Saab 9-5 Sedan

ffb13 · August 2003

i think that no one is more surprise with my tire wear than i am.
i even had the odometer checked.
i thought ,when i bought the car, that i would be lucky to get 18,000 miles out of the michelins based on my other cars.
i do understand that the rotation is based on mileage.i just took the easy way out.

kenboy · August 2003

hello to all. my question is whether or not the 2002 9-5 has side-impact airbags that protect the head as well as the torso. thanks in advance for any info.

dski · August 2003

Yes, the 9-5 has Side Air Bags. However, they are the Seat Mounted Air bags that are designed to protect neck/ thorax areas of the body.

They are NOT Side Curtain Air bags. There is debate about which design is better. The bottom line however is that the 9-5 does provide side impact protection that is effective. Is there a better way? Perhapse.

Good Luck
Drew

explorerx4 · September 2003

just checked the tires on our '01 SE w/29k miles.
there is plenty of tread left. rotate every 10k, but check pressure often, usually set to 32-33 lbs. look like they would be good at least to 50k.
mostly local trips.

deployed · September 2003

I am posted to Germany working overseas as a civilian and was shopping for cars through military sales and priced a 2003 Aero. They could get me a LOADED Aero with all the bells and whistles for about $36,000. Is this a good deal compared to what people are getting back in the states after negotiating? I saw in a recent post that people were getting $6 -$7 off of MSRP is this true?

Also is the 9-5 Aero a good car to own? It seems like going with the Saab you can get a lot more car for the money that a BMW 330 or 530. Also how is the resale for the cars back in the states/how do they hold their value?

deployed · September 2003

I just rechecked the papers and the $36,000 would be a 2004 build. Does anyone have any information on if the 2004 is better than the 2003? Also, I was having a hard time finding more information about the 2003 9-5 Aero, how it fares against competitors, and the 9-5 aero's reliability. Any information any one has would be great!

explorerx4 · September 2003

live in the northeast. local saab dealer is advertising a 9-5 linear wagon, new car inventory # matches one listed in ad, for almost 9400 off list.

explorerx4 · September 2003

just noticed the fine print has '* 2003 Loaner'

adrianfrsj · September 2003

Aero 2004 is the same as 2003. I bought my 2003 2 months ago and got $6000 off. Could have been more, but the dealer had to find the right car for me. I'm very happy with my choice over anything else out there i.e. Audi, BMW or Infiniti. I am planning on getting an extended warranty just in case. Saab Aero is a great value, but it will depreciate.

ffb13 · September 2003

just blew another mxm michelin tire.

i did get 60,000 miles on the first set.
only 1 blow out.

on this second set i have had 2 blow outs with less than 300 miles the first and 2000 miles the last one.

at $ 220.00 a pop i am thinking of getting rid of these 17 inchers and use my snow tire wheel (snowflake design ) to go into 205-55-16 tires which cost half of the 17 .

any thoughts out there ?

it is an aero 9.5 and i know the handling will suffer ,but i am not driving this car in europe ,but in the 80 mph max. usa. so,the effect will be minimal.

dski · September 2003

Blow outs!? You actually are having tires "blow out" while your driving.. and more than once?

That doesn't sound good. I've never had that misfortune and certainly hope I never do. In most cases, you will have plenty of notice or indication that a tire is damaged before it actually Blows Out. A slipping of the Belts is one common factor and the situation will cause an extremely poor ride before it fails.

I'm guessing yours are due to being Low Profiles that get damaged and blow very fast afterwords. Performance tires are great but I don't think I'd be happy with them for everyday driving. I'd be worried about every pot hole or bad road surface.

Drew

rob999 · September 2003

Do you already have a set of the Saab Snows (incl. 16" wheels)? Maybe just get some good all-season 16" tires for these, especially if you're regularly driving on potholed roads.

r34 · September 2003

I just found out from Edmunds there will be no more 9-5 Linear. It seems that Saab thew away the GM V6 again (They did it once for the 9-3). That's the thing I liked.

