| iceman1331 |
Looks similar in many ways including even pricing.
Has anyone tested drive one? and how does it compared with X?
:4: |
|
|
| iceman1331 |
| It is SAAB 9-7X instead. My typo, sorry. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| nightguy |
| Pretty much the same as the TrailBlazer but lower and cooler looking. There is something that draws me to the Saab. I was surprised they kept the middle console ignition. |
|
|
| JL_SS |
quote:
Originally posted by nightguy
Pretty much the same as the TrailBlazer but lower and cooler looking. There is something that draws me to the Saab. I was surprised they kept the middle console ignition.
I read that Saab did a lot of tweaking (suspension,etc) to get as much of the GM out of it that they could. |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
| Saw it at the car show. Pretty non-descript if you ask me. Felt like a Highlander. |
|
|
| Sinecure |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator
Saw it at the car show. Pretty non-descript if you ask me.
My office is right next to a Snaab dealer. After all the commercials during the Tour de France about how it stands out from the SUV crowd, I expected it to be dramatically different looking. In the window it looks boring as hell. I haven't been inside to look yet. I suppose I could do that and report back. Maybe today if I'm bored at lunch (not likely since I need to get ready to leave on vacation tonight). |
|
|
| eurohazard |
I really like the look of the Saab 9-7X. I think it is one of the best looking SUVs. I have never driven one...
But I have a driven a 5 passenger Chevy Trailblazer with the 275 hp I6. I must say I was impressed with that vehicle overall. The whole package is probably 800% better than the crappy S-10 Blazer previously sold. The engine was smooth and powerful, also it may even "sound" a bit better than the MDX when revved to red line.
But the MDX is quicker and faster. |
|
|
| anjan |
Its looks quite good, I have to admit. Like others said, its just a modified Trailblazer which means it inherited its bad crash-worthiness and reliability. Even though its not bad in reliability as the Touareg or XC90, its still at the bottom of the heap. Also, the full time AWD system on it is lacking in the low range, according to reviews.
Another review says, "Like the Buick Rainier, the 9-7X comes standard with a rear air suspension. Yet it rides terribly. Over all but the smoothest roads the 9-7X rides nervously, reacting to just about every bump and divot and generally feeling queasy. Other GM SUVs manage to disguise their body-on-frame construction. Not this one. The suspension might be tight, but the structure it is attached to is not. The Saab 9-7X offers nothing that could not have been better accomplished through a sport suspension option on another GM midsize SUV. Handling is better, but ride quality is unacceptable, the worst of any vehicle I've driven in recent memory. Sure, a Honda S2000 has a harsher ride, but at least it feels all of a piece. I prefer harsh to nervous. But then the 9-7X's ride is both." |
|
|
| Paclark01 |
If someone is actually going to consider a Snaab 9-7x in the caliber as a MDX, you would have to seriously reconsider your current Acura ownership status.
Take a GMC Envoy out for a ride with the SLT package, and you have a Snaab 9-7x, and an Isuzu Ascender. I had the horrible experience of driving both, a Snaab, and the Envoy, and I must say... Crap is still crap. They look the same they ride very similar if you compare an Envoy SLE to the ride of the 9-7x, but place the Envoy SLT package in the Snaab, and place the ignition switch in a different location. And don't forget the squeaks and rattles. The Snaab I drove had 26 miles on it.
Take one out and I guarantee you that you will run back to you MDX... Quickly. |
|
|
| JeffK |
I believe the Saab was recently written up in either Popular Mechanics or the New York Times.
It is basically, as you have pointed out, a Chevy Trailblazer.
Major difference, besides the much higher price, is a better interior (boy is that important on an SUV!), moving of the ignition key to the center console (somethings change for the worse!) better suspension (why does the Trailblazer have the "worse suspension"?) seating for 5 instead of 7 (Now there is another step backward).
GM owns Saab and the Saab division is bleeding cash.
First GM/SAAB took a Subaru WRX, (GM owns 20% of Subaru) changed the front end, jacked up the price and tried to compete head on with Subaru. The real problem is that a potential customer looks at the WRX/Saab, with more horsepower, AWD than the front wheel drive Saab which cost $10,000 more!
Kinda makes you wonder what GM was thinking???? Now after looking at the WRX/SAAB, a person in the showroom immediately realizes that the balance of the Saab line is underpowered, overpriced and unreliable.
Is it any wonder that Saab is losing money?????
If GM has trouble selling the Trailblazer who do they think will be buying a SAAB version for $10,000 more????????
There are only some many Saab junkies out there!!!
JeffK |
|
|
| td284 |
| The Saab is a truck. Having owned a Chevy Blazer, a Mountaineer and an Explorer, there is no comparing the ride, safety, handling and quality of the MDX to any of those. The Saab looks nice, but it's a poorly finished Chevy underneath the smooth sheetmetal. |
|
|
| scoobs |
quote:
Originally posted by JeffK
If GM has trouble selling the Trailblazer who do they think will be buying a SAAB version for $10,000 more????????
There are only some many Saab junkies out there!!!
JeffK
???? GM sold 283,484 Trailblazers in 2004. |
|
|
| JeffK |
Yes I guess you are right.
So if they were selling so well, why the rebates and employee prices?
My information was that there was more than a 90 day supply on the dealers lots.
JeffK |
|
|
| ScoobyT |
quote:
Originally posted by scoobs
???? GM sold 283,484 Trailblazers in 2004.
With about 70% going to the government, fleets and rentals.
Kinda like the Tauruses and Malibus. |
|
|
| anjan |
There's an authority right there - Car and Driver :21: They know about cars as much as I know about astrophysics.
PS - I know nothing about astrophysics :) |
|
|
| JL_SS |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
There's an authority right there - Car and Driver :21: They know about cars as much as I know about astrophysics.
PS - I know nothing about astrophysics :)
Nobody said anything about Car and Driver being an authority but you......:rolleyes: . As always take an info link FWIW. |
|
|
| perk |
I don't think I've ever seen a car more generic. The car reminds me of a generic automobile you might see in a movie, where the producer has removed all distinctiveness so that you can't identify the car as any particular make.
I found the new TV commercials on the Saab SUV hilarious because the ad agency is trying to pass the car off as distinctive and different, while the car itself is agonizingly generic and ordinary. I assume that the folks at the ad agency got the job then immeidately realized that the car had no personality or distinctiveness. In an effort to avoid the obvious, the ad agency decided to pull a Clinton--i.e., tried to make everyone think the car is something other than the obvious. Talk about putting lipstick on a pig! |
|
|
| anjan |
| You mean like this? |
|
|
| afs12065 |
quote:
Originally posted by td284
The Saab is a truck. Having owned a Chevy Blazer, a Mountaineer and an Explorer, there is no comparing the ride, safety, handling and quality of the MDX to any of those. The Saab looks nice, but it's a poorly finished Chevy underneath the smooth sheetmetal.
That's exactly right. I traded in my 2001 9-3 for the MDX... after many years of owning SAABs. They gradually took on more and more of the cheap GM feel over time.
I waited for the 9-7 to come out and confirmed that it was, in fact, just a re-badged Chevy with many ill-fitting parts, squeaks, rattles, etc.
There truly is no comparison in the fit-and-finish... Acura has that one hands down. If you need power/torque the 9-7 may be worth it but for build quality, reliability and overall ride/handling were much more important.
Shame on SAAB for taking a WRX and re-branding it a 9-2 and now for taking a Chevy and calling it a 9-7. ICK. |
|
|
| mrlegend |
I don't want the first year of any vechicle. I really don't want anything that GM has anything to do with for at least 2 to 3 years.
If it cost about the same as an Acura and is about the same size; why not just buy the Acura? Just my $.02 |
|
|
| saloveku |
| Being a SAAB owner, my wife an Envoy driver and looking at the GM 9-7, there is no question that the MDX is a safer, ride with a greater fun factor. The SAAB may be a touch more luxurious; but it your driving a car with adequate crash test ratings if we assume the 9-7 ratings are going to be the same as the GM product. |
|
|
| wmquan |
quote:
Originally posted by saloveku The SAAB may be a touch more luxurious; but it your driving a car with adequate crash test ratings if we assume the 9-7 ratings are going to be the same as the GM product. [/B]
I agree. The second Saab rebadge is a terrible one. A sow's ear into a tattered, polyester purse. Just like the first one (Impreza becomes a 9-2X). All Saab seems to be doing is fiddling with the front sheetmetal and changing some interior bits (more so with the 9-7X).
What is conspicuously and disgracefully absent is any significant improvement in the safety of the original vehicle.
The GM SUV's do not come with front side airbags to protect the abdomen. They only come with side curtain airbags to protect the heads of the front and rear occupants.
Sure enough, Saab doesn't bother adding front side airbags to the GM platform. Nor do they add Saab's active head restraints to reduce whiplash and other neck injuries from rear-end collisions.
Supposedly Saab made some structural improvements but it'll take crash tests to tell if it made much of a difference. There's an NHTSA test available, but it looks like they just copied over the Trailblazer results, which isn't a valid test.
Even if there is a small improvement, so what? The Trailblazer/Envoy family is so far down to begin with -- "marginal" IIHS scores:
http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0119.htm
When Saab rebadged the Impreza, they also did not add any safety feature improvements either. They could have added active head restraints and side curtain airbags but they didn't. The current 9-2X's do have active head restraints, but only because Subaru added their own design to the Impreza. |
|
|
| purpleporsche |
| Before purchasing my MDX i test drove a saab 9-7x even though i knew i probably wasn't going to buy another saab(my former car was an 2001 9-5 wagon) The ride felt stiff but i couldn't get a good feel because the test drive track at my saab dealer is about 1 mile on a straight road. |
|
|
| crazymjb |
Trail Blazer SS>Saab 97X
Id rather get a Trailblazer SS and keep the money :D
I am not a big Saab fan, in terms of reliability they are Meh, and with them joing GM reliability recieves a double Meh.
I also think they are hideosly ugly. The interiors are OK, but I still prefer Acura interior over saab(our TL owns on the new 95(my grandfather has one) as per the interior. I imagine the same deficite in the SUV class.
Mike |
|
|
| mkaresh |
I test drove one, and found the ride quality very disappointing.
My full review: http://www.epinions.com/content_190929014404
The Saab does have a significantly higher quality interior than the TrailBlazer, but the basic platform is dated and trucky. Among GM products I'd much rather have an SRX. |
|
|
|
