Until today, I've only ever driven one Saab. It was an F plate 900 Turbo 16v about 10 years ago, and I got out of it thinking what an all round superb bit of kit. Impressively solid, very quick, comfy and great fun to drive. I wanted one.
Wind forward a decade or so, and SWMBO is off on one of her occasional business trips. As usual the company have provided a hire car for her, and as it was short notice, they've given her the only car they had available, a beautiful black 08 plate 9-3 Aero Sportwagon auto. As I grabbed the keys to go for a drive, I felt a pang of anticipation and excitement that no car in years has provided.
What a disappointment! The interior is stylish, but the finish feels nothing like special enough for a £28k car. The driving position is strange with the steering wheel always feeling too close, whatever you do with the seat and wheel. Many of the minor controls feel cheap (including the door mirror control that looks just like the one in my old Cavalier), and the engine idles roughly with vibes transmitted into the car.
On the road, it's reasonably quick, but never feels anything like 210 bhp worth. The engine is harsh with a rattly, "tappety" note over 4,000 RPM that has mechanical sympathy starting to kick in long before the autobox in "Sport" mode, and the torque steer is dreadful. The steering is heavy, but relays no more information than my S60 and the ride is fidgety. Where the old 900 involved and engaged, this just covers ground. Admittedly quickly.
This is not how I remember the Saabs of old. Is it rose tints at work, my standards changing, or Saab going downhill? Saab were always a marque I respected - they made quirky, but brilliant cars that in my limited experience were fabulous to drive. The only possible thing that marked this particular car out for me as a Saab was the floor mounted ignition key. Take that away and I could have been driving anything. It had no identity or "feel" of its own, and that mass produced feel to the interior was a real let down.
I know its fashionable to bemoan the effect of the GM takeover, but my Volvo still feels like a Volvo even though Ford ran the show when it was designed. A Jag still feels like a Jag, a Lotus like a Lotus - big company ownership of smaller ones isn't always a bad thing. I didn't even think of this when I got in the car and formed my impressions - I saw a Saab.
The last car I drove in this price bracket was a friends E90 320d, and that just felt like an expensive, beautifully crafted bit of kit. The Saab frankly just didn't.
My goodness it looks good though, especially in jet black with those lovely wheels and the subtle Aero bodykit.
Cheers
DP
Edited by Webmaster on 30/04/2008 at 02:10
|
We have a 9-5 MY 2002 - we really like it, and I still feel like I am in a Saab, but we have had 93's as courtesy cars and I really didn't feel like I was in anything special, or even a Saab.
As you say, they don't feel like expensive cars, but the depreciation is massive so maybe at 3 year old you might find it good value for money.
|
TinTin01 hits the nail right on the head - Saabs aren't in the same league as BMW, Audi and Mercedes for quality or driving dynamics, but are incredibly value as a used buy. I bought an older 9-5 Aero HOT and it was my best car ever - mainly because it did so much for the money. They're really practical cars with lots of kit and surprise and delight features.
DP was right too about how they look in the metal - in the right colour the 9-5 is a stunner. The sporty 9-5s are unbelievably quick too - the most bang for your buck for sure.
Get a sporty specced fairly recent one, in a good colour, that's lost most of its value and you won't go far wrong...makes a refreshing change from the sea of rep spec Bimmers and aggressive Audis.
|
I feel the same way. I've always liked SAABs and still like the pre facelift 9-5, however the "airfix" quality of the interior together with some of the reliability horror stories you can read about- the Vectra C is better quality and available with the same engines.
I remember looking at a 1989 900 4 door about five years ago, and whilst there was a bit of rust on the door bottoms it felt like a tank.
|
|
Someone I know was in dispute with the dealer over a new or nearly new 9-3 a few years ago. Don't know what came of it and can't remember what was wrong with it, but he wasn't a happy bunny.
|
I think your critique is a bit harsh - perhaps the expectations were too high. I've regularly been driving a facelift (57 plate) 9-3 2.8 V6 Aero recently and thought it was rather good - refined, extremely comfortable and with a fine engine and six speed auto. It rides and handles capably enough and torque steer is very impressively controlled, even from fierce standing starts (perhaps it has more sophisticated electronic management than the less powerful 2.0T Aero?) The only negatives are the sub-25mpg economy and slightly more road noise that you'd expect from a fast motorway cruiser.
The cabin isn't going to trouble Audi, true, but it's still well made and looks and feels distinctively Saabish in many of the details other than just the location of the ignition - primarily the seats, the air vents, the shape of the fascia and the straightforward Scandinavian ergonomics.
Criticism of the 9-3 as nothing more than a tarted-up Vectra is tired and wide of the mark too. Yes, it uses the Epsilon platform but it has a different wheelbase and suspension and several unique engines. When you can get a new one £6k or more cheaper than an equivalently fast and well equipped 3-series or A4, it seems unrealistic to expect a similar level of perceived quality or dynamic polish. The next gen car will get a lot closer though.
|
|
|
|
I know its fashionable to bemoan the effect of the GM takeover but my Volvo still feels like a Volvo even though Ford ran the show when it was designed.
The ink on Ford's cheque had barely dried when the S60 was launched. The first Volvo that Ford had anything to do with was the 2004 S40. The XC90 was left to Volvo and that was launched 2002.
I agree with you regarding SAAB though. I had a mid-90's 900 V6 auto which, at the time, was great for long distances. My first thought when looking for a family car was SAAB. I looked at a 9-3 diesel. I bought a Volvo S60 D5.
|
My first ever Saab was a 99 that I bought in 1975. Since then, I've had a variety - 99s, 900s, gap of a few years in between when I switched to Volvo then (after bad Volvo experiences) went back to Saab for a (post-GM) 9-3 in 1998, then 9-5s.
1. The driving experience now is nothing like the "Real Saabs"
2. The finish of Post-GM is no better than a Vectra
3. The garage support is still great - only because the local staff are Saab enthusiasts
4. Reliability is no better than any other car
I used to love the Saab experience - now, it's just aother car - nothing special any more.
Sad, really.
|
I can agree wholeheartedly with the above, having had a sucession of pre-GM SAABs. My first was a 2 stroke and the last one I kept for 21 years. One 96 "died" a hero having been involved in a major accident at a time when most cars had neither laminated screens nor dual circuit brakes - both features may have saved my life.
I could never bring myself to sign a cheque made out to GM having seen the results of their value engineering. This in stark contrast to the innumerable clever features on the old SAABs, some of which became apparent only after a period of ownership.
So, it's VAG diesels for me now - brilliant engines but I really do miss my SAAB. That car had a rare feeling of total integrity with the driver as though it had been conceived and designed largely by one person - who knew what he wanted. The VAG car is competent, but is the result of too many committees and meetings - and feels like it.
659.
|
|
|
Agree completely with grumpyscot except on point 4; I felt reliability was definitely worse. I bought my first Saab in 1975 and sold my last 9-3 in 1998. The 9-3 was easily the most unreliable car I have owned and not particularly pleasant to drive.
Early clutch failure, burst hoses, airbag warning lights, leaking core plug and bulkhead shake made it a real disappointment after two "real Saabs". Local dealers were excellent and liberal in their use of the warranty. However after breaking down on holiday in Ireland and the next year in France it had to go.
alfalfa
|
Wow, I was expecting a bit of a flaming with a little hindsight after my posting, but not so.
Yes, I may have been harsh, but expectations are everything. I expected the car to be as brilliant as the old 900 was, and it fell short. I expected it to make up for any shortcomings with its sheer quirkiness and originality. It didn't. I wasn't going to trot out the old argument about the GM takeover because as has been said, it's been done to death, but the truth is, to me at least, the car feels like any other mass produced car out there. Maybe this is true with all cars to a degree, but you wouldn't mistake a BMW for anything else, and the Saab is priced to compete directly.
