From time to time I see comments and articles on topics like "Saab 9-5 before / after the facelift," General Motors politics, or general "nostalgic thoughts" - "everything was better in the old days". As so often in life, a balanced approach is worthwhile.
Why is the topic interesting? Like me in mine first blog article wrote, the 9-5 station wagon is probably the Saab, which today offers the most car for the money (if you want to have a large station wagon, otherwise the 9-3 is also a good choice). Add to this the large selection of used vehicles, at least in Sweden - which should also have a positive impact on spare parts availability. Almost every car "gives up" someday - then you either have to invest more than the market value to keep it ready to drive (if that's still possible) or you can dump it and buy something - maybe an 9-5?
Back to the balanced view and the question of which 9-5 you should buy then - a model of before or after the 2006 facelift? The innovations and changes brought by this facelift (such as the improved suspension) are certainly familiar to most readers. On the subject here just a short reference to an interesting article from the Swedish car magazine "Teknikens Värld", where inter alia, differences in the suspension tuning between gasoline (Aero) and diesel are described (http://teknikensvarld.se/provkorning-av-saab-9-5-aero-122976/). In this blog entry I just want to bring a few comments and general thoughts that might be important in your purchase decision.
The advantage of a more modern saab
When buying a used car, of course, the age is important. Even if one finds a "pre-2006" specimen with low mileage and in good condition - material ages and that's why I prefer to drive a 2009-built vehicle than one built in 1999 (apart from my wife buying one so old Cars would not have agreed anyway - most people just do not live alone and not every partner is interested in cars). There are also other aspects that can influence the purchase decision. Some of them can be dismissed as details - but also things that Saab has gradually omitted (see blog article the other day).All the nice little things") Are often just details.
- The engine: One reads more frequently about the throttle problems with the 1.9 TiD. However, I also heard that FIAT improved the quality at the end of the construction period (which certainly applies to the Griffin models). The same is true for the "oil sludge" problem with the petrol engines - in early models, it occurred (under certain conditions), then apparently no longer. Apparently the rule "the newer the engine, the better" - at least our 9-5 TiD had so far (if the workshop bills of the previous owner are complete) no problems.
- The diesel selection: If you want to buy a 9-5 with diesel engine, then obviously the 1.9 TiD is the best choice. The 3.0 V6 TiD is generally discouraged, and the 2.2 TiD is apparently too weak and has poor emissions. I can confirm from my own experience that the 9-5 with the 1.9 diesel and automatic drives fantastic - in the Alps, on the highway and in the city. Whereby you should avoid the latter, since the consumption is then too high - even if the difference city-country is not so extreme as in the gasoline, where the factory specification with automatic 15 over X / 100 km.
- The headlights: I do not want to drive a car without xenon lights (which is already outdated in the age of LED and laser light). Most 9 5s from 2006 are included, but many (or most) instances of 2006 do not.
- Controls in the center console: The radio / ACC panel from 2006 I like better because of the clear layout and the fact that no cassette deck is more there. These two aspects certainly have to do with each other - the fewer buttons and slots, the more elegant the design can be (the new Volvos do not even have a CD player). But as always, you never learn - there were also the older models without cassette, as this Orio spare shows (http://webshop.saabparts.com/9-5-gen1/audio-kommunikation-95/radio-cd-95). Added to this is the useful AUX feature, which was only available from 2006 ex factory. Older models can apparently be retrofitted "unofficially" - but I prefer to avoid retrofitting, since I want the car in its original state. The GPS navigation was also renewed, although I would prefer a vehicle without GPS. The navigation system was outdated even then, and I want the CD changer in front and not in the luggage compartment.
- The design: Some of the comments on my last article suggest that the "chrome goggles" (or rather the "Cartier look"?) Does not look so bad. Unique and unmistakable - yes. Nice? I think by now. It pays to take a look at the entire headlamp unit in peace (see photo) - is not this a design masterpiece? Here you can compare the look of the headlights in itself: http://webshop.saabparts.com/9-5-gen1/belysning/stralkastare95
- GM Savings Org: Nobody denies that Saab was forced to cut by GM. But was that really that dramatic? What percentage of production and purchasing costs have been saved? Certainly not much by omitting details such as some small lights or the tank unlocking from the driver's seat. Real wood in the dashboard? I do not want to have wood decor in the car, not real and no faux. Does the plastic look high quality? No, not always, but it does not stand out either. The leather quality, I can already imagine savings of a few hundred euros - I would rather have a car with fabric cover anyway, but the generally better equipped Vector / Aero models just have mostly leather. Thinner than before the facelift, OK - that means gentle care and regular care are even more important than previous model years or previous Saab models.
Maybe these thoughts are interesting for some - I'm happy about comments. I hope I see many of you at the "Saab Car Museum Festival" by 9. - 11.6. 2017 in Trollhattan!