View Full Version : "State of Michigan"
Seems that Saab is being uprooted and moved to Detroit. The better to "integrate" the product lines I suppose. Looks like they are getting less and less leash every day. I was a bit surprised to learn they had only 80 employees in the US (and now, presumably, less) -- when you consider how many of those people have to be sales and marketting or operations, doesn't leave much..
http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/saab21e_20040521.htm
Toreador93
23-05-04, 01:40 AM
Why doesn't GM just bring ALL of Saab over here!? We can move them into the Oldsmobile plant, and hopefully its curse will follow and put Saab out of its misery.
Thats not accurate. What they actually have done is move the SAAB USA Headquarters from Norcross, GA to Detroit, which makes more sense, now that they are part of GM. All of the activity that is going on in Sweeden is staying in Sweeden.
I meant Saab USA -- should have been obvious from my post -- but the point is the same -- it is pretty ironic that Saab has launched this major marketting campaign about the independence of the Saab approach at a time where they are losing what independence they had.
What makes a Saab a Saab? I'd be interested in other people's top three, but for me I say screw that 'quirky' nonsense, it is:
1. fun to drive
2. strongly unique design
3. effeciency -- in terms of space and resources
In a word, 'smart'. The 9-7x couldn't possibly be further from these ideals, IMNSHO. [edit, ok, well except perhpas a Hummer w/ Aztek-inspired side-clading, but forgive the hyperbole.]
sethsev7n
24-05-04, 07:52 AM
I havent heard any positive news out of saab since GM took full ownership, but.. thats to be expected. I dont expect anything great out of saab anymore under GM's control..sorry.. we'll all just watch them either completely die or turn into some twisted vision of GM and lose every part of its identity that it once held.
stickline
24-05-04, 05:17 PM
Wow....it's threads like this that really make me want to not read the SC anymore. Why does everyone discount GM so much? Have you been reading about what they have done to Cadillac recently? There is so much neat engineering, design and performance over there. They let them revive the brand and now their cars are getting rave reviews in the car mags that traditionally love BMW, MB, Lexus, etc... GM has created a performance division of Cadillac (V-series) and Chevrolet (SS models), I'm sure they won't stop there. These new cars are exciting and winning reviewers over.
Couple this with a huge influx of cash into Saab, many new models (9-7X, 9-2X, whatever for the 9-3SH is taking now, talk of a new Sonett, etc), and I don't see how it is not possible to be excited about the future. There's even development of twin-turboed V-6 motors to give us another Viggen! Is Saab exciting right this moment? Not to many of the traditionalists. Will Saab be exciting in the future? Yes. I am personally hoping that the 9-2X and the 9-7X sell out early in the model year. More cash for Saab = more cash to develop the products that we really want.
The future looks bright to me!!
valbowski1980
24-05-04, 07:06 PM
Good point stickline:
However if the new 9-3ss is the best Saab can do then its screwed. Sales may be up but they are nowhere near the competition which continues to be several steps ahead. BMW, Lexus, Acura and many others keep coming out with better and better new cars, cars which Saab can't match in quality or performance. Maybe I'm too negative here but to me it seems like Saab isn't getting a new lease on life but is just dying a slower death.
If GM does what it did with Caddy to Saab, there are bright days ahead. It's hard to tell which direction it will go right now.
I'll relate a positive story. I had a friend who was looking at convertibles. Looked at the Audi A4 and the Saab, ended up with the Saab. Said it drove nicer, and looked better.
The problem with reading Car and Driver (and I'm guilty of this as well), is associated their driving impressions with the rest of us. These guys are amateur racers, essentially, and are looking at absolute performance. Reading about a difference of .3 seconds in 0-60 times may sound important, but in the real world, you can't tell. Looks are one of the major points, and then just a subjective overall feeling. Not raw numbers. And their subjective ratings are, well, subjective, so you have to take them from that perspective.
The Saabs are in the same category, they are just missing those few extra 10ths that these car magazine guys emphaze, which is not what most of the car buying public emphasizes.
