The Future of Saab?

merc1

You're probably right since they're moving production of future "Saabs" to Germany anyway. I really can't stand the thought of car badged as one thing when its really a totally different product in mission, theory etc. underneath.

M

nippononly

I hate that too! Aren't all the Saab engineering staff getting folded into the grand new European Opel design center or something? This, while they begin building the new small European Caddy at Saab's old factory?

jrosasmc

That to me is sacrilege. It's really insulting to a Swedish car fan like myself.

dhanley

"But wasn't the employee price around $22-23k? They're still going to have discounts and incentives. "

Yes, but not nearly as much. And the "base" 9-3 now has the more powerful 2.0T engine, and a lot of the equipment that used to be on the arc. Cutting prices is important, as one step to respectability is losing the discounting image.

I'm also sour on moving production to germany.

jchan2

should stay in Sweden, IMO.

logic1

I doubt many of you would be willing to pay the $3to 5k premium making cars in Sweden as opposed to other locales dictates.

For much the same reason, Ford is increasingly moving Volvo production out of Sweden, some of it here to the US.

Merc: What is "pitiful badge engineered jobs" about the Sport Combi (or the 9-3 Sedan, for that matter)? Seems to hold true to a lot of Saab tradition to me.

And, at around 27k, the base model looks to be quite a deal. I am not certain I could ever pay over 30k for a fwd vehicle, however. Although the turbo 2.8 V6 sounds as those it may be muy cool. I hope that engine finds other applications (base CTS sport model, perhaps) very soon.

merc1

Merc: What is "pitiful badge engineered jobs" about the Sport Combi (or the 9-3 Sedan, for that matter)? Seems to hold true to a lot of Saab tradition to me.

Now you know I wasn't talking abou the 9-3 or any of its variants. I meant that Trailblazer and WRX combo.

You know (or at least I thought you did) that I'm a fan of the 9-3. The Sport Combi for that matter looks to be a fine addition to the line as in the new V6.

M

logic1

You know (or at least I thought you did) that I'm a fan of the 9-3. The Sport Combi for that matter looks to be a fine addition to the line as in the new V6

That is what I thought. I got confused because the context of the critique came in the midst of a Combi discussion. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

IMO, getting as many Combis to the US as possible and marketing them well, would do as much and probably a whole lot more for Saab sales than the 9-7 and 9-2.

Saab may be able to rescue the Tribeca platform though. Stay tuned.

nippononly

the Tribeca platform need rescuing? :confuse:

merc1

Np.

I agree, the SPort Combi looks to be a winner for Saab. All those buyers that wanted "the hatch" should at least take a look. Now if they would do a 9-3 Coupe Saab would really be back to way it used to be, as far as the 9-3 is concerned.

M

jchan2

too bad I own a new car already though...
Otherwise its a nice looking car.

logic1

GM has just started production in Trollhaten. Saab dealers worldwide have already placed 8,500 orders. Per GM, this is a record for new product first week orders.

dhanley

I am interested in the SportCombi--i miss having a hatch. I bet a lot of these early orders are "old" saab owners who miss the hatch.

The new "more realistic" pricing is also a plus.

I am concerned that the 9-3 placed last in the last C&D comparo. I agree with them that the ride/handling tradeoff is probably worst in class. E.G, a 3-series or CTS handles better and is more compliant at the same time.

ateixeira

A new model will get the attention, the value pricing helps seal the deal.

9-2x prices seem higher now, though.

-juice

logic1

The 9-3 has a hard challenge in comparos.

On the one hand, it is not intended to be the soft cruiser the E is. On the other hand, an fwd platform can never match the driving dynamics of even the base German and CTS RWD platform.

The Combi is where the format hits its stride. Early reviews say the slightly different dimensions in the Combi improve ride and handling. The Combi will be far more reasonably priced than the competing C and 3 Series wagons.

If the price reports are correct, a decently equipped Combi will come in less than a Passat.

dhanley

It is true that the 9-3 will lose in dynamics to the RWD platforms, but there were several FWD platforms in the test. and the 9-3 was still last.

I will say that i think part of this is the fact the test was done in 106 degree heat which handicapped the turbo saab engine.

I'm not sure why comparing it to the E is relevant. The E is a different category.

