Review
I’ve always been baffled by Saab.
Their cars, in my experience, have a lot to like about them, but are plagued by annoyances that seem at odds with the attention to detail taken in other areas.
Take, for example, the cupholder in the 9-3 Aero SportWagon.
A button in the dash is pressed and it extends outwards, the entire contraption unfolding majestically to await your beverage. It’s a Saab design classic.
But then look at the handbrake, which seems to have been constructed out of the plastic bits of a chocolate box, and risks crushing your thumb every time you release it.
Annoyingly, these are not new complaints – the same delights and blights have featured on Saabs for years.
The new car differs little, although there have been tweaks here and there to try and keep the 9-3 within touching distance of its rivals – Audi’s A4, BMW’s 3 Series, the Mercedes-Benz
C-Class et al.
Outside, things start well. In essence, it’s the same old 9-3, but the designers have finally succeeded in making it look really rather good.
The Dame Edna-style spectacles that adorned the face of the older generation of cars have been replaced by a chrome-surrounded grille and headlights inspired by the Aero X concept car.
The clear rear lights look very sci-fi, and our test car had some deeply sexy optional 18-inch alloys (£800).
When light bounces off the SportWagon, heads turn.
Get inside though, and it’s a depressingly familiar scene.
The aeroplane-inspired slab of dashboard remains in all its (subjectively) dull glory, and the quality of materials used still lags behind the quality of Audi and BMW.
Much of the dash feels brittle – one piece of the centre console actually came off in my hand.
To be fair to Saab’s engineers, they have tried to update things.
The optional touch-screen sat-nav and stereo unit (£2,430) is bang up to date and sounds brilliant thanks to the Bose speakers.
And there are some soft-touch materials splashed around.
Once you get moving, things are better.
The seats are up there with the best in terms of comfort, and the 419-litre boot is big enough for most needs.
The chassis is one of the 9-3’s best features – nimble and assured through the bends, soaking up bumps nicely.
The steering is nicely weighted and only a sludgy gearbox lets the driving experience down.
The new twin-turbo TTiD diesel engine is smooth enough and from inside the car sounds attractively boomy.
Don’t expect it to be too sporty though – despite 177bhp and 295lb-ft of torque, it’s no thrill ride.
But power delivery is consistent, with grunt available all the way to the top end.
At £27,305, the Saab is a good deal cheaper than its rivals, but unfortunately, it feels several years behind them.
Positive:
Looks good
Comfortable
Nimble chassis
Cupholder design
Negative:
Flimsy interior
Ageing design
Sludgy gearbox
THREE RIVALS TO CONSIDER
BMW 320d M Sport Tourer
Jaguar X-Type 2.2d Sport Premium estate
Mercedes-Benz C220 CDI Sport estate
P11D PRICE
At less than £27,500, the Saab undercuts all its rivals by almost £2,000, and as the top of the range 9-3 model, the Aero doesn’t suffer from a dearth of equipment. It’s also the most powerful, along with the BMW. Less than £250 separates the X-Type, 320d and C220.
9-3: £27,305
X-Type: £29,195
320d: £29,345
C220: £29,440
EMISSIONS AND TAX RATES
BMW’s diesel engines are almost without rival in their refinement, so it’s no surprise that the 320d is the greenest here and has the lowest company car tax bill – £185 a month for a 40% taxpayer. The Saab costs £191, the Jaguar £223 and the Mercedes-Benz £225.
320d: 131g/km/19%
9-3: 154g/km/21%
C220: 161g/km/23%
X-Type: 164g/km/23%
SMR COST
Thanks in part to a wide 18,000-mile service interval, the Saab is the cheapest to run over a fleet life of three years/60,000 miles. Close behind is the BMW, with a variable service interval. But the Jaguar, with larger 18-inch wheels and relatively small 12,500-mile service intervals, lags behind.
ppm/60k total
9-3:4.24/£2,544
320d: 4.36/£2,616
C220: 4.72/£2,832
X-Type: 5.33/£3,198
FUEL COST
The Jaguar is bottom of the pile with combined fuel economy of 45.6mpg. Just ahead of it is the Mercedes-Benz with 46.3. The Saab is in second place with 48.7. But the BMW, with combined economy of 57.6mpg, is almost £1,000 cheaper to fuel over 60,000 miles.
3ppm/60k total
320d: 8.63/£5,178
9-3: 10.21/£6,126
C220: 10.74/£6,444
X-Type: 10.90/£6,540
DEPRECIATION COST
With the highest CAP residual value – 45% – the Mercedes-Benz will lose the least amount of value over three years/60,000 miles. The 9-3, at 36%, has the lowest RV but is saved in part by its lower front-end price. The 320d just edges out the X-Type; both have a 40% RV.
ppm/60k total
C220: 26.81/£16,086
9-3: 28.88/£17,328
320d: 29.24/£17,544
X-Type: 29.32/£17,592
WHOLELIFE COST
There is very little to choose in terms of cost between the top three, but the BMW just beats the Mercedes-Benz by £24 over three years/ 60,000 miles. The Saab is around £600 more expensive, but the Jaguar costs almost £2,000 more to run than the BMW.
320d: 42.23/£25,338
C220: 42.27/£25,362
9-3: 43.33/£25,998
X-Type: 45.55/£27,330
VERDICT
This has been a tightly fought battle, with three different cars excelling in different areas.
The BMW is the cheapest to run, while the Mercedes-Benz obliterates the competition when it comes to resale value.
The Saab, loaded with power and standard equipment, is more expensive and not as refined, despite being cheaper to buy and maintain.
In the end, it’s the BMW’s green credentials that seal the win.
Thanks to its low emissions, it costs £40 a month less in benefit-in-kind tax than the C220, and although the three-pointed star has more standard equipment, it’s this saving that edges it for the BMW.
WINNER: BMW 320d M Sport Tourer
