(first posted 10/1/2015) Particularly in the world of sedans, it’s unusual for an all-new generation to last for only two years. This is especially profound when considering said vehicle’s predecessors were sold for twelve and fourteen years with limited changes. Yet like many cars of troubled brands, the 2010 Saab 9-5 was merely too little, too late, and Saab’s ever-rocky final years are to blame for its untimely death.
The original Saab 9-5 was introduced for the 1998 model year as a direct successor to the 9000, which was sold from 1984-1998. Although the 9000’s “Type Four” platform was co-developed between, Saab, Alfa Romeo, Fiat, and Lancia, the 9000 was very much Saab-unique, with only seven parts interchangeable with other models. Engines, transmissions, interior panels, seats, switchgear, and most body panels were purely Saab, as was expected by faithful Saab owners.
By the time the 9-5’s development began, General Motors already owned a 50 percent stake in the Swedish brand. In typical cost-cutting fashion, GM didn’t see it justifiable for Saabs to continue utilizing exclusive platforms and other components. Like the 1998 Saab 900, the new 9-5 used the GM2900 platform, originally introduced for Opel, but also underpinning cars including Latin American Chevrolets, Australian Holdens, and even the Saturn L-Series.
The 9-5 still used Saab-developed engines and transmissions, but no longer exclusively. Thankfully, in terms of appearance, the 9-5 was still very much Saab both inside and out. In fact, in terms of exterior and interior styling, the first generation 9-5 exhibited greater lineage to the iconic classic 900 than the very boxy 9000 did.
Saab’s latest vehicle may have lost some of its exclusiveness, but this didn’t deter buyers from embracing the 9-5. Total production of the first generation 9-5 reached 483,923 units over twelve years. This was almost as high as the nearly 503,000 examples of the 9000, which was produced for fourteen years. Considering this, the 9-5’s average annual production was actually higher.
source: essaabparts.com
The 9-5 initially proved popular in the U.S., with 1999 model year sales (its first year in the U.S.) totaling some 21,361 units. This was more than double the 9000’s best year in the U.S., 1993, when it sold 10,108 examples. 9-5 sales remained at or above 15,000 units in the U.S. through 2003, upon which they started dropping off considerably.
The 9-5 was given minor facelifts in 2004 and 2007, but apart from incremental power increases and minor trim changes, the 9-5’s evolution over twelve years was fairly minor. By this point in the late-2000s, Saab’s future was looking increasingly questionable. In recent years, Saabs were becoming progressively un-Saab-like, evidenced by the heavily corporate second generation 9-3, the rebadged “Saabaru” 9-2X and “Trollblazer” 9-7X.
Despite GM’s attempt to sell off its Swedish subsidiary amidst its own financial crisis in 2008, the automaker went ahead with the development of a successor. Given GM’s dwindling interest in Saab, the second generation 9-5 predictably shared more with other GM products than ever before.
Saab’s mantra may have been “Born From Jets”, but the new 9-5 used the Buick LaCrosse’s long-wheelbase version of the GM Epsilon II platform. Over the previous model, the 2010 Saab 9-5 grew some five inches in wheelbase, seven inches in length, and three inches in width. Although there were some visual ties to the Buick, such as excessively high beltlines and a short, high hood, sheetmetal was unique and unmistakably Saab.
Drawing cues from historic Saabs, this bold update of the brand’s flagship was really quite a beautiful car. Compared to its predecessor, the new 9-5 exuded a greater sense of power and prestige. Blacked-out A-pillars, unique wheel designs, and sharp lower character lines conveyed aggression, while clear-lensed LED taillights, thick chrome window trim, and a steeply raked roofline gave it a sleek and sophisticated appearance.
The discontinuation of the first generation 9-5 also saw the termination of the Saab H-engine. Saab buyers still had choices when it came to powertrain, but all engines for the second generation 9-5 now came from the GM parts bin. North American buyers had the availability of either a 2.0L Ecotec turbo I4 (220 horsepower; 258 lb-ft torque) or a 2.8L turbo V6 (296 horsepower; 295 lb-ft torque). Both engines were gasoline-powered, although the 2.0L was also available with “BioPower” E85 capability.
