Nothing we didn't already know I imagine, but it's good to hear it's still the case. I just picked this up from a GM press release. Self explanatory really.


Saab 9-5 and Saab 9-3 hatchback rated as 'Safest Cars' in Swedish road accident study

The Saab 9-5 and Saab 9-3 hatchback are rated as the safest cars in Sweden following the latest road accident study conducted by Folksam, the country's leading insurance company.

The Folksam report, 'How Safe is Your Car?', is published every two years and its findings are based on an assessment of personal injuries in accidents on Swedish roads involving 138 different car models. In winning Folksam's safest car award, the Saab 9-5 and 9-3 hatchback were found to carry the lowest injury risk rating.

The findings are based on an analysis of 94,100 car-to-car road accidents in Sweden since 1994 involving injuries to 35,400 occupants. An injury risk measurement is produced for each car model on which there is sufficient data available.

Apart from winning Folksam's overall award, the Saab 9-5 and 9-3 hatchback each topped their own respective categories, for large and medium -sized cars. The Saab 9-5 also won the safest car award two years ago.

Both models have been developed according Saab's real-life safety philosophy, which involves computer simulations and crash testing designed to replicate what happens in real collisions on real roads. These are derived from reports in a Saab database now covering more than 6,100 real-life accidents involving Saab cars on Swedish roads.

"This latest Folksam report is further independent confirmation of the effectiveness of our long-term work with car safety," says Per Lenhoff, Head of Crash Safety Development at Saab Automobile. "The current Saab 9-3 Sport Sedan model is not yet included because there is insufficient data available but we also expect it to perform extremely well in future studies."

Saab cars are also highly rated in surveys of real-life collisions carried out in the United States by the Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) and in EuroNCAP crash tests, the Saab 9-5 Sedan, 9-3 Sport Sedan and 9-3 Convertible have all achieved a maximum five star rating.

*clap* *clap* *clap* *clap*

Am I the only one that finds it a bit too coincidental that Sweden publishes data praising Swedish cars year after year? Even if this was accurate, I would guess it has a lot to do with the typical Saab driver demographic (female, older, cautious, concerned with safety) versus other brands like BMW (male, aggressive, younger, performance oriented).

According to a recent study conducted by the IIHS, the Saab 9-5 had a higher death rate than every Mercedes (E,S) and every BMW (3,5,X5) included in the study. In fact, the E class has the lowest death rate of all vehicles at 10 deaths per million registered vehicle miles; 4.5x lower than the Saab 9-5.

I've really never understood why people think Saabs are safer than other European cars. Saab has a rather lackluster record in the Euroncap and the IIHS crash tests. Only recently have Saab vehicles attained praiseworthy scores, though not necessarily any higher than other European brands. Saab has done very little as far as safety innovation is concerned. In fact, the only noteworthy Saab safety innovation/first is the SAHR system... A very miniscule achievement indeed considering the sheer breadth of all that Mercedes and others have done. Saab isn't even especially quick to adopt new safety technologies... You still can't buy a 9-5 with rear head airbags even though Mercedes, Volvo, BMW and others have had them standard for years.

In the end, it seems like the entire notion of "Saab=Safety" is more of a manufactured marketing myth than anything based on reality. I know Saab makes a safe car, but I also know that other companies make as safe or frequently safer cars.

Present lab crash tests have fooled many to believe that about all new cars are equally safe.

And what comes to Folksam is that you have to fully understand how its done, if there aint loads of crashed E-class cars then no E-class in the whole study.
Also it doesnt predict how likely its to crash, only what happens when two cars collide, in real life.

"more of a manufactured marketing myth than anything based on reality"

Well thats the way you wanna see it and you are pretty alone with that.

Present lab crash tests have fooled many to believe that about all new cars are equally safe.

So what you're saying is a highly rated Saab is safer than a highly rated Mercedes? Please, back up this claim with reason. To say that a highly Volvo/Mercedes/BMW/Audi is less safe "just because" it isn't a Saab is absurd.

And what comes to Folksam is that you have to fully understand how its done, if there aint loads of crashed E-class cars then no E-class in the whole study.

