Illustrated: 2010 Saab 9-5 Sedan

[Blake Noble]

Illustrated: 2010 Saab 9-5 Sedan
New 9-5 is coming soon.

Link to original Article @ Left Lane News

Some time next year, Swedish automaker Saab will begin production of a redesigned 9-5 Sedan. For the 2010 model year, the all-new 9-5 will take on an Aero-X-inspired look, while building on the existing model's somewhat angular roofline.

Saab general manager Steve Shannon recently told dealers the company would reveal the new 9-5 later this year at a major auto show, according to trade publication Automotive News. Saab enthusiast website Trollhattan Saab has speculated the most likely venue is the 2008 Paris Motor Show in October.

Also according to the website, the new model will have larger engines, increased overall dimensions, and will be a "true flagship" for the automaker. Some reports indicate the range-topping model will have up to 350 horsepower.

The new 9-5 will ride on a modified version of GM’s Epsilon II platform, which also underpins the new Saturn Aura. Expect it to have firmer suspension, improved steering, and better electronics.

[Croc]

Looks good!

[Sixty8panther]

Looks way better than that botched abortion of a raccoon looking thing they're selling these dys!

[pow]

Super cool. I really like it.

[turbo200]

as it goes with PR and 'buzz'-generating, this could very well be an official preview cloaked under disguise as a skewed 'magazine-preview'. it's a little disappointing. I was hoping for the coupe-profile hatch that was being speculated. I think that would serve a much better distinguisher for Saab's core values. safety, functionality, distinctive designs/profiles

just taking it for what it is, there's some saab-ness that is hard not to love, the blacked-out A-pillar with that wonderful old-time slope, the upright roofline, traditional hockey stick c-pillar, and the pushed-in edges at the bottom. so i mean, it's good looking and all, but I think they would have made a wiser investment in making something more distinctive in shape.

Edited April 18, 2008 by turbo200

[loki]

up to 350 hp..... hmmm, turbo'ed 2.8 or a highpo 3.6?

[Blake Noble]

I wonder why the artist of the sketch goes uncredited?

[Intrepidation]

That's awesome

[Northstar]

Looks pretty cool.

up to 350 hp..... hmmm, turbo'ed 2.8 or a highpo 3.6?

Well, I would imagine it would have a turbo, being a Saab. Probably turbo 3.6; I don't know if they can get 350HP out of the 2.8 and make it suitable for a daily driver at the same time.

[VenSeattle]

Saab gets the SWB & LWB EPII. I'm beginning to wonder if Buick will do the same in the US. It'll be interesting to compare the Invicta and 9-5.

[ZL-1]

Saab gets the SWB & LWB EPII. I'm beginning to wonder if Buick will do the same in the US. It'll be interesting to compare the Invicta and 9-5.

They'll have totally different flavours.

There was this old rumour on www.automotorsport.se (in Swedish, sorry) about the NG 9-3 being put on DeltaII, meaning the 9-3 range would have both hatches and a sedan/wagon. However, with this report that the NG 9-5 will be bigger than the current model I think that the lineup might very well be DeltaII 9-1, SWB EpII 9-3, TE 9-4X and LWB EpII 9-5.

EDIT:

New Insignia = 4.82m in length and current Astra sedan = 4.61m in length. I am now starting to wonder if it wouldn't be better for Saab (if technically/ and financially feasible) to have the NG 9-5 on the same EpII wheelbase as the Insignia at around 4.85m in length and a full 9-3 range (3-door/5-door hatches and a sedan/wagon) based on DeltaII with the sedan/wagon at around 4.6m/4.65m in length. I'd say let Buick have a 5m-long LWB EpII and let the Euro brands' cars be smaller.

Edited April 18, 2008 by ZL-1

[enzl]

Wow. A $40K+ EpII is what we've waiting 10+ years for?

Just sell it to the Chinese already.

Another 1 step forward, 2 back for the General. Just when the 'bu and CTS give me hope, they dish out some 'premium' rehashes of $20K products--just like the BRX & 9-4X will be.

They make it so hard to be a fan.

[z28luvr01]

Yeah, GM sucks. I mean, how could any manufacturer do something so cheezy as share platforms between entry level and luxury brands? They'll never get it.

Oh, wait:

[SuperSport623]

[Drew Dowdell]

oh.... wait...

[ZL-1]

I believe that Passat and that A4 do not share their platform.

[SuperSport623]

Eagle-X6

:rotflmao:

[pow]

I believe that Passat and that A4 do not share their platform.

