Still Away….

..but coming home soon.

Two guys emailed me overnight with a bunch of pictures. Unfortunately my email has a restrictive 10mb limit when I’m in webmail mode (away from home) so I had to delete them.

Edy G and Robert B – could you please re-send your emails to me at


Auto Motor and Sport have some new renderings that are apparently very close to what people in Sweden have had presented to them as the new 9-5 recently.

A number of dealers etc who check in here have also seen it, so what do you think? Hit the AM&S link for more images.

Saab 9-5 AMS


No update from 1985 Gripen yesterday – that XWD car must have worn him out good. Either that or he’s still asleep on his feather bed at the Ritz-Carlton.


Dissatisfied about the lack of XWD availability on the 2008 convertible, Kaz emailed Bob Lutz to find out why. Amazingly, he got a response!

I think there is a technical issue, in that the underbody reinforcements needed to give the convertible its extremely stiff structure (which is what makes it great) interfere with the driveshaft to the rear wheels. Sorry about that! It’s a real estate matter.

Kudos to you, Bob!

You may also like


  1. I quite like it, it appears to be A6 sized which is what Saab needs but it needs a bit of “Saabification” at the rear and in the detailing. Love the front of the car but Id love it even better with a more aggressive front a la 08 9-3.

  2. I quite like it. The profile shot that was posted with these images a while back had the car (mainly the D pillar back) looking a little long. Otherwise it looks great.

  3. we see more of the aero-x front. the grille doesn’t seem to be as deep, though. the light design that goes under the side grilles is very cool.

    i’m looking forward to the next-generation saab.

  4. i concur with what zippy wrote, about the front not being as “aggressive” (or “assertive”) looking as the model-year 2008, 9-3. i hope saab can continue the same intensity that the ’08 brings.

  5. This looks simply awesome, horn whatever. It oozes style and quality.

    Pity it will prob be unaffordable (see beemer).

    As for XWD on the convertible, if they can’t structure to have it on other sedan models …..

  6. The same question about the XWD for the vert was asked at the Saab USA roundtable session at the SOC. Mr. Shannon commented the convertibles are usually driven in good weather where you don’t really need awd. It’s also a low volume vehicle so it just isn’t worth the cost or it would make it too expensive. They kept the door strips on the vert so that indicates how important cost is.

  7. First off, the new 9-5 rendered speculation looks great, add a more assertive front fascia and maybe slightly more prominant taillights and it would be totally kickass IMO.

    Second, Bob Lutz is the man, regardless of what anyone says about him. He’s just awesome.

  8. It looks to be the same photoshoped render that AutoExpress showed 3 or 4 years ago, based on a Mauer sketch, and now updated with the Aero-X rear lights.

    Isn’t it?

  9. Tiago,

    agree, feels like a deja-vu. Still, looks promising despite the exaggerated proportions, although the C-pillar area is nothing like a Saab (VW Phaeton, perhaps?).

    The gas tank door, btw, is on the same side as in 96 an 99 – could it be that wrong ? Maybe this is the next Vauxhall Signum for RHD markets (smileyyyy) ?

  10. After my trip I had also emailed Swade.

    Saab would like to see XWD as an option across the complete range incl. the ‘9-1’ where Saab see this as the 2nd most important factor in producing this new compact vehicle.

    However it all comes down to a budget and Saab would rather invest in adding a XWD Diesel Sedan/Combi to their line-up first.

  11. the 9-5 hood just doesn’t look right to me … it just looks to “flat” compared to the AeroX and 2008 9-3 hoods that have much more depth … to me, if you cover the lights and bumpers the “flat” hood makes it look like a Chrysler Pacifica.

  12. The gas tank door is a relative point. I’d prefer it on the driver side too. But compared to current gen 9-3 and 9-5 models, it is opposite. πŸ˜‰

    Heck, maybe I need to think of alternate fuels. I’m thinking the next gen 9-5 should not need a gas tank door at all. Maybe it’s the hydrogen hookup nozzle door? Or electric plug port door? *lol* Oh wait, that’s the poop shoot, methenol for sure! j/k!

  13. I can’t stand it when the gas door is on the driver side. It just bothers me. It’s not something that would keep me from buying a car, but it would get on my nerves for a while.

Leave a Reply

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