Saab's days are definitely numbered. The competition is too fierce and the car is just too average to stand out in the marketplace anymore, IMO. It's ironic, because the Saab was much more popular when it was a pretty awful car mechanically, and now, so much improved, it hardly gets any notice or press or interest like it used to.
Saab was once a highly innovative, eccentric and practical car, but so much has changed since 1980.
RIP. If Saab has been GM's Swedish Fiat, then it is just dumb for hanging on so long. GM should have got rid of it five years ago. They could have used the money from the sale to pay off Fiat! :-P
Sometimes things just run their natural course and end. People have been acting like it would have been a historic tragedy of epic proportions for Saab to die in the 80s or 90s when it reached the end of its ability to be competitive in a globalizing market. But lots of car companies are no longer around that once were loved by their customers. The market isn't big enough for everybody.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I agree - in 20-20 hindsight, GM probably would have been better off just not buying Saab, and Saab would have died a natural death 15, 20 years ago....I just think it's silly for Saab loyalists to blame GM for "killing" Saab. Saab would have been long gone years ago without GM's money.
Absolutely. By 1990 Saab was no longer a competitive product anyway. It lost the "turbo edge", the reliability was abyssmal and the company really couldn't boost market share, being such a minor player in America anyway.
I'm sure GM saved it, not killed it, but really it was just giving life support to a dying entity (at least in America---I'm sure the car could survive in Europe in some form).
To Saab's credit, it did improve the quality and reliability of the car considerably, but as they say "too little, too late".
In hindsight, if Saab had continued to produce their 4 door hatch, added AWD, and improved reliability in the early 90s, they might be where Subaru is today (not exactly experiencing a windfall, but at least putting out interesting product).
At this point I agree that Saab would have been dead long ago if it weren't for GM, but now they should just shut the brand down instead of making a mockery out of it. This Chevy and Subaru conversion act is a last gasp. I wonder if GM would be open to selling Saab to the Chinese? Or if one those companies would buy it is the bigger question. They didn't want Rover.
should have forced GM to give them the capital resources needed to design and produce interesting, quirky, turbocharged and stylish cars similar to what Ford has done with Volvo.
GM, on the otherhand, used its typical strategy of "Hey, the TrailBlazer sells! Let's rebadge it!" And now we have the 9-7X.
If GM hadn't bought Saab, Saab could have died a quick, natural death which is less painful that the current prolonged and rebadged life that Saab is living.
I know everyone is saying that Saab would have died without GM, but I'm going to disagree here. I do think that, on their own, yes Saab was going to die, BUT I think that someone else could have bought them and actually done something positive with them. I know it is all speculation, but I just don't see why GM is off the hook for finishing off Saab. They've done a lousy job of managing Saab.
If a car company is bought by "foreigners", you can almost count on it being radically changed. In the case of Volvo and Jaguar, this was good, they needed radical change. In the case of Saab, the ONLY thing the car had going for it, character and eccentricity, was ironed out. By 1990 Volvo and Jaguar didn't have much personality left anyway, but Saab surely did. That's my theory anyway. You can turn an Opel or a Vauxhall into a Chevrolet, no sweat, and a Volvo or a Jaguar into a Ford, but you can't turn a Morgan or a Porsche into a Chevrolet or Ford or anything other than what they are. Well you can, but don't expect anyone to buy it.
I saw a TV ad for the new Saab SUV and it was interesting. The pitch of the ad was that this Saab SUV didn't "blend in" like other SUVs, that is was totally distinctive, different, unusual.
And yet, when you look at it, it looks just like every other SUV. It seems like the ad was trying to cash in on the Saab's old reputation for eccentricity without providing any actual difference. That is SOOOOO GM by the way. All sizzle, no steak in this case. At least Ford's Jaguars and Volvos really look different and most Chrysler products are distinctly different, if a bit weird looking or overblown.
Actually, if Saab's current lineup didn't consist of two blatant re-badgings, it wouldn't be a bad line of thought. But it is more than just a little hypocritical to use it when you're pushing the 9-7 and 9-2x.
I agree. If they didn't rush the 9-7X and the 9-2X and spent more time trying to make it look eccentric, the tag line "The State of Independence" might actually fit.
you're kidding, right? A Trailblazer! That pinnacle of SUV design.
I must admit I have seen a few 9-2Xs on the road now, and in terms of looks it has the jump on the Impreza/WRX. Not to mention it now has those models beat on price. I was sorta thinking of going and driving one, which notion I must firmly push out of my mind, since I doubt Saab will be around much longer, and on principle I would not throw my business to the 9-2 since Subaru designed and built it. (I would give Sube the business instead if I were going ahead)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
there seem to be conflicting news reports, which sound fairly definite on both sides of that question. My bet is, yes. Saab needs more product like yesterday, and in GM's eyes the easiest way to do that is just to rebadge other companies' cars.
As for manufacturing locations, aren't they moving all the 9-3 production to the same plant that chruns out Malibus in the U.S.? Or am I remembering that wrong?
Question: when is a car company no longer a car company, but merely a sign on a wall someplace, and a neat-looking badge?
Answer: when it is Saab.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I saw an ad tonight on TV for it - one of the usual ones where the announcer was talking about how it demonstrates "independent thinking" - yeah, as in independent of anyone at Saab! :-P
Saab, the state of independence....from any original design or innovation.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Here's a semi-recent article about Saab's future plans.
As we've talked about above in this thread, the 9-2x and the 9-7x are 'stop-gaps' to keep the brand alive for the next few years. They will supposedly be replaced by Saab designs.
So if the 9-3 and 9-5 will be built at Opel's German plant after 2008, that would signal the end of the Trollhattan-built Saabs as we know it, wouldn't it?
Yeah - looks that way...based on the autoweek article anyway, it seems like they'll mainly be built in Germany. I guess it depends on how you look at it. From a "glass half full" perspective, it looks like Saab finally has some new product in the pipeline. From the "glass half empty" perspective, they're all re-badged Opels.
I've had to eat my words on a few predictions (I never thought anybody would buy the PT Cruiser) but I was dead right about Saab as many as 7-8 years ago, that it was doomed, and I also thought GM was going to suffer too.
I mean, think about Saab say in parallel to Subaru. In the 80s and early 90s very similar characteristics...they both put out a quirky "niche" type of car of dubious quality and limp along like that. Then as competition becomes VERY strong in the early 90s, this is where things change. Subaru pumps out high performance affordable sedans, develops AWD, markets SUVs and crossovers, and Saab just stands still or at best puts out warmed over new models that really don't take the best of the old or develop the new very much. Not good.
Well that's sort of the problem isn't it? You drove a Catera and said "yeah, that's okay, not bad" and then you got into say a BMW 5 series and said "Oh, YEAH, that's more like it".
Same with Saab I think. What's there to "knock you out"?
Comments
Saab was once a highly innovative, eccentric and practical car, but so much has changed since 1980.
Sometimes things just run their natural course and end. People have been acting like it would have been a historic tragedy of epic proportions for Saab to die in the 80s or 90s when it reached the end of its ability to be competitive in a globalizing market. But lots of car companies are no longer around that once were loved by their customers. The market isn't big enough for everybody.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I'm sure GM saved it, not killed it, but really it was just giving life support to a dying entity (at least in America---I'm sure the car could survive in Europe in some form).
To Saab's credit, it did improve the quality and reliability of the car considerably, but as they say "too little, too late".
In hindsight, if Saab had continued to produce their 4 door hatch, added AWD, and improved reliability in the early 90s, they might be where Subaru is today (not exactly experiencing a windfall, but at least putting out interesting product).
M
It's hard to turn a moribund company around, really hard.
GM, on the otherhand, used its typical strategy of "Hey, the TrailBlazer sells! Let's rebadge it!" And now we have the 9-7X.
If GM hadn't bought Saab, Saab could have died a quick, natural death which is less painful that the current prolonged and rebadged life that Saab is living.
I'll miss Saab.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Possibly the Chrysler Corporation (this was before the merger, by the way)
And I think almost any other car company would do a better job with Saab than GM.
GM tried to turn Saab into a mass market brand, instead of a niche brand like Porsche or Lotus.
Mass Market works for some brands, notably Lexus and Toyota, but it doesn't work for others. (Saab)
And yet, when you look at it, it looks just like every other SUV. It seems like the ad was trying to cash in on the Saab's old reputation for eccentricity without providing any actual difference. That is SOOOOO GM by the way. All sizzle, no steak in this case. At least Ford's Jaguars and Volvos really look different and most Chrysler products are distinctly different, if a bit weird looking or overblown.
But Saab is just......boring.
http://www.tvacres.com/admascots_clarapeller.htm
In fact I think Saab's current advertising campaign is a complete joke. Every time I see a Saab ad or commercial, I just chuckle. So sad...
Bob
I must admit I have seen a few 9-2Xs on the road now, and in terms of looks it has the jump on the Impreza/WRX. Not to mention it now has those models beat on price. I was sorta thinking of going and driving one, which notion I must firmly push out of my mind, since I doubt Saab will be around much longer, and on principle I would not throw my business to the 9-2 since Subaru designed and built it. (I would give Sube the business instead if I were going ahead)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The next new Saab will be a rebadged Impala or maybe a Buick if they're lucky
:-P
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
What happens when Saab starts making many models and they run out of numbers?
Say they have a 9-1, 9-2, 9-3, 9-4, 9-5, 9-6, 9-7, 9-8, and 9-9, what will the next new model be called? The Saab 9-10?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
They couldn't. Porsche would sue them
Saab is going to make a 9-6 crossover (rebadge of Tribeca) at the plant in Lafayette, IN. Sad, eh?
As for manufacturing locations, aren't they moving all the 9-3 production to the same plant that chruns out Malibus in the U.S.? Or am I remembering that wrong?
Question: when is a car company no longer a car company, but merely a sign on a wall someplace, and a neat-looking badge?
Answer: when it is Saab.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
And everyone knows what they will produce from now on at Trollhattan - the new Euro-Caddy! :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Saab, the state of independence....from any original design or innovation.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
As we've talked about above in this thread, the 9-2x and the 9-7x are 'stop-gaps' to keep the brand alive for the next few years. They will supposedly be replaced by Saab designs.
http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=102627
I mean, think about Saab say in parallel to Subaru. In the 80s and early 90s very similar characteristics...they both put out a quirky "niche" type of car of dubious quality and limp along like that. Then as competition becomes VERY strong in the early 90s, this is where things change. Subaru pumps out high performance affordable sedans, develops AWD, markets SUVs and crossovers, and Saab just stands still or at best puts out warmed over new models that really don't take the best of the old or develop the new very much. Not good.
Oh, and cindy crawford, too.
I drove one, and thought it was quite allright. No my speed, but nice.
Same with Saab I think. What's there to "knock you out"?