Yeah, the previous generation Passat (1998-2005) did share a platform with the A4 from two generations ago (1996-2001). That's where VW got their longitudinal engine setup, 30V engine, and five-link front suspension. From 2002 onwards, the A4 has used an Audi-exclusive platform. The current Passat has a transverse/front strut layout and an iron-block DI VR6 as opposed to the A4's alloy DI V6 and more advanced front suspension.

[Drew Dowdell]

I believe that Passat and that A4 do not share their platform.

My mistake. The A4 was on the PL46, a modified version of the Passat's PQ46 up until 2007.

[pow]

My mistake. The A4 was on the PL46, a modified version of the Passat's PQ46 up until 2007.

PL46 (2002 A4+) and PQ46 (2006+ Passat) don't share anything in common. Different drivetrain layouts, different suspension...

[ZL-1]

My mistake. The A4 was on the PL46, a modified version of the Passat's PQ46 up until 2007.

Don't worry, I'm just on a nitpicking mood today. :AH-HA_wink:

And your point was brilliantly illustrated. I think users who don't have broadband will hunt you down, though

Edited April 18, 2008 by ZL-1

[Drew Dowdell]

Don't worry, I'm just on a nitpicking mood today. :AH-HA_wink:

And your point was brilliantly illustrated. I think users who don't have broadband will hunt you down, though

let them try to catch me as I race through the interwebs!

[ZL-1]

let them try to catch me as I race through the interwebs!

Interwebs? Were those also invented by Al Gore?

[Drew Dowdell]

PL46 (2002 A4+) and PQ46 (2006+ Passat) don't share anything in common. Different drivetrain layouts, different suspension...

arg..... ok, I got that one wrong too... VW platform names are confusing!

but the Passat and A4 shared a platform at one point! And THAT is my point.

[VenSeattle]

Wow. A $40K+ EpII is what we've waiting 10+ years for?

Just sell it to the Chinese already.

Another 1 step forward, 2 back for the General. Just when the 'bu and CTS give me hope, they dish out some 'premium' rehashes of $20K products--just like the BRX & 9-4X will be.

They make it so hard to be a fan.

The near luxury market is still one of the hottest markets in the US industry. As for the "rehash" comment, you have no basis for it when you have yet to see production versions of the BRX, 9-4x, Invicta, 9-3, or 9-5. You're too eager to be disappointed.

[VenSeattle]

They'll have totally different flavours.

Oh, I'm positive of that. I'm just very interested in having both of them available.

[Drew Dowdell]

Wow. A $40K+ EpII is what we've waiting 10+ years for?

Just sell it to the Chinese already.

Another 1 step forward, 2 back for the General. Just when the 'bu and CTS give me hope, they dish out some 'premium' rehashes of $20K products--just like the BRX & 9-4X will be.

They make it so hard to be a fan.

Since you've obviously already driven an Epsilon II chassis, could you enlighten the rest of us as to it's dynamics?

And the PRX and 9-4x aren't on the Equinox/Terrain/Torrent platform like you're insinuating.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

up to 350 hp..... hmmm, turbo'ed 2.8 or a highpo 3.6?

Detuned LS3...

(J/K)

[Robert Hall]

Wow. A $40K+ EpII is what we've waiting 10+ years for?

Just sell it to the Chinese already.

Another 1 step forward, 2 back for the General. Just when the 'bu and CTS give me hope, they dish out some 'premium' rehashes of $20K products--just like the BRX & 9-4X will be.

They make it so hard to be a fan.

What else would it be built on??? SAABs have always been FWD, and the Epsilon II is the newest GM FWD platform.... Wake up. SAAB is too small to get it's own dedicated platform.

Edited April 21, 2008 by moltar

[enzl]

Since you've obviously already driven an Epsilon II chassis, could you enlighten the rest of us as to it's dynamics?

And the PRX and 9-4x aren't on the Equinox/Terrain/Torrent platform like you're insinuating.

EpII will grace everything from a $20K 'bu or Aura to a $40K+ Saab...I haven't been impressed by GM's previous silk purse from a sow's ear efforts for Saab--that's all.

As for the spirited defense of the Theta/Ep CUV's, well, let's just say that there's every reason to think the 9-4 & BRX will be mere upgrades of the future 'nox, not truly unique architectures. I'm willing to bet you'll have similar dimensions and fairly similar powertrains--just peep out the spy photos floating around.

More evidence that the divisional needs are eating GM's young, IMO.

