Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

The Future of Saab?

1181921232427

Comments

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    MILWAUKEE — A Wisconsin man who drove a Saab for a million miles, then donated the car to a museum, is being given a free brand-new 9-5 Aero by the automaker.

    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=118909

    Rocky
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    I wonder how many Saab owners will take Saab up on that offer.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 235,175
    ..at an average of 40 MPH.. is 25000 hours...

    Or.. 12.5 full years of work..

    Not sure I'd want to drive a raggedy old car for an extra $1.50/hr..

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • stmssstmss Member Posts: 206
    Yeah, there's probably a few owners getting out the jack stands right now.
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    I wonder if this offer only applies to original owners, or just anybody with a Saab with a million miles.

    You could always drive one million miles at an average of 80 miles per hour, which would be 12,500 hours of work.

    Or you could look at it this way- you would have to put at least 50,000 miles per year on your car for 20 years, or 100,000 miles per year for 10 years, which is an aweful lot of driving.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 235,175
    I'm guessing he spent the equivalent of the price of a new Saab in maintenance over those million miles...

    Not to say there is anything bad about being given a new car... I'm just saying that there are easier ways.. ;)

    Besides... with my luck, I'd get it totaled with 999K miles..

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    Yeah that type of mileage on a 1989 car is a amazing. I like to drive, but that is ridiculous.

    M
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Besides... with my luck, I'd get it totaled with 999K miles..

    No that would be more like my luck. Wouldn't that just stink. :blush:

    Rocky
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    Knowing me, when the car got to 99K miles I'd run and trade it in for a new one :blush:
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    Maybe this isn't a "future" thing, but saab is offering a 60th anniversary celebration package soon. 17 inch wheels, xenons, sport seats, metallic paint, black leather interior, and a bunch of other options.

    http://www2.saabusa.com/anniversary/

    Seems like a pretty good deal.
  • musermuser Member Posts: 11
    All automotive enthusiasts wish Saab would innovate with unique, exciting new designs. Certainly being stuck under GM's umbrella is a mixed blessing, since platform sharing, co-manufacturing, and engine sharing is now mandatory.

    That said, allow me to disagree with many shallow opinions.

    "the small 6 cylinder turbocharged engines simply don't impress me nor should they to anyone."

    News flash: Saab's purpose is not to impress you. Saab is in the unenviable position to compete with Volvo and German hardware while pleasing GM's shareholders. Luckily Saab's engines are the least of its problems -- they are reliable, smooth, & quiet, if not groundbreaking.

    While the interior quality is exceptional it brings nothing different to the table.

    News flash: Saab specifies very good quality interior materials and builds to tight tolerances. If you don't like Saab's classic styling, then buy a Civic DX. Saab is not trying to keep up with the latest SEMA show styling trends.

    The only way a small turbo charged v6 could be efficient would be to lighten the car up significantly to produce any kind of effect from having a smaller engine.

    Engines become more efficent through improved design. Vehicle efficiency improves by reduction of mass, improved aerodynamics, and hundreds of other factors. For the record, Saab engines are tuned with mild boost for excellent driveability, reliability, and fuel economy -- not to win races. If you want a hot turbo, buy a Subaru WRX.

    Even with their new Aero X while an impressive design and high end engineering it’s like creating a statue of Gandhi out of cheese, Incredible, but why?

    Why does every major automaker in the world create concept cars? Probably because it is the best method of gauging customer reaction to new ideas. First you criticize Saab for not making a move, then you ask why it develops exciting new concepts for automotive enthusiasts to discuss???

    The only thing that Saab has is –Saab, a name.

    Yes, Saab is a name. Just like Ferrari, Lamborghini, Lexus, Infiniti, Porsche, Maybach, Rolls Royce, Bentley, Acura, Bugatti, BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Maserati, Lotus .... Each one of these manufacturers has strong and weak cars in the lineup, and all are overpriced. All out of your price range, I'm afraid.