Elsewhere in the world, buyers also had choice of a gasoline-powered 1.6L Ecotec turbo I4, and single- and twin-turbo versions of the diesel-powered GM-Fiat co-developed 2.0L I4. All-wheel drive was a new option to the 9-5 range, available with the 2.0L Ecotec and 2.0L twin turbodiesel, and the only drivetrain for the V6.
Although it was an improvement over the horribly outdated and outclassed interior of the old 9-5, the new 9-5’s interior still left a feeling of disappointment. While the interior didn’t flagrantly ooze cheapness, for a car whose base prices ranged between $39,000-$50,000, the plastics, leather, and switchgear just didn’t look or feel the part.
Egg-crate style vents, Saab’s “Night Panel” switch, and the cockpit dash shape remained, but overall the “Saab-ness” just wasn’t totally there. In spite of this, the new Saab 9-5 was at least competitive in terms of equipment, boasting an extensive list of standard luxury, safety, and technology features, comparable to other cars in its class and at its price range.
Contemporary reviews gave the 9-5 respectable marks for handling, bestowing especially high praise on its steering and cornering abilities. The 9-5 did feature a wider track and firmer suspension, but most mechanics were indeed shared with the Buick LaCrosse. Power from the turbo-4 was cited on the sluggish side, with most reviewers preferring the more responsive V6.
Notwithstanding its further loss of individuality and other shortcomings, the 2010-2011 Saab 9-5 was likely a satisfactory Saab for the shrinking group of loyalists that hadn’t jumped the sinking ship for makes such as Acura, Audi, Lexus, Volkswagen, and Volvo (brands that former Saab owners I personally know have gone to). The larger problem was, by the time the second generation 9-5 went on sale, Saab was essentially on life support.
source: saabcars.com
I won’t get into the nitty-gritty details, but in the years since 2008, Saab and its chain of several owners have gone through multiple partners, licensing disputes, lawsuits, bankruptcies, and production issues, among other major road bumps. Saab’s current owner, National Electric Vehicle Sweden, has reportedly produced a small number of the now archaic 9-3, but currently, it doesn’t appear any Saabs are rolling off assembly lines. NEVS has big plans for a future Saab lineup, but a quick look at their website doesn’t provide much hope of this every seeing life.
Second generation 9-5 production began in early 2010, but due to Saab’s precarious situation, never fully ramped up to maximum output levels. By early 2011, 9-5 production was halted, as the automaker couldn’t afford to pay suppliers. Total second generation 9-5 production was a mere 11,280 units. In the U.S., 9-5 sales for 2010 and 2011 totaled only 3,419 examples, with many models going unsold for some time after dealers closed.
The second generation Saab 9-5 was hardly a perfect car, and more importantly, it was by no means a perfect Saab. Regardless of its deficiencies, the second generation 9-5 was a striking design, and a car that Saab fans (including your humble author) were rooting for. Unfortunately, its success just wasn’t meant to be. The second generation Saab 9-5 was just too little, too late.
Related Reading:
2003 Saab 9-3 (COAL)
2011 Saab 9-5 (eBay Find)
It reminds me of the final Pontiac Bonneville. Even though compromised, it’s still a good sports alternative for a niche market, sometimes quite a broad range, but too bad the world is shrinking too much for alternatives and personal choices, even though it’s a trend for automotive industry. Maybe it’s a sinking ship itself, and I wonder when another British Leyland will emerge.
It was born from Vectras, Opel’s Vectra got relabeled Vauxhall which was rebadged Holden Chevrolet Buick Saab it was a world chassis just add which ever flavour you local market preferred.
