Saabaru

What do you all think of the upcoming Saab 9.2X based on the Subaru Impreza? Is it something that a typical Subaru buyer would be interested in? Just wondering.....

Reply to
Kevin Brewer
Loading thread data ...

Pictures I've seen are appealing. If it's an Impreza (WRX, actually, isn't it?), only more luxurious, why wouldn't a Subaru fan be interested, budget permitting?

As for the "typical Subaru buyer," what is that? I'd find that very interesting, as a new, first-time Subaru owner: what are the characteristics of the "typical" Subaru buyer? Especially those that distinguish him/her from typical buyers of other marques?

HW

Reply to
H. Whelply

As far as a typical Subaru buyer...I'm not sure what that is either. I work at a Saab dealership as was just curious what Subaru owners thought. We have never had a car like this, 4WD and priced low to mid $20's, so it should be a whole new market for us. let me know what others think......

Reply to
Kevin Brewer

Saab will now become the luxury version of Subie much like Toyota/Lexus, Honda/Acura as parent GM focuses on pickups and suvs. Its being build in Japan and looks to be competing against its own subaru line, especially if priced in the mid 20's. The only benefit would be the fluff of a Saab unless there is actually some more kick to it. Safety can't be a major selling point as in past Saabs as this is essentially a rebadged Impreza.

As for being a "typical subaru buyer" I'll look at the price before I write the check.

Reply to
John

Do you have any more details on the car? Is it essentially a WRX wagon with cosmetic changes to make it more Saab-like in appearance, or are there other upgrades, such as leather, sunroof, fancier wheels, upgraded brakes, upgraded suspension, etc. - have there been any changes (softening of suspension, changing the gearing, etc.)? If it's the same thing as the WRX with a higher price tag, I would think it's unlikely you will get Subaru fans fleeing to Saab - could definitely expand the Saab market, though...

I'll be curious to see what happens - in stock form (227hp/217ft-lbs + AWD), the WRX should best any of the 9-3's in terms of all around performance (and give the 9-5 a run for it's money as well - bettering it in poor road conditions), though they both have substantially more creature comfort things then the Impreza (and a bigger price tag)

Reply to
David & Caroline

Hopefully (for me) being a Saab will be a selling feature for the car over the Subaru (not that there's anything wrong with a Subaru). I do worry about our safety reputation. How safe is the Impreza? I know it's a smaller car but hopefully sonehow they will make it a safer car. As far as the price the 9.3 starts at $27k with incentives one could be had for as low as $24k. Hopefully the 9.2 will start at $21-22k. We'll see they haven't told us anything firm yet.

Reply to
Kevin Brewer

For years SAAB insisted that AWD wasn't necessary, and so far the little bit of snow driving I've done in our 01 Outback wagon (with new snow tires) and a (recently acquired) 98 SAAB 900 I agree with them. In going around corners with the Outback in the snow if you hit the gas you don't know what the rear end is going to do with AWD (These are both manual transmissions) The SAAB is very predictable - Oversteer and lots of it. Sure hill climbing is better with the AWD but I'm with SAAB that it's just not worth it most of the time. Now if you need to tow a trailer... then things start to look different.

So for us ravingly loyal SAAB fanatics (this is my 3rd SAAB) This will seem like another sell out. It probably WILL help market share, so that's good they can work on my next FWD car.

It will be interesting to see what "scandanavianized" (As Car&Driver put it) really means. A SAAB engine? (with a Timing chain) Can't sell it without a Turbo right? Redone suspension? Beefed up components? Got to at least have a new dashboard ?!

-D

John wrote:

Reply to
meld_b

in your FWD saab, when you punch the gas in the middle of a low traction corner, you get "oversteer and lots of it?"

i don't think that's true... at least it hasn't been in every FWD car i've driven in the snow.

jm2c ken

Reply to
Ken Gilbert

Reply to
harv

I am very disappointed that GM gave Saab the Subaru. If Saab is so great why did they need to be rescued by GM My last 3 cars have been Subaru but I'm considering others the next time. GM will ruin Subaru's name and reputation. They will probably give the Bowtie company a version next. As far as safety is concerned, Subies have ranked among the best.

Reply to
Jerre Bassler

Reply to
meld_b

Same reason all the other makes in the world had to be rescued...Jaguar, Volvo,Bentley,RR,Mazda? GM owns part of Subaru so were they rescued too?

I've already had several people tell me to buy a Malibu because it is the same platform as the Saab 9-3

So? what'll you buy? Ford? Jeep?

-D

Jerre Bassler wrote:

Reply to
meld_b

Reply to
Benleigh Bob

Turns out that Volvo didn't really need rescuing, and now perhaps wishes they (old owners) hadn't yelled "Help!" when rich Ford strolled by. From the latest Automobile magazine, inside back cover article, "PAG: The Pretty All-right Group?":

Volvo rakes in the herring for Ford, and lots of it. The components set that spawned the handsome (like never before) four-model range-from S60 up to XC90-is a hit, not to mention perfectly credible hardware. The new S40 may prove otherwise, but Ford's genetic galoshes print is, as yet, nowhere to be seen in the Volvo family abode. Miraculously, the Swedish patient seems to have staved off the inevitable mind-meld with Dearborn that promised to suck the life out of it. In the process, the company has been so successful, the brand proven so strong, we hear its former owners are busy kicking their own Swedish asses for lacking confidence in what they'd wrought and selling out to a very rich Ford.

Reply to
H. Whelply

GM bought into FHI, which owns Subaru. Sneaky way to get Subaru AWD technology.

IF you cannot build world class cars, you try to by into them.

Reply to
Jerre Bassler

...

...

Conversely, this would tell me to stay away from the 9-3.

Stu

Reply to
Stu Hedith

The 9-3 is a Vectra, I think that the Saturns are also based on the platform. Hey, if the Malibu is based on that, at least it's not based on the J2000 platform...

Richard

Reply to
Richard Kilpatrick

I'm sorry, i wasn't here for the rest of this thread. Are you referring to the Chevy Malibu? If so, i used to rent them and they're not the worst ride feel, i prefer them to a Mazda 626, or other midsize sedans and definately over the taurus/sable. I wasn't aware of this Saab>Malibu chassis. I used to have an '89 Saab 900S and come to think of it, the Malibu did have that nice drive feel but felt more rigid imo than the

900S. But naturally the 900S and 9-3 are different chassis as well so that's not an exact comparison.
Reply to
LeBernadin

Same platform but the Malibu does not have the fit and finish, quality or safety features built into it. The platform is just the base of the car. Each car then has different body panels, interiors, engine, transmissions, safety features etc. Drive both and you'll definitely see a difference. I guess it's the same way I hope they make the Saab 9.2X better than the Impreza

Reply to
Kevin Brewer

I think AWD can be pretty predictable. If there's snow and I'm going around a corner, if I'm in the torque band and give it a little gas, it will oversteer a little (or a lot, depending on throttle and steering input). It's just different.

Hill climbing with AWD is very nice when you're going around a snow 20mph switchback...with my old FWD GTI, you couldn't turn and power up the climb simultaneously, so you'd get wheelspin, even with Blizzaks. With AWD, you can turn and maintain speed without spinning.

C
Reply to
ct

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.