Maintain Your Identity - Saab

agreed

Reply to
JDS
Loading thread data ...

OK, for someone contemplating returning to Saab ownership, having owned an early square front C900 T16S (yes it really was a 1984 T16S), unless an exceptional Carlsson, Ruby or T16S convertable is willed to me, the tinkering is something I could do without for now (maybe, I have said that before). I also drove a 9000 CDE LPT for a couple of weeks. I liked it.

Was thinking of an NG900, but can't get away from the Cavalier tag. WHat are they really like to drive and live with compared to a C900? Which model in the NG900 range was the sporty one? Don't think I would want a NG900 convertable. They don't have the presence of the C900 convert on the road, even though they look nice enough.

Or would I be better hunting down a 9000 Aero, or CS Carlsson.

Probably won't be for another year unless something stupid happens, as the Celica has just gained itself another years MOT, and there are some bits I've bought that I could do with fitting (decat, braided brake lines, manual boost controller), and some bodywork scrapes, dings (carpark stuff) and laquer flaking, that I would want to sort before trying to move it on.

I do really miss my C900, even though the Celica has a sportier driving position, and more power.

Reply to
Sleeker GT Phwoar

The overall message seems to me: I don't like cars so I buy a Saab.

Sometimes when I'm in my Saab, stuck in traffic and they play one of the Dutch elitist "Look at how different I am!" commercials on the radio I actually feel a sense of shame for driving one.

Then, in the parking lot at the university where I work, I sometimes have trouble seeing which one of the black 9-3's is mine. What do I do now to be different?

The irony of it all... :(

X.

Reply to
Xenna

even in today's society. I also believe in not hoping on the bandwagon with the #1 baseball team even if your home team is not doing as well.

I'm deffinitely big on loyalty. I'm loyal to my family, my friends, those I work with etc. But do I feel any loyalty towards giant multinationals? Hmm...

Reply to
Grunff

That's some great marketing work being put out by General Motors. Too bad the cars don't get equal attention...

Wanna maintain your identity? by an old SAAB, and maintain that.

-Fred W

Reply to
Malt_Hound

Fred,

That's quite funny of you! :)

SaabGuy

Reply to
Saab Guy

Point missed? you did.

To answer your questions though:-

A Saab 9-3 is, IMHO far superior, £ for £ to a BMW 3 series. I admit to quite fancying a 328, but frankly a 318 or a 320? Nah, doesn't come close.

Audi A4?!? What! Generally driven by young sales managers with quiffy highlighted hair. Yes I love my stereotypes, but as an ageing fat bloke with a goatee I get stereotyped and judged all the time so who cares.

The 9-3 is in a different league to some of the cars I mentioned previously, Mundeos etc. I also made the point that on the second hand market Saabs represent tremendous value in the UK. I don't know about other markets, US or European, so I won't comment.

The NG900 is again streets ahead in terms of value compared to equivalent aged Beamers, and at least it came with a stereo when new. An old work colleague of mine had a new 318 every 4 years, I couldn't believe how spartan they were for the money.

BMW's are fine cars, image problem aside which I do not want to go into again, but there is no doubt about it the equivalent 2nd hand Saabs offer much better value for money. UK residents have this idea that Saabs cost alot to run. Which we all know isn't really true.

However, I am happy for the general population of the UK to carry on thinking Saabs are expensive to run, it means I can afford to buy a 5 year old 9-3 SE for less than £5k. Try getting a good beamer or merc for that money.

At the end of the day I love Turbo Grin, and only Saab can do that. Well so can Subaru but I don't want a car that looks like an accident in a body shop!

Cheers anyway.

Al

By the way Saab Guy, I actually quite enjoyed the link, though I can't see how it would make anyone want to buy a Saab or anything else come to that!

Reply to
Al

Actually, it's good you brought this up. I bought a 2004 9-3 aero in February. Meanwhile a friend of mine was shopping for a new car as well. He was driving a 1999 328 bmw. Hearing about the new 3-series BMW he waited and waited til it finally arrived. He went to the dealership the day they started taking orders. Placed an order, waited three months and finally got his new 330 just this week. Needless to say he's been espousing this thing for months. Got really annoying.

In any event, perhaps it was because he had built it up so much, but I was thoroughly underimpressed. Having paid significantly more for his beamer than my aero, in my view, he got significantly less of a car (save for perhaps the larger v6/255hp engine vs the aero's 210hp 4 banger). I found the BMW's dash to be too conservative and not the least bit driver oriented. A small display on the radio, well below driver's view (forcing the driver to look down), with even smaller controls made it difficult to navigate basic system display info (DTE, trip info, temp, etc). This stands in stark contrast to the 9-3's head-up, driver-orientation, of display information.

The seats were comfortable but felt too low and did not give a commanding driving view. The trunk/boot space was a bit better with an extra well of space available since there is no spare tire (car has run-flat tires). However, the 60-40 rear seat pulls were unintuitively placed hidden under the rear deck.

The key fob was awkwardly unintuitive and my friend found us locked inside the car w/o any clear way of unlocking the doors from inside...could be a bit dangerous.

There was a noticeable lack of unencumbered "cubby" space in the front console area. There is however a flip-up covered cubby awkwardly placed in a small area between the tall gear shifter and the console.

The climate control display has a chintzy knob interface with the seat heater controls seemingly tacked on as an afterthought.

No nightpanel.

No default auto-on lights.

Engine and gearbox were smooth and supplied more than adequate power for quick-response acceleration. BMW has slight edge here. But it comes at the cost of lower fuel economy.

I was excited to see the new "engine start" button. I was under the impression they used all RFID technology....meaning, you get in car with key in pocket and the car wirelessly authenticates the key and allows driver to simply "push" start the car. Nope. You still have to manually insert the key and _then_ press the start button. Neat, but more gimmicky than useful. This is vs. the Saab RFID key which allows the driver to place the key in the console ignition, turn and start the car...all in one motion like any standard key.

Looks: The new 3 is a pretty car. Nice subtle styling changes from the old

  1. I guess it's personal preference for looks.

- tex

Reply to
Tex

You can also start the car with your thumb if the remote is close enough to the ignition.

Reply to
Shane Almeida

I had a number of annoying little problems with my 2004 9-3. All of which I have previously discussed here in this group (namely, some initial quality defects). Those were all covered under warranty.

It's annoying that the car had these problems at all. However, Saab's biggest competitors have, by their own admission, had many of the same kinds of quality problems...Mercedes and BMW. Namely, electronics and other technology feature failures. This is not to say these problems are excusable...just that if you want to compare Saab to its competition, you have to recognize its competitors shortcomings as well. In this area, Japanese cars far outpace all of their euro-competitors.

My biggest "quality" problem with my 9-3 is the number of rattles and buzzes in the interior. I've identified them not as manufacturing defects but rather as inadequate "quality" engineering. All of the buzzes and rattles in the car are inherent design/engineering flaws/shortcomings. It's clear, they simply didn't do enough build-testing to identify and prevent rattle prone parts and materials. This would hopefully be fixed in a later build/model year.

- tex

Reply to
Tex

The above seems to indicate that your main criteria are image and price. If that's the case, then maybe Saab are hitting the target after all.

D'y know, I love that turbo grin too - but I haven't managed to get one out of a 9^3 yet!

Reply to
Grunff

v6 in a bmw? That'll be the day. Straight 6 Tex.

Yes, but how did the drive compare? To me, that's what matters - not how the seats fold down! I spend 99% of my time driving the car, not messing about with interior bits. How did it drive? Did it feel good? Did you feel in control? Was there always plenty of power there?

Reply to
Grunff

I think doing it wirelessly could be dangerous in some situations. Wireless transmissions can be broken by objects in the way or interference. What if your car stalls (say on a railway crossing), you press the start button and nothing happens? You then have to troubleshoot your wireless link before you have a chance to get out of the way of that approaching train ;)

Sounds like a much better and more intuitive way. They could have used start buttons decades ago (don't know when the button was invented) but I'm guessing they just thought the turn key ignition was simpler and safer.

X.

Reply to
Xenna

Yes. Coming along. I'm setting up BitTorrent after some advice from others and that should help with making the video file sharing better to manage.

I'll contact you privately to nut out details.

Craig.

Reply to
Craig's Saab C900 Site

Basically GM, being a large multi-national car company, has a vested interest in it's product because it supports the large multi-national oil companies since both depend on each other for continuing growth and development of the auto business.

I don't quite know how Saab is positioned in this, but since Saab is not a prime GM product in terms of sales volume, it might not factor in like the US domestic car brands under the GM banner no doubt would.

Craig.

Reply to
Craig's Saab C900 Site

Of course not - it was the English Electric Lightning ! ;-)

formatting link
Graham

Reply to
Pooh Bear

No No No! I was merely trying to point out that "purists" don't move on.

As an air show buff, (see you at Waddington?) as well as a Saab fan I see where you're going, the Lighting was indeed a superb aircraft, certainly speed-wise. Did it ever see action though? (I don't know)

The Spitfire did, and the sound of that Merlin, well I defy anyone to say it doesn't move them!

I have to admit the roar of any jet fighter on a low attack run can also be pretty stirring!

Al

Reply to
Al

And I was just pulling your leg ! ;-)

I haven't made it sadly. I do appreciate nice aircraft though.

Apparently the only aircraft shot down by a Lightning was a rougue Harrier whose pilot had ejected but the damn Harrier just kept on flying !

They sent a Lightning to shoot it down safely before the Harrier had a chance to do any damage !

Not to mention a Vulcan too. See same web site.

"At its operational height the Vulcan can outfly and outmanoeuvre any fighter in squadron service today."

- Air Ministry Press Release (1958).

For the benefit of US citizens unfamilar with the Vulcan, the Vulcan was a bomber !

Graham

Reply to
Pooh Bear

yes. sorry. clarification..._straight_ 6.

Fair enough. Being my friend's car I didn't exactly give it a thorough driving test. However, I did manage to gauge its performance from taking it on local roads and the highway (a 25 min ride to the movie theatre). As I had expected, the engine lacked the Saab's inherent turbo lag and provided clean, smooth, confident acceleration as needed. I found the high speed cornering to generally be clean (ie, it kept the track i fed to it) but with a slightly noticeable body roll. The articles i've read about it, indicated they've improved the steering, however, from a driving experience, i didn't notice any perceptible improvement (vs his old 3 nor my 9-3).

As for raw, standing start, vehicle power/acceleration, the edge goes to the BMW (due to inherent advantages of the larger engine and rwd). For passing power, the BMW has an ever so slight edge. However, at speed, the Saab's turbo kicks in quickly providing the boost needed for confident passing/lane changes. For cornering, I give the edge to the Saab. The 9-3 tracks any corner you give it w/o so much as a flinch.

As for braking, my friend got a little nervous when i actually had to put them to serious use. On the highway, the car in front of us decided to make a last second turn off, but yet remained squarely in lane (there were cars backed up the ramp), forcing me to give the the brakes a good workout. They provided solid stopping power.

Having really put the Saab's brakes successfully through even much more serious braking tests it's hard to say. I know the 9-3's brakes can stop the car on a coin. Perhaps the BMW's can do the same. For the sake of honest comparison, I'll say braking is a tie.

Whilst the interior "bits" may not give a car incredible road performance/control, it is the first place a driver becomes oriented with the vehicle. A bad first impression will assuredly not lead to a worthy driving experience. The Saab's cockpit lends itself to a more pleasurable driving experience.

The two cars both pack a punch in certain areas. However, they are from two very different design philosophies and have inherent differences (fwd vs rwd, 6 vs 4 cyls). While the fwd may provide better winter traction, the rwd counters with better standing start performance. Both engines proved well refined, smooth and quiet. But given the dumb marketplace, people automatically assume that more cylinders must be better (whether this is technically correct is subject to much debate). Regardless, GM & Saab recognized the marketplace demand for a 6 cylinder offering and will be providing that with the 2006 model.

- tex

Reply to
Tex

Huh? Given GM (not to mention virtually every other car company) has spent billions/milliards of $ USDs researching/developing alternative-fuel vehicles, I would hardly say they are planning a longterm future with petroleum based fuels.

If car companies want to sell cars to the 75% of the world's population who do not currently own vehicles do you think that they actually think they can do it purely by selling them fossil-fuel powered vehicles? For them, "continuing growth" means moving _away_ from oil-dependent vehicles.

Google: saab biofuel

- tex

Reply to
Tex

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.