One thing Saab is not short of is goodwill. The public outcry at the possibility that former owner General Motors might let it slide into oblivion was matched by the relief shown last year when it was saved (at first sight rather improbably) by Dutch sportcar manufacturer Spyker, and twice in the same day representatives of rival manufacturers recently told me how important they considered Saab's continued existence to be. In view of what you're about to read, I should take this opportunity to say that I'm rather fond of Saab myself.For several years now, Saab has stumbled along with out-of-date products, clearly and obviously not selling enough of them to pay its way. The fact that it sold anything at all must surely be down to the fact that some people remain stoutly loyal to the brand and would consider it the act of a modern-day Lord Haw-Haw to buy anything else. But that's not enough. Without question, Saab needs new cars before it can find new buyers.Well, the 9-5 is new. That's not enough either, though, because what I should have said earlier was that Saab needs car that are new and good. And I don't think the 9-5 is very good at all.Why not? To start with a simple example, I'm encouraged by Saab personnel to admire the car's design, though I must say I'm not much taken by it. That, however, is a personal opinion. Less open to dispute is that the 9-5 seems to have been styled in such a way that it can't be seen out of, or at least not easily. The rear window is particularly small (probably not much greater in area than that of a city car, though I haven't measured it), and it occurs to me that if you must go to the trouble and expense of providing windows at all you might as well make them of a useful size.That's not a Saab-specific criticism, though. Throughout the industry, manufacturers seem to be battling with each other to see who can provide the least visibility, and I suppose Saab has just been caught up with that. The 9-5 is bad in this respect, but not much worse than average.In another respect it's pretty good. There are cars the size of the 9-5 which offer surprisingly little room for rear passengers, but the 9-5 itself gives no cause for complaint here. At six foot three I have just about enough legroom and an almost satisfactory amount of headroom when sitting beside the driver's seat as set up for my comfort, from all of which I'd say that the 9-5 could easily carry four six-footers for a considerable distance in comfort (helped by the very well-designed seats).Comfort, but not exactly luxury. While the interior looks smart enough - new, but still reminiscent of that of much earlier Saabs - it has not been made from the best materials. Other writers have commented on the centre console, and in particular its flimsy feel. For me, the biggest problem is with the door-mounted electric window controls, which are not particularly pretty and feel as if they might snap off if you were too rough with them. In the exact form tested, with various extras, the petrol-fuelled Aero 2.0T costs around £32,000, and although it seems to have £32,000 worth of stuff in it, it does not feel like a £32,000 car.I would guess that this is because Saab's engineers - who I can't believe are delighted with the way the 9-5 has turned out - were limited by constraints of time, or budget, or both, since they would have been doing most of their work at a time when their employer looked like it would be out of business by Christmas. And nothing inspires this feeling more strongly than the way the car behaves on the road.Before I say what I think about this, I should perhaps record the reaction of a colleague when I told him. It soon became clear that we disagreed thoroughly. He had a much higher opinion of the 9-5's ride quality than I do, and there was some confusion until we realised that we were not talking about the same car. His experience was with the range-topping 2.8-litre turbo petrol four-wheel drive Aero, and I suppose it's possible that that version is better set-up than this one.But I can only speak of the car I've driven, and really the 2.0T Aero isn't good enough. It reacts to the most minor imperfection in the road surface the same way a depressed person reacts to equally trivial misfortunes in life: "It's just not fair. Why do these things keep happening to me?" And I found that it behaves much the same way in very different conditions - for example, at 60mph along a perfectly normal A-road, and at an indicated 7mph approaching a junction in a quiet residential area.All these things being the case, I can not imagine that anyone loyal to the Audi, BMW or Mercedes-Benz brands would consider the 9-5 for a moment, and it also compares badly with the top-of-the-range Skoda Superb, which behaves far better on the road and is £4000 cheaper. So things have not really changed with Saab - not yet. The 9-5 is likely to be bought only by people who wish Saab well and want to help finance the company until the better times arrive. I would understand the feelings of anyone who did that, but that won't make me pretend that the 9-5, as it stands now, is a good car. Engine 1998 cc, 4 cylinders Power 220 bhp @5300 rpm Torque 258 ib/ft @2500 rpm Transmission 6 speed manual Fuel/CO2 33.6 mpg / 194 g/km Acceleration 0-62mph: 7.9sec Top speed 149 mph Price From £30736.00 approx Release date 01/06/2010