Saab Phoenix Chassis Secrets: How Project 540 Was Aiming to Give the 9-3 the World’s Best Chassis

The first Alriks Bilar episode on the Saab Fenix project brought Project 540 back into public view. It showed the red Saab 9-3 Convertible development car, the SportCombi on the lift, the Griffin Cars plan for a small series of Phoenix/Fenix-based cars, and the people trying to preserve part of Saab’s last major platform program.

The second film goes where Saab enthusiasts really want to go: underneath the car.

Published on Alrik Söderlind’s Alriks Bilar channel under the title “Saab-Fenix skulle få världens bästa chassi”, the new episode focuses on the chassis work behind Project 540. Söderlind speaks with two former Saab engineers who were directly connected to that work: Gunnar Olsson, group leader for chassis pre-development and project leader for the front suspension, and Per Jansson, responsible for driving dynamics and comfort.

The result is one of the most technically valuable Saab videos published in recent years. It explains why Project 540 was not simply the next body shape after the 9-3, not just a Jason Castriota-era design chapter, and not only a Griffin Cars curiosity built from surviving parts. Underneath, Saab was trying to create a sharper, quieter, more stable and more future-ready chassis than the outgoing 9-3 platform could offer.

The Swedish series uses the name Fenix, while the English-speaking Saab community often recognizes the wider story under Phoenix. In this article, both terms appear because they describe the same late Saab development universe around Project 540. The important point is that this was the technical platform for Saab’s intended next-generation 9-3, developed while Saab was still operating in the final GM-influenced engineering environment and then into the post-GM, Victor Muller period.

Video: Alriks Bilar Explains the Saab Fenix Chassis

This second video deserves to be watched in full, especially by readers interested in suspension geometry, Saab’s development methods, the 5-link rear axle and the planned electric rear axle. The conversation is not a surface-level walkaround. It includes Saab’s own engineering slides, front suspension optimization studies, old comparison material against period competitors, and explanations from people who were involved before the company collapsed.

Why This Was Not Another Saab Facelift

One of the key messages in the episode is that Project 540 was not another facelift. Saab had a long history of keeping cars alive through continuous development. That approach produced strong model identities, but it also meant that cars often remained in production for very long cycles.

Olsson and Jansson discuss this openly. Saab had operated for years with relatively modest production volumes compared with larger manufacturers, and that made full model replacement difficult. The company often refined existing cars instead of replacing them quickly. That created long-lived models, but it also meant the final 9-3 was carrying structural limits by the end of its life.

Project 540 was intended to break that pattern.

The Fenix program included a new front suspension concept, a much more advanced rear suspension, new driveline planning and preparation for an electric rear axle. It was still designed with Saab’s real-world constraints in mind, but it was not a light update of the old architecture. It was the technical basis for the car Saab wanted to launch around 2013.

That distinction matters for the Griffin Cars story. The cars now being built are not interesting only because they are rare. They are important because they carry hardware from the moment Saab was finally moving beyond another 9-3 evolution.

The Ambition: The World’s Best McPherson Front Suspension

At first glance, Saab’s choice of a McPherson strut front suspension may not sound radical. It was a known, widely used layout. Saab did not pretend otherwise. Olsson explains that McPherson still had clear advantages: low weight, robust construction, cost efficiency, packaging efficiency and relative simplicity.

The ambition was not to invent a showpiece suspension. It was to make the best possible McPherson front axle.

That meant identifying the weaknesses of the layout and attacking them with detailed engineering. Saab wanted to reduce unwanted steering effects caused by road disturbances, vertical force variations, drive forces, braking forces and lateral loads. At the same time, the engineers wanted to keep the useful steering feedback that gives the driver confidence and precision.

This is an important Saab distinction. The team was not trying to isolate the driver from the road completely. They wanted the driver to feel the restoring moment from lateral forces in a corner, because that is part of steering feel. What they did not want was for random disturbance forces from rough roads, wheel load changes or torque input to create unwanted steering movement.

For anyone who has driven a powerful front-wheel-drive Saab on uneven roads, this target is easy to understand.

Design of Experiments, Not Trial and Error

The most revealing technical slides in the film concern the front suspension optimization work. Saab used Design of Experiments, parameter sensitivity analysis and multi-objective optimization to study the front axle before committing to the final geometry.

One slide describes the scale of the work: 11 variables, two main responses per driving case – toe and camber – 8 driving cases, around 600 parameter sets, and a Latin Hypercube statistical method. In simple language, Saab was using structured simulation to understand which design variables had the largest influence on the car’s behavior.

This was not a matter of changing one part, driving the car, and guessing what felt better. The engineers used multiple input variables and multiple responses to determine how suspension geometry and stiffness influenced steering disturbance, toe change and camber change under load.

The target was specific: when disturbance forces entered the tire, they should not create unwanted steering effects. When the driver turned the wheel, the car should respond directly and predictably.

That level of work is why Project 540 deserves more serious attention than it usually receives. In public, Saab’s final years were dominated by production stops, ownership questions and bankruptcy headlines. Inside the engineering work, the chassis team was still using advanced methods to solve real dynamic problems.

Stronger Components Where They Actually Matter

The simulation work led to hardware decisions. Olsson explains that the strut assembly, steering knuckle and related structure needed much higher lateral stiffness. The strut tube had to be strong within practical limits. The steering knuckle had to be stiffer in bending and around the steering arm. The distance between the strut mounting bolts was also increased compared with the old setup.

Those details sound small only to people who do not think about how suspension loads travel through a front-wheel-drive car. When the tire receives vertical, lateral, braking or drive forces, the structure can flex. If it flexes in the wrong way, the wheel steers slightly without the driver asking for it. That is exactly what Saab was trying to reduce.

The steering rack position was also optimized. Even if the suspension structure flexed slightly under side load, the rack needed to sit where those movements created the smallest possible steering error.

The result, according to the discussion, was a front axle with better course stability, less disturbance through the steering wheel and higher steering response than the existing 9-3. Project 540 also used electric power steering, which was a significant step for Saab at the time.

Testing Had Already Gone Beyond the Computer

The film also makes clear that the work had moved beyond theory. Olsson mentions early optimization drives at Idiada near Barcelona, followed by winter testing in Arvidsjaur. Saab had old 9-3 reference cars, but also Project 540 mules.

The number is important. Around 20 mules existed with complete driveline, front suspension and rear suspension, along with additional powertrain mules that did not necessarily include the full rear axle package.

That fact changes how the Fenix story should be understood. Project 540 was not an idea waiting for its first prototype. Saab had built and driven development cars. Engineers had compared simulations against physical results. The program was already deep into the stage where theory had to survive real road and winter test conditions.

This is why the Griffin Cars conversions are so compelling. They do not invent a fantasy version of Saab’s future. They reuse surviving parts and knowledge from a project that had already reached running development cars.

The Rear Axle Was the Bigger Leap

If the front axle was an optimized McPherson, the rear suspension was the bigger conceptual step.

Jansson explains that the rear axle was a completely new concept for Saab and still quite advanced in the broader industry at that time: a 5-link rear axle. The reason was control. A 5-link layout allowed Saab to define the wheel’s movement more precisely through suspension travel.

One of the most interesting details is the way the rear wheel was intended to move upward and rearward when it encountered a bump. That rearward component helps the wheel roll over an obstacle more softly, instead of sending a sharper impact into the body.

This links directly to the old Saab engineering slides shown in the film. One slide compares the Saab 9-3, BMW 3 Series and Audi A5 in terms of rear axle side-view swing arm deflection. The proposed Saab 540 5-link position appears close to the premium German benchmarks of the period, especially in the area associated with road isolation and rearward wheel movement during jounce.

That comparison is one of the most interesting parts of the video because it places Saab’s late development work against cars that continued to evolve after 2011. BMW, Audi and others had the financial runway to keep developing their platforms, production systems and premium chassis technology. Saab had engineering ambition, but the company ran out of time before Project 540 could become a production car.

Full Isolation and the Quietest Rear Axle Saab Had Measured

The 5-link rear axle was not designed only for cornering behavior. It was also a major NVH project.

The slides and the discussion explain that all links were mounted to an isolated cradle, creating double isolation from the road wheel to the body. That reduced harshness, improved ride comfort and lowered road noise transfer. Another slide states that the 5-link had an ideal shock absorber ratio close to 1:1, with the damper positioned close to the wheel center. That reduced shock absorber forces, improved tunability and helped ride comfort and noise.

Jansson makes one of the strongest claims in the video: Saab’s noise lab measured the new rear axle as having the lowest structure-borne road noise transfer they had ever measured on any car. That was not only a comparison against older Saab models, but against competitor cars as well.

For Saab owners, that matters because it fits the brand’s best engineering tradition. Saab was rarely about the stiffest suspension or the most dramatic spec sheet. The best Saab chassis work was about confidence, stability, real-road speed and long-distance control. Project 540’s rear axle aimed exactly at that: better comfort, better road isolation and better wheel control at the same time.

Prepared for the Electric Rear Axle

The rear axle also had another purpose: it was prepared for electric rear drive.

The next Alriks Bilar episode will focus on the electric rear axle with Stefan Barbunopulos, but this chassis episode already explains why the 5-link layout mattered for that future. The rear structure had provisions for an electric motor. Mules with electric rear drive had already run around 2010.

This was not only about lower fuel consumption. Saab was looking at traction, stability and active handling. The engineers discuss an electric rear axle concept with torque-vectoring capability, where drive forces could be controlled left and right to help the car turn, stabilize or rotate more effectively.

They mention a concept with a larger electric motor for propulsion and smaller power dedicated to vectoring function. In period terms, around 50 kW for propulsion was discussed, while today that number would sound modest compared with modern high-output EV systems. But the thinking was already there: use electric drive not only as an efficiency tool, but as a chassis tool.

That is why the upcoming electric rear axle episode may become the most important part of the whole series.

The Fastback Slide Shows Saab’s Product Logic

One of the additional frames shown in the video is especially useful beyond pure suspension discussion. It is a Saab presentation slide titled “Reason why Saab need a Fastback in Portfolio.”

This slide is important because it explains how Saab saw the next-generation 9-3 product direction. The reasoning was not only about looking different. Saab wanted a body style that reflected its roots in versatile, sporty and individual cars: Sonett, 99 Combi-Coupé and 9-3 SportCombi. The slide also lists competitors such as Audi A4, BMW 3 Series, Volvo S60, Lexus IS, Acura TSX and Infiniti G35, along with body-style references like Audi A5 Sportback, BMW 5 GT and Porsche Panamera.

The target customer description is also very Saab: independent-minded, modern, educated, active, interested in progressive design, driving dynamics, safety and technology.

This gives the chassis work a wider meaning. Project 540 was not only about making a better axle set. Saab was trying to reposition the 9-3 with a body style, chassis concept and technical identity that would separate it from mainstream premium sedans.

In today’s market, that slide feels surprisingly current. Fastbacks, crossover-influenced silhouettes and distinctive liftback shapes became more common after Saab disappeared. Saab was not guaranteed success, but it was clearly looking in the right direction.

Saab’s Competitors Had the Time Saab Did Not

The comparison with period competitors is one of the most useful ways to read this video. Saab was benchmarking against serious cars: BMW 3 Series, Audi A4/A5, Mercedes models and others. On the rear suspension slides, the proposed Saab 540 5-link appears in the same discussion space as premium German rear axle behavior.

The painful part is that those manufacturers continued. They developed new platforms, refined electric steering, introduced hybrid systems, improved NVH, expanded fastback and crossover body styles, and moved into performance electrification. Saab had many of those conversations on the table around 2009-2011, but the company did not survive long enough to turn them into a normal product cycle.

That is why the Alriks Bilar series feels different from ordinary Saab nostalgia. It does not only say “Saab could have built something interesting.” It shows that Saab had already done serious technical work in areas that became mainstream later: simulation-led chassis optimization, rear axle isolation, electric rear drive, torque vectoring and brand-specific fastback positioning.

The tragedy is not that Saab lacked ideas. The tragedy is that the production and business side never gave those ideas enough runway.

What the Three Men Under the Lift Add to the Story

The strongest visual frame from the new video is not a slide. It is the three men standing under the raised SportCombi: Alrik Söderlind asking questions, Gunnar Olsson explaining the front axle and Per Jansson connecting the theory to driving dynamics and comfort.

That image works because it places Saab’s late engineering story back in the workshop. The car is not on a show stand. It is on a lift, with its underside exposed, while the people who understand the thinking behind it explain why it mattered.

For a community that has spent years trying to reconstruct Saab’s final platform story from fragments, this is valuable. It gives names, roles, context and physical evidence to a program that was interrupted before most buyers ever knew how far it had gone.

From Mechanical AWD to Joystick Steering

Toward the end of the film, the conversation widens into older Saab development experiments. The engineers mention mechanical four-wheel-drive prototypes from the 1980s, including 9000 and later 900-based mules. They also discuss Saab’s joystick steering experiment, inspired partly by Saab’s aircraft side.

This section matters because it places Project 540 inside a longer Saab pattern. Saab often explored systems before they were commercially obvious. Some ideas stayed experimental. Some were not mature enough. Some were too expensive. But the company culture allowed engineers to test concepts that larger, more rigid organizations might have dismissed too early.

Project 540 was not one of the strange side projects. It was a serious production-intended platform. But it came from the same engineering environment: test first, understand the forces, try to solve the driver’s problem, then decide whether it belongs in a car.

Why This Second Episode Matters

The first Alriks Bilar episode proved that the Fenix project still exists in physical form. The second episode explains why the hardware matters.

The front suspension was designed to reduce unwanted steering effects while keeping useful road feel. The rear suspension was designed to improve comfort, road noise and wheel control through a 5-link layout and isolated cradle. The platform was prepared for electric rear drive and torque vectoring. The product planning slides show Saab trying to move the next 9-3 toward a more distinctive fastback identity, not another conventional sedan formula.

That combination gives the Griffin Cars project much more weight. These cars are not important only because few will be built. They are important because they carry the unfinished logic of Saab’s next real platform step.

The next film will cover the electric rear axle. If the chassis episode is any guide, that may show that Saab’s final development work was closer to today’s performance-hybrid thinking than many people realize.

Project 540 was stopped by bankruptcy, not by a lack of engineering ambition. Fifteen years later, Alriks Bilar and Griffin Cars are letting the Saab community see what was really being built underneath the lost 2013 9-3.