Saab 9-5 Aero Review

By P.J. McCombs
April 20, 2007 -

Research / Buy This Car

1200716.jpgSaab may have been "Born from Jets," but there's little about the brand's current offerings that you'd call state-of-the-art. The 9-3 has changed little since its ‘03 introduction. The 9-7X dates back to the ‘02 Chevy TrailBlazer. And the 9-5 has been stuck in holding pattern since ‘98. I recently tested a 9-5 to see if the quirky car lives up to its high tech brand proposition. My range-topping tester's trim designation: "Aero." That pounding sound you hear is GM's marketers driving home the high-altitude hype.

Luxury sedan buyers tend to place beauty at the top of their list of priorities. Fortunately, the 9-5's lines have worn well over the past nine years. But they have, well, worn. In 2006, Saab applied a masked-rider makeover to the front fascia. The result: a familiar face wearing Ray-Bans. In today's world of flame-surfaced shapes, it's not enough. The Saab's crisp, formal three-box shape lacks presence, and displays less than modern panel gaps.

1200727.jpgUnfortunately, the 9-5's exterior is the apex of its aesthetics. Stepping into the cabin admits you to the Museum of Premium Interior Materials, circa 1997. The 9-5's instrument panel is utterly artless, a drab plastic escarpment with scatter-shot secondary controls. Buttons and knobs feel hollow to the touch, and a single cupholder collapses loosely out of the dash. Born from a U.S. Airways galley, perhaps.

With petrified polymers filling your peripheral vision, it's difficult to feel much love at the 9-5's helm. Is that a Suzuki Forenza's mirror-adjuster pod? It is! Assessed discretely, some of the cabin's bits delight. Chief among these are the 9-5's seats. The chairs are wide, soft and all-day supportive: a welcome departure from the Teutonic class norm. Ditto the large windows and low beltline, which afford an airy view out. Passenger space is first-class.

1200696.jpgI'll avoid the usual hoopla over the 9-5's console-mounted ignition, and focus instead on what happens when you twist it: turbulence. On paper, the Aero's 260-horse, 2.3-liter turbo four seems like a timely alternative (20/30 mpg med stick) to the thirsty sixes and V8's common to this class. In person, the mini-mill idles with an economy car's dry, raspy drone, sending the wrong sort of tingles up your spine in the process. In a car that purports to rival 528is and E350s, what we have here is a failure to communicate.   

Despite its hopelessly proletarian character, the 9-5's engine has its charms; specifically, its ability to inhale straightaways in strong, gratifying lunges. Unfortunately, with the standard five-speed manual transmission, such efforts are accompanied by strong, less-than-gratifying lunges towards the hedgerows. Torque steer, the tendency for the front wheels to squirm in a rubber-smoking hunt for traction, is obvious by its presence.

Thus, while I normally implore shoppers to consider the stick shift rather than defaulting to the automatic, I'm flip-flopping this time. The autobox quells the 9-5's tendency to torque steer and spares you the numb, ambiguous shift action typical of Saab sticks.

1200715.jpgYou might expect the 9-5's driven front wheels to spoil its handling, too. In fact, its at-the-limit behavior is remarkably poised. The Aero benefits from a lower chassis (10mm), firmer springs and more aggressive shock absorbers. Hustled around a closed course, the Aero exhibits surprisingly gluey grip and a wispy, tossable nature that eludes most German iron.

Driven below the limit, however, the Aero feels significantly less graceful. Its power-assisted rack and pinion steering is precise enough but over-light, and there's a gritty, insubstantial quality to this aged platform's ride. Arthritis? More like Parkinson's. Textured surfaces feed a steady stream of high-frequency shivers through the 9-5's structure and steering column. Combined with the tingly engine vibes, this car's manners are better compared with Mazda than Mercedes.

Which brings me to a pointed question for prospective 9-5 buyers: why buy a new Aero when you can spend Mazda6 money on virtually the same car, used? For $25k, a low-mileage 2005 Sport Wagon certainly represents a more interesting (and roomier, more agile) family taxi than the CamCord.

1200709.jpgMoreover, as competition for the current 5-Series and Infiniti M, the Aero is worse than marginal; it's a curio, an irrelevance. No discerning luxury buyer would suffer the 9-5's downscale tactile sensations, and the Birkenstock-shod professors who used to resonate with Saab's brand values are now tooling around in Prii.

So what does the future hold for the 9-5? Um… nothing, really, unless you're squinting into the hazy distance that is model year 2009. That year's all-new 9-5, built on GM's Epsilon 2 platform, must be a true flagship product. It has to be evocative in design, unique in character and engaging on the road. Otherwise, Saab's promises will continue to ring more hollow than a Viggen's intake nacelle, and must eventually fall silent.


