9-4x Performance

[david]

I'm considering snatching up one of the remaining 9-4x's that have been heavily discounted. Some good deals on the 3.0 models, but the reviews online (car and driver and the like) say the 9-4x is very under-powered and sluggish. Even the Aero's 2.8T is said to be slow. I was looking at a FWD 3.0 - Anybody want to comment on their experience with it? Is it really that bad or is Car & Driver just being picky?

[nordwulf]

While it isn't the fastest in its segment and the 3.0i engine isn't the best in its class, it still is capable of moving the heavy 9-4X from 0-60 in 8 seconds. For everyday use, it was fine for me and I got pretty decent fuel mileage as well, about 20 mpg on average. Passing power over 50 mph is a bit limited though and sometimes the transmission doesn't know what gear it wants to be in. But the engine was fine for 95% of my driving.

Check out my 3-part review with more details about the performance and engine. 2011 Saab 9-4X long-term owners review - Part 1: Exterior, Engine and Transmission - Blogs - SaabWorld

I can understand why journalists think it is underpowered, especially when you compare it to other crossovers in the same class. I think we also have become spoiled with ever increasing engine power. 185 - 210 hp for the 9-3 when it was introduced were very respectable numbers. These days, it sounds very underpowered with 250+ hp being the norm right now.

Numbers don't tell the whole story so it's best to drive one yourself. The 9-4X is not the fastest but still an awesome automobile, especially for the price you can get them for these days.

What are you driving now? Is this going to be your first Saab? Welcome to SaabWorld!

[david]

Thanks for the reply!

I used to own an 08 Saab 9-7x Aero, with 6.0L V8 and 390 HP, it was very strong. But drove like a truck, as it was built on the Trailblazer platform. I actually really liked it. I've driven the last gen 9-5 when I had service done on the 9-7x at the dealer. I thought the 9-5 was small, cramped, and not very luxury for the price Saab was charging for it. But it moved along with decent power. The new 9-5 is beautiful, but I need a cross over as I have 2 dogs.

Right now I drive a company vehicle which is a Subaru Forester, with a tiny 2.5 4-cyl @ 170 HP, but you know the thing moves along pretty well (the Forester is light).

My concern is when I pull out into traffic, and step on the gas the thing better move. Or if I pass someone on the highway, it should move along just fine. I'm not going to be doing drag racing, but want enough power to take off with some authority.

I'd say the #1 thing I liked about my 9-7x is it was so rare -- especially being an Aero which they only made a few hundred of. It wasn't just another Ford or GMC, it was something different. I like that about the 9-4x.

I'll check out your review - thanks for the info!

[Mark_Venture]

My 9-4x Premium XWD (3.0i) is faster than my late father's 2010 GMC Terrain SLT (4cyc), but a little slower than my 2005 9-3Arc (2.0i). that being said, I was next to a Cadillac SRX that has the newer 3.6L V6. It was noticeably faster. Like Frank, I do think mine is fine for my every day driving to/from work and around town, as well as highway/interstate to visit friends and family.

I'm working on an update to my impressions of my 9-4x that I posted last November.

Here in Delaware, the 9-4x is rare. Since getting mine last October, I've seen only 2 others driving around here... One is owned by Delaware Saab. They had it on their lot before SCNA bankruptcy and they are now using it as a courtesy transportation vehicle (shuttling customers who dropped their cars off for service). Two days ago, I saw a black one pass me head on. There was something on its side (a sign of some kind) but I couldn't read it as it drove by.

When I took my 9-4x to General Sales Saab in West Chester, PA, for an oil change a month or so ago, three of their people came over to look at it while i was turning over the keys. When I came out to get my owners card, two guys said they hadn't seen them before, etc.. but noticed me driving by each morning and night...

[nordwulf]

I used to have a Trailblazer and drove the 9-7X a few times. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised when you drive the 9-4X.

The only issue with the engine/transmission I sometimes had was overtaking other vehicles at 50+ mph. The transmission liked to shift up too much and there isn't much power/torque above 5000 rpm, unlike the several 9-5 I owned. I learned flooring the gas pedal was not the quickest way to overtake.

But still, the engine sounds quite nice and still faster than the average car on the road.

[david]

Thanks for the info!

My only other concern was if there were going to be parts available in the future. If someone rear-ends me, am I going to be driving around without a bumper because no replacements exist? Have you had any issues along those lines?

[jeffgtx]

I have a 9-4x aero.

the SRX/9-4 are heavy, so there's just not really much you can do with that and still get decent mileage but put something on the conservative side in the engine bay.

no experience with the 3.0L, but the 2.8L turbo has the power when you need it to pass or make an aggressive jump, but its not going to drag against a Cayenne and win.

to be fair, you are comparing the 9-4 engines to the corvette engine. thats what that 6.0L was. it was essentially the trailblazer SS. neither of these two are going to run with a vette engine.

as for parts, it is a valid concern. i am currently on the waiting list for a couple of parts due to a little ding. i see more parts coming available the last few months now that the courts have done most of what they had to do. could be coincidence.

but you can't have your heavily discounted luxury SUV cake and eat it too. its discounted for a reason, and thats the dice you have to roll.

[toxicavenger]

I haven't seen any 9-4's in Colorado yet, but I would like to check one out.

So you have 2 dogs? Why is the 9-5 too small for them? I think the cargo space in the 9-5 is at least the same size as the 9-4 or bigger. Heck I carry both my dogs in my 9-5 and 1 is 85lbs and the other is 61lbs.

Good luck in what ever you decide.

[nordwulf]

So you have 2 dogs? Why is the 9-5 too small for them? I think the cargo space in the 9-5 is at least the same size as the 9-4 or bigger. Heck I carry both my dogs in my 9-5 and 1 is 85lbs and the other is 61lbs.

You're right, the cargo area is not that big in the 9-4X. The 9-5 hatch opening is actually larger than the 9-4X but the 9-4X has more space between the wheel wells. For dogs, a 9-5 will be much easier to get into because it is lower to the ground. I took this picture when I got my 9-4X with my previous 2005 9-5 Aero.

The rear hatch window in the 9-4X slopes more than the 9-5 wagon, resulting in possible less space for dogs to sit up.

[rpiereck]

... a Subaru Forester, with a tiny 2.5 4-cyl

That's the first time I hear a 2.5 engine called tiny! What does that make of my 2.3 liter Aero engine?

I test drove a 9-4x with the 3.0 at Dana Motors in Billings, Montana and found the power adequate. No hot rod, but it moved well.