[Saab_c9000] Saab C9000 SuperSwede's in Australia?

Craig,

Excellent! A C9000 page!

Are you enjoying all of the Saab videos on the Saab video site that I posted in here yesterday?

SG

in article mailman.3.1124837321.582.saab snipped-for-privacy@lios.apana.org.au, Craig's Saab C9000 Site at snipped-for-privacy@lios.apana.org.au wrote on 23/08/2005 23:48:

Now if I didn't know what an enormous venture maintaining a "special editions" website would be, I might be inclined to start a site dedicated to SAAB 9000 special models and start with this car! :)

Great looker and this one, particularly, is in excellent condition. The older-style 9000 with body kit looks sooo evil, but in a good way :)

Paul

Nice C9000 site, but please correct some inaccuracies. You write:

"Saab's C9000 (ie. 'Classic' 9000) family of cars was produced between 1985 and 1992 as a joint-partnership between Saab and Fiat, Lancia, and Alfa-Romeo. In 1990 Saab became part of General Motors (everyone has a different view about why and how this occured!), and GM initiated a complete re-design of both the 900-series and the 9000-series. The 'next generation' 9000's were released in 1993, and the redesigned 900's were released a year later in 1994.(refer to the note below)"

The 9000 wasn't re-designed in the same way as the 900. The 9000CS used the same basic design and platform, nothing to do with GM. The changes to the 9000 were mainly styling changes front and rear. Hence it's false to distinguish the C9000 as a Classic 9000 in the same way as the C900.

Johannes,

Regardless, it is terrific to finally have a C9000 page.

It is long overdue

SG

But the 9000CS is not a GM model as is implied on the site. In fact, Haynes manual is titled: Saab 9000 1985-1998, thus indicating the mechanical continuity of the range. It is far from a "complete re-design" by GM as suggested on the site. I doubt very much that GM was involved at all in the

Indeed - the changes are really quite minor - it's a facelift, similar to that which was carried out on the C900 in 1988.

I've got a mailing list going too - head to the "

I'm always open to corrections on the info and assumptions I put online so the SuperSwede page and the C9000 mailing list + webring page will hopefully grow over time and I'll change the info so it's more correct when I get the chance.

Regards,

Craig.

Ok well if that's actually the case then yes I need to make some changes.

I'll check some other sites and make sure what the facts are then figure out what to change on the site(s) of mine that mention C9000's (in the context that I've described the pre-1993 9000's).

Craig.

So, this means that in 2006/2007 the 9-5 will be the C9-5

SG

Possibly. I think GM has a very different rear wheel drive car in mind.

Jonannes,

Right, the rear from the spy shots looks BMWish

SG

So here is the Historical Timeline for the 900 and 900.

The years may vary depending on country

I believe the years indicated below are internationally accepted

1984-1992 (C9000) - Classic 9000

SG

Craig,

Have you seen the Saab videos?

There are lots of videos with the C900, C9000 as well as the NG900 and NG9000!

Take a look!

SG

These are obviously not Saab's own descriptions, so I can't see this having some kind of international status. They may be convenient labels for the purpose of discussion, but NG9K is not a label I would want to see in general use when there is already the CS/CSE labels. But that's just IMO.

The C900 and NG900 are very different cars, whereas C9000 and CS are not. The NG900 are build on a platform shared with GM Opel cars at the time, whereas the CS carries on with the same platform as C9000. This platform was superficially shared with Type 4 cars, but Saab used their own Panhard rod rear suspension. The CS was a facelifted C9000, unlike the NG900 which was a completely different car from C900. As said, Haynes manual is titled 'Saab 9000 1985-1998', indicating the mechanical continuity of the range. There is no merit in distinguishing the CS as a different creation, the difference is cosmetic. Some people like the C9000, others think the CS looks cleaner. It's a matter of taste.

Ok.

Ok.

Ok.

I really don't see how - this classification implies that the change is as significant as the C900-NG900 change - it is far from that.

This seems quite likely, yes.

Grunff,

I wouldn't say that you can compare the changes between the C900-NG900 vs. the changes with the 9000.

They are just "different" changes, and I don't think it's fair to use the Saab

Other vehicles can have changes, and don't need to be as identical to what the C900 went through.

I mean really, if there were 101 change orders for the C900 into the NG900, does the C9000 need the same to justify it's new design being named NG9K?

I wouldn't think so..

Maybe that's just my .02 cents

SG

Johannes,

I completely agree with you, and I'm sure others do but..

that means that if you are saying "same platform" then there is no NG that can be applied.

It's almost like saying that the Pontiac GrandAm is A Saab 9-3 SS, saying that there really is no different "Since" they are on the same platform, and I disagree, there are enough changes.

I mean, if we line up the last year C9000 (1992) with a 1993 CS, they LOOK different, and there were some changes with the engine, etc. The entire rear was redone, even though it is technically on the same platform.

SG

I will be tonight once the network traffic goes down a bit. Having a 128 kbps ISDN connection doesn't make streaming video workable with all the additional latencies.

Craig.

fact, Haynes

all in the

be applied.

there really is no different "Since" they are on the same platform, and I disagree, there are enough changes.

different, and there were some changes with the engine, etc. The entire rear was redone, even though it is technically on the same platform.

But then you can use the CS/CSE labels for the facelifted models. There has been engine variations (the same block) over the entire model life 1985-1998, not just for the 1993 model.

Secondly, in case of the 900, the 'Classic' tag was introduced because the car's unique styling and mechanical principles. That made it a classic, whereas the NG900 is much more a mainstream (ordinary) car. Note that 'Classic' is used as a special word with special meaning, not just a label. Since all 9000 are similar, they are much more likely to share the same status as potential 'Classic' cars; this should not be reserved for 1985-1992 models. Whether a car is can be termed 'Classic' depends on how it stands out from the crowd. It's also indicated by the secondhand prices of well kept models. The