I think previous 9-3 owners are more likely to move up to a 9-5 now. I have a 9-3 and I won't move up to a linear (185hp only ? Why should I switch to a 9-5 ?) and I don't like the GM V6.
The 220hp ARC would be enough for me.

gbriank · September 2003

I am a 9-3 owner (2001 MY) and am not even considering the new 9-3. I am not impressed with how the model has performed (reliability and performance). 9-3 Vector with 5 speed auto accelerates 0-60 in 8.1 sec. 9-5 Aero with 5 speed auto 0-60 around 7 seconds. Not to mention, the current 9-5 is a proven design and doesn't suffer electrical gremlins, brake drone, odd squeaks in the doors, etc... If a 9-5 deal doesn't come about, I have also looked at a used 530i and a CTS.

r34 · September 2003

I am driving a 2001 9-3 too. I think 2003 9-5 Aero is around $34-35K now because of the incentive. It's probably a better deal than the 2004 9-5 Arc now.

I hope Saab will use the concept AWD Sport wagon as the new 9-3SS Viggen and put at least 300hp to the 9-5 Aero.

mrnyker · September 2003

I was given to understand by a Saab dealer that the current incentive does not apply to the 2003 Aero and Arc and can only be used for the Linear. Carsdirect.com applies the incentive to Aero/Arc. With the incentive, the Aero becomes very attractive. Thanks for any information.

buddhabman · September 2003

I am not sure if they will do it for 2004, but I think the HP on the 9-5 will be 280HP (Trionic Tunning, New Exhaust), I don't think they can get 300hp without more costs (Bigger Turbo, Trionic Tunning, New Exhaust). The 9-3 HP could easily be raised to 250HP. Also extra Turbo HP should also mean bigger brakes.

I like the brakes on our 2003 9-5 Aero but I a am little more concerned with level of floatiness over bumps in the road. The car tracks great but it gets more unsettled than it should over rough patches. The bump stops come in to play more than they should on rough curvy roads. It needs stiffer progressive springs and stouter dampers.

akevinlang2 · September 2003

Has anyone had trouble with Wheel Bearings going out. My 2000 9-5 Aero has 65K miles. I hear what sounds like a loud road noise from the tires, but I haven't rotated the tires lately. It is getting increasingly louder. A Saab Mechanic said it "may" be the wheel bearings or something in the transmission.

dski · September 2003

Sounds more like the Bearings to me. Not rotating the tires shouldn't result in a Noise issue.

Good Luck
Drew

ncvol · September 2003

A few hundred posts back, someone was saying that they were glad the 9-5 didn't have side curtain airbags because they were dangerous for kids in car seats in the second row. I know that the 9-5 has very good head/torso protection for the driver, but nothing in the back. Is there any data to back up the assertion that side curtain airbags are dangerous for kids riding in back? I thought they were only about 2 inches thick, which doesn't sound like you'd have the same problems from a full size airbag popping out, and I'd be surprised if Volvo, Audi, Mercedes and Volkswagen were using them if there was a lot of data saying they were a danger. Saab is even using them on the 9-3 aren't they? Isn't there a new study from IIHS indicating that they greatly reduce the incidence of death or serious injury?

Thanks for any thoughts

dski · September 2003

I did make mention of a potential danger of side air bags for kids riding in back.

But... Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they are dangerous in general. They are ONLY a potential hazard if they were to go off when a child was resting/ sleeping with their head resting against the side door panel. I don't know how much the side curtain type changes the potential hazard.

There have been some aritcles pointing out the potential hazard but I have NEVER read about any actual injuries from the side bags.

Drew

ncvol · September 2003

So how is the safety record for backseat passengers in the 9-5? I know that in general the car is very safe.

tufts · October 2003

I have a new 03 9-5 Aero (150 miles), and it is a great car except for one problem. It seems to make a very annoying low grade whirling noise, esp when the steering nwheel is turned. Does anybody know what the problem is?

explorerx4 · October 2003

based on the time of your post, i'd go back to the dealer monday morning, and drive another one.
have an '01 se, but don't hear any noises steering related.

jgravel · October 2003

Morning everyone, can anyone advise how to re program a lock remote that had every dead battery for a 99 Saab 9/5. It's my daughters car and she neglected to tell me the remote didn't work for a few months. I just changed the battery per the owners manual ( replace battery and press unlock 4-5 times ) and nothing happens. I assume it needs to be re programed from the beginning.

