The Saab 9-5 is now an outdated ugly car.

[Andaluz]

As if being based on the appalling eleven year old Vectra B chassis wasn't bad enough, GM now decided to ruin the Saab 9-5 once for all with a crass attempt to give the 9-5 some unique styling.

New front-end may be friendly for pedestrians, but the resulting design is rather dubious.



The tail light design is a poor copy of the Audi A4 tail lights. Nice try GM. Try again!



GM corporate radio in a Saab?! What's with the 13 year old Vauxhall Omega gear lever?!



GM is ruining Saab. They have the Swedish brand under control for the last 17 years and they still haven't got a clue what it should be.

GM...HELLO! YOU CAN'T MAKE A 10 YEAR OLD CAR LOOK "NEW" 10 YEARS LATER!

[ifcar]

The corporate controls are an improvement over the mess that came first. But the exterior redesign is a travesty, and the mechanicals are outdated.

[JYODER240]

I like the design, especialy in black.

[ro51092]

Man, Saab's really going down the shitter.

The GM Corporate Radio looks like ass in the 9-5. It looks decent in every other application

[mazda6er]

Looks much better in person. Always has.

[the Teuton]

When my brother worked at a rental car agency, I got to ride in a 9-5 wagon.  He had a straight away to the valet pickup spot where he could gun it.  While I admit it was fun, I also remember a shudder coming from the torque steer under full throttle.  I'm not sure that should happen in a $40k wagon.

[SaltyDog]

While all that is true, it's much cheaper than other, better luxury sedans, especially used.  Your biggest complaint is looks, and an old chassis doesn't necessarily mean a bad chassis.

[SJ_GTI]

I think it looks pretty nice.

And its funny that its mechanicals are outdated. The 2.3T has as much power over a wide power band as any small turbo on the market (re: Mazdaspeed3 and 6).

[ifcar]

But what other small turbo is in a $40,000 luxury car?

[Andaluz]

While all that is true, it's much cheaper than other, better luxury sedans, especially used.  Your biggest complaint is looks, and an old chassis doesn't necessarily mean a bad chassis.

How wrong you are!

The Saab 9-5 is based on the old Vauxhall Vectra (Opel Vectra B) pictured below.




A car notorious for being boring and uninspiring to drive. Ask nickdrinkwater, Cawimmer and they all will agree with me on this.

The 9-5 never has never been an involving car to drive IMO.

[Andaluz]

When my brother worked at a rental car agency, I got to ride in a 9-5 wagon.  He had a straight away to the valet pickup spot where he could gun it.  While I admit it was fun, I also remember a shudder coming from the torque steer under full throttle.  I'm not sure that should happen in a $40k wagon.

It's a large front-wheel-drive car with 260 rampaging horses. What can you expect?

[mazda6er]

It's a large front-wheel-drive car with 260 rampaging horses. What can you expect?

I think he's talking about the shudder, not the torque steer itself. And may I ask what your screen name comes from or what it means?

[SJ_GTI]

But what other small turbo is in a $40,000 luxury car?

WTF does that have to do with anything?

[SJ_GTI]

It's a large front-wheel-drive car with 260 rampaging horses. What can you expect?

As opposed to the A6, which comes with 255 HP in a FWD car?

You guys are petty and rediculous IMHO. You want to not like the car, so you make up reasons why.

For what it costs, its a pretty nice car. Too big for my tastes, and honestly it only satisfies a small niche, but that does not make it a bad car.

[nickdrinkwater]

It looks like shit in person as well as in pictures.

Andaluz is right - the Vectra is renowned for handling like a dog.  A sound motorway cruiser apparently though.

[pommes-t]

I agree with Andaluz.

My uncle works as a lawyer for GM (besides in his office) and so he mostly drives GM cars. Every 5 years he gets new ones. He once had an Omega MV6, which I liked a lot as a little child. My uncle drives like a maniac and it was a lot of fun to sit shotgun and go through the countryside with 190km/h...
After this one he got a Boxter and then a Saab 95... (the prefacelift). It had the 3 litre Diesel engine and was tuned up to 250hp if I remember correctly. The car had no appeal to me. The gear lever was exactly the same, the door handles were from black plastic. The interior didn't look scandinavic cool like for example Volvos, but simply cheap.

A good thing about th 95 was that it was WAY cheaper than the competition.

The new facelift makes it worse IMO. The car looks ...fake! Look at those headlights. It looks like it would predict to be bigger. Not attractive at all IMO.

I didn't know that it's based on the Vectra though.

What I think is really dangerous for Saab's reputation are the US-market only Subaru Impreza and Chevrolet Trailblazer based ones. That's not good chassis-sharing. That's simply cheap and uninspired. But this chassis-sharing is a mistake many US American brands have made and still make.

For example the GM Vans (old and new). Or Dodge/Plymouth Neon. There'S no point in making the same cars and simply rebadge them.

Take a look at Audi A3/VW Golf. That's an example how chassis sharing should be done. The GM style simply kills any kind of brand-identity and so such great brands like Oldsmobile have to die.

That's at least my opinion!

[The Pirate]

I like the 9-5 a lot, and if I had a bit more to spend on a car, a used one would be a serious consideration.

I don't care for this restyle though.

[Catman]

I have to agree.  I prefer the old corporate grille.  This one looks foul.

[ifcar]

WTF does that have to do with anything?

That you're comparing power against cars that it doesn't compete with.

[SJ_GTI]

That you're comparing power against cars that it doesn't compete with.

Are you looking for an arguement?

I was not comparing the car to cheaper cars, I was comparing its engine to other engines. In the Saab 9-5, a 260 HP 2.3T is "outdated" but lesser power 2.3T's in Mazda's or Acuras are fantastic engines. Being cheaper doesn't correlate to power last I checked. A Honda Accord will outpower a 328i (with an engine roughly the same displacement), a WRX will outpower an A3 or A4, etc....

So again, you show me that you are essentially looking for reaosns to not like the car by applying standards to it that aren't applied to other cars.

[ifcar]

The car is out-accelerated by every competitor, or virtually every. It doesn't matter how much technology they put in if it doesn't accomplish anything.

[SJ_GTI]

My give up!   

[Raghavan]

I think it looks fugly. The only Saab i like is the 9-2X, and that's an Impreza!

[mazda6er]

I think it looks fugly. The only Saab i like is the 9-2X, and that's an Impreza!

Oh God. Poser Mobile.

[Raghavan]

Oh God. Poser Mobile.

Yeah, it is. That's why i'd rather get the Subaru versions.

[cozmik]

The 9-5 has never been top of class, but then, it's never been priced like it either. It handles pretty well, and Saab has made enough changes to the platform that it does pretty well. The update doesn't look so bad in person. Neither does the corporate GM controls. The new radio is actually a lot more advanced than the old unit, since it was, well, old. That said, I would have liked to have seen a few more things changed if they were just updating it. I'd have liked the gear shift changed out, a move to the electronic key. I also would have like to have seen them do something with the side sheet metal, so that it would match up a but better with the new front and rear. I also really think they should have put the 2.8T V6 in. They said it would have required extra modification to the engine bay, but I think it would have been well worth it. The V6 is so smooth and refined, it really would have brought new life to the car. And the power delivery is so linear, that torque steer is much less of a problem. It's got major balls too. Considering this car has to last for another 2 years (3 or so, total) it really should have been done.

[ifcar]

Actually, the 9-2X Aero, when discounted, was less expensive than a comparable WRX wagon.

[ifcar]

The 9-5 has never been top of class, but then, it's never been priced like it either. It handles pretty well, and Saab has made enough changes to the platform that it does pretty well. The update doesn't look so bad in person. Neither does the corporate GM controls. The new radio is actually a lot more advanced than the old unit, since it was, well, old. That said, I would have liked to have seen a few more things changed if they were just updating it. I'd have liked the gear shift changed out, a move to the electronic key. I also would have like to have seen them do something with the side sheet metal, so that it would match up a but better with the new front and rear. I also really think they should have put the 2.8T V6 in. They said it would have required extra modification to the engine bay, but I think it would have been well worth it. The V6 is so smooth and refined, it really would have brought new life to the car. And the power delivery is so linear, that torque steer is much less of a problem. It's got major balls too. Considering this car has to last for another 2 years (3 or so, total) it really should have been done.

The 9-5 has never been inexpensive, even discounted, unless you're comparing it against 5-Series class rather than 3-Series class. A V6 would have definitely helped it though, but I'd say the 3.6-liter's power is necessary at $40,000 over the 2.8.

[Raghavan]

Actually, the 9-2X Aero, when discounted, was less expensive than a comparable WRX wagon.

Really?
Then i'd get the 9-2X. I think it looks better than the new nose of the WRX anyways.
I'm such a poser.

[cozmik]

The 9-5 has never been inexpensive, even discounted, unless you're comparing it against 5-Series class rather than 3-Series class. A V6 would have definitely helped it though, but I'd say the 3.6-liter's power is necessary at $40,000 over the 2.8.

It's never been inexpensive, but it's not been expensive compared to things like the 5 series, etc, which is what it's sized like.

The 3.6 would be pointless. The 2.8 turbo Saab uses makes 250 hp in it's current form, which is similar to the current tune of the 3.6, and will easily generate a lot more than that. They aren't using much boost. It would be very easy to bring the 2.8 up the 270 hp and have no issues at all with it. With the BSR software upgrade in the 9-3, the 2.8 make 285 hp and 330 lb/ft torque. And it's still said to be reliable. IIRC, the 2.8T can also handle a larger turbo than what it has now, and produce well over 300 HP.

The 3.6 probably weighs more too, which we don't need in an already nose heavy FWD car.