Could be, but it still sounds funny to me. Sure, you can buy parts from anywhere, but that costs a lot more than internal component sharing. Porsche just doesn't have engines saab could use the way GM does. Porsche doesn't have FWD expertiese.
OTOH, porsche has a relationship with VW/audi, and I think vw's 2.0T is a great engine. And, heck, audi build great cars, but why sell them to a direct competitior?
I still think GM COULD be a great owner for saab, if GM did it right. Give saab money, let them develop some cool technology, offer it a few years later. Daimer hit home runs by handing the old mercedes E platform to chrysler and developing the 300/charger. The ford 500 is doing very well, and it's based off the aged s80 platform. Etc.
Forget FWD. It cost Saab the company. Every single Saab prospect abandoned the brand because they stuck with FWD and went to Volvo, Suburu, et al. Saab must go AWD ASAP.
Forget engines. Saab doesn't have any besides a four cylinder that has been turbo boosted to within an atmospheric bar of its life. Lots of people have engines they could sell to this new company. Look at how Volvo went to Yamaha to develop a V8! Saab/Porsche could even go to the guy who bought the alu Buick V8 castings from Rover last year and resurrect that hoary engine for another tour of duty.
can be valuable to Saab, and Saab can be valuable to GM (especially its Saturn division by providing a potential customer base via the sons and daughters of current Saab owners)
GM needs to take a risk, borrow heavily on Saab, and give them the money to do what they need to do to return to its former glory and sales levels.
GM can in turn use those platforms down the road, after Saab has moved on, in some of its more moderately priced automobiles, such as the Saturn midsize sedan and the Saturn Ion.
Porsche can be a great owner too, albeit there will be less opportunities for synergy. But an acquisition of Saab could provide Porsche with a larger customer base up north and could provide Saab with a stronger sunny weather clientele. (which would aid especially in moving the 9-3 convertible)
which would you rather sit in, an Audi or a Saab? My answer would certainly be the Audi, but that is just me. I bet a lot of folks would follow my lead on that one.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I love Audis - they make the best first impression of any car out there. The drive is great too. But I am way too impatient to have a car that needs as many service trips as VW Group cars apparently do. That gets costly after 50K too.
I have been in the current-model 9-3 and 9-5, and was underwhelmed to say the least. Certainly, the CTS is on a par with these models, and similarly priced with RWD - what's left to consider?
I used to love the old 9-3 SE hatchback, that is a car I might have bought if it had been a lot less money. But for that money I can find better cars.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Hm. I think the 9-5 has a very nice interior, though i suppose you disagree with me there. The 9-3's interior for me is one of the points against it. And i think both of them have some very nice and well thought-out features. The CTS IMO, has a junkier interior, although i agree it's better drivetrained with RWD and a bigger v6. However, the 2006 9-5 arc has more power with 260 hp/trq and quite a lot of standard features:
Brilliant post/ideas imo. Though none of it will never happen. I get the feeling GM is ready to get rid of Saab one way or another, either shut down or sell off.
I hope not. I like Saab. GM just needs to Volvoize Saab. Make high performance turbo cars that are very safe. AWD should be standard on the premium models, along with creature features and alot more damn autobahn crushing power. The badge engineering needs to end ASAP
I agree. The only thing though is that GM doesn't have any money to spend on Saab right now. Saab will have to hold on until GM's domestic mess is straightened out.
The 9000 was the end of Saab as a privite company. The equiv of a Sweed Edsel. If it was not for GM's platform sharing, the 9-5, Saab would be history. GM can make good cars, I don't hear to many people bitchn about the performance of their 50K Vette. The niche for Saab has never been defined or targeted well. The Born from Jets campaign is the best in 20 years. Emotion, sells cars in the United States i.e. the resurg of muscle cars. Saab has a good pipeline and will probably outlive all of us, so I would not fret. GM saved alot of German and Sweede jobs. I am not a huge GM fan either, took a bath or their stock and bailed this year. BMW sells performance, Audi sells design, Volvo Safety, Lexus Luxury, Saab ? I don't think anyone has ever known?