I'm not sure I follow you. However, I do know that the Saab 9-5 has a higher driver death rate than all Mercedes and BMW models included in the IIHS study, as well as most Volvo, Audi and Volkswagen vehicles.

Also it doesnt predict how likely its to crash, only what happens when two cars collide, in real life.

How likely a car is to crash is partially related to its active safety. Therefore it is perfectly realistic and logical to account for this factor.

Well thats the way you wanna see it and you are pretty alone with that.

Alone? Really? Then please explain to me exactly what makes Saab such a leader in safety since you obviously reasoned this through.

Crash tests? Saab has a rather dismal record when it comes to these tests, especially with older models. Newer Saabs do not score better on the whole than other European brands.

Innovation? Saab has innovated very little. Just the past decade of Mercedes-Benz, BMW or Volvo safety innovation easily trumps Saab's entire history.

Standard safety features? Saab's list of standard safety features is nothing special. For example, you can't find a Saab with rear seatbelt tensioners or force limiters and you can't find a Saab with rear thorax side airbags.

Implementation of new features? Saab is generally late to market with new features that have been available with other brands for years.

There really is no logical reason to think Saab is especially safe. Saab's "reputation" for safety is built upon decades of clever marketing and ignorance. The average Saab fanatic loves to boast about Saab safety... but if you ask for proof they always come up empty handed and resort to some vague and unrealistic report from a biased Swedish organization.

One factor I must remind is that many have had Saab car accidents or know somebody who has. Personal experience is strongest marketing that there is.

Overall Saab's safety marketing globally has failed completely.

American driver death rate study is about drivers also, not only cars.

You clearly have made up your mind on this matter so maybe its rather pointless to talk about it.

The average Saab fanatic loves to boast about Saab safety... but if you ask for proof they always come up empty handed and resort to some vague and unrealistic report from a biased Swedish organization.[/color]

I don't quite see why you think that Folksam somehow has a vested interest in releasing artifical figures. Do you perhaps think that Saab has paid them a bribe? Or is the connection that because both car manufacturer and insurance company are of the same nationality that they must be incapable of serious assessment when it comes to real accident figures involving their own citizens? I must admit that the glaring obviousness of this theory hadn't struck me before. Any sort of evidence for it at all? I mean, to try and discredit an insurance company's findings one would need a little more to go on, wouldn't you say?

It seems you are not quite as familiar with EuroNCAP as you think, otherwise you might have been aware that:

the Saab 9-3 Convertible joins the 2003 9-3 Sport Sedan and 2003 Saab 9-5 in achieving a maximum five-star rating under the EuroNCAP collision test program, Europe's leading crash-test agency.

http://www.internetautoguide.com/auto-news/25-int/5344/

which is hardly 'lacklustre' as you put it.

But perhaps you think that being European ratings they must be prejudiced in favour of Saab as well.

Yep, obviously Saab can't be deserving of being called safe... :roll:

The 9-3 isn't a double best pick by IIHS or anything http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0306.htm :roll:

And obviously the 9-5 is outright horrible at safety and doesn't do well in crash tests or any rubbish like that http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0208.htm :roll:

Nope, I can't see any reason why Saab vehicles are safe :roll:

Gimme a frickin break.

Fugly,

Given your nom-de-post and the fact that the posts in this thread are your only posts, I take it you've joined expressly for the purpose of bashing Saab? I'd consider it better for your mental health to find a forum you're enthused about and join that one. Better for you. Better for us.

Saab's safety record is well documented and if you're after a list of innovations, here's one (http://redinterior.typepad.com/trollhattan/2005/02/saab_innovation.html). Don't just go by number, go by importance too. From first days to now, they're a very safe vehicle by all comparisons. First manufacturer to include seat belts as standard - Saab. Important, don't you think? Consistent Euro NCAP ratings in the 5-star region. Important, don't you think?

You won't find anyone here disputing the fine safety records of other companies, but you will find people pleased with the fact that Saab is a safety leader as well, a fact that you obviously dispute.

Despite the troll like nature of Fugly's arguments (ha ha! troll! get it! I crack myself up.) We shall not stoop to baseless arguments and name calling.

But...if the Folksam was so biased towards Swedish marques, why has Saab consistently outperformed Volvo in the Folksam survey over the past decade?

Also, your target demographic is waaay off. In Sweden there are plenty of enthusiasts who drive Saabs. I mean geez, look at these forums (predominantly US/UK) and you can see that the enthusiast community is alive and well, not just little old ladies concerned about safety.

In fact, for the IIHS study, I'd argue that the E-class is more a little old lady car. Seriously, when was the last time you saw somebody under 50 driving an E? I can only think of a handful of occasions compared to the thousands of E's I've seen.

Fact of the matter is, Saabs do pretty well in protecting people from death and injury in real-world collisions. Saab pays pretty good attention to balancing passive/active safety, and in a more responsible manner than some marques that build 400-700 hp cars for any idiot driver with a big bank account and a bigger ego.

I'll take my fugly[C]900, and drive it for the safe, solid, sturdy, fun to drive car that it is.

As safe as Saabs have been over the years, they've never done a good job of using that as a marketing tool as has Volvo. Remember all the test videos Saab had....those would have made for great advertisements.
I find it fascinating that in the early days, some Saab safety innovations were NOT patented because Saab felt that the industry and motorists would benefit if all manufacturers adopted those devices. That sort of altruism seems almost comical today....
I wonder if the disparity in the safety results between Folksam and the IHS results from the difference in the other vehicles on the road between Sweden and the US. In Sweden, prime crash targets might be moose or Renaults or Opels, where in the US one is more likely crashed into by a Hummer or Escalade.

Ha. Escalade. My friend got into a small accident (parking lot, nothing major) with an Escalade (both cars were moving but very slow). Almost took out his whole front right side, and did some pretty severe damage to the Escalade.

Wait. No. I'm wrong. His hood wasn't tall enough to hit her bumper, sorry, my mistake. :nono;


edit: by the way he was driving a '97 900

One factor I must remind is that many have had Saab car accidents or know somebody who has. Personal experience is strongest marketing that there is.

Personal experiences are an incredibly inaccurate way to go about ascertaining the safety of a vehicle. Just because you might know someone that crashed their Saab and survived unscathed means nothing. For instance, I know someone that plowed their Kia into a tree at high speed and sustained little injury. Does that mean Kia makes a safe car? Absolutely not.

American driver death rate study is about drivers also, not only cars.

The same can be said about the Folksam study. Point Moot.

You clearly have made up your mind on this matter so maybe its rather pointless to talk about it.




The only thing I've made my mind up about is the fact that Saab safety is more illusion than reality. I would be more than willing to change my mind if someone could show me some evidence that proves Saab makes a safer car than Mercedes/Volvo/BMW etc. Unfortunately for Saab loyalists, the evidence only mounts against them.

I don't quite see why you think that Folksam somehow has a vested interest in releasing artifical figures. Do you perhaps think that Saab has paid them a bribe? Or is the connection that because both car manufacturer and insurance company are of the same nationality that they must be incapable of serious assessment when it comes to real accident figures involving their own citizens? I must admit that the glaring obviousness of this theory hadn't struck me before. Any sort of evidence for it at all? I mean, to try and discredit an insurance company's findings one would need a little more to go on, wouldn't you say?

I'm merely pointing out the fact that the Folksam study seems to be flawed. Call me crazy, but something seems amiss about a report that makes outrageous claims like saying a Mitsubishi Galant (85-93) is as safe as your beloved Saab 900 (79-93) or a Ford Scorpio (85-98) as safe as a BMW 5 (96-03). Give me a break...

Also, the American IIHS report clearly shows that the Saab 9-5 has a higher deathrate than virtually every European car included in the study. Saab fans like to brush this interesting tidbit under the carpet it seems.

It seems you are not quite as familiar with EuroNCAP as you think, otherwise you might have been aware that:
http://www.internetautoguide.com/auto-news/25-int/5344/

which is hardly 'lacklustre' as you put it.

Saab isn't the only one achieving 5 star EuroNCAP ratings. Check out Mercedes, Volvo and others. Historically speaking Saab does not outperform its European competitors in the EuroNCAP. And in the IIHS tests, Saab scores much worse comparatively. For example, every BMW ever tested by the IIHS has achieved a "best pick" whereas only 2 of 6 Saabs have achieved a respectable score. Score 0 advantage for Saab in this area...

But perhaps you think that being European ratings they must be prejudiced in favour of Saab as well.

Not at all.

Yep, obviously Saab can't be deserving of being called safe... :roll:

The 9-3 isn't a double best pick by IIHS or anything http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0306.htm :roll:

And obviously the 9-5 is outright horrible at safety and doesn't do well in crash tests or any rubbish like that http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0208.htm :roll:

Nope, I can't see any reason why Saab vehicles are safe :roll:

Gimme a frickin break.

It really is not in your best interests to parade around IIHS crash test scores for Saab. Check out their older designs and notice how poorly they fare realtive to the competition from Mercedes, BMW and Volvo for similar years. For instance, the 99-01 Saab 9-5 and 99-02 Saab 9-3 scored considerably worse than the 97-03 BMW 5, 99-05 BMW 3, and 00-02 Mercedes E class. Just because two of Saabs newest designs manage to match the performance of the competition does not warrant braging rights...

Wow, congrats to Saab for finally passing the IIHS tests with respectable scores like BMW/Mercedes have done for years.

Given your nom-de-post and the fact that the posts in this thread are your only posts, I take it you've joined expressly for the purpose of bashing Saab?

No actually I lurk this forum regularly and am a fan of most European cars. I have nothing against Saab. However, it does get quite annoying when Saab fanatics disregard the facts and the safety achievements of other brands and pretend that Saab is the market leader in safety when it clearly is not. When I saw this thread I just had to do my part to set the facts straight lest this myth be perpetuated even more than it already is.


Saab's safety record is well documented and if you're after a list of innovations, here's one (http://redinterior.typepad.com/trollhattan/2005/02/saab_innovation.html). Don't just go by number, go by importance too. From first days to now, they're a very safe vehicle by all comparisons. First manufacturer to include seat belts as standard - Saab. Important, don't you think?

That list of safety innovations is miniscule compared to all that Mercedes has accomplished... not to mention Volvo or BMW. As I said before, just the past decade of Mercedes safety innovation alone easily trumps Saabs entire history. Do I really need to type out pages an pages of these innovations? I will if you would like. The SAHR is Saab's only claim to fame.


Besides, that list is misleading and somewhat inaccurate. For example, Mercedes introduced diagonal brake circuits and the collapsible steering column in the 50s... well before Saab. Mercedes also introduced EBD in 1992 on the S class 5 years before Saab.

Consistent Euro NCAP ratings in the 5-star region. Important, don't you think?


Consistent?!? Saab's record is anything BUT consistent. 3 out of 6 5 star ratings in the EuroNCAP is a hit or miss record at best. As far as the EuroNCAP is concerned, Saab's record isn't any better than the competition. Numerous competing BMW, Mercedes, and Volvo cars have also achieved 5 star ratings. Oh, and lets not forget Saab's rather embarrassing record in the IIHS tests where only 2 of 6 tested received good scores... contrast that with the fact that every BMW, Volvo and all but one Mercedes have achieved a good score, if not a "best pick."

You won't find anyone here disputing the fine safety records of other companies, but you will find people pleased with the fact that Saab is a safety leader as well, a fact that you obviously dispute.


Saab has an inconsistent and lackluster reputation in crash tests. Just because a few of its newer models are able to match the scores of competing brands in the IIHS and EuroNCAP definitely does not make them a top leader in safety. Take Kia for example, a number of newer Kia models have achieved "best picks" from the IIHS. Does that make Kia a leader in safety? Hell no.

But...if the Folksam was so biased towards Swedish marques, why has Saab consistently outperformed Volvo in the Folksam survey over the past decade?

