2008 Saab 9-5 BioPower Review
April 18, 2008 by Matt Brogan
At the very least, it sounds good. “How do you do? I drive a Saab 9-5…BioPower!” Yes it definitely sounds good. But only 3 minutes had passed and I was already being questioned by other motorists.
“Does that run on electricity?” – “No sir, it actually runs mostly on Ethanol”
“Can you put vegetable oil in that thing? I saw that on TV” – “No sir, it actually runs mostly on Ethanol”
*large man in a Hummer H3* “Are those stickers a joke?” – “No sir, it actually…. forget it.”
Thankfully, you can buy this car without the BioPower stickers and it will look and feel like any other Saab 9-5, just with a small BioPower badge on the boot.
It also won’t come with 263 BioPower flyers in the boot.
Sitting inside the 9-5 is somewhat disappointing, there is nothing to make you go “wow”. It’s just… plain. It’s one of those, “here is an interior” interiors. As Matt said, the switchgear and the whole set up looks rather outdated and you have to pinch yourself to remember it costs 60k+.
My biggest problem with the 9-5 BioPower, however, wasn’t the interior or the quirky exterior, it was the fuel economy. I was expecting fuel usage of around 6-7L/100km given the BioPower badge, but the official fuel usage is rated at 10L/100km and you’d be lucky to achieve even that!
To sum it up: This car will make you hate driving. (It was gettin there with me!).
Perhaps that’s the motive behind Saab’s BioPower concept?
I like that you guys have the balls to tell it as it is – well done.
SAAB, get with the program!
My previous car was a SAAB. (the ex’s choice! grrrr)
I recently sold it after after the 3 year lease expired for a $20,000.00 loss.
I am NEVER touching the brand again. And you all shouldn’t either! :OP
while the 9-3 is good that thing is ancient in car years it must be about 100
Ummmmmmm the 9-3 isn’t good. I had my first 9-3 (an 04 model) replaced with a new one after 6 months as it was a lemon. Cost me a packet in lawyer fees but I finally got my way.
Go to wwwDOTsaabcentralDOTcom and chq out the 9-3 forums.
Just giving a friendly pointer so that others don’t make the same mistake :O)
Great looking car the 9-3, underneath its all pretty horrible.
I blame GM.
I owned a 1986 Saab 900 for a while. Great car, solidly built, handled very well and you felt good behind the wheel. This was before GM took them over and, well, they seem to continue their slide down to being forgotten about.
I thought the point of Ethanol fuels was to become an alternative and cheaper option to unleaded, and not fuel efficiency or CO2 emmissions??
You have Leather as a $4000 option in your options list. It is in fact standard. The option of “Premium Natural Leather” is $4000.
Apparently the new 95 in to be shown at a Motorshow later this year and is going to be pretty damn amazing.
I’m a fan of the 93 – its a very good looking thing. The 93 aero with its 184kW is a superb looking machine that hammers quite well and the drive train is silk smooth although, the upshifts take every bit as long as Volvo’s. Must be a Swedish thing.
I agree, the 95 Estate is not a good looking thing at all and is in desperate need of a re-style.
Well, at least it’s not a rebadged, current-gen Impreza.
Can you imagine THAT with a Saab badge?!?!
Thats why they are called a car for life …. you are always so upside down at the end of the lease the only way to get out of it is buy another Saab as they have so much profit margin in their new cars they can bail you out
And u said they don’t have auto wipers, but they do :p
Anthonia, the 9-3 Aero now has 188kW
Hey caradvice, are you guys going to do a review of the 93 Turbo X ?
Now that’s a hot Saab.
My cousin has one of these but its normal diesel. Its nice to sit in the back of – can I say any more?
Eddy – I know the spec sheet says it has auto wipers, but believe me, if they were fitted, they certainly didn’t work. In fact, the wipers were almost useless – period.
Saabs are such a ripoff. If not for their range of convertibles, they would be finished by now.
You’re absolutely correct Eddy, even better at 188k. I’m surprised that Saab doesn’t employ AWD on any of its passenger sedans or wagons, given their safety image. No doubt a cost thing! But then again, Subaru can do it with cars which retail for half the price?
Anothnia, the new Saab turbo will be AWD, that should be lots of fun. I do agree though,the Aero specs really need to be AWD
India,China also Egypt and theres probably more,recently suspended grain exports for fear they would not have enough for there domestic market.And another reports says where headed for a world wide food shortage in the future.MAKING FUEL FROM FOOD SEEMS DUMB.I don’t think ethanol is the way forward.
Agree, Making fuel from food is morally bankrupt!!!!!
Alborz – with regards to emissions…..the BioPower does put out a higher raw figure, but the point of BioPower is reduced fossil fuel emissions. So when you’re running it on E85, it reduces fossil fuel emissions significantly as the fuel isn’t pure dino-juice.
I’m betting the house on a new 9-5 for 2009 being shown at the Paris Motor Show later this year. I love the 9-5 to bits but this new one is well overdue.
Although I agree in most part of what has been written, there are a few points I would like to make.
I think the comments on the brakes are over exaggerated. I’ve never thought that any 9-5 I’ve driven was not going to to stop in time. I find them responsive and on par with any standard vehicle on the market today.
The author complains about the extra body roll on the 16″ wheels, but to me this points out that the vehicle was probably lacking sport suspension as this was the Linear version he was testing.
Lastly I like to clarify the BioPower issue.
Before I start though, I would like to mention that I think it is irresponsible for major companies like Shell, BP, etc not to supply E85. We see plenty of adverts showing they are heavily investing in BioFuels but I don’t see anything at the pumps.
Right… BioPower or BioEthanol if you wish.
BioEthanol will not reduce the C02 coming out the back of your car. If it registers 238g then that’s the amount the engine is churning out. The difference being with E85 is that approximately 70% of that C02 is non-fossil fuel based. Some may wonder why 70% and not 85% as E85 contains 85% recycled fuel.
The 70% is based on a ‘Well to wheel’ calculation meaning that a certain percentage of fossil fuel has been burnt in converting the Bio-mass into ethanol.
So the real figures are, out of 238g of Co2 only approximately 72g is fossil CO2 based. Which make this Saab 9-5 considerably more environmentally friendly than the Toyota Prius that can only burn your normal plumbed out the ground Fossil Fuel.
The other misconception is that E85 will reduce fuel consumption; It will not. E85 will increase fuel consumption by about 20%. However; you will gain an increase in performance which is mentioned in the article but not really explained why the performance dropped after filling up with 95RON. in this case the 2.3t produces 185hp on normal unleaded and 210hp on E85.
We should see an All New product late summer 2009. In the mean-time I suggest you actually take a 9-5 for a drive and judge for yourself and secondly Saab dealers are more than aware the the list price for this car is a bit high and they will be more than willing to strike you a deal.
I have got to say that Saabs are ageing alot! I reckon the 9-3 looks better that the 9-5.
The rear light set up reminds me of the HSV Maloo Ute.
Many thanks for that explanation WooDz – clears up the BioPower bit, I guess many (like myself) simply look at the CO2 rating without dwelling deeper. Obviously a need for better marketing then.
Are we not forgetting the fact that bioethanol reduces our dependency on oil? Maybe there is food shortage too, but at least it is a renewable source unlike oil.
I own a 99 95 s and have had know major issues at all with this car…
For those bagging the brand do some homework GM owns 100% of saab and more than 50% of suburu they do make 4wd versions thats what the x is, TARD
The issue is that in the U.S SAAB make the 4wd check out the saab.com us website now the last time i drove my car im pretty sure it was rhd and in america, for those of you who didnt know, they drive on the left of the car…Im sure you guys knew that hey..it’s just that you need to think before you type…
FOR THOSE BAGGING THE BRAND GOTO ANY BRAND REVIEW ON HERE AND YOU WILL FIND NEGATIVE REPORTS FOR THEM ALL…PROVE ME WRONG BEFORE YOU GOB OFF TOO
I would reccomend a saab to anyone without hesitation it is the service and after sale service that can lack due to holden dealers selling and servicing them where in country regions and south aust
Forgive me for all the yelling above but I am passionate about my 95 as it has provided many years and more than 170k kms of trouble free economical motoring due to regular servicing and tlc just as any car from any maker would/should 4 airbags and 4 star safety for 1999 show me an aussie built car with the same standards, i know these where dearer, but you get what you pay for dont you….
Whilst im on the price issue blaim the gov for that. luxuary car tax…to protect the local car industry..thats great but in my mind this removes the element of competition due to pricing cars out of range of most australians