SaabCentral Forums banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So now the list of cars with Turbo Ecotecs that are BETTER than the 2.0T are:

Solstice GXP
Sky Red Line
Chevy HHR SS
Chevy COBALT SS?!?!?!

This is the engine that should be in the '08 9-3. 260 hp from a 2.0L Ecotec, same block as the 2.0T.

It's kind of a joke that the '08 9-3 has a carryover engine in the 2.0T in the first place.

And why doesn't the Aero make more power? If GM can get 260hp out of a 2.0, why can't they get at least 300 from the 2.8? 350hp is pretty reasonable from an engine that size, if you've got AWD to get it to the ground (which the '08 has!).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
Krieg said:
Not anymore!

How sweet is that? A Cobalt with 260 hp. Hope it has a Quaffe!
Quaife?

It does! The Ion Redline/Cobalt SS when using the SC motor had an available competition package from the factory with a LSD in it. This competition package was standard on the Cobalt SS and an option the 2005 & 2006 Ion Redline.

The SC Cobalt SS outruns any car in its price range and will run laps at VIR faster than a Mustang GT.

When the new 9-3 bows in 2010 as a 2011 MY I'd assume it will come with this engine either standard or optional.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Why wait til 2010? '08 was the refreshening. Why give the 2.0T the same engine as '07? Makes no sense.

Also, Saab has shown an SC hybrid concept car that has the 260hp engine along with GM's new 2 mode hybrid transmission. It was a SWEET ride.

So we know that Saab has done the engineering to get the 260hp engine in the bay, at least for the SC. So where is it in production?

Not to mention that Saab, being a relatively green company, should TOTALLY have the hybrid transmission as well as the mild hybrid alternator that comes in the Aura and Malibu hybrids.

And while I'm on a rant, when is the 9-3 going to get the corporate GM 6 speed automatic? Again, that should have been part of the package for '08.

If I were in charge of Saab, these are the changes that I would have baked in for '08. I'd have the 260hp engine in the base model. I'd ditch the 2.8 V6 in the Aero and instead make the Aero a hybrid.

And, of course, every Saab would be E85 compatible. That's a no-brainer. I can't understand why they have not made that change yet.

Saab could easily be rebranded as GM's green performance division. That's not an oxymoron. It gives Saab room to grow away from its Sweedishness, which is under pressure from the weak dollar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Does Sweedishness require the car to be built in Sweeden? Would you buy a Saab if it were built on the Saturn line in Delaware (where the 260hp engine is made).

It's going to be hard for the European carmakers to compete in the US with the dollar where it is. Mercedes and BMW are hedged in that they have US assembly facilities.

How long before GM starts to assemble 9-3s in the same plant as the Aura and Malibu?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
562 Posts
Krieg said:
Does Sweedishness require the car to be built in Sweeden?
Errr,... yes.
At least to the eyes of many Saab loyalists.
Being another company acquired by GM is one thing, selling GM-rebadged cars lacking completely the Saab origin is another.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
What about the 9-7? It sells better than the Swedish made 9-5.

I don't think that Swedish design is in jeapordy. The 9-3 is never going to be a rebranded Malibu.

But I'll bet real money that, in the very near future, maybe a year or two out, US marketed Saab 9-3s will be built in the US, if the Euro stays so high.

The 9-7 is the future of Saab in America, most likely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
562 Posts
Krieg said:
What about the 9-7? It sells better than the Swedish made 9-5.
Well, one of the reasons could be that the 9-5 is overaged.

Krieg said:
But I'll bet real money that, in the very near future, maybe a year or two out, US marketed Saab 9-3s will be built in the US, if the Euro stays so high.
True though that may be, don't forget the norm -and correct me if I'm wrong- according to which many Americans would opt for European over American cars. That said, maybe GM will have to take that seriously into account when it comes to their best selling model.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Do American consumers know that their ML350 is made in Alabama, or their Z4 in South Carolina, or their TL in Ohio?

Do they care?

I have no idea. But I speculate that, no, they don't know, and even if they did, they don't care.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
3rd stone from the sun said:
True though that may be, don't forget the norm -and correct me if I'm wrong- according to which many Americans would opt for European over American cars. That said, maybe GM will have to take that seriously into account when it comes to their best selling model.

If there is an american made car that handles like my 9-3, as stylish as, gets as good of fuel econ, and sporty as the 9-3, I would buy one, but hell the price tag would be $75k +
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
If you look at your vehicle sticker, you see that the vast majority of parts content in the 9-3 is from Germany. GM is getting a lot of that content from the car that the 9-3 is based on, the Opel.

Now that that Opel is more or less being built in the US as the Aura, most of those parts are available stateside.

The Euro being what it is, there's a 40% discount just from sourcing in the US rather than Europe.

Same parts. Same car. But building it in the US saves 40%. How can GM not go in this direction?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Keep in mind that I'm only talking about cars marketed in the US. I wouldn't expect GM to start exporting cars from the US to Europe. And if the Swedes stop engineering Saabs, that would be a problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
297 Posts
Maybe I'm being a little naive but I feel that GM is almost purposefully making Saab less, and less appealing to customers with the dinosaur 9-5, trailblazeresque 9-7x, and putting less and less money into their money maker, the 9-3.

I completely understand the 9-3's new "shell" and XWD took some work, but it's not a new car, it's nothing more than a massaged '03 -'07, with a substanially higher sticker price if you get one with the new XWD package.

I mean with the Ecotec now spitting out 260hp in GM's lower end lines! (HHR SS, Cobalt SS, Saturn Sky Redline, Pontiac Solstice GXP) what are they thinking?!? I feel if any car deserves to strut the most hp out of the Ecotec it should be ours. Saab was the first to turbocharge it, is one of GM's few "premium" brands, and now we have 50hp less than a Chevy HHR. And why isn't the 2.8L being pumped up to at least 350hp to keep up with the real competition (Acura TL, Audi A4, C-Class...)? C'mon it's not even sporting 100hp/L? In today's game, a turbocharged, DOHC, V-6, in a premium car should have at least 350hp, not 260!!

Now i'm not sitting here waiting for Saab to put out some ridiculously fast 9-3, the viggen's day is long gone, but Honda Accords come with 260hp today!

I personally feel if Saab/GM don't step their game up big time, then everyone's going to keep walking all over them. And at the rate they're going no one, I mean no one other than a "die hard" Saab enthusiast would even consider one, with their low hp engines, poor interior quality, and sticker prices that keep going up.

What am I missing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,873 Posts
Kreig,

Boy are you on a roll...lay off the coffee:p

Anyway, yes Saab does have to stay distictive. Although those engines share the same block they aren't the same at all from a driving perspective--go drove a Cobalt:roll:

Re. the tranny I would want to continue with the Aisin tranny because I bought a Saab and not Chevy. Just as Volvo puts mostly the same Aisin trannys in their cars. Why don't they use the GM/Ford corporate 6 speed? Because they don't want the S60 or S80 to be the same a Taurus (although they share platforms I think)

I definitely wouldn't buy a Saab if it was US made--it's no longer a Saab.
I'm very passionate about country of origin for many vehicles. A Saab made in Ohio is not a Saab like a VW Jetta made in Mexico is not a VW.
Nor is a MB or BMW made in the states a real MB or BMW.
If I buy a European car I want it made, and most parts sourced, from Europe.
Japanese cars a bit different so I'm not as strict on that front.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,089 Posts
KrOlDoG8 said:
I personally feel if Saab/GM don't step their game up big time, then everyone's going to keep walking all over them. And at the rate they're going no one, I mean no one other than a "die hard" Saab enthusiast would even consider one, with their low hp engines, poor interior quality, and sticker prices that keep going up.

What am I missing?
What you are missing is that a 350BHP 9-3 would have a very, very limited market in Europe. Whilst it may increase sales in the US, the 9-3 still holds a small market share in the US (unlike here in the UK).

The V6 was produced to increase saleability in high cubic capacity markets like the US and Australia. May be Saab/GM has decided that there is a limited US market for a high power turbocharged four-pot as the V6 takes the majority of sales.

May be Saab has decided that development of it's new TTiD engines (diesel engines having over 50% market share in Europe) and Bio-Fuel engines is more important in it's "home" market before spending what limited development cash GM puts into Saab on some 350BHP Viggen replacement that would have a limited market?

I'm not saying it shouldn't produce such a car, I'm just suggesting that it's priorities may be elsewhere when European manufacturers are under increasing pressure to produce more efficient and environmentally friendly engines rather than increased power at any cost...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
297 Posts
JBob said:
What you are missing is that a 350BHP 9-3 would have a very, very limited market in Europe. Whilst it may increase sales in the US, the 9-3 still holds a small market share in the US (unlike here in the UK).

The V6 was produced to increase saleability in high cubic capacity markets like the US and Australia. May be Saab/GM has decided that there is a limited US market for a high power turbocharged four-pot as the V6 takes the majority of sales.

May be Saab has decided that development of it's new TTiD engines (diesel engines having over 50% market share in Europe) and Bio-Fuel engines is more important in it's "home" market before spending what limited development cash GM puts into Saab on some 350BHP Viggen replacement that would have a limited market?

I'm not saying it shouldn't produce such a car, I'm just suggesting that it's priorities may be elsewhere when European manufacturers are under increasing pressure to produce more efficient and environmentally friendly engines rather than increased power at any cost...
Good Point. Maybe I should have specified the US as my target. My bad.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top