Its still happening Holden brought their new sporty offering to NZ for winter testing recently, the OZ journos talking Holdens brilliant engineering up as usual when in fact Holden designed the badge, the car was a Holden VXR 4wd in other words they peeled off the Vauxhall badging as usual and call it Australian only the Aussies are fooled by this and probably not even many of them.
Thanks GM for running Saab into the ground!.What was advanced cars with aircraft engineering be came Opels with Saab like bodies and interiors. Ok the quality,handling and reliability was not up to German standards but the had their
follows, doctors,engineers and teachers among them.
Hummers death was justified…
What “aircraft engineering”, just because they once were part of SCANIA? Name anything in an ordinary SAAB that was truly “aircract engineering”?
What was laughable was the ads for the Chevy Blazer cloned 9-7x, calling it ‘born from jets’. Sure!! So was the Saabaru!
Aerodynamics, that’s one thing. SAAB started as a manufacturer of military airplanes in the late thirties.That company (SAAB AB) is still on air, BTW.
The aircraft engineering certainly didn’t come from Scania, since Scania is a truckmaker.
Saab the planemaker was very generous about use of the name on cars. They were willing to license the name for 1 Krone a year as long as production stayed at Trollhaten. Surprisingly patriotic for a company in today’s world.
The last ad slogan from the Spyker period was even worse. “Move your Mind”. In our house that was quickly changed to move your mind to some crazytown place where you would buy this car.
Actually, Spyker also built aircraft, during the First World War. Plus the very first car with a 6-cylinder engine, full-time AWD, and brakes on all 4 wheels. That was in 1903.
That company had nothing to do with Victor Muller’s Spyker Cars, of course.
We ended up buying not one but two Saab 9-3s during that time. The cars were well designed, had all of their bugs worked out by that point (since the basic design was 8 years old by that point) and they were a hoot to drive! We continue to enjoy our saabs every day. I love going into the parking lot and seeing my car amongst a sea of appliance camcords. they are fun to drive, responsive and handle great in all weather conditions. Don’t knock them if you don’t know anything about them.
That “aircraft engineering” and “born from jets” is pure BS. After WW2, Saab desperately needed a new product, which they decided would be a car. They had no clue what it took to build one. So they cribbed the DKW F9 (below). Full story here:https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/saab-the-eulogy/
Other born from jets features included the Ford Taunus V4 and the Triumph slant-four engine that was the foundation for the “purely Saab engine.” Saab reverse engineering the DKW 2-stroke is the closest they ever came to producing their own engine. Fans of Saab pretend the 9000 was significantly different from a Lancia Thema while ignoring its harbinger, the Saab-Lancia 600, which had a different badge to distinguish it from the Delta.
Aerodynamic cars certainly didn’t begin with SAAB; Chrysler & Tatra were examples from the ’30s. This was the same time frame the aircraft industry finally got serious about streamlining; compare the awkward Ford & Fokker Trimotors with the Boeing 247 & Douglas DC-2.
Chrysler & Rover could more fairly claim inspiration from jets with their turbine cars.
Aircraft design is a very different industrial art, not much is transferable to vehicular design. The Voisin bros. were among the few who did both.
Interestingly enough, Subaru’s parent company also started life as an aircraft manufacturer, although as with SAAB cars, the connection with jets in a modern engineering sense is about as real as one of us claiming to be “born from jets” because our parents met at an airport.
That was Nakajima, who produced excellent Army fighter types all thru WW2, like the Ki-84.
BMW & Rolls-Royce produced the earliest jet engines, & even our friends at GM also did not long after (licensing British designs at first).
Actually is was German modified by Swedes so it was definitely down to German standards.
Have you guys seen the estate version of that final 9.5 ?
I read somewhere, that a couple had been built before SAAB shut down for good.
Those were true beauties and sure would have sold well.
IMO GM should be using that architecture to build Lacrosse and Impala wagons. Sure, they’ll be niche, but if the development work is done why not?
MonzamanGermany:
In the photo attached to your comment it looks more
to me like a late model Ford Explorer! That is just
how homogenized automotive design has become
in the last 10 model years.
