A Requiem For Saab 438
Hugh Pickens writes "The NY Times reports that auto enthusiasts across the country are dismayed by the news that General Motors is planning to shut down Saab, the Swedish carmaker it bought two decades ago, after a deal to sell it fell apart. Even with its modest and steadily declining sales, Saab, an acronym for Svenska Aeroplan Aktiebolaget, or Swedish Airplane Company, long stood out as a powerful brand in spite of itself. 'It wasn't designed to be a fashion statement,' says Ron Pinelli, president of Autodata, which tracks industry statistics. 'It was designed to provide transportation under miserable weather conditions.' Many Saab owners consider the brand's glory days to be the 1980s, when Americans began buying cars again after a recession and energy crisis. 'The cars were communicative,' says Pinelli. 'They didn't try to numb the experience like cars do today.' The cars had odd touches and appealed to those who appreciate the unconventional. Swedish engineers assumed drivers would be wearing gloves, so they designed big buttons for the dashboard. Though the cars were compact, with long hoods and short rear ends, there was plenty of headroom inside. Now Saab, a brand that once had one of the clearest identities in the industry, seems headed for extinction just as automakers are searching for more distinctive designs to help set them apart. 'It's a shame that Saab is a victim,' adds Pinelli."
I guess you could call it a ... (Score:5, Funny)
Saab Story.
*rimshot*
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Latest news is that Spyker haven't given up completely yet. They are right now handing in a new bid and it's up to GM to decide if they want to sell.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I wouldn't hold your breath. Vauxhall in Britain and Opel in Germany were all set to be sold, with German government money there no less, and GM did a sleight-of-hand and changed their minds.
Re:I guess you could call it a ... (Score:5, Interesting)
GM and so many other corporations are having problems because they have focused on maximizing short-term profit as the absolute top priority, and either forgotten their product, or sacrificed the product (with blind cost-cutting) in the name of profit.
They have completely forgotten that producing products and services that people want to have is the way to generate profit in the long term.
I'm not a fanboi, but Apple is a great example of a company that started with the right idea, lost their way in the '90s and found it again in the '00s.
Re: (Score:2)
If Spyker buys Saab it will only be killed more slowly. Spyker's financial management team is not too competent IMO.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not intimate with the details, but the mere fact that modern Spyker still exists despite their far-below-average cars seems to indicate genius on the financial management side. Buying Saab, which actually does have good cars, might even save Spyker itself.
Re:I guess you could call it a ... (Score:4, Insightful)
You seem to be describing all victims of globalization. Make a better burger, catch McDonald's attention, be bought out, and your burgers disappear. Make a better car, catch the attention of a major auto maker -----
Obviously, I'm no fan of globalization. I'm perfectly happy to allow the Finnish to do things their way, South Africans do things their way, and New Yorkers to do things their way. I can look at each, and decide for myself which is best for me - if any. Screw those megacorporations - they decrease the number of choices we all have.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Even back in the pre-GM days, Saab used a lot of other companies' technology. The auto business is so capital intensive, its almost impossible not to run it in a global manner.
The real problem with Saab was that GM a lousy job in applying its global tech. Exhibit A is rebadging a Chevy Blazer SUV as a Saab. The 9-5 was also something like 12 years old and was just being replaced with a shared platform when Saab was killed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Obviously, I'm no fan of globalization. I'm perfectly happy to allow the Finnish to do things their way, South Africans do things their way, and New Yorkers to do things their way. I can look at each, and decide for myself which is best for me - if any
That is globalization.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's not Obama, shit-for-brains
It's GM
Set down your cereal bowl of paint chips and think way back to last year and two of the big 3 automakers on the brink of bankruptcy and crying out for bailout money. Bush was in control, and it was his idea to give away billions of public $$$ to bail them out as well as his banker buddies
Obama inherited an economy on the brink of total collapse. Were not much better off today, but at least we're not all forced to living in caves yet. Even the bankers that crashed the ec
Near-Death Experience of Saab (Score:5, Insightful)
Nonetheless, you need not cry for Saab. It will live again. According to a news report [wsj.com] just issued by the "Wall Street Journal", Spyker has made another offer to buy Saab. This time, we have the real deal.
Re: (Score:2)
You would encounter the same problem if Ford had re-badged the Mazda RX-8 as a "Mustang".
I don't know. Ford rebranded an F-150 truck chassis as a "Lincoln", and it didn't seem to hurt them.
Re: (Score:2)
The customers of today really don't care about brand - too many identical products are provided under the same brand with just some differences in styling.
And the latest version of the Subaru Legacy has some visual similarities to the Saab 9-5. But that's hardly surprising - since many different car brands do share the same style - even if the owners are different. In the end it's the designers that are hired that share ideas. Just look at how tail lights look on various cars from different years.
Re:Near-Death Experience of Saab (Score:4, Interesting)
Ford rebranded an F-150 truck chassis as a "Lincoln", and it didn't seem to hurt them.
That's because "Lincoln = Ford + extra shiny bits" has been in effect for at least 40 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Gad. I hated the Saabarus and what GM did.
