SaabCentral Forums banner

1 - 20 of 67 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
i know this is a little off topic, but i wonder why is it that our cars dont hold their value as well as an audi, or other car that is about equal to when they where new.

when i baught my car, i was looking at others, and one was a 97 jetta withhigher milage, at nowhere near the amount of goodies, so i opted for my 95se.

this has just been sort of on my mind, if anyones got any ideas...im curiouse.
thanks.
 
A

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Historically, many people have leased their Saabs, as opposed to how people bought their Mercedes-Benzes and kept them in the family for generations. Now it's shifted a little, but I guess since 3 year old Saabs always showed up on dealer lots after lease, dealers have had to price cars low to move them off the lot. Just a guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,009 Posts
I think you're right apzer. I found out recently that you can get 03 9-5 Aeros for less than $25k. Isn't that at least $15 k less than new? And these cars only had low 20k miles!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,874 Posts
Thankfully, they do depreciate a lot!

Most of it has to do with Brand recognition and low production volumes.

It's a good thing they are cheaper than most ... I know I wouldn't have one if they weren't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
true, but just thinking about it, do you guys/gals thi8nk maybe its because it has a hint of american GM in it. WE all know that american cars dont hold their value at all, and maybe the newer saabs since GM's involvement has caused it to loose its value like a cadilac or other luxury american cars.

just a tought.- cause jag's (wich is now ford i think) are going for pretty cheap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,874 Posts
I don't think it has anything to do with it (IMHO).

I don't like GM cars .. would never own one.
I just can not stand their interiors.

There is nothing about my NG900 that reminds me of the GM Corp ... nothing!
Sure, there are GM parts in my car ... but that does not make my car a GM ... Saab still designed and built it ...

I truely believe that it is what I said before ... and remember ... most people who drive Saabs ... don't even realize what they have!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,009 Posts
I don't think it has a whole lot to do with the GM thing either. Most people don't know about the Saab and GM connection, well non-Saab people that is. Do GM cars really depreciate $15k in first year? Last I checked a silverado 1500 4x4 ex-cab LS with the 5.3 v8 auto only looses like $2000 in first year and 15k miles. Its pretty unbeleibable. Tells you a lot about American's choices in vehicles, or at least Mainers!!! Or is that Mainahs? :cheesy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,596 Posts
I wonder if it has something to do with durability. Historically Volvo's and Mercedes and BMW's last forever. ng900's last a long time too relative to american and japanese cars, but 300K was very normal for a Volvo 740. I suspect most of us won't see that. I don't know where audi fits in - I imagine they're about as durable as our cars.

I think the other reason (fair or not) is that older SAABs are expensive. Especially since they're percieved as being odd and requiring dealer service.

It's a little weird. Most people have no idea how elderly my ng900 really is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
Just off the cuff, I think it's a combination of a few key factors:
First, they are (have been) pretty low-volume niche cars, and thus not on the common man's radar in the first place; second, they're perceived as slightly weirder than competitors since they haven't historically tried to either pander to broad tastes or create styling trends (a la BMW or Audi); third, because of the historic dearth of shops that can handle them and the relative expense of parts from Scandinavia, they're a little more expensive to fix (BMWs are too, but that's expected of a German 'prestige' car); and finally (with apologies to our N/A members) I think the N/A form is seen as a little underpowered, whereas the reliability of turbos on the other hand still worry those who aren't car people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,596 Posts
(with apologies to our N/A members) I think the N/A form is seen as a little underpowered
That's true, the turbo's beat us hands down. Until that pesky DI cassette craps out. :cheesy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,423 Posts
Tarpot has it right on. I remember being a yout' in the 80's and the guy with the black Saab was cool but he was poor to from getting it repaired. Saab's rep. never really has recovered from that.

Second also the n/a 4 cyl and 4 cyl in general. People don't expect 4 cyls in luxury cars. True, BMW didn't get rid of their 4 cyl (in the US) until the late 90's, the same time saab tossed the 2.3 n/a. But, even with the turbo, 4 doesn't cut it with your average premium buyer.

Speaking of the turbo, for the mainstream consumer, turbos are black magic. The only thing the average car buyer knows about a turbo is that when it goes out, it's expensive to replace. Your average luxury buyer these days was exposed to turbos in their 80's heyday, when every crap car had a turbo edition. Many of these cars engines just plain blew up (or the turbo did).

Also, there is the fact that Saab managed to make itself a car brand more popular in the snowy northeast than anywhere else. When you end up in a situation like that, you're in trouble. I only saw 1 9000 until I was ohhhh...26?

Then there's that whole quirky thing. Peddling a car with a rather liberal non-conformist sales pitch into a typially conservative conformist market segment as sort of the "none of the above" choice may get you a few customers, but it's not the way to achieve mega sales.

European cars depreciate rather quickly to begin with, BTW.

But, as SaabScott said, I'm glad! My car has been fairly reliable, very well optioned, and easy to wrench on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Well, I live in Switzerland and dealers are plentifull. Second hand prices, although not as low as in North America are also very low (that's probably why most of us people bought an NG900 in the first place).

I think that it's definitely an image problem. While Saab used to attract rather indivualistic people before the GM era (Classic 900 prices are far higher than NG900 prices). GM has slowly eroded the brand's individuality so that today people see the cars as upmarket GM products...

Also, it isn't as if Saab has produced a car really worth talking about in the press in the last 15 years...All most people have retained of Saabs is that they have lots of torque steer and have OKish handling. Definitely not a match for BMW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,584 Posts
I would't own this car if it weren't for the depreciated resale value. But it seems outside of Saab owners, that fact isn't really known. I was explaining that to a kid who was riding in my car when we had to take off and do a traffic project. He couldn't believe that his car was probably worth more. And another person a week later. Looking at the car like it was it was some billion dollar space ship or something. The resale depreciation was something that was going on previous to GM really getting a grip on Saab's ownership. I think it also has something to do with perceived service costs along with parts costs, which in my opinion really isn't that bad on the wallet when maintaining the the vehicle.
JMarkert said:
Quote:
(with apologies to our N/A members) I think the N/A form is seen as a little underpowered


That's true, the turbo's beat us hands down. Until that pesky DI cassette craps out. :cheesy:
Whats this DI? Dizzy Ignition? No problem, new dizzy cap and rotor will only cost them $20, problem solved. I went from an '86 C900 8 valve with a whopping 110 hp to the 150 hp in the NG900S. Quite a difference right there, enough to keep me appeased. Though its little consolation to us n/a owners, its interesting to me to look at hp/cyl. The n/a ng900 2.3L come out at 37.5 hp/cyl, compare that to say a '97 Mustang coupe or GT model, which, while producing 215 hp with a 4.6L V8, is really only producing 26.875 hp/cyl (higher end 305 hp Mustang Cobra is at 38.125 hp/cyl. Saab definitely got the engineering right for hp/cyl. It wasn't until last year did I start seeing any mainstream 4 cyl. engines hit the 140-150 hp range, 8-12 years after Saab did. Oh great, I've gone off on a tangent :roll: .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
To most people outside this section of the forum, GM's handhold of Saab started right here, when Saab made the GM900... I doubt many people other than Saab owners think differently. To many people an NG900 isn't a real Saab.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
well, speaking from the point of view of a none saab owner, thinking back before i got mine, all i knew about saab is that it was sold together with saturns. I knew it had to have GM involvement but since when or to what extent i didnt know.


and about people fearing turbos, i dont think thats true anymore, audi tt, a4, jetta/golf. volvos all have turbo editions.....and all 4 bangers.

so back to a theory, i guess the one that makes most sense is that there are so few of them out there! but usualy supply demand states that if there is less, then demand is high therefore price would be as well....so hmmm?!?!?!?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,863 Posts
When i wanted to buy a saab i had soo many people give me reasons not to. First i was told that they are too expensive to keep up. I was told that it required regular mainenance like "draining turbo oil lines" that was very expensive. I was told that they break down too often and I always heard the "sob story" line. I was told that the turbo could blow up and cost me thousands of dollars. I was told that there was too much turbo lag, and that you had to literally fight the torque steer. I was told, by my mechanic, to never buy a saab because their frames were made in such a fashion that they trapped water inside them and hes seen them rust completely through after 10 years and there was nothing you could do about it.

Those are just some things i remember. They really started to scare me honestly.. I didnt know what I was getting into. Thankfully when I found this forum and read up about saabs a bit it disproved about everything I mentioned.

So, imho the reasons above is why i think that saabs have poor resale value.. unfortunately many people do not have their facts straight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,348 Posts
Apzer09 - My dealer told me last time I was there 90% of his sales the last six months were leases.

Saabs do not have poor resale value.
Poorer then a Civic, sure, but no worse than a Volvo or a BMW or Merc (as someone stated).
How can you compare resale value between a $12K car and a $25K car?

I think the #'s are skewed here because people like us that hang out on forums like this tend to pay less than your average consumer.
My car was, what...$25K new? Someone prolly paid $23K. I could sell it tomorrow for $5,500-$7,000 (depending on if it was you or Joe Schmoe off the street). How does that suck on a 1998?


99 for $14K
That was $36 new. Figure $34 out the door. Figure big 1st year depreciation = $25K. 4 yrs later it's $14? Look up a 1999 Sebring and see how well it's resale has held up?

Agreed that a surprising number of people have no clue GM owns Saab.

Realdriver: WAAYYYY off-base. "many people an NG900 isn't a real Saab" is sadly mistaken. At least in my part of the world. Seems to me only the supposed "purists" are the ones that feel that way. ;) I have never once had anyone that didn't hang out on this forum call my car anything BUT a Saab.


Slaab4life said:
It wasn't until last year did I start seeing any mainstream 4 cyl. engines hit the 140-150 hp range, 8-12 years after Saab did.
I couldn't agree more. Don't get ME started. A 2005 Turbo Mini has LESS HP than a 95 900SE. And the NA Mini?!?! A pathetic 118HP or something.
Took until 2004 for a serious American turbo car (SRT-4).
Also Agree Bkrell Re; Americans perceptions of Turbo's. LMAO "all they know is they break". Recent study shows most Americans equate cylinders with HP.

Where do you think the slogan "most people who test drive a Saab, usually buy one". Due in no small part to the 150HP 4 cyl engine. :cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Poor resale is fine by me... I fell into 1997 900SE Turbo by pure accident a month ago. I had never even considered a SAAB before that. BUT for $5500 bucks for a car with full leather and only 71+++ on the clock that was in 8 out 10 condition how could I pass it up. Think of it this way - the poor resale of these cars is what will bring in new buyers to the marque - I am VERY impressed with this car and ya' know what - I would buy another one.
 
1 - 20 of 67 Posts
Top