Comments on: Channel 4 put 1.6T into Saab 9-5

By: Kelek0o

Kelek0o — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 21:39:56 +0000

Hey if it gets the job done. Will the new 9-5 Aero really receive XWD and a turbocharged V6 that puts out 350hp? I hope so. I’ve read that on a few other websites…

By: Adrian

Adrian — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 18:31:13 +0000

As has been said – VW’s TFSI. CO2 is king in europe these days, and that means diesel – but diesel running costs are now getting towards the same as those of petrol. Add in the well-known issues common rail diesels have with mis-fuelling (chuck petrol in, wave good-bye to a couple of grand for injection pumps etc) and failing dual-mass flywheels (needed to smooth them out) – and the peakiness of the rev range, and there’s going to be a kick towards petrol if they can get the CO2 towards the same level.

Not only are higher-CO2 cars much more expensive to tax over here, but the UK’s company car tax rules say that cars with high CO2 can’t be written-down in the accounts anywhere near as quickly as they’ll actually depreciate.

The lowest-CO2 9-5 is currently enough above that threshold that there’s no way massaging can get it under. Only 1.9TiD (not TTiD) manual-box 9-3s come in under. The Passat TFSI is under that limit. If they can sneak the forthcoming 9-5 under that limit, fan-bloody-tastic…

By: albert

albert — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:52:16 +0000

As long as Mercedes-Benz is doing good business with the base E-Class equipped with a 1.8 liter supercharger engine with an output of 184 hp/ 250 Nm, then why could Saab not sell a good 1.6 with DI-turbo-VVT etc. in a 9-5??

By: Joel

Joel — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:07:01 +0000

I think the ideal Saab small engine would be the 1.6 SVC inline 5, but also with a small turbo bolted on. Twincharged, that thing would HAUL! Plus it would still get great gas mileage, not take up too much space, and that extra cylinder would make it even more torquey!! BUILD IT, SAAB!

By: saabluster

saabluster — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:42:16 +0000

I cannot believe what I’m hearing from Saab folks here. Without any knowledge of just how much power the 1.6 would have they are dismissing it offhand. How long have we complained about people who court other brands dismissing Saab when they hear it has a 4 cylinder without ever driving them. I don’t care if they put a .6 liter in a Saab as long as it has the power we need. Doing more with less. Its the Saab way. In more way than one. Where have the real Saab fans gone.

By: NJ_Nick

NJ_Nick — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:38:56 +0000

They can put a lawn mover engine in the base model for all I care. But if SAAB does not have a NG 9-5 Aero that measure up to the top performing engines of the competition (i.e. BMW 5-series and Audi A6), I will be forced to go and cry on the shoulders of a Caddie-dealer. Brrrr…..

By: Bernard

Bernard — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:25:53 +0000

In related news, the 2009 Audi A6 will have a 2.0 125 kW (170 hp) base gasoline engine, so there’s no reason to think that Saab won’t be competitive with a 1.6 if they can match the torque and power. The 2.3T would get 180 hp if scaled-down to 1.6, and that’s without direct injection.

By: WooDz

WooDz — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:53:56 +0000

Tompa: I think you are becoming a bit too fanatical about Saab.
Volkswagen and Audi do a very good job in sharing engines
Some will buy the Passat over an A4 because essentially it is the same car but many still buy Audi for the name, extra quality and prestige.

By: Saaboy

Saaboy — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:29:08 +0000

Before anything else, SVC would be SICK! Who knows, maybe there was something else goin on at Saab these past few years also? Anyways…

Everyone that’s complaining about having a ‘little’ ’1.6′ liter engine in a big ‘flagship’ 9-5… whats the big deal? Its not gonna be the top of the line engine choice, but its gonna be an excellent choice for a lot of european markets! I have no doubt its gonna have decent torque and such…

And yes, I love my 2.3T aero engine.

By: Markac

Markac — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 10:30:59 +0000

Swade, I think a 1.6T would be okay in the next “lighter, slightly smaller and more chuckable” 9-3,
but I’m not sure it’s appropriate for the current one. Not sure I’d really fancy a current 9-3 combi with that engine and certainly not with XWD!