1999 SAAB 9-5 Reviews from North America - Page 7 of 8

1999 SAAB 9-5 wagon 2.4 t

Model year1999
Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 2.4 t Automatic
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 0 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 0 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
3.0 / 10
Distance when acquired75000 miles
Most recent distance93000 miles

Summary:

Never buy another SAAB made by GM

Faults:

This is the most unreliable piece of junk. So far seat heater has broken (1500), fuel pump replaced (800), modulator replaced (800), oil pressure switch replaced (600), light bulbs always need replacing and the headlights go in and out of power, Yes, there is the stutter when accelerating. Horrible reliability. Thank God for AAA.

General Comments:

It was a better car before GM made it a piece of junk when they bought the company.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 20th July, 2006

1999 SAAB 9-5 2.3 turbo

Model year1999
Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 2.3 turbo Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 4 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 1 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.6 / 10
Distance when acquired74000 miles
Most recent distance82000 miles
Previous carSAAB 9000

Summary:

Great car except for major mechanical failure for no good reason

Faults:

Climate control display numbers spotty.

Air conditioning smells for first ten minutes every use.

Seat adjustment buttons stick.

Brakes rotors require replacement every other pad replacement.

Number four cylinder blown at 82k.

Suspect turbo ceased to function around 82k.

General Comments:

Car feels and drives well.

Comfortable and civilized overall.

Relatively serious rear end collision at 76k miles did not affect straightness or function of overall chassis.

Excellent looking vehicle.

Purchased used from dealer and seemed like a lot of car for the money.

Engine replacement required at 82k miles seems premature. Dealer states that oil sludging not an issue, but would not specify cause of catastrophic engine failure. Have been hearing rumors that this is not an uncommon problem with this model. Is there any class action/legal activity associated with these failures?

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 14th March, 2006

3rd Mar 2007, 10:26

Your engine failure was caused by enging sludging. The dealer most likely told you that sludging didn't cause the problems in your car's engine to avoid paying for it to be fixed / replaced. There was a class action suit in America against General Motors and I believe they were ordered to have all saab 9-5 and possibly 9-3 engines rectified of the sludging fault.

1999 SAAB 9-5 Wagon 2.6 turbo

Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 2.6 turbo Automatic
Distance when acquired28000 miles
Most recent distance70000 miles
Previous carNissan Altima

Summary:

Problematic

Faults:

Turbo blew at 68,000 miles. They suspect an oil sludge problem.

Have to replace the front & rear bulbs and relays constantly.

General Comments:

This car handles well, but it has been a nightmare in the past 2 years. In the past six months alone I have spent $4,000 to replace everything you can think of including a turbo.

After doing some research, I discovered that this model may have oil sludge problems, but I am not the first owner, so have heard Saab will not help out. If they would make due, I would probably remain loyal and purchase another Saab.

The electrical systems are awful with lights burning out nonstop or not working properly.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 1st March, 2006

2nd Mar 2006, 08:57

I don't think there is a positive Saab review on this site, at least not for the late model cars.

I have always loved the concept of Saabs (handling, great room, good ergonomics, etc.) but it seems that the brand should just be put to sleep like Oldsmobile was. The only "good" Saabs appear to be the 92-X (built by Subaru) and the 9-7 (built by Chevy and warmed over by Saab), and that is sad.

11th May 2006, 11:36

I think GM should be put to sleep NOT Saab. Saab was a fantastic reliable brand before GM messed with it. The 9-3 and 9-5 models aren't bad, I've owned a 900, and two 9-3 (convertible and hatchbacks) all have been 100% reliable. The Saab 92x is an interesting car, but the 97 is terrible and is just a bad Chevy trailblazer dressed up. GM should learn how to invest in a brand from Ford who have done a great job with Volvo.

1999 SAAB 9-5 SE turbocharged 2.3 liter four cylinder engine

Model year1999
Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission turbocharged 2.3 liter four cylinder engine Automatic
Distance when acquired47000 miles
Most recent distance70000 miles

Summary:

Buyer beware!

Faults:

I had to replace the following items on my vehicle:

Ignition Coil Pack

Throttle Body

A Gasket

Turbo Kit

Hood Emblem

MAP Sensor

O-Ring

Trunk Latch

Driver's Side Mirror

Driver's Side Seat Trim

Front Headlamps

Tail Lights

General Comments:

In 2 years, I have taken this car into the dealership 8 times for repairs.

During the 2 years that I have had this car, I have only put 23,000 miles on the car.

The interior and the exterior of this car is gorgeous; it just goes to show you that you can't judge a book by its cover.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 15th March, 2005

Average review marks: 6.4 / 10, based on 28 reviews