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!

  • Varezhka I have still yet to see a Malibu on the road that didn't have a rental sticker. So yeah, GM probably lost money on every one they sold but kept it to boost their CAFE numbers.I'm personally happy that I no longer have to dread being "upgraded" to a Maxima or a Malibu anymore. And thankfully Altima is also on its way out.
  • Tassos Under incompetent, affirmative action hire Mary Barra, GM has been shooting itself in the foot on a daily basis.Whether the Malibu cancellation has been one of these shootings is NOT obvious at all.GM should be run as a PROFITABLE BUSINESS and NOT as an outfit that satisfies everybody and his mother in law's pet preferences.IF the Malibu was UNPROFITABLE, it SHOULD be canceled.More generally, if its SEGMENT is Unprofitable, and HALF the makers cancel their midsize sedans, not only will it lead to the SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST ones, but the survivors will obviously be more profitable if the LOSERS were kept being produced and the SMALL PIE of midsize sedans would yield slim pickings for every participant.SO NO, I APPROVE of the demise of the unprofitable Malibu, and hope Nissan does the same to the Altima, Hyundai with the SOnata, Mazda with the Mazda 6, and as many others as it takes to make the REMAINING players, like the Excellent, sporty Accord and the Bulletproof Reliable, cheap to maintain CAMRY, more profitable and affordable.
  • GregLocock Car companies can only really sell cars that people who are new car buyers will pay a profitable price for. As it turns out fewer and fewer new car buyers want sedans. Large sedans can be nice to drive, certainly, but the number of new car buyers (the only ones that matter in this discussion) are prepared to sacrifice steering and handling for more obvious things like passenger and cargo space, or even some attempt at off roading. We know US new car buyers don't really care about handling because they fell for FWD in large cars.
  • Slavuta Why is everybody sweating? Like sedans? - go buy one. Better - 2. Let CRV/RAV rust on the dealer lot. I have 3 sedans on the driveway. My neighbor - 2. Neighbors on each of our other side - 8 SUVs.
  • Theflyersfan With sedans, especially, I wonder how many of those sales are to rental fleets. With the exception of the Civic and Accord, there are still rows of sedans mixed in with the RAV4s at every airport rental lot. I doubt the breakdown in sales is publicly published, so who knows... GM isn't out of the sedan business - Cadillac exists and I can't believe I'm typing this but they are actually decent - and I think they are making a huge mistake, especially if there's an extended oil price hike (cough...Iran...cough) and people want smaller and hybrids. But if one is only tied to the quarterly shareholder reports and not trends and the big picture, bad decisions like this get made.
Next