Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Saab 9-5 Sedan



  • rickpctrickpct Posts: 71
    are known for less than stellar wet and certainly poor snow perormance - depending upon snow conditions. there are better choices - Bridgestone, Dunlop, etc. I've heard less than spectacular performance on the Pirelli's...6000 in particular,
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    The Town Hall is about to take on a new look in an effort to make content more easily searchable and accessible.

    Have you seen the Letter from the Town Hall Manager on the Town Hall Welcome page? If not, you might want to follow that link to have a look.

    And hang on to your seats. Change is never easy - for any of us - but resolving the Search problems we've had will be worth the pain.

    Sedans Host
  • apricoaprico Posts: 1
    I'm new to this discussion. We recently purchased a 99 9-5 with 47,000 miles. We have until 50K to sign up for an extended warranty (4 years 50K more miles). Have any of you had experiences with extended warranties? What have your repair expenses averaged per year once your manufacturer warranty expired? Any thoughts and information would be appreciated.
  • rghesselrghessel Posts: 122
    Can anyone tell me what changes (even if minor) are planned for the 2003 Saab 9-5? I'm currently looking at the BMW 330 and the MB C320 and have always liked the look of Saabs (though I've certainly never heard anyone sing the praises of Saab reliability, so I have some reservations). Also will Navigation be made available on the 9-5? (I know it will be in the new 2003 9-3).
  • smu1976smu1976 Posts: 110
    I do not know for sure, but I believe the 2003 9-5 has got to have a new dash? The new 9-3 looks way better than the 9-5 . I think the cassette is going bye-bye with Saab, at least the new 9-3 does not show one. I really love having the CD and Cassette in dash on my 99 9-5. I'm sure a navigation system has to be coming to the 9-5 as the 9-3 will have one (option $$). The 9-5 is a much larger car both inside and out than the BMW. Plus for the same price your going to get a ton more options. The MB has some fit and finish problems noted in the auto press, and is not near as tight as other MB models. I am looking at that new G35 also, for mid thirties its a lot of car. Both BMW and MB will probably give you better resale though. Best of luck to you, heck choosing a car is half the fun in my book.
  • aggie76aggie76 Posts: 266
    Let me add my voice to get anyone out there with valid info on 2003 changes to sound off please???? Dash look was one of my major put-offs for 2002 version.
  • eseireseir Posts: 26
    I looked at every single car in the price range of the 9-5 and honestly I could not find anything that matched the performance, confort, and overall feel of the 9-5. All the other cars were great. Some where faster, some were smaller, but overall the 9-5 offers a little bid of everything plus... Initially the dash (wood!) was a little weird, but it is grown on me and if that is all that it is, I can live with it. Actually, the only thing tthat I wish it had was an in-dash 6 cd changer. As far as a NAV, I always thoughtthat this is a waste of money and yes-useless.
  • rghesselrghessel Posts: 122
    Actually, I always thought Navigation was a waste of money and useless until I got it. (I currently have a Lexus RX300 with it.) While I dont fault anyone who doesn't want to pay the $$ for it, I personally won't consider a car without it... Even though I don't do any long-distance traveling, I have found it invaluable getting around new restaurants or stores or wherever. No more priting out MapQuest directions to get to unfamilar places...
  • dskidski Posts: 414
    I was amazed at how improved the current '02 version is over the previous. We had the first year model. This one's drive, ride and feel is much improved. The last one was great so that says alot. I don't believe there are any major changes scheduled for the next year. There were siginficant changes for this year, just not ones that you'll notice visually.

    I can understand some people wanting a Nav System. I'd like one for my work vehicle. But I do like the On-Star System. The phone feature is Awesome but I'll welcome the day when they offer more competitive rates and a portable phone connection feature like BMW has. Everyone has a portable now, why do we want two phone numbers and two bills? A small connection fee to the equipment with a portable phone would be perfect. I'd switch my provider to On-Star's and pay a small fee for plugging in. I'd bet that allowing that would double their revenue for the phone part of On-Star. Technically we could connect our phones to the electronics and use the hands free system now but On-Star doesnt want it done because of revenue and licensing. They probably could stop us legally from connecting our phones even though it can be done.

    At first I hated the New Wood Dash on the 9-5. But I quickly learned to apreciate it and actually prefer it over our previous one now. I'm glad they changed it.

    The new upcoming 9-3 does look impressive. If I were shopping in your catagory (3-series and C-class) I'd wait for the the 9-3 not for a redesigned 9-5. I saw the sales brochure for the new 9-3 at the dealer last week. I was VERY impressed. That car is going to have a TON of features that will leap frog it over it's competitors. Currently it's lagging.

    Good Luck
  • aggie76aggie76 Posts: 266
    Well, I can almost understand folks thinking navigation systems are a waste of money and had same opinion until we bought an MDX last summer with nav option in it. It's convinced me to look very favorably on it. We take the MDX anytime we are headed someplace unfamiliar and its never failed us.

    And its not about not reading maps, as a retired Armored Cavalry officer I've read maps for over 26 years of service and can easily read a road map and still use one myself in my GS300 since it is "nav-less".

    My spouse and kids rely on it daily and it is a blast to use when we find we need to detour due to road construction or just find a little known place to eat or even to let them go shopping around time. We live in Austin, TX and it's great here with the screwed up road network the city has developed here. Only issue is with all the new changes and development due to expansion not all roads on the DVD, but the paper maps are outdated too!

    My wife took a load of kids from vacation bible school to a service project on Friday and used the nav to recover the way after the leader got lost in her car. One rider was very jealous as her mom has a "fancy Cadillac with everything" so she said but she really wished her mom had a navigation system in it - "it was way cool" per the 10 year old's in the car.

    As for Mapquest, our Nav is much more reliable from when I compared it for trips. Plus we've used the "cookie" feature a few times during Boy Scout camping trips to several state parks.

    I've come to love the Acura system and will strongly consider nav system's for all my future car purchases.
  • eseireseir Posts: 26
    is really enough for me. Also as far as changes for next year, the 2002 moidel has a lot of improvements vs past models. The car is truly awesome! IKeep in mind that this car is already in the fourth year of production so a lot of the new year headaches has been taking out of the car. This car should be very reliable and very durable. Perhaps a new feature will be the NAV or the in dash 6 cd, which will be a welcome change for those who want it. I know that the new 9-3 looks and sonds great. But, I do not like to buy new models in their first year of production. No way!
  • dskidski Posts: 414
    Yeah I can understand that thought but.. both my first two Saabs were first year versions. The '94 900 and 98'9-5. The 900 was headed towards problems I think but really was a good car for us. The 9-5 was soo good that we had to replace it with another. But, like I said, this 2002 version is truely a better car than the first model year in most respects.

    I probably wouldn't shy away too much from the first year of the new 9-3 but maybe I'm braver than the average car buyer out there. Actually my last four car purchased were First Model versions. Hmm, I just thought of that. The only one I didn't like was the '98 Durango.

  • darandalldarandall Posts: 57
    Today I go to pick up a new 9-5 Linear wagon with 5 spd. and premium package. I turn in the old 9-5 wagon in awe of the new suspension - it is a different car. The new dash is weird at first, but I'm sure it will be fine. the contrast with the charcoal interior is offputtting, but I'm getting the beige so it should be fine. Saab did continue the lease special through the end of June - I got the wagon, metallic paint, delivery charge, and premium package net for $31677, plus they pay last month's lease on current vehicle. Monthly payments are $382 plus tax, and the residual is $16870. I pay roughly $30/mo. in interest for the first three years. What a deal. What a great car!
  • eseireseir Posts: 26
    I just leased a new 9-5 linear auto w. metallic paint but no premium package. My monthly payment is $399/m including the tax for 36 months and 12k a year. My residual is $15,969 and my total out of pocket was $1500 inc. first payment. With this type of residual, I might buy the car at the end of the lease, assuming the car turns out to be reliable and durable. I got the silver with the charcoal interior, and I must admit that wood dash was a little strange first, but I like it a lot for the simple fact that it does look different.
  • dskidski Posts: 414
    I guessing your payment is a little higher because of an automatic transmission. I would have loved the 5 speed but she won't drive one.

    As far as the wood dash with Charcol interior, I think it looks very good actually. The biggest difference is that you can always see the wood grain. The old style was so glossy that often times you'd just see glare.

  • shinddashindda Posts: 2
    Hello Everyone. I last visited this site three years ago prior to purchasing my beloved 9-5 SE. I read all 540 messages prior to leasing my Saab. This, by the way, saved me a couple thousand as I learned about lease loyalty (spouse has a 9-3 conv), appropriate lease payments, etc. I adore my car and these three years have flown.