Saab has always been a safety icon with turbo cars. Saab of the near future will be a car known as a AWD all weather fun to drive piece of machinery with safety. :shades:
It amazes me how the average consumer continues to consider Volvo to be the benchmark for automotive safety.While continuing to produce very safe cars they were surpassed by Saab years ago.Folksam Insurance Co.continues to use real world statistics regarding injury/fatality risks and has cited the Saab 9000,9-5,900.and 9-3 series cars consistently over the last decade as being the safest cars built in Europe.Saab 9-5 was the very first car ever to be awarded 5 stars in the demanding Euro NCAP crash test.Saab 9-3 in 2004 first car in any size or price category to be awarded double "Best Pick"for offset frontal and side-impact crash tests by The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and this year one of only 4 cars to be awarded "Gold Standard" by also achieving "Best Pick" status in a third category,Rear collision,whiplash protection.Volvo was rated no better than "good"in frontal and rear tests and only"acceptable" in side impact.Lastly even though Volvo and Saab jointly sponsored whiplash protection headrest research in the mid-90's only Saabs "Active Headrest Restraint System"received award recognition from the International Safety Council in 2002 and is now found in many other manufacturers cars,Volvos "WHIPS"system is only used by Volvo. Saab is now,and has been for a number of years, the standard by which all cars should be compared.
Volvo actively is selling the public on its safety, creating an image where people think Volvo = Safe.
Saab on the other hand, hasn't been advertising the safety factor of it's vehicles.
While Saabs may be safer than Volvos, the perception in consumer's minds is that Volvo is safer than Saab because Saab isn't actively and constantly marketing the safety features and excellent crash test scores of it's models.
When was the last time you saw an ad touting the safety of a Saab? I haven't seen one.
You did take the time to read the body of my post,right? You were smart enough to discern that the the topic we were discussing was safety,Right?You did realize my statement was regarding safety,right?So...you have an opinion or some evidence to dispute that statment....Right?
Apparently, Top Gear, the magazine (which is affiliated with the TV show, and also has a website), ranked the Saab 9-3 numero uno in a big Junior-Exec shoot-out. It even beat the new 3-Series! Apparently (you can go to the site for the details), it's not as good handling as the 3-Series, but it's more solid in other areas.
I was surprised. Usually I hear average-to-mediocre reports on the 9-3, but for TG to find it better than the 3-Series?? They're doing something right. They need to capitalise on that.
While they're at it... replace the 9-5 already! The facelift does nothing but make it look more frumpy. The 9-7x is about to be released in the European market, so it can't be THAT bad. And the 9-2x is dead, seeing as GM and Subaru are quits.
Wow.. but that 9-3 comparo. I liked the 9-3, but I didn't think it was a 3-Series-beater. If I had the dinero, I'd put a deposit down on a 9-3 SportCombi. And a chisel to take off the SportCombi badge (Combi down here was the nickname for the ol' VW hippie van)
Very interesting. In the last C&D test, the 9-3 placed last. However, i think part of this was due to the fact the test was carried out in 115+ degree arizona. This would of course hurt the turbo cars.
Still, i would be interested to discover what biases and criteria each set of testers had.
"My" 330I would sticker at $38,770. "My" 9-3 would sticker at 33,720. For the same sticker price, i would get the 330i without thinking, because i care a lot about performance. But at 5K cheaper ( and more of a gap when you consider "street price" ) it's worth thinking about.
Perhaps one factor was the fact that running costs ( higher fuel, taxes and insurance ) probably made the price gap even larger in the UK.
I like Saab. I think the Brand should be the Volvo/Audi brand of GM. Vehicles that are AWD, safe, high-tech, and offer a consumer a rewarding all season car that really backs the "Born From Jets" slogan. I love the new saab engine; What a piece of technology. Now only if they would put high-tech skins over that engine
In about 3 years GM said they wanna do alot of things with Saab. Yes they have the money, but are spending alot of it on SUV's and Trucks right now. I wish they would pump some money into the brand now. I think a 9-5 redo is much needed. I guess we might have to wait until 2008 or 9. This could really spark alot of interest into the brand if it's done right. :shades: GM has said it wants to make the cars have AWD since it's a popular feature in Europe and other climates with snowy weather.
I think GM should give Saab exclusive platforms, then when Saab is done with them, they can trickle down to Malibus and G6s and more mainstream cars.
DaimlerChrysler is doing this. The 300 uses the old E-Class equipment. It saves development costs in the long run while still giving Saab something exclusive.
I think Saab should have a line up like this: Saab 900- (I feel like bringing back the 900 name) Compact Premium car (ala Audi A3) Saab 9-2- Compact Premium SUV (ala Acura RDX) Saab 9-3- Entry Level Luxury Saab 9-4- Entry Level Luxury Crossover (ala RX330) Saab 9-5- Mid Luxury Saab 9-6- Mid Luxury Crossover (ala LR3 and R350, only without the hearse look) Saab Sonnett- Premium Roadster (ala SLK280, Z4)
I think a lineup like that combined with a wonderful marketing plan could actually make Saab a very vibrant automaker.