Well they can’t have two safest car brands now can they? Besides, I wasn’t saying that it is as much biased as it is inaccurate. Seriously though, when a report claims that a 1985 Ford is as safe as a 1997 BMW you know something is amiss. It just makes sense to me :shrugs:

Also, your target demographic is waaay off. In Sweden there are plenty of enthusiasts who drive Saabs. I mean geez, look at these forums (predominantly US/UK) and you can see that the enthusiast community is alive and well, not just little old ladies concerned about safety.


Well, maybe I was exaggerating a bit, but to say that the average Saab demographic is similar to the average BMW, or even Mercedes, demographic is ridiculous. If anything, Saabs demographics work to its advantage not against it. Yet despite this, it was still outperformed in the IIHS study by brands with obvious demographic disadvantages (BMW) and brands with similar demographics (Volvo/Mercedes).


In fact, for the IIHS study, I'd argue that the E-class is more a little old lady car. Seriously, when was the last time you saw somebody under 50 driving an E? I can only think of a handful of occasions compared to the thousands of E's I've seen.


I'm not sure I agree with you. The E-Class is most definitely not an "old lady" car by any stretch of the imagination. I live in a major metropolitan US city and I see all types of younger people driving the E-Class. Even if this were true, I would like to point out that the results from the IIHS report were adjusted to rule out gender influence. Mercedes is much more likely to appeal to aggressive hotshot drivers whereas Saab would more likely appeal to the careful driver brainwashed by Saab safety propaganda.


Besides, do you really want to attempt to invoke the driver demographic argument in your favor? Because if you do, I would again like to point out BMW, which no doubt appeals to a much younger and more aggressive demographic than does Saab. Despite BMWs disadvantage in this respect, every model included in the report has a lower death rate than Saab. For example, just the BMW 3 has a 34% lower death rate than the Saab 9-5.


How do you explain that one away?

Fact of the matter is, Saabs do pretty well in protecting people from death and injury in real-world collisions.


Well apparently not as well as other brands. Fact of the matter is, Saab not only has higher death rates than competing brands, but has also introduced FAR fewer and less significant safety innovations over its entire history than some brands have done in just the past decade. Oh, and don’t forget that Saab scores lower in general than the competition in IIHS crash tests.

I find it fascinating that in the early days, some Saab safety innovations were NOT patented because Saab felt that the industry and motorists would benefit if all manufacturers adopted those devices.

What Saab safety innovations?

The crumple zone? No, that was Mercedes. The seatbelt? No, that was Volvo. The side airbag? No, that was Volvo. Stability control? No, that was Mercdes. Front airbag patent? No, that was Mercedes. Head protection side airbags? No, that was BMW. ABS? No that was Mercedes. Pre-Safe? No, that was Mercedes. Dual-stage airbags? No, that was BMW. SIPS? No, that was Volvo. The Safety Cage? No, that was Meredes. Auotmatic convertible rollbar? No, that was Mercedes. Laminated safety glass? No, that was Mercedes/Volvo. Interlocking door anchor system? No, that was BMW. Automatic fuel shutoff on impact? No, that was BMW. Emergency telematics? No, that was BMW. Crash compatible structures? No, that was Mercedes. Seatbelt emergency tensioning retractors? No, that was Mercedes. Seatbelt force limiters? No, that was Mercedes. Front seat head restraints? No, that was Volvo. Emergency brake assist? No, that was Merecedes. Reinforced gas tank mounted forward of rear axel? No, that was Mercedes. Rear side airbags? No, that was BMW. Rollover sensor? No, that was Mercedes. Rear center 3-point belt? No, that was Volvo. Traction control? No, that was Mercedes. Wedge-pin door locks? No, that was Mercedes. Reinforced SUV roof? No, that was Mercedes. Diagonal-circuit braking system? No, that was Mercedes. 3-stage collapsible steering column? No, that was Mercedes. Roll stability control? No, that was Volvo. Battery safety terminal? No, that was BMW. Adaptive brake lights? No, that was BMW. LED brake lights? No, that was Mercedes.

I could go on, but I think you get the picture.

Oh wait, but Saab does have the SAHR... Bravo.

I wonder if the disparity in the safety results between Folksam and the IHS results from the difference in the other vehicles on the road between Sweden and the US. In Sweden, prime crash targets might be moose or Renaults or Opels, where in the US one is more likely crashed into by a Hummer or Escalade.

Possibly. But remember, Folksam wants you to believe that the Ford Mondeo and Honda Accord are equally as safe as the Saab 900 and Mercedes C. Doesn't sound too accurate to me...

Also, remember that the Folksam study is an asssesment of the injury rates whereas the IIHS is a study of death rates.

Well Fugly, I suggest you go and have a big accident in a Merc then and report back to us on your injuries.

But don't run in to any of us, there's a good chap.

You obviously didn't read this properly:

http://redinterior.typepad.com/trollhattan/2005/02/saab_innovation.html

I'm not saying that Saab's are the safest cars in the world, nobody is, but they have never sold their cars on the safety aspect. All they do is innovate wherever possible - which is all anyone could ask.

Several manufacturers sell their cars on the safety (Volvo, Renault for example) and that's fine, but there is always a huge come-uppance when something big happens:

e.g. Desmond Llewellyn died in a 'top of it's safety class' Renault Megane. How's that for egg-on-the-face?!


Saab's are well built cars, they are reliable and perform well. The fact that they are not as safe as an E-class is neither here nor there, unless you intend to drive into one - which given the average Merc driver would be slightly tempting at the best of times. :cheesy:

BTW, I went from a 9000 to a BMW 740 and then back to a 9000. German car's are certainly not as good as they are made out to be!

The only thing I've made my mind up about is the fact that Saab safety is more illusion than reality. I would be more than willing to change my mind if someone could show me some evidence that proves Saab makes a safer car than Mercedes/Volvo/BMW etc.

Why, Fugly, do you spend your time coming here, claiming that Saab safety is an more or less just a marketing ploy :roll: and then say that you'll only consider them safe (wait, there's a possibility they might be a little safe after all?:o) if there's evidence that they make a safer car than Mercedes/BMW/Volvo (drats! foiled again!! :x). Is there nothing safe at all except these three? Do you perhaps own one of them??

Saab safety is not an illusion. The tests are there and have been for many years. No-one here has contended that they're better than anything else (my dad's bigger than your dad!!), just that they're safe.

You don't agree. Fine. I said it before and I'll say it again, I think you need to be posting to a BMW BB where your p.o.v may be more appreciated.

FUGLY reminds me of this idiot who posts on the Mac mini forums. The forums are all about mac mini's and for the people who own them. All this guy does is come on and bash mini's and mac os x. That's it. Why is he there? I am guessing because his life is miserable and he feels the need to spread it around by being negative and argumentative when it isn't at all necessary.

Looking through the latest Highway Loss Data Institute report, I noticed one important thing. Look at the exposure size of the data you need to realize that statistics play an important role in how things are described.

I'm a scientist, I examine statistics. And these statistics (like all statistics) don't describe the whole picture.

The exposure size for the BMW 3 series was roughly 3.3 times LARGER than the sample size of the Saab 9-5. At first glance this makes the BMW look good, right? High number of 'incidents' with a lower number of fatalities, seems pretty black and white....a good ol' Bush-style statement. Not really the case, because a lower sample size is far more sensitive to randomness.

What the IIHS/HLDI report doesn't include is the most important figure, the standard deviation of mean (SDOM). By my calculations (which are not infallible, I suggest the book "Introduction to Error Analysis", by John R. Taylor), the Saab 9-5 has a SDOM figure that is twice what the BMW 3-series is, thus in a random sample of similar size, the Saab fatality rate would be in the range of 40-52 Fatalities (The BMW's range is 27-41, a wider range with an OVERLAP of the 9-5). Statistically speaking, most of the HLDI findings are INSIGNIFICANT, they are good at finding an overall trends (ie, larger, heavier cars tend to perform better than smaller, lighter ones), and are good at finding major outliers in the data (ex. vehicles in a size/weight class that consistently underperform by a large margin compared to most in the class, like the Dodge Caravan and Ford Taurus Wagon).

Being a physicist, I'm skeptical of statistics. Now that I've looked at how the data is presented, I'm even more skeptical.

As far as innovations, no one has denied that other manufacturers have made significant and important contributions to safety of automobiles over the years. You also need to realize that Saab was a tiny company during the 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's. Saab does a better job than most in terms of adopting new standards and working to make safety an important part of the vehicle.

Say what you will, but Saab is not unacceptable when it comes to safety. Not even close.

Volvo's do no better than Saabs in pretty much any measure of testing and data collection (although they didn't do as well as Saab on Frontal/Side Impact ratings in both the EuroNCAP and the IIHS tests, this year). Yet everywhere you turn you see the massive Volvo PR machine touting their philosophy "For Life". I've only seen Saab starting to market their safety features and that's only been recently...all of Saab's safety marketing up to this point had been perceived safety in construction quality and of course first-hand accounts...I've wrecked my Saabs, and I know others who have too, it does a lot for personal buying habits to have a good outcome :cheesy: . I have also had friends wreck their BMW's, Audi's, and Volvo's in similar circumstances to mine and come out with more personal and car damage. So any point has a counterpoint.

Slamming Saab for doing pretty well is hardly productive. No one here said the Folksam was the be all, end all of safety measurement.

Why does it matter if saab is the most safe? I don't really go around bragging about the active head restraints in the seats. What amazes me about this car is how well it avoids accidents. I dodged an accident the other day thanks to my car's ABS/EBD and fantasically powerful brakes. I hope I never find out why it has a 5 star crash test rating, but it's nice to know it's there. Even if Saab isn't the best, it's up there with the best of em.

No actually I lurk this forum regularly and am a fan of most European cars. I have nothing against Saab. However, it does get quite annoying when Saab fanatics disregard the facts and the safety achievements of other brands and pretend that Saab is the market leader in safety when it clearly is not.

Saab has an inconsistent and lackluster reputation in crash tests. Just because a few of its newer models are able to match the scores of competing brands in the IIHS and EuroNCAP definitely does not make them a top leader in safety.

Here's something I want to know: Why did the Saab 9-5 get a "Best Pick" rating in the IIHS crash test and not the Volvo S60? Why did the Saab 9-3 get a "Best Pick" in the side and frontal tests and have it declared the Safest Car IIHS tested and not the Volvo S40, S60, and Mercedes C-Class?

It doesn't necessarily matter who patents the idea, it matters how well someone uses it. Anyone could have patented traction control, but it could have turned out to be a piece of crap that never worked. Saab has learned how to use their findings in real-life crash tests to be incorporated into new car designs. Why the hell do you think the key is in the center console? It seems out of place to me, but if I'm in an accident, it would be really out of place in my knee.

Volvo's losing its lead in saftey, and BMW and Mercedes just keep increasing the amount electronic devices that go wrong. Your Saab is one, if anyone is looking for a new car, I strongly recommend the 9-3. In any case, Saabs are incredibly safe cars, and it's not fair to give all the credit to those companies who patented some of those saftey features before Saab started building cars.

LOL!

He's gone strangely quiet.

Maybe he started an unnecessary argument with his internet service provider.

If some non-saaber reads this I will make it clear once and for all. Pretty much all Saab models have been benchmarks of their time. Not necessary the best but podium anyway. Like 99, 900, 9000, 9-5 and latest 9-3.

Saab sells models longer time than others. Thats why you always have to compare market situation when launched. Different safety gimmicks are not primary safety measure, its the overall body structure.

And again, for those who do not know Saab safety(others can say "sigh"), here is the tabloid news of the day titled "miraculous save!":

http://www.iltalehti.fi/2005/05/11/200505113052628_uu.shtml

http://www.iltalehti.fi/2005/05/11/3051957_uu.jpg

Old Saab 900 hits the train from the side two times and immobilizes it. Police says strong car saved the women and little children. Cabin remainded intack, only bruises for passengers.