I don’t see much similarity besides the fact that they’re both 2-box designs. Cars from similar eras always tend to share some similarity in design, and this can be said for any era. The same can really be said for anything stylistic (architecture, fashion, furniture, etc.) Cars from today look no more alike than cars from the any other decade do.
Brendan Saur:
My point was there isn’t much “Saab” left in the latest and
last iteration. That it shared more aesthetically with the
current Explorer than with its Swedish roots.
Case in point
That’s a good point, but all three of your examples are American cars.
There was a clear distinction between European and American cars, and to a lesser extent Japanese (which mixed both with unique Japanese themes). This added quite a bit of diversity to our roads.
Yes there are some in-betweeners like some Euro cars with ‘Trans-Atlantic’ and so on, but really there was no confusing a Toyota with a VW with a SAAB with a Buick in 1965, 1975 or even 1985.
Today Euro-American-Asian cars are interchangeable in design language.
If you had slapped on a Toyota badge on a 1967 Buick Skylark, people would have noticed then. If the Chevy Spark came out with a Hyundai badge instead, no one would question it.
That’s getting a little too nitty-gritty. Keep in mind though that Asian automakers did not make truly full-size cars (in the American sense) until the 1990s, which is why there were no Asian cars 50 years ago that looked like full-size American cars. Even “compact” American cars back then were often larger than the largest Asian cars produced.
European cars were also traditionally smaller than comparable size-class American cars until the 1980s. Once sizes became more standardized, then the “all cars look alike” claim became an international affair.
Here’s three 1984 mid-size cars, one German, one Japanese, one American. No more dissimilar than cars today.
Thank modern cultural homogenization for that.
Not nitty gritty at all, just true.
You are being rather selective in your choices. Try say a BMW e28 VS. Cadillac Seville from say 1985. There is NO question even to any average auto-phobe which is American and which is European withouyt any badging what so ever.
Going back to the 70s – it had nothing to do with size: even if a Gremlin was shrunk down by 25%, it was still WAY different from a Beetle or FIAT from the era.
I will admit that by the 1980s thing were changing, but the sh*t really hit the sameness fan in the 1990s-present
I believe there are 16 of them, they were officially prototypes but were fully functioning. They were auctioned off after the bankruptcy and several were/are successfully registered in Europe. One is in Germany, another in Norway and several others in a few other countries. There is a long article on one of the car websites or forums detailing exactly what one owner went through in getting it registered, there were many obstacles.
The wagon was going to make it to the USA had Saab survived a few more months, with a different tail with a more prominent rear bumper. About 20 pre production wagons were auctioned off from bankruptcy not for road use as the car had never received certification. Some of those have managed to get licensed, who knows how.
As much as people mock it, to my mind the future classic from the Saab GM era is the 9-2X Impreza/Saabaru variant. Had all of the good features of the WRX plus bigger wheels and brakes and a very nice leather interior. Also had relatively sedate exterior styling, mercifully lacking in the Ricer affectations of its Subaru brethren. Another benefit is that they were more expensive, which made them less attractive to the tuner crowd, so also less likely to be wrenched/driven into the ground.
By the end of its life, the 9-5 seemed like a Lexus ES clone with Saab styling cues and GM powertrains and interior switchgear, which is really what it was.
The rest of the Impreza wagon/hatch already looked a lot like a Saab and unlike any other Subaru. It most have been done by a different designer or team or studio than any Subes before or since. The Saabish front end went fine with it. If the Impreza was never a thing already no one would suspected a thing, inside or out – well, unless they opened the hood.
I owned one of these, a 2011 Fjord Blue Turbo 4. I made the colossus mistake of buying it in February 2011, a month before the factory closed when they ran out of parts because they didn’t pay there suppliers. Talk about great timing. Allowed a lot of jokes around the house about when the Norwiegens are going to come to repo the dashboard or the Romanians are going to come for the steering wheel. World car.
The best part of the car was the looks. It looks smaller in real life than in pictures and the roofline has a certain Citroen DS quality to it. I had the only one in town so only saw another only very rarely on road trips. The seats, Lear Sieglar, were excellent although a little short of Volvo.
The bad parts. One of the reasons I chose it was it was the first in USA to combine the turbo four with the euro midsize,E class,5 seies A6 S80, body. I had several years earlier owned a 9-3 with an earlier version of the same engine and had gotten 36 mpg highway. The 9-5 had 220hp instead of 175hp and weighed more but I assumed wrongly the direct injection and the 6th speed in the auto would even that out. No such luck, I only got 31 mpg highway.
The ugly parts. Completely jipped out of the great warranty. No free maintance, no roadside, the car did not come with a spare tire. The completely LED taillights quickly had a few out with no way to fix them except a $500 taillight cluster. And the resale value, after much dealing I got $15250 for a 3 year old car with 39k that I paid $35000 for, it listed for $40700.
I am surprised that you did as well as you did on resale at 3 years old. What a bad situation, where the only choices are to get out as soon as you can afford to or to become Saab Guy and drive this one and others just like it for the next 15 years, telling everyone that “the problem with Saab was that they were ahead of their time.”
The modern Saabs had the bugaboo that the admittedly few parts that were unique became unobtainable, most often the key in the floor switch on the 9-3, and the start button on the 9-5. They just do not make the part, and both have a high failure rate because being on the console near the cupholder, they can get wet. On my 9-5, I had hoped to get over 50k miles, on the theory that the warranty would have expired by then anyway so would have less effect on resale. When my start button began acting up from time to time, and replacing the batteries in the key fobs did not help, I decided it was time to take the hit.
Trading it in was strange. When shopping around, the car would attract crowds of salesman who had clearly never seen one, but then the inevitable really low trade offer. Being born from Buicks, the Buick dealer gave me the best offer.
John, I’m really sorry to hear about your Saab experience. I imagine Saab owners lost out even more than owners of other discontinued brands, and Pontiac, Mercury, Saturn, etc. all shared greater parts with other cars and sold in higher numbers. I hope you at least enjoyed driving the car itself.
Saab was the only failure where the warranty went with it. In 2010 GM sold Saab to Spyker, a tiny Dutch high end sports car maker, that also went bust. GM covered the remaining warranty on cars from it’s period through some Cadillac dealers but not cars from the Spyker period. Sweden legally required former Saab dealers to cover Swedish buyers, but did nothing for anyone else, even though the Swedish government took over the allegedly lucrative parts business.
I was a nice car to drive although the weight was pretty high so there was a sense of inertia to overcome. The Buick that replaced it was quieter, but the by then electric steering has less feel.
It might not be a real Saab, but it’s still a gorgeous looking car, particularly in Aero trim with the more aggressive front bumper. If I had the money spare, I’d be seriously tempted.
A nice review. I found these attractive, but they seemed to lack that thing called Saab-ness. Sad that there was too much GM/Opel in the car to really appeal as a Saab, but there was then too much Saab about it when it came to parts and repairs for a guy like JohnC.
In late 2010 at a used car auto auction, I watched a parade of nearly new Saabs, Hummers and Pontiacs being wholesaled by GMAC to clear the inventories from the company books before the end of the year. Personally, could have cared less about Saab and Hummer, did feel bad about watching the Pontiac demise.
Yes you are right I miss Pontiac to. I wonder how the next grand prix would have looked like.
Cadillac ATS
sad. sad. sad.
even if it’s a decent car, i would never own one because every time i drove it, i would just feel sad about the decline of the most innovative of the modern independent car makers.
Interesting…I might be MORE inclined to buy this car, now that I know how much similarity there is with the Buick…at least I might have a fighting chance at finding someone who can work on the damn thing.
There is a black one running around here, and I saw a platinum gray one recently, but they are few and far between.
