I’ve never been a fan of the gen 1 Saturn S Series sedan styling. But I have to say, running into this wagon reminded me that the wagon was quite well executed; much better than the gen2 that started in 1996 and carried that awkward curved sedan rear door line into the wagon. This is clean, and a bit refreshing to see, as low little wagons have become something of a rarity.
I’m a bit less enthusiastic about its front end. But it works well enough, in the context of the times and…GM. That was a look they recycled a few times.
The downward slope of its hood was pretty advanced for the times. Of course this was coming from the makers of the “Dustbuster” minivans. But with those wheels, this has to be the one Saturn I would have been ok with having.
My Saturn GM Deadly Sin/Eulogy has been endlessly taken as a slur on the actual cars themselves. They weren’t exactly great, with the Honda Civic constantly being a moving target that stayed well ahead of the Saturn, most of all in refinement. But they had their positive qualities, most of all the plastic bodies in the Rust Belt.
Those wheels aren’t stock, I’m pretty sure they are Enkeis. But they do look good on it. The blue color of the car helps too, and yes this was pretty much peak Saturn, when the promise was still all there (mostly).
Great find. At the time, these reminded me a lot of the Geo Storm Wagonbacks. Like the current Civic, they had a low and wide stance, I thought was very appealing in a small car. As Jim pointed out above, the owner made a good choice in wheels. Flattering wheels can transform forgettable exterior styling. Saturn used a number of flat-faced wheel and wheel cover designs that made these cars appear conservative. I recall being pleasantly impressed GM took the ‘risk’ of giving the design some flair with the curved lower body side molding.
The rear/upward sweep of the beltline on the Storm creates an unpleasant tension with the hood line, at least to my eye. I feel the more horizontal beltline of the Saturn wagon works well, OTOH.
I agree. I credit GM for the upward sweep of the lower body side molding on the Saturn wagon. It’s subtle, inoffensive, and makes the design’s profile more interesting.
I had a 1995 Saturn sedan for a while. Tiny, economical, but drank oil. But oil was cheap at the time, and so was the car. And dear daughter drove it 60 miles a day back and forth to college for 4 years. Then she gave it to Mom, who promptly wrecked it.
There is a similar Saturn wagon in my neighborhood that an old couple drive. I’ll bet they have had it since new. And it still looks pretty nice.
I don’t love the front end either, but I do love how distinctive it is. Debadge it, see it from a quarter of a mile away, doesn’t matter. You know what it is.
SW2 wagon from either Gen 1, Gen 2, or Gen 3 (1993-2003) with manual trans and DOHC version of the 1.9 ltr 4 is something I would have loved.
I had a new “98 SW2 with a manual trans. It was such a pain that we named it the “Uranus”
I had this car, a ’93 SW2 in gold, DOHC engine and 5 speed stick. It was fun to drive with crisp flat cornering. But it was unrefined and a pain to live with day to day. It’s biggest fault was the general sense of being crude and unrefined – harsh ride, cheap plastic interior pieces, and the noise – road noise, wind noise, and a growly engine that was a far cry from the sewing machine-like Honda engines of the time. Mostly good memories with it, though, and it was reliable.
Would look even better lowered a bit.
My first assumption was that the station wagon had unique rear doors. But the rear door tops on the sedan look to be fully squared off.
Cost wise it just makes sense.
Don’t forget AMCs concept where they tried to figure out how to cheapen the production process by having the stampings on the car repeated front to back.
I’m half surprised that a modern manufacturer hasn’t tried something similar.
It’s just that it’s unusual to see a sedan in which the top of the rear door doesn’t taper downward. Even the old brick Volvo wagons had this giveaway—a slight downward slant that told you the door was from the sedan. But I don’t think the rear door on the Saturn has this at all…it’s dead level!
Bumpers became styled c. 193x and Ford put the same bumper on the Escort c. 198x, right?
I seem to recall Studebaker putting the same bumper on the front and the back of the Lark when it was very uncommon in the US market.
IIRC some Ramblers did too.
I’m really surprised, and was back in the day, that the wagons didn’t retain the early rear doors with the ’96 redesign. It was a lot of structural reworking for not much payoff, especially since they blacked out the wagons’ new curved C-pillar.
Agreed, sharp looking car. My dad had an SW1 between his ’88 Taurus wagon and ’10 Focus sedan. But the rings coked up and it started burning oil. It’s a shame because it was a Chicago car but looked great even after ten years, whereas the Focus started showing quite a bit of surface rust at just five years old.
Looks are not everything. My one Saturn experience with a ’94 SL2 sedan completely soured me on the brand.
But yeah, the wagon is pretty.
I don’t believe that I’ve ever seen one of these; you’re right, much better looking than the sedan. I purchased a gen 1 sedan for my daughter after she wrecked her previous car. It provided noisy, vibration prone & reliable transportation as long as you get it full of oil. there were famous for being mobile smoke screens via their exhaust. But it got her from point A to point B, and sometimes that all you can ask of a cheap car.
I had forgotten all about the first-gen Saturn wagon and the color of this one really shows its clean lines to advantage. Ironically, I recommended my sister buy a 1993 Saturn as her first car. She found the no-haggle pricing to be really appealing, which eliminated her worries of being cheated by the dealer. She bought a base model wagon, but it was dark green, had cheap plastic wheel covers and a cheap plastic interior and would have never been mistaken for being a striking car. It served her well, but the telltale blue smoke from the tailpipe hastened a trade for a new Subaru Forester, a significant upgrade in every respect.
The Saturn wagon was on my short list in 1993 when I was shopping for a small wagon. The seating position was practically on the floor, which made it feel like driving a go-cart, but not in a good way. The car felt crude and unrefined. The security cover for the cargo area seemed cumbersome and fragile. If I’d bought the Saturn it would have been blue like this one. I ended up buying a Corolla wagon, which I still drive. I can’t imagine the Saturn would have lasted me this long.
The problem of oil consumption/coked up rings was due to, in my mind, a ridiculously absurd engineering decision to eliminate the drainback holes behind the oil control ring. Seriously?! The only fix is a complete teardown and reassembly after drilling the holes yourself. Stupid!!
I recently bought a “big body” Saturn L200 for the princely price of $750. Much more refined than the little S body. Wouldn’t have been my first choice, but the 92 year old whose home we bought in FL was selling the car too, and I figured a 100k mile car that everything worked was worth the money.
2.2L auto, doesn’t burn oil. Aside from needing a pair of front quickstruts, and having a few “old lady” dings in the bumper covers it’s good to go.
My dad had an early 90s SL1, ordered it with the power sunroof, but forgot to order power windows and locks?!? He drove it 140k miles before he cooked the engine.