Safety: bad test, hopeful result

Safety’s always been a priority of the Saab brand.  The 9-3 and 9-5 ranges all have 5-star Euro NCAP ratings and in this case, it’s saved someone’s life, though he’s still in dangerous waters.

The young, 17 year old driver collided with an SUV a few days ago in Michigan.  No-one’s clear on what happened other than both drivers sustaining critical injuries.  The good thing is that the relatively smaller sedan, a Saab 9-5 9-3 (thanks Greg) by the looks of things, survived the collision with a larger SUV in seemingly good shape, and the inbuild safety from Saab most likely saved this young guy’s life.

As you can see from the photo below, the SUV is in a fair mess whilst the Saab looks in fair shape from the firewall back.  Here’s hoping both drivers are OK in the long run.  The SUV was being driven by a young 21 year old woman.

Thanks Ted for the tip.

You may also like


  1. I dunno Greg, I had it pegged as a 9-5 due to the point of the tail lights down the side of the body, but on further inspection I think you could be right.

    All this tells me one thing: as great as they are, the current Saabs aren’t as distinctive as they used to be…

  2. It’s unfortunate this accident occured, but I think this is a good example of differences between Saabs and other GM products… or any other cars. I’m glad you (swade) recognized the difference between the 9-3 and the SUV, crumple zones.

    I’m not sure what this part is called, but the beam coming down from the roof to the dash area on the 9-3 looks untouched, as the one on the SUV has been bent to make a nice 90 degree angle :).

  3. So, a Saab 93 performs brilliantly in a crash with an SUV – a GM Blazer whose A pillar and footwell collapse. Is that the same GM Chevy Blazer that is the base of the Saab 97 then?

    So how safe is the 97?

    Answer: Its not a Saab, its a GM product with its outer skin facelifted, but teh same structure underneath. Hail the 93s crash performance as superb, decry the GM SUV and worry about teh so-called Saab version

  4. Well, the SUV in the picture is the previous generation Blazer, not the current generation TrailBlazer. And the current TrailBlazer is substantially different than the older Blazer. As poorly as the Blazer did in this crash, it is not a commentary about the 9-7x.

  5. The SUV indeed did very poorly in this crash, but one cannot really judge about the Saab. This has been an offset crash situation (like most frontal crashes are), both cars had some rotation arround their vertical axis during impact. This means that the the left side of the Saab which cannot be seen on the picture has probably a lot more damage than the right side of the vehicle.
    On the other hand the Saab does not seem to have any deformation of the roof, so it can be assumed that there had been a lot less intrusion into the passenger compartment compared to the SUV.

  6. Another thing:

    I think the new Saabs are still very distinctive, but in more subtle ways. I can spot a 900 a mile away, well I can spot a 9-5 a mile away too. The 9-3SS has a rounded trunk-line, the 9-5 has a spoiler built into the trunk, this, among many other things, makes them very easy to tell apart. So the way I could tell immediately that there was a 9-3SS in this picture, and not a 9-5, was that the edge of the trunk had a soft form (rounded edge) as opposed to the hard, slightly protruding lip of the 9-5s.

    If you parked a 9-3SS and a 9-5 side by side in a rain storm, the rain would roll off the trunk lid of the 9-3SS, but it kind of pools on the trunk-lid of a 9-5.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *