A sad end

[skwdenyer]

I'm afraid to report, the last family Saab went to the great breakers in the sky at Christmas, meaning that my family is now Saab-free for the first time since 1973. After at least 16 of the beasts and well over a million miles between us, it is truly sad that there is nothing in the current range which appeals to such long-standing customers.

Actually, I do have a 96 restoration project stashed away, but it is a long way from being likely to be on the road in the next year or two, so doesn't really count as ownership so much as custodianship!

Why can't Saab produce something that actually looks, drives and feels like it was designed according to the sort of philosophy of old? It needn't be high-volume IMHO, nor even especially cheap - I have in my head a reinventing of Saab as a sort of "Swedish Bristol"

Does anyone have any info on the proposed 9-5 replacement? I know it is alleged to be very interesting and attractive, but then people have suggested the (just scooped) 9-4X is "attractive", so I fear for the judgement of observers at present

[aeropilot]

skwdenyer said:

Does anyone have any info on the proposed 9-5 replacement? I know it is alleged to be very interesting and attractive

Well as nobody outside of Saab/GM have seen it, other than the test mules which are Insignia's with the 9-5 running gear, it's hard to know whether it will be interesting or attractive.

And with Saab up for sale with a 3 month dead to be sold.....who knows whether it will even reach any showrooms...??

[marlinspike]

There has been a mention in some news reports of Saab being bought out by a Swedish group. I can't find the link just now. I think long term, if viable, that might result in a return to more traditional Saabs.

[kprm77]

marlinspike said:

There has been a mention in some news reports of Saab being bought out by a Swedish group. I can't find the link just now. I think long term, if viable, that might result in a return to more traditional Saabs.

Very interested to hear more about that. Hope something comes of it.

[RedLeicester]

IIRC they were denied, the same as they were in 2001. So they're up for sale and the 9-5 replacement is delayed indefinitely (AGAIN!) though the 9-4X thing will appear as advertised this year.

[skwdenyer]

RedLeicester said:

IIRC they were denied, the same as they were in 2001. So they're up for sale and the 9-5 replacement is delayed indefinitely (AGAIN!) though the 9-4X thing will appear as advertised this year.

There's been a lot of talk recently, including suggestions of - in essence - the Swedish government nationalising both Saab & Volvo in order to merge them - but do the Swedes have any money?

Volvo (proper) have said they don't want to buy back Volvo Cars. ISTR that Investor (parent of Scania, former owner of Saab Cars, etc.) were potentially interested in Saab Cars again, but then, last time around, they sold out to GM because they couldn't afford to finance new car development - has their situation improved very much?

The problem with Saab is that they don't appear to understand their roots, nor their market, any longer (then again, you could argue that was the case as early as the introduction of the 99 - that was more-or-less turning their backs on the existing customer base).

Let's just hope neither gets sold to the Chinese!

[K321]

saab is in talks with swedish government this week to discuss purchasing it. if this fails, within 6 months Saab will be no more. also discussions with the Chinese are ongoing.
Volvo are not having talks with the Chinese, this is a myth.


my mother left a Saab 9-3 turbo in 3rd gear for 10 minutes at 90mph on motorway a month ago and blew the engine up..

new 9-5 is on hold.

Edited by K321 on Tuesday 6th January 14:21

[aeropilot]

skwdenyer said:

The problem with Saab is that they don't appear to understand their roots, nor their market, any longer (then again, you could argue that was the case as early as the introduction of the 99 - that was more-or-less turning their backs on the existing customer base).

That's got worse since overall control passed to Detroit, as they are pushing Saab to do stuff to suit the US market rather than Saab's worldwide market.

I wonder what the Investor AB stance is now re the Scania situation since Porsche's recent further purchase of VW has forced them to buy up Scania shares as well due to the tie-in....??

From the GG thread on Porsche's >50% stake in VW.

Oddly, Porsche must now make an offer for outstanding shares in truck maker Scania in which VW is the dominant shareholder, under Swedish law. However, the carmaker said it has no ‘strategic interest’ in Scania and therefore will bid the minimum price

[skwdenyer]

aeropilot said:

skwdenyer said:

The problem with Saab is that they don't appear to understand their roots, nor their market, any longer (then again, you could argue that was the case as early as the introduction of the 99 - that was more-or-less turning their backs on the existing customer base).

That's got worse since overall control passed to Detroit, as they are pushing Saab to do stuff to suit the US market rather than Saab's worldwide market.

I'm not sure Saab understood their market before the GM buy-in. I don't think GM understood it then, nor understand it now.

Overall, Saab's sales have increased a little, and then flatlined. The new 9-3 sold well in yr 1, but has tanked a little, and the 9-5 is old when Saabs used to just become "mature".

Saab are never going to support a "normal" product lifecycle. They need extended cycles, and continuous development. If that means a new product takes 8 years to get out, so be it - a continual evolution rather than sporadic revolution would do it. Hence a "VVC-a-like" platform strategy could work very well.

I doubt GM can understand that

[kprm77]

RedLeicester said:

IIRC they were denied, the same as they were in 2001. So they're up for sale and the 9-5 replacement is delayed indefinitely (AGAIN!) though the 9-4X thing will appear as advertised this year.

I'd have thought they needed the 9-5 more than the 9-4x. Maybe the 9-4x is closer to production development...

[skwdenyer]

kprm77 said:

RedLeicester said:

IIRC they were denied, the same as they were in 2001. So they're up for sale and the 9-5 replacement is delayed indefinitely (AGAIN!) though the 9-4X thing will appear as advertised this year.

I'd have thought they needed the 9-5 more than the 9-4x. Maybe the 9-4x is closer to production development...

Not only that, but it is heavily based on an existing GM truck, and will be produced in the same (non-Swedish) plant as the existing GM truck, so the marginal expense in getting into production is low compared to the lost investment in not doing-so.

[aeropilot]

skwdenyer said:

kprm77 said:

RedLeicester said:

IIRC they were denied, the same as they were in 2001. So they're up for sale and the 9-5 replacement is delayed indefinitely (AGAIN!) though the 9-4X thing will appear as advertised this year.

I'd have thought they needed the 9-5 more than the 9-4x. Maybe the 9-4x is closer to production development...

Not only that, but it is heavily based on an existing GM truck, and will be produced in the same (non-Swedish) plant as the existing GM truck, so the marginal expense in getting into production is low compared to the lost investment in not doing-so.

Err....not quite. You're thinking of the 9-7X, which was effectively a rebadged Chevy something or other, with a traditional US style 'truck' chassis.

The 9-4X is a joint Saab/Cadillac design based on GM's 'Theta' platform. It's a completely new design and isn't based on any existing GM vehicle.
Supposedly, the Saab will have double-wishbone front suspension, while the Caddy BRX stays with MacPherson struts.
Both are being built at GM's Ramos plant in Mexico.

Edited by aeropilot on Monday 12th January 12:01

[skwdenyer]

aeropilot said:

skwdenyer said:

kprm77 said:

RedLeicester said:

IIRC they were denied, the same as they were in 2001. So they're up for sale and the 9-5 replacement is delayed indefinitely (AGAIN!) though the 9-4X thing will appear as advertised this year.

I'd have thought they needed the 9-5 more than the 9-4x. Maybe the 9-4x is closer to production development...

Not only that, but it is heavily based on an existing GM truck, and will be produced in the same (non-Swedish) plant as the existing GM truck, so the marginal expense in getting into production is low compared to the lost investment in not doing-so.

Err....not quite. You're thinking of the 9-7X, which was effectively a rebadged Chevy something or other, with a traditional US style 'truck' chassis.

The 9-4X is a joint Saab/Cadillac design based on GM's 'Theta' platform. It's a completely new design and isn't based on any existing GM vehicle.
Supposedly, the Saab will have double-wishbone front suspension, while the Caddy BRX stays with MacPherson struts.
Both are being built at GM's Ramos plant in Mexico.

Edited by aeropilot on Monday 12th January 12:01

No, I was thinking about the 9-4X. It is scheduled for release as a Cadillac, the factory's already in place, it will go ahead as a Cadillac, the logistics side of Theta has been geared to supply it, and so on. Therefore, at this stage, no point in dropping the Saab version.