[regfootball]

that rendering sucks and is bland. there is an older photchop of a potential 9-5 out there with a menacing rear pillar look to it, time to find that, it was much better.

http://carnoise.blogspot.com/2008/04/2009-...to-gallery.html

Edited April 21, 2008 by regfootball

[turbo200]

that rendering sucks and is bland. there is an older photchop of a potential 9-5 out there with a menacing rear pillar look to it, time to find that, it was much better.

http://carnoise.blogspot.com/2008/04/2009-...to-gallery.html

there were drawings previous to these renderings that looked even better but followed the same theme. i think the concept is the best part of the rendering, but the results in the renderings are ghastly.

[enzl]

As a further note to posters obsessed with the platform sharing done by others....

What other makers do is immaterial.

GM needs 'Home run' product, ASAP. Emulating others will merely bring them back to competitive with future Saab product. They need spectacular...and between the BRX, BLS, 9-3, 9-5 & 9-4X---along with possible niche entries like 4 dr. coupes, SAV's et al, I would argue a singular 'premium' FWD/AWD (think current Audi B4) platform might make perfect sense. It could underpin Buick's future stuff, be built across the globe & sold in ANY country.

Or just follow the horde...that's how GM is going to leapfrog the competition & replace revenues from big trucks

[turbo200]

I agree, GM has been stringing Saab along for far too long. in saab they have a valuable entity with a recognizable face and really good mystique. the only way they are going to be able to remake saab is if the core engineering is there. again, i always have to say you must look at the competition and where they're going. right now, at bmw we have a very good and standard-bearer entry level solution, the 3-series, 1-series, and the X3. to try and compare the execution in those [mostly aging] products to any Saab is misguided, at best. look at the 1-series launch for example, it's another example of how good product sells itself. there's a good amount of advertising, not a bombardment mind you, but the real advertising has been all the magazine covers and great reviews this product has recieved. i mean, just go and pick up automobile, read the review, and if you don't find yourself wanting to own one then you don't know exciting and you don't know exciting driving.

as for epsilon, anything is possible. if gm can really engineer the hell out of this chassis, it could happen, they could find the right ride/handling equation for even a luxury intender, luxury priced unit like Saab. the problem is it doesn't really make sense to have a $40-50k product [top end for 9-3 and mid for 9-5] share a basic architecture with a $20k. that's a bit too wide of a spectrum, and just sounds like it won't work. it's different from say a $29k G8 sharing a platform with a $50k Cadillac because the extra 9k goes a long way from 20k, which is basically a bare bones basic car, then again companies like honda have shown a real sophisticated chassis and car can be produced for 20k. let's pay tribute to GM and GME because Delta really is a great architecture that has produced very solid chassis to receive much praise in form of astra, and to a lesser extent cobalt [expecially SS]. with epsilon they've never been able to top ford's own mondeo, a midpack car intended to compete with 3-series on the low end, i mean it undercuts that car. they're gonna have to seriously improve on that work.

i don't blame enzl for his mistrust, after all we're putting a lot of faith to believe GM is going to competently handle an architecture that will cover at least 5-6 cars in NA market and cover a spread from 20k to over 40k, and hopefully [fingers crossed] offer some appreciable chassis tuning differences, while still offering better ride/handling solutions than what is currently out there from GM in thier respective classes, including malibu. it's a tall order for any manufacturer, but then there's GM that has fumbled at every attempt at doing this. you really can't blame enzl for making this argument or casting doubt on GM. i don't beleieve they've done anything but earn it.

Edited April 23, 2008 by turbo200

[enzl]

I agree, GM has been stringing Saab along for far too long. in saab they have a valuable entity with a recognizable face and really good mystique. the only way they are going to be able to remake saab is if the core engineering is there. again, i always have to say you must look at the competition and where they're going. right now, at bmw we have a very good and standard-bearer entry level solution, the 3-series, 1-series, and the X3. to try and compare the execution in those [mostly aging] products to any Saab is misguided, at best. look at the 1-series launch for example, it's another example of how good product sells itself. there's a good amount of advertising, not a bombardment mind you, but the real advertising has been all the magazine covers and great reviews this product has recieved. i mean, just go and pick up automobile, read the review, and if you don't find yourself wanting to own one then you don't know exciting and you don't know exciting driving.

as for epsilon, anything is possible. if gm can really engineer the hell out of this chassis, it could happen, they could find the right ride/handling equation for even a luxury intender, luxury priced unit like Saab. the problem is it doesn't really make sense to have a $40-50k product [top end for 9-3 and mid for 9-5] share a basic architecture with a $20k. that's a bit too wide of a spectrum, and just sounds like it won't work. it's different from say a $29k G8 sharing a platform with a $50k Cadillac because the extra 9k goes a long way from 20k, which is basically a bare bones basic car, then again companies like honda have shown a real sophisticated chassis and car can be produced for 20k. let's pay tribute to GM and GME because Delta really is a great architecture that has produced very solid chassis to receive much praise in form of astra, and to a lesser extent cobalt [expecially SS]. with epsilon they've never been able to top ford's own mondeo, a midpack car intended to compete with 3-series on the low end, i mean it undercuts that car. they're gonna have to seriously improve on that work.