    Now, I get a call from Saab to tell me about my end of lease options. No, I may not lease for one more year. No, they will not negotiate my buy out - $21500. Obviously they want me to buy another Saab. So, I have to part with my wonderful car, perfect condition, 45,000 miles.

    The car I am going to lease is, yes, another 9-5. I am getting the Aero, but having a walnut dash installed (not easyto find a new walnut dash). I think Saab has lost their minds with the new dash options. If I could not have found a walnut dash, I would not have bought the Aero.

    This is the deal. $2600 down, $475 w/tax per month, 36 months, 15K miles per year. This inclues lease loyalty. Also, realized last night the three month early out mailer includes a certificate for an extra $250 off a 9-5 sedan.

    Is this a reasonable price?

    By the way, test drove a BMW 5 series and Lexus 300(?) - had the dealers both tell me that it is crazy to get a Saab - "not much of a buyer's market because only a small group of specific type buyers have an interest in a Saab". This convinced me their is no other choice for me.
  • eseireseir Posts: 26
    You are paying an extra $75 dollars more than I am per month, which is is a total of $2700 in payments. Plus , you are paying an extra $1100 out of pocket vs the $1500 that I paid. So, that is about $3800 more than me for an Aero. Sounds like a great deal, not to mention the fact that you are getting 15k a year. What is your residual?Metallic? Auto? Where?
  • shinddashindda Posts: 2
    Wow - that seems like a bad deal to me (or a good deal for the dealer). It is an automatic, with black paint (which I understand cost more). I am unsure of the residual - didn't even ask. The dealership is in Ohio. It does not have the ventilated seats which is OK as I am not crazy about the appearance. But the Zenon (sp?.?) headlights are awesome.
  • eseireseir Posts: 26
    A linear Sedan with auto and Metallic paint at $374 month plus tax with a $1500 total out of pocket, which it includes the first month payment is a great deal. Pleople are driving Passats and Honda Accords for this price. I forgat to mention that Saab waived my last three payments. Perhaps you might be getting an extremely good deal on an aero, but your are paying an extra $4000 in the life of the lease and your residual or buyout price will be much higher than mine. It is all realtive! Remember Automatics and metallic paints are more $$$$. Balck is not a metallic color.
  • bretfrazbretfraz Posts: 2,021
    As an FYI, I thought I'd post my latest mileage figures for those interested in what a 9-5 SE sedan can give you:

    Dates - 5/18 to 6/12
    Total miles - 1228.70
    Total gallons - 50.75 from 4 fill ups
    Avg MPG - 24.21
    High MPG - 27.78
    Low MPG - 21.86

    This is from a combo of long distance driving at fairly high speeds (75+mph) and local suburban driving.

    Running Mobil One 10W-30 and a new K&N filter. Tires are at 41psi front and 39psi rear.

    Of course, ymmv.

    Hope this helps.
  • tlivactlivac Posts: 11
    I'm in the market for a 9-5 wagon, either Arc or Linear, and want to know if I can get a better deal in another state. I live in Westchester County NY about 20 miles from NYC so my guess is that I see the highest prices possible in my area.

    Also, what is the best deal I can expect for a lease with 15k on either car?
  • jerrykeejerrykee Posts: 3
    The testers at Edmunds totally missed the boat in their '02 Aero road test. They keep mentioning how you can get a loaded A4 or 330 for the same money. That may be true, but unless you are under 6 feet tall and weigh less than 160 pounds, there is NO WAY you can be as comfortable in those cars. The 9-5 is so much roomier than the A4 or 3-Series, you can actually use the bacak seat on trips longer than 10 minutes. And a 5-series? Great cars, until it rains or snows. Give me the SAAB with its good performance, roomy comfort, and good foul weather capabilities over those arrogant german marks any day.
  • redirectorredirector Posts: 27
    In the Aero Test, Ms. Richens asks: "Would you rather drive (and pay for) an athletically gifted A-student with a graduate degree or a flighty C-student who aspires to attend art school and grow his own food in Northern California?"

    Perhaps Edmunds should consider this weighty question when screening future road testers. What has Edmunds purchased and employed for its readers?