How about a "Viggen" model as the Top of the line performance version. Would you make that kinda like the "V" series of Cadillac for Saab ????
I agree the Turbo should stay. My perfect 9-5, 9-3 convertible, Saab Viggen would have these features.
Adjustable Magnaride suspension, 20 inch tires and rims that are chromed and Z-rated all season rubber, Twin Turbo 450 horsepower 3.6 "high feature" V-6 that GM made for the Velite Roadster or new Twin Turbo Bio Power Saab engine that runs on alternative fuels, See GMtv, 6 speed manuel and F-1 inspired shift paddles manumatic, AC, heated, massaging seats, Voice Recognition w/ Navigation with XM and XM traffic, 7.1 DVD Surround Sound, All-Wheel Drive w/ 4-wheel steering, adaptive cruise, adaptive headlamps, swivel headlamps, State of the Art safety equipment with knee airbags, Dual Stage front airbags, rear seat airbags on the back of the front seats, full leather trim, side impact airbags both front and rear with curtain airbags, cooled cupholders, cooled glovebox, rear seat center console that features a ice box and heat, defeatable stability and traction control systems, dual exhuast with Quad tips, auto dimming windows that limo tint during sunlight. See Gentex ! heated steering wheel, Chrome or Aluminum Trim with maybe wood as a option, Onstar with crash notification, bluetooth, power moonroof, auto dimming heated mirrors with turn signals, heated windshield washer fluid, deicer windshield, rear seat entertainment system with integrated LCD's in head rests, power reclining rear seats with all the fuctions of front seats, 5 yr. 60K factory warranty, and any other gadget I might of left out. :P
I would pay $65K for such a vehicle and it would put the Saab Brand into the premium gotta have limelight. I know I sound extreme, but I know for a fact that their is an audience for such a vehicle. It would sell faster than GM could make em'
BMW, Audi, would be back to the drawing boards with a holy cow what are we going to do ????? :surprise:
There you have it !!!! Rocky's Fantasy Saab :shades:
There is NO WAY GM will have the money to properly invest in new Saab models in the next few years. In fact, if it did have the money, I would say it would be MUCH better spent investing in GM cars, which are already beginning to fall behind again after the "year of the car" 2005, or was it 2004?
The very best Saab can hope for from GM is stealing a whole slew of stuff out of the Caddy and Corvette parts bin, with an ignition switch slapped between the seats, all riding on a properly developed Epsilon II platform (long and short wheelbase versions to differentiate a 9-3 and 9-5). And I don't have much faith that GM will even go THAT far with the brand.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Hey GM has clearly stated by 2010 the Saab brand will be totally transformed. A Cadillac style overhual. All we are doing is playing the waiting game. :shades:
5 years is a long time to wait... They haven't made money for GM corporate yet, why would they allow the bleeding to continue for another 5 years? :confuse:
They need to put the cash towards the home brands instead of blowing it on side jobs. Build a decent Chevy that doesn't reek of cheapness before sinking it into an also-ran Euro brand...
Now Saab is playing into the typical GM waiting game...brighter days are always just around the corner, with no justification given for the shortfalls of current products.
was originally scheduled for around 2007. I don't know if that is still on target, or how long it would take them to engineer a LWB version for the 9-5, but I am assuming it will be at least an extra year, meaning the existing 9-5 will have a 12-year run before it is significantly redesigned. Why bother. Paging janitorial, the flagship model needs to be dusted off.
9-2 and 9-6 are gone, buh bye.
9-7 is uninspsiring to say the least, and sales reflect that. And when the TB is updated (next year?), apparently GM will not update the 9-7 as it hopes to have a proper crossover for Saab in the near future. What is "near" exactly? And how come the king of rebadging can't rebadge an SRX to be the 9-7 in the meantime? It would fit much better.
Anyway, this has all been said before. I have NO faith that GM will ACTUALLY launch all the new Saab models it has hinted at by 2010. Why would it direct Caddy-rebirth R&D money at a brand that was never more than a quirky little niche label to begin with?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I can see your frusteration. I understand. I however don't want GM to sell Saab. I think it's a brand with lots of potential. GM has huge plans for this company as the General Manager of Saab has said a few months back. I honestly don't think you will regret what GM has planned for Saab. Do some homework on edmunds. You might beable to get a copy of the interview somewhere on this site.
I agree that Saab has a lot of potential under GM, since GM can keep the costs of development down by using stuff from the GM parts bin for minor stuff- say GM radio controls (Impala radio controls are in the 2006 9-5) and some other minor stuff.
GM just has to pump some cash, and their previous track record with new, competitive import fighting models isn't good. (Alero, Intrigue, Lacrosse, Saturn)
GM's track record with trying to get "back on par with the imports" isn't exactly one I'd want. They've mostly had failures.
GM should throw cash at Saab, let them do their own thing, and see what the Saab team brings to the table. If it looks good, approve it. If it doesn't, throw a little more cash at those engineers and tell them to mix things up a little.
I read the interview and posted my thoughts on it. He said nothing except that we should all be patient and father knows best. Now, this guy is coming out of where? Another premium brand European car co? Nope, they picked him up from another GM division. Want to bet what he drives? Want to bet how often he has driven an Audi, Volvo, Lexus, MB, SAAB, etc? Want to bet how many times he has been to Europe on pleasure?? These may seem like ad hominen statements but they are all directly relevant to where Saab is going.
I think I read last week that they sell more Toyota Camry's in a week than Saab sold cars in the US last year. In the scheme of things, GMs Rick Wagoner has far more to worry about than how to save a nutball division. These guys were on third base and heading toward home plate when their "winter car" competion was still in the dug out. They didn't even have enough sense to adopt AWD 20 years ago. Turn out the lights. Its over.
I think GM should put Lutz in charge of Saab, in addition to his current duties.
At least Lutz used to live in Europe (right?), someone posted that he drives a 9000 Aero, and he knows what Audi, Volvo, Mercedes, and BMW are capable of putting out. And he knows what good product can do to a company's (or division's) bottom line.
Lutz as GM product planning chief hasn't done anything for Saab. Or much else. Look at the pickup truck interiors of the non-rack and pinion, non-irs suspension, non multivalve head, non power folding third seat GM SUVs. The mid-70's, big ex-marine who flies his own helicopter to work (and has landed his fixed wing warbird with the wheels still retracted) seems more interested in Bob Lutz than anything else.
It would be nothing but a smart move for GM to rid themselves of Saab. My guess is they are waiting for the outcome of the Caddy BLS in the UK before any decision?
Comments
OTOH, porsche has a relationship with VW/audi, and I think vw's 2.0T is a great engine. And, heck, audi build great cars, but why sell them to a direct competitior?
I still think GM COULD be a great owner for saab, if GM did it right. Give saab money, let them develop some cool technology, offer it a few years later. Daimer hit home runs by handing the old mercedes E platform to chrysler and developing the 300/charger. The ford 500 is doing very well, and it's based off the aged s80 platform. Etc.
dave
Forget engines. Saab doesn't have any besides a four cylinder that has been turbo boosted to within an atmospheric bar of its life. Lots of people have engines they could sell to this new company. Look at how Volvo went to Yamaha to develop a V8! Saab/Porsche could even go to the guy who bought the alu Buick V8 castings from Rover last year and resurrect that hoary engine for another tour of duty.
GM needs to take a risk, borrow heavily on Saab, and give them the money to do what they need to do to return to its former glory and sales levels.
GM can in turn use those platforms down the road, after Saab has moved on, in some of its more moderately priced automobiles, such as the Saturn midsize sedan and the Saturn Ion.
Porsche can be a great owner too, albeit there will be less opportunities for synergy. But an acquisition of Saab could provide Porsche with a larger customer base up north and could provide Saab with a stronger sunny weather clientele. (which would aid especially in moving the 9-3 convertible)
I don't think FWD is killing the company. The best selling cars are FWD. I don't like it personally, but i know i'm not representative of most buyers.
AWD and big engines are great, but is saab just a copy of, say, audi then?
dave
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I love Audis - they make the best first impression of any car out there. The drive is great too. But I am way too impatient to have a car that needs as many service trips as VW Group cars apparently do. That gets costly after 50K too.
I have been in the current-model 9-3 and 9-5, and was underwhelmed to say the least. Certainly, the CTS is on a par with these models, and similarly priced with RWD - what's left to consider?
I used to love the old 9-3 SE hatchback, that is a car I might have bought if it had been a lot less money. But for that money I can find better cars.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
http://www.carprices.com/vehicles/2006_Saab_9_5_Sedan_23T.html
I think audis are pretty nice, but i'd want to lease one as well.
dave
M
M
Saab needs to go Volvo- safe, AWD cars with Swedish character.
GM needs to throw money which is what it doesn't have currently.
I miss the hatchback, and love the new 2.8T even if it is 6 cylinders, but AWD? Too much.
Rocky
was the very first car ever to be awarded 5 stars in the demanding Euro NCAP crash test.Saab 9-3 in 2004 first car in any size or price category to be awarded double "Best Pick"for offset frontal and side-impact crash tests by The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and this year one of only 4 cars to be awarded "Gold Standard" by also achieving "Best Pick" status in a third category,Rear collision,whiplash protection.Volvo was rated no better than "good"in frontal and rear tests and only"acceptable" in side impact.Lastly even though Volvo and Saab jointly sponsored whiplash protection headrest research in the mid-90's only Saabs "Active Headrest Restraint System"received award recognition from the International Safety Council in 2002 and is now found in many other manufacturers cars,Volvos "WHIPS"system is only used by Volvo.
Saab is now,and has been for a number of years, the standard by which all cars should be compared.
Volvo actively is selling the public on its safety, creating an image where people think Volvo = Safe.
Saab on the other hand, hasn't been advertising the safety factor of it's vehicles.
While Saabs may be safer than Volvos, the perception in consumer's minds is that Volvo is safer than Saab because Saab isn't actively and constantly marketing the safety features and excellent crash test scores of it's models.
When was the last time you saw an ad touting the safety of a Saab? I haven't seen one.
For a Volvo, I think I saw one last month.
You didn't print that with a straight face, did you ....?
Terry.
You were smart enough to discern that the the topic we were discussing was safety,Right?You did realize my statement was regarding safety,right?So...you have an opinion or some evidence to dispute that statment....Right?
Terry.
I was surprised. Usually I hear average-to-mediocre reports on the 9-3, but for TG to find it better than the 3-Series?? They're doing something right. They need to capitalise on that.
While they're at it... replace the 9-5 already! The facelift does nothing but make it look more frumpy. The 9-7x is about to be released in the European market, so it can't be THAT bad. And the 9-2x is dead, seeing as GM and Subaru are quits.
Wow.. but that 9-3 comparo. I liked the 9-3, but I didn't think it was a 3-Series-beater. If I had the dinero, I'd put a deposit down on a 9-3 SportCombi. And a chisel to take off the SportCombi badge (Combi down here was the nickname for the ol' VW hippie van)
Rocky
Still, i would be interested to discover what biases and criteria each set of testers had.
"My" 330I would sticker at $38,770. "My" 9-3 would sticker at 33,720. For the same sticker price, i would get the 330i without thinking, because i care a lot about performance. But at 5K cheaper ( and more of a gap when you consider "street price" ) it's worth thinking about.
Perhaps one factor was the fact that running costs ( higher fuel, taxes and insurance ) probably made the price gap even larger in the UK.
dave
Rocky
Does GM have the money and patience to make Saab into that kind of an automaker though?
GM has said it wants to make the cars have AWD since it's a popular feature in Europe and other climates with snowy weather.
Rocky
Rocky
DaimlerChrysler is doing this. The 300 uses the old E-Class equipment. It saves development costs in the long run while still giving Saab something exclusive.
I think Saab should have a line up like this:
Saab 900- (I feel like bringing back the 900 name) Compact Premium car (ala Audi A3)
Saab 9-2- Compact Premium SUV (ala Acura RDX)
Saab 9-3- Entry Level Luxury
Saab 9-4- Entry Level Luxury Crossover (ala RX330)
Saab 9-5- Mid Luxury
Saab 9-6- Mid Luxury Crossover (ala LR3 and R350, only without the hearse look)
Saab Sonnett- Premium Roadster (ala SLK280, Z4)
I think a lineup like that combined with a wonderful marketing plan could actually make Saab a very vibrant automaker.
Would you scrap FWD in favor of RWD or AWD ???
I think keeping turbo engines is important. Do you ???
Rocky
Weren't Turbocharged engines always a part of Saab? I think it adds to the quirkiness of a Saab, so it should stay.
Sorta like Audi, only from Sweden
So basically the lineup would be FWD with optional AWD, and turbocharged engines.
I agree the Turbo should stay. My perfect 9-5, 9-3 convertible, Saab Viggen would have these features.