If the car buying public where like the Car and Driver reviewers, Toyota wouldn't be seeling any Camry's, because we'd all by Accords.
valbowski1980
24-05-04, 07:38 PM
In performance Saabs are a bit off and you are right fabric that that .3 makes virtually no difference. However, price out a 9-3ss Linear versus say a TSX or an ARC versus a TL. Both of the A badges give you far more car for less cash. Acura (also see Lexus I300, BMW 325 & 330, ...) also has a reputation for relaibilty which Saab doesn't. How do you compete with that?
My point is not that the 9-3SS is a bad car, the competitors just have better ones. IMO, Saabs are priced too high.
Jet 9-3
25-05-04, 02:36 PM
However, price out a 9-3ss Linear versus say a TSX or an ARC versus a TL. Both of the A badges give you far more car for less cash.
MSRP, yes. Real life prices, no.
A loaded Linear will be lower than a TSX, and a loaded Arc will be lower than a TL
valbowski1980
26-05-04, 08:56 PM
However, price out a 9-3ss Linear versus say a TSX or an ARC versus a TL. Both of the A badges give you far more car for less cash.
MSRP, yes. Real life prices, no.
A loaded Linear will be lower than a TSX, and a loaded Arc will be lower than a TL
Are Saab dealers really cutting the prices that drastically? Also, can the Arc and Linear really match the levels of standard equipment of the Acuras? Not tryin to pick a fight, just wondering.
finwake
27-05-04, 05:18 AM
On the Caddy point, I saw a video clip of the 9-7x product introduction at the ______ autoshow. I am certain I saw that link somewhere on this forum.
The new 9-7x was being introduced alongside with the new Cadillac, as GM's flagship/premium brands. I surmise that GM would not want to tarnish its progress with Cadillac by putting sub-par effort behind the development of the Saab premium brand.
On the note of the product quality: 1. Saab is a year or two behind Cadillac in development by my estimates. I am hopeful we are ramping up to better things to come. Also, I have a 93 Linear with the 17" wheels and sports suspension: very cool and very competitive to the other mentioned brands (Acura, BMW, Audi, etc), and I picked it up in the mid-20s. Looks comperable to a high end model and at a great price just above a Honda Accord.
finwake
27-05-04, 05:21 AM
On the Caddy point, I saw a video clip of the 9-7x product introduction at the ______ autoshow. I am certain I saw that link somewhere on this forum.
The new 9-7x was being introduced alongside with the new Cadillac, as GM's flagship/premium brands. I surmise that GM would not want to tarnish its progress with Cadillac by putting sub-par effort behind the development of the Saab premium brand.
On the note of the product quality: 1. Saab is a year or two behind Cadillac in development by my estimates. I am hopeful we are ramping up to better things to come. Also, I have a 93 Linear with the 17" wheels and sports suspension: very cool and very competitive to the other mentioned brands (Acura, BMW, Audi, etc), and I picked it up in the mid-20s. Looks comperable to a high end model and at a great price just above a Honda Accord.
In performance Saabs are a bit off and you are right fabric that that .3 makes virtually no difference. However, price out a 9-3ss Linear versus say a TSX or an ARC versus a TL. Both of the A badges give you far more car for less cash. Acura (also see Lexus I300, BMW 325 & 330, ...) also has a reputation for relaibilty which Saab doesn't. How do you compete with that?
My point is not that the 9-3SS is a bad car, the competitors just have better ones. IMO, Saabs are priced too high.
I'd agree that the Saabs are priced too high. The Saab definitely undercuts the BMW and Benz, though. However, nobody can touch the Acura's on content, although they apparently mucked up on the torque steer of these things, which has been it's undoing in every comparison.
As for reliability, BMW and MB are definitely losing credibility on that front, particularly MB. Saab doesn't appear to be able to shake it's reliability reputation, despite that fact that has improved considerably. Those who truly value reliability go Japanese, so that probably doesn't hurt Saab as much against it's Euro competition.
valbowski1980
27-05-04, 11:37 PM
Also, I have a 93 Linear with the 17" wheels and sports suspension: very cool and very competitive to the other mentioned brands (Acura, BMW, Audi, etc), and I picked it up in the mid-20s. Looks comperable to a high end model and at a great price just above a Honda Accord.
Thats a hell of a deal considering a strip Linear starts at about 27 grand according to Saab's website. I can see how an Acura dealer can simply say no to one customer since another customer will come along fast enought and take it. Saab with its weak market share can't afford to do that.
Firehead
28-05-04, 12:47 AM
I'd also like to say that I own an '89 saab 9000 and I can tell over the years when saab became part of GM, It had lost its orignality and started to turn into an american piece of junk. That, of course, is my personal though.
valbowski1980
28-05-04, 02:04 AM
I'm not a big fan of GM Saabs either but I gotta say that I do like the 9-5. Very beautiful car IMO.
Another IMO, Saab would have been in much better shape under the Japanese. Imagine it, the appeal of a Saab with a Toyota or a Honda trouble index.
Firehead
28-05-04, 02:37 AM
Yes the 9-5 is very good, but i doubt GM had much of an influence with it. Not sure though.
valbowski1980
28-05-04, 02:43 AM
Yes the 9-5 is very good, but i doubt GM had much of an influence with it. Not sure though.
The Echotech engine is a GM I think.
The 9-5 is based on a european GM chassis, not sure which one. I think the GM cars in Europe are probably superior to the American made, since they are still fairly different, although that is changing.
I'd agree that GM stuff up till very recently is not great. Just take one look at Caddy though, and you can see they are headed in the right direction. The new 9-3 is also a very good design. It appears the Bob Lutz is having some positive affect.
Your 9000 had a chassis shared with many other's, I believe Lancia and Fiat. Saab does a good job of taking an average to good car and making it much better. If GM could capture some of that, things would be looking good. Big companies take a while to turn around, let's see what GM is like in 5 years.
valbowski1980
28-05-04, 04:36 PM
Your 9000 had a chassis shared with many other's, I believe Lancia and Fiat.
This is true, I found a Lancia like that on eBay with a Ferrari motor :o . The Lancias and Fiats turned out to be rust buckets where as the 9000s bodys last longer.
finwake
28-05-04, 05:55 PM
Let me note also that I once owned a 1986 Saab 900 Turbo, which would be a purist Saab, old school Saab, whatever.
That car, which I did love dearly, burned to the ground in rural Montana within about 15 minutes of seeing a little smoke from the dash. You know huge flames and a fire department that just coated the prairie so as not to create a bigger fire. Anyway, saying is that Saab's tend to burn, and I know of many old school Saabs that seemed to do so. Seems the electrical system was too close to the fuel lines and the minor fender bender I had two days before may have crossed the two.
Point is: my 10,000 mile old 93ss is very high quality and the GM influence and GM parts seem to be rock solid... and no known tendancy to burn...
finwake
28-05-04, 05:57 PM
Also, GM is a juggernaut; if it get's its economies of scope and scale pointed in the right direction, its cars will be unbeatable. Look at the new Pontiac GTO, the new Caddy's, (okay never look at the Buick Rendevous -- yech!), and compare those to the GMs from the 1970s oil crisis on, and you will see that they seem to be heading more and more towards the right course.
Even look at the 97x and Blazen/Envoy brothers; pretty solid, pretty good looking; sure beats the Ford Explorer (yech!). Hey, I like my Volvo XC-90 better for my wife, being built on a car chasis and all... but if it was for me, hmmmm....
Toreador93
30-05-04, 07:23 AM
The only good thing from GM is the CTS and Corvette. The new STS looks like a larger CTS, which I, and many reviews I've read, don't like. Why buy a more expensive car that looks like a smaller one? And they didn't even do that great of a job with it. It looks really boring.
The GTO looks like every other pontiac. It's basically a 3-4 year old Holden Monaro. How original is that!? Going retro would be better than taking an existing car and putting the name of a legend on it! At least the Corvette is new, and looks different, but familiar.
A few others have mentioned that Saab took the Cadillac platform, and made a kick-*** SUV with it (though I'm not a fan of SUVs). But GM didn't want Saab to outshine them (or spend more money than ALLOWED).
I would LOVE to see the Saab 9X concept, and would own one WAY BEFORE owning a Saab Envoy. A Saab should be unique, not a GM or Subaru product.