    Ms. Richerns' bio (posted at speaks for itself:


    "After graduating from a college in Memphis, Erin... came to California to pursue delusions of fame and grandeur... Eight months later, while still waiting to be noticed, she happened upon an ad for an Editorial Assistant who could drive a manual and eagerly threw together a cover letter full of sweet nothings and somehow landed the job... Erin readily admits that her background is not automotive in the least -- her parents owned a Fiat and a Pinto concurrently in the late 1970s and she probably paid too much for the aged Camry. But she reads and drives everyday and drags just enough of her job home each night to sicken her partner. Besides vehicles, her interests tend toward books, cake, fragmented films and vegetables.

    Erin drives a 1995 Nissan 240SX equipped with an automatic transmission."

    Stunning. Doesn't take an A-student to see the irony.

    Also noteworthy... Memphis is one of the country's great blues & bbq towns, and this one prefers movies, cakes and veggies. Oh-KAY...

    The power, reach, and "credibility" of the media is staggering.

    Aim higher, Edmunds. You underestimate your C-student readers.

  • siwatkinssiwatkins Posts: 6
    (Edited some typos)

    Dear Sirs,

    I write in disgust at the recent Erin Richerns review, and clearly inaccurate, biased Road Test on the 2002 Saab Aero. In brief, I believe the article to be full of factual inaccuracies, comments that would indicate that the reviewer hasn't actually tested the car in reality and tactical omissions that make one wonder at the credibility of Edmunds car reviewers. One wonders whether the article was posted by Edmunds as response to an allegation made on the very active Saabnet forum:-

    "A while ago someone from the Edmunds boards came here and posted a negative message about the 9-5 and then started to post negative replies using different names. I caught the IP in the logs and when I brought it up to the Edmunds admin over there, they quickly suppressed the fact - didn't want anyone to know about it. "

    Regardless, my comments about the review:

    are shown below.

    >Saab hasn't enjoyed a significant increase in sales over the last decade

    Errmm, sorry, but I think Saab would have something to say about that!

    >As always, though, numbers are only part of the story: if you're a turbo fan, you'll probably like the Aero's engine — it feels and sounds great above 2,000 rpm, and even better above 4,000 rpm, and it revs more smoothly than most high-pressure turbos.

    Probably revs more smoothly than all high pressure turbos! Has your reviewer understood the concept of twin balancer shafts?

    >But if you merely want a fast luxury car for $30,000 to $40,000, we think you'll prefer the more even power delivery of a six-cylinder engine.

    Doubt it - show me a V6 (*at the same price*) that has a smoother engine!?

    >You can get a V6 in the 9-5 Arc (albeit with a light-pressure turbocharger attached to it), but the G35, TL Type-S and 330i (not to mention the Audi A4, I35/Maxima and Chrysler 300M) all provide substantially more naturally aspirated power than the Arc for less money — in some cases, far less.

    The v6 is not the engine to go for in the Saab 9-5 - the Aero engine offers more of everything - Torque AND Power - why didn't they mention that?. Guess your reviewer didn't do much research before writing this article. Can your reviewer use a Browser? Try .......

    >Take the Aero out on public roads, and you'll enjoy perhaps the most refined suspension ever offered by Saab. In the larger context of entry-luxury sedans, however, it's nothing special.

    Has your reviewer actually tried anything else? The above (it's nothing special) comment suggests not....

    > If this is the way you drive most of time, the Aero will certainly suffice, but you could save yourself some money by going with the less sporting Linear model.

    LOL - credibility meltdown. The Aero has SPORTS suspension! It will "suffice"? - get real - how about an unbiased road test Edmunds!?

    >In spite of Saab's efforts to position the 9-5 Aero as an athletic entry-luxury car (since its introduction for the 2000 model year), we still wouldn't define it as such, even with the 2002 model's suspension upgrades — stiffer springs, retuned shock absorbers and thicker antiroll bars. When we pushed our test car into tight curves, we noted excessive body roll, as well as a strong predisposition toward understeer when exiting turns.

    Guess Edmunds have a different view to pretty much every other road test/user. Could it be that the reviewer lacks credibility?

    >Most drivers found it necessary to deactivate the system in order to give the Aero a serious workout, but in case your enthusiasm impairs your judgment, Saab made it tricky to turn ESP off: According to the owner's manual, ESP cannot be shut off at speeds above 35 mph, and even when it is turned off, it is always operative during braking.

    Excuse me? "Most Drivers"? Can you back that up with how many drivers you polled to make the claim "Most Drivers"? Absolute tosh. Never had to deactivate it yet! It does it's job.

    >As we eagerly pressed the throttle to power out of turns or glide down empty two-lane straightaways, our steering inputs and our gusto were immediately checked by heavy amounts of torque steer (not unusual in high-power front-drivers but especially pronounced in Saabs), the drive wheels veering outside of our intended path.

    Ahh, so the reviewer didn't drive the car at all! There is practically no perceptible Torque Steer on the 2002 Aero. What car were they driving?

    >Overall, the cockpit has a cozy, almost cramped feel (as if you were sitting in coach class)

    LOL. This is a car with MORE interior room than anything else in it's segment. I guess your reviewer knows how to spell "Hidden Agenda"

    " in consequence, we found that there weren't enough places to stash small items like cell phones,"

    Doh! Saab provide in their Accessories catalog a very nice Cellphone mount, not to mention door mounted pockets. Guess what? The Audio system is pre-wired to enable you take/make calls through the Stereo. As standard. Did that get a mention? No...

    " garage door openers (HomeLink isn't available) and tins of mints."

    Reviewer didn't find the seat pockets in the front of the seats then? Either they didn't drive the car, or they didn't do much research here. I suspect the former, picking up on out of date reviews by other testers of older models. It certainly wasn't a 02 they could have been testing. (or for that matter, any MY - they've all got these pockets)

    > The cupholder situation isn't any better; you have your choice of a funky holder that deploys from the center stack or another that's only available when the center console lid is open.

    A cupholder that has been acclaimed by more Designers than this reviewer has driven cars apparently. I suspect Saab have made more sales through the design of this cupholder than any other more important feature - such as Safety, safest in class. (But how important is this anyway! - it's a car, not a fast food joint! Perhaps the reviewer is more familiar with the interiors of MacDonalds?)

    "Still, we had a couple of small complaints: First, we wish the telescoping steering wheel provided a greater range of adjustment; and second, a sedan in this price class needs to provide height-adjustable seatbelts (which are already a staple among economy sedans)."

    What a surprise. Again the reviewer shows a lack of research. What's wrong with the telescoping adjustment? It has plenty of range! And height adjustable seatbelts. LOL, the reviewer didn't note that they are height adjusting

  • siwatkinssiwatkins Posts: 6
    . And not only that, they automatically adjust!!!

    "Getting in and out of the 9-5 was a little tricky for some of us."

    As is reviewing a car impartially and accurately it would seem lol.

    "The front doors seemed not to want to stay in their first hinged positions and swung back, bopping any heads and elbows that were in their way."

    Perhaps the first, fair and accurate, very minor criticism. Nice use of artistic flair to make a mountain out of a molehill though - (H.I.D.D.E.N. A.G.E.N.D.A - spelt out for your reviewer...)

    > Opening the doors wider solved the problem, but this wasn't always possible in tight parking lots.

    Noooo, really? And that's a Saab quirk is it?

    > Also, the door sills are rather high in the front and rear, so extra attention is required to avoid tripping over them.

    LOL. Absolute drivel. (H.I.D.D.E.N. A.G.E.N.D.A - spelt out for your reviewer...)

    >Editors were generally content with the visibility from the driver seat — helpful features include double sunvisors, an auto-dimming rearview mirror, memory for both outside mirrors and a built-in convex mirror on the passenger-side mirror. The latter feature was initially bewildering to a couple of editors, as images in the blind spot region (cordoned off from the rest of the mirror) appear distorted.

    Convex mirrors - now incorporated by other luxury makers. Surprised (very) that your reviewers hadn't picked up on what is a very useful safety feature before. They do test drive these cars they write about don't they?

    >Rearward visibility isn't great because of the 9-5's high rear decklid (a Park Assist feature was made available as part of the Touring Plus Package starting in March 2002)

    Worse than on any other large luxury Sedan, thus worthy of comment? No. (H.I.D.D.E.N. A.G.E.N.D.A - spelt out for your reviewer...)

    > and we would have liked an auto-dimming feature for the outside mirrors.

    And now we get onto things that didn't make the feature list. Show me a BMW that is as well equipped as a Saab at the same price? You can't? Oh. (H.I.D.D.E.N. A.G.E.N.D.A - spelt out for your reviewer...)

    >The rear seat is well-cushioned and supportive; a single-setting seat heater can warm up the entire bench on cold days. Leg- and shoulder room is about average for a midsize luxury car, but toeroom is tight.

    Toeroom is tight? They did actually get in the back did they? Toe room extends the length of the seat in front. How the reviewer could possibly say it's tight, would suggest that they didn't actually review a real car.

    > It's possible to put three kids back here,

    Nice (H.I.D.D.E.N. A.G.E.N.D.A) comment. It's possible to put 3 large adults back there in comfort. Try that in a 3 series. (Bumped heads anyone?)

    >but the center passenger doesn't get a headrest and a hump limits legroom.

    Show me any manufacturer that provides a centre Headrest as standard for the *same* cost as the Saab with all the other extras that Saab provide as standard. Also show me a German manufacturer that includes a 3 point belt in the centre as STANDARD. Show me any car where the centre console doesn't limit legroom for the centre passenger. Or do you want the centre console removed so you can criticise that? There is nothing that can be done by any engineer of any car - centre console will limit centre rear legroom. Period. Reviewer not been researching again? Tsk. Tsk. When you have only two passengers, they can take advantage of the fold-down center armrest, ...

    >from which two flimsy cupholders deploy.

    LOL. They are not in the slightest bit "Flimsy". Have we seen owners reports on Saabnet moaning about these breaking? Of course not. They've been around now for 4 years.... (H.I.D.D.E.N. A.G.E.N.D.A - spelt out for your reviewer...)

    >The only disappointment we found back here was the temporary-size spare tire under the floor.

    Disappointing for the reviewer not to find more?

    >The secondary controls were less impressive, as only the driver and passenger windows were auto-down from the driver door (with no auto-up feature whatsoever).

    Saab safety feature. It can't be cost - the electronics already exist in the car.

    >The control stalks (wipers on one, cruise and turn signals on the other) are cheap plastic.

    What did the reviewer want? Forged Aluminium? They are not "cheap" at all. This is again makes me extremely suspicious that the reviewer actually even tested this car.

    >When we pressed the foglights button on the left side of the wheel, we noted four other unused buttons — odd considering that our test car had all available options.

    Really? How about sensible. Saab thinking ahead for model revisions, provision for user fitted accessories without having to drill the dash? Yet again, a positive turned into a negative for some kind of hidden agenda.

    >Although we liked the handsome leather, thick-pile floor mats and soft-touch dash and door panels in the Aero, some of the materials were out of place in a $40,000 vehicle — vinyl sunvisors and scattered cheap plastics with mismatched grain patterns.

    What did the reviewer want the sunvisors to be made from? Wood? Doh. What BMW/Mercedes uses other than vinyl for sunvisors? Did they mention the secondary, very useful sunvisors? No, funny old thing....

    > Build quality was below average, as editors noted rough edges on the visors and various plastic panels,

    Nonsense. Better built than many recent Mercedes. Have you seen the plastic used in them? Or in Japanese cars?

    > loose interior trim pieces, misaligned headlight and taillight assemblies and rear doors that didn't fit uniformly.

    Really? Well, 4 x 9-5's I've never noticed a single flaw in those departments. Strange that your reviewer did then....

    >Aside from its turbocharged engine and unusual cabin styling, there is nothing to distinguish the 9-5 Aero from its competitors.

    Really? Can the reviewer spell Performance? Can the reviewer understand the concept of value for money? Do a proper review of this car versus any of the major manufacturer's equivalent, at the same pricepoint. So you'd be looking at best, a base BMW, with tiny engine, and no options. Clearly the reviewer hasn't done their research very well.

    >Consider that you can get a real sport sedan like the 330i with a sport-tuned suspension and leather for roughly the same price

    Oh.. it's a "real" sports sedan? What does 250bhp, 0-60 in 6.7seconds, sports tuned suspension, and torque levels that blow away the competition make the Saab then? (H.I.D.D.E.N. A.G.E.N.D.A - spelt out for your reviewer...).
    Note that the 330i has MUCH less interior space. (some could call it cramped), and fewer extras as standard. Spec it to the same levels, and you are talking about a consiberably smaller car, with no performance advantage. And guess what, the 330i has sports tuned suspension LIKE the Aero, that will cause "rough patches of p
  • siwatkinssiwatkins Posts: 6
    avement tended to upset the chassis a little."

    Enough dissection. It is clear that the reviewer has limited experience in driving and accurate reporting, let alone in driving the 2002 Saab Aero. It would be interesting to hear what Saab think, so I've copied this to their customer service departments, and to Saabnet, as I'm sure such a clearly biased, and non-impartial review will provoke lots of discussion as to Edmunds credibility as an automotive resource. I'm surprised that your editorial department didn't pick up on the gross inaccuracies in this article. Funny that the reviewer didn't pick up on the word "quirky" when they were amalgamating all their negatives about this car from other peoples reviews. Shame they didn't pick up on the positives too. Class leading Safety, Class leading performance, Class leading fuel economy for such high performance, superb ergonomics, practical common sense features, class leading reliability, class leading lighting equipment (funny the HID lights weren't mentioned), class leading value for money, class leading interior room, class leading comfort. It's not a perfect car, but compare it to anything else at the *same* pricepoint, and it knocks spots off the competition. Regardless of Class.

    Disgusted at what was a clearly third-rate article about an A+ car. C- awarded to the reviewer with so little experience that they didn't even mention Twin Balancer shafts, amazing levels of torque, and outstanding fuel economy.

    Suggest they might like to cut their teeth on something smaller and a Nissan 240SX - they might actually be able to talk from a factual standpoint.

    Simon Watkins (From the UK, 2002 9-5 Aero owner). And yes, I looked very closely at competition at the same pricepoint. Nothing else came close.
  • jracinejracine Posts: 28
    I, too have been completely disgusted by the biased, distorted, uninformed and unfair review of the 9-5 Aero.

    More than a "religious" thing, I simply cannot accept that such a GREAT car, recognized as such by ALL recent reviews receives such an obviously flawed and insulting review from a obviously inexperienced driver.

    GO BUY THE LAST ROAD AND TRACK. "Real reviewers rated the car 4th out of 12". The "Engineering Editor" of the mag even made it HIS pick!

    To add to my disappointment, when I read the name of the reviewer, I said to myself: great to see a women writing a review. Might have a new perspective. BOY WAS I WRONG!

    Erin: reviewing cars is a serious job. Less informed people RELY on reviews such as yours to get informed. You cannot treat your readers like this.

    siwatkins did a great job of commenting this review. I just would like to add a few items.

    It is an insult that security aspects (best in class!) have not been give appropriate coverage. THIS IS ONE MAJOR REASON WHY WE BUY CARS: TO PROTECT US!

    "One common feature that Saab has not picked up on is a head curtain airbag system for front and rear passengers."

    Oh, there are no side curtains? You know why? They are dangerous!

    "Safest car ever tested" please read:

    Last year, the Saab 9-5 was given a top, four-star crashworthiness rating by EuroNCAP after the inclusion of a new pole impact test. Following the tests, the EuroNCAP consortium stated that the Saab 9-5 was the safest car they had ever tested. The EuroNCAP consortium is comprised of the Swedish Road Administration, the British and Dutch Ministries of Transport, the EU Commission, FZ<caron>dZ<caron>ration Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA), Allgemeiner Deutscher Automobil-Club e V (ADAC), Alliance Internationale de Tourisme (AIT) and International Consumer Research and Testing (ICRT).


    What about the SAHR system which limits the movement of the head in a rear-end crash? Please read from the same source.

    For the full detail on the 9-5, please visit:

    (Thank You Saabnet)

    Yes, SAAB has come a long way. And 2002 sales are the best ever. If car companies that improve tremendously their cars cannot be recognized and applauded, then write off the whole US car industry!

    EDITORS OF EDMUNDS PLEASE READ THIS: Hire who yo want to test drive cars. But you ARE responsible to ensure that the content is ACCURATE AND FAIR. You clearly dropped the ball.

    A VERY well informed 32-tear old car fan, who drives a stunning 9-5 Aero (2002) Silver Gray (3rd SAAB in 7 years) during the week and carries his little family in an Honda Odyssey EX-L 2002.

    I am seriously wandering if I will log in here ever again.

    I stand behind all this. My email address is:

  • jracinejracine Posts: 28
    I have made a request through this site to

    "Add another category to this discussion" so all info pertaining to the review could be in the same thread.

    I hope Edmunds will have the guts to do this.
  • siwatkinssiwatkins Posts: 6
    As has been pointed out to me in another forum....

    The article quotes:

    >The secondary controls were less impressive, as only the driver and passenger windows were auto-down from the driver door

    Since when have the Window switches on any 9-5, let alone the Aero been mounted on the Driver's door?

    Did they really test this car? You decide....

    (Hint to Erin: They never have been mounted on the Driver's door. Nowhere near in fact. Might be handy to pick up a brochure from Saab before you do your next "Test Drive"....

    Simon Watkins
Sign In or Register to comment.