Identifiability
I felt much better about the Saab 9-4x concept when I finally saw it for myself in the metal in Detroit (was that just last month?).
But Volvo have just taken the e-covers off their XC60 - online and official - and they make an interesting point.
From Volvo design chief Steve Mattin as per the press release at Autoblog:
If you say that you’d recognise a Volvo from 300 feet away today, I dare say the XC60 radiates a clear Volvo presence from at least twice that distance.”
600 feet? That’s around 200 meters, right? I’m not sure I’ll go that far, but I will say this: I’d recognise this as a Volvo from a distance well before I’d recognise the 9-4x as a Saab.
That said, that doesn’t mean the 9-4x is an un-Saab-like design. For Saab’s first in-house SUV it’s a great starting point, if not quite as daring as some may have liked. Volvo have had years with the XC90 to get this design language and shape into people’s heads.
Saab haven’t had that luxury and that’s the subject of a whole other conversation. Saab are now getting their Aero-X inspired design infusion and hopefully we’ll hear Anthony Lo making similarly bold claims in a few years from now about a variety of models.
It’s just a shame that it’ll be a few years that we have to wait before we hear it.
More from this category
- Nordic adventure in Åre, Sweden
- One guy’s view - What GM should do with Saab
- Scorching Saab Seats can Stifle your Swimmers?!
- Wednesday Snippets
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
- 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
- Jeff on A Quick Thankyou
Coincidentally I posted a thread on SC on the XC60 and how its launch timing will beat the 9-4X :-((
Actually Swade, this XC60 without the center grille I would have *not* recognized it from 300 or even 30 ft away. To me it has a combination of the Acura RDX and Toyota RAV4.
Yeh, I’ll agree with that. Because Volvo is known for putting all that extra plastic on their back ends going up the back D-Pillar which is UGLY (At least on the XC90). Though, I’d say this time its actually relevant since they put in some LED lights to accent the curve of the body. Though light pipes would of done a better job.
The front could be from any manufacturer.
As much as i hate to say this - the Volvo is a better looking vehicle than the 9-4.
I’m still underwhelmed with the 9-4x; somewhat of a boring and lackluster design. Maybe in the flesh it will look better, as Swade has mentioned.
eww the volvo just looks so…bland.
at least the 9-4 has RELEVANT curves. this volvo has WAY too many curves, and it really subtracts from the design. The front end especially is bland.
and for some reason it just looks flat. ah i know! it just needs some roof racks. then the back would look simply striking.
overall, like i said, the back is mighty nice, especially with roof racks. but that flimsy dashboard and those headlights with the ’sleepers’ in their eyes need to go away.
of course there are things i dont like about the 9-4, but in comparison, the 9-4, ESPECIALLY the interior, is just drool material. anyone will fall in love with that interior. and the front is pretty confident too.
lets hope they both succeed however.
The XC60 looks like a rebadged Hyundai or Toyota, but it’s still much more “dynamic” and distinctive looking in the eyes of the average car buyer than the 9-4x is.
Not that the 9-4x isn’t an attractive design, it just looks a bit too conservative for what it needs to do for the brand.
On the other hand, if the Saab.com teaser is anything to go by, the 9-1 will more than make up for any “dynamic design” deficits that Saab might have compared to Volvo. Just compare the headlights and front profile alone to that of the C30 and you can see we’re already in good shape.
Just add a bit more of a curve to the 9-4x’s beltline and give it a clamshell hood and it will be more than distinctive enough to wear the Saab badge.
There was a good shot of both the 9-4X and the XC60 in one Swedish paper yesterday. Then it hit me how good and clean the Saab deisgn is compared to the Volvo that (like BMW) is just a chaos of lines and curves. The Saab may not stand out from 200 m away (and that probably because the design language is new to us), but it sure is a well designed car from 20 m away.
I think the problem now is that the Saabs of yesteryear were VERY distinctive, you could have identified one a mile off. But now you can’t. I quite often see what I think is a 93ss in the distance only to find out that it’s the ubiquitous Vauxhall Vectra - understandable I suppose seeing as they’re based on the same platform.
Saab need to distance themselves from the design crowd a little more, but make sure they use their new design language across the entire range - since the 1997 95 things have been design leapfrogging the rest of the “range”.
More productive manufacturers with bigger model ranges are able to roll out their design language over most of their range over the space of a couple of years. So there are more cars on the street that share the brand identity.
Saab now have themselves a unique opportunity to reaffirm their identity. With the brand new 9-5, 9-1, 9-4X and all new 9-3 due out over the next few years, we can hopefully expect to see a solid identity/language re-emerge, presumably all based on the universally well recieved Aero X.
Having completely different looking models that look good in their own right is great for individuals who say “I like the look of that car”, but I think it’s more important for Saab to get people saying “I like Saabs” again. People used to do that.
I think this discussion defines Saab’s problem pretty well.
A Volvo has more dynamic design than a Saab!
Listen to that. The Volvo boxiness and the Saab dynamism are only in our minds, not in the exterior styling of the products. And it has actually been that way for many years now. Why are we even surprised Volvos sell better?
And how did that happen? Why was the 9-3 allowed to look like more like successor to the 2nd generation Vectra than even the 3rd generation Vectra does?
If Saab can’t manage to create interesting LOOKING cars, they will have to be taken off the life support system that they have been surviving on since the Scania time.
So: please give us a 9-1 and a 9-5 that are SAABS! Not Fiats, Opels, Chevys, Subarus och Lancias. Saabs.
Aside from the debates about BMW & Volvos design flaws…..which I don’t really buy into at all……….the one major difference between their cars and Saabs 94X is that they are launching cars and not just presenting concepts.
The Saab 94X is easy to identify - there’s only one and you need to go to Geneva to find it. Volvo & BMW ? Try your neighbourhood dealer.
I like the XC60… and I’m not a CUV lover at all but compared to the heavy and lame XC90 this will be a good motorway refresher.
The SAAB 9-4X will look slow and boring next to the XC60
Volvo made a slick prodution version out of the alienated XC60 Concept and now I sincerely hope Saab will make the production 9-4X look lighter and more streamlined too (Or distribute it US only if no change at all)
I don´t like the XC60 and I don´t think that this car screems Volvo. The only thing that leads you to recognize it from a distance is the typical Volvo grille.. Otherwise I´d say it looks like something korean mixed with a VW Tiguan.
I can´t see why some of you say that the 9-4X will look slow campared to the Volvo and that the 9-4X will look boring next to the XC60. The 9-4X to me looks more muscular and screems here I come. The Volvo looks to lame and like something anyother company would produce. The 9-4X sticks out.. And I´m happy it does
I wasn’t 100% pleased by the picts of the 9-4X, but compared with ovlov XC60, the 9-4X is a gem.
The ovlov design tends towards fat & chubby instead of muscular, a bit similar to this one (watch out, the link has a terrible effect on the eye):
https://portal.health.fgov.be/portal/page?_pageid=56,547250&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
The kicker though is that Volvo is selling the XC60 with the ~2985 hp T6 engine as the base powerplant. This engine not only makes more power than Saab’s 2.8T, but it makes just as much torque and has variable cam phasing as well as variable cam profiles (like Honda’s VTEC).
That means that the XC60 will not only look faster and more dynamic than the 9-4x, but if the DI ecotec from the 9-4x concept is the only engine that Saab offers, the XC60 will also be faster than the 9-4x.
So Saab’s really going to need to work hard on keeping the 9-4x as close to the concept as possible. More importantly, they’re going to need to offer it with some sort of turbo V6, and it will need to make or break the 300 barrier to once again position Saab as the “sporty” Swedish brand. I for one hope they can do it.
Alex, isn’t that about 2690 hp to much ?
But I do agree, Saab needs not only to be different in terms of design, a more outstanding powerplant is needed if they want to be concurrential.
But that is just the top motorisation, most XC60 certainly will be sold with a dieselengine (in Europe at least).
What about the hp/ton comparison? Lower weight means faster 0-100 (or 60), lower fuel consumption & less pollution. If Saab wants to continue on the green BioPower-path less weight will help.
Volvo’s designs are much more distintive than Saab’s right now. That makes me very sad and nostalgic. [Insert crying emoticon here]
This guy is crazy. Take a way the logo and it still screams Volvo.
I didn’t really like the interior though. Notice the SID and then the Nav screen under it in a separate spot. Weird.
The base engine in Sweden probably will be the 2,5T just like in the XC90. A not so thrilling engine. And Saab will ofcourse have the 2,8 turbo 280 engine as annoption and probably an even bigger engine with 300 + horsepowers. Look at the engines in the 9-7X. Look at the 9-7X Aero.. Why wouldn´t the 9-4X have something just as chocking as that? I can´t believe many of you think that Volvo´s got a more distinctive design than Saab in a positiv way.. Saabs are classic but at the same time are getting more dramatic. Volvo has lost touch with themselfs I believe. The V70 is one of the most ugly cars out there right now and specially the XC70. The taillamps of the C30… Is this all positiv to you?
The 9-5 will probably have a dramatic design.. But hopefully not in the Volvo dramatic way, because then Saab will loose their carma like I think Volvo has done now. Volvo is no longer Volvo.. It´s a euro Ford
If Volvo is no longer Volvo, then what does that make SAAB? The product has to some extent been diluted (evidence of cost cutting the main culprit), but at least they have new product. And the XC60 will be manufactured in Europe in a Volvo factory. And Volvo still launch with new safety features; never mind the design, how close will 9-4X get to XC60 in this area? XC90 set the standard for SUV safety, including compatability in impacts with smaller vehicles. Any takers who would rather have an accident in a 9-7X? The sad truth is that Volvo is still, just about, a car company that can design, engineer, and manufacture its own products, whilst SAAB is now little more than a brand with little control over the design and engineering.
“Mike T // Feb 22, 2008 at 4:53 am
The sad truth is that Volvo is still, just about, a car company that can design, engineer, and manufacture its own products, whilst SAAB is now little more than a brand with little control over the design and engineering.”
And just to throw salt on those wounds, Volvo has been building better cars than Saab in pretty much every possible way since ~2001 or so.
In 2001, Ford gave Volvo the S60, a car built on a Volvo-specific platform with an all Volvo-designed and built drivetrain, a beautiful Swedish modern interior, and a gorgeous eye-catching shape with distinctive details.. GM gave Saab the 9-3ss, an Opel Vectra with anonymous front and rear end treatments, a cheap-feeling interior and an engine commonly found in Chevy Cavaliers, low-end Saturns and the Cobalt.
In 2001, Ford also gave Volvo the P2 V70 and XC70, in my opinion some of the best looking wagons ever built. Saab had to wait until 2005 for the equally good-looking 9-3 wagon.
In 2003, Ford gave Volvo the XC90, a bestselling CUV with an all-Volvo engine lineup, riding on a Volvo platform and built in Sweden with the same beautiful Scandinavian good looks of the S60 and V70/XC70. The XC90 set all sorts of safety records for SUV’s and it quickly went on to become one of the best-selling European SUV’s. Thanks to GM, Saab got a badge-engineered Chevy Trailblazer with the key between the seats that has become nothing but a sales disaster and the butt of jokes and snide comments by Saab lovers and haters alike.
In 2004, Ford gave Volvo the new Volvo-designed C1 platform as the basis of the new S40 and V50. These Swedish-built cars all come with those same Volvo-designed and Volvo-built engines and a striking dash design unlike anything else in it’s class. The S40 and V50 also feature the same elegant distinctive styling of the S60 and V70 and the car has excellent safety ratings. GM gave Saab a Subaru Impreza Wagon with a different front fascia.
Also in 2004, Ford let Volvo build the S60R and V70R. These cars came with 300 hp and 300 ft-lbs of torque from a 2.5 liter Volvo-designed and Volvo-built engine, Brembo 4-piston calipers and 14″ rotors on all four corners, along with the latest Haldex awd system. More importantly they featured the Swedish-developed Ohlins 4c system, one of the best active suspension systems on the market. These cars also combined the beautiful styling of the S60 and V70 with more aggressive front and rear end treatments and a whole host of distinctive exterior and interior colors that weren’t available on any other Volvo model. After 5 years of underpowered, fwd-only 9-3 Aeros, in 2008 GM let Saab build the Turbo-X. The Turbo X makes 280 hp and 300 ft-lbs of torque from a 2.8 liter v6 that is built in Australia, has the latest Haldex awd system, the same single-piston calipers as the standard Aero models, and a lowered suspension compared to the Aero models. It comes in only one color combination, black on black and the Aero’s don’t bring anything new to the playing field either in terms of exteriors and interiors.
I’m not even going to try to compare the current S80/V70/XC70 to the current 9-5. I love the 9-5, and it was a great car …back when Clinton was president. But at least it’s nice to know that GM saved money by axing the replacement 9-5 that was due back in 2003, the one that would have shared it’s platform with the Alfa Romeo Brera. I’m sure the investors and beancounters in Detroit were happy about that one…
So before you bash Volvo, look at Volvo in this decade and look at Saab in this decade and tell me why Volvo builds anything but real Volvos and how Saab is anything more than a hollow brand through which GM wants to sell more GM’s.
If GM’s handling of Saab in this decade isn’t outright mismanagement, I don’t know what is.
I’m not saying it’s not salvageable, but the 9-4x left me with some serious doubts and I’ll have to see the 9-1 and new 9-5 for my opinion of the GM-Saab relationship to change.
Well said Alex. - Harsh but true.
Tangental to this - the consistent perception/existance of a disconnect between Saab & GM may or may not be the case but the net result is all that matters. Saab may well behave like insolent children. GM may well be full of stony-brained beancounters or perhaps a combination of the two. Regardless, the net output is disappointing and that must surely be on Rick Wagoners radar by now. I hope the current talkfest about Saabs new energy & budgetary commitment in development actually delivers some cars that we can buy.
Alan Mullaly over at Ford is in charge of an even greater mess but they still manage to produce some pretty decent cars without 10 year gaps between models or 2 model line-ups per marque.
Reading this nearly decennial overview & comparison by Alex is like ‘taking a bitter pil’ (sorry, freely translated from dutch, i’m sure there is a better english sentence).
But point is, in the end he is right, no matter I dislike the recent V70 and the XC60 isn’t looking better, this V70 is selling more than actual 9-5 estate, same as it did in previous generation.
The Aero-X picture with Saturn-badge says it in a more funny way. It would be better if GM kept the innovations for a while at saab instead of draining them towards the other GM-brands, like there are the BioPower, the XWD, the Turbo-technology in general and the TTiD in specific, the SVC-project if that ever comes back to life, more safety-issues (hasn’t got most cars at least 4 or 5 EuroNCAP-stars or similar?), the Diesel Hybrid Tecgnology, the BioPower Hybrids, …
The way to promote Saab as a premium works if you give the brand many exclusive items that the other (GM-) brands simply do not have in their catalogues.
Saab needs urgent a status as a ‘technologic leader’ in the industrie, not just another follower.
And indeed , another design studie or concept car isn’t much of a help. The cars just be produced an driven.
must be prodived and driven, that is.
Yeah that’s not to say that Ford isn’t mismanaginf it’s PAG brands either. They spent so much money on giving Land Rover four excellent all-new models only to criminally under-advertise them. The fact that the Landy’s sell so slowly is even sadder when you realize that they are some of if not the best vehicles in their respective classes.
The same goes for Jaguar, they spent all of that money on the advanced aluminum unibody for the XJ then they torpedoed its hopes of becoming the segment-buster that it could have been by making it look nearly identical to the 15+ year old outgoing model. As to the X-type, that car was almost as much of a rolling abortion as the 9-7x and 9-2x were.
Volvo on the other hand has excellent engines (just google their 3.2 inline six and T6), excellent platforms, and excellent interiors, but they made the same blunder that Jaguar did with the XJ. The if the current S80 and V70 had distinctive, Scandinavian exteriors to match their stunning interiors then maybe they’d be worth the exorbitant sums of money that Volvo asks for them. Likewise I think they’d actually sell S40’s, V50’s, and C30’s in the US if they could slash the price by ~2-5k to bring them down to GTI/Jetta/Jetta wagon prices.
At the end of the day however, it just seems like Ford is much more committed to giving Volvo good products that are also “Volvos” than GM seems to be about making real “Saabs” instead of the American-designed, German-engineered and Swedish-badged poser mobiles that they seem to be moving in the direction of.