i don't blame enzl for his mistrust, after all we're putting a lot of faith to believe GM is going to competently handle an architecture that will cover at least 5-6 cars in NA market and cover a spread from 20k to over 40k, and hopefully [fingers crossed] offer some appreciable chassis tuning differences, while still offering better ride/handling solutions than what is currently out there from GM in thier respective classes, including malibu. it's a tall order for any manufacturer, but then there's GM that has fumbled at every attempt at doing this. you really can't blame enzl for making this argument or casting doubt on GM. i don't beleieve they've done anything but earn it.

Thanks for the support.

I honestly don't mean to offend around here, merely bring some reality to the table--as I see it.

Perhaps as a jaded auto person, I'm expecting too little from GM. What the guys here don't understand is that I'd love to be wrong in this case and many others. I just don't get the sense that GM has a grip on the gravity of their situation nor how to pull out of their dive.

They're just getting the message that a proper 5 seat lux CUV might be a need for Caddy or Saab? Or that the Lexus ES is a profitable product to try and emulate? 10+ years to bring competitive models to fruition does not inspire my trust or confidence.

[Robert Hall]

Thanks for the support.

I honestly don't mean to offend around here, merely bring some reality to the table--as I see it.

Perhaps as a jaded auto person, I'm expecting too little from GM. What the guys here don't understand is that I'd love to be wrong in this case and many others. I just don't get the sense that GM has a grip on the gravity of their situation nor how to pull out of their dive.

They're just getting the message that a proper 5 seat lux CUV might be a need for Caddy or Saab? Or that the Lexus ES is a profitable product to try and emulate? 10+ years to bring competitive models to fruition does not inspire my trust or confidence.

GM has been the underdog for a looong time..it's like in the last 5 years they have been slowly awakening from a 25 year sleep...25 years of building 'ok' or 'average' cars, but little that was truly competitive... it's taking them a long time to get competitive...hopefully they can succeed.

[Drew Dowdell]

EpII will grace everything from a $20K 'bu or Aura to a $40K+ Saab...I haven't been impressed by GM's previous silk purse from a sow's ear efforts for Saab--that's all.

uhm, wasn't the 9-3 the first Epsilon 1?

[Robert Hall]

uhm, wasn't the 9-3 the first Epsilon 1?

That's true...and some of them are over $40k.. has there been any word on when the 9-3 would get redesigned? After 2010?

Edited April 23, 2008 by moltar

[enzl]

uhm, wasn't the 9-3 the first Epsilon 1?

The 9-3 is a modified Vectra platform, upgraded for Saab..whether introed first or last doesn't matter. The fact remains that Saab hasn't had the growth projected for them --- and GM needs said growth in the entry-lux sector to justify Saab's contiunued existence.

What would have a better chance of success? A killer architecture that sweeps awards, blows away buyers and sells at MSRP or giving away weak kneed also rans with $5-8k on the hood?

Keep in mind, this isn't just about Saab, its about all of the other products that could be sold as premium products ---again, being late the the CUV party means the product has to be demonstrably better, not just good enough. What will the 9-4 or BRX do that an X3, Q5 or RX can't do already? Diesel, hybrid & car-like handling have all been covered...

I haven't driven an EpII, however, in my experience with Honda/Acura or Toyota/Lexus platform mates, the buyer is merely paying for some interior frills and exterior mods--along with a sterling reputation. GM needs to do better than aping the former & hoping for the latter, eventually.

Just my .02

[daves87rs]

The 9-3 is a modified Vectra platform, upgraded for Saab..whether introed first or last doesn't matter. The fact remains that Saab hasn't had the growth projected for them --- and GM needs said growth in the entry-lux sector to justify Saab's contiunued existence.

What would have a better chance of success? A killer architecture that sweeps awards, blows away buyers and sells at MSRP or giving away weak kneed also rans with $5-8k on the hood?

Keep in mind, this isn't just about Saab, its about all of the other products that could be sold as premium products ---again, being late the the CUV party means the product has to be demonstrably better, not just good enough. What will the 9-4 or BRX do that an X3, Q5 or RX can't do already? Diesel, hybrid & car-like handling have all been covered...

I haven't driven an EpII, however, in my experience with Honda/Acura or Toyota/Lexus platform mates, the buyer is merely paying for some interior frills and exterior mods--along with a sterling reputation. GM needs to do better than aping the former & hoping for the latter, eventually.

Just my .02

Agreed. Saab has got to bring something to the table that the other brands don't already have..while it may not be the fastest, or the biggest, whatever.......it needs really good selling points that will reel in drivers of other products , like the Blu' is doing now...

While the 9-5 looks nice, what will it do for me that my Lexus can't?

If Saab can't get some extra attention that it is going to need to survive, well, you know....

[Croc]

The 9-3 is a modified Vectra platform, upgraded for Saab..whether introed first or last doesn't matter. The fact remains that Saab hasn't had the growth projected for them --- and GM needs said growth in the entry-lux sector to justify Saab's contiunued existence.

What would have a better chance of success? A killer architecture that sweeps awards, blows away buyers and sells at MSRP or giving away weak kneed also rans with $5-8k on the hood?

Keep in mind, this isn't just about Saab, its about all of the other products that could be sold as premium products ---again, being late the the CUV party means the product has to be demonstrably better, not just good enough. What will the 9-4 or BRX do that an X3, Q5 or RX can't do already? Diesel, hybrid & car-like handling have all been covered...

I haven't driven an EpII, however, in my experience with Honda/Acura or Toyota/Lexus platform mates, the buyer is merely paying for some interior frills and exterior mods--along with a sterling reputation. GM needs to do better than aping the former & hoping for the latter, eventually.

Just my .02

The 9-3 is an Epsilon--I'm 99.9% sure of that. Also, I'm fairly confident that the 9-3 sells as it does because of poor SAAB dealership penetration, which is why GM wants to group SAAB with Cadillac and HUMMER. The 9-3 is a genuinely great piece of engineering, and I am always surprised by how nice the interiors are when I check them out.

[z28luvr01]

The 9-3 is an Epsilon--I'm 99.9% sure of that. Also, I'm fairly confident that the 9-3 sells as it does because of poor SAAB dealership penetration, which is why GM wants to group SAAB with Cadillac and HUMMER. The 9-3 is a genuinely great piece of engineering, and I am always surprised by how nice the interiors are when I check them out.

Agreed.

I'm not sure if Epsilon itself is a modified previous-gen Vectra platform or not, but the 9-3 was the first Epsilon, followed by the Vectra, Malibu, G6, and Aura.

You're spot on with Saab's dealership network. The nearest Saab dealer to me is about 15 miles away. The second nearest one is on the other side of the Long Island Sound. I'm sure that in less populous areas the situation is even worse. Pair them with Cadillac and/or Hummer. That'll a) increase their dealership network, b) help restore their "premium" image, and c) allow each brand to remain in its niche (no FWD Caddies, no BOF Saabs).

[SuperSport623]

Z, where is the SAAB your talking about? im thinking Roslyn, right?

[z28luvr01]

I'm talking about Smithtown Saab. It's on that stretch on Jericho Turnpike, west of the Rt. 347 intersection, where there's nothing but dealerships.

[enzl]

Sorry for creating confusion--the 9-3 is on Epsilon--a modified/upgraded version of the architecture that underpined the Vectra (and 'bu/G6 et al.) at the time of this gen's intro.

I don't know if Saab is limited by dealer count--they've sold 30k+/yr. cars in the past without GM (1986 was the high water mark, IIRC).

Saab is limited by product and their presence at the bottom of nearly every measure of quality, other than IIHS ratings.

Until or unless the elves in Sweden can screw the cars together properly, I'm not sure that even a ground-breaking product could get much traction...putting out some nice EpII's means we're getting less than groundbreaking, so their chances for success are also reduced dramatically.

[SuperSport623]

I'm talking about Smithtown Saab. It's on that stretch on Jericho Turnpike, west of the Rt. 347 intersection, where there's nothing but dealerships.

but... theres SAAB dealerships in Roslyn, Garden City and Hempstead too!

[daves87rs]

The 9-3 is an Epsilon--I'm 99.9% sure of that. Also, I'm fairly confident that the 9-3 sells as it does because of poor SAAB dealership penetration, which is why GM wants to group SAAB with Cadillac and HUMMER. The 9-3 is a genuinely great piece of engineering, and I am always surprised by how nice the interiors are when I check them out.

I'm hoping soon....because I have not seem as many SAABs lately....

[vonVeezelsnider]

I'm hoping soon....because I have not seem as many SAABs lately....

The Pacific Northwest is where I see all the Saabs.