Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Saab 9-3 Real World MPG

PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Pennsylvania Furnace, PAPosts: 5,854
With the price of fuel being what it is, the mileage you're getting is becoming more important. This is the place to discuss the mileage performance you're getting out in the real world.

Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews



  • 1viking1viking Posts: 2
    I'm getting right at 24 mpg overall with my 2003 9-3 convertible. Probably could do better if I tried to.
    I do tend to push it, but why buy a sports car to drive slow?

    What do you all think about using regular instead of premium? Mid-grade?
  • rs9904rs9904 Posts: 15
    99 96.5k miles base auto just got an average of 25 on a 2500 mile trip with speeds in excess of 80+ regularly. Typically with cruise at 55 can get 32/33, at 65 maybe 29, at 75 26 or so.

    04 22.5k miles linear cruise control 55 can get 37/38. At various speeds get 34. Mixed driving 27/28

    Great cars
  • dbodekdbodek Posts: 6
    I have been very pleased with my 9-3 Arc's gas mileage. I average around 27-28 around town and about 31-32 on trips. For me this has been one of the pleasant surprises about owning this car.
  • hororhoror Posts: 1
    I have a 2000 9-3 linear with a 5-speed standard transmission. Three years ago i took a trip from Winnipeg MB to Victoria BC, which is about 2300 km (1450 mi) from the middle of the continent to the pacific coast. On the return leg I reset the SID, and on return to Winnipeg it indicated an *average* speed of 115 kph (71 mph) and mileage of 7.8 l/100 km (30 mpUSg) on the highway. My wife has a '99 9-3 with an automatic, giving her about 3-5 mpg poorer mileage around town than i get. We never use premium grade gas, instead relying on 87 octane for most of the year and switching to e10 (90 octane) for the winter. I find that city driving in Canadian winters uses a lot more gas for each of our cars, typically dropping by 5 mpg.
  • My 2001 9-3 turbo is averaging between 25.5 and 27 MPG. I drive from Providence, RI to Boston, MA (approx. 50 miles each way) several times per week. I always use 93 octane fuel.
  • my consumption here to share.
    Seems like it's not care about the speed but the distant. the further I drive it get the better mpg. AT least I am driving at steady speed from 40-80 mph.
    when I drove under 20 miles per trip it got 22-24mpg. when I drove 36 miles it got 26-27 mpg. when I drove 45 miles it got 27-29 mpg. When I drove over 100 miles it got 31-37 mpg. Those are number I can recall from the led screen. :)
  • paapaa Posts: 2
    We are looking at purchasing a 2005 Saab 9.3. Everything I read says it requires Premium gasoline but the dealer says it can use regular unleaded. What do you use?
  • My 2003 9-3 owner's manual states 90 octane so my car runs fine on mid-grade 89 octane. And I always try to buy Shell gasoline too.
  • baldnjbaldnj Posts: 2
    Read the owners manual. I have a 2006 9-3 2.0T and it says it can handle down to 87 octane, but you will lose horsepower at that octane. I still have a ton of acceleration on regular and I am getting about 31 mpg on the highway, 24 in the city. So depending on the model year, you can use lower octane.
  • davem5davem5 Posts: 8
    I average 24 mpg with my '04 Aero 6-speed (using premium), but on a recent trip at a steady 75 mph I averaged 33 mpg over 330 miles.
  • Ive been using regular and mid grade gasoline on my 2007 9-3 SS and I recently had to have it towed to the dealer because my spark plugs were so dirty that my engine wouldn't start.

    The Saab servicer explained that it was due to poor fuel quality and they recommended using only premium fuel from Chevron or 76 (I was going to the cheapest gas station in town).

    My vote is to use the best gasoline around.
  • waterdrwaterdr Posts: 307
    I run 87 Octane only in my 9-3 and average about 26 - 27 mpg. I have gotten as high as 35 mpg on a highway trip, but typically get more like 32.

    I wish the world would wake-up and start making more 4 cyl turbos. They really make sense.
  • How did you get to 35 mpg's highway? How fast (or slow) were you going?

    I go about 65-70 mph each day for my commute and only average around 25 mpg. Which is still pretty good, I guess.
  • waterdrwaterdr Posts: 307
    We just set the cruise and go....usually around 70 mph. Been a while since I took a long trip, but I know we have gotten over 500 miles between fill ups.

    You have to keep the foot off the pedal. Passing a lot etc... will cause the mpg to suffer.

    I get about 30 - 32 going to work and back as traffic slows in a few spots. I also only run 87 octane, but have run 89 and even 91/92 on rare ocassions.
  • waterdrwaterdr Posts: 307
    Are you going by the trip computer, or verifying with actual usage? I wonder if your trip computer is reading a little low. Also, do you live in a hilly area?
  • waterdrwaterdr Posts: 307
    Both actually. Sure, most times I go by the trip computer because It is just too time comsuming to verify all the time and my wife now drives the car and she does not keep track of anything. But, I have compared the trip to real world. The trip seems to read about 5% high...or about 1 - 2 mpg high.

    We live in a mostly flat area now.....Twin Cities. Hills kill fuel economy.

    It is going to the shop right after Christmas. I have a door that won't open from the outside and rge sunroof quit too. Wife said the check engine light came on too. It does it from time to time but ends up being nothing. As long as it is not flashing, I don't worry.

    My biggest gripe is the dam OnStar which is not deactivated due to the fact that it is analog and they won't upgrade. This will be a fun game to play, but the car is 100% under warranty. I am going to demand financial resitution from GM on this...I am soo ticked about it actually that I have written unanswered letters to GM.

    In fact, we just bought a new car and I refused to buy a GM product because of the OnStar fiasco. The salesmen even told me about a new on on the lot "hey, this car has OnStar" and I told him "you have no idea the can of worms you just opened". - lol
  • ronfcronfc Posts: 6
    I have a 2003 bmw325i now it gets a bit hairy in the snow , and it has just about every driving aid in the book, i had a vw jetta 1.8t i run that on regular for a while i did notice a drop in power in the upper revs but that is about all.
    Iwas thinking about a change from the bimmer to a 2006 9.3 if i could run it on regular gas , having to use premium all the time is a real pain
  • I have a '01 9-5 Aero with a manual transmission.
    I get a real world 29 miles per gallon on the highway and 22-23 in the city. I ONLY run premium. I see a huge variance in miles per tank (close to 80 if not more) between regular and premium. Being a 4cyl/turbo car there is ahuge loss in performance (I tend to be a little heavy footed) and again the loss in economy.

    This is a all around great car!
    29 MPG on highway trips, all the room in the cabin for 4 full size people, a huge trunk and still a blast to drive.
    I've outrun V8 mustangs, V8 Hemi Chargers, and tuners. It is a somewhat of a sleeper car, but gets lots of looks.
  • Yes, I was just going by the trip computer. Which could be throwing me off because my daily commute includes both highway (on a very congested highway) and city mpg's (on San Francisco hills).

    So, 25-26 mpgs seems about right for my conditions, I guess.

    I do notice that when Im able to just turn on cruise and not use the pedal my mpg's increase. But still...I cant imagine getting 30+ mpg's!
  • waterdrwaterdr Posts: 307
    Glad you like the 9-5, but if you out running a V-8 Mustang, then they were not trying hard or it was really a V-6 made to look like a V-8. 1999 - 2004 Mustangs run 14.0 flat in the quarter out of the box. The 2005-2008 Stangs run mid 13's out of the box....both cars are sub 5.5 second cars 0-60 mph.

    The 95 Aero runs a 15.2 in the quarter and 6.7 sec 0-60.

    Keep in mind that horsepower sells cars, but torque wins races. Mustangs make more torque and are also geared a lot better to get out of hole over your typical sedan.

    Sorry to jump in on this, but as a Saab owner, and an avid Mustang owner and drag racer, you are playing on my turf - lol.

    The Charger is a bit slower then a stang due simply to all of it's mass. But they are still mid 14 second cars.

    The other thing that plays a part is power-band. Anyone in a Saturn could beat me from a 50 mph roll if they caught me in 5th or even 4th gear, but drop the hammer into 3rd, and the tires get roasted.

    One of the big appeals to me with a Saab though, is Saab's passion for 4cyl turbos. They get much better then average mpg, yet, when you need the power, it is there.
Sign In or Register to comment.