Does anyone think the 9-7x is a good idea?

[Grimace]

Because I sure don't, and I'll wager that most people who post here don't either. It is almost the antithesis of a typical Saab.
-RWD/AWD
-body on frame
-V8
-large and heavy
-SUV!

I do understand why GM has created a few new models to help Saab gain market share. The 9-5 is actually a very competent large sedan and does quite well in comparison testing. The 9-3 has gotten very favourable reviews. Both have really helped increase sales in the hatchback-phobic US. The 9-2x is pushing it a little - I'm still not sure it will fit in to the product portfolio and do as much for sales as GM is hoping. And a little more should have been done with it to make it more distinctly Saab (and less warmed-over WRX).

But the 9-7x? Do we really need/want a warmed over Trailblazer with a different nameplate slapped on? That's the final straw in diluting the brand image to "just another division of GM".

GM could have done so much more with positioning Saab as the unique, fashionable alternative to BMW, Lexus and the like.

There is a good thread over at the miata.net forum (I'm also Grimace over there) if you want some other opines on the subject. http://forum.miata.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=016254

[garry]

GM could have done so much more with positioning Saab as the unique, fashionable alternative to BMW, Lexus and the like.

So true!


People will argue that GM stopped SAAB from going under when they took over the company... But at the time the small luxury car maker from Sweden had created a brand that was recognized worldwide with high esteem for astounding engineering available to those who could afford it (maybe not in the US from the reports we hear day to day). That worldwide respect and image the luxury car manufacturer achieved was worth 10 times what GM payed for SAAB ... The debt SAAB were in was nothing compared to what they were worth if managed correctly.

To this day SAAB are the ONLY global luxury brand GM own. I find it astounding that GM are not developing new platforms for the SAAB brand directly. SAAB is and still could be the only worldwide Jewel GM own.
10 years after the GM takeover we only saw 3 new models...for a world wide brand thats stupid.

The re badging is said to be a temporary situation while SAAB build up some revenue. I suggest the exercise only serves to damage the brand further, downgrading the model status and market to offer competition to Ford when it should be raising to the greater circles and challenges this proud engineering firm once innovated and pioneered within.
The re badging of the WRX is so blatant it is embarrassing.
I wish GM would stop poossy footing about and see SAAB as the opportunity it is and always was.

The brand survives today only because of the loyalty of its customers throughout the 90's who know where SAAB came from.

[CleveSaab]

The brand survives today only because of the loyalty of its customers throughout the 90's who know where SAAB came from.

That's just crazy talking. ;) I think you'd agree I'm a bit of a Saab fanboy, and my first Saab story began in 01'.

The 93 SS brought more first timers to Saab than anything they've done in the past. Sure, it does resemble a BMW, but it worked. Saab sold many cars.

I personally would never buy any SUV, but I don't blame Saab/GM one bit for this move.
Let's say you are a Saab dealer. People are trading in thier Saab 9-5 wagons to you, and not getting another Saab, because they want an SUV.
My only problem with it is they should have done this years ago. I think the SUV craze is starting to reach critical mass and will start to decline in the next few years with the intro of cars like the 9-2.

[garry]

9-5 9-3 and especially the the 9-3ss have shown that SAAB can get back on track. 2000 to 2004 reflecting a general restoration of faith that the company is once again able to compete utilizing its own design and engineering.
Just when SAAB is starting to show how good it can be again the 9-2 and 9-7X bizarrely arrive taking SAAB backward reusing older platforms instead of progressing with new, fresh and innovative design of its own. GM continues to force SAAB to struggle.

Im not bashing SAAB. I have owned 5 including a 97 900.
It makes me mad that just when SAAB look to be heading down the right road with fantastic cars like the new 9-5 and the 93ss they go and do a stupid thing like rebadge other peoples older engineering. Now would have been the ideal time to build on the 93ss success with more superb and original engineering...

Trailblazer anyone?.... no thanks.

[saabfan]

The brand survives today only because of the loyalty of its customers throughout the 90's who know where SAAB came from.

The brand survives today because of people who buy Saabs today. People driving 900s and 9000s are not helping Saab out, I am sorry to say. Yes, they did help Saab way back when, but not now. The loyalists who refuse to buy new Saab products because they consider it 'tarnished' or 'unSaab' are only speeding up Saab's demise. Which is totally fine if you don't like the product... but don't think that by having an older Saab is what keeps Saab alive today.

[Jim]

The brand survives today only because of the loyalty of its customers throughout the 90's who know where SAAB came from.

The brand survives today because of people who buy Saabs today. People driving 900s and 9000s are not helping Saab out, I am sorry to say. Yes, they did help Saab way back when, but not now. The loyalists who refuse to buy new Saab products because they consider it 'tarnished' or 'unSaab' are only speeding up Saab's demise. Which is totally fine if you don't like the product... but don't think that by having an older Saab is what keeps Saab alive today.

Well said Saabfan, your totally right! If no one bought new Saabs because their not "real Saabs" then all there would be left by now are the old 900's and 9000's, Having owned both I can say they are great cars but so are the new models out now, especially the 9-5 it is tremendous value for money.

[TYPE IXXI]

I have always loved SAAB's and do consider myself a purist...
but.. I am in need of an SUV to tow my boat and do house chores. So if it makes me less of a purist to buy a 9-7 then so be it. We are getting a great platform and I for one welcome the SUV with open arms.

Its just a matter of which Viggen in the barn is going to get evicted to make room. My heart aches thinking about it.
the 99 Vig is almost paid off so it will probably be the 2001 Vig that goes.

