After years of wishing that SAAB would lay a golden egg for GM and become the BMW cash cow that they had hoped, why don't they just rename the marque what it actually is becoming: "GMW," a.k.a. Generic Motor Works. Funny, I thought the first "S" stood for Svenska (Swedish.) Subaru and Chevrolet rebadges? Their truck brand is already GMC so the remnants of SAAB would easily have universal acceptance as GMW.
I have been the proud owner of a '76 99GLE, a '78 99GL, and now drive a '00
9-3 convertible. My Dad drove 2-stroke SAABs in the '60's and flashed high beams about once a month to greet the other SAAB driver. The '78 99GL hatchback probably saved my Dad's life in a head-on crash over 60 mph before airbags and ABS. He walked away with a scratch on his knee from the after-market foglight switch. After repairs, I drove that remarkable car for eight more years. I just ask every past, present, and future(?) SAAB owner to remember and appreciate the quirkiness, safety consciousness, and unique recognizability of the brand while it still exists..
I laugh/cry every time I see one of the TV commercials say "Be independent, drive a SAAB" as they homogenize the marque out of existence.
I enjoyed your rant, however I think it comes to symbolize a much larger dichotomy of thinking among lurkers in this group, and perhaps in the larger Saab "community".
There are those who long for and continue to live in the self-styled pre-GM "glory days" of Saab (...-c.1993 Saabs). They will, generally speaking, never be happy with new Saabs. ...the "purists".
Then there is the other group who is perhaps a bit more casual in their dispersal of their love for Saabs...they respect the history and lineage of Saabs, yet are quite comfortable prowling about in what purists would deem as "GM-tainted" Saabs (1994-...). ...the "tainted ones"
Being an owner of a newer Saab, I guess I will place myself in the latter category. That said, I have complete respect for the individual views of the purists and admittedly, I would love to one day see a return of the C900. :-)
Tex's post hits on something I've been thinking about for a while. I'm interested in buying a used Saab convertible, and was wondering what years are "good"?
I've owned older Saabs, a 1966 96 2 stroke, a couple of Sonett 3's, and a couple of mid-80's 900's.
My 900 Turbo was great, so I would even consider an "old type" 900 convertible, but I would also appreciate any input as to how new of a convertible I could buy before it got too far away from being a "real" Saab.
I am in the latter group as well. Face the facts: platform sharing is here to stay. Ever car maker is doing it. But making the next 9-3 in Germany with the Vectra is going a bit far.
We have Vectra's here in Australia too - marketted by GMH (aka General Motors Holden) who also import the Astra. They make the Commodore here locally, and the Monaro (which is being exported the US with a different name).
I can see the USA-isation of Saab simply by the non-offering of a hatchback these days.
Anyone with knowledge of the European market knows that the hatchback is the single most popular body style here.
Yet GM wants to produce 'sedans' it seems. Utterly blinkered thinking.
The apparent anticipated demand just for the 'wagon' 9-3 in Europe shows for example where GM has been losing sales ( even though it's *not* a hatchback) .
Then again, GM as a corporation simply seems to be dumb. Common in modern corporates where individual radical thinking seems to be suppressed.
Welcome to the demise of Saab.
BTW - I bet GM are so dumb that they don't have a single employee perusing this NG for ideas !
There's nothing better than dumb ppl than even dumber ppl.
I bet there's a few GM employees reading here, but I also bet management would blow them off even if they did have the sense to bring up some of the feedback.
My own category would just like to see Saab models evolve as modern efficient cars, with regard to unique style and Scandinavian driving conditions. This seems less likely under present GM management.
BTW, Visiting my usual Saab dealer, I found that they now have a Mazda show room. This is an odd combination since Mazda is associated with Ford. However, had they chosen GM Vauxhall, then I guess their Saabs would stick out as dressed-up Vauxhalls, whereas Mazda is more complementary to the Saab range. Walking around there, it will be difficult to choose, since the Mazdas are good value, whereas Saab have more prestige (still)...
About a s crazy as making the new Cadillac BLS in Sweden... However I saw some pic's and the car didn't look half as bad as I feared, I doubt if the Cadillac brand will be a success here, even with this "local" product. The Cimarron of the 80's was no big success on either side of the big puddle. That also was a plain 4 Cyl Opel rebadged to GM's luxury brand.
I wonder what's gonna happen now since they renamed DAEWOO to Chevrolet in Europe, the association of the brandname Chevrolet from "Big American" and "V8" will change into "Cheap Korean"...
Tex: I think there is a big difference between a Saab engineered NG900 using some GM parts and a Subaru with a Saab tweaked interior... or a GM truck with a Saab badge.
While all brands seem to be going cross platform, the Saab part is being removed entirely from Saabs. They are doing that with other acquisitions too. GM is just building a new generation of what they did with buick/olds/chevy/pontiac. One car, multiple trims. They've just realized how stupid that was with the original GM brands and are shutting down redundant products - but too stupid to realize that they are doing it again with all the brands they just bought. Corporate morons, once and forever.