The second remote that my wife keeps works fine.

Thanks in advance for the help.

-Jay

ncvol · October 2003

Before this year, I thought that the V6 engine in the Arc seemed like the right engine for me in the 9-5 line (enough hp, smoother, quieter). Now they've ditched it for another I4 on the 2004 Arcs. Is this indicative of a problem with the V6? Should I be worried about trying to find a 2003 or before with the V6 in it?

gbriank · October 2003

No, this is not indicative of a problem. I believe the reason is that GM is discontiuing production of this 3.0l engine in favor of the new GM Global Engines. Remember, SAAB spent quite some time with the current/old Six reinforcing and smoothing it out to accept a turbocharger. Don't know if they have had enough time with the new engines yet (2.8l V6).

explorerx4 · October 2003

the v6 is definitely smoother than the 4's in the linears, i've driven. gets pretty good mileage too; usually 22+-24+ mpg with no long trips.
the 4's seem fine other than idle.
don't know about the 4 in the '04 arc model.

jaydoll · October 2003

Just bought a 9-3 vector earlier this week. What a piece of @!#$%&^. What was I thinking? Test drove a 9-5 aero tonight. What a world of difference. Where do I start, much better ride, better performance cabin is really nice looking. My 9-3 cabin looks like it came from the Starship Enterprise. 2003 Program aeros are selling for $29900 with 5K miles. Does this sound like a good deal?

Thanks for any advise

gbriank · October 2003

Sounds like a good price jaydoll...bet you could get a few more dollars... The 9-5 is running on older technology, BUT there are virtually NO GREMLINS. All the bugs have been worked out.

rbr · October 2003

Haven't posted here for a while, but I feel I must after taking my 2001 9-5 SE for service and getting a 2004 Aero wagon as a loaner. First point -- I was not particularly impressed with the 2004 Aero, especially the plastic aluminum look dashboard which, IMO, would have looked cheap in a Buick. Also, for a sportier car, the seats felt like they were overly padded ("cushy," if you know what I mean)-- it just seemed like a really weird combination. The engine certainly had reasonable power, but it was nowhere near as smooth as the V6 in my SE.

That brings me to my main point -- what in the world was Saab/GM thinking not offering a V6 in the 9-5 sedan for the 2004 model year? Even granted that GM is/has/was discontinuing the current V6 engine, they couldn't plan a bit? I mean no disrespect to the I-4 Saab drivers out there (I used to be one), but I'm "all grown up" now and I have no intention of getting a four cylinder car when pretty much all of Saab's competition offers a strong V-6 as their standard engine. If I may say so. IMO if GM was serious about Saab they could have had a 300 HP HPT V6 Aero out by now.

I have been driving Saabs for 6 years and I'm now 2 months from the end of my lease. Saab Financial wont let me extend a year (in the hope Saab gets its act together on a V6) so I dont believe I'm left with much of a choice. Saab (I probably should say GM), sorry but you're losing me and its an entirely self-inflicted wound.

gbriank · October 2003

Join the club. My SmartBuy is terminating in March on my '01 9-3 and have already started to look for a replacement. Not sure what to get. I have been pampered by the low payments and VERY comfortable seats. So far, I have narrowed the playing field down to a used 530i, new TL, or possibly a modified Accord coupe. Funny, I traded an Accord for my first Saab...looks like I may be going back. Sad.

rob999 · October 2003

I think when you start a discussion between Saab owners between the merits of the I4 and the V6 it soon erupts into something like the old "TASTES GREAT" - "LESS FILLING" beer ads. Everyone has their own preferences and opinions.

I prefer the I4, it has plenty of power and delivers great gas mileage on road trips. Yeah, it vibrates slightly at idle, but the vibration vanishes at anything above idle speed. I have no complaints.

I'm sure the decision to drop the V6 had mostly to do with improving production economics, i.e. not having to support 2 engine options. With all manufacturers seeming to increase power in engines these days, I'm guessing Saab will come out with something competitive in the next generation 9-5.

I agree on the cheesy 'aluminum' dash in the Aero. I think upgrading to the wood or carbon dash would be a good thing.

rbr · October 2003

I dont mean to overstate to V6 I4 issue, and the 2004 Aero engine was impressive at speed. However, my 9-5 SE with a V6 was a fabulous value proposition when I got it compared to the competition, IMO, and notwithstanding Edmunds somewhat "crabby" reviews of the car. I got it at invoice, less advertising, and it included free scheduled maintenance, loaners, etc. My lease rate was within $30/ month of what I was being quoted for a V6 Accord. I guess a lot of that is still there, by Saab really hasn't moved the ball along as far as improvements to the 9-5 and, again IMO, took a major step back by deleting the V6 from the lineup and mucking up the interior appearance of the Aero. Sigh ...

blockislandguy · October 2003

Sorry guys, the I4 Vs. V6 controversy can't be dismissed as easily as a beer commercial. The Saab product planners simply fell asleep with the North American market (e.g., Saab was THE Swedish winter car until Volvo converted to FWD and then cleaned house with their AWD, which now does so well that they sell more XC wagons than the less expensive FWD!)

And their bad (lazy?) product planning can't be dismissed as simply a lack of money. Saab could have taken the existing V6, hung a turbo on each bank (like the Audi 2.7 engine), beefed up some of the internals, and voila you'd be reading about Saab not the new Volvo R series in all the current buff books and buying at the full Moroney. Hello?

While I'm no fan of GM, one would have to think that the General is getting a bit impatient with the Swedes. Saab doesn't compete well in its segment against Volvo, Audi, Acura, BMW, etc. and doesn't seem to be getting positioned to do any better. An AWD (quick, just call Haldex and outsource it--just like Volvo) 9-5 with a twin turbo V6 would be a start.

ncvol · October 2003

I'd buy that car right now if they made it

rbr · October 2003

I agree. A lot of people (particularly current Saab 9-5 drivers) would. Plus it would get more interest back in the brand. Two other observations:

It may have been a fluke, but on my recent service visit to the dealer they had a bunch of unsold current year cars -- many, many more (2-3 times) than I had ever seen before. Possibly they are not moving as fast as they used to.

I noticed at our auto show (Minneapolis, MN) last spring that GM has Saab mixed in with the other GM brands now instead of with the imports. I dont think that's such a good idea.

ffb13 · October 2003

sorry drew ,your question was back on sept.10 regarding tires .i have been traveling and are currently in connecticut in the middle of a wind storm that just knocked a branch into my house as i type this.a big one.
anyhow the blow outs occur because the tire gets a nail and develops a slow leak..........and with these tires you just cannot tell..........so,it blows.
i checked the tires when getting into the car but given that i drive from fla. to conn. and vt. 4 times per year -- by the time i stop to get out of the car it is too late and the tire has already blown.
so far 3 in front and one in the rear.
-i hate the new air--buses---rather drive....

and yes i do have not only 4 but 5 of the 16 inch wheels ......4 with snow tires and one is my full size spare.,
and yes,i may go for 16 inchers all around and get rid of the 17 inchers....thinking about it.

re----i4 vs 6.......

saab is a rather unique car /4 cyl.engine.all the sixes that have been shoehorned into this engine bay have never been able to improve on the 4. and most have been very unreliable.

i selected the aero because of the 4 ......and its power.and it is smooth.and lets face it it is what saab knew how to make well.........this now changes with g.m.......we will see.
but give me a 4 anytime.
its power is amazing for the size and 32 mpg at 85 mph all day (true 72 mph average speed )is just incredible.--it gives me a range of 600 plus miles.....before having to stop for gas when i drive from fla. to vermont.
last trip with the a/c on the average was 29 mpg.

i prefer lite weight cars with small engines and high horsepower.......so,saab.
i recently test drove the mb500 and the 300amg.
nice but the feel is artificial ......and all that power is required to move that overweight mass.----i do beter with the saab.

my other favorite car is my 1955 porsche spyder by beck.......it weights 1200 lbs. and has a racing engine putting out 175 hp.---on skinny tires and direct steering-----you guys do not know what fun is until you live with one of these-----forget viper and vette......those are heavy ....high mass cars with thick tires.i own one and prfer the 550.........