[SentraSR20]

The brand survives today only because of the loyalty of its customers throughout the 90's who know where SAAB came from.

The brand survives today because of people who buy Saabs today. People driving 900s and 9000s are not helping Saab out, I am sorry to say. Yes, they did help Saab way back when, but not now. The loyalists who refuse to buy new Saab products because they consider it 'tarnished' or 'unSaab' are only speeding up Saab's demise. Which is totally fine if you don't like the product... but don't think that by having an older Saab is what keeps Saab alive today.

Saabfan - Precisely correct! The one and only reason Saab is even still building cars is because of GM. No matter how you slice it, Saab was in trouble financially and GM was there to relieve them - with a few conditions of course. That's the price of doing business, though, you don't get something for nothing... :wink: It seems GM's plan has worked, however, I don't think Saab has sold this many cars in a long time.... 8)

To this day SAAB are the ONLY global luxury brand GM own.

Oh, so very wrong. GM's original luxury nameplate is available in Europe - Cadillac. :wink:

To the original question posed, however, I do agree. The last thing that was needed by the automotive world was another variant of the Trailblazer. It's a great vehicle, both in capability and in value - when in Chevy guise. However, it doesn't have the quality and refinement needed to be used as a luxury platform as well. Just my opinion, but my parent's do own one, so I'm pretty familiar with it. It's powerful, tows/hauls a lot and was very inexpensive for what you got. That was my father's criteria and the Trailblazer beat out most anything available at the time, he didn't care about luxury, just capability. That is what the Trailblazer has in spades.

[garry]

Anyone got any comparative sales figues for Cadillac outside the USA and Canada?
I am ready to be surprised :o

My guess... SAAB sell way more cars than Cadillac worldwide. (excluding the US) In the UK for example, we have none.
I would imagine Rolls Royce sell more cars outside the US than Cadillac.
Im sure there may be a Cadillac dealer in one of the UK's big city's but I have never seen a Cadillac younger than 30 year old on the road. Im not making this up, the only time you are likely to see a Cadillac on a UK road will be parked outside a 50's rock and roll club.
I can only assume that the UK would be one of the most viable target markets for Cadillac to exploit?....not the case. zero.

I am even having to check the spelling of Cadillac whenever I use it as it is such a rare word for me to use. ....2 D's or 2 L's ? I don't know im just copying you. :-? So I have been using the word Caddy instead most of the time.

Can Cadillac cut it in Europe?
29 Sep 2003
Source: just-auto.com editorial team

GM’s vice chairman, Bob Lutz, said he’d like to be building Cadillacs in Germany? “This would help the brand to be more accepted in Germany and other European countries,” Lutz was quoted as saying. “We should be able to find the necessary capacity,” the GM product honcho added, and probably at an Opel factory.

Help the brand be more accepted in European countries?.... That sound to me as if Cadillac are not even established in Europe?

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m3012/11_181/84398545/p1/article.jhtml

I Quote



Cadillac used to call itself "The Standard of the World," but for decades few outside GM'S sinecures in Detroit have actually believed it. Cadillac once rivaled Rolls-Royce as a paragon of luxury; later, as the brand embraced mass production and volumes surged in the 1940s and 50s, it came to symbolize a moneyed, confident; faintly flamboyant attitude that today is found among BMW buyers.

But few people under age 50 now aspire to owning a Cadillac -- and that's in North America, which accounts for 98 percent of sales Outside the U.S., where GM sold fewer than 5,000 Cadillacs last year, the brand lives on in a time warp of tail fins and Elvis. "Cadillac has a wonderful image," says Rudy Zeller, global market director of GM Europe. "But it's missing about 30 years of development."



Now, Why should Cadillac be re badging SAAB when SAAB is already established worldwide by comparison?.. MAKE BETTER SAAB's and forget about Cadillac outside the US... If a European SAAB buyer thought a new SAAB was based on a Cadillac they would probably be interested. Rebadging the other way is simply swimming upstream by comparison

SAAB is GM's ONLY worldwide luxury brand. If Cadillac are worldwide then they are a small specialist firm by comparison. 5,000 cars worldwide outide the US ????

The brand, respect and the network is already establish to sell premium luxury cars outside the US, its called SAAB.

It looks like GM intend to use the SAAB network to sell a brand nobody wants in Europe.
Again, GM fail to see the potential of SAAB outside the US. But, GM seem to want to market SAAB against standard Fords hyundi etc...... :o :o :o

Insane

For Europe Cadillac is wrong wrong wrong and if GM are so stubborn to throw vast amounts of money trying to establish Cadillac as a serious contender :lol: it will probably be the beginning of the end for GM :( :(

http://www.rockandrolliconart.com/dylan/old.jpg

If GM want to sell large volumes of luxury cars in Europe with little outlay and risk.... Re badge the so called 'luxury Cadillac's' as SAAB.

[Mattlach]

I personally would never buy any SUV, but I don't blame Saab/GM one bit for this move.
Let's say you are a Saab dealer. People are trading in thier Saab 9-5 wagons to you, and not getting another Saab, because they want an SUV.
My only problem with it is they should have done this years ago. I think the SUV craze is starting to reach critical mass and will start to decline in the next few years with the intro of cars like the 9-2.

This is partially true, and partially not.

Rebadging a Chevy is NOT the solution. They should have gone the way of the Volvo XC90, BMW X5 or Mercedes ML, Porsche Cheyenne, VW Touareg. All of these are refined well built SUV's (even though I wouldn't want one)

GM is actively ruining the SAAB brand name, and removing its superior engineered solutions. Instead of making the wise choice and designing in unique and well engineered SAAB products into the rest of the GM line, they are doing the opposite, forcing their GM dog products on the poor SAAB engineers.