    Regardless of how much power this engine is producing for its size it’s a small heart in a large body.

    Different strokes for different folks. You want a high displacement engine in a vehicle with exciting styling? Plenty to choose from, but Saab has NEVER been a big-bore engine manufacturer, and we hope, never will be. Next, please.
  • bigo08bigo08 Member Posts: 102
    Yes, Saab is a name. Just like Ferrari, Lamborghini, Lexus, Infiniti, Porsche, Maybach, Rolls Royce, Bentley, Acura, Bugatti, BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Maserati, Lotus .... Each one of these manufacturers has strong and weak cars in the lineup, and all are overpriced. All out of your price range, I'm afraid.

    I think you forgot Cadillac and Lincoln ;)
  • krzysskrzyss Member Posts: 849
    "If you want a hot turbo, buy a Subaru WRX."

    or SAAB 9-2X Aero.

    I do not think that WRX is hot turbo. STI and Evolution are.

    Krzys
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    Yep it is. Lots of features, but I knew the V6 wasn't part of the deal. Shux.

    M
  • w9cww9cw Member Posts: 888
    I've owned SAABs since 1968, and still own two classic 900 models - an '85 900 8-valve 4-door sedan, and an '87 900S 16-valve 3-door hatch. I bought both cars from a very small town Indiana dealer who's sold SAAB exclusively since 1955. The dealer's three Certified Master SAAB Technicians have over 100 years combined experience on SAABs. Each will tell you that the Opel-derived V6 is junk, compared to the SAAB Inline 4. They used the term "junk" in terms of long-term durability and reliability compared to the 4-cylinder. I can't tell you the number of times I've been in their shop and seen V6's torn down due to various problems. Not so with the SAAB Inline 4.

    With both of my classic SAABs, neither engine has had the head removed, or any other major mechanical work since purchase. The oil change interval is 3K or 3 months, and neither car uses any oil between changes. The SAAB Inline 4, either naturally aspirated or turbo, is one well-designed, tough engine, and very smooth as well. I'll take a current low-pressure turbo SAAB Inline 4 any day over the V6.
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    Well I'm a Benz man myself, but isn't the Saab inline 4 just a GM Ecotec with different heads?

    M
  • georgekgeorgek Member Posts: 50
    "The SAAB Inline 4, either naturally aspirated or turbo, is one well-designed, tough engine, and very smooth as well. I'll take a current low-pressure turbo SAAB Inline 4 any day over the V6."

    I agree completely about the turbo 4s, and I fear that when it is time to replace my 2006 9-5 (high-output turbo) the only option will be a V-6

    On the other hand even SAAB mechanics say the new V-6s are OK. It was the older ones that were very problematical.

    What I keep in mind on this board is that you and I, and posters like Muser above actually own and drive SAABs, whereas most who post here drive Japanese appliances and use this board to talk about their dream cars
  • georgekgeorgek Member Posts: 50
    No, it is a design derived from Triumph many years ago. You can find a full history on Wikopedia.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    Nah completly different engine then the Ecotec.
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    Maybe its the V6 that I was thinking about, it being a "corporate" GM engine.

    So the Saab 4-cylinder is the last thing that is geniune Saab left huh?

    M
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    I think so yeah. The interiors still have a little bit of that swedish SAAB feel other then that SAAB is dead.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    The second-generation model was launched at the Detroit Auto Show in early 2003.

    All variants feature either a 1.8 L or 2.0 L straight-4 petrol engine derived from General Motors' Ecotec family, or a turbocharged 2.8 L High-Feature V6 (starting in 2006). There are two different versions of the turbo I4, with the amount of turbo boost determining the power output.


    http://wiki.saabo.com/index.php?title=Saab_9-3&redirect=no

    :confuse:
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    Hmh I thought it was its own unique engine too but I guess not. We have a Saab dealership but I really don't have that much interaction with them.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    No, that's cool. Everything I have ever read has stated it was "Derived" from the Ecotec. So maybe outside the Block, everything is all swede. What I do know is that the Turbos were once Mitsubishi units, but I don't know if that holds true anymore...

    And Merc mentioned the V6 being a GM unit as well. The 2.5l is listed as a "High Feature" V6 which is also a GM unit so I think he may be correct.

    But, yeah, Saab is toast. Even a buddy of mine here at work has said his 99' is his last (Bought a Jeep). I think abandoning the signature hatchback was the final nail in the Saab legacy's coffin. Although the 9-3 vert. is quite the looker. :shades:
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    Well, the 2.3L in the 9-5 is still the "old" saab engine. The 2.0L in the 9-3 is the new engine derived from the ecotec. Frankly, i like the new mill better.
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    > "the small 6 cylinder turbocharged engines simply don't
    > impress me nor should they to anyone."

    > News flash: Saab's purpose is not to impress you.

    I don't know where you're coming from, but saab's purpose *is* to impress me, and other buyers. Turboing can be impressive. However, when you put the turbo v6 next to the sixes available from the competition, it doesn't seem so impressive anymore.

    The thing is, someone who can pony up for a saab can afford a lot of other cars as well. I can see the hypothetical saab buyer hearing the turbo v6 spiel, then saying, "Well, ok, then why does the bigger TL have more HP, get better MPG, and hit sixty quicker? Why does saab boast about their vast turbo heritage but the new turbo BMW roasts it ( 0-60 in 4.8) , and gets 20/29 mpg?.

    Now, i'm not saying that saab sucks, or anything like that, just that i don't see the v6 moving a lot of metal despite all the attempted hoopla.
  • saablcpsaablcp Member Posts: 195
    Even though the 2.8L.Turbo V-6 failed to "impress"you,the editors at Wards Automotive who annually choose the 10 best engines currently in production apparently did not share your opinion.I suggest you take a look at what the Industry Professionals had to say.
  • w9cww9cw Member Posts: 888
    merc1 wrote: "Well I'm a Benz man myself, but isn't the Saab inline 4 just a GM Ecotec with different heads?"

    No, and yet, yes - bear with me on this one! The basic SAAB Inline 4 design began it's life as a Triumph-designed and manufactured 1.7 Liter SOHC unit from the Triumph Dolomite sedan. Later in 1971, displacement was enlarged to 1.85 Liters, but the engine was still made by Triumph in England. This was, of course, in the SAAB 99.

    Due to Triumph's quality control problems, and some inherent unique design idiosyncrasies, SAAB moved design and production of the engine to Sweden. This occurred in 1972 when SAAB bought Scania - a Swedish truck manufacturer. This new engine was called the B Engine, and was completely built by SAAB-Scania. Displacement increased from 1.85 to 2.0 Liters. The B Engine shared much from the original Triumph design, but was significantly redesigned and improved by SAAB-Scania. Plus, materials and quality control were substantially better than that provided by Triumph.

    In 1981, SAAB introduced the H Engine with the advent of the SAAB 900. However, it was also used in the SAAB 99 and SAAB 90. It is a slanted Inline 4. Originally still a SOHC 8-valve design, a DOHC 16-valve head was added in late 1984. All later variants and displacements of the SAAB-designed Inline 4 were/are based on the H Engine design.

    However, that being said, the current 9-5 is the sole user of SAAB's H Engine design and Swedish manufacturing. In 2003, the Epsilon 9-3 switched to the GM Ecotec engine. According to my SAAB sources and Wikipedia, the H Engine will most likely end its production run in 2008 when the current 9-5 is replaced. The end of an era!

    Wikipedia has an excellent synopsis of all SAAB engines, including the SAAB SVC (SAAB Variable Compression) engine which won design awards in 2000 and 2001, but GM killed the design and project.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    Wikipedia has an excellent synopsis of all SAAB engines, including the SAAB SVC (SAAB Variable Compression) engine which won design awards in 2000 and 2001, but GM killed the design and project.

    Oh man I remember reading about the SVC motor and thinking that was about the coolest thing ever on an engine at the time. I had wondered what happened to it a few times but never looked into it.

    Doesn't surprise me that GM killed it though. I can imagine the conversation now...

    SAAB: We have developed this incredible Variable compression engine for use in our new small vehicles. This could revolutionize the IC world as more alternative/bio fuels become avaliable.

    GM: Why doesn't it have pushrods and how can we put that in an SUV??? :surprise: :sick:
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    lol
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    GM, is working on making a a smaller version of this engine
    a 2.8 "High Feature" V6 which will be expanded into more model line-ups so i read in this months issue of Motor Trend. :)

    Rocky
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    So far i know that it has 255hp and is currently used in the Euro-only Cadillac Bls that is built on the 9-3's platform.

    -Cj :)
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 10,685
    IIRC, the last few C/D comparison reviews had Saab coming in near last. My other Saab story is that the only two people that I knew with Saab convertibles both had them bought back by the dealers because of unsolvable problems with the tops. So my new car $$ are going elsewhere...
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    Even though the 2.8L.Turbo V-6 failed to "impress"you, [ etc ]

    Instead of trying to imply that i don't know what i'm talking about, why don't you respond to my actual points concerning the engine? You know, like the power and mpg?
  • readerreaderreaderreader Member Posts: 253
    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Pretty darn cool...... :)

    Rocky
  • blckislandguyblckislandguy Member Posts: 1,150
    The most impressive thing about SAAB, seriously and without sarcasm, is their resale. Because the MSRP is so high and they have to offer so many subsidized leases to move the iron, a used SAAB is a good deal. A very good deal. Where else can you get the same content, neat features, safety engineering, etc. for such a price?

    As an alternative, consider the pricing on a used BMW. Every 30 something self respecting yuppie has to have one and the resale is sky high. Not so with SAAB.
  • sidvsidv Member Posts: 64
    The 2.8t is a damn nice motor, extremely smooth and fairly flexible. Not ultimately as powerful as a 2.8 turbo could, or even should, be-but it's fine in a fairly light car like the 9-3.

    The 2.3T old school design is not an ecotech but the 2.0T is, albeit with extensive Saab-exclusive features. The 2.0T has a much smoother idle, especially when cold than the 2.3T and revs higher than the 2.3T but I've found the 2.3T to have a more muscular sound and much better torque across the rpm range and less turbo lag.

    Anyone who thinks a Saab motor is too small simply needs to drive one-unless you want really major power, there is more than enough in any recent Saab.
  • dhamiltondhamilton Member Posts: 878
    It's not that there's not enough power, It's that it comes on so high and in a non linear kind of way.

    The engine doesn't feel good with a manual[deal breaker for me] you have to get the automatic to feel somewhat less thrashy.

    Then, the steering is horrible. Excessive torque steer, and it's to thin and cheap feeling.
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    Yeah that is what I remember too, but I Saab isn't on my A-list so I wasn't ready to argue the point. I didn't think it was a unique engine anymore.

    M
  • blckislandguyblckislandguy Member Posts: 1,150
    You know SAAB is fighting an up hill battle trying to market a four cylinder engine, however good, in this price segment and their 6 cylinder is underwhelming. But as I posted about a year or so ago, they could solve this problem quite easily by taking a page from the Audi playbook and strapping two turbos, one for each bank, onto the V6. They would then have an AERO that would compete with BMW, expecially in the snow belt. Developemnt time? How long would it take to get a couple of pallet loads of V6 engines shipped to someone like a Roush or ASC in Detroit? Add an engine oil cooler, some better rod bearings, and a few other tweaks and they would be done.

    SAAB pioneered the idea of the winter car. Then Volvo moved upscale and blew by them with an AWD system they buy off the shelf form Haldex. SAAB naturally can't find Haldex' phone number on their rolodex (hint: look under "Lipe Clutch") and so is stuck (pardon the pun) with FWD vehicles in a market segment that is moving to AWD.