I can at least account for the relative lack of performance - HJ's figures say the auto option adds a faintly ridiculous second and a half to the 0-60 time. The manual version is, on paper at least, a pretty fast car. The auto isn't, and doesn't feel it either. What kind of autobox castrates a car that badly? Maybe the manual version would have presented a better opinion, or the bigger engined 2.8 version.
Some very interesting responses though. Thanks.
Cheers
DP
|
|
I think Volvo have gone the same way. Even the Swedes don't buy them in the same numbers any more apparently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree on most points, and although I think the interior is still better then a GM one (better design if nothing else), I would stick my neck out and say the 9-3 handles better than the 900. I always liked the 900, but the car did torque steer, or understeer everywhere. (Ironically, a bit like a cavalier (although that had less torque steer, it had No steer instead!)).
I think the way the car feels / drives is common to all modern cars, as they feel insulated from the road.
Edited by Shaz {p} on 30/04/2008 at 16:38
|
I would stick my neck out and say the 9-3 handles better than the 900. I always liked the 900 but the car did torque steer or understeer everywhere. (Ironically a bit like a cavalier (although that had less torque steer it had No steer instead!)).
I don't think anyone could pretend the 900 handled. It didn't.
As a long distance car which could accommodate a family in relative comfort it was a good choice for me though.
It's interesting to read what REAL SAAB owners think, my ownership comparison was early GM product with latest GM product so can't say I see them moving in the right direction.
I had a ride in a neighbours '76 99 model in the early eighties as a kid and always remember what a massive car it felt like in comparison with my Dad's car. It went quite well too for the time.
|
|
The striking feature of most Saabs, 900 and 9000 anyway, was their enormous, cavernous boot, easily big enough to hide three people in relative comfort.
|
........as pointed out in their brochures at the time.
Different people, different requirements!
|
To be fair, although most owners of older Saab's will say 'they're just not the same', it doesn't necessarily mean they are bad cars. Modern Saabs are still amongst the nicest looking cars on the road, the seats are still great, and despite the sludge issues, I don't think they are that much worse than other non-Japanese cars for reliability.
As the OP said there is quite a high expectation with a Saab, but I've been in MB's and BMW's and been a bit underwhelmed too. If petrol wasn't so expensive I'd have another c900 turbo tomorrow.
|
Wait till you see what a 1 year old Saab is worth, truly scary
MVP
|
|
|
|
I had a brand new 93SS Vector Diesel, and only kept it 16 months due to my overall unhappiness with the fit and finish and niggling technical problems. At the time I used to read the Saabscene website and it seemed that the new 93SS was all about dodgey trim, rusting wheelnuts and rattling front suspension.
All of the motoring magazines at best exagerated (lied) about the residuals of the new 93 at the time, saying they would be on a par with BMW etc.
When GM finally totally took over Saab, one GM exec was quoted as saying something like "Saab is a company run by boffins in sports jackets with leather elbow patches, this must change".
I defected to Audi with no regrets, sorry Saab is no longer the great and innovative company it once was.
|
Aye, and GM wanted it run like their business - all accounts with calculators and spreadsheets!
It was the chucking out of the boffins that caused the slide.
I still maintain, that somehow, inexplicably, the Vectra C is far superior in every measurable way to it's Saab 9-3 cousin (except image!). How that can happen, I have no idea.
Perhaps because GM alienated the remaining Saab workers so much, and got rid of many they should have kept! Fairly typical take-over story though.
|
|
"Rusty wheel nuts" - I remember that, looking at a year old low mileage 9-5 at a main dealer a couple of years back. It's ridiculous that such a manufacturer can get something so simple so wrong.
|
That's nothing - on my sister's Mercedes-Benz SLK the wheel bolts shear off when you try to undo them.
659.
|
|
|
|
