Our neighbor Sven is still hung up on the fact that our 2010 Saab 9-5 Aero isn't a hatchback, never mind how good it looks as a sedan. And of course, he's almost outraged when we tell him that the new 9-5 shares its basic chassis architecture with an Opel and a Buick.
"They're flushing their Scandinavian heritage down the drain!"
"Good point. But you're a little late with the passion," we reply.
Saab hasn't sold a hatchback in about 10 years, and it started using General Motors' platform architecture in the mid-1990s. So it's senseless to argue that the move to the Epsilon II platform has somehow made the redesigned Saab 9-5 sedan less Swedish.
Besides, Saab and its Dutch parent company, Spyker, don't have the luxury of worrying about their cars' genealogy right now. The only thing that really matters is whether this 2010 Saab 9-5 Aero is good enough to compete with other midsize luxury sedans priced around the $50,000 mark.
Yes, It Costs $50,000
Maybe you have a tough time believing that a Saab 9-5, even an all-wheel-drive Aero model, costs $52,360 (and that's for our late-build 2010 9-5 Aero; an equivalently equipped 2011 Aero model costs about $55K due to a $2,000 increase in the base MSRP). Sven sure did. He clutched his chest, then turned and retreated to his driveway graveyard of Saab 900s.
In reality, our 2010 Saab 9-5 Aero lands smack in the middle of the premium midsize sedan market. The Acura TL SH-AWD, Cadillac CTS Premium AWD and Volvo S60 T6 AWD cost less when comparably equipped. The Audi A6 3.0 TFSI Quattro and Infiniti M37x cost slightly more. And big-name cars like the BMW 535xi and Mercedes-Benz E350 4Matic cost about $60 grand.
You get a respectable amount of stuff for your $50,000 and change. A 300-horsepower turbocharged 2.8-liter V6 provides the motivation for every 2010 Saab 9-5 Aero, and an Aisin six-speed automatic transmission drives all four wheels through the clutch-type Haldex XWD ("Cross-Wheel Drive") all-wheel-drive system, which includes an electronic limited-slip rear differential.
Also standard is a driver-adjustable adaptive suspension, along with adaptive bi-xenon headlights; a keyless ignition; heated, leather sport seats; dual-zone climate control; a USB input; satellite radio and Bluetooth. Our test car has the $2,395 navigation system with real-time traffic, plus the $825 Technology package, which provides a head-up display and a lane-departure warning system (an automated parking system is added for 2011, pushing the package price to $1,695). Another $750 swaps out the 9-5 Aero's standard 18-inch all-season tires for 19-inch summer tires.
Unlikely Sport Sedan
You could save a couple grand by choosing the 9-5 Turbo6 XWD model, which is new for 2011 and forgoes the Aero model's limited-slip differential, adaptive dampers and various other sport-sedan appointments. And if you don't care about a V6 or AWD, the front-drive, four-cylinder Saab 9-5, with its 220-hp, turbocharged Ecotec 2.0-liter, starts at $39 grand.
But after driving the 2010 9-5 Aero sedan on our favorite road, we'd be loath to part with its specialized hardware, which transforms a car that's as long, wide and heavy as a Buick LaCrosse into something resembling a sport sedan.
Of all the cars that use the Epsilon II architecture, the Saab got the best steering.
The new Saab 9-5 Aero is one of those cars that makes you realize that an automaker's chassis engineers hold the world in their hands when they tune a suspension. It changes direction quickly and doesn't slow you up with excessive body roll. It's honest with you, too, and 5 minutes into the drive, you already know the car and the kind of inputs it likes.
And one thing it likes is gas before the apex, thanks to the new AWD system. You don't even have to be smooth about it, as even the clumsiest stabs of throttle summon the system's torque-vectoring magic to pull the 2010 Saab 9-5 Aero's nose around. It's similar to the TL SH-AWD, but Saab's XWD system reacts more quickly and seamlessly, especially in the slalom. However, the cars' slalom speeds are nearly identical — 67.5 mph for the 9-5 versus 67.8 for an automatic-equipped TL SH-AWD. Other AWD sedans like the S60 (64.6 mph) and A6 3.0T (also 64.6) aren't as well sorted.
Our 9-5 tester's Sport mode provides a well-damped ride over rough patches. We don't care for the increased steering effort in this mode, but Saab lets you adjust the suspension and steering à la carte. So the otherwise precise electric-assist power steering stays in Normal (er, Intelligent mode) and everybody's happy. Of all the cars that use the Epsilon II architecture, the Saab has the best steering.
Brakes see hard use on our route, but pedal feel and stopping distances remain consistent, just as they did at our test track, where the 2010 Saab 9-5 Aero stopped from 60 mph in 113 feet — an excellent number.
Sorta Kinda Quick
We never would have foreseen a day when we'd tell you that a 300-hp sedan isn't all that quick, but here we are. There's no sense trying to explain it to Sven, but if you keep track of such things, you know that the 2010 Saab 9-5 Aero's 6.4-second 0-60-mph time and 15-flat quarter-mile at 95.5 mph are pretty average for this price range.
Granted, the automatic TL SH-AWD turns in similar numbers, but the manual-shift TL drops more than a second off those times. Moreover, the automatic-equipped S60 and A6 3.0T both run high 5s to 60 mph and low 14s through the quarter-mile. The difference likely comes down to torque, as the Volvo and Audi both have more of it, especially the S60, which makes 325 pound-feet to the 9-5's 295 lb-ft.
Put the numbers game aside, and the Saab 9-5 Aero is easy to like, with a nice, linear throttle response that feels right whether you're in Normal or Sport mode. Turbo lag is minimal, though you can sense whether you're on- or off-boost through the gas pedal or by watching the "turbo meter," which is devoid of psi or bar markings. You can't actually hear the turbocharger gathering steam, and that's maybe the one thing we miss from Sven's crusty 900s.
The V6 has a useful though not overpowering midrange, and the six-speed automatic's ratios are well matched to it. Shifts are smooth and nicely timed in Drive, so even on back roads, we rarely have the urge to use the paddle shifters. Good thing, since the transmission's manual mode is half-hearted: Upshifts are slow, and downshifts aren't rev-matched.
As the 2010 Saab 9-5 Aero's 16 mpg city/27 mpg highway EPA rating suggests, fuel mileage can vary a lot in this car. We see mid-teens in heavy traffic but come close to 23 mpg in highway driving. Our 18.6-mpg average over 800-plus miles is on par with our results in the S60 (18.8 mpg).
Oh, You Wanted a Luxury Sedan?
Driving on back roads is pretty much our favorite thing to do, but any sedan that costs this much has to be able to play the role of a luxury sedan, too, and this is where the redesigned Saab 9-5 comes up short.
We like its controlled ride on two-lane blacktop, but none of its modes can dial up the compliance needed for an hour-long commute. The optional 245/40R19 Goodyear Eagle F1 summer tires are likely the problem here.
Inside, the 9-5 Aero has the unexplainably comfortable front seats you always find in Swedish-brand cars, plus an enormous backseat (38.8 inches of legroom), but materials quality falls short. The Acura, Audi and even the Infiniti far surpass it here. We also noted a few ill-fitting center stack pieces and a couple instances of plastics with flashing left over.
It's easy to want to give the 2010 Saab 9-5 Aero a pass in these areas. After all, if not for some late-hour deal-making, this car might not exist at all. And there's little doubt that Spyker is building it on a tight budget.
But $50,000 is still $50,000, and you should feel like you spent that much every time you get in the car. The Saab 9-5 Aero doesn't deliver that feeling.
The manufacturer provided Edmunds this vehicle for the purposes of evaluation.

Add A Comment »
carguyinca says:
10:48 AM, 02/06/2011
Ok, I've gotta comment because I'm really tired of people criticizing the fact that it shares the platform with a Buick. Yet, these same people compare it to the Audi or Acura FAILING to remember (conveniently) that the Audi shares a platform with a VW Passat, or that the Acura is a Honda platform. Since when does platform sharing mean the car is not worthy? If Anything, please point out why that particular platform is bad. I mean, nobody is poo-pooing a $1.5 million Bugatti Veyron even though it is using a Volkswagen W16 engine (albeit heavily modified), or a DSG transmission, an option in a $24k Golf. Of course, these things have been modified and designed for use in the Veyron, but so have the Saab's components. Granted, there are shortcomings to this car, I'm not enamored. The interior is a nice clean style, but I agree materials aren't up to par. And the power is a bit underwhelming. That said, let's compare apples to apples. I dare you the find me an AWD 5 series or AWD E class with similar feature content and power (the 528 for example has only 240 hp) for less $$. Would I buy one of these? Perhaps, though I'd have to do a lot of cross shopping. And for the record, platform and component sharing is very common all over the industry - for you die-hard Infiniti fans for example, how does it feel to know that they just announced they'll be using MERCEDES engines in their upcoming cars?!?
http://www.motortrend.com/future/future_vehicles/1102_new_small_infiniti_to_get_mercedes_1_8_liter_turbo/index.html
camaroguy37 says:
05:39 PM, 01/30/2011
Why is this rated only 2 1/2 stars by readers? The problem with the star ranking system is that you can vote an unlimited number of times if you keep deleting your cookies, and it isn't specific enough. The car could be good and the article could be bad, or vice versa.
As to the car itself, it's good. I've examined the base and top-level 9-5, and the top-level model is a really nice car. I'm not at all fond of the base model, though. Yes, the top dog is expensive. Yes, you should get a little more for your money. But it's still a good car, and that isn't debatable...
Having said that, I put the 9-5 in its own class. It just isn't on the same planet as the BMW 5-Series and Mercedes-Benz E-Class, both of which are strong on luxury. The 9-5 is attractive and comfortable, but is held back by the solid black plastic center stack and some improperly fitting bits and pieces...
jkp1187 says:
08:16 PM, 01/27/2011
@myob:
You get one more thing from the BMW that you don't get with the SAAB.
A car from a company that will more likely be around to honor the warranty for the next 5 years.
robert_bausch says:
03:53 PM, 01/26/2011
I'm 72 years old, but my 1995 Saab 9000 CSE still makes me feel good, and Scarabe Green was the perfect color choice! It is a 16 year old car now, but I have tried to take good care of it, and it still returns the favor. A car for all seasons and reasons, a fantastic machine.
I was somewhat intrigued by the "old" 9-5, but, as a Saab car salesman, I was able to drive several, and could never understand why they made a car at the top of the line with less room than a 9000 hatchback. The new 9-5 appears to have solved that problem, but still is not a hatchback. I see even Audi now has a top of the line car that is a hatchback, maybe Saab will eventually return to one of its roots.
Anyway, I would like to see this new Saab in person, and learn more about it. As far as pricing, there seem to be some conflicting quotes mentioned, something else to sort out. One thing I was not too happy to learn is the new 9-5's weight, apparently about 1000 pounds heavier than a 9000, can this be true? No wonder even the Aero seems a bit slow in the 0-60 sweepstakes, though what that has to do with long-term owner satisfaction I've never understood.
The German car nuts will always try to put everyone else down, and they will never be able to see value in anything else. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if they are wrong!
I think Saab will survive, and am looking forward to what Victor Mueller will do with his new responsibility. The idea of a new version of the Saab 93, one of their earliest and most iconic cars, sure sounds exciting. Good luck to Saab. I'll stay tuned.
edved says:
08:04 PM, 01/20/2011
I might buy it if they throw in what's in the CD player. But 50 large is kind of steep.
gdeevis says:
07:37 PM, 01/20/2011
This car is just going to be another Suzuki Kizashi, all the editors love it. But its going to go know where because of poor ad campaigns and its better known competition.
mk40 says:
04:27 PM, 01/19/2011
If this car can be had ofr $42k street price it's not a bad deal. I think the body looks great... so distinct/unique compared to many other competitors.
The interior materals could be better, but not bad & certainly acceptable at $42k. I saw a youtube of one in another market and it had a glossy piano black plastic on the center console rather than the pretty bland plastic on the US market version... It looked much nicer, to me. If I were to get this car I would probably try to find that part and have it installed to dress up the interior.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkqJy86A59U @30 sec.
jsc4321 says:
01:13 PM, 01/19/2011
So many negative comments from so many people. I beg to differ though. Saab is a unique company and I hope it does well. Many general opinions from other automobile media publications also says the interior quality is not up to par with the price tag. But everyone seems to agree that this 9-5 looks good and handles well. I think the price tag is a little steep but compare with other cars from this segment it is priced competitively. A smart consumer buying a car in this price range will test drive other cars within this class and may ultimately find that the Saab is a better fit for them. There are just too many people who shop in this class that would automatically jump for a BMW, MB, or even Lexus.
myob says:
12:20 PM, 01/19/2011
Sorry for the posts. I built a comparably equipped 535xi (no 528ix sold) on Truecar and it is roughly $14,000 more. Deduct for the superior power/acceleration and at best the BMW is ten grand higher. I doubt an Audi would be much different.
Cars are just getting darn expensive. Except the workaday midsize sedan class, where $26,000 or so buys you a lot better car than it used to.
If not for the resale I would probably choose the Saab, as I care not a whit for the "prestige" angle of these things, and max performance is not my priority anymore. The Saab seats are a big selling point.
myob says:
12:08 PM, 01/19/2011
Oh, and go see what $50,000 buys you in a BMW before you knock this new Saab. It gets you a small I6 that is quick but slower than the Saab. It will have leather seats only because you paid extra for them. It now has the "new and improved" number electric BMW steering. It will have the base suspension, not the better handling one that now requires 2 or 3 options to get to, and it will have bland skinny wheels/tires where the Saab would have a much more aggressive look for that price point. The BMW 5's you see in the press photos are usually $60,000 and up.
Not saying the Saab is better, but if it has similar performance and features, you can't really expect it to be much cheaper. But at your dealership, in the real world, it probably IS cheaper. I saw Aeros for sale on ebay for mid 40's. You just gotta use services like TrueCar and buying services to find out.