The quote in this story, "(SAAB) wasn't designed to be a fashion statement, it was designed to provide transportation under miserable weather conditions." tells the story of when Saab was at its best. In the GM years, at least in the US, Saab took the path of expensive Euro car. Saabs and Volvos both used to drive a bit like trucks, but they felt secure and solid. Trying to market Saabs as a Swedish BMW failed - people looking for the cachet of BMW will buy BMW.
Re:Near-Death Experience of Saab (Score:5, Interesting)
Why?
Saab was badge-engineering well before GM got involved. They used Triumph Dolomite engines in the 99 and Ford V4 engines in the Sonatas, The Saab 600 was a Lancia Delta, and the 9000 a Fiat Croma/Type Four.
Apart from a few of the very early models, Saabs were, mechanically at least, generic eurocars.
Two questions from ignorance (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Who owned SAAB before?
2. If it is such a good brand, why don't those previous owners buy it back?
Re:Two questions from ignorance (Score:5, Informative)
It was owned by an investment company called Investor. And they were just interested in cashing in money.
It seems like GM was mostly interested in technology and mot much in brand identity. The last decade of Saab has really went from something with at least some identity to something very average that can't compete with Toyota or other brands.
And since Saab was just another brand in the GM portfolio - and a small one - they weren't too keen on promoting it. Selling an Opel or Chevrolet would add more to the GM identity.
Re:Two questions from ignorance (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreed. I owned a 1994 900S for years. I liked it but the repair costs were atrocious. That said, it had nearly 200k miles on it and was still very dependable when I got rid of it.
In the later years GM tried to rework Saab as a traditional luxury brand a la Audi/Infinity/Lexus by watering down Saab's classic quirkiness. Loyal fans were alienated and there were too few advantages to win over fans of the competing brands. It's death is not surprising.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Selling an Opel or Chevrolet would add more to the GM identity.
If only GM would sell a decent Opel here. I have owned the Vectra and loved it, and spent a lot of time in Italy with a rented Astra - 1.8l 4 speed 200km/hr on the flat.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Rejoice! ;-) It is coming. Buick regal 2010 [insideline.com] is actually the Opel Insignia with swapped grille and logo. Initially it will be even built in Germany [74.125.95.132] moving later to Canada [gm.com].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
GM really needs to shrink. They don't need to die. They're a huge monolithic company trying to maintain a dozen brand names in a market that just contracted. To top it off, with few exceptions they built largely uninspired cars at cut rate prices to compete with Toyota, Honda and Ford and pumped out trucks like there was no end to demand despite Ford having the market for trucks tied down nicely.
GM is a failure of managements foresight, ability to create a car people really want, failure to compete. Dare I
Speaking for myself as a Swedish brick driver, (Score:5, Insightful)
I lose any interest in the brand the moment an American company buys it, because I know that the quality of the "American version" isn't going to hold a candle to the Swedish version. Once the Americans get their grubby little hands on it and start to try to integrate it into their manufacturing and supply chain and QC practices, the car's gonna just be another Chevy.
If I wanted a Chevy, I'd buy a chevy.
I'm finally getting ready to replace my '84 with 300k miles on it. When I do, I'm buying used, and I'm buying the "last Swedish year." I'm not touching any GM Saabs or Ford Volvos.
Re: (Score:2)
At some point it will be quite hard to find those in good condition; or registration of vehicles not abhorring to some emission norms will be impossible (you will be only able to continue owning them) - that last part quite soon in Sweden when compared even to rest of Europe, I imagine.
What then? ;/
Anyong haseo! (Score:2)
Unlike you, I don't want to push all of the Americans into the sea, but I have to admit I haven't had much with American cars. In addition to Japanese cars, though, consider Korean ones. I love my 2007 Hyundai Santa Fe, it's just as good a car and it was at a noticeably better price than its rivals. And it has a feature that I never realized I'd appreciate so much -- a tight turning radius.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
IMO Saab is dead since 1989. The innovation, comfort and ergonomics just didn't improve at the rate competitors did, and seemed bad rehashes of existing stuff; the 9-7x was
And why do I care? (Score:5, Informative)
I've got an idea... how about everybody who liked Saabs go out and order a Fisker Karma [fiskerautomotive.com] or the Tesla Model S [teslamotors.com]!
Bill
Um... Because Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Plymouth (Score:2)
and Saturn suck? (Saturn to a lesser degree at first, but eventually it was of course ruined by Detroit.)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, because those piece of shit cars, that can’t get further than five miles without needing half a year of reload time, and weigh a megaton because of the batteries, are useful in heavy snow and with nearly no sunlight.... you know... what Saab cars were made for, according to TFA! ;)
Re: (Score:2)
This is news for nerds for a few reasons:
SAABs are in some ways the Slashdot user of the car world: geeky, high tech, innovative, uncommon...
Though I'm not sure which car you would be, suggesting that SAAB l
Re:And why do I care? (Score:4, Informative)
"Frankly, if you cannot discern that SAAB was very different from the above brands, you don't know much about cars."
Yeah, right... Saab is GM just like most of the other's I mentioned. In fact, YOU need to check out how many of Saab's "very different" cars are actually just rebadged versions of the cars I just mentioned above.