I've seen several reviews for the combi, and i haven't seen one that claims that the combi handles better than the sedan, just that the 2006 handles a bit better than the 2005.

The 2.0T combi is $27,620. The 2.8T v6 is $33,620.
The 2.0T passat is $23,900 and the 3.6L v6 is $29,950.

Not sure how this translates to wagon and comparably equipped, though i think VW has the edge on engines here. I think the saab has better equipment standard--climate control is standard even on the 2.0T, not even available on the base passat, and xenons and sunroof are standard on the v6 saab, still optional on the v6 passat.

The a3 is also competition, as is the legacy GT.

The bmw wagon is now 34K but it's only available in AWD for now. Kind of weird for BMW.

There's no 2006 c-class wagon. Again, weird. Even in 2005 it was only available with the 2.6L v6 which i think is a lame engine--166hp and 19/24 MPG.

Heck, the dodge magnum is $32K, AWD, has a 340hp 5.7L v8. Pretty good if you don't care about 17/24mpg(i do).

I'll look at the combi for sure. I have fond memories of my old saab despite the wonky handling and the fact it broke every 3 months. But i'll approach it with a little skepticism too.

dave

logic1

I'm not sure why comparing it to the E is relevant. The E is a different category.


You include the E in your original post. I assumed you were citing the Lexus ES.

I've seen several reviews for the combi, and i haven't seen one that claims that the combi handles better than the sedan, just that the 2006 handles a bit better than the 2005.

Believe it was the Automobile review that said the Combi handles better than the sedan.

dhanley

No, i said E.G. ( for instance )

I guess you assumed i meant E and G cars.

Hm--maybe. If you mean this review, it just mentions that it's nearly as stiff as the sedan:

http://automobilemag.com/reviews/intellichoice/wagons/369_0508_2006_saab_93/index1.html

I'd be surpried if the combo really handled better, but of course anything's possible.

I forgot that the v50 is in this class too. It's hard to compare, because the v50 slots in between the 2.0T and aero in features,power, and price. The 2.5T in the volvo isn't much more powerful than the saab's 2.0T but it lags significantly less. The volvo is a little quieter and more compliant. OTOH, volvo makes you pay for stability control which i think is stupid.

dave

logic1

I did indeed think you meant the Lexus ES and the Infiniti G.

I will say those cars make life difficult for the Saab 9-3. The ES does fwd very well and in the more soft luxurious manner most fwd fans prefer. The G costs about the same as the 9-3, but has the rwd dynamics.

The Combi's unique body style gives it an edge for some on most of the similarly priced sedans.

I like the V50 a lot. Volvo underestimated US demand this year, allowing dealers to take a pretty hard line on MSRP (at least the ones I visited). I expect Volvo is working on supply. The main advantage the Combi has is that it is slightly larger and (IMO) somewhat better looking.

jchan2

I actually like it a lot.

Now only if the general public could agree with me and bring Saab back...

To save Saab though, I know this has been mentioned MANY times (by everybody here) the 9-7X and 9-2X have got to go.

The freshened 9-5 is ok. It should have been redesigned a while ago, but that's another case.

dhanley

I agree with that basically--i think the combi is better looking than the v50 and the cargo room appears superior.

Before I bought a '97 900 SET, I test drove a ES300. Waayy too soft for my tastes. On the other hand, some people don't corner hard, and love quiet.

I think the problem is that saab _needs_ to knock one out of the park, metaphorically speaking. Most of car companes do it now and again.

dave

ateixeira

That is their bread-and-butter, whenver they update that is had to be a home run. Big time.

The 9-5 refresh did very little besides change the look of the nose. That car is going to seem old compared to its peers. Looks how much the RL, GS, and Infiniti M have improved in the meantime, and Saab might have trouble competing in that class.

At least they offer a wagon, but so do Volvo and Audi.

-juice

jchan2

Saab needs new product definitely.

The issue now is... what?

Here's what I think:
9-2- Compact Premium (NOT a rebadged WRX)
9-3- Entry Level Luxury (Bread And Butter)
9-4X- Entry Level Crossover (Bread And Butter, not a redone Tribeca)
9-5- Midlevel Luxury (needs to be redesigned, definitely)
9-6X- Performance Crossover (sorta a halo car?)
Sonett- Two Seater Roadster. Based on the Kappa platform, but theres enough differences between this, the Solstice, and the Sky to be able to sell about 5000 units per year (its another niche product)

Here's the body styles they should sell for each model:
9-2: Sedan or Hatchback
9-3: Sedan, Hatchback, SportCombi, or Convertible
9-4X: Crossover
9-5: Sedan, SportCombi
9-6X: Crossover
Sonett: Roadster, Coupe

What do you guys think? Could a totally new (and unique) lineup really save Saab?(with the hatchbacks reinstated for the purists)

merc1

Could a totally new (and unique) lineup really save Saab?(with the hatchbacks reinstated for the purists)

Yes, but GM isn't going to spend the money on Saab to allow that to happen now, at least without continuing the current trend of rebadging existing GM products.

I think Saab will survive for a while, but it won't mean anything to people who know cars and/or Saab loyalist.

M

ateixeira

But I also doubt GM will invest that much. Look at what Isuzu got.

Saab has to pick up sales else GM will do the same to them. Isuzu has basically become an extra sales outlet for GMC truck.

-juice

stmss

I don't know what GM is doing here and why they don't take Ford's approach. Ford owns both Volvo and Jaguar (and others) but you don't see these cars as rebadged Fords (yet). In fact you are seeing the opposite, some of the technologies making their way to Ford. Why would anyone devalue the brand name that they purchased.

My real concern is the lack of direction, enthusiasm, interest, whatever you want to call it regarding these cars from GM, the dealers and public alike - at least here in Canada. Where I live the dealers are far more interested in selling their Saturns and is difficult to find more than one Saab on the showroom floor - very limited inventory and usually sitting on the back lot somewhere. The competition has left them in the dust with respect to product, marketing and service.

We have lost Isuzu here and I fear it is only a matter of time we lose Saab being sold here as well - mainly because of apathy!

jchan2

I'm sorta proud of my lineup.

Toss that in with a class leading warranty (5 year 60K B2B, free maintenance, 10 year 120K Powertrain, Free Roadside Assistance for Life) and maybe Saab might be able to come back from the dead.

Whether GM will throw some cash at the company is another story.

Robert Lutz, you reading this forum?

jchan2

Here's some details, not much, about each model.

Saab 9-2
Segment: Compact Premium
Production Location: Russelheim, Germany
Platform: Opel Astra
Body Styles: Sedan, Hatchback
Price Range: $23,000-$28,000
Trim Levels Available: Linear, Arc, Aero
Transmissions: 5 Speed Manual (Linear) 5 Speed Sentronic Automatic (All Models) 6 Speed Manual (Aero)

Saab 9-3
Segment: Entry Level Luxury
Production Location: Trollhattan, Sweden, Graz, Austria (Convertibles)
Platform: Epsilon Generation 2
Price Range: $26,000-$37,000
Trim Levels: Linear, Arc, Aero
Body Styles: Sedan, Hatchback, SportCombi, Convertible
Transmissions: 5 Speed Manual (Linear, Arc) 5 Speed Sentronic (All Models) 6 Speed Manual (Aero)

Saab 9-4X
Segment: Entry Level Crossover
Production Location: Russelheim, Germany
Platform: Totally New, to be shared with Opel for Frontera replacement.
Price Range: $31,000-$42,000
Trim Levels: Linear, Arc, Aero
Body Styles: Crossover
Transmissions: Sentronic 5 Speed Automatic (all models) 6 Speed Manual (Aero)

Saab 9-5
Segment: Mid-Level Luxury
Production Location: Trollhattan, Sweden
Platform: Enlarged Epsilon Generation 2
Price Range: $38,000-$44,000
Trim Levels: Linear, Arc, Aero
Body Styles: Sedan, SportCombi
Transmissions: 6 Speed Sentronic Automatic (all models) 6 Speed Manual (Aero)

Saab 9-6X
Segment: Performance Utility Vehicle
Platform: All New, to be shared with Cadillac and Opel
Production Location: Trollhattan, Sweden
Price Range: $43,000-$45,000
Trim Levels: Arc, Aero
Body Styles: Crossover Performance Vehicle
Transmissions: 6 Speed Sentronic Automatic (All Models) 6 Speed Manual (Aero)

Saab Sonett
Segment: Performance Roadster
Platform: Kappa
Production Location: Trollhattan, Sweden
Trim Levels: Linear, Arc, Aero
Body Styles: Roadster, Coupe
Price Range: $34,000-$37,000
Transmissions: 5 Speed Sentronic (Linear) 5 Speed Manual (Linear, Arc) 6 Speed Sentronic (Arc, Aero) 6 Speed Manual (Aero)

jchan2

the 9-4X and 9-6X should have 3 rows of seats, for those of us with families

dhanley

Bingo!

Ford seems to be getting real benefit from their "boquet" brands. The new ford 500 is a hand-me-down s80. As such, it's a better car than others in its class, roomy, safe, quiet, etc. AWD is available and development costs were low.

Look at chrysler too. The mangum/300/charger are based off the old e-class. As is, they are great cars also developed on a low budget.

I think GM would be better off letting saab create great platforms/drivetrains and handing them (post debugging!) down to pontiac/chevy after 5 years or so. But, i'm not lutz in any case.

jchan2

Ford and Chrysler are doing well with their hand me down S80s and E-Classes.

Why can't Pontiac or Chevrolet end up with the platform to a hand me down 9-5?

And notice that I didn't post engines. I have some in mind, but one or two of them are all new designs, which would cost some serious $$$.

dhanley

The 9-5 is already a hand-me-down platform. 1/2 opel vectra, 1/2 saab 9000. I think it's a nice car in a lot of ways (safety,power/economy,great interior/room), but my opinion of the driving dynamics is somewhat poor.

dave

jchan2

True. Whereas the S80 resides on its own platform which until lately, was Volvo exclusive.

Saab's got nothing exclusive anymore.

Hence my newly redesigned product lineup! (2-3 Models are relatively exclusive, but they share platforms with Opels no American will ever see unless its badged as a Saturn, and the rest would only share a few components)

Which brings up the issue: What about Saturn? Rebadged Opels? But then wouldn't Saturn get a version of the 9-2 and 9-4X I'm proposing since Saab would have to share those two with Opel to cut down on costs?

Perhaps Saturn should just return to building no-frills, durable cars with good customer service scores... The original one was somewhat of a success.

dhanley

I basically agree with you and like your lineup.

Saturn = lo-frills cars with a european flair, like of like the LS was.

dave

ateixeira

Big news, GM will be out, selling it's 20% stake. That puts the future of the 9-2x in doubt. The Saab based on the Tribeca is supposedly cancelled already.

The "synergy" probably didn't work because of Subaru's unique powertrain arrangement - boxer engines, longitudinal layout, symmetrical AWD. They could not bolt any GM engines to it, especially diesels needed for Europe.

OTOH, Subaru did not get squat from GM. They were supposed to get fuel cells down the road.

Toyota picked up 8.7% of those shares, so maybe we'll see HSD on a Subaru? But Subaru just showed its own TPH hybrid system in concept form.

-juice

jchan2

Interesting. That's the end of WRX based 9-2Xs!

Could be a collectors item. Snatch them while you can!

But it could be bad news. That means the next generation 9-2 may not be Astra based as my plan calls for, but gasp, Delta based. (Cobalt, ION)

Does that mean the 9-6X is dead? Yippee! One Rebadged Saab dead, two to go!

(And hopefully Robert Lutz is reading this board and taking notes)

satchmo

Juice --this from the Dow Jones electronic newsletter "Myway": "...rumors have surfaced suggesting the division [Saab] is up for sale and a possible suitor could be Renault SA or a Chinese company." If true, I wonder if Renault could do for Saab what it did for Nissan --renew and revitalize it? I, for one, have always liked Saab, seeing it as a Eurocentric, oddball car that rode, drove and handled exceptionally well, had first rate safety features and was fairly affordable.. Would like to see it persist in some form.

dhanley

Renault seems to have some interesting cars, and ghosn did not just save nissan, but made it into a highly competitive company.

However, nissan has has a much larger market than saab for a long time, so that probably means part sharing i nthe future. The laguna could be made to look sort of saab-ish.

The whole thing makes me shake my head, though. GM gives saab a subaru, then sells them. Now saab is saddled with an orphan. Then if they sell saab, whence the 9-7? Then there's a 9-3 with an orphan ecotec, not to mention platform?

jchan2

GM selling Saab would almost be the death kiss.

You have the GMT360 9-7X, the Epsilon 9-3, which is the volume leader.

The 9-2X is an orphan now. Better snatch them up because they could be a collector's item! The only Saab without the ignition on the floor! (Maybe)

Which leaves the 9-5. Which is based on the previous 9000/some sort of Opel.

Basically if GM sells Saab, the owner can start from scratch, which could be a good thing.

Could Renault bring Saab back from the grave?

I sure hope Saab does not go to a Chinese Company. If it does, I'd rather it stay with GM!

The Chinese will cheapen it. They will probably move all production to China, and try to make a quick buck. A sale to a Chinese automaker would be a swift, quick, merciless death.

If I had to choose who buys Saab, I'm placing my bets with Renault. Carlos Ghosn can turn around a car company really fast.

Worst Case Scenario: Saab gets sold to the Chinese, who destroy the brand worse than GM.

Best Case Scenario: Saab goes to Renault, with Carlos Ghosn at the helm.

Average Scenario: Saab stays with GM. GM's got Lutz, but GM doesn't have $$$ for Product Development.

Most Likely: Saab will be sold. It's just a matter of who.

Hopefully Renault.

At least GM is making some sort of an attempt to move the metal.

nippononly

Saab is SO GONE!

Why doesn't Lutz get that?

anythngbutgm

Saab has had one foot out the door in the whole time that GM has had stake in them. Limping along on two models through the 90's, abandoning the hatchback, raiding cheap GM trucks for vehicles. Where does it end. They literally are the whipping boy of GM, and the joke is not funny anymore. Maybe Fuji can pick them up as a luxury division for Subaru...

it just seems like GM has enough garbage to weed through with their core brands, let alone worry about their failing Swedish money pit.

dhanley

I don't agree with that--i think, however, that the mistake was having saab take two hand-me-downs and slap saab badges on them.

If nothing else, these orphans will be a pain, especially if saab dealers have to stock subaru and trailblazer parts and equipment for the next 15 years. It made a lot more sense to me for the 9-5 to be upgraded with a spanking-new platform. Then the 9-5 ( bigger heavier car ) could have gotten the turbo v6, tuned for more power.

I don't think saab will evaporate. Someone will buy them who wants a boutique brand. I think ford would have done a much better job with saab. I have this weird idea about BMW buying them, dropping in a turbo i-6 ( or even one of their great 4's ) and having the guy(s) who designed the mini cook up a great FWD platform.

Just a dream.

dave

jrosasmc

The Subaru-based 9-6X will not become a reality? Why?

anythngbutgm

Without GM putting the two teams together, I don't expect Subaru to volunteer the design on the Tribeca with Saab. I believe Subaru was reluctant to give up ANY of their engineering secrets when they were under the GM umbrella which was a rift to begin with.

"I think ford would have done a much better job with saab."

Like night and day IMO... Even Ford has done some boneheaded things in the past, but managing acqusitions properly is not one of them.

jchan2

I personally could have done a far better job than GM when it comes to managing Saab.

Then again, if managing an automobile company was that easy, Saab would be selling plenty of vehicles and Isuzu would be a mass market automaker.

It's not easy, but GM made a ton of mistakes.

Passing along an Impreza and TrailBlazer with Saab badges were the biggest mistakes.

I say bring back the hatches, but keep the sedans. That way you can attract new buyers while appealing to the purists who just have to have a Saab hatchback.

Who else might be interested in Saab?

ateixeira

The 9-5 platform was shared with Alfa and Fiat, IIRC.

-juice

jchan2

And what did Alfa Romeo and Fiat do with the platform?

ateixeira

Alfa had the 156, I believe (such a gorgeous car).

Fiat had a large sedan, I forget the name right now.

The 9-5 just got a freshening but it's still on a now old platform. Saab will be cash starved if they are on their own. Of course it's not like GM has given them many resources to work with, either.

They'd be better off with a partner more willing to invest in them. But they'd have trouble on their own.

-juice

jchan2

Do you think Carlos Ghosn would pump some capital into this company?

dhanley

I think it was the 9000 platform that was shared with Alfa and Fiat. Of course, the 9-5 is in part based on the 9000.