Home » Battle Of The Swedish Wagons: 1997 Volvo 850 vs 2000 Saab 9-5

Battle Of The Swedish Wagons: 1997 Volvo 850 vs 2000 Saab 9-5

Sbsd 12 4 2024
ADVERTISEMENT

Good morning! Today we have two station wagons from a country famous for meatballs, candy fish, a world-class chef, ready-to-assemble furniture, and some of the catchiest tunes of the 1970s. But I’m really only supposed to write about cars, so I guess we’ll stick to those.

Yesterday I showed you an odd couple of vehicles that didn’t really have anything to do with each other, and based on the comment and vote counts, they both kind of went over like lead balloons. The Blazer won handily, despite its higher price, probably mostly because it’s drivable.

Vidframe Min Top
Vidframe Min Bottom

The Blazer would be my choice as well. Yeah, I know, there are “better” small SUVs out there, but I’ve long had a soft spot for the baby Blazer, especially in two-door form. And the beefed-up ZR2 is the one to have.

Screenshot From 2024 12 03 16 42 54

You’ll be happy to know that today’s choices are much more closely matched in age, size, shape, and price. They also both hail from Sweden, have turbocharged engines, and sit just a little bit on opposite sides of the 200,000-mile mark. Let’s check them out.

ADVERTISEMENT

1997 Volvo 850 GLT – $2,500

467656093 122154215942304266 3605688942085838358 N

Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 2.4-liter dual overhead cam inline 5, four-speed automatic, FWD

Location: West Orange, NJ

Odometer reading: 214,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well

ADVERTISEMENT

The Volvo 850 series sits at a weird point in the make’s history, after the drivetrains modernized and went front-wheel-drive, but before the styling actually became, well, stylish. They’re still boxy, still good, but no longer resemble farm trucks underneath. And as the old RWD boxes age out and increase in value, the 850 is becoming a good way to get that square Volvo coolness for less.

467906350 122154215660304266 2090959888591279404 N

This is the GLT model, with a turbocharged 190 horsepower version of Volvo’s inline five. I think we’d all rather see this engine sitting alongside a five-speed manual, but the Aisin four-speed automatic Volvo uses in these cars has a pretty good reputation. It has 214,000 miles on it, and the seller says it has been carefully maintained and runs well. It does currently have a check-engine light for a secondary air pump failure, but if you don’t need to smog test it, there’s no hurry in getting that fixed.

467762000 122154215648304266 3251349226485606946 N

One huge upgrade from the 240 to the 850 was the interior. It still has that good Volvo no-nonsense design, but it no longer looks so brutalist. This one is in pretty good shape considering how many miles are on it; the leather is a little rough, but that’s what those sheepskin seat covers are for.

ADVERTISEMENT

467834152 122154215906304266 7113720282077169322 N

Outside, it looks pretty good. There are a few bad spots in the clearcoat, but it’s mostly shiny. A check for rust underneath is in order, but I sure don’t see any problem areas in the photos. And I really like the color; too many of these are silver or beige.

2000 Saab 9-5 V6 – $2,250

00d0d Gizey5fikzu 0ci0t2 1200x900

Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 3.0 liter dual overhead cam V6, four-speed automatic, FWD

Location: Portland, OR

ADVERTISEMENT

Odometer reading: 190,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well

Inconsistencies in ads are something I’ve gotten used to in this line of work. Usually I catch them, and the ones I let slip through, you all can be counted on to find for me. Sometimes, though, a mistake is so egregious that you’d have to be blind to miss it. The seller of this car calls it a 2000 model in some places and a 2006 in others, and in the ad headline refers to it as a “Soap” instead of a Saab. It can’t be a 2006 model, because the V6 engine was discontinued after 2003, so I’m assuming 2000 is correct. And I don’t know where the hell Soap came from.

01717 J63vtivtkrm 0ci0t2 1200x900

The V6 in question is a weird design, but what else would you expect from Saab? It’s an Opel design, with an unusual 54 degrees between the cylinder banks, and if that weren’t strange enough, only one bank’s exhaust powers the turbocharger. It works, though; it puts out 200 horsepower to the front wheels, in this case through a four-speed automatic. The seller says it runs and drives well, but we don’t get much more information than that.

ADVERTISEMENT

00w0w 3b1ygngxv8g 0t20ci 1200x900

Inside, it features some of Saab’s greatest hits, including a center-console-mounted ignition switch, an upright arms-out-straight driving position, and a special “night mode” for the instrument panel, quirks which are endearing if you like them and just plain weird if you don’t. It looks like it’s in really nice condition inside. The seller lists a whole bunch of options on it, but doesn’t specify how many of them work. I guess you’ll have to try them out and see.