    Think about the showroom traffic dealers would have if they could offer a twin turbo six cylinder AWD 9-5 wagon or sedan.

    Why GM's Bob Lutz, supposedly a real car guy, can't figure this out is amazing. I think he landed his jet fighter too many times with the wheels up.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    With a new 9-3 arriving in 2010 and a 9-5 (optimistically) proposed for 2008, along with two failed badge jobs, how much hope can we really hold for the survival of the Saab brand? Really, how much equity is really left in the nameplate? I think even Putz knows this, and is just milking it along, waiting to dump it on somebody else for any amount of cash. Heck, Toyota bought the stake in Fuji heavy Ind. a former GM affiliate and is teaming up with GM's old ally Isuzu to build a line of diesels. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Saab followed suit. I really wouldn't. :blush:
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    I think thats a great idea. I think GM, should sell Saab to Toyota and the 9-3 can be a rebadged Yaris and the 9-5 can be a rebadged camry, oops Lexus already had dibs on that one. Okay how bout a rebadged Carolla. ? ;)

    Rocky
  • brightness04brightness04 Member Posts: 3,148
    It's not that there's not enough power, It's that it comes on so high and in a non linear kind of way

    I have no idea what Saab's you have been driving. All Saab's sold in the US (aside from 9-2x and 9-7x rebadge jobs) since circa 1998 are turbo-charged cars with peak torque below 2000rpm, compared to typical 4000rpm torque peak for normally aspirited engines. That's what make Saab's great cars to drive in cities and normal highway driving.
  • sidvsidv Member Posts: 64
    "Then, the steering is horrible. Excessive torque steer, and it's to (SIC) thin and cheap feeling."

    Don't know what you've been smoking but none of that is true recently in the least. Yes, the power is non-linear in the 2.0T but not the 2.3T which has a stellar torque curve.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    Saabs next model lineup should be:

    9-1 as a aveo twin with a saab designed interior,
    9-3 SAAB designed off the g-6/aura/malibu platform
    9-5 built off the Impala's platform
    9-7x being a Saab designed equinox with saabs engines
    9-9x being a lambda

    All odd numbers and a great lineup of vehicles! The aveo with a 2.0T engine = 0-60 in 5secs because of the lightweight!

    -Cj :)
  • georgekgeorgek Member Posts: 50
    "All variants feature either a 1.8 L or 2.0 L straight-4 petrol engine derived from General Motors' Ecotec family, or a turbocharged 2.8 L High-Feature V6 (starting in 2006). There are two different versions of the turbo I4, with the amount of turbo boost determining the power output."

    That's the 9-3, about which I know very little. The 2.3 HOT in the 9-5 is not a GM design, but the last of the SAAB fours derived from Triumph.
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    Saab's lineup could be:

    9-2 (using the Saturn Astra platform)
    9-3 (using the second generation Epsilon platform)
    9-4 (using the next generation Theta platform, or possibly a shortened version of Lambda)
    9-5 (using the second generation Epsilon platform)
    Sonnett (using the Kappa platform)

    I also think that Saturn and Saab could possibly work together, benefiting both companies. Saab's base models (like the 9-2)could be built in Spring Hill, avoiding higher labor costs at Trollhattan (and therefore creating a cheaper Saab). Niche models like the Sky/Sonnett could be built in Trollhattan, where better quality can be ensured. (maybe)

    Does anybody else think so?
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    GM already announced that most production of Saabs would be (or has already been - this is old news now) moved out of Trollhattan, while they would move IN production of the Euro-Caddy BLS?

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    As far as I know, Trollhattan is still pumping out 9-3s and 9-5s. (along with the rebadged 9-3 Cadillac BLS)

    I remember hearing something about Trollhattan being an underutilized plant a while back, and I think it might make sense to build an Opel or two there, although if Saab added new models I wouldn't be surprised if GM decided to build them at Trollhattan.
Sign In or Register to comment.