My 0.02c on the Saab 9-4x Concept
OK, after a good night’s sleep and a bunch of enlargeable images coming on line, I’m ready to express some fuller thoughts on this.
The initial, small images and your 150+ comments on them are here.
The press release and enlargeable images are here.
——
I kept mentioning over and over yesterday, on the post and in emails with people, that the initial images were just CGIs and that history’s proven that the vehicle always looks much better in the metal. Thankfully, the full set of CGIs has now come out and they’re not all just based on a white background.
I’m not an SUV buff (or a CUV buff if you want to get picky) so it was always going to be a bit of an uphill battle with me on this one. I was pretty flat about the initial images last night, but these new images, which surreound the car with some texture, have me warming to it a bit more.
Show the car on a white background and it looks a little staid. But put it in a setting and you get a better feel for it’s presence, which is what I’m getting now.
——
A few thoughts on the initial response:
First of all - and it can’t be stated enough - these are still just CGIs.
Secondly, this is a different kind of vehicle for Saab. For a company that cut its teeth on smaller vehicles, doing a big one from the ground up and retaining that particular Saab DNA has to be somewhat of a tall order. Seeing it in some scenario images, as we have here, makes me think they’ve done an OK job of it.
Third, the sheer number of comments is reflective of several things: increased participation here at TS but way more importantly, there’s a distinct interest in this vehicle and there’s a lot of people who care about it’s success.
One commenter mentioned something quite relevant with regard to the opinions being expressed here - we’re Saab enthusiasts. A new vehicle like this is supposed to envoke a spirited response from enthusiasts. And I’m glad we got those spirited responses by the shipload.
——
As mentioned earlier, seeing it against something other than a plain white background has caused me to warm to the design a bit more. I’m actually excited now at the prospect of seeing it in person and photographing it for you all to see.
There are a couple of things I’m still not keen on, however.
The main think I’m not keen on AT ALL is the way the center grille rises into the hood of the car. Someone mentioned the first version of the Subaru Tribeca and whilst it’s nowhere near that bad, it’s still somewhat unclean, IMHO.
In comment, Joti linked to a cleaned up version of it and I agree with others that it looks a LOT better.
Click here to see Joti’s version.
I’m also not a huge fan of the large SAAB wording in the middle of the grille. It’s just me, but I think it looks a little too prominent and not in keeping with the designs that have preceeded it. Actually, when they removed the ‘SAAB’ lettering from the facelifted 9-5 grille, I figured that it was possibly gone for good.
I’m not totally sure about the SAAB badging on the rear, either. Many of you noticed that the blue griffin badge has gone, and those with good memory retention would recall that this was first mentioned here a few months ago (damn, wish I could find the post!). I don’t mind the rear badge going, to be honest, but I think there will be a ‘Saab’ badge to the left and a ‘9-4x’ badge to the right on the productioin version - and that would look a lot cleaner to me.
The one thing I’m really hand-bitingly excited about, it’s the interior.
I’ve heard from as far back as June or July last year that the implementation of the Aero-X interior was coming. That was in reference to the Saab 9-5. Whether the 9-4x will get this interior in the production version is unknown, but the evolution is exciting and I think it’s going to be fantastic once we see it installed in a production car.
——
A few words about the powertrain mentioned in the press release.
It’s the first time that the words Direct Injection and Saab have appeared together, which is a great thing. But remember: this is just a concept vehicle. The proof is when that engine technology comes out in a production vehicle.
Saab needs that kind of 2.0 litre engine in the 9-3, and it needs it yesterday.
——
So all up, I’m feeling much, much better about this vehicle now.
Time heals all wounds and it seems that combined with good imagery, it also enables better impressions.
Tomorrow morning I get on a plane and for the first time it really feels like there’s going to be something more than just cold weather and a good steak at the final destination.