CosmicSaab
30-05-04, 04:03 PM
I have to say, I really don't know what you expect GM to do. Saab is not profitable, and since 1990, that made a profit only twice. Do you want GM to say "well just do what ever you want even if you loose money doing it so that you can make a very small number of people happy" ? I guess I answered my own question. :roll:
Think about this then... You are in charge of a very large multi billion dollar multi national auto manufacture, say, GM, and you bought this small Swedish car company, like Saab, they make no profit at all, in fact, the amount of money they loose in a year could make anyone stomach turn, what do you do? I have a feeling I would be doing exactly what GM is doing right now, expanding the line up as quickly and cheaply as possible to get them to make a profit. Then later, one could slowly do new cars all of Saabs own.
You people can say whatever you want about being unhappy with where Saab is going, but this is business, and business seems to be a concept some of you can't quite grasp. The point of a business is to make money. Period. That is the first and foremost goal of a business. If a part of your business is not making money you may try to turn it around, or more likely, if it is loosing as much as Saab is, you dump it entirely. GM has been exceptionally paitent with Saab, but one can be paitent for only so long. GM's paitence has run out.
You people can say whatever you want about being unhappy with where Saab is going, but this is business, and business seems to be a concept some of you can't quite grasp. The point of a business is to make money....GM has been exceptionally paitent with Saab, but one can be paitent for only so long. GM's paitence has run out.
Well, that's the line from GM anyway. But I think a good case could be made that under pre-Lutz era GM, Saab never got the resources to do what it needed to do. And when it did, designing the SRX derived Saab SUV, GM pulled the plug because the car was _too_ good. So GM honchos saying "we lost our patience" is just a little disingenuous. But thats neither here nor there, water under the bridge, etc. It _is_ a business decision where GM goes from here, but they are in serious danger of throwing the baby out w/ the bathwater, for just one more cliché.
I just thought "what a fine day in the world of marketting irony for GM to be playing on Saab's perceived índependence just as they embark on an orgy of badge-engineering." Now Saab's badge-differentiator (why someone would buy one vs. say an Oldsmobuick) becomes the only thing left of their historical indepdendence. Its a level of cynicism that might make Karl Rove blush!
:cheesy:
Toreador93
31-05-04, 10:39 PM
I posted this in another thread:
http://www.detnews.com/2004/autosinsider/0404/04/a01-112086.htm
General Motors Corp.’s acquisition of Volvo’s crosstown rival, Saab Automobile AB, has not lived up to its potential. Saab sales are down in Europe and in the United States.
For Volvo’s 28,000 employees, Saab’s troubles serve as a cautionary tale of what can befall even a prestigious brand when it loses its independence.
I don't understand why GM would think Saab prestige would be a bad thing. So the Saab is placed higher than the Cadillac...big deal. Most people see european brands as being more prestigious than American.
There are 400M+ people in Europe, most of which haven't seen a Cadillac in how many years? It needs to be able to compete with Volvo and Audi. Rebadging isn't going to make that happen. People who look at European cars aren't thinking about GM or Subaru products.
Jet 9-3
01-06-04, 03:44 PM
Why buy a more expensive car that looks like a smaller one?
I guess we should ask the people who buy:
The 9-5
The S60 & S80
The A6 & A8
The MB E & S class.
The BMW 7 series (and soon, the 3 series will look like a smaller 5 series)
They all look pretty much like bigger versions of the next smaller car in each respective line
Why buy a more expensive car that looks like a smaller one?
I guess we should ask the people who buy:
The 9-5
The S60 & S80
The A6 & A8
The MB E & S class.
The BMW 7 series (and soon, the 3 series will look like a smaller 5 series)
They all look pretty much like bigger versions of the next smaller car in each respective line
Beat me to it. :) Although more people get grief for getting the smaller (read: less expensive) version of many of these (I'm mainly pointing at you, C-class and 3-series owners :wink: :cheesy: )
Beat me to it. :) Although more people get grief for getting the smaller (read: less expensive) version of many of these (I'm mainly pointing at you, C-class and 3-series owners :wink: :cheesy: )
Most agregious? (sp) Has to be the Jag X-type. Looks just like a 5/8 scale XJ. I actually think BMW does the best job of differentiating; the 3, 5, and 7 all have a distinctive style of their own with common characteristics -- not that this means I'd buy one, mind you!
valbowski1980
02-06-04, 04:32 AM
Beat me to it. :) Although more people get grief for getting the smaller (read: less expensive) version of many of these (I'm mainly pointing at you, C-class and 3-series owners :wink: :cheesy: )
Most agregious? (sp) Has to be the Jag X-type. Looks just like a 5/8 scale XJ. I actually think BMW does the best job of differentiating; the 3, 5, and 7 all have a distinctive style of their own with common characteristics -- not that this means I'd buy one, mind you!
I wouldn't mind a 3 in the least bit. One of the best cars I've ever driven and handles like no Saab can ever dream of.
Most agregious? (sp) Has to be the Jag X-type. Looks just like a 5/8 scale XJ. I actually think BMW does the best job of differentiating; the 3, 5, and 7 all have a distinctive style of their own with common characteristics -- not that this means I'd buy one, mind you!
Egregious. :)
Mercedes has the same problem: I think the C class looks like a 5/8ths S class. The X-type doesn't look as much of a mini-me of the newly designed XJ, but you really nailed it on the head, it was so blatant when the X-type first came out. I can usually tell the models apart, but the average person probably can't. I'm guessing that's why they do it. :)
squishmann
02-06-04, 06:41 PM
The problem with the STS is that it just looks longer. I feel all cars should have a family look, but it's no good if you just stretch it out.
Toreador93
02-06-04, 08:24 PM
I guess you guys are right in that looks are subjective. But to me (and seemingly a few others), the new STS is mostly a copy of the CTS. There are no distinctions between the two. You'd think when you're use to rebadging vehicles, you could come up with something to better differentiate two vehicles.
I can easily spot the differences, but I also am a huge car fan, and knew that I was looking at the new STS. In fact, the difference between the two is kinda like the difference between the last two models of Jaguar XJs, to bring another part of the conversation in here. They look very similar at first glance, but are fairly obviously different after looking for a few moments. Still hard to tell, and the average car buyer probably can't tell the difference between either of these pairs.
I suspect that back end of the STS is very different, though.
For one thing, I think the STS is a much more successful rendering of the new Cadillac design theme..it seems much more mature and less out to make a statement, while still looking fresh and distinctive. The X-type, OTOH was simply a derivative/retroish/safe design who's primary focus was saying "Yes, I am a Jag, even though I am also a Mondeo".
My 2 cents worth on GM...
GM has the uncanny ability to destroy things. Look at Saturn. GM tightened it's grip on Saturn and what came out of that??? The Ion. Everyone I knew who owned Saturns (i know plenty) loved their S Series, their reliability was well above average, very comfortable, good driving cars. So when I knew I needed a new car I went for an brand new Ion… what a piece of junk. It started having problems around 15,000 miles. I had the transmission replaced at 20,000 miles, moldings fall off. The thing scratches in a mild breeze, the interior rattles, the seats put my bottom to sleep. The headlights are aimed weird, drivers flash their high beams at me all the time. The electric stearing means you must spend your time holding the steering wheel straight, alignments don’t help. They ruined Saturn IMHO. Saturn, if I remember right was supposed to compete with Asian imports. The quality I’ve seen come out of them lately doesn’t even match up to a Kia or Daewoo.
I have to say that the Saab 9-3 is the first Saab that has caught my interest.
I never cared much for the older Saabs. I think they are in fact quite ugly. GM has improved the mechanical quality and engineering discipline of the Saab brand. Also, I think they have taken Saab styling cues and developed them in a way that appeals to more people.
I think if GM is to be faulted, it should be faulted for not developing new Saabs quickly enough. But the blame for that lies more with the general ineptness of the GM Europe operations, which recently have been turning around.
The way GM stands to today, I think their products lack some of the final polish that their competitors like Ford do a better job with. But the nuts and bolts mechanicals of GM products (especially the newer ones) is very good. I like GM's emphasis on developing stiff platforms and developing manufacturing techniques that minimize build quality problems. I can live with a little lack of refinement, as long as the "meat and potatoes" are there.
No wuestion the newer GM platforms are quite good as are powertrains more or less.
I can live with a little lack of refinement, as long as the "meat and potatoes" are there.
Have you not driven a Japanese car? They've had the meat and potatoes and the refinement for years.
Being willing to accept a lack of refinement is why GM can get away with selling some of the junk they do.
The only consistently reliable Japanese brands are Toyota and Honda.
If you've been following the news lately, you've probably heard about Nissan's disgraceful plummet in overall build quality. While everyone else was improving the past few years, Nissan kept falling further behind.
As for the others: Suzuki, Subaru, Isuzu, Mazda, etc. I don't think they were ever anything to write home about.
The other Japanese brands do benefit, however, from the well earned reputation of reliability of Toyota and Honda: Most Japanese cars sold are Toyotas and Hondas. The average consumer thinks "Japanese cars are reliable". And they extent this perception to the smaller Japanese brands.
I've driven the Infiniti G35, and I wasn't impressed with the mechanical quality, the material quality, or the refinement of the vehicle. It leaves a lot to be desired.
As for Toyota and Honda, I think their vehicles are ugly. Toyota in particular I hate, because my father buys only Toyota/Lexus products, and I'm just sick of their bland styling and general lameness.
I must say, though, that Acuras new products have good styling. I have always appreciated the angular styled car. The Acura TL had me excited, but many reviews that I've read say it handles like crap. How unfortunate.
The way GM stands to today, I think their products lack some of the final polish that their competitors like Ford do a better job with. But the nuts and bolts mechanicals of GM products (especially the newer ones) is very good. I like GM's emphasis on developing stiff platforms and developing manufacturing techniques that minimize build quality problems. I can live with a little lack of refinement, as long as the "meat and potatoes" are there.
There is no refinement anymore with Saturn. I drive my Ion for a few months, then i hop into my mother's '95 geo and say outloud "This is kinda nice." The Geo Prizm is a Toyota Corrolla. It's shocking that after 9 years, almost 10 years, 180,000 miles, it still rides good, nothign is rusty, nothing is falling apart, it's not leaking oil. She only had her starter and alternator replaced in it.
I know people who drive their saturns into the ground, takes 10 years but they do it. I couldn't imagine a vue or ion lasting anywere near that. I'll be surprised it'll last much past it's 36,000 mile warrenty.
The only consistently reliable Japanese brands are Toyota and Honda.
If you've been following the news lately, you've probably heard about Nissan's disgraceful plummet in overall build quality. While everyone else was improving the past few years, Nissan kept falling further behind.
As for the others: Suzuki, Subaru, Isuzu, Mazda, etc. I don't think they were ever anything to write home about.
Not sure what you are reading, but based on CR's info, and any long term reviews I've seen of all of the above except perhaps Suzuki, that Nissan and Mazda are definitely on par with Honda and Toyota, and Subaru is pretty close. Isuzu doesn't really exist anymore.
The other Japanese brands do benefit, however, from the well earned reputation of reliability of Toyota and Honda: Most Japanese cars sold are Toyotas and Hondas. The average consumer thinks "Japanese cars are reliable". And they extent this perception to the smaller Japanese brands.
I think the others have earned this on their own merits, not on Toyota or Honda's coattails. And they are all clearly superior to the US models.
We'll see what happens to Mazda though, now that the 3 is mostly Ford.
I've driven the Infiniti G35, and I wasn't impressed with the mechanical quality, the material quality, or the refinement of the vehicle. It leaves a lot to be desired.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but you are in the minority, as the G35 is the darling of almost every car magazine I've read, and has bested most of its competitors in their comparisons.
As for Toyota and Honda, I think their vehicles are ugly. Toyota in particular I hate, because my father buys only Toyota/Lexus products, and I'm just sick of their bland styling and general lameness.
I too think the Toyota's are unattractive, but that's hardly relevant, is it. :)
I must say, though, that Acuras new products have good styling. I have always appreciated the angular styled car. The Acura TL had me excited, but many reviews that I've read say it handles like cr*p. How unfortunate.
It suffers from bad torque steer. I never saw a review that said it handled badly, just that the torque steer was significant. Especially when a number of it's competitors are RWD, AWD, or less powerful FWD.
Considering this is about the only complaint I've seen about the TL, with it's high content and low price, and Acura's quality, I can understand why I see so many of them. I'd have a hard time buying a new 9-3 instead of the TL.
jpeezay
31-08-04, 10:08 PM
Thats not accurate. What they actually have done is move the SAAB USA Headquarters from Norcross, GA to Detroit, which makes more sense, now that they are part of GM. All of the activity that is going on in Sweeden is staying in Sweeden.
I move up to Michigan from Georgia and here Saab comes thinking they can follow me around... :lol: