A few thoughts on the 9-7x

[Flash9-7x]

Just found this site. It appears that the 9-7x is approved of by some, and even loathed by others. Having never been a Saab owner, I cannot speak to the passion, however I would like to share a few thoughts on the 9-7x.

I have owned SUV's since 1983 when Chevrolet first introduced the S-10 Blazer. I orderd a 2wd 4 speed 2 door. It was the closest thing available to a '55 nomad (as in 2 door station wagon). I have always liked station wagons. I continued owning SUV's, Blazers, Bravada's, and 1 Escalade. I have a lease due up in a couple of months and was considering Cadillac's SRX, Buick's Ranier, BMW's X-3/5 and the Hummer H3. The Saab 9-7x seems to be the perfect vehicle for what I was looking for but could not find in the other choices. The SRX is OK but a V8 will run you 50 grand. The Ranier has significant interior improvements for '05 with a better cabin than even Lexus. However the ride was a bit too soft. The BMW's had excellant driving abilities however the interior was a bit plain for my taste, especially for the price and they only burn premium. The H3 is still a possibility, however it is primarily designed for offroading and that is not my 1st need. Then we have the Saab 9-7x. From what I gather, it will have the interior luxury of the Ranier, the driving performance more akin to the BMW's, and priced with a V8 10 grand lower than the SRX. This for me is exactly the vehicle that I was looking for. I am not totally sold on all of the exterior styling (as in backend), however the 1" lower suspension and 18' wheels, plus the optional 300hp V8 and the ability to tow 6500 pounds, all while having some modicum of performance seems like a vehicle that just might fit my needs.

I realize that it is not a purists favorite, however, for a longtime SUV driver, this may be my first opportunity for "enlightenment".

Regards,

Flash9-7x

[Lodro]

Interesting perspective. Sounds like you are just the man that Saab is looking for!

[CleveSaab]

I was at my dealer today. They had a ton of pics of the 9-7X.
I think it's very pretty and looks nothing like the model it's based on.
No, I still wouldn't buy any SUV, but if I were going to, the Saab would be first on my list.
My dealer told me he has lost over 40 of his regular customers BECAUSE they don't have an SUV.

[benji9k]

BECAUSE they don't have an SUV.

But they could. 9-5 Aero + 6-inch lift kit + 18-inch wheels & dirt tires = Saab SUV.

Excellent objective opinion, Flash, welcome to the site.

[squishmann]

i think the car would be great if the back of it just looked better.

it's also not going to win any awards in safety.

[CleveSaab]

It does have an anti-rollover system called ROS.
Funny how the Trailblazer still won't. ;)

[valbowski1980]

It does have an anti-rollover system called ROS.
Funny how the Trailblazer still won't. ;)

It's also funny (to me anyway) how the Subaru Outback doesn't have one either. Doesn't need one since it's stable enough. It also does virtually everything an SUV can, a lot of it better. Just food for thought.

[squishmann]

but it still looks like a wagon and it doesn't have that commanding view of the road.

[valbowski1980]

but it still looks like a wagon and it doesn't have that commanding view of the road.

And an SUV is nothing more than a wagon with a lift kit anyway. That and the Outback does sit higher than most cars.

[squishmann]

^^^may be true but the simple fact is an outback doesn't give someone the same feeling as an SUV. you don't have the interior room in a car like you have in an suv. that's what people like. they like the floaty ride, the excellent leg room, and the view they get.

if i didn't like 'driving' so much i would buy an SUV.

[ViggenPilot]

We went to the Washington International Auto Show last Friday (really just dealers' show). We both liked the 9-7x immensely and this is immediately after we came from the Lexus area of the show and sat in the their very nice, but very pricey SUVs.

Wife wants a SUV for the utility and has a "thing" against wagons and
minivans (don't flame me or her please anyone).

This was the black 9-7x they had at the NY Auto Show last spring (9-6X
will debut there in '05 FYI - just read that in this week's AutoWeek).

In any case, after viewing this auto in person, those who say it's not
a SAAB don't know what they're talking about. The interior is
completely SAAB - that was the wife's first comment and she's not a car-crazy person like us. SAAB dash, seats, cup-holders, ignition in the center console, classy, nice materials etc. Front end is unmistakably SAAB as are the wheels, angular look etc. The price point is on the mark too ($37-45K)- having just looked at the Lexus GX 470 at $52k and the bigger model at $67k, this looks like a steal.

It's a nice looking ride and very SAABish to us. Other attendees had
multiple positive comments as well.

FWIW, the whole argument of "a SUV is just a wagon with a lift kit..." is so flawed it's not even funny - completely not true at all, but that's another argument for another day.

[USAF - 1]

I have been reading these posts with interest as I am considering the 9-7x, as well as the Touareg and Volvo XC90. I personally don't want an SUV, but my wife does. I have been looking at the 9-7x sister cars, i.e. the Trailblazer and Buick Ranier, and the resemblance to both, especially the Ranier is almost too much. Take a look at this interior Ranier shot.


http://www.buick.com/rainier/photogallery/interior/

Now compare it to the Saab 9-7x interior shot.

http://www.saabusa.com/flash/97/gallery/enlarged/int1.jpg

There is not much difference. I think the Buick interior looks pretty nice, almost better than the Saab interior. Then again, it's just my opinion. I wish GM would have made the 9-7x a bit different than its standard SUVs.

[squishmann]

what i don't like about most american cars is the rubberyness of they're interiors. it seems that they found the cheapest materials possible. that's how the buick feels. hopefully the saab will use better materials.

i also like the saab interior better b/c it just looks cleaner. the buick is all over the place. the clock radion LCDs. parking brake from '88. plastic door pulls. the headliner is gray and the car has a beige interior?

i will make note that pontiac has been improved. their new cars seem to have it together.

if your looking for a capable SUV then i would personally recommend the Touareg or XC90.

Touareg>>>Volvo

[apzer09]

There is not much difference. I think the Buick interior looks pretty nice, almost better than the Saab interior. Then again, it's just my opinion. I wish GM would have made the 9-7x a bit different than its standard SUVs.

The Saab mostly differs in the special heating vents GM likes to mention a lot, the ignition in the center in place of a cup holder which is now in the dash like the 9-5, and the placement of the wood trim. The Rainier's still looks like the Trailblazer's, complete with giant panel gaps and a lumpy appearance. The Saab's looks different enough, and much better.

[valbowski1980]

FWIW, the whole argument of "a SUV is just a wagon with a lift kit..." is so flawed it's not even funny - completely not true at all, but that's another argument for another day.



Considering that this "utility" that you speak of is barely if not at all used but most SUV owners it might as well be a wagon with a lift kit.



Hey I have an idea, lets build one with a huge fuel sucking motor that gets a terrible emissions rating so it can actually merge its fat, almost 6000 pound *** into traffic and extra ground clearance so the driver feels that great sense of superiority over everyone else. But hey, gotta love that extra body roll and ****ty brakes.



Look ma. No hands. Ops I'm upside down and I dropped my Big Mac and spilled my diet Coke.



Keep them rolling America, the Saudi Royals need a new Bentley convoy.

[apzer09]

Hey I have an idea, lets build one with a huge fuel sucking motor that gets a terrible emissions rating so it can actually merge its fat, almost 6000 pound *** into traffic and extra ground clearance so the driver feels that great sense of superiority over everyone else. But hey, gotta love that extra body roll and ****ty brakes. [/color]


Nice to know you have such a positive attitude. :roll: Sure, some SUVs suck, but do you need to keep repeating that. We get it.

The 9-7x isn't great but since it's development cost probably weren't that high, it should make a decent profit so Saab can develop cars that are more in line with their philosophy, regardless if it's a car or SUV.

