The Future of Saab?

jchan2

I think its a great idea if GM can make the Saab version different enough from the Solstice and Sky.

The 9-2X and 9-7X are stopgaps, but I think almost anyone with a brain can tell that both of them are simply rebadged Imprezas and TrailBlazers.

The 9-5 has been around since 1998. It's time to either pull the plug or redesign it.

An Aveo rebadged as a Saab 9-1X with a plusher interior would be a disaster, even worse than the 9-2X and 9-7X

The reason why the S40/Mazda3/European Focus platform sharing idea works is because they a) look significantly different and b) don't share too many parts.

davem2001

I think the poster up above talking about a rebadged Aveo (Saab 9-1) was just being sarcastic...I agree, it would be a disaster.

logic1

As far as I am concerned, the Sonnet was the Saab that established the brand's reputation as an independent.

Especially if it were designed to meet EU and Federal standards, you would think GM could move enough of them in both markets to make it worthwhile.

They could make them in Delaware and take advantage of the dollar/Euro.

The only problem I can think of: the Kappa is a pure rwd platform. I'ld love a cool little rwd Saab. In fact, I really want a Kappa 2+2 no matter what brand it comes out as. The Sonnet faithful, however, may tear a page from the GTO faithful and pan a nice car because it is not exactly like what was made 30 years ago.

jchan2

I think it'd be very hard to make a Kappa based Sonnett exactly like the old one.

ronhextall

I have contacted Saab several times about using GM Card points towards a Saab and they always say no. I would like a 9-3 because that would be a nice 4 door performance sedan that seats five with a manual transmission. The rest of GM offers nothing that fits the bill but I am not going to throw away $3500 in GM card points to buy a Saab. I will probably end up getting a used Maxima. If Saab is in trouble in only makes sense to open up the brand to GM points. It leaves me rather bitter towards GM and Saab and I find myself chuckling at GM's problems.

jchan2

GM won't let you use GM Card points towards a Saab?! Do they let employees use Employee Pricing on Saabs?

bcool

Use the GM Extended Family Card to get points towards a SAAB. This is a little different that the GM Card. And yes there is an employee discount plan for GM employees .

ronhextall

I am about 11 months away from maxing out my old school GM card at $3,500. Took seven years to get it up that high sure as heck am not going to start over on a different card. The GM card gets 5% and the Family card gets 1%, not sure but the Family Card probably has a $ limit on each vehicle. If you have the old GM card that goes up to $3,500 you get plastered with mail all the time almost begging you to switch to the new GM card with the vehicle $ limits. My understanding is that in Canada you can use the old GM card for Saab which really makes my head hurt.

jchan2

Driving to Canada to buy a Saab (and using your GM Card Points) then legally importing it back into the US? I don't know how hard it is to import a car from Canada here legally, but I'm sure some people have done it before and can help out.

nippononly

the customs fees would cost you more than the money you save using the card to make the purchase. Not to mention the federalization (for smog) nightmare that may or may not ensue depending on your state of residence.

ronhextall

Ever notice that every GM thread is dominated by people talking about they employee purchase program? I don't notice that kind of talk on other brands. GM is a company that makes most of its profit on its finance division and seems to spend their spare time making cars for its employees to buy. GM should spend its time trying to get the general public to buy its cars. The whole GM card, good in Canada for a Saab but not the U.S., is a prime example of GM's problems. The situation really doesn't make sense. It is probably just a big red tape mess and nobody at GM/Saab feels like getting it changed. From the outside it looks like GM has too much red tape and too much management. Seems to me all GM cars should be good to go with the GM card. GM gets the money no matter what so what is the big deal? GM needs downsized.

nippononly

"GM needs downsized"

You can say that again. And a little bit of downsizing that would make a great start would be jettisoning Saab to the winds of history.

logic1

GM radically downsized its management in the mid-90s. GM has among the smallest management framework of any for a company its size.

GM sells over 5 million cars and light trucks per year. It certainly has nowhere near that many employees.

nippononly

I think his implication was more that GM's most vocal and avid fans are its own employees. And part of the reason they are so avid and vocal is because they get RIPPIN' good deals that no-one else can get unless they save up their "GM points" on a special credit card.

PF_Flyer

Let's not turn this topic into a general GM topic. We already have a couple of topics dealing with GM and their future in general. Let's keep the focus of this one on Saab.

ronhextall

I would like to consider a Saab but until I can use my $3,500 in GM Card points I really cannot. Saab lets Canadians use their old GM Card points but not Americans. Allowing GM card points may not bump Saab sales a bunch but I am sure it would have some impact and every little bit helps.

logic1

I do not have a problem with that.