this is why,the i4 saab engine is such a delight.......
remember that the need for the v6 and v8 and v10,etc....is only due to the weight of the cars that they have to propel ......and they are getting heavier as we add more stuff to the cars.....and the tires wider to keep suspension costs down .........
a well tuned suspension on good sized tires will ,for driving in the usa,be better than those 17 and 18 inchers.....

now ,if you drive in europe and are near southern and mid germany where you can go flat out in most ,not all areas ,then it is a different story.

drive54 · October 2003

I am researching a 2001 Saab 9-5 wagon and noticed that they offer a V6 engine. Saab historically has offered 4 cylinder turbos and has eliminated the V6 for the 2004 model year.

Should I avoid the V6 engine, or has it been reliable?

blockislandguy · October 2003

ffb13, you make some nice arguments for a nimble, high output car, but what did you mean by the statement relating tire width to saving on suspension costs?? Colin Chapman, RIP, might have disagreed with you.

bretfraz · October 2003

Its a discussion that's been had many times before. I suggest using the search function to look at previous comments and opinions. Here's a clip of something I wrote a few months ago when someone asked a similar question:

This is one of those eternal debates within the Saab 9-5 community. The fact is that both engines are very reliable. Your friend's mileage figures are 100% arbitrary and seem to have little or no basis in reality. I wonder how your friend became such an expert in Saab engine durability.

The current 2.3L 4 cyl is based on an old design which has been upgraded many times over the years. Its almost over-engineered and is very robust. With proper maintenance 200K+++ is easily attained.

The current 3.0L V6 is sourced from Vauxhall (GM England) and is heavily modified by Saab. While its only been in the line since 1999 its proving to be very reliable. About the only beef people have with the V6 is that it uses a timing belt instead of a chain, and the belt needs to be changed every 60K (Saab pays for the first replacement). Comments from dealers show the V6 to be less troublesome than the already reliable 4 cyl but that's prolly due to there being fewer V6 Saab's on the road.

dski · October 2003

IMHO.. yes avoid the V6! Talk to any long time Saab Tech. It is extremely difficult to service. Over time, this is going to be a very expensive engine to service and repair.

Saab made a critical mistake with this one which is why they are dropping it. The Timing Chain issues, Assymetrical Turbo (silly idea)etc... are not in anyones benefit. Particularly for Saab who is paying for services in the first whatever miles. That's costing them more than they anticipated it seems. The time needed for serivce has to be killing their dealer reimbursements.

True, the I4 is not as smooth at idle as the typical Honda. That's mostly due to the fact that they have been able to Pack a relatively small engine with a nice level of Horse Power. That comes with a cost.

When Saab has a 6 as nicely designed as BMW's, I'll buy one. Until then, there is NOTHING wrong with Saabs I4's.

Drew

bretfraz · October 2003

The Saab techs I've spoken to (both dealer and independent) have very few negative comments about the V6. In my experience the only people that say bad things about it are those who have entrenched prejudices against it.

No one I've met has mentioned anything about the difficulty in working on the engine. There is no "timing chain issue" with the V6 - it uses a timing belt, like many engines do, and needs replacement every 60K, like many engines do. I have not heard or read a thing about abnormal warranty service costs with the V6. At least, not any worse than the 4 cyl.

I own a 9-5 V6. My ear is CONSTANTLY on the tracks, listening for any known or potential problems with this engine that could cost me big $$$ down the road. Probably the most common thing I've heard over the past 3 years is the animosity towards the V6 which comes mainly from the "I hate GM" crowd and the vocal Saab Philistines who almost constantly bemoan the rape of the Saab culture.

Look, every engine has its issues. What you need is a local shop or mechanic that knows and understands the car, not just the engine. The V6 may not be as robust as the 2.3L 4 cyl, but the 2.3L 4 cyl days are numbered as new designs and technologies come from GM and Saab. I say drive cars with both engines and buy the one YOU like best, not what some voice on the internet tells you to buy. It's your money after all.

ncvol · October 2003

heh

gbriank · October 2003

Before the all out bashing session commences, you are both correct. Yes, there have been issues with the V-6 SAAB uses.... the 2.5 litre to be correct. The NG900 had considerable problems with the Opel V6 (non-turbocharged). And bretfraz, if I remember correctly (it has been a while since I read the posts on Saabnet) there were issues with the early generation 9-5s with the V6 (1999 model year).