00505 126qitle3t9 0ci0t2 1200x900

Outside, it’s my favorite turn-of-the-century Saab color, a really nice washed-out green. It’s subtle, but stands out more than plain old silver would. Most of it looks pretty good, but there are some bad spots in the paint on the bumpers that tell of parking altercations in its past. Not a big deal, of course, especially for the price.

Seeing these two makes me nostalgic for a time when the car market was more diverse. Volvo still exists, of course, still good from what I hear, but no longer boxy, and nowhere near as charming. And we all know Saab’s story; it might be the least-deserved death since Barb in Stranger Things. But if you want to relive the market as it was 25 years ago, the cars are still here, and they’ve held up pretty well, it looks like. So what’ll it be – the Swedish car, or the, um, Swedish car?

ADVERTISEMENT

(Image credits: sellers)

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Subscribe
Notify of
88 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Argentine Utop
Argentine Utop
1 month ago

I don’t need to channel my inner Gus Fring. I love the Saab. Too bad borh have a slush, wich fits nice only in the Volvo.

Mike B
Mike B
1 month ago

I like the interior of the Saaaaaab more, but the Volvo is my pick. I looked into buying a Saab about 15 yeas ago, I can’t recall what the reason was, but IIRC, the Saab nerds said to run, not walk, from the V6.

Plus, after owning 2007 XC70 for a decade, I realized I’m kind of s “Volvo guy”. Currently I’m keeping my eye out for a reasonably priced P3 XC70 T6.

DDayJ
DDayJ
1 month ago

850 for me. Those seats look like every 850 I’ve seen over 10 years old, they just all seem to wear like that. The Saab is cool but it needs the 2.3 four cylinder; the V6 is a no go. Someone correct me, but didn’t Saab slap the turbo on the GM mandated Opel V6 so they could boast a 100% turbocharged lineup? I may have just dreamed that. Anyway, great showdown today!

Dogisbadob
Dogisbadob
1 month ago

Fuck the shitty 54-degree V6 in the Saab. I voted for the Volvo.

Ford beats GM in this case LOL

Philip Dunlop
Philip Dunlop
1 month ago

I’m always going to go for a Volvo, especially since there’s a wagon-shaped hole in my life right now after my 2006 V70 (same colour, less engine capacity but about the same power, and the same Aisin 5-speed slush) went to the big parking lot in the sky.

Gubbin
Gubbin
1 month ago

The Volvo is the better idea, but the 9-5 is near me and in a city with an actual SAAB dealership.

Huja Shaw
Huja Shaw
1 month ago

This showdown gives me all the feels. The Volvo is not far from me so I’ll take that one.

Ward William
Ward William
1 month ago

While I am edging towards the Saab, if those cars were women I would not kick either out of bed if they farted.

MaximillianMeen
MaximillianMeen
1 month ago

Minty green beats God-awful, disgusting, puke-inducing maroon any day of the week.

Plus I already have a Volvo, so I’ll take a chance on the GM’ed Saab.

Jsloden
Jsloden
1 month ago

I’ve owned both. The saab was an electrical nightmare. I finally sold it when the computer went bad and stopped recognizing the key. This was over 20 years ago with less than 100k miles. The Volvo on the other hand is about as solid as they come. Owned one for a few years and never a single problem. The 850’s are one of the most bulletproof cars you can own. Easy choice here.

Cyko9
Cyko9
1 month ago

The 850 is pretty iconic, and it looks nice enough, so it got my vote.

Mr. Canoehead
Mr. Canoehead
1 month ago

Usually, the smart choice on shitbox showdown is “Neither” but today my decision is “Both”! The rational choice is the Volvo but that Saab is cool and you could probably swap in a 2.3 when that weird engine inevitably dies.

Brandon Forbes
Brandon Forbes
1 month ago

I’m shocked to see the Volvo with more miles and a CEL winning. I went Saab without hesitation. It’s a prettier design, and the interior is in better shape.

Baja_Engineer
Baja_Engineer
1 month ago
Reply to  Brandon Forbes

Agreed. The Saab is cheaper, has no CEL and the interior presents better than the Volvo. Boasting lower miles doesn’t hurt either.

Brandon Forbes
Brandon Forbes
1 month ago
Reply to  Baja_Engineer

Exactly! I see no benefit to the Volvo at all. Oh well.

Box Rocket
Box Rocket
1 month ago
Reply to  Brandon Forbes

Volvos are very repairable, have great parts support, a community with amazing in-depth knowledge, and the company still exists and still makes cars.

Saab, uh, hmm. Ah… Hmm, no… Uhhh… Nevermind.

Luxx
Luxx
1 month ago
Reply to  Box Rocket

I’ve owned three Volvo’s (1999 S80 T6, 2005 S40 2.4i 5 speed and a 2016 XC70 T5 Classic) and I have a 2005 9-3 sitting in the driveway as we speak.

The Saab is way more easier to work on then any of the Volvos. To me, it’s much more thoughtfully engineered as well. For instance, would you like to replace the cabin air filter? The Saab, no problem, open hood, pop a couple of clips off, pull up on the wiper cowl and slide out the filter. The Volvos? The S80 was fairly easy, the XC70 and S40? Not so much. Step one on the S40 was to remove the gas pedal (kid you not).

Repair information was not really available publicly for any of the Volvos, the best one was probably the S40. The Saab on the other hand, the Saab Club has a digital service manual available for every Saab going back to 1994.

Parts availability was excellent for both I’ve never had any issues getting parts for the Volvo’s and lots of parts still available for the Saab.

Detlump
Detlump
1 month ago

That probably means my 98 V70 with 50,000 miles is worth enough for me to retire. This was just before the ignition system got all complicated – it still has an ignition coil and no turbo. Just change the timing belt on time and the oil and you’re good for another 150K at least.

Dan Roth
Dan Roth
1 month ago

The asymmetrical turbocharging was a really interesting LPT approach.

BUT – the Volvo is less scruffy.

Keep in mind, we have a rule in Brickland: Nothing is as expensive as a cheap 850.

Fare thee well!

(side note: The Saab probably drives much better than the 850 when everything is well-sorted. And the GM lash-up might help you out, since it’s mostly an Opel underneath, and they made MILLIONS of those things. I think a lot of the parts in that particular wagon are available here if you tell them it’s a Saturn)

Last edited 1 month ago by Dan Roth
Luxobarge
Luxobarge
1 month ago

I voted Volvo, but at that price I say buy both.

Autonerdery
Autonerdery
1 month ago

I loved my 850 wagon, but the CEL was a never-ending battle—and this was nearly 20 years ago. I don’t know if I could do it again, but somehow I’m still way more tempted by the Volvo than the Saab.

Guillaume Maurice
Guillaume Maurice
1 month ago

I’d take the Volvo…

Saab was already NOT Saab by the 9-5 time.

Fiji ST
Fiji ST
1 month ago

Since I was carted around most of the 1990s in one of those boxy Volvos, I’m taking the 850. I’ll ask for a few hundred off to cover the cost of some seat covers though.

TOSSABL
TOSSABL
1 month ago

I’ve managed to avoid owning a transverse V6 to this point, so Volvo boxy goodness for me

TheCoryJihad
TheCoryJihad
1 month ago

By this math, my 2004 V70 with only 129,000 miles that looks damn near perfect should be worth $7,000, right?

Holy shit, I didn’t ever think I’d see a Volvo with over 200,000 miles on it with a comma in the asking price. Especially with a CEL.

Gilbert Wham
Gilbert Wham
1 month ago
Reply to  TheCoryJihad

These still go for silly money here in the UK, and our used car prices are waaaaayyyy less crazy than the Cousins. TBH I’m surprised how cheap it is.

Matt Gasper
Matt Gasper
1 month ago

The 3.0 V6 in the Saab is unique to Saab, despite being based on Opel. It’s pretty undesirable, being more complex, more rare, and not significantly more powerful than the 2.3T. It’s a nice example, though.

Taargus Taargus
Taargus Taargus
1 month ago

Can’t really go wrong here, I love both Saab and Volvo, and these are two of my favorites. But I tend to favor Saab, and I love love love the 9-5 wagon. If Saab existed and sold something like it today, I would own one. And I’ve nearly pulled the trigger on a few 9-5 wagons in the past…

So 9-5 it is.

FrontWillDrive
FrontWillDrive
1 month ago

I love both honestly in terms of appeal, but the half-turbo also makes me half as interested. I’ll take the brick.

ChefCJ
ChefCJ
1 month ago

I work at a school, I’m pretty sure that legally obligates me to choose the Volvo. I’m fine with that, I know for a fact that engine is about as robust a thing as Volvo ever made, and despite the front seats having paid the Volvo Seat Tax, I’m betting they’re still amazingly comfortable in the way only a Volvo seat can be

88
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x