If you have GM points on your card, they should apply to Saab. Otherwise, the brand is that much more an orphan.

jchan2

I'm sure Saab would appreciate every single sale it can get right now, even those money-losing deals to GM Employees and those huge rebates to GM Card holders.

Seems like Volvo doesn't have this problem...

logic1

Volvo is doing pretty well. The big sedan and wagon sales have slowed a little this year, but are otherwise respectable. There is plenty of demand for the XC90.

Volvo got the mix of the S40 and V40 backwards. More people want the little wagon than the little sedan. Unfortunately, Volvo does not have the capacity in place to make enough US legal little wagons to sell this year.

I hope Saab does not make this mistake with the Combi. With the right execution and marketing, the Combi can really help Saab get some momentum.

jchan2

The big difference is that Volvo's smallest car isn't a rebadged one. Sure, the S40 shares components with the new Euro Focus and the Mazda3, but if you parked them all next to each other, you wouldn't know that they shared the same components underneath. If you parked a 9-2X or 9-7X next to its rebadged counterparts (Impreza, TrailBlazer) I'm sure many people would say "hmm... those cars look alike..."

merc1

I still can't believe GM has done such a thing and then has the nerve to (lie) act like these are real Saab vehicles. Lutz said in recent issue of CAR magazine that they have tuned the Saablazer to the point of blowing the X5 in the weeds in the handling department.

One of GM's biggest problems besides size is their historically big mouth. Always saying things that they can't back up and/or outright lying. Saab didn't "design" anything on these Subaru or Chevy clones other than the grille.

M

nippononly

actually, I heard that Saab had more time to tweak the TB for the 9-7 than they did when they were reworking the Impreza for the 9-2, which of course screams "Subaru" even if it does have a Saab badge on it. There have supposedly been significant suspension mods, and who knows. It could all be hype with no substance (very typical of GM) or it could be real. I am not sure I would want a sport-suspended Trailblazer anyway.

kyfdx

At least with the Subaru, you have a pretty good car to start with.. With the Trailblazer, you just have a typical GM vehicle.. I'm not sure a marriage of that along with Saab's input would be something I'd want...

regards,
kyfdx

logic1

Perhaps my problem is that I understand 99% of the car is the platform and mechanics, while the superficial looks mean little.

The S40 and V50 are not mechanically all that different from the Euro Focus. In fact, the European models use the same diesel engines available in the Focus.

The 9-3 family of cars, which as I've said ad nauseum is Saab's main show, are in fact quite different in appearance from their Epsilon platform cousins.

The 9-7 and the 9-2 were, admittedly stop gaps to succor US dealers only. The Lambda and Kappa (you know there will be one) will be as unique as the Epsilon Saabs are now.

seminole_kev

yes other than the different gas engines, drivetrain options, suspension, brakes, safety systems (including structural), exterior looks, interior looks and the fact that you can't tell they're related, sure it's the same as the new Focus. ;-)

Contrast that to GM's Saab 9-2X and 9-7's execution and you can see the difference that the rest of us are talking about.

Now the 9-3 was the way I would rather see GM execute platform sharing (as opposed to badge engineering).

stickguy

platform sharing/rebadging/whatever isn't that bad, assuming what you start with is worth it. The Volvo/Mazda/Euro Focus are all on a top=notch platform. Unlike the 9-7.

Hey, I like the 9-3, which is probably more analagous to the S40 et. al. Same basic platform, but unique cars from it.

davem2001

This is just another example of how GM is spread too thin among too many brands, too many models... I'm more and more of the opinion that GM should just dump Saab and not waste any more time/money/development efforts on it.

ronhextall

I don't think GM should fold Saab cars, Saab offers cars like the 9-3 that are unlike any other GM offering. I think maybe GM should fold all their offerings into single dealerships. It would be nice to go on a GM lot and be able to compare Chevy, Saab, Pontiac, and Cadillac side by side. It would be nice to drive a 9-3 and then maybe try out a G6 to see how it compares.

logic1

Have you actually seen the Euro Focus? The wagon especially looks very close to its V50 cousin. If Volvo brings a diesel model to the US, it would have the same engine as the Euro Focus. I doubt there is much difference between the Euro Focus and S40/V50 safety designs. The EU does not allow much leeway for many of their requirements.

