We’ve already reported that Forbes thinks buying a new SUV from just about anyone in these time of killer depreciation is a damn fine idea. Apparently, the mag’s enthusiasm for vehicles with barge pole marks also extends to other advertisers unloved automobiles. “Cars Worth A Second Look” can be roughly translated into “Four-Wheeled Dogs You Can Get for A Song.” Poster child for this ten worst best list: the Saab 9-5. “It’s not that the Saab 9-5 is a bad car, ‘it just doesn’t flow well’ with some people, says Stephanie Brinley, auto analyst at AutoPacific, an industry research and analysis firm. The interior is a little bit ‘off center’ with the ignition located on the center console and not the steering column or dash board, which is appealing to ‘a little different buyer with a little different personality,’ she adds. The fact that it sits on an ancient (i.e. decrepit) platform has nothing to do with it. This time out, Jacqueline Mitchell (for it is her) factors crap sales (sub-10k), safety (“acceptable” crash rating or better), EPA mileage (17 – 20mpg) and five-year cost of ownership (including depreciation!). [Mitsubishi Outlander, Mazda Tribute, Mazda5, Volvo S80, Audi A6, Hyundai Veracruz, Hyundai Entourage, Acura RL, Audi A3 (captioned A2 in the slide show), Saab 9-5]
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Acura FL? The Audi A2 you can get (in Europe) but what’s the FL?
There’s some merit to a list of sales dogs, but there’s a big difference between the 9-5’s reasons for not selling, and that of the Mazda5. Notably, the 5 doesn’t meet American expectations of bigger/faster/longer-nosed, while the Saab is just a weak offering that, without competitive leasing, you’d be insane to buy.
And yes, it’s not a bad car, but you’d need a screw loose to pick it over a mainstream midsizer. Even the wagon is a hard sell against, say, the Legacy or many crossovers.
Acura FL my bad. Amended.
Audi A2 theirs.
I still think the S80 and RL are probably some of the best luxury cars out there…however they lack the name cachet, German heritage, or gobs of power that really isn’t needed to glide along the interstate or sit in traffic on a daily basis. I bet even the Genesis will outsell these two gems.
It’s all about marketing.
The 9-5 actually breaks my heart. 2009 is its 12th model year, with one facelift and none replacement in sight. No, that’s not the way to treat a premium brand, GM…
The A3 and the Mazda5 are actually great cars. The A3 is gaining a lot of popularity in NJ, as I start seeing them quite often. It’s just that Americans are taking a long time warming up to the concept of “compact luxury”.
The others are generally not very competitive in their class. I love Audis, and think the A6 avant is the sexiest car on the road today, but front wheel bias in a car this size is just…weird.
Personally I think the RL is not a bad buy for most buyers, likewise I have a soft spot for the S80, but only in AWD trim. The A6 is certainly an excellent car and the A3 is the nicest Golf I have ever driven. Personally I find it mildly offensive that they have managed to lump the RL, S80, A6 and A3 into the same group as the 9-5 which, as I reviewed a while back, is shit on wheels with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
agree with the 9-5, but the 9-3 is cheaper, looks better, and is similarly unwanted. The Veracruz, Entourage, and Outlander haven’t been around long enough to have a used market. Concerning the Mazda5, A3, and A6, don’t confuse low sales numbers with being unwanted. Resale on those three is healthy.
Edit: Wait a sec, they’re talking about new cars? Okay, but while one can get a deal on an unwanted new car, you can get a steal on an unwanted used car.
If you think the part about the SAAB ignition is good then you should see Stephanie Brinley’s article on underapreciated used cars where she claims that the Yugo was a great car but that America wasn’t ready for a hatchback.
The Mazda 5 is a really good car/compact minivan, but I see a lot of them, and I hear that Mazda has trouble keeping them in stock.
My top pick for a sales dog to buy now would be a Ford Taurus (formerly the Five Hundred). I rented one (naturally) and came away impressed. The car exhibited no real faults other than not being beautiful. It was roomy, quiet, handled well. Had good pick up and reasonable mpg (21-28). For about the price and fuel economy of a compact SUV, you can get a full-size car with a huge trunk, 0-60 under 7 seconds, luxury car comfort front and back and top notch safety ratings. Even better, buy one a year old and avoid the depreciation hit.
The 9-5 actually breaks my heart. 2009 is its 12th model year, with one facelift and none replacement in sight. No, that’s not the way to treat a premium brand, GM…
Why not? That’s how they treated Cadillac for years.
(and yes, it breaks my heart, too)
Why are we supposed to take Stephanie Brinley’s word for all this (the sole “expert” quoted by Forbes)? Really thorough reporting.
A3 a sales dog? A little overpriced, perhaps, but still desireable in my book. I split my time between San Francisco and Palm Springs. 3 of the most popular cars seen in SF are Mini, A3 and Smart. Coversely, you rarely see any of these in PS where, Benzes, Porkers and Bentleys are a dime a dozen.
Hey, I’d rather have a 12 year old Saab design rather than a 4 year old GM one. That’s not really fair — I can understand why GM killed the hatchback (the convertible is the better seller) — and the new 9-3 body is quite nice. I just wish they hadn’t screwed up the inside of the new 9-3.
And the 9-5 has a great Saab engine — the last of a long line.
I actually have a soft spot for the 9-5. I find it more enjoyable to drive, and with more room and better seats, than the 9-3.
Hey, I’d rather have a 12 year old Saab design rather than a 4 year old GM one.
It’s a twelve-year-old GM design. Doesn’t that just piss you off?
The last Saab untouched by GM was the 1992/93 convertible. The 9000 was a joint venture (with FIAT, I think), the 92-02 was a heavy reworking of the Opel Calibra, and the 9-5 of the 1998 Vectra (and, thusly, the Saturn L-Series).
I actually have a soft spot for the 9-5. I find it more enjoyable to drive, and with more room and better seats, than the 9-3.
Which says a lot about what GM took out of the Epsilon 9-3, than the 9-5. Lower mileage, less room, worse reliability (yeah, I know, I’d never thought it possible). It handles nicely, though, even if it rides roughly
The 9-5 is a good car–Saab gets a lot of mileage out of a chassis–but it’s outclassed by the Honda Accord. Not good.
The Veracruz is in the top five as far as cross overs are concerned in most comparisons to its peers. Great interior quality as well as a decent ride. A little floaty but decent. I think that the play it safe as Toyota styling has killed it and they need to take a chance on the styling of the next one. With that said I will be purchasing a CX9.
There are some good cars on this list, and certainly they are not all under-performing for the same reasons. The Mazda5 has a perception problem – it’s too small for the minivan crowd and too minivan for the wagon crowd. The Audi A3 is just plain too expensive for what it is. Period. The Acura RL doesn’t understand it’s market – it needs RWD or AWD to compete in any reasonable way with the German competition in its price range. And I think Acura’s prestige is still weighed down by the 4-banger hatchbacks they used to sell (a lesson BMW learned well!).
EDIT: OK, serves me right for posting before reading, but..
The Saab is $5k more than the BMW 3 and they are wondering why it doesn’t sell!!!!? Also, apparently they set a pretty low bar, since “windshield washer nozzles” are listed as a reason to consider the A3. And every single “Second Look” feature on the list for the A3 (well, maybe except for those nozzles) is a four digit ka-ching over the $25k base price, making the car they describe more expensive than the BMW 3 series too! And they wonder why BMW sells 30 -40 times more 3’s than either the Saab or the Audi?
@ psarhjinian:
touche, you got me. But I still find the mid-90s Saab interior superior to the modern 9-3 GM style. Is the new 9-3 rough on bumps — that is really my only complaint about the NG900.
In any case, I can understand why Saab (niche car) can’t update their bodies — what I will never understand is why GM (huge) can’t keep up the Honda/Toyotas of the world in terms of bringing new bodies out every three years.
Something about machine tools, I guess.
Let’s just say that Alex D. and I have pretty different views about the 9-5s we have driven and leave it at that. I don’t want to run afoul of flaming rules.
That said, anybody who compares the 9-5 and the 3 Series on price isn’t totally aware of the true selling market (let alone that they’re in two different size classes). If you buy a 9-5 at full MSRP, I’ve got some mortgage-backed securities you could also look at….
Invgar–I thought you would have known the next-gen 9-5 is due out late next year? If GM doesn’t go belly-up beforehand and cancels it.
touche, you got me. But I still find the mid-90s Saab interior superior to the modern 9-3 GM style.
Saab did good ergonomic work throughout the 1990s (the auto climate controls excepting). And the seats, oh, the seats.
I haven’t looked at an Epsilon 9-3 in a bit, but the 2002-2005/6 had awful controls. They fixed that, but added some pretty bizarre trim detail when they did.
Is the new 9-3 rough on bumps — that is really my only complaint about the NG900.
It’s rough but different. The NG900 is a flexy bastard–hit a bump and you feel the body twist–and that helps smooth the ride out. It’s whole-car shock absorber. It’s bendy and uncontrolled, but not too busy unless you’ve a Viggen. The Epsilon 9-3 rides sort of like a Mazda. It’s a bit hard and busy, but at least the chassis doesn’t twist like a noodle.
Yea.. the Acura FL. It is the model they sell to retirees in Miami. It features the left turn signal stuck on all the time, a radio stuck on Rush Limbaugh’s AM talk station, and doesn’t do over 25 mph.
“Ingvar–I thought you would have known the next-gen 9-5 is due out late next year? If GM doesn’t go belly-up beforehand and cancels it.”
I haven’t seen it. And as for GM products that are due out “sometimes next year” I will believe in them just like I believe in UFOs; “I’ll believe in them when I see them…”
And yes, Saab is a niche player, but so is BMW and Mercedes as well. And they have succeeded in delivering two cycles of mid-range cars, with a third one around the corner, since the 9-5 came out in 1997. The ’96-02 E-Class, + the current E-Class, ’96-04 5-series, + current 5-series. IF GM had been in touch with reality, they would have had an 9-5 replacement out not later than 2003, or the exact time the current 9-3 was launched. Even Saabs own small-range 9-3 will have completed an entire cycle of its own before the replacement for its bigger brother is due. Its like GM only has time to concentrate at one thing at the same time, and everything else is, well, FA…
Well teh Saab might be a POS but it’s better than the POS I drive daily so I wouldn’t mind being seen in it… :)
I did work on/drive a Saab ‘vert a few years back. Second owner and 50K miles. Very nice car. Needed a clutch cable. A CABLE on an expensive car like that? Apparently the auto-adjust cable had some quality issues. My VW has the same thing but luckily so far it works well at 153K miles.
I think buying an under loved car is a great way to get a car. My VW was an under loved car and it’s been a fine car (higher than Civic maintenance levels). Was cheaper than the other four-seater convertibles available at the time for it’s age and mileage.
Also bad quality is still better than average quality was 10-15 years ago. Of course it helps if you like what your driving b/c I wouldn’t make the same excuses for another brand vehicle that I didn’t like… Just being honest.
willbodine: I lived in Palm Desert up until 3 months ago. The A3 count rises and falls with the snowbird count. On a side note, have you spotted the Rolls Drophead that wafts around La Quinta yet?
Where’s the Astra?
Consumer Reports likes the Outlander and Mazda 5 quite a bit.
The Entourage has reported poor reliability according to CR.
Hmmmm… certain used models come to mind here..
Minivan: Mercury Monterey
90+% of the public don’t even know what it is, and the rest pretty much ignore it after reading the new car reviews. It surprisingly won the J.D. Power Durability Study. Wholesale is usually the mid-5’s but I’ve been able to buy them well into the 4’s and in surprisingly good shape.
Midsized: Dodge Intrepid
The 2.7 and 3.2 engines are garbage. The only engine worth it’s time is the 3.5L and the 2003 and 2004 models are the best by far. Bought a 2004 model in early January 2007 for only $3000. It was a surprisingly good car. Sold it for $5k. You can find plenty of them with reasonable miles for under $5k.
Luxury: Lincoln LS
You can get these models for near the price of an Accord and Camry. They are actually very worthwhile if you’re someone who has to drive a lot of miles over the course of the year. The V6 isn’t anything special but the V8 has gobs of power, far better durability, and matches the powertrain quite well with minimal fuel economy loss.
Full-Sized: Pontiac Bonneville
Along with the police interceptors, these are the most frequently purchased vehicles for auto auctioneers and fleet lease managers. They ride very well, have an exceptional power / fuel economy combo with the 3.8, and are very reasonably priced in the used car market. The Pontiac interior and exterior aren’t for everyone, but I’ve known plenty of friends who have bought them at 60-80k, drove them to 225k-250k, and then found another one. The SLE trim is by far the most popular version overall.
Compact: Mazda Protege
While the 3 gets all the accolades, the Protege is treated as the automotive equivalent of Finland. It’s subtly neglected and often ignored in the used car market. I think the Protege was a great buy throughout it’s history. They always offered plenty of room with surprisingly strong fuel economy to boot. The final generation in particular was better to drive than the overwhelming majority of it’s competitors, and could easily hit 35+ mpg and 200k miles if it’s kept up.
Subcompact: They’re all crap
Rio, Aveo, Accent… unless you live in a place that needs small cars you’re better off buying a compact that’s 2 years older.
Anyone else???
Every time I see an article like this, I get excited. “Wow, great deals on cars! Finally, the terrible new-car market becomes my benefit!”
And then I read the actual list of cars, and it’s like “…oh. THOSE cars.”
It’s like raiding the discount bins at Marshall’s – you get a good look at the 70%-off XXL paisley sweater, and you suddenly realize WHY nobody’s purchased it. :6
With a few notable exceptions. I’m still pushing my brother to resist the lull of the Fit and buy a g-damn Astra already, since it’s just as much car for $2500 cheaper. This afternoon, the Saturn guy called us and took another thousand off. Soon, my pretties…!