[ViggenPilot]

I'm not going to argue the merits of SUVs with Valboski AGAIN - we'll just have to agree to disagree.

The bottom line is that SAAB was/is starving for new product and they were going to lose dealers if they didn't give them an SUV - that's what their customers were demanding. The company could not survive on 2 models alone and ones that were getting rather long in the tooth at that.

You can ague those FACTS if you want, but you'd be wrong.

[Flash9-7x]

Last weekend went back to each of my previous options, BMW X3/5, Buick Ranier, Caddillac SRX and closely assessed each interior. I then went to my local Saab dealer to personally "feel" the interior (9-3SS), sit in it, touch it, review the lines and seams, materials and grab a brochure. I left even more convinced that this is the right choice for me. I have actively sought any info on this vehicle, even attempting to locate engineers working on the project in Ohio. My conclusion, especially with ViggenPilot's first hand account, is that this is exaxctly the vehicle that I have been looking for.

With your money you can choose to buy and drive according to your criteria. The 9-7x meets mine.

[Buddhabman]

I checked the comparison interiors that USAF-1 listed. You are right they are similar. I think Saab used the Buick Rainier platform, which has the nicest interiors of the Trailblazer styled SUV's. I have sat in a Ranier and I like it. interior wise it is not a slouch. The plastic you see in some of the others is improved in the Buick. If they get the driving dynamics worked out with the lowered independent suspension and the 5.3 V8 and the brakes it might be an Ok ride. I am hopeful as we need a larger car. It's still on our list of SUV's to checkout.

9-7X
SRX
B9X Tribeca
Pathfinder
Armada
Tahoe
Durango w/Hemi of course ;-0
Armada

[TC]

B9 Tribeca = SAAB 9-6X

[squishmann]

^^^

true but it's not going to be released for 2 more years

[valbowski1980]

You can ague those FACTS if you want, but you'd be wrong.

I will gladly argue those FACTS with you.

SAAB needs a crossover since many former SUV owners are switching to them now. The chance to get in on the ground floor of the SUV craze has long passed and now the market is flooded with them. Do you really think the masses will give two ****s about another TB do-over? This thing needs to make money so SAAB can keep it's doors open right? Kinda reminds me of the 9-2X which was built on the "we need a new model, any new model" philosophy. Well the 9-2X isn't selling and this thing won't move well either.

I know I'm negative and pessimistic about this thing, why shouldn't I be? Isn't it crystal clear and obvious that by building cars like this SAAB will not rise to the level of it's competitors?

[apzer09]

Isn't it crystal clear and obvious that by building cars like this SAAB will not rise to the level of it's competitors?

Here's how I see it: it's not great Saab is selling the 9-2x and 9-7x as is, but they are still building and will build cars that aren't copies of others (the 9-3 and 9-5). The 9-2x and 9-7x are meant to bring new buyers (or keep buyers) in the fold so they can still make money and continue to make their core models and rise to their competitors.

[squishmann]

this is totally out of left field but since the 9-6X is only 2 years away i think the 9-7X should evolve into a bigger vehicle that can take on the likes of Range Rover. they should get with GMC and Hummer to make it a true off-road capable vehicle but with very good road manners.

i'm suprised the volvo and saab are so late to SUVs. don't they have any hills in sweden?

[valbowski1980]

this is totally out of left field but since the 9-6X is only 2 years away i think the 9-7X should evolve into a bigger vehicle that can take on the likes of Range Rover. they should get with GMC and Hummer to make it a true off-road capable vehicle but with very good road manners.

i'm suprised the volvo and saab are so late to SUVs. don't they have any hills in sweden?

So the plan now is to completely piss off and alienate the few fans that SAAB actually has left?

[apzer09]

So the plan now is to completely piss off and alienate the few fans that SAAB actually has left?
or bring in new fans to learn to appreciate the qualities in saab cars that have been put into their SUVs.

[valbowski1980]

or bring in new fans to learn to appreciate the qualities in saab cars that have been put into their SUVs.

The 9-7X has nothing to do with SAAB. It is the compete antithesis of what a SAAB is. The 9-2X, while being ripped off of an excellent car and therefore possessing that excellent car's characteristics still isn't much of a SAAB either since it isn't in the least bit European.



Once again, I'm going to ask the million-dollar question:
How do you compete with the likes of BMW, Infinity, MB, Acura and Lexus by building products that are inferior to theirs when you compete in a market segment where your potential buyer isn't looking for the lowest priced car?



They aren't selling to the crowd looking for Chevy Cobalts with a rebate check attached here man!

[apzer09]

the 9-7x has little to do with saab, but that's the point, since many of their buyers were defecting to brands that had suvs and all-wheel drive. we all know it's not as good as it could have been, but until something else arrives, we hope it can sell well enough to have saab make a profit so they can develop new models more closely aligned to their philosophy. as soon as new buyers of the 9-7x and 9-2x find the 9-3 and 9-5 have a lot to offer, they can be drawn into the fold, and become lifelong saabers. at least that's what saab wants to do, and that's what's worked for so many other brands.

[SaabKen]

as I just read in UK's CAR magazine (current issue) today, he saidtheir target was the X5, and SAAB has now tuned it to "blow away theX5" :suprised;

[ragtopcav]

I saw a new Range Rover on the road yesterday [prototype, pullingintoJaguar's developement centre at Whitley],with all its camoflage paintbits all over it,suprisingly 9-7x like in its roofline,but so I've beentold it is a monocoque rather thanbody on chassis, so this vehiclecould steal both the X5 and the 9-7x's thunder, interesting times.

[SaabKen]

Range Rover Sport ?


http://www.autosite.com/autoshows/2005-Detroit-Auto-Show/2006-land-rover-range-rover-sport.asp

http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=7979&sid=176&n=156

[danbee]

Why is it that Saab did not even put the newer electronic 9-3 key system in? They are using the old regular key used in the 9-5s (just a standard key you plug into the center). You would think that if Saab cared at all about this vehicle they would have put in the new key system. It sounds like they are just rushing to get this thing out there with very little effort on their part. Very disapointing, and I hope their lack of effort = consumer lack of purchase.

[apzer09]

Why is it that Saab did not even put the newer electronic 9-3 key system in? They are using the old regular key used in the 9-5s (just a standard key you plug into the center). You would think that if Saab cared at all about this vehicle they would have put in the new key system. It sounds like they are just rushing to get this thing out there with very little effort on their part. Very disapointing, and I hope their lack of effort = consumer lack of purchase.

Why do you hope a lack of consumer purchase? Why do you wan't Saab to continue losing sales to customers who feel a 9-5 wagon isn't sufficient for their shopping and soccer practices? I'm not totally impressed with the 9-7x as a whole, but I am impressed considering its humble beginnings.

Plus, I think it's better they installed a traditional key in the 9-7x. The 9-3's electronic one has too many computer problems, like the car not recognizing the key. If they keep the Trailblazer's remote (like how the 9-2x's is just the Impreza's with SAAB stamped on it), that will be unfortunate.

[danbee]

Believe me, no one wants Saab to do better than I do..... I just feel that they cannot pass off crap on consumers and expect us to be happy about it. Perhaps I'm one of the few, but I have never had 1 problem with my 9-3 key. How many of us have had problems with various things in our cars? Many - but Saab traditionally learns from their mistakes and improves upon them. In this case, it looks like they were just too lazy to work the problem, and installed the quick fix to rush to market. I await the 9-3 Hatch and hope the Saab innovations continue. I was really looking forward to the 9-7x....until I sat in one during a focus group meeting on lux SUVs. It was the one I was most looking forward to sitting in, yet I ended up being the least impressed with.