Now, in the US they sell 3 cars, the 9-3, 9-5 and the 9-7. Two of the three models that Saab currently sells in the US are simply rebranded GM cars. (9-3 = Opel Vectra, 9-7=Chevrolet TrailBlazer) The last one (9-5) is actually unique to them. However, it is being replaced with a car based on the GM Eplison platform (Buick Lacross, and previously on the Pontiac G-6 and Saturn Aura). Again, nothing unique to it.
They quit selling the little 9-2 a couple years ago, which was, get this... a rebranded Subaru.
Now, genius, please tell me again how I don't know what I am talking about.
Bill
Saab cannot die! (Score:5, Funny)
New bid.. (Score:4, Informative)
It was GM themselves that turned down the offer from Spyker - seemingly a company that is in financial difficulty doesnt need the money. The timing of the decision speaks volumes as well.
the latest news is that there is another bid as of today from Spyker, so the nail isnt quite in the coffin just yet.
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article6321526.ab
GM has woefully mismanaged SAAB, played accounting games and not used the company in the way it should.
SAAB has come up with fantastic technology over the years especially around safety, I think the engineers there have alot to offer in the future for environmental cars.
They feel fine (Score:2)
Re:They feel fine(Let me make it more readable (Score:2)
Liquidate your company, liquidate your company
GM - Here's one -- nine pence.
Saab - I'm not bankrupt!
Bankrupcy court - What?
GM - Nothing -- here's your nine pence.
Saab - I'm not Bankrupt!
BC - Here -- he says he's not bankrupt!
GM - Yes, he is.
Saab - I'm not! (And so on, I hear Saab feels fine)
numb driving experience (Score:3, Insightful)
I've never driven a Saab and have no opinion on how they fared in this way.
But what is it with Americans preferring numb cars that totally insulate them from what the car is doing? They all seem to like very mushy suspensions where the car tips around corners, and automatic transmissions. Then, because they drive very tippy cars with very high centre of gravity, they're deathly afraid of corners, and they nearly stop every time there's the slightest bend in the road.
It seems the automotive equivalent of removing all the taste from one's food. Sure, it'll still keep you alive, but you go through your life eating bland and boring food.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Have you examined the typical American diet? It's very bland; flavored only with fat, sugar, and salt.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Quite a lot of roads in the US are poor quality, and straight.
So, you don't care about handling, and you want something that soaks up the bumps.
Re:numb driving experience (Score:5, Insightful)
The simple answer is, Americans drive. A lot more, than anyone else in the world. Whereas most Europeans can comfortably live without a car at all — relying on government-run public transportation (and when those are on strike — stay home) — most Americans need a car to get anywhere. So, in Europe a much higher share of drivers are enthusiasts — people, who like to drive. In the US everybody is a driver, even if they'd rather not be — and so there is a much bigger bias towards comfort over excitement.
Even for enthusiasts, if you spend 90 minutes in your car every day (45 minutes each way to work and home), for example, you'll value certain features, that you wouldn't care for, if you drove for 90 minutes a week.
Re:numb driving experience (Score:4, Informative)
That said, I still love my car, and I find it truly blissful to drive in any other occasion, but Americans really do have different driving habits and driving needs. For example, being an even six feet tall with size 12 feet (which is barely above average for American males), I am physically unable to cram legs into the well of the driver's seat of an Alfa Romeo Quadrifoglio. Cars of European sizes I am literally incapable of driving.
Re:Eh, you give the answer. Food (Score:4, Insightful)
Compare an american pizza with an italian one.
The best pizza I ever had was in Amsterdam, actually. The second best was in New York City. Italian pizza is, sad to say, largely unimpressive. It was, however still better than american pizza from a chain like Dominos.
A real hamburger with anything from any american restaurant.
I can direct you to no less than six unbelievable hamburgers within 20 miles of where I currently sit in the US, as can anyone else in a medium or large sized city here. What you won't get is directions to a chain restaurant like McDonald's or Burger King.
American beer?
I have to agree with you there. Beer here is terrible.
Coffee?
I can direct you to no less than a dozen good coffee places here where I live... What you won't get is directions to a chain coffee place like Starbucks.
Are you picking up on the pattern? There's nothing wrong with our pizza, hamburgers, or coffee. The trouble is that franchised chains that specialize in these products do not make good stuff.
Re:Eh, you give the answer. Food (Score:4, Insightful)
YES.
I live in Japan. I get so tired of people telling me that the food/beer/coffee in America is bad. I always follow up with "where did you eat?" The people who complain the most about the food, no shit, answer "McDonald's."
Really? The food at McDonald's in America is bad? Really? So, you mean, it's exactly the same as at McDonald's in Japan? Really? Why did you go to McDonald's????
Beer? Oh, you drank Budweiser and Coors. Well, that right there is why no one with more than a high school education touches that crap. Micros abound, especially in my home state of Colorado, and many of them are fantastic and award-winning.
Coffee? Did you go to Starbucks? You did, didn't you? Did you happen to notice that it tasted exactly the same as in Japan--burnt, bitter, and then dressed up with more sweetened milk than coffee in a futile attempt to hide the fact that they spend nothing on their beans? You did? Then why did you go there?
When I'm in the states, I love to grab foreigners and take them eating. It's not that food is bad in the US. We have some really phenomenal food--both at the high, hoity-toity end, as well as the hearty "food of the people" end (truck stops FTW!)--It's just that, as a foreigner, you go for what gets in your eye first, and that's going to be a chain. Chain food, no matter what country, is bad--or, at least, nowhere near as good as if you go to an independent place.
America has many problems, but lack of delicious food is not one of them. In fact, I've never been to a country that did not have delicious food, but usually you need a local to show you where to eat.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Oh sure, it is hell on the short daily trips, but one day you might drive away from it all and you will be glad for it then. "
Hell in the city perhaps, but not in the suburbs or rural areas.
I prefer pickup trucks (I haul lots of tools and equipment) and cannot fault them for commuting in the many areas they fit.
They are comfortable, torquey, have excellent visibility, and other drivers treat them with much more respect than they do small cars or motorcycles.
I won't commute on my Harley any more due to the
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Once again, another moronic comment. Given that you actually do have to drive for lon
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Harleys (like Indians) are for those who are not in a hurry, and who want to keep the same machine for decades. Been there, done that, wore out the T-shirt and still have the bike.
Having taught many Motorcycle Safety Foundation classes using my FXR, I note that because of their low CG a Harley can be forced to corner quite smartly. Great for reinforcing how well countersteering works, and that apehanger handlebars work just fine. :)
They can't die fast enough... (Score:5, Informative)
Slaabs can't die fast enough... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
GM had a majority in Saab in 1990 (51%) and bought it completely in 2000. Olds was killed in 2004. GM offers unisex cars that no one wants, both brands do not fit the bill.
Re:They can't die fast enough... (Score:5, Interesting)
Big buttons for people wearing gloves? That's the best contribution the author can come up with in his requiem?
How about the ignition being in the center console so there's one less thing to split your kneecap in a crash? How about the collapsing steering column, once again helping to avoid turning the steering wheel into a death machine? How 'bout the fact that my '88 had a fully-modern EFI system with intake manifold injectors, 2 HO2S, and a MAF sensor, not that crap throttle-body, barometric pressure based crap everyone else had? How about having 9007 lights with reflector housings instead of those sealed-beam light scatterers?
I live in Central PA, and that car was unstoppable in the snow. The only thing I've driven that was close is my Jetta, and that has 4-wheel ABS and traction control. The SAAB certainly did not. And I'm no slipmatic driver either.
Victim of its own success (sorta) (Score:5, Insightful)
SAAB was once quirky and bizarre, the choice of folks who needed some particular features. Then people started buying it, not for the suitability for cold weather or whatever, but precisely because it was quirky. Then the customers even stopped caring about the quirkiness and started buying them for the nameplate. Sure, there were a few folks who needed some strange features, but for the most part, people only cared about the name. GM, though not having the brightest business acumen, sought to capitalize. Instead of quirkiness they sold the brand on its name. Alas, in circles of people who cared about these things, GM and exclusivity are mutually - ahh - exclusive. The cars stopped selling.
There's a right way and a wrong way to capitalize on quirkiness, I think. Apple used to sell their products as the choice of the minority. Their "Think Different" campaign was not so much about suitability but about the mere fact of being different than the masses. That campaign might not have worked a few years later when nationalism and homogenized thinking was seen as patriotic, but it was perfect for the times.
So here was GM peddling SAAB as the choice of the oddball right during the time when it was gauche to be different. Then when that failed they started talking about SAAB's roots in a foreign military when US patriotism was near a peak. I suppose if they had survived, GM would have marketed it as the choice of banking executives. "Look! SAAB is the number one choice among failed banking executives!"
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And what is it with Doctors and Saabs? In Australia and New Zealand at least, probably 3/4ths of the Saab drivers you'll meet are Doctors! How does that work?
Before SAAB was bought up (Score:3, Interesting)
by GM they made beautiful and wonderful cars. After GM got their dirty gready little mints on the maker Saab cars started looking more like most american cars: UGLY!
What about the Saab Defence division? (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Horrifyingly poor management (Score:5, Insightful)
Back before they developed the yuppie image and the high prices, they were just a nice solid car that was unstoppable in bad weather. Certainly they were more expensive than the typical car, but not so much so that they were unaffordable.
But GM really destroyed them by pushing them into a market that they were designed for.
We New Englanders still need a nice winter car, and Saab is not there for that purpose any more because they are just too darned expensive now. I only have one because I bought it used, there's no way I'm going to pay $40K for a car.
Saab was a modest company making a modest profit on a modest sales. GM came along and doubled their production and raised the prices. In the process they made the company much more fragile because now they had to maintain sales levels to pay down the expenses of expanding.
Really the story is not all that different from the typical failed high-tech company: crash and burn while attempting to grow out of the initial successful market. The projected sales increases don't happen. This failure pattern happens over and over again so many times, you'd think managers would learn.
A lesson to be learned and yet another reason for Europeans to be annoyed at Americans.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Horrifyingly poor management (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean the same United Auto Workers union that the very successful Ford has worked with for decades? Amazing how that union has brought down GM, but somehow the same union represents workers at the successful Ford.
Scott Adams made fun of the tendency of management to blame the least powerful individuals for management failing. [wikipedia.org]. The UAW is a convenient scapegoat for right-wing talking heads, but the decision to manufacture poorly-made cars that do not meet a market need is purely management's.
Re:Horrifyingly poor management (Score:4, Interesting)
You mean the same United Auto Workers union that the very successful Ford has worked with for decades? Amazing how that union has brought down GM, but somehow the same union represents workers at the successful Ford.
Scott Adams made fun of the tendency of management to blame the least powerful individuals for management failing. [wikipedia.org]. The UAW is a convenient scapegoat for right-wing talking heads, but the decision to manufacture poorly-made cars that do not meet a market need is purely management's.
It's not the current union contracts. It's the retirees.
Ford has pretty much maintained their smaller-to-being-with market share. So because of market growth worldwide, Ford is selling more cars than they used to.
Unlike GM. GM is a shodow of its former self. They're selling a lot fewer cars than they used to. The company is a lot smaller, with much smaller cash flow. But GM has huge numbers of retirees from its heyday, along with probably a huge number of early-retirees from the days GM was shrinking and laying off workers.
And all those retirees are on defined-benefit retirement plans.
So, GM is fucked.
Their loss of market share made their union retirement plans the millstone around their neck that sunk them. Just because that didn't happen to Ford doesn't make it false.
God, what horrendously weak "logic" you used there.
Re:Horrifyingly poor management (Score:5, Insightful)
But ask your self how did these long-term retiree contracts even exist if management hadn't thought it was a good idea to offer them in lue of a 50 or a dollar an hour raise back in the 1950s? How did the become under-funded over years of management not funding them?
Did these contracts appear out of thin air? Nope each side went into the agreement with something they can accept and signed on the dotted line and expected the other side to hold up their end.
These were all management decisions that were made by GM's board and the decisions they made catasrophicly bad. They based them on assumptions that became appearent in the late 60's were not holding up, but GM kept making them over and over again. Based on their size it let them asorb the hits until the 80's, but by then it was way, way too late to make the changes.
Blaming the guy on the factory floor trying to keep a middle class life for things he cannot control is sad.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, it doesn't stop at "bad management". Basically they let Opel stab SAAB in the back by letting them use the company as a dumping ground for old unwanted parts (for instance stuff from the Ascona) that could be sold for outrageous prices via intercorporate transfers, in general overcharge the company like for instance the same engine in a SAAB would cost the car manufacturer 3-5 times more than if it was going to an Opel, they let SAAB pay wages and benefits for quite a few people who were working *excl
Re: (Score:2)
part of our family is dead (Score:5, Interesting)
My father and I worked on every Saab in the southern half of our state from the '60s until 1980. My dad was known for converting '65-up models from the 3-cylinder engines to the later V4's, and he also did special effects for the one Bond film in which 007 drove a Saab. Saab offered to build a dealership for my father, but he was ready to retire... so they sold the franchise to a real loser, and stopped selling us parts.
The Saab 96 was so far ahead of its time that nobody has yet caught up to it. It was the stiffest, strongest & safest 2000-lb. car ever built.
Re: (Score:2)
Didn’t they say: Put a cannon on a Saab 96, and you got a tank? ^^
A current owner, not dismayed (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm currently on my third Saab. A couple decades ago, I scattered my old Chevy Citation along a guardrail during a snowstorm (one of the few guardrails in these Colorado mountains). I decided to get a safe winter vehicle, and found a used '83 Saab. Quirky, yes; cold, yes; but great control with a crash-cage disguised as a passenger compartment. Turbo is great for getting around trucks in the mountains.
My current Saab 93 is much more comfortable to drive, though their great handling means feeling every b
Re: (Score:2)
GM killed Saab some years ago.
I enjoyed the Saabs I have owned. I bought them new and put 200k miles on both of them. Three years ago I needed a new car and found out they were not making real Saabs any more. The new Saabs were turned into just another GM piece of crap.
I bought an Acura. It is not as good as Saab used to be but it is a lot better than Saab is now.
Sell It to an Electric Company (Score:2)
There might possibly be some kind of good business reason to shut down Saab rather than sell it. But it seems to me that there are several startup electric car companies that need a brand to sell cars to "normal people" who just want a more efficient vehicle that's "just a car". Companies that also need factories and workers to build lots of cars when they scale up. Saab has both. It seems that the next generation of car tech is taking just slightly too long to recycle what the dying old generation needs to
GM is the Computer Associates of the car industry (Score:5, Insightful)
They take brands past their prime and run them into the ground
(damn, a computer analogy for a car story. A first for Slashdot?)
Re:GM is the Computer Associates of the car indust (Score:3, Funny)
They take brands past their prime and run them into the ground
That description fits the New York Mets as well.
Quirky? (Score:4, Insightful)
Remember the 9-2X? It was a re-badged Subaru Impreza. Even by SAAB standards it was a flop. You can't keep a niche brand going with re-brands!
Saturn went out pretty much the same way, and that's why I traded my Saturn SL2 for a Subaru Impreza, rather than a Saturn ION. The Subaru has lots of unique things about it. Saturns became typical, boring, unreliable American cars.
Way to kill all the interesting brands, but keep Buick on life support.
What about the Spyker purchase offer? (Score:2)
Any more news on the new offer Spyker just made for the Saab assets? Not guaranteed to be dead yet.
What this thread needs . . . . (Score:4, Funny)
Is a decent car analogy.
My Saab Story (Score:5, Interesting)
This is probably my last chance to tell my Saab story in public.
In 1973 I was living in Sweden. Just before returning to the USA I bought a new Saab Combi Coupe. That is the hatchback model that later became the famous Saab 900. 73 was the first model year and they were not marketing them to the USA yet. I had mine shipped to the USA when it was only 2 weeks old. My oh my. Remember the adage about not buying version 1.0 of anything? I should have remembered that.
On the very first day of driving the manual shift lever jumped out of 2nd gear, hit me in the wrist and cracked a bone.
Back in the USA, my clutch failed. I took it to the Saab dealer for a free warranty replacement. The new one failed; and the next and the next... That car went through 7 clutches in one year. Once, the new clutch failed only 6 miles from the dealer. It wasn't me. I have long experience with manual transmissions and I don't ride the clutch.
About a year and a day from new (with a 12 month warranty) I drove through a puddle. The car stopped instantly. The engine refused to turn. Upon taking the engine apart, we found water in the pistons and all the connecting rods bent like pretzels. It turns out that the air intake was low to the ground with a 90 degree elbow. Mine was mounted with the elbow facing forward, like a water scoop if one ever hit a puddle. There was a factory bulletin to rotate that elbow 180 degrees, but my dealer just shrugged. After 7 visits to the dealer he didn't feel responsible for doing the work or for informing me about the bulletins.
Still more. Upon further inspection we found that there were no retaining rings on the piston king pins. The pins had been wearing grooves in the side of the engine block. If I hadn't driven into the puddle, the block would have exploded soon; probably while I was speeding down the interstate.
The Saab regional office refused to talk to me or even listen to my story. I sold that Saab, 13 months old for 10% of my purchase price leaving me with nothing to do but Saab saab saab.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What a horrible story. A few years ago I thought about buying a Saab someday, but then I looked up the reliability on Consumer Reports (generally poor). That and the price tag killed any thoughts about Saab.
I think the lesson learned from your story (apart from not buying a 1.0 version of anything) is to not import a car into a country where it's not normally sold. I'd bet a lot of your negative dealer experiences can be explained by just this one simple fact. The mechanics don't know anything about i
Let the EU buy it then. (Score:3, Funny)
I learned to drive in a 1967 Saab 96 (Score:3, Interesting)
2 stroke, 3 cylinders, 3 barrel carburetor. 4 speed on the column. Dual diagonal braking, unibody construction, aircraft seat/shoulder belts. The 2-strokes were sadly, badly, filthy.
Parts on the car were half-metric, half-English. Many of the electronics were by Lucas, Prince of Darkness.
Over time, rebuilt two transmissions, several clutches, several sets of brakes, replaced some body panels. Eventually worked on the engine some, also once swapped front brakes, drum for disk.
My brother totalled two of them, one with the able assistance of a speeding drunk from the rear, the other as a solo effort, rolling the car and denting every body panel. Both times, nobody was hurt.
Bought two Saab 95s (station wagons, one V-4, the other 3-cylinder), one for $100, the other for $50, combined them to make one car, drove it from one side of the country to the other.
The old Saabs were damn fun cars, even though they had itty-bitty engines (820-850cc) producing barely 50hp. In terms of "bang for the buck", they were a total win. The only car I've ever had all 4 wheels off the ground, was a Saab.
Your argument is over 20 years out of date (Score:3, Insightful)
"Is that why they built a bunch of intensely front-heavy FWD vehicles with atrocious understeer?"
"They also had reverse-mounted engines"
They stopped making these cars in the mid 80's.
Neither of those criticisms applies to the cars that they make today.
Re:Your argument is over 20 years out of date (Score:5, Insightful)
Neither of those criticisms applies to the cars that they make today.
Unfortunately for you, the quotes that I attacked were about how great Saab was back in the Eighties. My point was that it was NEVER great. So your criticism does not apply to my comment. The Saab autos of today are just like anyone else's, and they are not the leader in any class — they have always been mediocre autos at best. Why should they survive?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I attacked were about how great Saab was back in the Eighties. My point was that it was NEVER great.
[I wonder how this was modded Insightful? - Not by an owner of SAAB, in any case]
Actually, sitting in our Volvo 240 GLE comes only second to sitting in a(n old) SAAB. Front-wheel drive, safety, it was a great car; and greatly missed here. Except of its price, by then. No, not everyone feels great sitting in a bumpy 4WD Jeep (that includes Range Rover at al).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, sitting in our Volvo 240 GLE comes only second to sitting in a(n old) SAAB. Front-wheel drive, safety, it was a great car; and greatly missed here.
It's easy for me to be jaded, because I own a 1982 Mercedes 300SD. 100% high-strength steel, crumple zones, available airbag (Standard on all non-diesel models, which can easily do over 100mph... unlike the diesel) PLUS actually being fairly sizable makes it one of the safest cars of its day. It also outhandles Saabs which come in at a fraction of its mass. I ALSO own a lifted 1992 F250 XLT Diesel with an added turbo, which is one of those bumpy things. In fact, it makes the ride on anything that comes from
Your opinion (Score:4, Informative)
"My point was that it was NEVER great."
What does "great" mean? They were not high performance in the manner of Porsche. They were not high reliability like a Japanese car. They were not luxurious like a Rolls. That's not the point.
