As read in the NY Times....

For Saab, Some See the Beginning of the End. Others See the Middle

May 24, 2004 By JAMIE LINCOLN KITMAN

Saab loyalists have predicted the worst ever since General Motors bought its initial 50 percent stake in the Swedish automaker, for $500 million, in 1990. But an announcement last week by Saab Cars USA - that it would relocate its home office from Norcross, Ga., to G.M.?s world headquarters in the Renaissance Center in Detroit ? was seen as the final bit of proof that the odd little automaker, an upstart not so long ago, has indeed been integrated into the world?s largest industrial company.

G.M. did not complete its financial takeover of Saab until 2000, but longtime fans of the brand ? known for its early adoption of front-wheel drive, innovations in turbocharging and its longstanding commitment to air quality and safety ? started grumbling loudly when the company?s first product under G.M. ownership, the Saab 900 of 1994, made its debut.

Based heavily on the Opel Vectra, the 900 handled clumsily, suffered alarming quality lapses and was later reported to have done poorly in Swedish crash testing. A freshening for the 1999 model year was said to incorporate more than 1,300 improvements - reflecting, critics said, a car that needed a lot of improvement.

The 9-5, also introduced for that year and still in production today, was based on Opel underpinnings, too, but was less underbaked and better received, though it, too, has yet to become a significant object of Saab aficionados? desire. Among other turnoffs, it was the first Saab to offer a V-6 engine, a lightly re-engineered version of an Opel power plant that seemed rather less sophisticated than Saab?s trademark turbo four-cylinders.

Like all post-G.M. Saabs, the 9-5 retained the company?s signature center-console placement of its ignition switch. Naysayers wonder if that minor character trait has become the marque?s sole distinguishing characteristic in the eyes of Saab?s new masters. While the ignition switches all remain on the consoles, the proof of Saab?s lost independence has come in waves.

In 2002, Debra Kelly-Ennis was named president of Saab?s American operations. With just three years? experience in the car business (most of it at G.M.?s moribund Oldsmobile division, where she was charged with turning out the lights), she had little prior exposure to the Saab culture.

Far more worrisome to the keepers of the faith, last year G.M. laid off 1,300 engineers and designers at Saab?s world headquarters in Trolhattan, Sweden, effectively eliminating the company?s in-house ability to engineer a car. And just recently, Saab?s head of design, a rising star named Michael Mauer, quit to work for Porsche.

The inevitability of the mass firing in Sweden can be understood by reference to Saab?s most recent product. A new 9-3 released last year was largely designed by Opel. It shares G.M.?s Epsilon platform with the Pontiac G6 and the Chevy Malibu, as well as the newest Opel Vectra and a Saturn model yet to come. The new 9-3 sedan is a conventional three-box design, losing Saab?s distinctive and roomy hatchback configuration. Also, the car?s American-German engineering has chafed some loyalists, though in fairness not nearly so much as the two newest Saabs, the 9-2X and 9-7X.

The former is a lightly retouched, duller handling and slightly more expensive version of Subaru?s subcompact Impreza WRX sedan and wagon, built for Saab in Japan by Subaru (of which G.M. owns 20 percent). Authenticity issues aside, the turbocharged, all-wheel-drive WRX is, at least, the sort of car that Saab might have built today if it had only received enough financing in the 1990?s. Like the rally-winning Saab 96?s of the 1960?s, the 9-2X wrings maximum advantage from being a light car with a small engine and loads of grip.

The 9-7X, by contrast, is a lightly restyled Chevrolet TrailBlazer built in Ohio. In its bulk and its cumbersome ways, with its optional V-8 engine?s thirst and heavy carbon-dioxide emissions, it is the very antithesis of the Saab ethos. (But, hey, check out the ignition hardware in the center console.)

A former Saab executive who was at the company when General Motors first took over has suggested that Saab?s failure to retain its identity is not so much the fault of G.M. as of the Wallenberg family. The former majority owners of Saab, the Wallenbergs agreed to sell G.M a half interest with the clear understanding that they and their minions would be abdicating any meaningful further role in Saab?s future.

?When they sold it, they should have insisted on input, using their executives and remaining true to the company?s ideals,? this executive said. ?But they rolled over and said, ?You run it.? G.M.?s got its problems, but it?s the Swedes? fault. They gave away their heritage. General Motors is just doing what they know how to do, the way they know how to do it.?

The former Saab executive added that a ?powerful industry watcher? told him at the time: ? ?You know what a Ghia badge looks like on the side of a Ford? That?s what?s going to happen to Saab.? I?ve carried that thought for almost the last 15 years and I?m sorry to have to say, at the end of the day, he was right.?

I've been reading about the "death of Saab" since, well, I think when the 9000 came out. There was probaby the same noise when the Triumph engine went into the 99's, and when the 2-stroke was replaced by the V4.

See, now this is just _wrong_ on so many levels. (not the claim, the concept of a V8 built in Ohio being called a Saab).

If it takes tolerating stuff like this to keep the Real Saab cars in existance, it's tolerable. But, my 900 Turbo was more fun to drive than my 9-5 is.

Yeah. Or my 9000 Turbo, or my 900 base-model for that matter.

My 9-5 Aero is very disappointing in many ways. I've driven nothing but Saabs for 16 years, but this will probably be my last. If I get another Saab, it will be an old 900T or 9000T.

Gary

All of this lamenting of the SAABs of yore sounds very similar to the caterwailing that is going on in alt.autos.bmw newsgroup over the new 5, 6 and 7 series models. The funny thing is that I agree with both camps. The newer 9-3's and 9-5's are no match for the Classic SAABs C900's or even

It appears the trend is to continue to morph and dumb down all of the european car marquees until they are indistinguishable from the "world cars" being spewed out by the American and Asian car companies.

I guess I will just have to keep my old cars forever. Well, actually just until *I* die. Hope in 10 years the parts places stay well stocked on 20 year old car parts... Maybe I should just buy 2 or three of every part now?

;-)

-Fred W

Rust proofing and the speed limit are our friends.. :) ..

The funny thing about that is that the 9000 is a hybrid from a consortium project, although the 9000 are probably the more durable of its cousins. The chassis is simpler than the 9-5; when the 9-5 first arrives, it was hailed as modern advancement, although in truth it felt better to some because the suspension was softer. The 9000 CSE is fun to drive, and it can be difficult to contain yourself and drive sensibly.

There is probably just one mathematically correct shape, just like the airliners look alike. The car manufacturers try desperately hard hard to fold their own impressions into the small tolerance gap of plus or minus a centimeter or so. It makes for some weird and wonderful shapes, sometimes looking almost like scratches and dents, e.g. Ford Cougar, BMW Z4, Fiat Coupe.

Brother Johannes, I'm afraid we have to agree to disagree on this one. My take is that while it is explained away by 'design math' and 'customer ergonomics feedback' - current automobile builds have much more to do with competitive component suppliers and their marketing drones than anything to do with a paying customer. Indeed - it has been argued that most of the modern automotive brands are much more simple sales chains than true cradle to dealer 'manufacturing' entities as we understood them back when.

Advancement in automotive builds now seems to be represented by different things working properly and reliably between years rather than overall improvements. However, the long term ownership cost has risen considerable given that more and more parts are whole integrated components rather than fitted and recoverable assembles. This is offset somewhat by the fact that takes less time to fix things - but not much less.

For example - the NG900 (and pretty much any mid-90's car and beyond) requires a complete control arm to replace a sour ball joint. This lowers the cost of manufacture and warrantee considerably as you/they don't have to assemble or repair the lower arm - you/they simply apply or pull the bolts from the entire component. But as a long term owner - you (and in many ways the dealer networks) are boned at the parts counter by pricing policy that far outweighs any real value in terms of component build costs.

The 'lego' approach to the biz makes it much less expensive to build and warrantee automobiles - as ir makes it much easier to shop the planet for component suppliers who will run 20,000 throws of their mold with your part number in the slot instead of your competitor's down Michigan Avenue.

At the end of the day - if they didn't go out of their way to lock us into that part using bolt pattern trickery and bleached circuit boards - I would be totally in favor of the idea as it would allow me to also shop the planet for parts.

Interesting article all round actually - it is very eye-opening to see the crew from Olds running the shop at SAAB. I fear that the brand is going to wound down in the coming years and have aquired a sensible 93 9000 Aero to counter events myself.

Yes - they are real and they are spectacular.. :) ..

The part I find funny is that nearly 20 years ago, when the 9000 was introduced, the common cry was that the 9000 is not a "real" Saab because of the consortium development. History has shown that Saab made the 9000 unique and it survived longer than the models from the other consortium members. Also of note (at least to me) is that the 9000 is the only model from the consortium to have been sold in the US. Fiat and Lancia were gone from the US market by the time these models came out.

I have to wonder how the 9-* models will be regarded 15 or 20 years from now. Maybe I'll have to drive one of the 9-* models to see if they are that bad - I mean "different" - or should I say "improved"?

I knew this would be pointed out when I posted it, ie. that the 9000 was not a "Real SAAB" such as the prior 9's. Heck it doesn't even have the key between the seats!! But I still maintain the 9k is more SAAB in character than any of the new 9-'s which all handle much more GM like.

While this is probably technically correct, I don't think any of them are actually making them in that shape (yet?). Thankfully, there is still enough marketing value in design for cosmetics that we don't have to yet squeeze the last nth degree from the coefficient of drag, fuel economy, etc. OTOH, if the designs did go further in that direction, it would be the death knell for all the big SUVs... and that wouldn't be such a abd thing, now would it?

-Fred W

Peopl will be complaining about the then-current-models and say that they will continue to drive the only true Saabs, the 9-* models.

They are improved. Sure my old '70 99, '75 99cc, '84 900 turbo and '88

I agree that the new Saab 9-3 looks anonymous, but certainly don't see a trend towards *all* European cars looking like 'world cars'. The new big BMWs do deviate from the classic BMW look, but they are certainly distinctive and to me at least have a strong presence on the road. Talking of BMWs, the new (pastiche) Mini looks distinctive and BMW seem to be selling as many of them as they can make.

Other European cars that are very distinctive shapes include just about any recent Alfa Romeo, new-shape Renault Megane and Scenic, new Nissan Micra and Primera, Audi A2 and TT, Fiat Multipla, Ford Ka, and of course the 'Smart' Car. And that's just a short list put together without much thought...

I suspect that every stage of evolution in car styling has been accompanied by laments of 'all these new cars look the same'. As it happens, yesterday I saw a Triumph Herald on the road. There were still quite a few of these on the roads when I was a schoolboy and first old enough to tell one car from another, so I recognised it immediately. If I'd been a few years younger, I doubt whether I'd have known it from any other small car of the 1960s, as the styling is in fact very typical of that era.

Martin

It is annoying when particular fads starts mushrooming on all new cars. This boot lid that is cut into the rear bumper... I think VW started it, then Vauxhall and of course now the new 9-3.

Another strange new feature is the rear windows that are blackened out around the rim; the black rim somehow gets wider and wider. It looks like a cheap production short cut.

I suppose that with modern advances, it is no longer a problem to make a car that is sufficiently comfortable to do the job, even with a fairly small engine. Such a car becomes a commodity car, e.g. Ford Fiesta and the like.