We’ve had a few people asking for this information about the Saab 9-4x. The most recent from a 9-7x owner who was interested in seeing how his current vehicle compares with the one he’s thinking about 🙂
Note: measurements are in inches except for cargo capacity.
[table id=12 /]
For us living in a metric world (Red J)
[table id=13 /]
My thanks to George L for putting the information together.
44 thoughts on “Saab 9-4x Dimensions comparison”
Interesting that the 9-4x has almost an inch more ground clearance than the SRx. I wonder if that holds true for all versions (FWD, AWD, Aero).
Lots of interesting things here…
Clearance… I wonder if we are necessarily comparing apples to apples here (how are they all measured? spoilers, actual minimum, loading?), but assuming it’s correct, I’m surprised how little clearance these SUVs have! Eg. a Subaru Outback has 8.7″ (220mm) clearance in comparison, so almost an inch more clearance than these other SUVs! A “normal Saab” (c900, 9000, 9-3, 9-5, etc) has 6″/150mm clearance. iirc, the 9-3x has 165mm (6.5″ – please correct me if I am wrong on this one, I remember also reading 35mm more than 9-3ss, so does 9-3ss have 130mm clearance? I’d love for someone in the know to clarify! thanks!)…
Comparing overall heights, a normal Saab is about 56″ tall, these SUVs are 66″ tall and the Outback is 65.7″ tall… so comparable to the SUVs.
In terms of length, 9-4x is about the same as the outgoing 9-5 (190″), but with a little longer wheelbase… Outback is 188″ long…
In terms of cargo, with all the seats up, the 9-4x hauls 29.2, the Outback 34.3 and the outgoing (gone) 9-5 wagon 37.0 (all cu ft.)…
So, from a purely utilitarian point of view, the only advantage a 9-4x holds over an OG 9-5 wagon is 2″ of clearance (the 9-5 hauls more + is comparable size inside) and available xwd… The outback does the same with almost 1″ more clearance than the 9-4x! But both 9-4x and Outback are 10″ taller than a 9-5!!! that’s gotta hurt driving dynamics… here’s an idea: why not raise a NG 9-5 wagon with XWD by 2″ (in the same vein as 9-3X, Allroad, and Outback) + have an awesome utilitarian snow machine that is 60″ tall rather than 66″ + drives tighter?
Maybe there is not much market? Aesthetics are important after all… In the US, something that looks like the 9-4x might sell better than an equally (or more) capable wagon (in terms of utility)?
just some thoughts… (I am personally quite interested in the 9-3X)…
The 9-4X is not an SUV but a CUV. A type of car in the middle.. So it all makes sence to me. But if I´d go for something 4×4 like you I´d choose the 9-3X.
btw, my comments were not meant to be negative towards the 9-4x, I actually think it looks very nice (though I prefer cars to SUVs)…
one other point of comparison: Subaru Forester. 8.7″ clearance, 31cuft cargo, 67″ tall, 179.5″ long + somehow gets more legroom than 9-4x front + back (43.1″/38.0″). A steaming pile of poo to drive (rented one for a month + 5000km), but packs as much or more utility in as a 9-4x in a 10″ shorter car!
(note, I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, there are a million reasons I’d rather own a Saab than a Subaru, but in these parts, Subie customers represent the #1 potential market for Saab… if one could convince them to actually sit down + test drive something other than another Subaru… darn lemmings!)
Because taller CUVs look better than wagons to many people, including me. The proportions just are that much chunkier and more masculine. Which is a reason why so many chicks love them, they feel safe in them. If ground clearance is that important to you, maybe the next generation might have something like Porsche offers (I know many others do too) with their air suspension setup.
I understand the aesthetic side of it. 9-4x does look great + hopefully it will be a big seller! I was just surprised to see that the whole class of SUVs there, aside from the Volvo have less clearance than an Outback or Forester… I would have guessed the opposite… mind you Outback is becoming more SUV + less car… I was also surprised that while those CUVs/SUVs look big, they don’t really hold much more… the point below re Volvo is true, the bigger wagons are being phased out… that was one of the reasons I said the (larger) market might not be interested in it… Audi Allroad is pretty darn nice though (with adjustable suspension, iirc prone to expensive problems)… just too expensive for most people…
I think there is a market for wagons though, even if it is not as big as for SUVs… our neighbourhood is full of wagons: 4 9-5 wagons on my street of 4 blocks, + none of those are mine! still more volvo, audi, and subaru wagons, and half of those are raised, with awd… some find SUVs unappealing for whatever reasons…
I’m mainly interested in a little more ground clearance from the perspective of driving in snow. All wheel drive doesn’t matter as much as clearance, imho… of course too much clearance can mean lesser handling (the main turnoff of SUVs for me)… 9-3X looks like a great balance for someone like me…
It is a fact in the US that SUVs and CUVs far outsell wagons. For whatever reason, here wagons are not considered as stylish as a CUV, and many people prefer the higher seating position. Wagons are considered old-fashioned or boring by many buyers. People who need larger cargo capacity still buy SUVs and people who who don’t need the space and/or want better fuel economy get CUVs. I saw an article the other day that this is why Volvo is phasing out wagons in the US. (Although, Acura is introducing a sport wagon this year.)
It’s amusing to see how it compares to the 9-7x (which is a larger car offering less space) and to the SRX (the 9-4x looks more dynamic while unexpectedly offering, still, a bit more room). 🙂
Australia go metric inch by inch….. 🙂
The first statistic that stands out is that the 9-4X is bigger than the SRX and even though we were locked out at the Chicago Show and were forced to go to the Cadillac stablemate for comparison, this does not surprise me. Saab is about function, not cladding.
I cannot wait to compare dimensions with the 95 Combi.
Glad you are including the RX in comparisons.
Real competition is the Volvo — which is a great car.
Perhaps somebody could translate it in cm so that the overhelming rest of the world could understand it 😀
Multiply by 2,54 😉
judex non calculat 😀
You win !!! 😛
You have to consider, however, that despite being 8 inches longer than the Q5, interior space is not much larger. And the still 2.3 inch shorter Lexus offers much more room (especially boot). In my opinion, Saab hasn’t been very good at using interior space except for the 9000.
Still: Nice too see that the 9-4X offers decent space for its passengers.
It really is amazing how long the overhangs are on the 9-4x compared to the Audi or Lexus. I think that’s where we’re getting the discrepancy from overall length to interior volume.
An inch less front leg room than my current Volvo XC70 which is barely adequate? C’mon tall guys, hold out for enough seat travel!
Interesting to see that the 9-4x and the Q5 share the same wheelbase/ground clearance up to the millimeter! Any explanations?
Funny, the 9-4x is larger than the SRX and gets better gas mileage. Funny but not surprising
Sorry, off topic I know but a final video from the Arctic Experience, driving was my wonderful wife who despite her reservations and nerves power slid the 9-5 Aero to the finish line after only three laps and with me barking words of instruction in her ear.
She doesn’t know it yet but as a well done her Sportwagon is being Hirsch’d next week during the anniversary period.
Aim ze car at ze cones! Love it!
You’d better tell her that her car has been Hirsched before she takes it to the supermarket. The gobs of power could prove very interesting on the parking lot.
Great videos from a great weekend! Sorry for spoiling your lap time 😉
I mentioned it last night in comments, but you should all take a look at Saabkyle’s video review of the Cadillac SRX which gives a great impression of size and scale of the 9-4x, and indeed, its quality – which for me was a bit of an eye-opener.
yes, although having “leatherette” in the base version is a mistake. Bad GM mood. Will hurt resale value — the one thing that people want in a used car is leather.
You even find leatherette in Porsches. I agree though, it sounds like something a stripper is going to wear.
For all those lucky new 9-5 owner; Does the leather smell like the good old Saab leather? That always went really well with my cigars (which I unfortunately had to give up some 6 years ago).
I agree, it’s a bad word and conjures up images of tacky furniture, but as said, lots use it. Like Mercedes and their ‘MB-tex’ or whatever they call it these days. And I know Skoda use it too. Will be interesting to see what it’s like, I know Volvo have an interesting synthetic textile fabric in some cars called T-Tec.
Remember the fine wool in the 9000!?! That was cool.
I don’t think “leatherette” is a bad thing if it’s get the entry point down, everyone does it, I just would give it a better name as everyone else has realized is a good marketing move. Saab though in my mind could benefit by making some notable features such as leather, heated seats and a sunroof standard across the board to make the deal look even better then up the price by adding all the other features such as park assist, nav, etc.
Leatherette, always better to sell something on what it is rather than what it is not.
Swades living in a Metric world too?
Normal metric doesn’t apply to Swade, his space-time continuum is quite warped.
Sorry, that was a physicists joke, we’re a pretty hilarious bunch.
Sounds more like Star Trek to me.. 😉 hehe
Aha, a van Dantzig adept, Gerrit?
I do indeed.
But I didn’t collate the information on the table. It was sent to me and I just formatted it for the site. I figured inches would be OK because the 9-4x is primarily a US thing anyway and they think old-skool when it comes to measuring stuff.
I see RedJ’s slotted in an updated table for the latter 20th century.
I still have a question about the cargo volume.
The US cu.ft value is twice as high as the European litres value!!!!
At least for the 9-4x.
Believe it or not, officially the US is metric too.
The big problem is that many things have an imperial base. For instance, buy some cabinetry, that is and will stay in inches until the industrial tools which produce them have finally fallen apart. For the same reason many home improvement items in Europe are actually in inches, that’s why their sizes in metric are so crazy.
I’m almost ready to order as soon as I can see the crash test data and determine the color. The white is growing on me, I just have a problem with the chrome around the fog lights now. Maybe a grey/black lower body molding would be good. Like some of the 9-3X, XC70, A4 All-roads have had. Good accessories idea 🙂
9-4x is smaller, with less interior space. Yet you get about the same performance and mpg as in the 9-7x. How is that possible?
Interior dimensions may be adequate for intended demographic, but major disappointment to me. Our much ridiculed Aztek is 8″ shorter but boasts the following interior dimensions (which we find very useful):
Behind rear seat: cu ft/liters 45.4 /1282
With rear seat removed: cu ft/liters 93.5/2669
Front in/cm 40.5/102.9
Rear in/cm 38/96.4
Anybody has the weight figure for the 9-4X?
2010 – 2120 kg (9-4X)
2085 – 2135 (9-4X Aero)
Comments are closed.