Adjustable Magnaride suspension, 20 inch tires and rims that are chromed and Z-rated all season rubber, Twin Turbo 450 horsepower 3.6 "high feature" V-6 that GM made for the Velite Roadster or new Twin Turbo Bio Power Saab engine that runs on alternative fuels, See GMtv, 6 speed manuel
and F-1 inspired shift paddles manumatic, AC, heated, massaging seats, Voice Recognition w/ Navigation with XM and XM traffic, 7.1 DVD Surround Sound, All-Wheel Drive w/ 4-wheel steering, adaptive cruise, adaptive headlamps, swivel headlamps, State of the Art safety equipment with knee airbags, Dual Stage front airbags, rear seat airbags on the back of the front seats, full leather trim, side impact airbags both front and rear with curtain airbags, cooled cupholders, cooled glovebox, rear seat center console that features a ice box and heat, defeatable stability and traction control systems, dual exhuast with Quad tips, auto dimming windows that limo tint during sunlight. See Gentex !
heated steering wheel, Chrome or Aluminum Trim with maybe wood as a option, Onstar with crash notification, bluetooth, power moonroof, auto dimming heated mirrors with turn signals, heated windshield washer fluid, deicer windshield, rear seat entertainment system with integrated LCD's in head rests, power reclining rear seats with all the fuctions of front seats, 5 yr. 60K factory warranty, and any other gadget I might of left out. :P
I would pay $65K for such a vehicle and it would put the Saab Brand into the premium gotta have limelight. I know I sound extreme, but I know for a fact that their is an audience for such a vehicle. It would sell faster than GM could make em'
BMW, Audi, would be back to the drawing boards with a holy cow what are we going to do ????? :surprise:
There you have it !!!! Rocky's Fantasy Saab :shades:
The very best Saab can hope for from GM is stealing a whole slew of stuff out of the Caddy and Corvette parts bin, with an ignition switch slapped between the seats, all riding on a properly developed Epsilon II platform (long and short wheelbase versions to differentiate a 9-3 and 9-5). And I don't have much faith that GM will even go THAT far with the brand.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Will GM put the brand on the market? Who would be willing to take Saab, inject some cash and brainpower into the brand, and turn it around?
Rocky
They need to put the cash towards the home brands instead of blowing it on side jobs. Build a decent Chevy that doesn't reek of cheapness before sinking it into an also-ran Euro brand...
But just wait till 2015! :P
9-2 and 9-6 are gone, buh bye.
9-7 is uninspsiring to say the least, and sales reflect that. And when the TB is updated (next year?), apparently GM will not update the 9-7 as it hopes to have a proper crossover for Saab in the near future. What is "near" exactly? And how come the king of rebadging can't rebadge an SRX to be the 9-7 in the meantime? It would fit much better.
Anyway, this has all been said before. I have NO faith that GM will ACTUALLY launch all the new Saab models it has hinted at by 2010. Why would it direct Caddy-rebirth R&D money at a brand that was never more than a quirky little niche label to begin with?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Rocky
GM just has to pump some cash, and their previous track record with new, competitive import fighting models isn't good. (Alero, Intrigue, Lacrosse, Saturn)
GM's track record with trying to get "back on par with the imports" isn't exactly one I'd want. They've mostly had failures.
GM should throw cash at Saab, let them do their own thing, and see what the Saab team brings to the table. If it looks good, approve it. If it doesn't, throw a little more cash at those engineers and tell them to mix things up a little.
I read the interview and posted my thoughts on it. He said nothing except that we should all be patient and father knows best. Now, this guy is coming out of where? Another premium brand European car co? Nope, they picked him up from another GM division. Want to bet what he drives? Want to bet how often he has driven an Audi, Volvo, Lexus, MB, SAAB, etc? Want to bet how many times he has been to Europe on pleasure?? These may seem like ad hominen statements but they are all directly relevant to where Saab is going.
I think I read last week that they sell more Toyota Camry's in a week than Saab sold cars in the US last year. In the scheme of things, GMs Rick Wagoner has far more to worry about than how to save a nutball division. These guys were on third base and heading toward home plate when their "winter car" competion was still in the dug out. They didn't even have enough sense to adopt AWD 20 years ago. Turn out the lights. Its over.
At least Lutz used to live in Europe (right?), someone posted that he drives a 9000 Aero, and he knows what Audi, Volvo, Mercedes, and BMW are capable of putting out. And he knows what good product can do to a company's (or division's) bottom line.
But does Lutz have the time?
Krzys