The following post was submitted by Greg Abbott, who I had the pleasure of spending some considerable time with over the course of the NAIAS in Detroit last week (was it just last week?)
——
Driving to work this morning in my 9-5 Aero, I had an encounter with the Minneapolis police. It turns out I had forgotten to renew my license tabs, and my license plates had expired at the end of September (nearly four months ago!). Terribly embarrassing, and after I got the ticket I drove straight to my local government service center and took care of it. 30 minutes of waiting, $133 for the new tabs, and $105 for the expired plates violation, and all was well.
The depressing part of this otherwise trivial adventure was my conversation with the young man behind the counter while paying the fine. The topic of Saab came up (I was wearing a Saab jacket), and he said something I’ve heard far too often: “I had a Saab once, but I had a lot of trouble with it, and sold it. I was not happy with it.”
If I had five dollars for every time I’ve heard that statement, I could pay cash for a Turbo X with change to spare.
Driving back to the office, I made a rough calculation in my head: I know more former Saab owners who’ve moved on to other brands due to problems, than I know current Saab owners.
I tried to counter the negativity in a pleasant way – among other things, I pointed out that the 9-3 is now on Consumer Reports’ recommended list. On the whole we had a friendly chat, but I could tell at the end I had made no progress in improving his opinion of Saab. He had bought a used ’99 9-3, and based on his poor experience, he had written off Saab permanently.
In my judgment, overcoming the perception of unreliability is the core of Saab’s problem in the American market. Many people have criticized Saab (and rightly so) for too deep discounting on the sale price, arguing this accelerates depreciation — increasing the cost of ownership and hurting the brand’s image in the used car market. I have no statistics to back this up (perhaps some of you can help me out in the comments), but the perception of unreliability has to play as big or bigger role in depreciation than sale price.
The effect of a *good* reputation for reliability on used car prices can be seen in the ridiculously high resale values for Honda and Toyota. For example, judging from the market prices the average used car buyer is willing to pay a premium of as much as 25 percent for a used Toyota Camry over a used Saab 9-5. My local internet classifieds provide the evidence: excluding salvage or “project” cars, there have been four 1999 Saab 9-5’s listed on Minneapolis Craigslist in January, offered at an average price of $4625. In the same period, nine 1999 Toyota Camry’s have been listed, offered at an average price of $5990 (including one car mysteriously listed at $3220).
1999 models are now nine years old. How does that influence or affect Saab’s ability to sell new models today? Think about about the typical purchaser of a nine year old car. Many of them are likely to be young, still in college or graduate school, or perhaps in their first low-paying job right out of school. Perhaps they get excited and buy a used Saab, but experience some problems that make them unhappy, then sell it never to return to the brand again. The damage a few bad model years have done to the brand has taken Saab permanently off the shopping list of a very large number of people.
A case in point: I have a friend who lives in northern Virginia, the wife of my best friend from high school. She recently bought a new car, and spent several weeks considering the purchase. She is a smart, analytical person who fancies herself as an educated consumer (with reason).
As the “car guy” in my circle of friends, she asked me what cars I thought she should look at — and at the time she was very narrowly focused on the Camry V6 or the Accord V6, costing with options in the 28-30,000 range. Now for that kind of money in the U.S. market, there are a large number of very good cars. I tried very hard to broaden her horizons beyond the Camry and Accord. For example, at those numbers, a 2008 9-3 SportSedan was a possibility. But her focus on reliability was so high, and Saab reputation for poor reliability was so engrained, that she would not even test-drive a 9-3, even after we discussed at length the fact that the 9-3 was on Consumer Reports’ recommended list (she has three kids, so safety was a factor in purchase decision). I also recommended that she test drive the new Chevy Malibu and the Mazda6.
To make a long, frustrating story short, she ended up buying a base model Honda Accord for $22,500. Four cylinders with 170 hp turned out to be more than adequate.
The bottom line: she point-blank refused to even test-drive a Saab even though one was well within her price range, against the advice of a close friend whom she respected enough to seek out.
Perceived reliability is a real problem. I don’t care how good the 9-4x or the next 9-5 are, they aren’t going to sell well if people won’t even consider Saab in the first place.
Even worse, I see nothing in SaabUSA’s marketing which engages or even addresses the reliability problem. Many words have been spilled about “Born from Jets” on these pages, but its biggest shortcoming is the failure to address the consumer’s primary objection to Saab.
If I were in charge of SaabUSA, I would put “Recommended by Consumer Reports” in big letters at the top of every print or internet ad for the 9-3 and 9-5 (assuming there isn’t some legal obstacle to doing so).
I spent this morning thinking about this question, and now I throw it out for comment: what can Saab do about its perceived reliability problem?