The Ford Motor Company is a success story when it comes to a big American car company owning luxury brands. They have successfully owned and operated Volvo, Jaguar, Land Rover, Aston Martin, and others in their "Premiere Automotive Group" (run by Ferdinand Rietzle, ex. BMW exec, if memory serves) without diluting the brand or the technical superiority.

GM seems hell-bent on ruining SAAB, and it is sad. Unfortunately I foresee SAAB being nothing but another Cadillac in a few years. A dumb American dog of a car...

Being an engineer educated and employed in the U.S. has not biased me in favor of American products. in fact, it has just made me even more sincere that buying any mechanical product that is American made is a bad, bad idea, and unless GM shapes up their running SAAB, my current SAAB will probably be my 4th and last :cry:

1978 SAAB 99
1985 SAAB 900
1991 SAAB 900
2001 SAAB 9-5
The End?

[Mattlach]

The brand survives today because of people who buy Saabs today. People driving 900s and 9000s are not helping Saab out, I am sorry to say. Yes, they did help Saab way back when, but not now. The loyalists who refuse to buy new Saab products because they consider it 'tarnished' or 'unSaab' are only speeding up Saab's demise. Which is totally fine if you don't like the product... but don't think that by having an older Saab is what keeps Saab alive today.

Although your argument makes sense, it may actually not be correct.

Car companies make very little money on selling cars. (Some of them even sell them at loss) They do this because they hope you will buy factory parts and service. Thats their biggest income source.

That being said, it doesnt matter if you drive a new SAAB or an older one, as long as you get factory parts when you repair it :P

[Mattlach]

I have always loved SAAB's and do consider myself a purist...
but.. I am in need of an SUV to tow my boat and do house chores. So if it makes me less of a purist to buy a 9-7 then so be it. We are getting a great platform and I for one welcome the SUV with open arms.

Its just a matter of which Viggen in the barn is going to get evicted to make room. My heart aches thinking about it.
the 99 Vig is almost paid off so it will probably be the 2001 Vig that goes.

Just do what the Swedes do...

Put a hitch on the Viggen :P

Seriously.. At least when I left Sweden in 1999, NOONE had SUV's. They were an aberration. yet lots of Swedes like boating and have boats. They just put hitches on their every day cars. (Saabs, Volvos, etc.)

It is a fallacy that you need a <i>BIG SUV OR TRUCK</i> to tow stuff... I've towed huge *** boats in my dads old 1984 Volvo 240...

[valbowski1980]

Yet another fuel guzzling SUV is exactly what we don't need. Will it make money and win market share for Saab? Maybe, but every single one of these overweight and inefficient turds that is created makes us that much more dependent on foreign oil. The question is why not create a hybrid? Honda and Toyota can't build enough to meet the demand.

[SentraSR20]

Garry - For all your fluff and evidence, you still have not disproved my simple statement that Cadillac IS available in Europe - making it one of GM's global brands :lol:. Goto www.gm.com and navigate to their global listing - you might be surprised. Don't get caught up in yourself and think that the UK constitutes all of Europe, by the way.... :roll:

P.S. You were right to copy me, it IS "Cadillac"... :wink: You could have simply googled the word instead of writing a paragraph about how you didn't know how to spell it - whatever the point you were trying to get across... :roll:

[valbowski1980]

Although your argument makes sense, it may actually not be correct.

Car companies make very little money on selling cars. (Some of them even sell them at loss) They do this because they hope you will buy factory parts and service. Thats their biggest income source.

That being said, it doesnt matter if you drive a new SAAB or an older one, as long as you get factory parts when you repair it :P

You mean like the 500 bucks I'm about to drop to get my fuel pump replaced :( .

[Mattlach]

You mean like the 500 bucks I'm about to drop to get my fuel pump replaced :( .

Exactly. It's no fun, but it's the factory parts that keep the factory alive. Not the vehicle itself.. Most car manufacturers have less than 1% profit margins on cars, many sell cars at loss.

By that reasoning people driving older SAABs actually benefit SAAB MORE cause they are paying more for repairs than someone who is still under warranty. :P

[CleveSaab]

By that reasoning people driving older SAABs actually benefit SAAB MORE cause they are paying more for repairs than someone who is still under warranty. :P

I was actually going to say that too. My Saab dealer makes a lot of money on me, and I've never bought a new one. ;) (Including another $50 this weekend). Not to mention how nice they are to me, I recommend them to everyone and have had 2 people I told to go there actually BUY cars from them. How am I not supporting Saab?? I am...in a big way. ;)

As for Cadillac...anyone that thinks Cadillac is garbage....has never driven one. Those are some well-built solid fast comfortable luxury cars, and HAVE BEEN FOR YEARS. Drive a 1990 Eldorado....very nice ride, very fast car...they've only gotten better.

Not to mention the new Roadster is sweet as hell. ;)

http://www.usa500.com/images/cars/ce3.jpg

Of course, it better be for $70,000+.

[saabfan]

That's a very good point... I guess I assumed that the majority of Saab 'purists' do their own repairs, etc., and thus the money to Saab is limited. Additionally, many of the older cars get parts from wrecked and salvaged Saabs, no?

But yes, I do agree to some extent.

