SaabCentral Forums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Can somebody please explain to me why Saab's depreciate much faster then other cars of equal build quality such as BMW's and Audi's.

I know that this is good news for people wanting to pick one up third hand but is is a nightmare for new or second hand buyers.

If Saab produced cars in similar quantities to Ford's Mondeo then i would understand (its a simple demand and supply issue) but they don't. The Saab production rate is similar to the manufacturers mentioned above.

When you consider the build quality, performance and overall ease of ownership that Saab's have you would expect them to hold their value well.

Can somebody please explain it to me, what am i missing?:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,030 Posts
People perceive Saabs to be expensive to run, they are expensive to repair (unless you know a man), insurance firms base their groupings on these factors making Saabs expensive to insure, all this has a knock on effect on residuals. I've always been of the school of thought, let somebody else take the hit of depreciation for the first 3 years, buy your Saab and run it into the ground it will have little or no value after another 5 years. The only time i'd own a new Saab would be if it was a company vehicle or lease.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
But surley that is the argument for other leading German brands but they still keep a reasonable amount of value at year 3.

You can still get badly burnt when buying at year 4. I have a friend that purchased a 9-5 estate that was 3 years old and it seems that he got a good deal. 18 months and 40K miles later he sold it and lost 50% of his original payout.

Most cars depreciate and i agree that people do assume that quality cars are expensive to fix but some depreciate a lot faster than others.

Don't get me wrong, i love my Saab to death, more than any other car i have owned. but when it comes to Part exchange time you get a raw deal if you buy swedish.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,030 Posts
Look in any yellow pages and see how many independant specialists there are for BMW, Audi/VW, Mercedes, then see how many Saab indy's you can find. The apparent lack of non main dealer/cheaper repairer options puts prospective buyers off a car, they will look for a vehicle that can be put into a nearby back street garage that can be serviced for £80, not one that needs plugging into specialist equipment to diagnose the problem. All this affects the residuals because people just don't want to be hassled with going the extra mile. I had a clutch put in my old 9000 by a "clutch specialist", i'd used them before with 2 other cars and they turned round a car in about 6 hours, 3 days the Saab was in!! When i picked it up he said "i'll never do another Saab 9000 again", the other mechanics all talk amongst themselves about how it took 3 days to do a Saab clutch and the car gets a bad rep because they were'nt familiar with the necessary procedure. Again, residuals are hit.
Anyone buying a car will get a Parkers/Glass guide to prices, if they are sensible they will not only look at buying prices, but prices of models 3 years older to see what they may get if they choose to sell on at a later date. The reason you see so many Saabs with stellar mileages on them is because they are capable of it, but also because as Saab owners we know the resale value is gonna be poor so we run them into the ground whilst we save for our next 3 year old Saab.:cheesy:​
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
That explains it, thanks

I guess i will just have to wait about 4 years until the new model 9-5 has been on the market and been hit by depreciation.

Cheers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
As someone who owns one

The simple and obvious answer is that values reflect the independent decisions of tens of thousands of owners and buyers. If you lease a Saab for three years, it's a great experience. If you own one after year four, it's a disaster.

I have owned several cars up to the 200K mile mark over the years, most a lot less. Some were good, reliable vehicles; others I got rid of at a loss because I understood that the maintenance would eventually far exceed the value of the vehicle. I get the not-so-subtle economics of car ownership.

My Saab '99 9-5 has 85K miles. I am now spending somewhere in the neighborhood of $400 per month average on maintenance items. For example, I am about to put on my fourth DI cassette. If you are interested, I can provide a list of the things I have replaced at my own expense since the car went out of warranty. It's impressive.

People vote with their feet. Saab's vote tally after reaching three years of age is pretty clear.

John Martin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
I'd actually like to see that list, just so I know what I'm in for. I expect the DI and the CPS, but what else is going to go horribly wrong? :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
312 Posts
jmartin said:
My Saab '99 9-5 has 85K miles. I am now spending somewhere in the neighborhood of $400 per month average on maintenance items. For example, I am about to put on my fourth DI cassette.
On the other hand, I bought my 9-5 @ 63k and am now on 85k. Have spent money on the "normal" services and the interim 6k oil changes.

The only thing I'm paying out for every month is fuel!!

I shouldn't have posted this, now everything's going to go horribly wrong ;oops:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
855 Posts
I think it's a supply and demand issue. There isn't much demand for them, so they depreciate BAD.

We picked up a 2001 9-5 in 2004 for $18,500 -- or a little less than half of the original purchase price. The DI Cassette went out, replaced under warranty. Other than that it's been regular maintence and some bulbs, nothing major but we're just rounding 45k so we'll see if things continue to be reliable or if things go downhill.

Maintence hasn't been bad. We've paid about $800 out but have also had a lot of things done. 35k and 40k services including serpantene belt, and brakes and tires.

Insurrance isn't bad. Because of all the safety features and low theft rate, this car is within $10 every 6 months of what it cost to insure our previous car, a 10 year old minivan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
739 Posts
I bought my vert in March 02 for just under 24k and it is still worth around 16k so i do not think that is bad. It costs me £325 per year to insure and has cost me nothing other than tyres and mods..not even any warrenty work. If you look at all big cars such as the A6 and A8 or the 5 and 7 series these have taken a big hit in deperciation. I think it is alot to do with customer awareness and this is due largely to the motoring press. Saab simply do not get the coverage other cars get, If you lok on the Top gear website they have tested the new 9-3 V6 and they liked it alot but again this was a loan test so whatdoes the customer have to compare it to? When the "stig" took the 9-5 Aero on the track it completed the lap in 137.9 if you look down a little further the civic type R was 136.5 and the Clio V6 was 136.2. Now if you look at this on a more global view the type R and the Clio V6 are built for track racing the Aero is'nt but it was a close run thing.If JC bleeted on about this i am sure the Saab dealers would have been packed out on monday morning...But he didn't:(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
381 Posts
I will never buy a new SAAB again. :cheesy: Used they are a BARGAIN. Especially lease turn-ins/certified, which earn you a whopping extra 3 years/up to 100,000 warranty - like the new car warranty in all ways except for the radio. For whatever reason, the radio is not covered. :nono;
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,198 Posts
1. They are severly over-priced when new causing an even bigger correction of value on the used car market

2. Saabs are currently suffering from a severe lack of desirability...this is clearly reflected in the sagging new car sales of all Saab models. Reliability and cost of ownership are reasons for this. Outdated philosophy and quirky engineering are other reasons for this. 4cyl turbo engines have their positives but they also have their negatives. The vast majority of American entry-luxury car owners would never even consider a 4cyl regardless of the power ratings. If you have ever driven a 9-5 automatic with the a/c running, I'm sure you can understand why. In my last Aero even with some performance mods, turning left through traffic with the a/c on was down right frightening because the car would just bog and feel like it was trying to pull itself out of quicksand while the turbo spooled up. Sure once it spooled it was a rocket but off the line with that a/c on was really quite depressing. Nothing a stick shift couldn't solve though. :cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
reliability is not as it was but this seems to be down to increased electrical complexity my 97 900 was a basic model and trundled on to 300.000 miles before the engine blew prob my fault for all those 25.000 mile oil changes! the wifes 93 is fine at 260.000 miles but sids shot worth nothing but i payed £8.000four years ago when it hd only 54.000 on clock definitly worth the money (still on the 25.000 oil changes naughty!) my 2000 aero is respected a little more ie proper oil changes cost 10.000 from dealer 2 years ago worth nearly 7.000 now not bad only downer gearbox failure at 98.000 cost £900 inc new clutch not to bad overall is it?
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top