Note about the platform

[CosmicSaab]

I just remembered something. I remember reading some test by one of the big car mags on the Chevy SSR, that convertible truck thing (the answer to a question that was never asked) and I remember them saying that it was more ridgid than the Ford Thunderbird, that it didn't shake as much and was just a lot stiffer. Here is why that matters with the 9-7x:

The SSR is on the same body on frame platform as the 9-7x

The Thunderbird is on the same unibody platform as the Lincoln LS/Jaguar S-Type.

My point is that the platform is a very capable one, it is very, very strong. Generally a unibody is supposed to be stiffer than a body on frame car, but not always. People are condemming the GMT360 platform as junk, but it is very good, and if Saab tuned the suspension right, the 9-7x should be one of the better handling SUVs available. Clearly not up to Cayanne levels, but at least to Touareg and possibly BMW X5 3.0i (not 4.4i or 4.8is) levels.

[XAAMOTTOMAAX]

Good info...hopefully we can stay on topic in THIS thread. Are the additional stiffening cross members used in the 9-7x used in the SSR or are these exclusive to the 9-7x? Is the rear air suspension used in any of the other models sharing the platform?

[SaabScott]

Everything I have heard about the 9-7x says that GM / Saab are trying to do it right ... and I only say trying because they are working with existing hardware as opposed to a ground up build ...

Having said that, one if the things I have been told they are doing is using a lot of hardware from the long wheelbase version ... brake lines and such, to give the 9-7x a much better feel and more responsiveness than its GM cousins.

I can't wait to see it on the road.

[CosmicSaab]

Originally Posted by XAAMOTTOMAAX

Good info...hopefully we can stay on topic in THIS thread. Are the additional stiffening cross members used in the 9-7x used in the SSR or are these exclusive to the 9-7x? Is the rear air suspension used in any of the other models sharing the platform?

I don't know about the structural braces, but the air suspension is optional in some of the other GMT360s, and it is standard in the Buick. I am sure the Buick has a totally different program for controlling it though, the Buick is supposed to "ride like it is on air" the Saab is supposed to ride like it is on blacktop.

[fabric]

From what I've seen of the pictures, I'm hopefully optimistic about the 9-7x. A stiff structure is key to eliminating squeaks and rattles, and giving an overall feeling of solidness, and that subjective feeling is going to matter more to many buyers than the performance numbers.


My bigger concern than body on frame is the solid rear axle. It's harder to mask it's ride deficiencies just due to it's massive sprung weight. But it can be fairly effectively dealt with, lets hope the engineers have done their homework.

[garry]

Getting the suspension right"" ....?

This suggests the suspension for this platform has been wrong in the past.


Its a 4X4 at the end of the day, if the car will be aimed at the 'pretendy' I need a 4X4' market then they should make it handle exceptionally well. aka BMW.
Its not difficult to make a wobbly car go round corners better..... Look at all the ricers.

I hope SAAB have invested in a general solid state of build quality...that should be of greater importance... squeak and rattle free motoring.
Going round corners fast is no bonus in todays world, its a standard.

Even though I repel the thought of any SUV been driven fast

[fabric]

Originally Posted by garry

Getting the suspension right"" ....?

This suggests the suspension for this platform has been wrong in the past.

Getting it right in terms of doing best for a live rear axle. I phrased it badly, it's not right vs wrong, but optimal vs suboptimal. The live rear axle is inherently a bit unwieldy in terms of ride and handling on imperfect surfaces, and poor design exacerbates it.

Fortunately in the case of the Gm360 it's linked to a rigid structure, and that's a good place to start. But ultimately, you will never be able to rival the smoothness of the indepent rear for roadgoing. And lets face it, few of these are leaving the road... on purpose, at least.

[Mattlach]

Originally Posted by E715

Clearly not up to Cayanne levels, but at least to Touareg and possibly BMW X5 3.0i (not 4.4i or 4.8is) levels.

Forgive my ignorance, but arnt the Touareg and the Cayanne more or less the same vehicle with slightly different bodies?

[CosmicSaab]

Originally Posted by Mattlach

Forgive my ignorance, but arnt the Touareg and the Cayanne more or less the same vehicle with slightly different bodies?

Not exactly. They share the basic platform, and a V6 engine from VW, but the interior, exterior, and the suspension setup, and most of the drive train are specific to each, except in the V6 models. VW does a lot of the manufacturing on the Cayenne, but that was part of the deal. VW got Porsche engineering and Porsche got VW manufacturing capacity. It is kind of like the 9-3SS and the Chevy Malibu, though with only a little bit more in common between the 2 SUVs.

[fabric]

Originally Posted by E715

VW got Porsche engineering and Porsche got VW manufacturing capacity.

Too bad the couldn't get a touch of Honda reliability in there somehow.

[Mattlach]

Originally Posted by E715

VW got Porsche engineering and Porsche got VW manufacturing capacity.

That, to me, is like saying Ford got Mercury engineering and Mercury got Ford manufacturing capacity...

VW and porsche have always been the same company...

[CosmicSaab]

Originally Posted by Mattlach

That, to me, is like saying Ford got Mercury engineering and Mercury got Ford manufacturing capacity...

VW and porsche have always been the same company...

VW and Porsche are two totally seperate companies. VW does not own Porsche, Porsche is independent.

[fabric]

Originally Posted by E715

VW and Porsche are two totally seperate companies. VW does not own Porsche, Porsche is independent.

Son of a gun. I thought they were part owned by VW.

[CosmicSaab]

Originally Posted by fabric

Son of a gun. I thought they were part owned by VW.

Nope. They have worked together in the past, and the first VW (the Beetle) was designed by Dr. Porsche before he had his own company, but they are seperate. (VW may have a small stake in them, but I don't think they do. If they do, it is small, single digits at best, and not controlling).

[squishmann]

seems as though the 9-7X will have a very very short life. if the cash comes in quickly then

saab could go back to the SRX platform, or they could wait for the GMT360 replacement and tool it the way that they want it so that it is completely different from the envoy and rainier

either way it seems as though they will have an SUV and a crossover, they are also going to get a crack at one of subarus new platforms for a 7 seater crossover.

[SPratel]

[quote="CosmicSaab"][quote="fabric"]

Originally Posted by E715

VW and Porsche are two totally seperate companies. VW does not own Porsche, Porsche is independent.

Not an expert here by anymeans, but Volkswagen AG is kind of like GM internationally, it owns alot. I believe that part of the VW Family is teh Peoples car, Audi, Porsche, Seat (I think), Bugatti and a few others we dont get this side of the pond. Then again, I used to think that BMW meant British Motor Works. True, I was only 10 at the time, but some things never change ! :wink:

That said, I think the GM platform has LOTS of potential to be developed into a fine handling Sport oriented SUV. THe pictures I've seen are a bit chunky for my taste, I'd like to see a bit more traditionall Saab tapered/sharp front end treatment, with cleaner wheel openings and a bit lower stance.

[SPratel]

[quote="CosmicSaab"][quote="fabric"]

Originally Posted by E715

VW and Porsche are two totally seperate companies. VW does not own Porsche, Porsche is independent.

Not an expert here by anymeans, but Volkswagen AG is kind of like GM internationally, it owns alot. I believe that part of the VW Family is teh Peoples car, Audi, Porsche, Seat (I think), Bugatti and a few others we dont get this side of the pond. Then again, I used to think that BMW meant British Motor Works. True, I was only 10 at the time, but some things never change ! :wink:

That said, I think the GM platform has LOTS of potential to be developed into a fine handling Sport oriented SUV. THe pictures I've seen are a bit chunky for my taste, I'd like to see a bit more traditionall Saab tapered/sharp front end treatment, with cleaner wheel openings and a bit lower stance.

[fabric]

[quote="SPratel"][quote="CosmicSaab"]

Originally Posted by fabric

Not an expert here by anymeans, but Volkswagen AG is kind of like GM internationally, it owns alot. I believe that part of the VW Family is teh Peoples car, Audi, Porsche, Seat (I think), Bugatti and a few others we dont get this side of the pond. Then again, I used to think that BMW meant British Motor Works. True, I was only 10 at the time, but some things never change ! :wink:

Porsche is not part of VAG, although the others you named are, plus Skoda, Bentley and Lamorghini are also part of VAG.

[AnF_Saab]

Originally Posted by squishmann

seems as though the 9-7X will have a very very short life. if the cash comes in quickly then
saab could go back to the SRX platform, or they could wait for the GMT360 replacement.

I have to tend to agree with that, when the 9-7 gets to the showroom the platform is already 3 years old. The Lamda platform (2007) has already been annouced as the successer for number of GM SUV's/crossovers. Think it would have made better sense for Saab to barrow the basics of the SRX, they're both part of GM's premier auto group and the SRX is the only vechile currently using that platform. I find it hard to justify a $37,000 clone, specially one that's in a highly competitive market

Hopefully my brother will get one as a company car from the proving grounds so I can see how it really is