Comments on: Reconsidering the AMS Insignia 9-5

By: Congolese

Congolese — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 16:14:55 +0000

IMO It’s the US/China Buick Regal, an Opel Insignia with a new grille
Makes sense as Opel are to be sold as Buick rather than Saturn in the US/China

By: Konsta

Konsta — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:58:59 +0000

If you go waayy back, when launched the 9-5 pretty much set the standards for a fwd-car. It beat pretty much everything in comparos despite being “just” a stretched Vectra. There are apparently some very competent peeps at Trollhättan chassis department.

The fact that 9-5 will use the the most premium components the platform allows bodes well too.

By: Me

Me — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 06:10:09 +0000

Guys,
the car is a 100% Insignia, why is it disguised ?
Who of you wants to peel all the black tape snipets ?

By: Greg Abbott

Greg Abbott — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:25:37 +0000

I’ve always been fond of those sketches – I hope they do not deviate from that too much (albeit with normal sized wheels).

I made the decision to pass on a Turbo X, to wait for the next 9-5 (plus my natural car buying cycle would hit in 2010-11 anyway). Given the 9-5 delays and GM financial crisis that have intervened in the meantime, perhaps this was not the best decision.

By: svenml

svenml — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:38:53 +0000

Speaking of road handling, I’m pretty sure I read somewhere that the 9-5 is supposed to have better suspension setup than the Insignia. Double wishbone front suspension compared with McpHerson on the Insignia, if I’m not mistaken. That may take care of the premium handling, I guess.

By: Mats

Mats — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:36:47 +0000

Well in all fairness, the Insigna is an exceptional car, it’s the first Opel that I’ve felt some kind of attraction too…

By: Ken H

Ken H — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:14:15 +0000

My point was not to critizise platform sharing, but a worry that the promises of an exceptional 9-5 are as precise as the promises for an exceptional Insignia were. Not to be confused.

By: ctm

ctm — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 09:08:26 +0000

Just because two cars shares the platform and some other pieces, doesn’t not mean they will be the same. They can tweak things like handling any way they want and create cars with different characteristic. The main reason for using platforms is to share the development costs, to have common mounting points for things like engines, gearboxes, fuel tank, etc., and to be able to build the cars at different factories since the whole assembly line and its tooling is built around some key measurements of the platform.

I rather have Saab using a proven platform, than fooling around with some weird specialized thing that is not tested enough and only make the cars more expensive without any other gains. That’s not what Saab needs at the moment.

By: Ken H

Ken H — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:40:44 +0000

I just got a bad feeling…
Before Insignia was launched, the designer stated it was going to be “like nothing else seen in the class”. It was more or less a revolution, according to the designer. We’ve seen later that it was not exactly October 1917….

Now Saab is using somewhat similar words, can the difference between the promises and the end product be so dramatic as in the case Insignia?

Hopefully not.

By: Joe Meek

Joe Meek — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 05:01:19 +0000

I love the head up display (HUD)!