[apzer09]

I am not exactly thrilled by the 9-7x and feel there could have been much more for Saab's first SUV. Even a badge-engineered SRX would have been a better idea. But I think there are enough buyers wooed by Saab's service and sales, not some freaky Chevy sales guy who sells the Trailblazer. And if they price it below the competition, they will have a slight leg-up. But the best news, the upcoming 9-6x should be much better.

[me3head]

Well, I am not sure why everyone seems to praise the 9-6 when it is based of a Subie platform when the 9-7 is based on GMT360. Neither is "developed by Saab" as you like to say.

The 9-7 is, sheetmetal-wise, the same car from the A-pillar back as the rest of the 360s, but somehow they all manage to look different enough. They have completely different dashboards. While you can say that the overall look is similar, so is any dash when you get down to it. The different shapes on the dash are definitely indicitive of an extensively re engineered dash. Why do you think this car is taking so long to come out? It it were truly just fender stampings and saab badges, this car would have come out long ago!

In an idea world there would be no "developed by Saab" per se. The best scenario for GM (the Saab brand and all the rest included) is for them to be able to utilize their VAST engineering resources GLOBALLY to develop each new vehicle. GM undoubtedly has far more engineering resources and knowledge than any other automotive company. It is in everyones best interest for them to use it efficiently.

As an engineer in the automotive world, I can tell you that GM's requirements and design reviews are widely seen as the most stringent and difficult to meet. They are by far the most difficult OEM to make happy, and one of the most difficult to get business with.

[Lodro]

As an engineer in the automotive world, I can tell you that GM's requirements and design reviews are widely seen as the most stringent and difficult to meet. They are by far the most difficult OEM to make happy, and one of the most difficult to get business with.

Interesting but unfortuante that with all of those review processes they turn out so many lousy cars. At least now there are some good ones as well.

I agree that it looks like more than a rebadge, and it would be nice to see the GMT360 get a decent interior, but the platform just so deos not fit with any of the Saab ideals. I can'timagine anyone from the original Saab even contemplating a body-on-frame design. Help from GM engineering, yea, but Saab itself has always been an engineering company, and I see no stamp of Saabs influence on real engieneering bits except for tuning handling. There is literally no technologythat I can see. Even a trubo would have made a big difference in perception I think.

To the poster that said they had seen one in a consumer clinic -- what exactly was it that turned oyu off the most.

[squishmann]

for GM/SAAB it's about money. the 360 platform is the cheapest and most efficient platform to use right now with Olds going out. they tried the SRX but it's cost was to high and i'm pretty sure they looked at other options as well.

the 9-2X and 9-7X weren't conceived to fly out of the showrooms. they were made to keep people from not even considering saab. some will buy it, some won't but when saab does come back with a better effort they will be on someones list again.

for them every car they sell is like winning the lottery. it's all profit and pennies are spent on R&D. these vehicles aren't here to WOW anyone. they just add more light to the brand as a whole.

this year for the Philadelphia Auto Show SAAB has been moved upstairs from the basement. right next to Acura, Cadillac and VW. without these two cars they would still be in the basement.

in two years time the replacements will be released and properly done and noone will remember these days because it will all happen so soon. to sell more cars you need more cars. noone said it would be pretty. GM is the number one automaker in the world and probably makes some of the worst vehicles because they make the most,


i still hope the 9-7X sticks around and turns into the Range Rover beater i want it to be.

[me3head]

I just don't understand why anyone sticks to the concept of a Saab Engineer.

They are all employees of General Motors. The concept of a Saab Engineer is like saying Cadillac Engineer. You may happen to have a GM employee working primarily on Saab products, but they are a GM Engineer.

My wife is an engineer at GM who works primarily on Cadillac products, but also on some Chevy products. She is not a Cadillac or Chevy employee. She is a GM employee.

A long time ago, all the GM divisions operated autonomously. This is unviable in a modern auto company. It makes more sense, and ultimately makes all the cars better, for GM, Ford, VW Group, DCX, et. all for the development to not be organized by brand.


As for "no technology," vehicles are inherently a tech product. Your car, no matter the make, is surely the most engineered product in your home in terms of man hours.

GM has an entire group of people who study color compatability of different materials in a vehicle's interior to make sure that the color and grain are compatible. They also ensure that the materials will fade to like colors over the life of the vehicle, so that things look as color-consistent in a 5 yr old vehicle as a new one.

They have a whole group dedicated to the smell of materials, to make sure that a new car smells the desired way.

GM's engine control systems and body electronics are more advanced than probably any other OEM, especially the japanese who still use 8-bit engine controllers.

[squishmann]

Saab engineers live in Sweden not Michigan

your statement was correct though, i chevy engineer is a cadillac engineer.:D

http://us.autos1.yimg.com/img.autos.yahoo.com/ag/chevrolet_tahoe_2wd_2005_exterior_2_346x270.jpg
http://us.autos1.yimg.com/img.autos.yahoo.com/ag/cadillac_escalade_2wd_2005_exterior_2_346x270.jpg

i think what most of us is saying is that SAAB thinks different than GM. GM signs all of their checks so they are all GM employees but Saab in Sweden has always been a different company in a sense that's why when given a platform to use from the ground up it can turn out to be completely different than it's cousins(9-3, Vectra, Malibu, G6)

GM only sells cars to rental companies. volume=profit. saab has to sell cars to people.

[apzer09]

Actually, Saab has had more and more input on their cars from Detroit as new models are introduced. And Saab's Swedish operations have been tied into GM Europe, which is basically in Germany, I think. Therefore Sweden itself has become less and less important as far as product development. After Michael Mauer, the new design cheif of Saab is also in charge of GM Europe (Opel, Vauxhall, etc.), so I think he's based in Germany as well.

[squishmann]

i really don't know anything.

but i will say this.

9-2X-japan-usa-sweden
9-7X-USA-sweden
9-3-Sweden
9-5-Sweden

9-6X-Sweden-Japan


The whole bringing Saab, Vauxhaul, and Opel togetherin GM Europe so that they can work more efficiently just happened a couple months ago.


the only point i want to make is that if it is a global car i don't see U.S. engineers getting involved with the poduct. i don't think there are any designers or engineers based in the u.s. maybe a few to handle buyback issues and field engineers.

[me3head]

Surely when a platform is developed engineers from all over the world have input. This is even more true now that architectures are to include electronics subsystems (why does 9-3 use MOST and G6 use GMLAN for their audio networks?). There will be input from the world over on most cars from here on out.

Additionally, GM has a sort of cross-polination policy in management. I know of several GMNA managers who came from Saab and vive versa.

Alls im sayins is that it makes sense for GM to have consolidated engineering efforts in Aisa, NA, and Europe. It makes no sense for effort to be duplicated under the auspices of differentation unless the differentiation is really there. The epsilon cars should all use the same climate subsystem, for example, as it's not something you can see. (The only factor where this is not true is in the HVAC controls, which must be tailored to the ergonomics of each brand).

It alse makes no sense for the Sweeden plant to have to make an epsilon and non epsilon vehicle when both the european epsilons could be built in the same facility.

Sure there will be integration pains as GM absorbs Saab's structure, but in the end it will be better for all. With GM redefining itself as an integrated auto manufacturer instead of a disparite conglomeration, it would be unfair to leave Saab out on its own.

[andante]

They have this part with "Feature Highlights" on http://www.saabusa.com/saabjsp/97x/index.jsp
Did it not say "300+ hp" before?
And also "Fully Independent Suspension"?

Now it is simply "300 hp" - and there is no word about independent suspension.

[Lodro]

They have this part with "Feature Highlights" on http://www.saabusa.com/saabjsp/97x/index.jsp
Did it not say "300+ hp" before?
And also "Fully Independent Suspension"?

Good eye! Ya this just cvhanged in the last couple od days. Maybe they thought they could get away w/ saying fully independent suspension (yes, the front is "fully inependent", haha) and thought better of it...