Aeromod of a 1964 Saab 96

[NeilBlanchard]

John,

What's your plan for the drivetrain? The 1966 Saab 96 had a 2-stroke 3 cylinder engine, and it was a nightmare. Overheating is a huge risk with a 2-stroke so no grill blocks...

[Varn]

Are they still making saab's? I had thought that GM bought them and brought them down.

[Sven7]

No, they were sold to Koenigsegg, then Spyker (or vice versa), and now production has stopped but the naming rights are in the hands of Swedish EV consortium NEVS.

[Varn]

It is too bad that they are not being manufactured. They always had good designs. Not just copies of others.

[SwamiSalami]

cool cars. cool ideas. i'm in.

[JohnAh]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

John, What's your plan for the drivetrain? The 1966 Saab 96 had a 2-stroke 3 cylinder engine, and it was a nightmare. Overheating is a huge risk with a 2-stroke so no grill blocks...

From what I have learned about the "Old Smokey" there were problems but I wouldn´t call them a nightmare. The stock main bearings could seize and the cooling was less efficient until the radiator moved from behind the engine to the front in 1965. (new body nicknamed "longnose") In later years the main bearings are of higher quality. The cooling can be improved on a pre-1965 "shortnose" by cutting up holes in the rear of the bonnet at the sides. This was done at most rally cars.

The 4-stroke Ford V4 that was used from 1967 to the end 1979 or -80 is perhaps not the best of engines but it´s more efficient than the "bluesmoker". I am building something of a 1964 replica from a 1974 body so I can do just about anything I like without destroying a nice vintage car. I have got myself a 1965 two-stroker that I will install, at least to start with. I have childhood memories from my grandfather´s 1964 so I just have to experience this for a while! I´m also very curious to see how efficient I can manage to drive such an engine, -first with a standard body, then with aeromods. I expect to be way more efficient than an average 2-stroke saab owner.

What happens next I´m not sure about, but I guess I will either replace the Old Smokey by a small diesel or install the diesel in the rear as a plug-in unit with extra efficient transmission. I have a tiny 2-cylinder Kubota that I hope can deliver the power needed but then the car has to be extremely aerodynamic and lightweight. Having two different powerplants will increase weight and reduce luggage capacity but it will definitely improve reliability! Being stucked at the side of the highway or in the center of town during rush-hour isn´t the funniest thing in the world and I´ve had my share of it with all old junk-cars I´ve owned through the years... (but I continue to chose that risk before the payments for a new car over and over again)

Here´s some short vintage Saab engine history:
Saab two-stroke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[wdb]

I believe the 850 Monte Carlo motors had roller bearings for the crankshaft. I drove one once; the engine took an age to spin back down to idle!

I also had a 1968 Saab 95 (station wagon version of the 96) with the v4. It was hands down the ugliest car I ever owned, and I loved it.

[NeilBlanchard]

My family's 1966 Saab 96 overheated twice - once it had to be rebuilt, and the second time it had to be replaced - and then the transmission failed. All in 40,000 miles...

Mixing the oil into the gas was a huge pain - you had to use precisely all of the tank before refilling, if you didn't want to have a partial quart of oil knocking around the trunk. I doubt very much that this engine could pass today's emissions test.

We had friends who owned a 1967 96 with the V4, that was driven over 300,000 miles.

[JohnAh]

Terribly slow progress with my 1964 "shortnose" replica... All those projects around me... Still just a body on wheels.

However, I'm making great progress with improving my eco driving skills on ny 1975 V4 Saab 96. These cars have a 1500cc/63hp 4-stroke V-engine from Ford. Four gears and high revs. Most people get around 7-8 liters per 100 km (35-28 us mpg) from these cars while following the stream like average dead fish. My best result recently is 4,8 l/100km (49 us mpg) through city and highway with 4-5 persons and vacation luggage! I mostly stay below 85 km/h (52 mph).

The old saabs have a wonderful feature, a freewheel, originally put there to save the two-stroke engines from seizure, but they kept the freewheel throughout the 96 model, even with four stroke V4's. The freewheel is a great help both for clutchless gear shifting and for Pulse & Glide driving with engine shut down. I have installed LED lights in front and rear to be easy on the battery. I also have two switches on the shift stick and a "magic" relay box that makes engine stop and start realy easy. I rarely use the brakes, not even in city traffic, except for holding the car still in slopes and behind traffic lights. I get about the same fuel consumption through city as on highway.

No aeromods or engine mods this far. I plan to install an electric radiator fan soon. Since it's the family car and some members are a bit "sensitive" I may find it hard to get approval for the more effective aeromods...

[JohnAh]

This thread was originally intended for my 1964 Saab 96 "shortnose" replica but reality seams to have directed my future earomods towards the 11 year younger family car of same model.

I have been experimenting heavily with ecodriving and made huge progress with the P&G method, lowering fuel consumption from aprox 7 litres per 100 km down to amazing 4,5 (34 to 52 mpg)! Avreage spead is 75-80 (45-50 mph) km/h on highway but rush hour city traffic is often included.

I find it hard to believe itś possible to push these results much further so next step I expect to make meassurable results is aeromods. A major problem for my family of five plus two dogs (one of big breed) is the narrow inside of the car. The big dog have serious problems with the sloping rear window so my plan for a first step into the aeromod business is to make something like a penthouse window that will fit in place of the rear window. This will straighten out the sloping roof/window line and probably create less turbulence. The new rear window will be flat and vertical with roof and sides slightly wedge-shaped i hope of creating a part of a Kamback. Not sure if this will give any meassurable improvements but at least my big dog will be a bit happier...

I will try to make a simple Photoshop sketch soon.