Research / Buy This Car

79 Responses to “Saab 9-5 Aero Review”

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 » Show All

  • discoholic Says:

    Saab’s biggest problem is that GM thought it would be a great idea to take them over and build Vectra-platformed designermobiles on the cheap, sort of like IKEA on wheels. Of course, they thought Saab would then still appeal to its cliché customer base, i.e. the Granola-with-money crowd. Naturally, the customers tended to be more intelligent than that, wondering why they should spend €/$ 10,000 more on a Vectra/Subaru/Chevy just because it was “Born from Jets.” (Pigs would fly if they were born from jets.)

    So far, GM has done absolutely nothing to fix this problem, apart from a dubious nose job on the 9-5. (Lipstick on those flying pigs, anyone?) - and evidently they still have no real idea of the direction the brand is supposed to take. The Saabrolet Jetblazer is a case in point. I have my doubts as to whether the 2009 9-5 will be able to win Saab’s customers back.

  • philbailey Says:

    Probably one of the most expensive and difficult brands of car to repair. When you call the dealer for parts prices, sit down and hold the phone well away from your ear. I truly cannot ever find a raison d’etre for this car.

  • SherbornSean Says:

    Dead brand walking.

  • Michael Karesh Says:

    PJ identifies the limited number of reasons to buy one of these: great seats, airy cabin (better driving position than the 9-3), somewhat entertaining handling…and cheap price used.

    I included the 9-5 Aero in a recent blog entry on used car bargains:

    http://www.truedelta.com/blog/?p=63

    New the 9-5 is clearly not a good value, which explains why monthly sales are only around 400.

  • tsofting Says:

    (20/30 mpg hos stick) - where the word “hos” is supposed to mean, what?

  • Frank Williams Says:

    “hos” is supposed to mean, what?

    Swedish for “with”

  • Brian E Says:

    I’ll admit some amount of affection for the platform, since it also underpinned the Saturn L300 I used to drive. But what made for cheap thrills in a used Saturn is not what makes a satisfying driving experience in a $38k sedan.

    The comment about interior materials is spot-on: the interiors of both the 9-3 and the 9-5 are just bad, bad, bad, with the exception of the seats and the steering wheel. The Saturn Aura significantly out-classes most of the Saab’s interior materials, and is built on a much more modern version of the Vectra donor chassis. Its V6 puts the same number of horses down in a much smoother fashion, and never exhibits the kind of torque steer found in the 9-5. And all of this costs less than the base 9-3 sedan.

  • GS650G Says:

    Parts are indeed expensive. A pair of brake rotors set my neighbor back over 200 dollars. The other day it would not start and the fix was a very expensive sensor only the dealer had. Overall a rather mudane car that offers nothing new and everything about it screams badge engineered.

    The days of SAAB glory are over.

  • qfrog Says:

    This car needs a eulogy not a review.

  • bfg9k Says:

    GS650G:
    April 20th, 2007 at 8:48 am

    Parts are indeed expensive. A pair of brake rotors set my neighbor back over 200 dollars.

    The pair of Brembo rotors for my ‘01 9-5 wagon sitting on the floor next to me cost me $49 apiece. The trick with Saab parts is never, ever buying them at the dealer. Mail order is far more reasonable.

    It’s worth noting that this car is still one of the very safest on the road, best in its class according to IIHS Injury & Death statistics, beating much newer designs. The wagon is quite nice, with a cavernous trunk and wide backseat that allows 2 adults & a car seat in comfort.

    Saab owners (myself amongst them) are noted for their fervent brand loyalty. GM appears intent on beating that loyalty out of us. Pushing the new 9-5 back to 2009 is a travesty and GM has systematically starved Saab for product for years. Now with the Cadillac BLS, it appears that GM is intent on transforming Cadillac into their global luxury brand, while ignoring Saab’s near-luxury, cross-continent brand. The Aero-X and 9x concepts shows that there’s plenty of terrific design ideas in Trollhatten, but there’s no love for them in Detroit.

    My wagon cost me $13k when it was 3 years old with 50k miles. An unbeatable deal. It’s excellent highway performance has saved my bacon more than once.

  • Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 » Show All



    Leave a Reply Back to Top


    You must be logged in to post a comment.

Vehicle 1  
Vehicle 2  
 
Pricing engine provided by TrueDelta.

New Content Feeds

Bookmark This Post

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

© 2004 - 2008 The Truth About Cars | Terms & Conditions | POWERED