Now, there is a forlorn-looking Saab 99 sedan at a mechanical shop around the corner from my office…I am tempted to pop in and ask about it.
SAAB was in trouble when GM got involved. While GM did not ultimately help much, SAAB would either have been taken over by someone else or gone under.
I agree; Saab was circling the drain, GM or not. GM didn’t help much, but I don’t think Ford, or Chrysler, Daimler, Fiat, etc, would have done any better.
Look up history, SAAB was in trouble before GM stepped in.
But, purists think “any car from Europe is pure and cool”. Sure, just look at what’s going on with VW Diesels.
All the fan boys who said they “would buy new SAAB’s if GM sold the company” sure didn’t put $ where mouths were.
These are beautiful to look at in my opinion. I saw one several months ago out in the wild and thought it had some styling cues from the 900. Very nice.
This is the new go-to article for anyone interested in these 9-5s. Great job. I must admit I did not know the last 9-5 was on the LaCrosse platform. I’ve always liked the styling of the final 9-5 and knowing it’s a Buick underneath doesn’t bother me.
The roofline is what makes it, it looks like an opening clam shell like the one on the 370Z. The purple taillamp lenses were super cool too. The 9-5 looks very Saab all the way around and is a terrific example of how to evolve a signature look. Far more effective than what Volvo did with the S80 or Jag with the XJ.
The biggest let down is that instrument panel, needs more vertical drop. The steering wheel has to go too.
The taillights were according to the brochure, styled after Scandinavian ice blocks. Who wouldn’t want that.
The instrument panel was supposed to be fixed for 2012 if the car had made it. The original prototypes had a more distinctive look, but the Swedish firm had went belly up between the GM prototypes and Spyker production. A new Swedish style real wood and a more advanced interface would have helped the looks of the console in 2012. Over time it was to move away from GM parts. One of the differences between the 2010 and 2011 model is that the 2011 ditched the GM computer management in favor of the old in house Trionic system.
Outstanding write-up, Brendan. It is such a shame these didn’t get half a chance to succeed. These were seriously some of the best-looking sedans I’ve ever seen. My brother is a SAAB guy (had three of them at different points), and his disappointment with the execution and lack of SAAB-ness this car was pretty hard to take, given what a huge fan he was of this brand.
Thanks Joseph. Just out of curiosity, may I ask what your brother drives now?
It sounds like I am in the minority here, but certain styling elements just do not work for me on these cars. The blacked out upper half of the mirror caps. The chromed outline of the faux vents just behind the front wheels. Worst of all to me is the combination of the blacked out A-pillar paired with the chrome detailing that runs along the bottom window line and up to the top of the C-pillar. Too bad, because the overall silhouette is fairly attractive to me.
I could never get over those odd silver headlight surrounds – like the car was wearing glasses.
LIke the ghost of Harley Earl was saying “It’s gotta have more chrome – somewhere, anywhere!”
When I was in high school, I thought Saabs were cool cars, with a reputation for being weird and innovative (I went to high school in the ’80s). Then I remember that a neighbor of ours who had two Saabs in his driveway, a 900 and a 9000, suddenly had two more prosaic Subarus. I think I started to understand at that point that weird and innovative did not equal practical to own. (I now have two Subarus in my driveway.) I think my wife and I considered a 9-5 at some point in the early 2000’s but couldn’t see the point of paying extra for the same platform as a Saturn L-Series. Sic transit gloria.
Well, SAAB couldn’t stand on their own for one thing. GM just gave them life support.
All the fan boys on SaabUnitied site “Swore” they would buy a new one if the company was “saved”. Where were they when they needed sales? “Oh, I’m waiting for a used one”. “My spouse won’t let me”, etc.
I suspect it’s not just “too little, too late” but also, for Europe at least, too big. But it was always going to have difficulty getting any success, given the strength of the German premium brands, the lack of identity SAAB had by 2010 and the financial status of the company limiting the reach of the brand as well.
I had a ride in one being used as a taxi in Gothenburg, Sweden (home of Volvo!) in December 2012 and the driver proudly gave me a guided tour of the dash showing how he could change the CD track with 3 different controls, the heated seats and black panel. But if 20 minute cab ride is going to cost £85, I’d expect a bit of TLC
The GM Saab never did it for me. We had a 87 9000 turbo my uncle bought used, sunroof, turbo, 5 speed and all. A truly remarkable car indeed. Very innovative and had a mean roar. Look at the engine set up of the early 900’s beautiful engineering at best. That car was tough, no oil changes or tune ups. Never cost us a dime, it was supposed to be mine. Then the car sat and the clutch went out. Dad got rid of it. My first and current car…a irorn duke equipped Chevy Celebrity base. Reliable and dirt cheap. But that Saab will always be special to me.
Well, I had no idea the 1998 9-5 was on the GM platform, I’d always thought it was a re-skinned Type Four. Thanks for the education on that point Brendan!
Count me as a fan for the 2010 9-5 – we didn’t get them in NZ, but I saw one in the UK a couple years ago and it looked even better in the metal than in photos. A very, very handsome car.
If I recall correctly, the V6 in the 9-5 was cast in Mexico, sent to Melbourne for assembly then shipped to Sweden. It was well travelled. The V6 Aero was a class act to drive.
KJ in Oz
great looking car. shame what happened to Saab but, I wonder how much sooner they would have gone under if GM hadn’t have bought them.
FWIW, Saab automobiles is now completely dead. That Chinese company that took over the name and managed to build a few more (long-obsolete) 9-3s went insolvent, and the Saab aircraft company exercised a clause in their licensing terms that allowed it to withdraw use of the Saab name on cars if the company became insolvent. So unless Saab Aerocraft decides to bestow the Saab name on future cars from a different manufacturer, Saab cars are history.
The real oddball is the 9-4x, the very short-lived crossover SUV based loosely on the Cadillac SRX, but only produced for a few months, with about 600 built. Not built by GM, but Spyker IIRC which is no longer doing business in the USA. So these cars are complete orphans. Spare parts not shared with the SRX are already hard to come by – don’t crack the unique windshield for example.
FYI this is incorrect. While the name itself is no longer allowed to be used by SAAB Defense, National Electric Vehicle Sweden, NEVS, is still very much alive and the headquarters, engineering, design, and administration is still in Trollhattan, while the pure electric version of an updated 9-3 is initially being produced in a new factory in China, production for elsewhere will likely also be in the Trollhattan factory, hopefully in the near future. Focus is not strictly on auto production alone but new and comprehensive transportation modalities:
https://www.nevs.com/en/
The owner/financier is Chinese/Swedish (Swedish citizen), but virtually the entire management team is Swedish:
https://www.nevs.com/en/investors/management-team/
The “Dame Edna” Saab. 🙂
My grandpa bought one of these new, a black 2.0 turbo sedan. At the same time my grandma also bought a new Saab, a silver 9-3 convertible. She had a dark blue 1993 900S 16V turbo convertible on BBS rims earlier and a bunch of sportscars before that. Renault Caravelle, Triumph Stag, Porsche 944 and so on while my grandpa had a ’56 Bel Air, Thunderbird landau, Mustang and a few Jaguars XJS v12 before.
I guess that later on they wanted more practical cars that still seemed a bit sporty and had enough power too.
We took plenty of trips to Paris in those cars, more than a dozen times thru the years and they never had any problems at all. Very reliable cars.
Later on my grandpa couldn’t drive anymore and grandma started to drive the 9-5. Its two decades old now and I expect the reliable little Saab to last much longer, it only has 70k miles on it after all.
A final postscript is that car was the key feature in Nolan’s Tenet sequence where time goes backward and forward on the motorway. I winched as the Saab was rolled…can’t be many left. And Nolan totalled three.
Looks like my question was removed, so I’ll ask it again:
What is the most recent model year/generation of ‘pure’ Saab one can buy?