Saab could definitely benefit from shouting about Peter Gilbert and his one million miler ‘89 900 SPG from every dealership rooftop. They should also whisper a disclaimer too.
When I bought my ’03 9-5, I was banking some nice cheddar. I wasn’t worried about how much it was going to cost to keep my baby running sweetly. Now that my financial resources are on the leaner side (along with most of middle-America these days) , I’m finding the very-necessary and meticulous maintenance schedule to be a major pain in the posterior. Last summer I replaced WAY too many expensive parts on my 9-5. After surfing some of the Saab sites, I learned that I was just one of many Saab owners who have had to replace these same MAJOR parts. It turns out that by far this is the story of most Saab owners.
The bottom line is summed up Rick Barret’s quote: “Certain brands of cars, such as Lexus and Acura, are known for reliability. But that’s not the same as longevity.”
I believe any Saab like Peter’s can go for a few hundred thousand miles. However, you WILL pay for this long love affair. Oh yes, you WILL pay! I remember as a student, I drove my Honda CRX upwards of 250K miles and did little more than frequent oil changes. But she didn’t elicit the kind of passion my 9-5 gives me.
I love my 9-5. Every time I look at it’s sexy balanced lines I grin a little. Every time her turbo kicks in at 50mph, and I dust other cars in my eco-friendly exhaust I chuckle. But, every time I drop her off at the shop to replace another major part, I curse, curse, and curse some more. Next time around, will I have the heart to endure this painful love affair or will I settle for the cute wholesome girl …uh I mean Honda Accord….next door?
I feel that most people have problems with Saab’s because they do not know how to maintain them. I have seen this first hand. Just sit in the Saab Service Department long enough and listen to the service writer’s questions. Most people with a leased car won’t even change the oil, EVEN WHEN SAAB PAYS FOR IT… It has been proven that if the car is purchased, the maintenance gets more attention. I am on my 3rd Saab, I have (thank God) had very few problems, and one’s I have had were taken care of THE FIRST TIME.
Saab should talk about better reliability and better quality AND SAFETY. I see MB. is now talking about safety, BMW is talking about cult followings. WHAT IS SAAB WAITING FOR… LETS GET THE BALL ROLLING NOW.
Thank you thank you thank you for this piece. It is something that cannot be hammered home enough to GM management. I think a case can be made that this is the #1 issue facing Saab.
I have a Saab Viggen. I love it. But I don’t recommend to anyone because of the trouble I’ve had, and I don’t want anyone telling me I gave bad advice. I hadn’t seen a CR recommendation for the 9-3, as of last year’s car issue it was still a black spot for predicted reliability.
There is conventional wisdom for dealing with the reliablity issue. Saab wouldn’t be the first company to address the problem. Look at Hyundai.
First is to have standard, long, and comprehensive warranties. Which then is extra incentive to…
Then, actually improve the reliability to excellence, not just above the midpoint to get the CR recommendation, whatever it takes.
I had seen a shocking admission from GM a while back. The admitted that until lately they had designed for a 100,000 mile life and had only now started designing for essentially lifetime life span.
One thing that really hurts the reliability perception that drives me crazy is the parts availability. When I lived in Boston (one of the areas with the highest concentration of Saabs) I bought a second hand Viggen still under warranty. After owning it for a month the ABS computer went out and it took over a week for the dealer to get a new part. So that was a week my co-workers saw me when I came to work in the Ford Focus rental that the dealer gave me for a week and said how I never should have bought a Saab. After that the car was great and never had a another serious problem but the reputation was already ruined. People see a car in a relatively new car in the shop for a week and think the worst.
Now I live in Pittsburgh and the part situation is worse. Just recently a bad radiator hose kept my 9-5 “grounded” for 4 days while I waited for a new one. Just a simple hose wasn’t in stock anywhere!
I think reliability is a big problem and it holds me back from recommending it.
I did have a ’97 900 that was very reliable, almost bullet-proof. However I’ve got a 2000 9-5, that I purchased new but it has given me a lot of problems, including just refusing to start/conking out. I think the problems are electrical -unreliable computer control modules, for one thing. Headlights also go out every couple months. Also a peculiar thing: the suspension makes a squishy noise when it gets very cold.
The other side of this that Saab should address is repairs costs. I’ve been warned multiple times that Saabs get very expensive to repair once off warranty. Truth or just perception, that impacts the perceptions of potential customers as well.
I think has started to stand behind all thier products including Saab by now offering a 5 Year warranty.
In UK it’s 3 and on mainland Europe manufacturers only offer a 2 year warranty.
I am on my third SAAB as well. I had the CR dreaded 2003 9-3 SS. All I have to say is that it was one of the best cars I have owned. I had very few problems with it. It was by far more reliable than my old 93 9000 CDE turbo when new. I loved my old 9-3 so much that I bought (not leased) an 07 9-3 convertible recently POO-ed… This one has been even better. I have recommended the 9-3 to others as well. I do this more confidently as we have an excellent dealer here in Dallas.