As for which engine, it is totally up to the purchasing party. I prefer the 4 since it gets slightly better fuel economy and I think it's slightly lighter (better agility, in my opinion).

>Probably the most common thing I've heard over >the past 3 years is the animosity towards the >V6 which comes mainly from the "I hate GM" >crowd and the vocal Saab Philistines who almost >constantly bemoan the rape of the Saab culture.

Bretfraz, people are nervous when it comes to change... GM has not set the best standard in the auto industry for decades, but they are getting better. Most folks looked at the Cadillac Catera, which shared the same engine, body, and interior components with the 9-5, and began to worry.

As for the "Saab Philistines", I would like to thank them. Without their years of loyalty, SAAB would not exsist today in the US. Their purchasing dollars are what held this company together until GM came along to assist.

Most "GM haters" must have a reason to vocalize their anger. I would like to understand why they feel this way. Are there any folks out there that have issues with their SAAB?

dski · October 2003

Well.. I have no "entrenched Prejudices" I'd love to have a well designed V6 option with a Saab. The 4 is great but I don't like the harshness that comes with packing a load of Hp in a smaller engine.

This is Saabs second attempt at a V6.. both have failed which is why both designs have had a very short Product Cycle.

FWIW.. to prove I don't have those "Prejudices"... I had the first Saab V6 in our '94 900. UGH What a Dog that was.

Drew

pat · October 2003

Hi folks.

A better place to discuss the ins and outs of GM as an industry is on our News & Views board. One likely discussion is The Return of GM's Might II.

Let's let this conversation focus on its subject, the 9-5.

Thanks!

ramonaledge · October 2003

greetings,

i own a 1999 saab 93. for the most part i like it a lot.

BUT....

i let my dad drive it today and i told him that the only way to remove the key is to put it into reverse.

well, he got home and put it into what he must have thought was reverse and he couldnt remove the key. so i went out to check it out and it looks like it is in 4th, but i have to keep the parking brake on or it will roll. worse, is i cna remove the key and reinsert it, but i can not turn the ignition or move the gear shift from what looks like 4th gear. if that werent enough, the car is parked in front of the garage door where my mothers car is parked and she cant get it out. HELP!!!!!!!! if anyone has experienced this and has the secret to starting the car, i would be much obliged.

please email me at: backcountryjournal@hotmail.com to be sure i get it.

thanks in advance!!!!

mike

rbr · October 2003

If its an electrical lock, you can try disconnecting the battery. Sorry, my 9-5 is an automatic, so I cant be much help. Also, to state the obvious, try the owners manual or you can always try calling Saab's customer service number.
Another suggestion -- given that this is an "emergency," you may want to try posting on saabnet.com given the number of very active Saab owners that contribute there -- good luck.

ffb13 · October 2003

block island guy,

colin was famous or infamous for his light weight cars and flimsy but excellent suspension systems.
many crashed and did not survived because of this and many won races because of this.
a well tuned suspension does not need oversize tires .............but yes they do help and improve cornering...but with these tires came ovrely agressive power steering ,it needs it.
so,give me a good suspension,skinny tires up front and mid size tires in rear and no power steering.....a la lotus elan and i am in heaven.

g.m.-i decided to buy american 3 years ago and went for a cadillac deville.
on day one the accelerator pedal fell off.i got home by tying a string to the cable and pulling on it.
the onstar quoted a time of 3 hours or so to come get me.in downtown miami.
then a month later the oil cooler hose came off,in my garage ,so no damage.but a lot of oil spilled. htey came the next day to pick up the car and got it back in 3 hours.
the northstar engine used 1 quart of oil every 400 to 700 miles.
the brakes did not.a recall was made but,still they were no good.
other failures made me sell the car at a loss of 25 gs.after 18 months.
the new g.m.---yes ,maybe, i do own a vette,86 conv. and it has been great.
who knows ,i will buy their stock over any other car company at this time.

Saab 9-5 Sedan

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles