2009 Saab Turbo X: Not Quite X-traordinary
Saab: the awkward years and now
I am not a Saab naysayer. I have always found the slightly quirky cars a nice balance to all of the Luminas and Cavaliers cranked out over the years by the “designers” (and I use that term loosely) from mothership General Motors. I also, admittedly, generally only write about cars I like and I WANT to like the Turbo X. But I don’t; and like most bad things these days it’s because of money.
First the good news:
One of the main reasons Saab has failed to make much of an impression in the U.S. is because of Saabs rather lackluster performance in comparison to other European luxury cars. In that regard the Saab earns higher marks than is usually expected. Instead of the front-wheeled drive we’ve come to expect all Turbo X models come with all-wheel drive and a pretty exceptionally turbocharged 2.8-liter V6 that produces 280 horsepower. Finally Saabs horsepower numbers are at least in the ball park of their sport sedan cohorts. Turbocharging is something Saab has nearly 30 years’ worth of experience doing, so the Turbo X does it and does it well; without any lag of power that has plagued the Turbo’s reputation in the past. Best of all, Saab generates all its torque at low engine speeds: 2,150 r.p.m., which, means the power is immediately available, providing great acceleration the moment you step on the gas pedal. In terms of handling, the AWD is great, perhaps even the best of the cars in its class.
Turbo X: Not lagging far behind the competition
Now the bad news: All of this available power sucks down gas at an abysmal rate.
The Turbo X’s EPA rating of 15 m.p.g. in the city and 24 m.p.g. on the highway is worse than any of its competitors and worse than larger cars like the all-wheel drive Cadillac CTS. In Saab’s defense, I’ve read that it gets marginally better gas mileage on the highway than what the EPA rating states. So maybe I’ll give it a pass on that.
While the exterior and interior styling itself, for that matter, is quite attractive and very much in league with other luxury cars, the execution comes across as cheap. Like much of GM’s products, there is too much hard plastic alongside the upscale leather upholstery and carbon fiber trim. Additionally, fit and finish is an issue with a car trying to be talked about in the same breath as Audi or Lexus; a big no-no. And while it is nice, it isn’t quite nice enough for a car that costs, wait for it…….over $40,000.
That’s bad news #2. The 2009 Turbo X starts at $41,765 for the sedan, $42,565 for the wagon, and is nicely equipped at $44,560. In a competition where your rivals are the Audi A4, BMW 225xi, Lexus IS 250 AWD and Volvo S80, all of them AWD vehicles; the Turbo X is the priciest entry of the bunch.
While the Turbo X performs admirably it really hasn’t earned the right to be the most expensive car in that group.
I’ll be right behind you if they get rid of the turbo and give me a supercharger instead. Saab has always had really comfortable seats. I hope this is not a manual only model as I insist on an automatic transmission.
Words by Jessika on August 5, 2008 at 11:36 am | #
The guy who wrote this article is cluess what a Saab Turbo X is. First and foremost the Turbo X is a Limited Edition car. Seems the editor know’s nothing of xwd drive and yes XWD not AWD drivetrain. It’s a cross transfer all wheel drive train let you get that on beemer or audi.
There is so many things left out and the reason why this car really shines to comment on, best to disreguard the editors write up and read one where editor know what he his talking about.
Words by James on August 15, 2008 at 12:47 pm | #
I’m sorry I gave the impression that this was not a solid car in many ways, “Turbo X: Not lagging far behind the competition.” It does handle well, but the “XWD” of the Saab whose handling I commended as being “great” is not unique to this “limited edition” model. In fact, you may get it (and most other options on this vehicle) on less expensive Saabs. In fact, the paint job may be the only thing special about it. The engine is the same as in other Saabs as well, but without a torque limiter. The XWD itself is simply a pre-emptive system that does not rely on front wheel slippage to engage. Truth be told, and I’ll allow you to make your own conclusions once you’ve driven both cars, the xDrive, (by BMW no less) which I have not had the pleasure of driving, is thought by many to be superior to the XWD. From BMW, “xDrive acts in advance, actively withdrawing drive power from the axle with less grip and re-distributing this power to the wheels benefiting from greater traction on the road beneath.” Sounds awfully similar to Saabs doesn’t it? In Grant Yoxon’s test drive last October he felt that the XWD system would not allow the kind of driving, even at lower speeds, that those looking for a performance sedan might want. It may make the car safer, but certainly not more fun. Finally, I will reiterate that the performance of the “X” was not the issue, but actually the price. Limited Edition or not, most would not think a cheaply finished Saab should be more expensive than the other AWD, XWD or WHATEVER-Drive vehicles mentioned as its competitors. Thanks for reading James! Hope that clears things up.
Words by Geoff Scheusner on August 15, 2008 at 4:23 pm | #
To be fair the Turbo X does come pretty much fully loaded. I suspect that it is significantly cheaper than all of the cars you listed if equipped comparably, except for the IS250 (which is significantly slower, by 1.5-2 seconds to 60). The S80 is also considerably slower and isn’t really a sports sedan anyway.
Words by Tim on September 11, 2008 at 5:02 pm | #