I have come across ex-SAAB owners (C900 in particular.) They tell me they loved the car, but reliability was not the issue, repair cost were. Either way, SAAB does need to shout their CR recommendations as well as their safety ratings. I love the discounts, but hate the depreciation.
This is a very valid point and it speaks I think to the root of perception problems with the brand. And it is not only perception – it is reality in my case as well. I am a Saab driver at heart because I love the smart design, the efficient power delivery and the brilliant utility of the Saabs (bring back the hatch!).
I purchased my second Saab just over a year ago – a 2002 9-3 SE. It had just over 85000km on it (just past the warranty expiration as it was a lease return). And by the way – 80,000km warranty? What’s up with that? That is not a way to attract customers if you can only guarantee major components to 80K. See Mitsubishi for proper minimum warranty coverage levels.
But I digress. In the past year, I have had to replace both the starter motor and the alternator on this Saab. And I haven’t even hit 100K yet. These are not components that should be failing anywhere near this mileage point. Now I also have issues with the accessory belt idler pulley. I am thoroughly not impressed with the build quality, and I would honestly be hard pressed to recommend Saabs to anyone – beyond the fact that they are a blast to drive.
Cost of ownership is a skyrocketing factor in vehicle purchases. If I were to consider a new 2008 or even 2009 Sport Combi in the near future, I want to know damn well that this vehicle is going to take me well past 300,000 km without major component issues just as my previous ’85 900 Turbo did.
My mom still has her old ’86 9000 turbo, which has been relatively reliable (with only a few things going at the beginning, under warranty- most notably the computer).
But I think it comes down to taking care of it (or any older car)- if it gets regular service, then it’s more likely to be reliable. Same with her ’95 Mercedes, which she’s so obsessive about, she actually gets the oil changed every 3k miles instead of the 7500 that MB recommends. That being said, it’s never had a major problem in 13 years.
Yes, Saab needs to emphasise their reliability, but they also need to encourage owners to have their cars serviced when the car needs it. That’s what the ‘check engine’ and ‘change oil’ lights are for, after all…
I have a Saab, I have had a lot of annoyance and trouble with it, and it will most likely be my first and last. If I can get it sold, that is.
Perception – or just simple facts?
I’m on my second Saab now, a ’04 9-5 2.0T which still has the engine warranty(8 years here in Norway, don’t know about other countries), my first one was a ’96 900 2.0i. I haven’t had many problems with either, the 9-5 had the wheel bearings replaced due to a hole in the road(don’t ask…), and on the 900 the only problem I had was one of the pipes for the AC, of course a lot of other things were replaced, but nothing serious, just the usual wear and tear.
None of the people around me owning saabs have ever commented on the reliability either. When people hear “saab” here, they tend to think about high safety ratings.
There are two issues at play here. First, there aren’t enough mechanics that are familiar with Saabs. Anyone who’s worked on the German brands will recognize all the bits (the ones that break say Bosch on them, just like in a BMW!), but few of these mechanics go to work for GM dealerships.
The second issue is more psychological. As my mechanic says, there are tons of Toyota owners driving cars with broken heaters, falling-off trim, pulsating brakes and “check-engine” lights on that claim that their cars are very reliable. European car owners tend to be the exact opposite and think that a scuff in some plastic bit is a major crisis. The way he puts it, nobody cares if they get a tear in an old pair of jeans, but they do care if it happens in slacks.
I don’t think that Saabs are inherently unreliable. A friend of mine has a 300000km 9-3 that is as reliable and tight as a new car. My own 9-3 has had very few non-maintenance issues (all of them Bosch-related, btw).
One thing that Saab should fix is the fact that every SID is illegible after a few short years, and every bonnet badge loses its paint. It would definitely be worth it for Saab to release updated parts at a low cost for these chronic problems. After all, most potential Saab customers are going to ride in one of the older cars at some point.
In response to the OP’s question about what SAAB can do to address perceived reliability problem……..make a more reliable vehicle and back it with an industry leading warranty. Anything less and people won’t go for it. look at the responses here, on a website for SAAB enthusiasts, frank admission that the cars have not been very reliable and that repair costs are high and part availability is low. That sucks for anyone thinking of joining the SAAB family. I’m here learning about the 9-3 Aero XWD that will debut this year? Sounds almost perfect for what I want in a car. I am concerned about reliability. I currently own an Acura TSX and Volvo XC70. Both have been extremely reliable. I had many concerns about the Volvo but it has never been to the shop except for scheduled maintenance. my fear of SAAB’s poor relibility is stronger than my concerns about Volvo. Hopefully the XWD versions of the 9-3 will be good cars. Time will tell and SAAB rep will be determined in part by how they do. The poor image SAAB maintains for relibility will take at least one model lifespan to change, and that will be only for a model that has vastly improved reliability. I hope SAAB can do it. I like their cars, but am hesitant to be an owner.
I’m the third owner of a 1999 9-3 convertible. I was lucky (read: persistent) enough to get the COMPLETE service history of this vehicle before I bought it. It had been a lease, returned, sold used, traded-in, sold at auction and then to me. When I got her (3 years ago) she was a low mileage (40k mi) 6-year-old car.
There were 2 issues in play. The service history was HUGE. I was seriously concerned that the car had low mileage because it was ALWAYS parked behind the dealership. … and the Buick/Saab dealership’s reputation for service sucked. I bought it thinking I’d give it 6 months to see if I could deal with the problems.
I bought the car, took it to a Saab-specialist independent shop … and after the first couple of visits to work out the kinks, she’s been a dream.
I’ll be flipping 100k miles in the next month or so (that’s nearly 60k for me in three years) and the car is still a great ride.
The cost for repairs is somewhat of an issue, as it is much higher than the wife’s honda … but if I had to commute 50 miles a day in a Honda, I’d drive off a bridge.
The moral of my story … my car was a “problem car” for 2 previous owners … but a simple change of mechanic has made her a very dependable car for me.
(NOTE: The dealer in question no longer exists.)
Greg Abbott summed things up beautifully. I’ve tried to get friends look at SAAB and the same horror stories of reliability come back to haunt.
I had no problems however with my 2001 9-5 Aero SportWagon but traded it when it reached 62K miles out of fear of future high repairs.
My 2007 9-5 Aero SportCombi has been a great solid car although I have just under 5K miles on it at this point. I was very disappointed to see the gas door was not remote opening nor was it flush with the body as it was on the 2001. I was also disappointed to see the kick plates in the ’07; they’re plain and look cheap. The 2001 mixed chrome (where it read SAAB) against the plastic kick plate. Small things like that cheapen the feel of a $44K car. Yeah, it has navigation which I like a lot.
Would I buy another one? If SAAB would give us some clue what that next 9-5 is going to look at, maybe. I am a loyalist to the car but a lot of other products are out there to lure us away….
My 2000 9-5 Aero has had it’s share of big problems, but I love the car anyways. It went through two transmissions in 2 months, but both of those were fixed under warranty by the dealer/indy mechanic I bought the car from. Since then the only thing major was a throttle body failure.
I think alot of the problem that people here have trying to convince the toyota and honda buying public to buy saabs is just what those people are looking for. The vast majority of american car buyers are looking for a reasonably “stylish” looking appliance that gets them from A to B with minimal hassle. It the journey doesn’t matter, all they care about is the car’s ability to do it “reliably”.
Saab just doesn’t make that kind of car, at it’s core saab makes cars for driving enthusiasts. The key difference between the buyer types is that the enthusiast will be able to look past a car’s reliability and focus more on the driving experience, while your average car buyer will complain about having to change the oil every 3000 miles. The problem that saab has is that unlike BMW, Audi, Mercedes and VW, companies whose cars are equally high-maintenance, Saab doesn’t have the kind of brand value to make people look past the faults.
To make matters worse, the H-engine cars were designed to be meticulously maintained just like an 80′s or 90′s BMW would be. Unfortunately old BMW’s are much more likely to be in the hands of enthusiasts than old saabs are. Whereas the enthusiast will say “yeah, that problem was a PITA, but it’s a small price to pay for driving such a fun car”, your average car buyer will just be frustrated at having to spend any money on the car beyond fuel costs.
Saab needs to improve it’s brand perception as well as fight it’s jaguar-like reputation for reliability if they want to actually sell cars.
Its very simple. Its not how often they break, but what the dealer does when they break that that makes a difference. The loudest voices are not the happy customers but, understandibly unhappy customers.
Also consider the background of the car, which vehicle is more likely to have been hammered through every amber light it sees, the Toyota or the Turbo Charged lease Saab?
Granted Hondas just don’t break but they are the exception.
Gregg Abott just hit right on the nail.
Reliability is something that used to be really good on Saabs. Nowadays those major problems, especially with 9-5, have given people an impression of truly unrealiable car.
Three very close friends of mine, workmates, drive 9-5 wagons (´99, ´01 and ´02) they all have had so many problems that it´s almost like a joke. Just name one typical problem on 9-5 and they´ve had it.
One of them was into Japanese cars, and I turned him into Saabs by taking him for a testdrive on a newish 9-5. He loved it and they bought one, though a bit older then. Now he says that it´s the last Saab he´ll ever drive again – there´s been sludge problem (full rebuild, which he had to pay 1200€ and the rest paid by the dealer), blown turbo, Di cassette failure, throttlebody problems (limp home), heater core leak, pixels missing on SID, airbag failure (false) notification few times. 3 times left on the road with family on a vacation trip. No wonder.
All of them had turbo problems, one lost catalyst during the turbo blow up. DI cassettes blown etc. Just horrible!
I had no gut´s to buy 9-5 when we needed replacement for our 9000 two years ago. 9-3 SC has been a dream come true so far, but there´s only 33000 kms on it now.
Today I cannot / do not recommend anyone close to me, to buy 9-5. Allthough I know they are still very good cars. And newer examples should be more reliable. But I just don´t want to ruin relationship should there be any problems later on.
Greg: Great write up, your thoughts are always well-organized. I appreciate that, I really do.
Warranties help. And, service packages help — I’ve mentioned that BMW’s brilliant “everything is covered for the first 36,000 miles”-type service package allows the dealer to fix the little nagging issues when the car is “in for routine service” to give the impression that it is reliable even if it really isn’t.
One of the MAJOR things hurting Saab in this area isn’t just the reliability statistics, it’s the exhorbitant cost of some of those repairs! Price a new tranny for a C900 lately? At $3000 and up, that’ll leave a dent in anyone’s wallet. Why so expensive? Because one must remove the whole engine and transmission for a transmission service. An oil sump check for my “new” 9-5? Requires removal of the front subframe, thank you very much.
Is it so hard to build a car that one can easily maintain? Is it really that hard?
Good article and discussion in the comments. A lot of the comments above sound to me like rationalizations.
“People don’t care for them like they should” Duh, ya think? What makes you think that Saab owners are worse in this respect than the owners of other makes?
“Saab has a perception problem” No, Saab has a quality problem. The reason people think Toyotas and Hondas are more reliable because they are. Period. Advertising won’t help. Pretending there isn’t a problem won’t help. Making excuses and rationalizations won’t help. Building higher quality cars will help. Building cars that don’t need expensive, frequent servicing and repair will help. Building cars that will run practically forever will help. Can’t do it? Toyota and Honda can.
I must love Saabs because this is the third one I have owned (2004 9-3 2.0t). But they have all three had maintenance and reliability problems, and they have been expensive to repair (even though the cost of much of it was under warranty). I made a conscious decision when I bought them that I would put up with it, rather than just buying an Accord and not worrying about it. But apparently most of the driving public is not as forgiving as I am.
When looking for a second car I had used car dealers telling me to avoid 9-5s, because when they’re bad they’re very bad. On the other hand I had a supposedly reputable Saab dealer give me a test drive of a ’99 9-5 with shuddering brakes, missing pixels and peeling grille-chrome. The ’98 9000 I bought instead is mostly bullet proof, bought out of Saab love.
Sam: You’re absolutely right.
My wife’s old Toyota RAV4 did 84,000 in 7 years and the only two things I ever did to it were oil changes and coolant flush. No brakes, nothing. Except a set of tires.
My sister in law is driving ´97 Saab 900 (she had two c900´s before and she loved them!) and she was looking for a 9-5 to replace her good old 900. I told her not to. If she really had to buy one I´d say it has to be ´04 or newer, but I really cannot recommend one.
And I do all of the maintenance to her cars, mind you…
I appreciate all the comments. This has always struck me as a central problem for Saab.
I would say the problem is both real *and* perceptual.
My fear is that the mindset is so ingrained that people will simply pass on the 9-4x and 9-5, regardless of how good and reliable they are in the real world.
*Assuming* that Saab’s reliability is improving (a huge assumption I know, but true at least for the 9-3ss), then how does Saab turn around these negative ingrained perceptions?
(That is, how does Saab fix the problem other than wait 30 years for the next generation of car buyers to grow up?)
Greg, mine is a 9-3ss… I’d love to keep it “forever”, as it has good qualities. But…
Ken,
What year is your 9-3? Statistically, the first model year (03) was not good, and ’04 was somewhat improved but still problematic. It was not until ’05 and ’06 when the 9-3 reliability gremlins were finally put away.
That was the point I was trying to make: the 9-3ss reliability started off poorly but in the last couple of model years has gotten pretty good.
At least this is what an acquaintance of mine, who is a Saab Master Tech at a dealership, tells me.
2003 Aero Wagon – Only problem was pinched battery cable which caused problem with Alternator. It was covered under warranty, but took a while to discover and fix. I just broke the front cup holder ) with my laptop case, will have to get fixed at next oil change ($160 – Damn)!
.
We picked Aero over Audi A6 wagon, after seeing recommendation from Consumer reports.
No problems outside of warranty (79K) thus far (Knock on Wood)
Very tempted to look at BMW 535XI wagon for next go around 2010, unless Saab comes in with a bit wider 300-350 HP AWD 9-5 wagon.
Everyone who rides in car really likes it. Still a good looking car also.
That’s my impression, too, Greg. I guess it’s going to take another year for that to sink in to the marketplace via Consumer Reports etc.
Does that mean I’m going to have to start hearting CR?
Hey all,
Swade, this one’s for you (prompted by your Friday Snippets intro)…
My parents had a ’92 9000S (N/A). They bought it with 52K miles on it and drove it until 210K. In that time, the car received a clutch master cylinder, an alternator, and a clutch (including slave at the time). Of course, brakes and a serpentine belt were addressed at some point, but what car wouldn’t need those? Fluid changes were regular. They gave it to my brother to commute in. He rolled the odometer upwards towards 240K, and then sold it. I see it every once in a while. (My dad now drives a ’01 9-5 LPT. After the turbo and cat were replaced (warranty), it’s been trouble-free.)
A family friend put over 250K onto an ’85 900T, then another 200K on a ’95 9000 CSE (T). He currently is on his second 9-5, and I don’t know his mileage tally. He’s had great service from his Saabs. He and my parents both take very good care of their cars by being attentive and pro-active in the maintenance arena.
My 9000 Aero has been very good to me once I got the initial used-car issues worked out (a bad head gasket and slave cylinder). I’ve put 50K on it in 4+ years. Just replaced engine mounts and bushings.
That said, I don’t recommend Saabs to anyone who doesn’t understand that cars deserve their attention.
As for Greg’s friend who now owns a 4-cyl Accord, i have two things to say: 1. Sorry. 2. At least it doesn’t drive like a Toyota.
~P
My 2000 9.5 Aero has been extremely reliable, durable, and solid.
The only item that has failed was the DI which happened conveniently less than 1 km from the dealer where it was replaced under warranty.
I’ve had the car for 5 years now and have no plans (or reason) to replace it.
Ps. Did I mention that the car is very fast, fun to drive and fuel efficient!
I think the problem is real. Some of the failures are just plain ridiculous (I am reminded of the 9-5′s heater bypass valve, which remains a lame design, and suicidal serpentine belt pulleys. Why do we have so many problems with our damn serpentine belt pulleys? If a Toyota belt pulley is better, then Saab should use Toyota pulleys.)
But I think the other major problem is that the dealer part’s cost is absurd in comparison to the cost of the same part from anywhere else. When my heater bypass valve failed, it cost me about $80 for the part (at a Cadillac dealer, my local Saab dealer was selling it for $120) and about $75 for an indy to install.
The Saab dealer would have charged me $300 for the same procedure.
Undoubtedly it’s a car that requires a bit more attention and love than a Toyota or Honda, but, unless you know the car well and pay attention to it, and you know the best places to buy parts, if you go to the dealer you’ll be raped.
Swade: You can heart anything that you put your mind to. Especially CR. Just heart them for their reviews of towels and dishwashers, not cars.
I purchased a used MY 2006 9-5 in 2007. I would not have bought it if it wasn’t CPOed with a warranty. Already I have had to replace the emblem on the hood (under warranty of course). I hope that it isn’t a bad omen.
All my friends care about is the fact that they have a car that runs. They’re not at the stage in their lives where they’re looking for reliability or safety or whatever, because we’re all indestructible twentysomethings that can’t see past next week. That said, no one I know drives any car that even approaches exciting, except me, because I’m awesome.
…I had a point in there, somewhere. Oh, right: I only know one person that likes Saabs, and his father is a master Saab tech. Everyone else is completely indifferent…so I don’t really have much insight for this topic.
I have two MY01 9-5 Aeros (one brand new and the other bought used). Turbo failure because I fitted an aftermarket air filter which did not sit properly in the housing and allowed fine particles of sand to filter thru (I live in the desert and frequent dust storms are a norm). DI cassette gone bust on the red 9-5, apart from that, nothing else. Mileage on the red one currently 180,000km and the cosmic blue 211,000km. Servicing a delight (how does a 4,000km round trip sound to service your car?). Of late the service charges are sucking my pants dry: they charged me of late the following:
1. bearing change (I supplied the parts) = R400 per hour
2. Upload new data for fuel manangement module: R200
3. Upload new engine management data = R800
Apart from the above, I had none of all the problems listed above apart from the cosmic blue 9-5 which needed a complete sub assembly when the turbo calved it took the pistons with it home – replaced under the 8-year engine warranty (+_R103,000). A goodwill gesture of GM was the cherry on top.
I have to add that I use full synthetic oil anywhere between 7 – 10,000km intervals and attend to every little gremlin or notification popping up. Reliability issues not a factor in this part of the world, the only glitch is that few people care to notice that a Saab does exist. Of all the 6 Saabs in Namibia (we know each other), none has been complaining too loudly apart from when you visit the gas station too often! Am en route now to purchase a MY07 9-3 as the incentives being offered by GM Southern Africa is simply too good to ignore. Will keep you posted.
Reading about all these problems with the 9-5 really makes me nervous. I think I should be ok though, mine is a 2004 model. *fingers crossed*
My friend was looking to buy his first car, second hand, recently. I put in a good word for SAAB and found some excellent value OG 9-3s. Initially he was interested but in the end the servicing costs were ‘too high’ and he wanted something ‘reliable.’ The high depreciation of SAABs made his father suspicious – ‘there must be something wrong with these cars.’ As much as I pointed out the safety, performance and comfort advantages of SAAB it wasn’t going to happen.
Is there something wrong with them? I don’t think so. But there is clearly that perception. My friend is a very (small l) liberal kind of guy who is about to become an academic and enjoys driving manual transmission. If i couldn’t convince someone like that to buy the car then there is definitely a perception problem.
I do not change cars very often, but when I do (for the last 20 years at least) I have bought my cars brand new. I’ve been into Saab since ’96, when I bought a 900S 2.0i. An excellent car which, when I sold it 5 years later (50000km), had costed me absolutely nothing in terms of parts and repairs. It had a few minor issues in the warranty period, but which brand hasn’t? My next car was a ’01 9-3 2.0t. I had it for seven years (80000km). Apart from normal maintenance costs, I’ve had one repair of a suspension part (thanks to the Norwegian road standard…) I’ve had two DI cassette breakdown, both warranty repairs. In addition, a few minor issues in the warranty period. A minor pixel fault in the SID appeared after five years of use, but that was an easy DIY repair (being an electronic engineer). I sold the car to a colleague three months ago for a good sum of money, and he’s still very satisfied. 2 1/2 months ago I got my ’08 9-3ss 1.8t BioPower. It’s a bit too early to give a reliability status on this one, but so far everything is working perfect.
The reasons for me still being true to Saab are that this brand offers me: Top safety, good handling, comfortabe cars – and reliability. I’m sorry to read that others have had more negative experience with the brand. Most people I know driving Saabs are in general satisfied with the brand and are also a bit proud of owning a Saab.
IMHO, the DI cassette problem is A MAJOR problem. Yes, it is easy task to fix IF you have replacement part. But if you are in the middle of nowhere on your 9-5 without sparepart, it´ll leave you right there! I call everything that´ll no doubt to leave you on the road, a major problem. I wouldn´t leave home in a 9-5 without spare DI in the boot. Even the latest versions have had problems, so it is reliable part. And it has been in production since ´91, so ALL the problems on it should´ve been solved more than ten years ago!
MarkoA: I did not call the DI cassette a minor issue. But as I understand, this problem is now solved. There was a recall of involved models, mine was not included as the DI cassette was already changed to the latest (improved?) version.
My workmate got new “improved” which had to be replaced again soon after?!
I cant remember how many times I hav e written this… What the heck is different with US Saabs? There must be some sort of seperate line in Trollhättan for vehicles for the US market with flaws and faulty parts.. I´ve never experianced any major problems with Saabs I have owned.. The Swedish test agency ranks Saab as one of the top brands.
(Volvo on the other hand has had so many problems with the S40/V50 that it ranked at the very bottom for new cars.)
One other story: Like a posted earlier, 3 Saab vert. with very little issues… My Boss has a new BMW. Has had a few software problems and is not that happy with the dealer service.
He told me that from what he can see, Saab does a good job with keeping me happy (and that’s not easy…) I looked at BMW as they are now at the dealer where Saab USED to be. My Boss told me, ” If i were you, I’d stick with Saab”… FOR WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU BUY A SAAB, YOU STILL CAN’T BEAT IT…
Greg did do a great job with that post and reading about some of the ‘experiences’ reminds me of all the problems I saw with GM cars through the 1990’s (right up until the end of the decade and into the 21st century). At any rate customers were usually more unhappy with there vehicles when they had problems that were intermittent and could not repaired – which of course resulted in multiple service visits etc.
At any rate – the one thing you have to keep in mind is that any company can build a great car, but the dealer is ultimately responsible for service and customer satisfaction.
For example – I took my 2007 9-3 in for a driver door panel vibration that was (still is) coming from the audio system causing resonating within the door panel. When I went to leave the dealer the driver’s door lock button (interior) did not operate because they did not hook it back up. They repaired that in a few minutes but after I left the dealer I noticed that the noise was still in the door panel and later noticed the auto-up feature on the driver’s window was inoperative – they had forgotten to re-learn the window pinch protection feature. A subsequent service visit resulted in the window being re-learned but the vibration is still in the door.
In the end, I will be repairing the driver’s door vibration after having a friend who does premium audio system installation listen to it and recommend some Dynamat (Google it to learn more) to cancel those audio system noises. And at least I know it will be done right.
So, again – it goes back the dealer not being able to go that extra mile to repair a vehicle. Maybe the technician was not going to get paid anymore to investigate the problem etc. or maybe there was a ‘better job’ in the rack, but that is how things work at dealers so I was not surprised by any of the above problems.
Simple things like that is how GM (Saab) loses customers. I saw it all the time at the Chevy dealer I worked at. They walked right across the street to the Toyota store and we never saw them again.
I have been lucky to have good service at an old dealership Casa De Cadillac / Saab of Sherman Oaks. You should expect superior service when paying high 30′s and 40′s for a car. Hopefully they will improve the warranty for the new 9-5 if they are thinking of getting mid to high 40′s low 50′s.
Very good article, Greg. Thanks for sharing this with us, Swade.
I agree wholeheartedly with everything in this post. Last year my mother was looking for a one-year-old car (she feels it’s silly to suffer the depreciation hit of buying a brand new car) in the $30K-$35K price range. I had to beg and plead with her to add the 9⁵ to her list of candidates. To appease me she test drove one, and to her surprise she liked the drive the best of all the candidates. But the reliability demon reared its head and she bought a 2006 Acura TL because it had a better reliability rating from Consumer Reports.
There’s no doubt the Saab is a technically better driving car than much of its competition, but there are some things holding it back from better sales, such as the historic reputation for un-reliability, high cost-of-ownership, and expensive repair costs (especially price of replacement parts).
It should be pointed-out that in the U.S. all current Saab powertrains are warrantied for 5 years/100K miles (whichever comes first). So if you’re buying a current Saab you’re safe for quite a while. It’s also incentive for Saab to engineer longevity into the components to ensure they don’t have to pay-out a lot of warranty claims. Also, I think GM is the first to make the warranty FULLY-TRANSFERABLE, so even if you’re not the original purchaser of the car you still have the warranty until the 5 years or 100K miles are up. This shows that GM is fully backing their cars’ reliability or “putting their money where their mouth is”.
However, if you’re buying an out-of-warranty Saab you have to know that there is a lifetime engineered into most components. Not that there’s some sort of conspiracy to make you buy a new car, but because it would cost multiple times more money to design components that last forever. You can make something out of steel for $10 a piece which will last forever or you can make the same thing out of plastic for $1 which will last 7 years (just longer than the warranty period). If they made everything to last a lifetime the car would cost much more than it does!
I hate to say it, but the reliability and price of repairs really is a problem for Saab’s cars. I have a well maintained 2000 Saab 9-5, and the number and cost of repairs on it have greatly outnumbered those of a 1997 Saturn SL-2, a 1997 Ford Taurus, and a 2000 Ford Taurus that friends and family have. I get my oil changed every 3000 miles, have the tires rotated, get tune-ups, and still have spent $4900 in the past three years on repairs alone! That’s more money than all the repairs for the three mentioned cars combined!
Don’t get me wrong, I think the 9-5 is one of the best driving cars I have ever had. That does not, however, make up for the problems that I have had. Once a Saab is out of warranty, it isn’t worth keeping around unless you plan on footing some heavy bills. Not so of the American and Japanese cars by comparison!
My point? If it’s a new or certified Saab, it’s fine. If it’s out of warranty, replace it.
I fit the exact description of the used ’99 9-3 buyer–just out of college with first job, I bought a used ’99 9-3 with 48,000 miles on it from Schmelz Countryside Saab in Maplewood. Less than a week after buying the car, steam was billowing out of the hood and I needed a new head gasket. I love Saabs because of previous experience with a 900NG; but the dealer’s lack of responsibility as well as the car’s low mileage and problems made me furious. Shortly down the road I also needed a water pump. As a result I recommend never buying from Schmelz but stick with Saab. However, unlike the typical owner, I stuck with it and continue to drive my lemon—which I truly believe is just a lemon, rather than a reflection of Saab quality.
I think Saab should try and distance itself as much as possible from GM and re-establish itself as a completely independent manufacturer (pre ’99 merger)—and in so doing, undergo a marketing campaign focused solely on quality and reliability as well as performance.
I’m a college student looking around for a car and I have to say that I’m completely turned off by Saab, in spite of how attractive they look. At this point, I have US$50k/year in tuition to worry about and an unreliable car is just not in the works. Given the mixed reviews(biased negatively), I am turned off by Saab’s inherent unreliability. It’s not a perceptions; it’s based on cold hard facts. You want to cement brand identity with performance AND reliability. If the car has a punch but leaves you stranded, then what’s the point? Sure, it’s fun, but you rarely get to experience it. I’m going for a Volvo or Toyota, which have better ratings.