This is strange because the majority of the Saab C900's I've noticed here in Sydney when driving around are sedan body versions, and very few are hatchbacks. In affluent parts of Sydney it could be different, mainly because those areas would have the biggest concentration of more recent GM-ified models.
I don't know if the story is the same in other main Australian cities like Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide, Hobart or Perth. Given that Saab seems to be associated more with Melbourne than Sydney (in terms of have more outlets for service and parts), the picture in Melbourne could well be favouring hatchbacks versions.
I think that deciding on producing sedan-body or hatchback-body only is a stupid move as it's forcing that onto markets where one or the other is more favourable.
I wonder if there will be a 'sunroof vs no sunroof' decision? Personally I hate sunroofs, but other people love them. Bit of a subjective issue.
OK. How about this as a hypothetical...I like Chevys. I happen to drive a Chevy Corvette. I love my Corvette. However there a couple Chevy models that really stink, like the Cavalier. What a piece of junk. Oh, and by the way, those Chevys sold in the UK, those rebadged Daewoos, I think those really stink.
My point is that you don't have to like all of Saabs models to be comfortable with Saabs, in general. Futher, there are few people who would actually define the true Saab lineup as anything beyond the current 9-3 and
9-5 models. The 9-2x and 9-7x are pretty well accepted to be models of their respective manufacturers anyway. Anyone who buys one, knows that, going into it.
Last I checked the Saab 9-3 and 9-5's were both nearly entirely conceived and built by Saab engineers/designers (aside from the design of the Epsilon platform and Ecotec engine...Saab engineers were a part of both of those projects as well).
As anyone here in this group, with any base knowledge of Saab's history, will attest, Saab has historically depended on others for various expertise in the design/manufacturing process.
To remain competitive Saab needed to expand its product lineup. Over the past 10 years Saab has seen its clientele drift to other manufacturers for vehicle types that it simply did not have in its portfolio. GM recognized this and quickly moved to do something about it. Quick moves are a valid level of response to market demand, but they aren't always ideal. Given a typical lead time to market for a new vehicle is from 3-7 years (f/conception to execution), a manufacturer can't always respond to market demans the way it wants. That's the situation GM was in....so as a quick fix they did a rebadge with the Impreza and soon the, Trailblazer. This was hardly an ideal but until new products can be fully developed, this fit the bill. If nothing more, it let consumers know Saab wasn't just sitting by idle.
I think a lot this will change now that the manufacturing process has been finalized for the next few years. Work will begin in earnest to internally develop new vehicles. The first task they'll have is to do a full redesign of the 9-5 (now a bit overdue).
I don't think the general idea of a certain level of component sharing is actually that bad of an idea. Nor does it need to lead to brand homogenization. Many GM vehicles already share epsilon platform (9-3 included), yet, aside f/their similar size, they don't look alike at all. The epsilon platform and the ecotec engines are really good examples of what can be done when employing a shared components methodology. Keep in mind, sharing components and rebadging are two very things.
To rub it in; The first two stroke engines were a SAAB design, but the engineers were 'inspired' by the German DKW. The later V4 cars had Ford engines. The first 99 engine was a Triumph design. The 9000 is similar to a Fiat Croma Most aux. equipment is third party
I agree with some of your sentiments but I don't think the lack of a
9-3 hatchback alone is evidence of Americanisation of Saab. The BMW 3 series and Audi A4 are made primarily as saloons (sedans). Neither is American-owned and both are also available in estate/wagon versions (cf the forthcoming 9-3 estate). Volvo dropped the 440 hatchback in favour of the S40 saloon before they came under Ford ownership. Much as hatchbacks must constitute the most common body style across the range in Europe, saloons seem popular in the market that Saab is aiming for
Conversely I haven't seen any sign that GM intends to drop the hatchback versions of the Vectra or Astra...
I think you pretty much summed up my own view there too.
GM appear to think that a ' brand ' can be made attractive on the basis of the badge they stick on the vehicle rather than its basic engineering !
I have no trouble wish shared components or chassis where they're good. But you need to keep the vitality of the brand ( especially when it's an upmarket one ) alive.
Btw - in former days in the UK, similar vehicles were made by BMC under the Austin, Morris, Riley and Wolseley brands. Not one of them left now.
Are hatchbacks generally popular in Australia vs the '3 box' body style where both versions of the same model are available ( probably not many models that fit that category now ) ?
Exactly. Saab's lost sales in it's home European market where hatchbacks are v. popular.
My last car had a glass sunroof and I liked it - it illuminates a possibly gloomy cabin in the winter months and provides extra fresh air in summer.
The absence of one from my 9000 doesn't bother me - but the cabin's trimmed in a light grey so it's naturally relatively light.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.