But they were "great" at their original design goal as stated: a good car in bad weather.
Re:Your opinion (Score:5, Interesting)
And against Moose. Hitting a moose is unlike hitting any other animal because of how high they stand. It's more or less like hitting a 2 ton wrecking ball.
http://www.saabhistory.com/2006/12/22/saab-900-moose-test-footage-1997/ [saabhistory.com]
And Saab was the best recourse in arguments against "But I NEED an SUV because I live in Michigan in the snow." Really, because the Swedish get away with a Saab.
----------
Then there's that old urban legend of the old Saab owner challenging a Porsche owner to a race... in Reverse.
Saab owner shuts his car off. Rolls it forward, drops the clutch with the car in reverse and the car roars to life.
He soundly beats the Porsche owner with his 3 forward gears as the engine runs backwards.
Good ole two strokes.
----------
And a list of Saab innovations:
* 1958: The GT 750 is the first car fitted with seatbelts as standard.[26]
* 1963: Saab becomes the first volume maker to offer diagonally-split dual brake circuits.
* 1969: Saab creates an ignition system near the gearbox, instead of behind the steering wheel like most cars.
* 1970: Saab introduces a world-first - headlamp wipers and washers.
* 1971: Heated front seats are introduced, the first time in the world they are fitted as standard.
* 1971: Saab develops the impact-absorbing, self-repairing bumper.
* 1976: Saab was the first manufacturer to produce a turbo engine with wastegate to control boost.
* 1978: Saab introduces another 'world-first,' the passenger compartment air filter (pollen filter).
* 1980: Saab introduces Automatic Performance Control (APC), and an anti-knock sensor that allowed higher fuel economy and the use of lower grade fuel without engine damage.
* 1981: Saab introduces the split-field side mirror. This reduces the drivers blind spot.
* 1982: Saab introduces asbestos-free brake pads.
* 1983: Saab introduces the 16-valve turbocharged engine
* 1985: Saab pioneers direct ignition, eliminating the distributor and spark plug wires.
* 1991: Saab introduces a 'light-pressure' turbo.
* 1991: Saab is the first manufacturer to offer CFC-free air-conditioning.
* 1991: Saab develops its 'Trionic' engine management system, equipped with a 32-bit micro-processor.
* 1993: Saab introduces the 'Sensonic clutch' and the 'Black Panel', later to be called the 'Night Panel'.
* 1993: Saab develops the 'Safeseat' rear passenger protection system.
* 1994: Saab introduces the 'Trionic T5.5' engine management system, its processor is a Motorola 68332.
* 1995: Saab presents an asymmetrically turbocharged V6 at the Motor Show in Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
* 1996: Saab introduces active head restraints (SAHR), which help minimize the risk of whiplash.
* 1997: Saab introduces Electronic Brake-force Distribution
* 1997: Saab fits ventilated front seats to their new 9-5.
* 1997: Saab introduces ComSense; an alert delay feature that reduces the risk of distraction by briefly postponing lower priority alerts when the brakes or indicators are activated
* 2000: Saab introduces Saab Variable Compression, an engine in which the compression ratio is varied by tilting the cylinder head in relation to the pistons.
* 2002: Saab developed ReAxs System provides crisp steering feedback and contributes to enhanced driving stability in curves
* 2003: Saab introduces CargoSET; automatic storage well retraction for the convertible, a two-step tonneau action for quicker soft-top deployment
* 2008: Saab introduces Cross-wheel drive, an advanced all-wheel drive system with eLSD.
Re: (Score:2)
"Why should they survive?"
Evidently not enough people wanted them to maintain the company, therefore it should be dumped and let whoever buys it play with the wreckage.
Re:Let's just be clear on what they mean here (Score:5, Informative)
You are obviously not much of an engineer.
Front-heavy front-wheel-drive cars had great traction in the snow. The reverse-engine placement made a reliable and compact power-plant. Nothing special about it, and I worked on them for years, models from the '70s through the '06. There were no special parts required for brake pad replacement, just a simple tool to rotate the piston which is quite common these days (see VW for instance.) This system has become more widely because of its superiority - the emergency brake uses disk brake pads and is integrated with the caliper, offering reliable and the best possible hand-brake.
Saab will be missed - engineering that was obviously superior, with other manufacturers later following suit with surprisingly similar designs. Such as the now-common front wheel drive arrangement Saab began using in 1948. How about cold-rolled steel body frames with crumple zones, heated seats, the hatchback, how about a standard-production turbo? - the list goes on and on. They may not have invented each one of those items but stuck with the good stuff throughout. I am driving a '93 9000 with >195k miles for a winter rat this year. That kind of mileage is not uncommon, in fact almost expected in a Saab. What companies can suggest that kind of longevity today?
It would be a shame to see a great engineering company fail.
Re: (Score:2)
Front-wheel drive arrangement: Predated Saab by a lot, and Saab's first front wheel drive drivetrains were a 1930s DKW design. (That DKW design's successors evolved into the current Audi lineup, BTW, and I believe that 1930s DKW design may have been exhumed as the (very loose) basis of the original 1974 VW Golf's drivetrain.)
Hatchback: Arguably, the first hatchbacks were in the 1930s. Saab's first hatchbacks were in the late 60s.
Standard production turbocharger: 1978 for the Saab 99, 1962 for the Oldsmobile
Re: (Score:2)
Please mod parent up.
(The post provides informative rationale for design decisions.)
Re: (Score:2)
How about cold-rolled steel body frames with crumple zones, heated seats, the hatchback, how about a standard-production turbo? - the list goes on and on. They may not have invented each one of those items but stuck with the good stuff throughout. I am driving a '93 9000 with >195k miles for a winter rat this year. That kind of mileage is not uncommon, in fact almost expected in a Saab. What companies can suggest that kind of longevity today?
Not to jump all over the Saabs, but my family of mid 80's through early 90s Volvos (an '85 240DL wagon, an '88 740 wagon and a '91 740 Turbo sedan) would beg to disagree. Crumple zones, safety cages, 3-point safety belts, childproof doors...Volvo. :)
Re: (Score:2)
also, they each went to their next owners with 175K, 265K, and 190K miles respectively.
Re: (Score:2)
also, they each went to their next owners with 175K, 265K, and 190K miles respectively.
So they'd barely got past the running-in period then?
Re: (Score:2)
"That kind of mileage is not uncommon, in fact almost expected in a Saab. What companies can suggest that kind of longevity today?"
Many of them.
Toyota, Volkswagen and Honda often last that long (and are gobbled up when they do make it to salvage to keep the rest running).
Those brands were just as tough even in the late 1980s. Turning well over 200K is even routine for domestic pickup trucks and (barf) Jeep Cherokees.
I feast on the dead in salvage yards and know their secrets. :)
Back in the day at the commune (Score:3, Interesting)
There was always the rivalry going on between the saab two stroke guys and the VW beetle guys over which car had the best traction in the snow. So we had the great drive off until you can't get any further contest (we had a tractor to get the cars unstuck). We got the good blizzard needed, can't recall exactly but around knee deep. Lined up the VW and the 900 next to each other on the old country gravel road and off they went.
The air cooled rear engine VW kept going around one hundred yards further, albeit
Re:Back in the day at the commune (Score:5, Interesting)
What trounced both of them was an old Model A Ford one of the guys had that still cranked and ran. I thought that was funny.
If you actually consider what the vast majority of road were like back when the Model A was produced, you'd think nothing of it. Cars from those days were >all essentially off-road vehicles, because if you lived anywhere but the center of a big city, you were going to be driving down muddy, rutted cart tracks. Seriously, look at the designs: low gearing and high clearance, the lot of them.
Re:Let's just be clear on what they mean here (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, come on....
The reverse-mounted engine made replacing a clutch in my '82 900 T something a neophyte could do. Yes, the Haynes manual suggested using a belt to hold the clutch pressure plate compressed, but that doesn't work - yes, you do need the two special tools SAAB made to compress the pressure plate fingers and then a spring-steel c-shaped ring expands to hold the fingers compressed... But, having borrowed the tools from the dealership for an hour - at no cost - I was able to complete the job with just a small set of metric sockets.
The brakes did need a "special tool" because the brake activator had a hydraulic cylinder with back-facing notches - it ratcheted forward as the pad wore down and had to be screwed back up to the new pad position. The face of the cylinder had two depressions in it and a flat wrench with two prongs was called for to screw in the cylinder. I made one with a flat, metal ruler and two pop-rivets. It took only a few minutes to create and worked until a jerk in a 3/4 tom pickup ran a redlight and hit me in the left-front quarter-panel - spinning my SAAB more than 360 degrees... the truck's bed came up and over and the truck that hit me wound up landing on its cab roof and skidding 45 yards upside down down a city street.
My 6 year-old son and I, both belted in, were completely unharmed.
I have one of the last SAAB 900 Turbos manufactured out of Trollhatten - with mostly SAAB parts - albeit that GM changed the window / cab profile. It is at 160k and doing very, very well today - averaging 32 mi/gal and just passed the CA emissions test (not too bad for a 14 year-old car that never seems to age). Compared to my twin-turbo Volvo S-80 '01 vintage (also with 160k) I've put far more money into repairing the Volvo than I ever did that SAAB.
Understeer can happen in any vehicle with even weight distribution (mid-engine) or front-heavy design. The famous Porsche 911 has massive understeer - big deal.
All that you do to deal with understeer is to accelerate and brake as you enter a curve forcing the front tires (drive & steering on the 900) down to greater road contact, then accelerate out of the turn. Easy and solid turning control with the tight and well crafted SAAB steering & brakes. Yes, you do need good tires - Pirelli, Yokohama & Michelin have been my go-to brands - with the Michelins winning the wear/performance battle.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Cite the errors, wizard. My facts are out there for everybody to review...
Attack the argument when the facts don't support your argument. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
Re:forgot something... (Score:3, Insightful)
You forgot one thing: Car makers have spent the last 100 years not inventing anything new... and strong-arming everyone who was trying to invent something new out of the market.
Re:forgot something... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I know [wordpress.com] what you mean [online-carro.com].
Re:Over here companies can fail (Score:5, Informative)
Even Sweden will let the free market actually do its job. Kinda ironic seeing how the neocons of other governments like to describe us.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/19/report-swedish-government-to-meet-with-gm-officials-could-saa/
You were saying?