[garry]

Garry - For all your fluff and evidence, you still have not disproved my simple statement that Cadillac IS available in Europe - making it one of GM's global brands :lol:. Goto www.gm.com and navigate to their global listing - you might be surprised. Don't get caught up in yourself and think that the UK constitutes all of Europe, by the way.... :roll:

P.S. You were right to copy me, it IS "Cadillac"... :wink: You could have simply googled the word instead of writing a paragraph about how you didn't know how to spell it - whatever the point you were trying to get across... :roll:

Maybe Cadillac IS available in Europe... I know why I have never seen one as well....

Outside the USA Cadillac sold only 5000 cars WORLDWIDE

It would be an understatement to call that poor. TVR in Yorkshire probably sell more!.
Cadillac is simply not recognized as a world brand outside Detroit.

So, I will rework my statement:-

SAAB is the only global brand anywhere near a level perceived as luxury or quality that GM own; - that sell at a mass produced level.

GM could be funding a Cadillac dealership in every country in the world !!!... but they only sold 5000 cars last year outside the USA. How many countries are there?
Split 5000 between all the countries in the world if you like it only makes the situation look worse :o

The new Cadillac's may look nice but GM would sell more of the very same metal in Europe if it had a SAAB badge on it.
Simple mathematics and marketing.

America seems to like the European/Asian style of car. The new Cadillac's look very American to me.... I can't see the admiration working in reverse. Plus the name will put many off conjuring up images of large fuel guzzling cartoon like cars. In the UK and Europe we have had expensive petrol for years, the last thing we want is to be reminded of this by the sort of image Cadillac represents (in our world at least)


What are GM thinking about !!!
I can imagine the delight in the board room

"Well we sold 5000 Cadillac's worldwide outside the USA last year"
"Outstanding news!, lets plough millions and millions of dollars into promoting Cadillac as our main luxury brand outside the USA"
"Hey!, we could use the SAAB dealerships"

Durrrrr

I suppose SAAB will be blamed for loosing GM even more money when they find it near impossible to sell Cadillacs in Europe.

[Mattlach]

As for Cadillac...anyone that thinks Cadillac is garbage....has never driven one. Those are some well-built solid fast comfortable luxury cars, and HAVE BEEN FOR YEARS. Drive a 1990 Eldorado....very nice ride, very fast car...they've only gotten better.


I have only very limited experience with Cadillac's.

As I understand it, they cater to their core market very well. Large cushy luxury cars. There probably isn't anyone who can touch them in this field.

Thats not the kind of car I'm interested in driving though. (and apparently more Europeans agree with me on this)

Every attempt they have made towards making a car more like the increasingly popular european sport sedans seems to have failed. ts just a matter of facing the facts. For some reason american cars like the Cadillac Catera, and the Lincoln LS, aimed squarely at the sports sedan market fail to impress.


As far as the new roadster goes... I'm not entirely sold on the new styling. I don't know why all the auto makers have become so spaceship inspired in their car designs as of late. (then again I'm just very conservative as far as car design goes)
That being said I hear it drives quite well, and isn't as "sloppy" in the suspension as most american cars are. I'd have to drive one before making up my mind though.

[Mattlach]

The new Cadillac's may look nice but GM would sell more of the very same metal in Europe if it had a SAAB badge on it.
Simple mathematics and marketing.


That may be true, in which case that confirms my belief that I detest people in marketing :cheesy:

If you ask me, putting a round blue Griffin logo on something doesnt make it a SAAB. I could buy a spare badge for $13 and put it on my old Ford Taurus....

I know commonality of parts is one of the main reasons why it is a good idea to merge/buy out similar product types (like cars) but I am generally turned off by anything that even has a bolt made by GM in it. When I buy a Saab I dont want it to share any significant components with a chevy, especially not important ones like engines etc.

One of the reasons the option of buying different brands of cars is so great is that different companies came to different engineering solutions for different problems. This makes each brand of car kind of unique with its own characteristics.

I don't know what bothers me more. The fact that some marketing puke can put spin on a the same product and sell it as different products by just making it look a little different, or the fact that people fall for it.

This dislike of mine goes for all companies that make more than one brand of car.

The only exception to this is the Ford Motor company who has let their acquisitions (Jaguar, Aston Martin, Land rover, Volvo) more or less operate independantly under their ownership. This has helped preserve this engineering distinctiveness in their product lines.

(Well I should probably mention Daimler Chrysler here as well, but they havn't been merged long enough for me to know well yet)

Sorry for being so negative, but I just get peaved at all this "fooling people to think the same product is in fact a different product" marketing does. Marketing pukes are some of the sleaziest people I know. engineers should dominate the businesses :cheesy:

[SentraSR20]

I think Garry needs to have a couple and relax :wink:. I just called you on a wrong statement, no need to go and reiterate why you were wrong in the first place. Like I've always told you, do some research before making a blanket statement - it will prevent further posts with unnecessarily large print on your part.. :roll:

Regardless, Saab still needed to be bailed out by somebody in the 90's, GM just happened to have a soft shoulder for Saab Execs to cry on and an open wallet. Poor sales because of a stodgy lineup (relative to other manufacturers) are to blame. They simply weren't bringing enough new blood into dealerships. This is not slander, it's a simple fact (well, except maybe for the soft shoulder part, but I'm sure you get the idea... :cheesy:).

[SentraSR20]

That may be true, in which case that confirms my belief that I detest people in marketing :cheesy:

If you ask me, putting a round blue Griffin logo on something doesnt make it a SAAB. I could buy a spare badge for $13 and put it on my old Ford Taurus....

I know commonality of parts is one of the main reasons why it is a good idea to merge/buy out similar product types (like cars) but I am generally turned off by anything that even has a bolt made by GM in it. When I buy a Saab I dont want it to share any significant components with a chevy, especially not important ones like engines etc.

What year is your SAAB? Considering GM has had a controlling share of SAAB since 1990, there's a good chance you might have a bolt or two in your car from GM.... :wink:(that is, if you car was built after 1990).

One of the reasons the option of buying different brands of cars is so great is that different companies came to different engineering solutions for different problems. This makes each brand of car kind of unique with its own characteristics.

I don't know what bothers me more. The fact that some marketing puke can put spin on a the same product and sell it as different products by just making it look a little different, or the fact that people fall for it.

This dislike of mine goes for all companies that make more than one brand of car.

The only exception to this is the Ford Motor company who has let their acquisitions (Jaguar, Aston Martin, Land rover, Volvo) more or less operate independantly under their ownership. This has helped preserve this engineering distinctiveness in their product lines.

Totally agree, kudos to Ford. They do let most of their divisions operate mostly on an individual basis, but there is still a large amount of parts sharing.

(Well I should probably mention Daimler Chrysler here as well, but they havn't been merged long enough for me to know well yet)

Have you checked out the new Chrysler CLK 320 er...I mean Crossfire?? :wink: j/k At least the Crossfire doesn't look anything like a CLK!

Sorry for being so negative, but I just get peaved at all this "fooling people to think the same product is in fact a different product" marketing does. Marketing pukes are some of the sleaziest people I know. engineers should dominate the businesses :cheesy:
As an engineer myself, I have to agree for the most part :D. Though, there are some engineering people that haven't got a clue how to market a product and wouldn't be bothered with such a thing. After all, who cares if it sells? Most engineers just consume themselves with trying to figure out how to get an unreasonable request from designers to work... :cheesy:

[garry]

Well, from a Marketing point of view, excluding one country 5000 car sales worldwide is not good and certainly not a result expected from an established Global car brand.
But thats just it, Cadillac are not a established Global car brand. They came, they failed. If SAAB returned those figures they would be dropped like a sack of potatoes. :cheesy: Its laughable.

Though I also detest badge engineering and would prefer to see NEW engineering I have to say there is more marketing logic in rebadging a Cadillac as a SAAB than offering the SAAB crutch to Cadillac. (when selling outside US)
If GM have a runt in the litter it is surely the Cadillac image, brand and failure to sell beyond the USA ?

I just called you on a wrong statement, no need to go and reiterate why you were wrong in the first place. Like I've always told you, do some research before making a blanket statement -

Some things require no proof, although Cadillacs Global statistics are diabolical there is no other word.... Do a tour of Europe, go Cadillac spotting. :P :lol:
Global brand my ****, its shocking to find out they have any dealers at all in Europe! :roll:

Cadillac must be costing GM a fortune outside the US !!... Simple solution, call it a SAAB (rebadge the Caddy) and both GM and SAAB will come up smelling of roses, New luxury SAAB model, Zero development time with the image and infrastructure worldwide to challenge the best of the best.
People are screaming in europe for such a SAAB where as the same Cadillac....no.

From an engineers point of view SAAB are not doing much engineering.
From a historical point of view SAAB owners were proud to 'buy into' a part of cutting edge engineering with every new SAAB launched. (as BMW owners still do)

Ohhhhh a new SAAB !!!!! what have they invented this time :D :D .....Rebadged a old 4WD car :-? :( :o

If it were not for the diabolical Cadillac for the world plan GM are about to pursue SAAB would not be made to pitch its car range so low.
http://www.deutsches-filminstitut.de/hdf/pic/darth_vader_gr.jpg
Search your feelings
You know it to be true

[saabfan]

One thing that has been overlooked in all these messages is that the 2005 9-7X (and 9-2X) is a STOP-GAP model. Saab desperately needs to get product out the door in order to increase brand-awareness worldwide and to prevent a brand collapse. It appears they have been successful so far, but a lot of their future success will depend on these two models. I have all the faith in the world that the next iterations of the 9-7 and 9-2 will be far more Saab-like and to the liking of most Saab purists, save the raging anti-SUV peeps.

Keep the faith.

[Mattlach]

What year is your SAAB? Considering GM has had a controlling share of SAAB since 1990, there's a good chance you might have a bolt or two in your car from GM.... :wink:(that is, if you car was built after 1990).


Well... Controlling share... in 1990 they bought 50% of SAAB Automobiles, the other 50% being held by the Swedish company Investor AB. I forget what year they finally bought the rest of it, but that wasn't until more recently.

Yes, and I DO realize there is a lot of GM stuff in my car, a 2001 9-5 Aero, but at least its subtle... (unless you get the 9-5 SE with the GM V6 that they recently dropped from the 2004's (thank god))

Have you checked out the new Chrysler CLK 320 er...I mean Crossfire?? :wink: j/k At least the Crossfire doesn't look anything like a CLK!

Haha, Well at least they are trying to IMPROVE on Chrysler by importing Mercedes engineering, and not the other way around. I don't think I'd be whining if GM decided to put SAAB engines in Chevy's. (Which woukld be the smart thing to do...)

[SentraSR20]

Saabfan - Again, absolutely correct! :D

Garry - You better calm down, you're gonna give yourself a heart attack getting so worked up! Besides, you basically just proved me right again, that Cadillac is in fact available in Europe.

This quote is great, I just had to point it out:

If SAAB returned those figures they would be dropped like a sack of potatoes. Its laughable.

You're precisely correct, which is why Saab was nearly bankrupt in 1993. Less than 20,000 units sold in the USA. Hell, Cadillac's worldwide sales nearly tripled Saab's worldwide sales in 1993 - now THAT's laughable... :wink:

[CleveSaab]

Well... Controlling share... in 1990 they bought 50% of SAAB Automobiles, the other 50% being held by the Swedish company Investor AB. I forget what year they finally bought the rest of it, but that wasn't until more recently.

1998 GM assumed 100% ownership.
As for finding Saab at a wrecker. Hah. No such luck. I've called over 20 junkyards in my area and they have no Saabs past the c900 range.
Either there's nothing left of these cars after an accident or they aren't in as many accidents, because there is a serious shortage in the boneyards....

[garry]

Saabfan - Again, absolutely correct! :D

Garry - You better calm down, you're gonna give yourself a heart attack getting so worked up! Besides, you basically just proved me right again, that Cadillac is in fact available in Europe.

But nobody wants to buy them so they effectively dont exist outside the USA.


This quote is great, I just had to point it out:

If SAAB returned those figures they would be dropped like a sack of potatoes. Its laughable.


You're precisely correct, which is why Saab was nearly bankrupt in 1993. Less than 20,000 units sold in the USA. Hell, Cadillac's worldwide sales nearly tripled Saab's worldwide sales in 1993 - now THAT's laughable... :wink:

When SAAB were still a >Small< luxury car maker from Sweden they sold:-

20,000 virtually hand made units in one country alone, testament to the desireability of the product, which at the time was based on a 20 year old blueprint.

The mighty Cadillac sold only 5000 state of the art machines in total spread between every other country last year with the full backing and funding of GM ??? Are Cadillac a >small< car maker? the figures would sugest not only small but minute and unwanted outside the USA.


How big do you want to dig this hole?


_

[saabfan]

CleveSaab, thanks for that info.

I retract my previous comments... everyone, even you purists who refuse to buy new Saabs, are helping the brand!

BTW, for what cars does Saab still make parts? Anything older than the 900 and 9000?

[SentraSR20]

I dunno Garry, you're the one who started digging - guess it's up to you! :wink:

[garry]

One thing that has been overlooked in all these messages is that the 2005 9-7X (and 9-2X) is a STOP-GAP model. Saab desperately needs to get product out the door in order to increase brand-awareness worldwide and to prevent a brand collapse. It appears they have been successful so far, but a lot of their future success will depend on these two models. I have all the faith in the world that the next iterations of the 9-7 and 9-2 will be far more Saab-like and to the liking of most Saab purists, save the raging anti-SUV peeps.

Keep the faith.


I would like to see the 9-7x and the 9-2 really sell well as they are supposed to be a temporary solution in the lineup. :D

My fear is that we will see more re badging and no new engineering further reducing the status of SAAB away from its engineering roots to simply a lower marketed brand.
Especially when you look at GM's larger plan for __'GM'__ and where SAAB is been positioned within.

For sure I would like a brand new SAAB whatever it is based on. :D . but for now I will continue to buy the spares as one thing SAAB are good at is making cars that last. I hope the new 9-7x will have the same durability.

I'm not worried so much about what SAAB are doing... SAAB are great at blending unenthralling platforms into fantastic cars. Although they don't seem to be doing much to the blend with the forthcoming models.
I am more worried about what GM are doing with SAAB, that for me is the issue raised by the new entries.

:wink:

[Nairda]

1998 GM assumed 100% ownership.
Negative, GM got total ownership in 2000.
In 1990 GM Europe accuired 40% of Saab which gave them control
of management. You have to remember that at the time GM was
near bankruptcy which choked funding for Saab for most of the
'90s but Saab still managed to get good cars out of outdated
platforms. The 9-5 was the turning point for Saab which probably
influenced the decision to make the 9-3 a sedan(saloon).
Both of these cars are vastly better than the old Saabs
in every respect even with the GM DNA. Having a Saab based
on a GM truck is kinda sad but I've been reading that the
9-7 will have no resemblance to its GM siblings. Maybe we'll
be surprised. I was one of many who hated the new 9-3 but over
time(with a little help from JNgold & others) I've been completely converted :cheesy:

[garry]

1998 GM assumed 100% ownership.
Negative, GM got total ownership in 2000.
In 1990 GM Europe accuired 40% of Saab which gave them control
of management. You have to remember that at the time GM was
near bankruptcy which choked funding for Saab for most of the
'90s but Saab still managed to get good cars out of outdated
platforms.

at the time GM was
near bankruptcy which choked funding for Saab for most of the
'90s !!!

That I was not aware of! :( :) :-? It explains so much.
So many people play the 'GM saved SAAB' card when it appears that SAAB may well have been the long term savior of GM all along, offering some quality international portfolio under drastic times allowing GM to hold at least some Global infrastructure intact. Now could be the time for GM to really push SAAB and IMHO cut losses with the international Cadillac failure utilizing the developed platforms under the SAAB brand. Which would finally place SAAB (and GM) level or above BMW with a respected luxury image already set in stone throughout the world.
SAAB need a 'Super Luxury' model and not 'Sub Luxury' automotive fusions.

SAAB is the best way for GM to play with BMW and Mercedes, but would also require SAAB to use the best quality and luxury engineering available/(or allowed) which means Cadillac stepping down from GM's marketing plan allowing SAAB the oxygen to expand.
Will GM have the good sense to realize the obvious?

[Mattlach]

SAAB is the best way for GM to play with BMW and Mercedes, but would also require SAAB to use the best quality and luxury available which means Cadillac stepping down from GM's marketing plan allowing SAAB the oxygen to expand.
Will GM have the good sense to realize the obvious?

This is probably the first thing you have said that I agree with.

Traditionally saab was known for being an understated performance drive. More recently they have become known (well atleast teh 9-5) for over the top electric gadgetery. (yes my 9-5 beeped at me casue my washer fluid was low today. My reaction was equal parts "wow it does that?" and annoyance :cheesy:

If the gadgetery in Cadillac and Saab can be combined, using possibly a V8 engine, built by the same team that puts out the 4cyl SAAB engines. (Saab has long toyed with the idea of mating up two I4's to make a V8, but never done it), possibly implementing some rwd, or awd action there is some real potential to challenge the likes of BMW on their home turf.

Unfortunately I dont envision the GM chain of command realising this...

[garry]

SAAB is the best way for GM to play with BMW and Mercedes, but would also require SAAB to use the best quality and luxury available which means Cadillac stepping down from GM's marketing plan allowing SAAB the oxygen to expand.
Will GM have the good sense to realize the obvious?


This is probably the first thing you have said that I agree with.

And yet this is at the very heart of my arguments. :D


If the gadgetery in Cadillac and Saab can be combined, using possibly a V8 engine, built by the same team that puts out the 4cyl SAAB engines. (Saab has long toyed with the idea of mating up two I4's to make a V8, but never done it), possibly implementing some rwd, or awd action there is some real potential to challenge the likes of BMW on their home turf.

Unfortunately I dont envision the GM chain of command realising this...

You mean this V8 .... using Twin 16 valve heads.

http://www.saunalahti.fi/~rjh/V8cut3.jpg

Sisudiesel in Linnavuori (Finland) developed a V8-motor for Saab and made few testmotors.
Effect 300hp, max torque 300Nm, 4 camshafts, 32 valves.
At the same time GM became a partner and said that they have a new V6-engine and so was V8 buried.
Motor in the picture is in the Linnavuori factory museum.

Just like my own hoax twin turbo saab V8 :cheesy:

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/design_jon/SAAB/V8202.jpg

So much potential ! ...... We all know this (now 30 year old) engine design is capable of a a Smoooth 300+ bhp in I4 cylinder Turbo format.... the potential of a V8 is simply staggering.

[saabfan]

Well I have read some rumor articles that say a larger-than-9-5 luxury sedan, known as the 9-6, is in the pipeline. I for one hope it's true. Would love to see Saab be more competitive with the likes of BMW, Audi, and Mercedes.

[Mattlach]

Well I have read some rumor articles that say a larger-than-9-5 luxury sedan, known as the 9-6, is in the pipeline. I for one hope it's true. Would love to see Saab be more competitive with the likes of BMW, Audi, and Mercedes.

Sounds nice :) Just hope it isn't a rebadged Chevy Impala... :P

[me3head]

people said the same thing about lexus 15 years ago, that they could never compete with the bmws of the world. alot can change if you try hard enough, and cadillac is trying.

also, 30 years ago the head of BMW told MotorTrend that his goal was for BMW to be a European Buick!

Alot can change, and if the 2nd largest company wants to put its resources into making that change there is at least an even chance of success.

[SentraSR20]

Um, has anyone here even driven a CTS? Let alone a CTS-V? Even the standard CTS now has 250+HP, and RWD :wink:. Know why? to compete with the BMW's of the world. The CTS does a better job overall than most Saabs right now. Don't argue with me unless you have driven both, Garry... :wink:

I never disagreed that Saab didn't have potential. I rather like the current 9-5 overall. However, you have to look at worldwide sales. It might not be smart to compare Cadillac to Saab. While Cadillac isn't in it's heyday, it's still outselling Saab handily. Now consider that your average Cadillac costs more money than your average Saab and you have even more revenue.

Garry - You took what Nairda said and ran with it without looking at the whole picture, didn't you? Nairda was correct about GM nearing bankruptcy, but they weren't bankrupt like Saab was. Plus, Saab wasn't the only one who got funding cut. Cuts were made across all brands, and since Saab wasn't selling as well as other brands, it only made economical sense to put proportionally more money into brands that actually brought money into the company. Any person with any basic fiscal/economical sense whatsoever could see that. :wink: While you're complaining about funding being cut, you should remember poor Oldsmobile, the GM brand that got deep-sixed a couple years ago because of slumping sales.

With increased profits in recent years, GM has pushed funding over to Saab. Hence, why you have the new 9-3SS. A totally re-designed Saab that shares pretty much nothing with the previous 9-3. It's unfortunate, but you still find cost-cutting in the 9-3SS, though it's mostly in the interior quality of materials. In the next couple of years, there'll be a new 9-5 and obviously the 9-2X and 9-7 will broaden the mass-market appeal of the brand. I sincerely hope Saab starts to outsell Cadillac, it's absolutely necessary for them to do so in order to make any sense for GM and not become the next Oldsmobile.... :wink:

[garry]

CTS does a better job overall than most Saabs right now.

Better at? .... I don't doubt its a hyper luxury car :D I can't try one out as I have never seen a Cadillac dealership or a Cadillac from this decade or the last in the flesh whatever European country I have traveled through.. :roll:

Not only did I have no idea that GM was in such a pickle with their own financial troubles GM also required SAAB to substantially up production volume after the takeover effectively pushing them out of the executive market. I always wondered why GM did this, now I know.

The 9-3ss and new 9-5 are a total triumph! .... Thats the way to do it as Mr. punch would say.
New, innovative, stylish engineering.... then what do they do!? :-?

Saab to outsell Cadillac ????? 98% of Cadillac's sell within the USA. Maybe they sell better than SAAB in the USA, that I don't know.
The Cadillac brand is essentially dead outside US shores, that I am sure of. SAAB probably sold more cars in Belgium than Cadillac sold in every other European country last year. that's rough. that's loss making.

Using the 'wonderful ?' Cadillac models reworked as SAAB's would offer that ultra refined luxury 'performance ?' car to the rest of the world in a more desirable and acceptable package.
Doesn't mater how good the new Cadillac is it wont sell outside the USA with a Cadillac badge.
GM could salvage the marketing disaster by swopping badges outside the US. which would help SAAB, GM and also Cadillac! as jobs would be saved and overall revenue accelerated overnight.

[SentraSR20]

Again, you conveniently ignored the fact that it was GM that made the new 9-3SS (the car you claim as a total triumph) possible :wink:. The new 9-3SS also uses a lot of GM-sourced parts :wink:.

You also conveniently ignored the fact that WORLD-WIDE total sales are what count in terms of keeping a brand afloat, not sales in a specific region. Stop being so blind and contorting the truth to support your argument.. :lol:

By the way, the CTS is better overall in performance than most/any Saab currently available, as it should be. Styling is subjective however, but we'll focus on the tangibles, thank you... :wink:

I think it's funny that you "wonder why" GM pushed Saab to up production volume. Have you been reading any what's been posted at all? Seriously, think before you speak. GM gave Saab an order to up production because they weren't selling enough cars to make a profit. Saab was losing money year after year on an aging product line that wasn't attracting any new blood to the brand, until they eventually fell into a financial hole they couldn't climb out of without the aid of a bigger corporation. All Saab needed was a kick in the rear to realize reality; you don't make money unless you actually sell cars .

[garry]

GM that made the new 9-3SS

Pull the other one it has bells on :wink: :lol: I dont have any problems with GM allowing SAAB to design great cars using GM parts!! why should I ?


WORLD-WIDE total sales are what count in terms of keeping a brand afloat, not sales in a specific region

And Cadillac is effectively a one country brand. SAAB has the potential to grow into a worldwide leader in the luxury sector. Cadillac has no chance.. GM are simply wasting money subsidizing Cadillac's failure internationally.

the CTS is better overall in performance than most/any Saab currently available, as it should be.

Great!....in that case rework the styling put a SAAB badge on it and watch sales rocket worldwide. :D Thats the way to do it.

"wonder why" GM pushed Saab to up production volume

When GM took over SAAB they had many investment options that could have been applied to SAAB, They chose wisely in retrospect (now knowing GM's full financial situation). If GM were not in the trouble they were in, they may have opted to challenge BMW at the time by expanding the model range with greater luxury and build quality commanding a higher price per unit. without the urgency to see instant return on the investment.
It appears that SAAB helped GM at the same time GM helped SAAB :wink: After the storm has cleared SAAB still has its Global infrastructure intact, a firm base to grow.

[Mattlach]

Again, you conveniently ignored the fact that it was GM that made the new 9-3SS (the car you claim as a total triumph) possible :wink:. The new 9-3SS also uses a lot of GM-sourced parts :wink:.

I have driven a 9-3SS once. it drove great. Really felt like a natural update to a SAAB. Apparently they are having some terrible quality problems with it though.

Sounds to me like the SAAB Engineers did the best they could using the constraint of GM parts.

[Nairda]

SentraSR20apparently they are having some terrible quality problems
Apparently all other European brands have more quality problems
than Saab. That may not hold well with some SC members who've
had some glitches but the facts are that Saab along with Porsche
have the least amount of warranty claims for European makes.
The GM parts that you refer to are engineered in Germany(Opel)
Most of the parts were conceived by the 4000+ engineer's in
Trollhattan, Sweden. Other major parts like the transmission
are made by Aisin Warner(Toyota subsidiary) While companies
like BMW buy GM's automatic transmission. So GM really doesn't
control Saab with an iron fist like you all believe.
You can argue that the CTS is a better competitor for the
BMW 3-series but the majority of the public think that the
9-3 is a serious alternative to BMW and the CTS is a wannabe.
Back to the original subject, we have 3 more days until they
unveil the 9-7, to suck or not to suck? I'm keeping my fingers
crossed and hope for the best.

[Mattlach]

SentraSR20apparently they are having some terrible quality problems
Apparently all other European brands have more quality problems than Saab.

Yeah.. I mean specifically for the 903ss though. I was talking to my local dealer (Newport Saab) and he was talking about some horrid quality issues on the 9-3ss.

Traditionally though, including the old 9-3 and current 9-5, SAABs are well known for their quality levels.

[Jet 9-3]

SentraSR20apparently they are having some terrible quality problems
Apparently all other European brands have more quality problems
than Saab. That may not hold well with some SC members who've
had some glitches but the facts are that Saab along with Porsche
have the least amount of warranty claims for European makes.
The GM parts that you refer to are engineered in Germany(Opel)
Most of the parts were conceived by the 4000+ engineer's in
Trollhattan, Sweden. Other major parts like the transmission
are made by Aisin Warner(Toyota subsidiary) While companies
like BMW buy GM's automatic transmission. So GM really doesn't
control Saab with an iron fist like you all believe.
You can argue that the CTS is a better competitor for the
BMW 3-series but the majority of the public think that the
9-3 is a serious alternative to BMW and the CTS is a wannabe.
Back to the original subject, we have 3 more days until they
unveil the 9-7, to suck or not to suck? I'm keeping my fingers
crossed and hope for the best.

Nairda is actually saying kind things about the 9-3? Is it a late April Fools joke? :cheesy: :cheesy: