Car Magazine – new 9-5!!!

Car Magazine has these pics, which look pretty similar to other Saab preliminary imagery we’ve seen over time. The first Aero-X pics were of similar quality and in a similar setting.

UPDATE: as noted by TuuSar and Bookalon in comments, the pics are attributed to ‘Radovan Varicak’ rather than Saab, hence it’s safe to say these are artist’s CGIs rather than a concrete sneak-peek into what might be coming. In my haste to post these I overlooked the attribution. My mistake.




The 9-5 will share the new Epsilon II architecture with Opel and Saturn, but it won’t be just a stretched Vectra. GM has engineered great flexibility into the architecture, enabling different lengths, wheelbases and tracks. Components will differ, too….

….Saab gets the plushest Epsilon components, with a double wishbone front suspension and multi-link rear axle biased towards sporty ride and handling. Air springs will also be offered…..

…..the blown petrol V6 should reach the 350bhp mark to raise the Aero bar.


Previous images of the 9-5 have been artists impressions and looking back at them, this image seems to be pretty consistent with what we’ve seen before.

Now, as sab ponders in comments, is it a hatch on the back there?

You may also like


  1. I would like Saab to come up with an innovation. Why not a hatchback where you can only open the lower “half” of it like a normal trunk when you don’t need to open the whole thing to get something big inside?

  2. they are cgi`s done by Radovan Varicak, i dont have much faith in his work, they look great and i would not complain about it if it was true but we will have to wait and see.

  3. looks great to me. I do not miss the hatch back what so ever. no other premium brands has that, and it does not feel very premium to me either… Prefer a sedan and a wagon.

    I just which that it would get the full aero x lights that goes all the way to the center….

    2 other things. read that saturn will start to sell the vectra, made in russelheim in the us, with expected production of 50k cars – after this, will there be capasity left for the 9-5 there or will it be made in Thn?

    Also, on the 9-3 face lift, from what I have read it will come with AWD, but I have not heard speculations re the crossover – would this not be natural considering the small additional cost (likely more expensive to develop the AWD than the plastic bumpers and higher suspention).


  4. My comments on the photos:

    1) This is CGI
    a) The C-Pillar is not hockey stick Saab like whatsoever
    b) You can tell it’s again CG, because they are using 9-X wheels in this.
    c) Rear looks like a Chrysler Sebring Sedan
    d) First photo on the side looks like the Dodge Magnum (yuck!)

    I am happy that this is no where close to the real thing, just another attempt at fooling us. Good thing we realize they failed miserably here.

  5. “multi-link rear axle biased towards sporty ride and handling”
    Are they going back to a solid axle for the fwd versions? Will they be able to use the ReAxs rear wheel steering with a solid axle (doubt it). An awd version wouldn’t use a solid axle.
    I once saw a rendering of a supposed new Saab 9-5 that was a left rear quarter shot where the car had ridiculous looking parallelogram-shaped tail lights sort of draping down over the left rear fender like something Salvador Dali would have designed. The second shot above looks remarkably like that rendering but with the rear end cleaned up Aero-X style. Can’t remember where I saw that other rendering.

  6. Eduard,
    Thanks, that Autocar rendering is the one I was talking about. These renderings just don’t say “Saab” to me. Sorry.

  7. I like it. As for the hockey stick, it would be easy enough to reshape the roof line to include it.

    Actually it’s missing an interesting texture from the Aero X — there’s raised curve on the hood which is quite attractive.

  8. I surely hope this is what the next 9-5 will look like. Its a beautiful CGI, simply put. What do you mean it doesn’t look like Saab to you? sorry if its not a knotchback, it has an aero-x front end, and Mauer’s rear end/aero-x rear end. I agree with the fact that a hatchback isn’t a premium feature, but I like the idea of having an innovative hatch/trunk combo, that would be very saabish to me.

  9. “doesn’t look like Saab to you?”

    Proportions are in overall wrong, looks awful and on front pic rear looks like mini-bus. Design is also wrong, Saab aint just going to copy paste supercar nose into family sedan.

  10. That’s a cropped trunk – not a hatch. Let’s say yes, please to the A-Pillars, no thank you to the Cadillac C-Pillars.

    Nice ride – I’ll take two.

  11. Why do all the new cars have huge wheels which require 15 series tires? They look unrealistic and impractical. Pretty soon, we’ll have metal wheels with a layer of rubber sprayed on?

  12. when everyone is saying that it should have some sort of hatchback function, are you guys saying that something similar to a mazda 5 door. if so i like that idea.

  13. i feel stupid now asking. i should nice lookin viggen in that pic. yep that viggens rear slope looks very similar to a mazda 6 5 door. i should have known my bad

  14. saaboy, I agree that the hatch is more saab, but it is not very premium. It also minimize the difference to the wagon (and if you do not have one, you lose one of the models).

    The hatch works for a smaller car (9-2?), but not for the top of the line.

  15. I can’t agree about a hatch not being in the premium field. The 9000 was right up there with all premium marques when it came out in the 80s and that was available in both hatch and booted versions. Just because other manufacturers don’t do their top models in hatch and booted i see no reason for Saab not to. The fact that others don’t should be a good reason for Saab to. The new 9-5 should be saloon with either boot or hatch, a wagon and a flat out 3 door a la Monaro with all the goodies and a stonking engine.

  16. Front end is like the acura TL. Rear end looks like a dodge intrepid (someone already mentioned the sebring). Overall I find it very boring and lacking distinction.

  17. Yeap: I see the differences too: the side’s design features are different between the renders: rear window frame shape, sides profille, B and C pillar, side-mirror…

    And it’s design, mainly on the sides (but also on the hood), is too bland, too simple: I’m sure the 9-5 will have more curved, sculptured shapes! I hope! 🙂

    But the rear end looks quite interesting: it’s a way of solveing a rear end with those Aero-X lights, without me having an heart-attack. 🙂

  18. What frustrates me about all of the renderings that I’ve seen is that nobody seems to notice the subtle (and elegant) continuation of the grille’s crossbar into the headlamp and rising up on the ends like the wings of a plane. It should be easy to spot a legitimate Saab image when such a design feature is recognized.

    I also think that when the rear is put into production you’ll see tail lamps such as those on the AeroX except that they’ll be connected by a chrome bar instead of a continuing lamp like what was on the 9000 CS model. GM always seems to take such an easy route once production starts.

  19. Where is the “Saab” in this car? Looks like an Opel to me so lets hope GM lets Saab build real Saabs instead of boring rehashes of Opel or dare I say Japanese designs.

  20. This comment comes WAY after this blog entry was posted, but I’ve been mulling it over: I like just about all of these next-gen suppositions by Photoshop-proficient SAAB fans. The molding of the AeroX-look into a sedan is more successful than I would have imagined. I like the lower, sleeker look (never have been a fan of the 9000/9-5 boxy look personally). I know the sacrifice will have to be passenger headroom though.

    As for some of SAAB’s signature design elements (like the hockey stick rear) missing, I too lament the move away from SAAB tradition, but lets face it, the design has to change SOMETIME. When did the “hockey stick” first appear? On the 99? So it’s not really too old of a “tradition” relatively speaking. Same with the ignition between the seats. I too will miss some of this SAAB uniqueness (some call it “quirkyness”) but SAAB has to move on designwise. You can’t sell a car that looks like the C900 to the masses anymore.

    This is actually a 9-5 I’d consider buying (at least based on the looks).

Leave a Reply

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