Saab Turbo X -vs- Saab 9-3 Aero XWD
I got an email last Friday from Saab USA. They’re concerned that there’s still confusion about the Saab Turbo X. I won’t reproduce the contents here as Ryan at Saab History also got it and published it verbatim. I didn’t publish it straight away as I had one fundamental question to ask - the question I’m trying to answer here.
The presentation shows how, as an enhanced model, the Saab Turbo X is a greater special edition than the 9-3 Viggen was relative to the OG 9-3. This is a reasonable thing to discuss and shouldn’t be devalued, but devalue it a little I must, as it completely misses the point.
No-one’s shopping the Turbo X against a Viggen, so whilst that discussion will be a good one for a future Saab Owner’s Convention, it’s of limited relevance in the here and now. The one question people want answered about the Turbo X is “Why should I buy one instead of just getting an Aero with XWD, or waiting until 2009 when the Aero with XWD will have the eLSD (at least in the US market)?”
I pointed this out to SaabUSA and they’re not able to provide the answer to that at the moment, primarily because the 2009 specs haven’t been set. Fair enough. But if they want to clear the air on the Turbo X, they’re going to have to address it some time.
So here’s a brief Trollhattan Saab comparison, based on known information about the cars.
Exclusivity
I don’t list this first because it’s the most important, not by any means. But you’ve got to start somewhere. I had a question on the site a few days ago asking if the Turbo-X would be continued in to the 09 model year, so it’s relevant to mention here.
The Saab Turbo-X will be limited to a worldwide volume of just 2,000 units for the 2008 model year only. Each country has an allocation, so if you want to get one, it’s not one in 2,000, it’s one in 600 if you’re in the US, one in 500 if you’re in the UK, one in 30 if you’re in Australia. I’ve got a number of national volumes listed here (along with everything else you need to know about the vehicle), but if your country isn’t listed you need to check with your national Saab organisation to see how many you’re getting.
If you think exclusivity doesn’t matter, then have a chat with a Viggen owner, or a 900 Turbo S owner. I love Saabs of all generations and iterations, but these special Saabs are special for a reason.
XWD System
The Saab Turbo X will be the showcase vehicle for the new XWD (cross wheel drive) system, which allows for torque splits not only between front and rear, but also from side to side in the rear.
The Saab 9-3 Aero with XWD (hereon referred to as the ‘XWD Aero’) will also get the XWD system, but in 2008 that system won’t have the electronic limited slip differential (eLSD). And this is critical, as it’s the eLSD that allows the torque split from side to side on the rear wheels.
It’s understood that the XWD Aero will get the eLSD as standard equipment in 2009 in the US market. It’s unknown whether it will be standard or an option in other markets.
XWD awesomeness
It’d be easy to read about the XWD system being available, partially available, delayed, etc, and not think about how good the system is. This system, from my brief drive and from similar drives by multiple motoring press, is absolutely brilliant.
Don’t just read about the XWD system and think about it intellectually. This system gives great reassurance. It’s fully tied in with the ESP system, which is tailor made for the car so as to cut in later, allowing the XWD system to control more of the traction characteristics by shifting the torque around in any given situation before cutting in.
Power Delivery
Both the Turbo X and the XWD Aero will come with a V6 engine of 2.8 litres displacement and both will put out 280hp and 400N of torque.
So where’s the difference?
The gearbox in the Turbo X is strengthened and will have the torque limitation removed in first and second gear, which the XWD Aero will miss out on (for 2008 at least - no indications yet for 09 onwards). This will give you much more grunt early on and explains the improved 0-100 km/h time.
Chassis
The XWD Aero already comes with a sports tuned chassis that’s lowered in comparison with the 2.0T.
The Turbo X comes with an even finer-tuned chassis that’s lowered a further 10mm. This lowers the center of gravity even further and allows for better handling and control. The front and rear dampers have been selected to suit and the rear dampers are self-levelling to provide a consistent ride.
People spend considerable amounts of money doing this stuff on other cars, aftermarket. With the Turbo X, the suspensions system is already done and tuned to the dynamics of the XWD system.
brakes
The XWD Aero, as far as I know, will come with 314mm front brakes. These will be fantastic.
The Turbo X will come with massive 345mm brakes on the front.
This is another one of those instances where you might see a number and think “oh, that’s good” without really giving it the thought it deserves. As a Viggen owner, I can testify to the reassurance a good set of brakes can give to a driver. These are much bigger than my Viggen brakes.
Again, people spend bucketloads on uprated brakes. We’re talking upwards of $3,000 for a big brake kit in some most instances. This is a real and tangible difference maker. A car can get as angry as a cut snake when you hit the gas, but if you can’t stop it properly then it’s just one thing - dangerous.
You won’t believe the reassurance and confidence that better brakes can bring until you try them.
Wheels
It’s somewhat superficial, but in so many instances the wheels maketh the car. So it is with the Turbo X.
At the Detroit Auto Show the Turbo X they had there didn’t have Turbo X wheels fitted. It had a standard set of double-blade 18-inch wheels on it. A handsome set of wheels by anyone’s standards, but the Turbo X wheels are something else again.
These babies really stand out and dress the car very well indeed. And they’re exclusive to the Turbo X.
Exterior and Interior Trim
I’m not going to spend a lot of time on this as for most people, this is just gravy. The meat is in the powertrain and the way the rubber hits the road.
But there are a number of exclusive Turbo X additions. As I mentioned earlier with regard to exclusivity, ask a Viggen owner if he/she likes the Viggen specific interior. You’ll get a resounding ‘yes’
The exterior trim includes a new rear spoiler on the sedan, a new rear air dam and a deeper front spoiler - all designed to reduce drag that little bit more. Add all that to the already improved, more purposeful design of the 2008 9-3 and thrown in those rhomboid exhaust pipes at the back and you’ll be smiling every time you walk up to the car.
The interior gets some good stuff too. I love my carbon fibre, and the old-school turbo guage and fancy display messages will be a nice touch that owners will appreciate.
The details do count.
——
If you just look at a list of differences between the Turbo X and the XWD Aero, most of the items on the list will be details such as trim, etc. That’s why I’ve tried to actually write about the differences here and just include the trim items as a group. The list view gives a disproportionate picture and discounts the importance of the fundamentals.
I’ve tried to emphasise a little more on the material differences between the vehicles as I think that’s what buyers really want to know. And I think when you measure those differences and the real-world effects they’ll have on the driving experience, then you’ll see that the Turbo X will indeed stack up nicely.
The XWD Aero is going to be absolutely superb.
The Saab Turbo X is going to be a limited edition screamer.
I’ve heard from a number of people who have ordered one already and all I can say is that I’m insanely jealous.
Enjoy.
——
And if anyone at Saab has some other fundamental differences to add that I’ve missed, you know where to find me. I’ll be more than happy to add them to the post.
More from this category
More from this author
Subscribe to this author
Recent Comments
- Conor on Saab 9-1 - the ‘news’
- Markac on Saab 9-1 - the opinion
- saabyurk on More photos from Le Mans
- turbin on Turbo X startup question - answered!
- Beren Erchamion on Turbo X startup question - answered!
- Jörgen Trued on More photos from Le Mans
- Jeff K on More photos from Le Mans
- Jeff K on More photos from Le Mans
- Ying on Lance Cole: The Saab Psychosis
- Gordon on Saab 9-1 - the ‘news’
Why do i get the suspicion sales arent going as fast as they thought they would?
I know the initial responses from the people who drove the pre-production test cars was good, but Id love to here / see a review of the turbo-x on real roads or the track.
The first real positive review of the turbo-x might be all thats needed to make some sitters-on-the-fence commit to purchase.
Does anyone at Saab know what time it did the Nurburg ring in???
You failed to mention one difference that will not be overlooked by potential buyers … Price. What is the difference between the Turbo X and a similarly (as close as possible) equipped Aero X?
Also … Free Aero Academy with time ON Road Atlanta
I get pragmatic with these things — would I really use these features? Some yes, some no.
If I, as an enthusiast, were in the market for one of these cars, I’d likely chose the Turbo X, but by the narrowest of margins.
Exclusivity means nothing. Better brakes, better tranny, better cornering win the battle. But these upgrades are relatively small, therefore my comment — it wins, but not by much.
Oh, and great work. Very educational read.
Just noticed those Turbo-X high performance tires are Michelin, not Bridgestone as will be featured in the upcoming Super Bowl commercial.
One word: 300
(or lack there of 300 horses)
People don’t see a different because there really ISN’T a difference!
Actually, “300″ is two words. “three hundred”
carsdirect.com list the pricing for the XWD Aero & Turbo-X (US$). I did a comparison between 2 comparably equipped cars. The Turbo-X, with standard equipment only, has a dealer invoice price of $42,510 (including $745 manufacturer’s destination charge). The Aero, with optional XWD ($2,354) and jet black metallic paint ($490), has a MSRP of $39,155 (including $745 manufacturer’s destination charge).
So there you have it, for MY08 an additional $3,355 dollars buys you eLSD, more low end grunt, beefier brakes, some chassis tuning, 18′ wheels and an exclusive trim kit.
The remaining question is, how much will a MY09 XWD Aero w/ eLSD cost? Early rumors had eLSD as an additional $2K on top of XWD. If that turns out to be true for MY09, then you’d be crazy to wait and not to buy a Turbo-X now.
Hmmm…I guess I’m still on the fence. The biggest drawback to the Turbo-X for me is the color, I just can’t get a black car again. And those wheels; I just don’t like them. Even though the other performance advantages like bigger brakes and no torque limitations are appealing, I seriously doubt that I would _really_ benefit from these advantages on a daily basis.
If they made the Turbo-X in a color that has never been available in the Aero trim before (hint: white) I’d be much more inclined. Correction: I’d be first in line at my dealer. Maybe, just maybe, they will offer white in Aero trim for 2009. One can only hope.
This is translated from http://forum.saabturboclub.com/viewtopic.php?p=1510052#1510052 regarding the strengthened gearbox on Turbo X compared to Aero XWD that you mention.
“Sure it should be strengthened if they will increase the torque. So I asked people who are working with those gearboxes, I got the answer that it was exactly the same gearbox. It would be interesting to see what sources trollhattansaab.net uses.”
I can also inform that in some thread on STCS forum (can’t find it now) it was mentioned that the torque limitation was not removed, it was only increased compared to Aero XWD.
Well, if the Turbo-X came in something other than metallic black, maybe I’d consider it more seriously. I’d love a Snow Silver T-X with those 19-inch grey wheels.
(Wait, who am I kidding… I’m not buying a new car!)
~Peter
“Psycho Dave // Jan 30, 2008 at 3:15 am
“Sure it should be strengthened if they will increase the torque. So I asked people who are working with those gearboxes, I got the answer that it was exactly the same gearbox. It would be interesting to see what sources trollhattansaab.net uses.””
Remember this is penny-pinching GM we’re dealing with. I highly doubt that they’d spend the money engineering an upgraded transmission for a run of only 2000 cars. Either the “beefed-up tranny” story is BS or it’s going to be standard equipment for the 09. Same goes for the big brakes, I’m sure we’ll see them on the 09.
Same goes for the wheels and bodykit, they may be turbo-X exclusive for 2008, but I’d be very surprised if they aren’t offered as a sport package or dealer option. I’m sure the wheels will stick around too.
My personal hunch is that the 2009 9-3 aero XWD will mechanically be the exact same car as the turbo X, just without the bodykit and interior extras. The 2008 aero XWD sounds more and more like it’s some sort of weird production/prototype sort of car. Basically a dry-run for the 09’s to see how epsilon will hold up to an AWD system or a test to see how consumers flock to an AWD saab.
The turbo-X makes more sense when you look at it from the standpoint of it being a test model for the eLSD system, but even as an automotive enthusiast I see little reason to buy one over a 2009 where I’ll be able to choose the color, etc. GM needed to think more about how the car will appeal to consumers. I highly doubt that it would have been hard to give the car 20-40 more horsepower. The car had the potential to offer lancer evo acceleration and handling with european refinement, but it looks like it’s going to be just another R32 or Mazdaspeed6. It’s not what the turbo X is, it looks to be a wonderful car by all means, but it’s what it could have been.
Psycho Dave: if the source of the “strengthened gearbox” and torque-unlimited lower gears was Saab themselves and this turns out to not be true, wouldn’t they be guilty of false advertising?
I know, you’re just reporting what you’re reading and I do appreciate it. Especially the translation. It’s interesting to know what’s being discussed in Swedish Saab forums. Thanks.
I have one last rant about the “more differentiation than the viggen” argument. Back in 1999, the viggen was released in the US with 30 more hp than the 9-3se turbo and only 20 hp less than the outgoing US-Spec M3 and was just as fast of a car in the straight line.
Now the Turbo X comes with 30 less horsepower than the current mid-level 3-series, let alone the ~140hp advantage that the current M3 has on it. These things matter, and the “more differentiation than the viggen” argument would at least hold SOME water if the turbo X offered some sort of a horsepower increase over it’s regular-run companions.
I think the euro-market OG 9-3 aero would be a much better car to compare to the turbo X.
The turbo X needed to break the 300hp barrier to attract buyers, GM ignored this, and now they’ve realized their mistake because the turbo X’s aren’t moving and it’s too late for them to change the car.
At this point if I were GM I’d cook together a last-minute reflash for the ECU that pushes the engine to ~310 hp, re-rate the car and include the reflash as part of the PDI procedure for the turbo X’s.
Alex, I might agree with you on the gearbox being available on the ‘09 Aero, but those other things such as the body kit, brakes, and wheels will likely remain Turbo-X exclusive. I mean, look at the Viggen. Its body kit, brakes, and wheels remained exclusive. Also look at the 20th Anniversary convertible wheels. They remained exclusive except for when they ran out of the exclusive 60th Anniversary edition wheels and they had to start fitting 20th Anniversary convertible wheels at the end of the run.
I really do like those Turbo-X wheels. I think that they’re distinctive so there are people who will love them and others who will hate them (sort of like the turbine wheels seen on all the recent Saab concepts). I like that titanium or gunmetal color. I hope Saab introduces a different design wheel in the same color in the future. What I like about the Turbo-X wheels is that they’re really a stylized three-spoke, which hearkens back to Saab tradition as found on the special edition C900s and 9000s.
One last thought: who would buy an ‘08 Aero w/ XWD?
It’s a good thing they are not selling them, because it looks like them can’t make them.
From I link I found on gminsidenews.com:
http://www.donlen.com/production_cars_gm.asp
Scroll down to Saab 9-3 “….delayed start up.”
RPG: that’s big news. 12 to 16 weeks from the date that page was last updated would be anywhere between mid-April to mid-May. I think the original plan was the March-April timeframe. At this point, why even offer the Aero as an ‘08 model? Simply offer the Turbo-X as an ‘08 and then the Aero becomes available in ‘09. This would eliminate the awkwardness of the ‘08 Aero w/ XWD but w/o eLSD… Kind of a white elephant.
Alex: I agree, other than the fact that Saab has released the spec of the car to be 280, I really think that Saab should swallow their pride and ramp it up to 300+. Hirsch have already said they’ll be offering the upgrade, perhaps they were told by Saab not to go over 300 to make it look like it would be detrimental to the mechanicals of the car. If the car was 300 as stock, Hirsch could still come up with their 320+ upgrade so they’re not out of pocket - and don’t tell me that 320 is beyond reach on a 2.8V6
On a different note - I’ve got one of these on order, the first thing I’ll be doing (well, second after some Hirschification) is to get rid of the awful silver (sorry, “titanium”) strip over the rear numberplate and swap it out for a body coloured one. Looks like a cheap A6 trim imitation. So not necessary. My MY03 93 is blacker than the TurboX already - wasn’t this car supposed to be an homage to the “Black Turbo” of yesteryear? To me, it spoils that otherwise lovely deriere.
Gripen: No. if the TurboX wasn’t coming out I’d probably be sniffing round for a nearly new S4. Much as I love my current 93 Aero, I doubt I’d be looking for just a slightly better version of what I already have. And to be honest, it was a difficult decision to have to make between the TurboX and S4.
RPG: maybe they’ve delayed it to test it fully with 300+ BHP. Here’s hoping!
@GWC: It though we settled this one a while back: Depending on conditions, participants may drive on a purpose-built autocross course, skid pad and other track
paddock areas where driving exercises are conducted. Driving exercises are not conducted on Road Atlanta’s
road course.
http://www.saabusa.com/images/aero/aero_academy.pdf
Before anymore comparison goes on between the Turbo X and the M3/S4/RS4, take a look at their prices.
Starting Prices:
M3 = $53,975 US
S4 = $48,600 US
RS4 = $66,910 US.
Turbo X = $42,510 US.
The Turbo X is the cheapest out of all those vehicles and possibly the better deal out of all of them.
The only other luxury-sport vehicles that I can think of that share similiar price ranges are the 330XI ($40,800) and Infiniti G Sedan AWD ($34,100). It would be interesting to see how they compare with similiar equipment.
isn’t the 1-series (bmw) coming with 300hp, in a turbo-charged, inline 6.
saab needs to start bringing the heat. the competition is unrelenting.
at least they the got the turbo-x color right. i’d be tempted to put different wheels on it, though.
Long time reader - awesomne site Swade!! First time comment-leaver:
The 17″ wheels from the 20th anniversary convertable were not exclusive. they were offered on an upgraded premium package in the US (they offered both premium 16 and premium 17 packages). I know because I have them on my 07 9-3SS. Therefore in 07 you could either get them by ordering that oprtion package or getting a later built anniversary edition. Ironically I had a hard time choosing between a loaded up SS with the premium 17 package or getting an anniversay edition. I LOVED the original anniversary wheels and seats but hated the greay/black interior and no xenon lights. I went with the loaded up SS - paid a little more but got my xenons and in fact the wheels I probably would have ended op with anyway! Thanks!!
Has anyone actually mentioned in a previous topic that the Hirsch 300hp upgrade will also be offered on the 280hp Aero? Because it will be.
It would be nice for the “exclusive” TurboX to also have its own exclusive Hirsch mod. An extra 20BHP edge over the rest of the range could make it that little bit more special.
Maybe if Hirsch was given the nod by SaabUSA the market would be large enough for them to financially justify little niches for specific cars like the TurboX.
The BMW 135i is priced at $34,900, is significantly smaller than the Turbo X, and lacks AWD. I have a feeling that the 135i similiarly equipped will be in the same price range as the Turbo X.
I don’t consider the 135i comparable to the Turbo X since they would appeal to different cliental.
saab9X: I know a lot of the people inside Saab are worried about fighting the horsepower war. Not because they can’t technologically match-up, but because it’s at odds with a core Saab ethos: safety.
I remember when Swade was riding with a Saab engineer in the Saab 9-3 Aero w/ XWD prototype in Trollhattan during the Saab Festival the engineer mentioned that he has reservations about offering so much power in the car. “Responsible performance” or something like that, I think he called it.
I have no doubt Saab could develop a twin-turbo V16 supercar, but why? That’s not what Saab does. They’re above that. The enthusiasts who want to compare whose is longer can buy BMWs or Audis.
To NineTwoX, yeah, the M3 and RS4 prices have really skyrocketed, bur remember just a few years ago when Saab’s top models were just as fast as BMW, Audi and Mercedes’ were.
Now for $5k more than the price of a Turbo X, you can get an audi S4 which has a far, far superior interior, a much more refined chassis, and 60 more horsepower, not to mention the brand clout.
More importantly, a 335xi sedan MSRP’s at $40k. For that money you get BMW’s twin-turbo, direct injection straight six that while rated at 300hp really makes more like 330. That car also gets you the phenomenal BMW chassis and lets not forget the power of the roundel on the car-buying public.
Meanwhile, the base MSRP for the 306 hp G35x is $34k, and again, nissan’s FM platform far outshines epsilon in the handling department.
All of these cars are just as fast if not faster than the turbo X, and all of them have equally advanced AWD systems, not to mention equally competent road manners. The bottom line is that even if they didn’t have better interiors, engines, build quality and brand appeal compared to the 9-3, they’d still beat it in terms of hp for your dollar.
The turbo X would have been an awesome, top-notch car back in 2003 when the 9-3ss debuted, but it’s too little too late. Like another poster said, the competition is relentless and “responsible performance” isn’t going to sell many cars for you when your competitors are selling plain old “performance” for the same money.
“responsible performance” reeks of “Detroit wouldn’t let us do anything cool so we’re going to try to justify the measly LPT v6 we’re stuck with”
Me, I want to buy a used turbo X in a couple years and give it the 14 psi, FMIC and hirsh leather dash that they should have came with from the factory.
Alex, take a breath.
Want to make some comparisons? How about the Turbo X slalom time beating German and Japanese rivals, including the Porsche 911 Turbo? That’s reproduced at one of the links, above.
It’s not all about horsepower, mate. I agree that they should have made this car 300hp if only for marketing purposes, but as with almost every Saab it’s not the horsepower that excites you, it’s the torque. That’s what gives a car it’s great driveability in everyday driving.
The Turbo X has 400Nm of it. Do you know what BMW’s all-conquering M3 has? The new one?
400Nm.
You need to drive this thing. The XWD system is awesome. Saying that “all of them have equally advanced AWD systems” proves that either you’re not reading the text or you’re choosing to ignore it. This system is a first. Others will catch up, no doubt, but for just a short period of time, Saab will have a class-leading system in place.
You seem to be pretty fond of the BMW’s. Why not just get one? Maybe the Saab isn’t for you. It’s not for everyone.
And ‘responsible performance’ is a legitimate line to take. Should you end up with that Turbo X in the future you might be thankful for it. Having pushed my own car beyond my abilities and walked away unharmed, I know I am.
Psycho Dave: The info on the gearbox and torque limiting was from Saab. They may have termed it in a way for me to understand and the ‘removal’ of torque limiting instead of just upping the threshold might be me phrasing it wrong.
i.e. it could well be that they’ve just lifted the threshold to a safe level for the standard gearbox. My recollection, however, is that a strengthened gearbox was also mentioned.
I’d be happy for the STCS guys to discuss it here as well as their site. Not because I want them to visit (though that’d be great) but because most of us here can’t read/write Swedish. I’d just love to get the facts straight.
“People don’t see a different because there really ISN’T a difference!” - That’s exactly the kind of first-glance thinking I was trying to tackle in this post.
Simply not true. But at the end of the day, maybe Saab haven’t differentiated this model enough for it to make a stand in the minds of many. It’ll be an awesome car and much appreciated by those who get one, and later on after it’s done. But Saab, most likely, only have themselves to blame for not setting it apart enough.
Alex - There are some things you are incorrect on:
1. Audi’s quattro (the previous Haldex awd system) and BMW’s xDrive are not equivalent to what the Turbo X is getting. The Turbo X is getting a superior AWD system.
2. The eLSD has the potential to deliver better handling characteristics than either of Audi’s or BMW’s awd. Chances are the Turbo X will out handle the comparable Audi and BMW.
3. The $40,800US listed for the 335XI is base price. For an equivalently equipped 335XI, you may be looking at $6K-8K more. This also applies to the G Sedan.
One needs to look at value per dollar and not only HP per dollar.
4. The 335XI’s 0-60mph time (per BMW) is listed as 5.6sec. The Audi’s S4 is 5.5s. So far, the Turbo X offers equivalent performance numbers.
I’m still wholeheartedly pro-saab swade, I think we’ll see good things when the EPII cars come out. Even so I can’t wait to testdrive the XWD system. My hope is that the eLSD can put an end to the understeer that our cars are so famous for. As a preview of how all future saabs will handle, I love the turbo-X.
I just really, really, really wish that it was a good second faster from 0-60
Let me explain myself, my real problem with the Turbo X isn’t what it is but what it represents. Right now GM is selling a 260 horsepower direct injection ecotec in the HHR and cobalt for $21k. GM is also selling a direct injection high feature engine in the CTS.
What irk’s me is that saab, a company with a reputation built on cutting-edge engines doesn’t have a DI engine in any of their models. If saab wanted the turbo X to push “responsible performance” to the tune of
Oh Alex…. oh Alex….. you’ve hit the nail on the head.
I love my Viggen, even though I’ve spent money on it, and will probably continue to it’s a unique ride that just keeps me smiling.
However I’m thinking, and have been for some time it will be my last Saab. They’re just not keeping up with the competition either with quality, finesse, or technology.
My friend has a 328 BMW that’s done 140k and he’s spent $0. I have a Viggen, done 90k now and I’ve spent about $7k. Same year model. His is more solid, handles better, more refined, would still sell for around $40k in about 2 weeks. Viggen = $15-18k and would take months to sell.
Admittedly the BMW is boring but still you have to weigh everything up and in the end it’s a no brainer. (correct - you keep the Saab - SW)
People around me (friends etc) wont be able to grasp I’m saying this but seriously the cars just aren’t adding up to me any longer. Couple that with the fact I’m STILL waiting for one of the 3 dealers i contacted about the Turbo X to get back to me.
Meanwhile my brother is still receiving courtesy calls from Mini, 12 months after his purchase.
ps - I can’t believe you guys in the USA get a 330 twin turbo for 40k - an M3 for 50k… here they’re 140 and 170k and our dollar aint that far behind yours. Buggers!!
Richo you should be glad your not living in Denmark then, her an M3 will cost you what roughly corresponds to 280K US-dollar, and my guess is that the TurboX will land at about 150K US-dollar.
So if you want a nice car, Denmark is defiantly not the place to live… I feel sorry for myself
About safety - 300 hp should not be a concern.
Doesn’t seem to be a concern on Subaru’s WRX Sti.
I see ‘responsible performance’ as relating more to warranty costs and being ‘responsible’ to the bean-counters. 280>300hp could be the difference between:
Something Almost Always Broken
and
Something Absolutely Assured Broken
Where did the rest of my last post go? (I was wondering about the same thing - SW)
In any case, I was saying that if Saab wanted to go the “responsible performance” route with the Turbo-X, then why not give it the turbo direct injection ecotec instead of the 2.8t. The engine’s clearly capable of making the same 280-300 hp that the 2.8t does and it would definitely return better fuel economy.
What I also don’t get is why the 2.8t hasn’t been given direct injection. They already engineered DI heads for the highfeature 3.6 that’s in the CTS, it would barely cost them anything to make a DI version of the 2.8. Saab is supposed to be at the cutting edge when it comes to new powertrain designs, so why hasn’t GM given them any DI engines to play with.
I’d love to see what GM has to say about that one Swade, if you ever feel like asking them. Forget diesels, Saab needs DI models, and they needed them yesterday.
Saab Canada still has no price on the Turbo X.
IMO, I do not think that there are enough distinguishable differences between the Turbo X & Aero XWD. Aside from the badging, on the street, I think someone taking a quick glance over the Turbo X could mistake it for an Aero XWD.
Some people may find fault in this, however, I these kinds of cars are designed for enthusiasts in mind. The kind of people who know everything about the Turbo X months in advance.
Alex - Hopefully this Turbo X is like a first generation of M3 where every generation gets better and better (up to the point of the current M3). Maybe Saab is testing the waters with the Turbo X.
Whoa, so much negative feelings toward Saab, it seems every time there is a posting about the Turbo X the whole site goes nuts and loves to slam GM for all things bad.
Relax, fellas. Saab is in a transitionary period, you want everything now and yesterday, but seriously… Saab is a brand that sells just over 100K vehicles a year, that has little to no appeal to the general public, gets branded as “quirky” all the time, itself proclaims its for well-off liberals… You can’t seriously expect Saab to better all the Germans and Japanese altogether all the time. If you do, you are delusional. After all, if you really want an M3 fighter… Go buy an M5. It has 520 Nm of torque.
Alex, I pray to god GM is not going to start dropping Cobalt SS engines in Saabs. Please! I can just read the what all the already skeptical journos are going to write… “Open Vectra with a Chevy engine”… “Badge-engineered and engine-rebadged”… etc.
Do we need that? My view is that Saab have done a good job with the MY08 refresh for the 9-3. They also seem to have a good understanding of where the brand needs to be in 5 years time. Like it or not, the 9-4X is gonna help Saab get there. So let us reserve our judgement until we see the 9-1, the new 9-5 and the all-new 9-3.
It would really benefit Saab to read the feedback that this website receives, it would solve so many of their issues. As others have mentioned, the Turbo X had a lot of potential but just doesn’t cut it in several key areas:
1) 280hp out of a blown V6 is nothing special…most normally aspirated 6’s with slightly larger displacement have no trouble with 280 bhp
2) Stop comparing the Turbo X to BMW’s M3, it compares closer to the new 300hp 335xi in price and features…
3) Don’t use the “safe + responsible” excuse for the lack of horsepower…I think we all feel safe in BMW’s and Audi’s with 300+ hp. This is about selling cars and horsepower sells.
4) Where is direct injection!? Even with lower power the Turbo X cannot deliver the fuel efficiency of the new direct injection engines with more power…
5) Beating a dead horse here: Bluetooth, someone better get fired for this screw up…and stop forcing OnStar on us!
* I really want to like the Turbo X, but it just seems like too little too late. Of course, my mind may change later in the year when incentives come about.
You know, I believe even Saab is asking GM, “where is direct injection?” in the engines they’re supplied.
Witness this line from the press release on the BioPower 100 concept: “With the future addition of direct injection and lean-burn technology, E100 fuel consumption can move even closer to gasoline levels.”
I think Saab only gets to use whatever engines GM provides them with. Once the 2.3-liter engine currently in the 9-5 is discontinued in a couple years Saab’ll be left with essentially an Opel engine (the Ecotec found in the 1.8t and 2.0T in the 9-3), a Holden engine (the 2.8T found in the 9-3 Aero), and a couple of diesel FIAT engines. The diesel to be found in the 9-4X and the next-gen 9-5 are speculated to be the VM Motori one currently available to the Cadillac CTS in Europe.
Saab does the best it can to improve the engines they’re given. They do pretty well with this. Imagine if Saab were provided with the best engines GM has to offer like Cadillac has been. Or if Saab were allowed to develop their own technology (SVC…).
I wanted to make this comment for a while now - the similarity between cars and cameras.
Cameras you ask? Yeah.
Reading through car forums and blogs is a similar experience as reading a camera forum.
Case in example, Pentax just announced their K20D digital and before it’s offocial press release, people were extremly excited, some has a ‘wish list’ of what they want - faster fps, high res sensors, better AF speed, can cook breakfast for you, etc.
Then came the press release - Pentax stuck to improving image quality by employing a new sensor design, but, no improvement on fps and AF speed.
then the complaints arise - Canon and Nikons can shoot at 6 frames per second, why can’t Pentax?
Then the Pentax defenders counterpoint saying they don’t need 6 fps, 3 is fast plenty and they don’t shoot sports so don’t need a machine gun shoot rate.
The dabate goes on….
Sounds rather like a car forum huh. My own opinion on this is a long and convoluted one so I will leave that to another post.
Incidently I think Pentax and Saab are very alike in their way of doing things, and attarcts the same kind of clientier.
“1985 Gripen // Jan 30, 2008 at 4:22 pm
I think Saab only gets to use whatever engines GM provides them with.”
And therein lies the key problem with the GM-Saab relationship. If GM let Saab have all of the good engines like Ford has with Volvo it would be one thing, but fact is that they clearly don’t.
If GM isn’t going to give this premium brand the treatment and technology that it deserves and more importantly that it needs to compete, they just need to cut bait and sell Saab to someone who actually knows how to manage the brand.
I just want to do what everybody else seems to be doing: pitching in 2c worth of thouhgts…
The TurboX is not special enough. A 2000-cars series car should be Very Special, much more like the M3 than a stickers pimped Saab Aero (with or without eLSD, which BTW sounds like a 90’s drug from some UK club)
Bottom line, I agree 100% to Alex’ comments.
Sorry if this has already been covered since I last posted, but I’m quite sure that the first 100 or something TurboX owners get to go ON Road Atlanta.
Still wish they sorted the ‘vert to have XWD as well.
I had a few wheelspin issues on a country road storm the other day, XWD would have been very welcome.
As for the Turbo X, 300hp should have been the minimum, and one of the reasons the car may not sell as well as we hope is that hp figure alone. It may not need it from a performance perspective, but it certainly needs it from a marketing perspective.
Anyway, had the hood down today, and it was 9 degrees celcius, but sunny. The Saab cabrio certainly is a the cabrio for all seasons. Still felt cosy and warm in the cockpit despite the outddor temp
I was one of the first people to put my name on the list (12/07) for the turbox at the saab dealer in san diego, ca and I really can’t wait to test drive it. Im getting ready to sell my 02 S4 with 98000 miles on it. But why doesnt the US models have the same clean look as the Euro ones? Ex. on the US headlights they have the stupid yellow corners where as the Euro has clear corners. Whether or not it came with 280 or 300hp I would get this car no questions asked if they allowed Hirsh tuning to be included in their warranty like the Euro warranty has. I know some of the pics show the wheels with michelin ps2 and other brands but dealers say it should come out with pirellis because they have a contract with them. Right when I get my turbox..I plan taking out the pointless yellow corners, tint all my windows light, install the Pioneer AVIC-D3, get a ECU to push it at 300, and air filter. Now thats sexy!!
At least 300bhp is a must, especially as for very little outlay my 1990 900 t16 runs 240 bhp and handles brilliantly. Ok, the power delivery is crazy, the gearbox will disintergrate sooner or later and it’s FWD, but I along with others want something that will tempt us away from the older saabs. There is a huge market for performance tuning in SAAB circles for such a low volume manufacturer - look at all the 9000’s etc., that are modified through companies such as MAPTUN who offer 500 bhp ‘off the shelf’. This proves there is a market there for something truely brutal. Yes, I would love a drive of the turbo X and to experince XWD, but it is a worry that it won’t appeal, especially to individuals new to the marque and old SAAB stalwarts.
I had a 900T in 1985, A 9000T with the then new engine and chasis and when the 9000 saved my life in a 50mph t-bone collision, in 1999, I bought the last hatchback, the 1999 SE 9-3. I’ve driven them about 330,000 miles, but got tired of how Saab had come to neglect this fringe market and eccentric car.
Then,I read of the 2008 9-3 XWD, and I dared to hope. I test drove the 2008 9-3 AERO FWD, and it is a bandit. I couldn’t hold back, and I ordered # 24 of the 2008 9-3 XWD and I’m waiting, not patiently, and I’m salivating, hoping that this is the car I’ve always wanted since beginning to drive in 1965. Let’s hope so, or likely it’s Saab’s last Hurrah. P>S> - the Saab Atlanta Driving School doesn’t hurt!
Waitaminit, all this time I thought only the Turbo X will be putting out 280hp, while the Aero (with or w/o XWD option) got the 5hp bump from 250 to 255.
Nope, the fwd 9-3 Aero gets 255 hp, or 14 horsepower LESS than a camry V6.
The 2008 9-3 Aero with “xwd” AKA just the 4th-gen Haldex minus the eLSD gets 280, or 20-25 hp less than the G35, IS350, 335i, Hyundai Genesis V6, CTS, or C350.
The 2009 9-3 Aero XWD with the eLSD will also get 280, or 20-25 hp less than the G35, IS350, 335i, Hyundai Genesis V6, CTS, or C350.
And finally, the Turbo X, the limited-edition “sport” model, also gets, you guessed it, 280, or 20-25 hp less than the G35, IS350, 335i, Hyundai Genesis V6, CTS, or C350.
Now I know alot of you think that Saab doesn’t need to get into the horsepower wars, and that the cars are about “real-world acceleration” instead. That would be fine if these other cars weren’t also creaming the 9-3 Aeros in acceleration tests.
Saab needs to let go of some of it’s old ideas and realize that it will go the way of the dodo if it doesn’t get with the times and crank out a sports sedan that is as competitive today as the 900 and 9000 turbos were back in the 80’s.
Those cars had some of the nicest interiors available at ANY pricepoint, some of the most advanced engines available at ANY pricepoint, and some of the best acceleration and handling available at ANY pricepoint. All of this on top of the distinctive Saab styling and trademark Saab hatchback utility.
Saab desperately needs to get the attention of (not to mention sales from) luxury sports sedan buyers, and the way to do it isn’t by churning out eye-catching concepts, it’s by building cars that are as competitive as the Saabs of yore were.
I just don’t see any new Saab today that comes close to any of those things, the underpowered Turbo X included. The sad thing is that given GM’s parts stable that wouldn’t be all that hard to accomplish today.
Aero XWD 0-60 in 5.9
Turbo X 0-60 in 5.4 this is d/t increased compression 11.4 PSI as opposed to 9 psi if memory serves me well.
Turbo X 5 point multilink suspension sport tuned, very stiff, XWD so-and-so “I am going to roll over” feeling in turns.
I test drove both before i got the Turbo X.
Speak up Kroumcho (otvori si ustata momko) about our great rides.
The turbo x is the best i have ever driven, and this is coming from the VW R32, and Volvo S60R, both Haldex cars.
A fine understated ride in tune with the Scandinavian design school.
As for the Holden HFV6 2.8l, have no illusions, the turbo tuning and exhaust is pure Troll work.
You don’t know what you are missing out on! And I am talking insane pickups in 90 degree weather, wait to see what the T will do 20 degs lower.