Sort of. Lots of people - lots of bearded Saab fans - bemoan the new Saabs as being pale versions of what was an original Saab.
But, what was, or is, an original Saab? Where does the line blend?
I still remember my Dad's '72 99 GL, in that lovely metallic blue. Was that a proper Saab? Even though the engine was from another manufacturer?
Yeah, sort of - but again that depends on what you want from a vehicle. For the most part I don't care how it drives as it's my commute hack, so pretty much anything will do. I'd like something that doesn't want to swap ends on icy roundabouts but otherwise "whatever." I do, however, appreciate a good seat and driving position. I don't need to worry about CO2 or fuel consumption or list price. I like buying GM parts for a Saab. I like that Saabs have a very loyal following, resulting in plenty of specialists, who know the new stuff as well as the old stuff.
Lots of long term Saab fans hated the fact that GM bought Saab and then injected their DNA into the product line up. Actually, no, I think all did. ;-) Would they have wanted Saab to stop making cars and go bust? That so many Saab fans are up in arms that this could happen now says something.
Me? I *like* the fact that my 9-3 Sports Saloon is a decent blend of Saab-ness and Generic (sic) Motors. The car has a far broader appeal, too. I don't deny that it has lost something in this process.
Lots and lots of people buy or pick the Audi because:
It isn't a 3-Series. It isn't a C-Class. It has a low CO2 figure and a great automatic transmission. It isn't a Passat / Vectra / Mondeo.
Besides, I remember driving an early 90. That being the 80 with a five cylinder engine. And an economy gauge, as this was an early 80s machine. That felt... well... more solid than the later A4 feels. And the A4 certainly doesn't feel flimsy by any stretch.
Indeed, there are so very few manufacturers that haven't had their range diluted, that pointing the finger at is a bit of a moot point.
The Alfa Romeo 75 is pig ugly inside and out and with the four cylinder engine, it's also wrong (should have six cylinders) *but* it sounds so much more alive compared with the 156 or even the 155.
155s were - and are, if you can find one - ace to drive. But they're pale compared with earlier stuff. They're quiet and smooth and... just wrong...Progress.
Here endeth the moan about modern stuff... ;)