The 9-7 will share a V8 with the Buick. That V8 is not available in the other SUV lines I believe. The 9-7 will have a different suspension as well.

I agree that the Volvos are more differentiated from the 9-7 and 9-2. As the 9-3 is from its Epsilon cousins.

That is because in both cases, the platforms were designed to be shared among the disparate brands from the start. Lutz has said on multiple occasions that the 9-7 and 9-2 were stop gaps to satisfy the Saab dealers demands for more product now.

There is nothing to suggest that future Saab products will not be planned from the start and that they will not be more differentiated. The 9-3 series demonstrates how well Saab can do if it plans from the start.

seminole_kev

while currently owning a focus and previously having another, I do follow the Focus scene a little bit and I'm familiar with the C1 European Focus. The structure of the Focus and the S40 is different. Different design and different steel is used. The Volvo uses stronger steel for a supposedly safer design. To me the C1 Focus still does not look like the S40. The wagons will naturally look more alike as you have less design "freedom" with the wagon shape. Still, different they are.

Logic, do you see the S40/Focus as "badge engineered" or as "platform sharing"?

Actually, just for curiosity what do you guys think about the following pairs (answer, if you want, with either "badge engineered" or "platform sharing")

Subaru WRX/Saab 9-2x
Ford Focus/Volvo S40
Lincoln LS/Jaguar S-type
Toyota Matrix/Pontiac Vibe
Toyota Camry/Lexus ES330

stickguy

badge/platform/platform/badge/badge (but bigger difference than the others).

stickguy

Hey, if you are going to share, do it right. Give Saab a Vette with a nose job.

PF_Flyer

I know, we're getting to the time of year when it's almost light here in the east when we sit down to chat! But what's more fun than ignoring yard work that could be done to chat with the Subaru Crew???

PF Flyer
Host
News & Views, Wagons, & Hybrid Vehicles

The Subaru Crew Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule

logic1

Badge/platform/platform/badge/badge.

I did not know about the different steel. That obviously would make the superficial differences between the Focus and the S40 further apart.

jchan2

The Camry and ES330, they share quite a few similarities but they still manage to look different and command different prices.

GM needs to shut down a few of its brands. GMC has always been redundant. The rest of the brands need to be combined into one gigantic dealership, as someone mentioned earlier, so someone could test drive a G6 then walkover and try out a 9-3 or Malibu.

nippononly

that there has been a heavy anti-SUV "backlash" of late in Europe, even small car-based SUVs. Will they try to sell this 9-7 in Europe, or is this strictly American fare?

Footnote on the ES330: with the advent of the Lexus brand in Japan this year and its further segregation from everything Toyota-branded, the corporate folks have announced that the next gen ES will be the last badge-engineered model. The (2012?) model will not share anything with the Camry. I guess they got sensitive to these kinds of remarks! :-P

merc1

Doesn't the trailblazer still have a solid axle in the rear? I seriously doubt Saab could do much with such a primative design to make it outhandle an X5. I simply don't believe any of that from GM.

M

logic1

9-7 is US only.

GM made the 9-7 as a stop gap response to dealers threatening to exercise their contractual rights to drop Saab when dollar volume went too low.

Not even sure the 9-7 will be sold in Canada, where GM combined Saab dealers with Saturn and Subaru. If only the US had Canadian franchise laws!

logic1

The SRX has consistently beat the X5 in buff rag comparos.

The Trailblazer is not so much a primitive design as a design for practical uses the X5 cannot handle, such as true off roading and heavy duty towing.

Whether there are any would be Saab drivers who want true off roading and heavy duty towing is another question.

I personally would not be offended to see a 9-7 on the show room floor when I go to check out my Sport Combi. Nor certain why it is such a big deal.

nippononly

the SportCombi gets a blown version of the CTS' 2.8L as the optional engine? How much power will this engine make?

merc: so it does, but people (car reviewers as well as consumers) have been generally impressed with the "sportiness" of the new 4Runner, which also has a solid rear axle. I wouldn't want to take on an X5 in one, but there is a lot GM and Saab could do if they were so inclined. Seeing as this was a quick and dirty model for Saab, I am thinking they probably were NOT so inclined! They probably lowered it a little, and put on more sporty shocks with larger rims and consequently shorter tires, and called it a day.

logic: what GM SHOULD have done is given Saab a rebadged SRX for the 9-7, instead of a rebadged TB. That would have had a much better likelihood of making good sales and having sticking power for the future, ESPECIALLY now that there will be no 9-6.

logic1

Saab say tentative 250 hp and 258 lbs torque. GM traditionally understates HP before launch.

What Saab really needs is the Lambda vehicle in my opinion. That and a new 9-5 sedan and wagon.

stickguy

one of the car mags this month had a piece on a hot-rod TB (an SS I believe) that had a big motor (from the Vette I think), and a significantly upgraded suspension that was supposed to give pretty good handling. SO, I guess it can be done.

davem2001

Yeah, I would assume that the 9-7x setup is similar to the SS Trailblazer (other than the big HP engine)...now, to say it handles better than a X5 is probably hyperbole, but I'm sure it handles a lot better than a "regular" Trailblazer/Envoy/Rainer

davem2001

To me, it's just another argument in favor of the "GM has too many brands" camp -

They're like a juggler with too many balls in the air... They've taken their eye off of Saab for too long, let the product line get dated, and now they have to rush some badge-engineered stop-gaps (9-2x, 9-7x) into the market..

logic1

Well, I think the best thing would be to put Saab with Saturn. Then Saab could just stick with variations of the 9-3. In the past, Saab only had a few models anyway.

Saturn could take on the rest of the burden with its Opel variants.

nippononly

runs on 20 inch rims. You can bet the Saab will not do so. The 20-inchers are all about typical GM bling. And unlike the SS, the 9-7 does not get anything but the stock TB engine.

Trust GM to put out a vehicle for its niche brand and call it sporty, then immediately outsport it with an SS version of its rebadge twin, LOL! :-P

logic: that sounds decent for the SportCombi - I can see why some people are interested in this vehicle. It will have a moderately hard slog though - think that the Legacy wagon has the XT version with a 250/250 turbo 2.5, and costs less. Will the Combi have AWD? Not to mention, at the same price as the Combi, the Legacy also offers the H-6 wagon - down on torque, but no turbo lag, and tons of frou frou luxury stuff, as well as VDC (which they should definitely make available on more Legacys than just this high-end one). That is before we start to talk about V50s and V70s, etc.

The 9-5 will be eight yeard old this fall, right? I agree with others who have said this should be their very first priority right now, before 9-7s and SportCombis, and if they cannot do a new one in time they should put it on hiatus for a while until the new one is ready. They continue to be starved for decent vehicles. GM will have to waste more and more money propping them up if it continues to starve them of vehicles.

davem2001

Yeah, but even then ...3,4 years from now, if the Aura is an Epsilon-based car that is trying to be "Euro", upscale, sporty...and the 9-3 is an Epsilon-based car that is trying to be "Euro", upscale, sporty...whats the difference? To me, you have Saturn, Saab, and to some extent Pontiac stepping all over each other's toes in this segment.

logic1

Well, I am surprised you would want a Saab with AWD. That is further getting away from what Saab has always been about.

I have not heard one way or the other if the Combi will have AWD.

I understand Volvo wants to increase production of the V50. The Combi will probably be slightly larger than the V50 but a little smaller than the V70. If it could come in close to V50 pricing, it should find a market.

Guess I'm just not a Subaru fan. If I were to buy a car, I would seriously consider a base engine sports suspension V50 and the Combi. I would not consider the Legacy. I really wish someone had a non retro rwd 2+2 or hatch less expensive than the GTO or 3 Series offerings.

Saab Kappa Sonnet, where are you?

nippononly

I don't "want" AWD in the Saab, I was just wondering. It is certainly a selling point to a significant and growing segment of the population.

At 250/258, the Saab is well up on power vs the V50 turbo. That is definitely a point in its favor! Not to mention it is one cylinder larger.

The Subaru makes a GT package for Legacy which is basically a sport handling package. The turbo XT has it standard.

I expect the Combi to come in right around the $30K mark, wouldn't you agree? The base 9-3 sedan is what, about $27K? So the car we are talking about, with the 2.8, is probably going to be close to $35K, V70 T5 territory in terms of pricing. At this price, the T5 has 257/258 for power and torque. In fact, the 2.5T (such confusing nomenclature from Volvo!) comes in $3K lower and has 208/236. The base V70 is also a $30K car, but would be bigger and lower-powered than the base Combi.

OK, I will stop thinking out loud now! The market is not flooded with wagons at this price, but the Volvos and Subarus will be solid competition.

davem2001

Maybe one way to differentiate Saab from it's other GM platform mates? I dunno, I'm still in the "drop Saab" school of thought.