There’s been an interesting discussion taking place in the BBTH Halloween entry for the last few days about the place of the 9-3 Sport Sedan in Saab’s history book. I think some of the criticism is accurate and some of it’s a bit rough. So let’s talk about it….

The main point of criticism with the car is that it’s not “Saaby” enough to some. It doesn’t have a hatch and has a comparatively generic GM-based engine. A few described it as being a future candidate for the label as “the worst Saab ever” with the disclaimer that the 9-7x and 9-2x don’t count as they weren’t ground-up Saab designed vehicles.
So what’s the story?
Well, from my point of view, I think the 9-3 is compromised somewhat but I don’t hold the car, nor the designers at fault for that.
The Saab 9-3 has been described as missing that certain panache that made Saab’s so distinct in earlier years and I can certainly see whare that comment comes from. Saab’s iconic designs are the hatches of the late 20th century. The sporting looks, combined with the comfort, space and versatility offered by the hatch layout were an outstanding success for Saab and they built a very loyal following on the back of it.
The decision to release the 9-3 with only a sedan version and bring the Combi version much later wasn’t great a great one, especially as Swedes love their wagons so much. I’m sure the home market suffered much lower sales than it could have if the wagon had emerged at the same time as the sedan instead of coming some two-and-a-bit years later.
But let’s be certain of one thing: the fault there lay with Saab, and Saab alone.
I’ve spoken to people who were working there at the time and they assure me that when the 9-3 model range was conceived, it was a full range. This included the sedan, combi, convertible, as well as either a coupe or a hatch version of the car.
If you’re fairly new to Saab, you may not know that Saabs expenditure got way out of control around this time. The corporate owner, GM, had laid off Saab to a large extent but when they finally noticed the degree to which their Swedish subsidiary was bleeding money, they went hands-on in a big way. An added complication was the fact that Saab engineered the 9-3 in such a way that the car couldn’t be built anywhere other than Saab’s factory in Trollhattan, an much of technology that Saab employed in this car could only be used in the 9-3 (the fibre-optic system, for example).
As a consequence, GM called a halt to model development and suspended all variations of the Saab 9-3 other than the existing sedan and convertible and soon-tom-come SportCombi version.
It’s not the outcome we would have liked, but it’s how it played out. Saab’s head honcho in Sweden at the time, Peter Augustsson, resigned his position as a result and weve Jan-Ake Jonsson in charge ever since. Saab have reduced their costs by around 33% since 2005 and it’s only because of this that they’ll continue to have a presence in vehicle manufacturing into the future.
So if you like the prospects of a Saab being built in Sweden in years to come, you’ve got the restraint of the 9-3 program to thank for it.
——
In objective terms, some could make the argument for the current Saab 9-3 being described as the best Saab ever.
* It’s definitely the safest Saab ever, having earned multiple top safety awards all around the world. The 9-3 range employ more passive and active safety features than any Saab that’s come before it.
* It’ll probably prove to be one of the most reliable Saabs ever. Whilst there were early problems with interior parts and electronics, these were ironed out eventually and I think that once the data plays out, it’ll show 2004 or 2005-onwards model years were pretty solid.
* It’s got the most dynamic chassis ever in a Saab. 9-5 owners might want to disagree here, but I’ve spoken to several engineers and test drivers about this over the last few years. The 9-5 is a great driver’s car, but the 9-3 has a significantly higher potential for development. In many ways, the 9-3 has been held back by the 9-5′s need to be the top of the tree, a position which only changed in 2008 when the Turbo X topped the 9-5 for horsepower.
* It’s got the best interior in a Saab. Ok, it hasn’t.
——
And that leads us to those subjective things, which are probably the building blocks for any arguments against the 9-3.
The lack of Saabiness – This is an argument based mostly around the body style. As explained above, the restriction of body styles is a problem that Saab largely brought upon themselves. The sedan was the hot sector of the market at the time the car was being developed, so it was a no-brainer to bring that first. The fact that it wasn’t accompanied straight away by cars that purists might consider more Saaby is something we’ll have to live with in the hope that it’ll be remedied in future models.
This certainly doesn’t render the 9-3 as unSaaby, however. The car is still a great looking machine and I think future Saab museum-like timelines will show the design fits very well in historical context. The 2008 iteration of the car is suffering not from a lack of design ethos, quality or appeal (it’s subjective, I know) but more from a lack of support in terms of pricing and marketing structures.
This is a great car. I’d love one.
The lack of Swedishness – I think GM are still finding their feet with Saab. Where Saab used to design cars for the Swedish market and then find niches and success elsewhere in the world, the 9-3 was largely built with the US and Western European markets in mind. I think this will still be GM’s future mindset when it comes to Saab development, but I think they’ve learned a lesson from the 9-3 that they won’t soon forget.
The 9-3 sedan is certainly the most generic of the ground-up Saabs, but it’s still a very sophisticated car that doesn’t show it’s full colors until you drive one for a while. It still has the Saab-ish virtues of driver comfort, safety, ergonomics and power-when-you-need-it, it’s just that these virtues aren’t wrapped in as much of a distinctive package as some earlier cars.
The other thing to note about Swedishness is that Saabs are going to be designed and built in places other than Sweden from now on. That’s just a fact. The input of Swedish-trained and inspired people is going to be somewhat limited as time goes on. Engines will no longer be designed and built exclusively in Sweden. This is also a fact. There will still be input from Saab-trained designers and engineers, but it’s a fact of business today that Saab is part of a global company and will receive input from various sources around the world.
We, the people, have to press GM on the fact that Saab are a unique brand with a unique identity and hold them to that in the best interests of keeping the Saab identity alive. We, the market, will keep GM accountable for that and Saab, the brand, will suffer if the corporates don’t recognise this.
The interior – If I’ve got one major bugaboo with this car, it’s the interior. A car’s interior is really important to me as it’s where you spend the most time. The 2008 Saab 9-3 interior is vastly improved in NVH terms, but still lacks some of the ‘feel’ of a Saab interior.
The seats are still magnificent. The controls are still in the right places (with the exception of the power window switches, which should be centered instead of on the doors). The visibility is still good and the road feel is still fantastic.
But there’s still something missing. Maybe it’s the dark/light room theming? Maybe it’s the lack of luxurious materials in the dashboard area?
I think a certain amount of it has to do with the dashboard layout: the button dash vs the more generic 2007-onwards dash. The button dash lended a degree of visual richness and sophistaction that’s been lost since it was cast aside at the end of 2006.

——
Conclusion
I think we’re all looking for better things to come from Saab in the future. There’s no doubt that Saab has suffered from a lack of a clear identity in the last few years. Slow model development might have been OK prior to the rise of the internet, but nowadays people expect things to move faster than that. GM have let Saab get caught napping to a large extent.
But don’t let that derail your thinking, especially when it comes to the quality of the Saab 9-3. The design polarises people to some degree, as great designs should. It has great powerplants, great dynamics and great owner amenity.
Are Saab positioning and pricing it correctly? Maybe, but I suspect the current positioning has more to do with next year’s new 9-5.
But make no mistake: this is a great car to drive and I’m sure owners will suggest that it’s a great car to live with.
-