More from this category
- AMS score 9-4x spypics
- Saab 9-4x concept VS Saab 9-4x
- Friday Snippets
- AMS forecast Saab 9-3x in Paris, 2008
More from this author
- A Quick Thankyou
- Automotive Rites of Passage
- Friday Snippets (well, it’ll be Saturday when you read them)
- Edmunds provide puzzling Saab Turbo X road test
Subscribe to this author
Recent Comments
- Ned on Automotive Rites of Passage
- 1985 Gripen on If you’re in the market for a Saab, now’s the time
- papluh on Automotive Rites of Passage
- Mag-X on A Quick Thankyou
- SaabKen on A Quick Thankyou
- Mag-X on EnG Weekend Snippets
- Mag-X on A Quick Thankyou
- ELBOBO on A Quick Thankyou
- eggsngrits on A Quick Thankyou
- eggsngrits on A Quick Thankyou
Well, steak’s not half bad either.
I’m still wishing it could have looked more like the 9-3X, a much cleaner design. But, I thought the Aero-X was awful when the first image leaked, and many others made negative comments too. But look what happened when it made its appearance in Geneva. I hope the same is true for the 9-4X.
try this http://www.trollhattansaab.net/archives/2007/09/wednesday-snippets-3.html
That does not look like a Saab, it looks like an american attempt at copying Saab. The interior is cool, but the exterior must be the worst I’ve seen in a long time. Funny how the press release talks about uncluttered scandinavian design… what happened to the Aero X inspiration? This car could’ve been so much cooler!
I’m with you on the grille-hood notch — it’s too much. Just makes a too-busy front end even busier. Joti’s version is MUCH better.
And, once again, I kinda like it overall. Saaby, but breaks some new ground. I would soften the fenders a little and give the front fewer folds and more rounded edges.
My two cents.
You have a great time in the USA, enjoy it like you did in Trollhӓttan, but try and get more sleep, don’t work too hard—play.
The more and more I look at it, the front end is too un-Saab-like. So unrefined and simplistic. Should have been transplanted from the Aero-X or 9-3, but there’s still hope, the Lincoln MKS has had 3 different pre-production grilles, and maybe if us Saab fans voice our opinions, the could redesign it like Ford did with the 08 US Focus, which didn’t really help the car that much but enough to where it’s tolerable.
You are dammed right about the real healing that times gives to all wounds and aching. I also see a lot more positives and feel much more enthusiastic about the future prospects of this new car. Some of the comments here in about this new release can only prove how passionate we all are and how much we love Saab. Any signs of damage or harm being done and we all react as if it’s done to one of our own. That’s what I like also so much about being a Saab follower. Have a good trip and we await for your comments when you can, just don’t kill yourself in the process !!!
The more I look at it the better it looks…
First, its the right size, not too big, not too small. It has the herretage such as the rear wrap around windscrren from the 9-5, front wrap around windscrren, hockestick, the rear ligths reminds me somewhat of the old (bust still good looking) 9000cs. Think that the major thing that me, and others are undesided on is the front, where the gaap goes up in the hood, but I think that we will get used to this, but I am more surpriced that I do not see any front LEDs.
Just commenting about your trip to Detroit. I live here and hate it. But for the past to days it’s been in the 50s (Fahrenheit mind you) and for the auto show its supposed to be in the low teens (F) or below zero (C). Sorry Swade.
As far as everyone’s negative comments let’s wait until the the Detroit Auto Show.
Personally, I really like the car overall and I’ll tell you why:
• The rear is very nice - especially the wrap-around brake light.
• The interior is fantastic! Sign me up.
• I can understand why people don’t like the front, but it will definitely be different on the production model.
• It’s exactly the car I would upgrade to. Once the wifey and I have a child or two, we will look for a larger vehicle than our 9-3, and we’ll want something that is safe, sporty, fuel efficient and powerful. This is it.
• Finally, if it has bluetooth, I’m sold.
The only change I would make though is that Saab should have partnered with Thule, and the rack should hold 2 snowboards.
joemama: Saab has had a partnership with Salomon for years, primarily in the European market, so that’s why they didn’t partner with Thule. Plus, an internal ski carrier would probably take sales away from Thule, so they probably wouldn’t support such a thing.
SaabSalomon
I wonder how much collaboration with SaabSalomon-sponsored athletes was required to come up with that rack?
There were several comments in the press release which come off as a bit questionable, which I guess is to be expected, IMHO. The first is the thing about collaborating with skiers to come up with the rack, the second was when they claim that Anthony Lo and GM Europe designed the vehicle in collaboration with engineers from the Saab Brand Center after it was previously reported that the exterior was designed in the U.S. and the interior was designed in Germany (unless that info was wrong, of course).
After much deliberation, debate, and several hours spent in a think tank of some of the worlds sharpest critics. The notch in the grill is a very, extremely, pontiac touch.
Exhibit A:
http://www.skinz.org/cars/pontiac-gto/pontiac-gto-wallpapers-4.jpg
Exhibit B:
http://www.thetorquereport.com/2008_pontiac_g8-thumb.jpg
If anyone from Saab reads this, take heed.
There come times, every now and then, when something much be done - fast. Those moments when something must be changed, even though it is last second - and very costly. In these moments, some have said, “We’ll fix it later,” and later has never come. Some have said, “Do it. Fix it. Now!” Some of those have turned into flops, but many have turned into huge success stories.
Saab, this is one of those moments. At 24 hours per day, there is still time to redesign the hood and grill and ship it (although at great price) to Detroit. It can be done. Do it.
Other cues on this truck (yeah yeah - truck) will certainly call for criticism, but those same lines will make it memorable. The grill line is NOT one of those cues. Production, concept, CGIs, that line needs to be changed.
Take Joti’s picture above, email it to whomever can build a new grill and good, and fix the problem. This is not a Pontiac, whether it is or not. The difference between a Chevrolet and a Pontiac CANNOT be the same as the difference between a Pontiac and a Saab. Saab customers do not operate that way! Change it, change it, change it!
Hi, here are my 6 cents.
I have mentioned it before, and yes I still would like a 9-4X, pronto. I was blown away with the Aero-X, thought Saab went to a whole new level. I like the older concepts, they are fantastic. I had to get used to the new 9-5. I still don’t like the sedan rear as it is to mainstream, but the wagon is simply beautiful.
So my 6 cents:
1. I think the front is MAGNIFICENT. Give it a day, a week, you will come around. This front gives you a reason not to have a front license plate. (the grill is more 9-5 inspired, don’t know if somebody mentioned that)
2. I don’t like the wheels. Like mentioned in a different post by someone else, they need to be less shiny, Saab does not need this. (Personally, the “new” Saab 9-7X concept doesn’t do it for me either)
3. I want, no I need Saab seats, and head rests. Especially the last 9-3’s are a little off my taste. Again 9-5, please repeat.
4. I also need a sturdy cargo shelf, like the 9-5 wagon. Nothing flimsy like the 9-3SC.
5. Imagine this car, or the Aero-X in other classic Saab colors, now who doesn’t want one.
And 6. I always hope for better mileage. Nothing less than 28mpg please.
Swade: I can’t wait for your “real” pictures, have a save trip.
Nico
Hi Swade -
I was wondering if you could print out a copy of Joti’s CGI/front end rework and give it to the Saab guys!
Much better - good work Joti!!!!!
I worry about being able to use the climate control if the gear lever is so close to it.
After sleeping a night, I slowly start thinking that maybe I like the new design. With front hump and everything.
Actually the car is so big that the front HAS to be different than the previous Saabs to make it look good.
One comment from Joemama caught my eye:
“Once the wifey and I have a child or two, we will look for a larger vehicle than our 9-3, and we’ll want something that is safe, sporty, fuel efficient and powerful. This is it.”
This one is interesting. Safe - it definitely should be safe for occupants. But for other cars around or pedestrians - probably not.
Fuel efficient - it really should be. But considering the size and weight (assumed ~2000kg?) the absolute consumption will be high. Unless they have hybrid or something. From the existing engine lineup only TTiD has some potential to it. The engine seen in concept, is just concept.
Sporty - I don´t see much of a sporty car there. But this I should not say before driving it. It still can be sporty in some weird way.
Powerfull it might be, right.
But what it offers over 9-5? More room? It should have a load space more than 600liters to be better than 9-5. And rears folded there needs to be at least 1800 liters. Do we finally see adjustable rear seats? Is the loading height low enough?
It looks like the
What it really offers over 9-5 wagon is the question to me? Exept the mean big american look? I looks like the hatch is quite small compared to the size of a rear?
I know the engine is just conceptual and would be surprised to see the 2.0T four cylinder in the 9-4X in the N.A. market but this article keeps popping into my mind.
What are you sacrificing by buying the 9-4X as conceptually-configured over the 9-7X and what are you gaining?
You’re slightly increasing fuel economy when running on gasoline. When running on E85, the combined fuel consumption of the 9-4X and the 4.2-liter V6 9-7X (running on gasoline) are equal (16 mpg).
You’re likely sacrificing interior space (though I haven’t seen the specs on that yet) and towing capacity.
Is this a worthy replacement to the 9-7X to all potential customers?
I am still not sure about the SAAB lettering on the steering wheel. The logo on the steering wheel makes a huge difference to me, especially when i am driving my 9000. I just look at the logo and get this big smile on my face, i don’t think the lettering would have the same effect. Stupid thing i know but those are the small things that make me happy.
A few comments along the line of “but I am more surprised that I do not see any front LEDs”. I thought that at first - but take a closer look at the high res images and it looks to me like they are there - but they have moved the game on from MY08 9-3…?
Fop, yes I raised this yesterday - the LEDS seem to wrap from side and under the lamps? Very Audi TT style - don’t minsd this, think the LED on the 9-3 is cool and would like some family features between the models.
1985 Gripen:
You discuss the little benefit of a CUV (9-4x) vs a SUV (9-7x) with the exception of a small improvement in fuel consumption, little more space, etc.
I guess I question the “small” comment as if the data is legit and the 9-4x gets 22mpg combined (assuming 2008 new standards) that is about 38% better than the 9-7x’s 16mpg combined.
More impressive, the 22mpg in the 9-4x is the same combined mileage as the 9-3 sedan (automatic 2.0T) which is constantly be marketed as a very fuel efficient, yet fun car. I guess responsible performance is the correct saying.
Just a thought…
Matt: a good point about the fuel economy. I had no idea the combined fuel economy of Saab cars was so poor. I guess I got used to hearing the highway numbers on a manual transmission model and never really looked at the more common configuration in the U.S. Thanks for the info.
So I guess Saab has just as far to go to raise its average fuel economy standards in the U.S. by 2020 as a lot of other manufacturers! I believe the U.S. Legislature set the bar at 35 mpg average by 2020.
Saab’s use of turbochargers and “rightsizing”, using inline-four cylinder engines, doesn’t have the same savings versus higher displacement inline-6 engines (BMW) as it used to. The 2008 BMW 328i w/ a 3-liter inline-6 with automatic transmission gets 22 mpg combined as well.
The fuel economy stated for 2008 vehicles in the US is 2-3mpg less than years in the past due to the new “real world” driving characteristics that are used when computing fuel economy.
I drive a Cadillac SRX AWD that is very fun to drive in addition to being one of the better mid to large sized SUVs in fuel economy. I only get about 17-18mpg combined, so getting 22mpg is still an attractive number when you compare to similar vehicles.
I ideal engine would be the new 2.9 TTid that GM is co-building. If they could get mid to upper 20s combined mpg with the 9-4x, the added tow capacity, and still fun to drive for CUV, could get some serious traction in the US. So why not bring it over anyway and sell it in the 45 states until they can get it approved for all 50….
BMW is bringing their new X5d, so why is Saab always lagging?
You know what this car is a bit like? The new(ish) Tundra. It’s a car that this marque has little to no experience with. They’re trying to get it perfect right off the bat. The Tundra is far from perfect. It is nowhere near the Silverado or F-150 (or even the Ram) in terms of durability, but even a guy like me, who is completely and utterly biased against Toyota in pretty much every way, can see that it’s an amazing first effort in what is probably the most competitive auto market in America. Like I said, though, it’s far from perfect. This new CUV is Saab’s first attempt at building a vehicle like this. Everybody and their mother makes CUV’s nowadays, so the market is pretty competitive. Frankly, I think the 9-4x is shaping up to be a great first try, and that’s just based on pictures.
So, yeah, my point is, if this one isn’t clicking, cut Saab some slack, it’s their first attempt at something like this. If this one isn’t totally amazing, the gen 2 9-4x will be.
THE BACK ITS THE FRONT!!
take that in consideration, about the front and rear design. Its something that all the brands are trying to do. To give a brand image with the design of the front, and then they try to apply that design to the rear of the car.
In this case is easy to see. Take a look at the rear lights, the shape and then the design of the central part of the boot, where is placed the plate.
Its the front grill applied to the rear of the car.
Also is interesting that in the rear there is no saab badge, only the word SAAB in the center. Interesting detail.
regards
Go to Saab.com they are preparing the launch of the 9-4x site………
regards
Why on Earth couldn’t SAAB implement a similar upgrade of the 9-3 interior?
Someone mentioned that a little over 1 litre/100km (1,05) for the I4 245hp (Petrol) Saab 9-4X is bad.. What the heck is then the C90´s 1,2/100km from its 3,2 litre V6 with 235hp.. Shouldn´t that bigger engine have an easier time pulling a big car? Saab engines are are ARE superior in this and every other case to Volvos and many other carmakers and has been so for a long long time.. When it comes to journos in affect I can tell you about a test between the 9000 AeroCS 225 and the Volo 850 turbo back in 1993.. The Saab won in every round.. But the jouno, Håkan “the Volvo praised” Matsson, ruled Volvo the winner due to it´s better seats, because they didn´t feel like you were in a racing seat.. I´d thought that was a PLUS for a high performance car rather than a minus… The same Matsson tried to persuade Fords Head Designer to talk crap regarding the 9-7X in national swedish television when it was first presented. Matsson.. You are a phony.. But most of them are not apperantly like Robert Collin, even though he is pro Volvo many times… In Sweden most journalists are trained and convinced into thinking Volvos are the best, even though Saab has 1. A higher safety level. 2. Has a lower fuel consumption/car. 3. Saab had the first side impact “security” system. in …. 1969 freekin´69!!!! (And Volvo claimed to be first in th 80´s!!!! Come on GM tell the public that Ford/Volvo are liars.. and not small but BIG liars!!!!!!) 4. Safety… Swedish incurance company Folksam, has for several years held the Saab 900, 9000, NG 900, 9-3, new 9-3 and 9-5 to be the safest cars in the country. And eventhough the V70 is outselling Saabs the Swedish Salesmans Union is recommendating the 9-5 as the best car for company use due to supperior safety/ reliability and best value. Toyotas are á close second and so are Subarus. Volvos? No.. But still people buy them.. Volvo is superior of Saab in one and one SINGE aspect… MARKETING!!!
Saab is the best you can get.. How can Saab spread the word? Come on.. Tell us your story!
Diesel.. BMW I suppose now is the maker to look at for insiration in that sence.. BUT! Look out BMW.. Soon we will have the 2,9 l GM/WM motori V6 AND hopefully from the start an Aero TTiD with a Saab converted twinscroll turbo and 300+hp with an average of 0.75-0,8/100km..
And.. when the 9-1 hits the market.. Get Saab back into Rallying!!!.. With a Hatchback! hehe