Saabscene Saab Forum - Saab Technical Information Resource banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,673 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Whats the easiest way to more power from the K reg 2.0 LPT up to say 200ish horses.
Whay was there an LPT in the first place, why change the full blown?. I know may sound a stupid question but Iv'e never understood why.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,277 Posts
Probably for tax reasons, in some countries car tax is worked out on the bhp the car produces. I believe the lpt at 150bhp comes in just below the higher tax bracket for Italy, but with plenty of lovely torque. In this country it was useful for insurance groupings as well.
Nick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
I don't think the LPTs were created for Tax perposes as mentioned LPTs in Italy were rated at 190BHP and cost less then UK ones.

Just another case of us being ripped off and paying more for less.

I had my 2.0 LPT modified by Hirsch gave me 215 BHP and off the clock speedo readings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,216 Posts
Originally posted by Oles:
[qb]Just another case of us being ripped off and paying more for less.[/qb][/b]
It was for market positioning against competing models with a similar power output. Except the very latest ones, that were marked "2.0t" or "2.3t", the LPT doesn't have "Turbo" badging nor a boost gauge as Saab attempted to play down the use of turbocharging, since this was associated in the minds of the public with high-performance vehicles. The 2.0LPT replaced the 150hp 2.3i, giving better fuel economy and much better drivability, for which the LPT engines won awards.

Saab probably recognised that not everyone was interested in ultimate performance, and that many people viewed the performance of the full-pressure turbo models as excessive. Add to this the cost of insuring a high-performance car (my Aero is listed as group 17 while my LPT is group 13) and it is not hard to see that the LPT had a legitimate place in the market.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Add to this the cost of insuring a high-performance car (my Aero is listed as group 17 while my LPT is group 13) and it is not hard to see that the LPT had a legitimate place in the market.[/b]
May be a bit off topic, but will a Subaru Imprezza and Mitsuibishi Evolution be very expensive and difficult to insure in the UK?

They are in Hong Kong because of the number of accidents involving these cars. So is Peugeot 206GTi. But Saab Aero and Volvo T series are not more difficult and expensive to insure than say, a 3 litre Toyota Camry because they rarely get involved in accidents attracting adverse publicity (But they're rare on the roads either).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
623 Posts
Originally posted by cdcarlsson:
[qb]Probably for tax reasons, in some countries  car tax is worked out on the bhp the car produces. I believe the lpt at 150bhp comes in just below the higher tax bracket for Italy, but with plenty of lovely torque. In this country it was useful for insurance groupings as well.
Nick. [/qb][/b]
I don't think the LPTs were created for Tax perposes as mentioned LPTs in Italy were rated at 190BHP and cost less then UK ones.[/b]
Until a few years ago here in Italy Tax and insurances were a lot higer for more than two liters cars. So the most common engine in Italy was the 2.0, in LPT (150hp) and FPT (185hp) versions.

So there was no 190hp LPT
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
765 Posts
Elk had to change the year after I gave them a hard time !!
I have 94 2.0 eco (no intercooler)however in sweden intercooler was standard in 94 on my car.
They contacted sweden but they could not do anything
Elk had to change advert to 96 as this is when uk got intercooler.
I did ask about fitting intercooler then speedparts upgrade but they were unsure. Speedparts is without doubt best bhp to the £
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
My MY95 9000CS 2.0 LPT also had no intercooler. I mail ordered one from Abbott Racing instead, together with the reprogrammed Trionic ECU.

I've them installed at the dealer in Hong Kong. It apparently was the first time they saw an Abbott intercooler, and they said it was better than the stock one because the Abbott one was all aluminium whereas the stock one is made of aluminium and plastic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Originally posted by Haggag01:
[qb]ngu,
how did the car perform after taking it from 150bhp up to 190bhp ??  
 [/qb][/b]
At low rpm, not much difference. But this may be due to the fact that I'm still using the stock wastegate, not the Abbott one. Abbott told me that the stock wastegate could "swing" too much and couldn't cope with the increased boost. I just am not sure.

At higher rpm (2500rpm, 100km/h, 4th gear on the auto transmission), the acceleration on top gear is brisk. I could feel a gentle "push behind the back". Road speed climbs remarkably quick for such a humble engine.

It could go to 160km/h (100mph), my personal top speed, effortlessly. I feel it could go even faster without hesitation but I never tried in view of Gatso, Vascar, photo-radar, hand held laser and the demerit points system we inherited from Britain.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top