 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1 generation 2.1 AT, 136 hp | 136 hp | 175 Nm | 2,119 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 3-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 1 generation 2.0 MT, 141 hp | 141 hp | 202 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1 generation 2.0 AT, 141 hp | 141 hp | 202 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | Turbo | 3-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 1 generation 2.0 MT, 160 hp | 160 hp | 255 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1 generation 2.0 MT, 175 hp | 175 hp | 273 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 2 generation 2.0 MT, 131 hp | 131 hp | 177 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 2 generation 2.0 AT, 131 hp | 131 hp | 177 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 4-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 2 generation 2.3 MT, 150 hp | 150 hp | 210 Nm | 2,290 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 2 generation 2.3 AT, 150 hp | 150 hp | 210 Nm | 2,290 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 4-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 2 generation 2.5 MT, 170 hp | 170 hp | 227 Nm | 2,498 cc | Gasoline | 6, V-shaped | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 2 generation 2.5 AT, 170 hp | 170 hp | 227 Nm | 2,498 cc | Gasoline | 6, V-shaped | No | 4-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 2 generation 2.0 MT, 185 hp | 185 hp | 263 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 2 generation 2.0 AT, 185 hp | 185 hp | 263 Nm | 1,985 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | Turbo | 4-speed Automatic | FWD |
Within the 1 generation, the naturally aspirated 1,985 cc 2.0 MT with 126 hp produces about 63.5 hp per litre. The Turbo 141 hp version raises that to about 71.0 hp per litre, the Turbo 160 hp version to about 80.6 hp per litre, and the Turbo 175 hp version to about 88.2 hp per litre. The naturally aspirated 2,119 cc 2.1 MT produces about 64.2 hp per litre.
For the 2 generation, the naturally aspirated 1,985 cc engine produces about 66.0 hp per litre, the 2,290 cc engine about 65.5 hp per litre, and the 2,498 cc engine about 68.1 hp per litre. The 185 hp Turbo develops about 93.2 hp per litre, the highest figure calculated from the listed Saab 900 versions.
Saab 900 Turbo performance, top speed, and fuel economy
The strongest straight-line choice in the data is the 2 generation 2.0 MT or 2.0 AT with 185 hp. Both are listed at 8.5 seconds from 0–100 km/h and 230 km/h, with 263 Nm available at 2,100 rpm. Fuel consumption for these versions was not measured.
In the 1 generation, the Turbo 2.0 MT with 175 hp and 273 Nm reaches 100 km/h in 8.7 seconds and has a 210 km/h top speed. It therefore supplies 10 Nm more than the later 185 hp Turbo, but the later car is 0.2 seconds quicker to 100 km/h and 20 km/h faster at the top end. The 175 hp version records 11.2 l/100 km in the city, 6.8 l/100 km on the highway, and 10.2 l/100 km combined.
The 1 generation Turbo 2.0 MT with 160 hp and 255 Nm takes 9.6 seconds to reach 100 km/h and tops out at 200 km/h. Its measured consumption is 12.2 l/100 km city, 7.6 l/100 km highway, and 10.8 l/100 km combined. Compared with it, the 175 hp Turbo adds 15 hp and 18 Nm, cuts 0.9 seconds from the acceleration time, adds 10 km/h to top speed, and uses 0.6 l/100 km less on the combined cycle.
The 1 generation 141 hp Turbo takes 11 seconds with Manual and 13 seconds with Automatic; top speeds are 190 and 185 km/h respectively. Combined consumption is 10.2 l/100 km for 2.0 MT and 11.8 l/100 km for 2.0 AT. Choosing the Manual therefore means 2 seconds quicker acceleration, 5 km/h more top speed, and 1.6 l/100 km lower combined consumption in this pairing.
Among later naturally aspirated cars, the 2 generation 2.5 MT and 2.5 AT each have 170 hp and 227 Nm, a 9.2-second 0–100 km/h time, and a 225 km/h maximum. Their fuel consumption was not measured. The 2.3 MT takes 10 seconds and reaches 210 km/h, while 2.3 AT takes 11 seconds and reaches 205 km/h. The Automatic records 14.9 l/100 km city, 7.8 l/100 km highway, and 10.4 l/100 km combined; consumption for the Manual was not measured.
The 2 generation 131 hp 2.0 MT takes 11 seconds and reaches 200 km/h, while 2.0 AT takes 12.5 seconds and reaches 190 km/h. The Automatic uses 16 l/100 km city, 8.5 l/100 km highway, and 11.3 l/100 km combined; consumption for the Manual was not measured.
Saab 900 weight, ground clearance, tank, and wheel specs
All listed versions have 140 mm of ground clearance. Wheel sizes were not measured for any of them.
The 1 generation 107 hp 2.0 MT has a 1,165 kg kerb weight and a 1,640 kg gross weight. That is about 10.9 kg per horsepower. The naturally aspirated 126 hp 2.0 MT is listed at 1,200 kg, or about 9.5 kg per horsepower; kerb weight for the equivalent 126 hp 2.0 AT was not measured.
The 1 generation Turbo 2.0 MT with 160 hp appears with kerb weights of 1,315 or 1,325 kg in the supplied versions, equivalent to roughly 8.2–8.3 kg per horsepower. The 175 hp 2.0 MT weighs 1,370 kg, or about 7.8 kg per horsepower. The listed 1,820 kg kerb figure for one 141 hp 2.0 MT exceeds its listed 1,710 kg gross weight; both values are reproduced from the data, so they should be verified before using them for a purchase comparison. Kerb weight for the 141 hp Automatic was not measured.
In the 2 generation, the 131 hp 2.0 MT and 2.0 AT appear at either 1,295 or 1,370 kg, depending on the listed entry. That corresponds to approximately 9.9–10.5 kg per horsepower. The 150 hp 2.3 MT and 2.3 AT weigh 1,375 kg, or about 9.2 kg per horsepower. The 170 hp 2.5 MT and 2.5 AT weigh 1,400 kg, or about 8.2 kg per horsepower. The 185 hp Turbo versions appear at either 1,310 or 1,390 kg, equivalent to roughly 7.1–7.5 kg per horsepower.
The 1 generation has a 58- or 63-litre tank in the shown configurations. Every listed 2 generation version has a 68-litre tank, giving it 5 litres more than a 63-litre early version and 10 litres more than a 58-litre one.
Which Saab 900 version should you buy?
For maximum performance, choose the 2 generation 2.0 MT or 2.0 AT with 185 hp. They combine the highest listed power, the quickest 0–100 km/h result, and the highest top speed. The Manual offers 5 gears and the Automatic 4, but their supplied acceleration and speed figures are identical. Economy was not measured, so the data cannot identify the cheaper one to fuel.
For the strongest measured blend of early-generation performance and economy, the 1 generation Turbo 2.0 MT with 175 hp is the standout. Against the 160 hp Turbo Manual, it is more powerful, quicker, faster, and records lower city, highway, and combined consumption. It also has the best calculated weight-to-power figure among the early versions whose kerb weight is usable for comparison.
For naturally aspirated performance, choose the 2 generation 2.5 MT or 2.5 AT with 170 hp. They are 0.8 seconds quicker to 100 km/h and 15 km/h faster than the 2.3 MT, while adding 20 hp and 17 Nm. They also introduce the listed 6-cylinder, V-shaped layout. Fuel consumption was not measured, so that advantage cannot be weighed against economy.
For a later naturally aspirated Automatic with measured consumption, the 150 hp 2.3 AT is the better numerical choice than the 131 hp 2.0 AT. It adds 19 hp and 33 Nm, accelerates 1.5 seconds sooner, and reaches a top speed 15 km/h higher. Its combined figure is also 0.9 l/100 km lower, while city consumption is 1.1 l/100 km lower and highway consumption 0.7 l/100 km lower.
For an early Automatic, the naturally aspirated 2.0 AT with 126 hp uses 11.1 l/100 km combined, while the 2.1 AT with 136 hp uses 11.3 l/100 km. The 2.1 adds 10 hp and 5 Nm, cuts the 0–100 km/h time by 1 second, and adds 10 km/h to maximum speed for a difference of 0.2 l/100 km in combined consumption. If stronger acceleration matters more than that measured fuel difference, the 2.1 AT has the clearer numerical case.
The final choice is therefore straightforward within the supplied figures: the 185 hp 2 generation Turbo is the performance buy, the 175 hp 1 generation Turbo is the strongest early all-rounder with measured economy, the 170 hp 2.5 MT or 2.5 AT is the naturally aspirated performance option, and the 150 hp 2.3 AT offers the best later Automatic comparison when fuel-use figures must be available.