Poor Saab. GM has taken hold and is strangling the life out of the brand in a lame attempt to make it more popular. In doing so, they’ve estranged the long time fans of the brand and getting rid of its uniqueness.
At first it seemed like a good deal. Saab hadn’t had a new version of it’s 900 model in 15 years, and was drowning in red ink. GM came to the rescue with the new for 1994 900 that kept many of it’s unique traits in a nice looking package. But the GM fingers were still in the mix. The first model out was the 4 (technically 5) door hatch, with the coupe and convertible coming a year later. The lineup featured the familiar turbo and non-turbo 4 cylinders, but GM added a V6 to the lineup. The V6 wasn’t well received due to it’s low output (lower than the turbo 4) and sketchy reliability and was finally dropped in 1998, just before the 900 morphed into the 9-3. The cars remained essentially the same as the 9-3 with only a revised look, mechanical improvements and more power. The Viggen was introduced as a sports car model with wads of horsepower (225hp), but also wads of torque steer.
Around the same time the 9-3 was introduced, the 9-5 was introduced to replace the 9000. This car had a large deal of GM intervention, and was looked at with wary eyes from Saab fans. After all - it was based on a GM chassis and no longer had a hatch. But at least it was attractive and looked very much a Saab. In addition to a turbo 4, a turbo 6 was available, and was relatively well received this time around.
After this comes the redesigned 9-3. And while it’s attractive and very Saab-like, gone are the coupe, and the hatch. Only a sedan carries on the Saab lineage, which was later joined by a convertible (and a wagon that’s on it’s way).
Now things get scarey. GM wants to fill out the lineup as cheapy as possible. Mainly, the reason for all this is those freaking SUVs. Everyone seems to need one nowadays, or at least some model with four wheel drive.
First of all though, the GM beancounters think that they need a smaller car under the 9-3 to attract younger buyers. Makes sense. I would love to own a smaller, cheaper Saab. But shucks - GM has no money! What to do… Badge engineering! It’s "worked" in the past for GM. And it "works" now - just look at the Trailblazer/Envoy/Bravada/Rainier, and the Terazza/SV6/Uplander/Relay. But who to rebadge? GM doesn’t have many good small cars. I don’t think they can rebadge a Cavalier and get away with it (again - remember the Cimarron?).
But wait - they own 50% of Subaru. And Subarus all have 4WD! And they have a good, reliable turbo 4! And a hatch (well - a wagon)! Bonus! The end product - the 9-2X. I have to say that it actually is a nice looking car, if you get past the fact that from the A pillar back it looks very similar to the Impreza on which it’s based. This is what the Impreza should have always looked like… (Wait a minute - look at the new face lifted Impreza. Very 9-2X like.) The sad thing though is that although it has Saab traits, it’s only because Subaru is Saab-like in that it makes quirky turbo cars. And although the engine is a turbo 4, it’s not a Saab engine but the Subaru boxer 4. In the end, the 9-2X was well received by the automotive press - as the Impreza was and is - but hasn’t sold well. Rumor is that the poor Saabaru (as the press has dubbed it) will be axed. If it makes it through alive, it will possibly be redesigned with the Impreza is in 2009. Oh - and this Saab is built in Japan. Very Swedish.
OK, so that was strike 1. But according to GM Saab still needs a fuller lineup. What next? An SUV of course! Because SUVs are so deep routed in Saab history (now THAT'S sarcasm). But what to badge engineer. Well crap - GM only has one SUV is it’s vast empire that fits into the size needed for an upscale SUV (the Tahoe/Suburban is a tad too large). So the Trailblazer it is, and out comes the 9-7X. The 9-7X irks me. It’s soooooo un-Saab. Besides that, the Trailblazer as an upmarket European SUV seems so wrong, but that’s what they’re attempting. It even looks bad. Like the Cimarron. You know what they say - you can shine up a piece of crap, but it’s still a piece of crap. And worse yet, it uses the same hardware. And a very un-Saab selection of V6 and V8 truck engines. That being said, they did a good job of banning the typically hideous GM truck dash for an elegant Saab design. Oh - and this Saab is built in Ohio. As Swedish as apple pie and baseball.
The last fug to hit Saab is the 9-5 redesign. I had heard of rumors of the new 9-5, and I had like the original a lot so I was looking forward to what the new clean sheet design would look like. However, was unveiled was a strange looking sedan on recycled paper.
To explain the origins of this hideous beast, we must look to previous Saab concept cars. In particular the 9X and the 9-3X from 2003. This is Saab/GM’s attempt at bring the concept to production, via an ill-fated attempt at facelifting it's aging figurehead sedan. Not explained is why the headlights evolved to have strange rounded edges that ruin the look of the concept's. Or why they stole the fog light design from the Audi A3. Or why they decided to cheap out and keep part of the taillights (and the rear fenders) from the old design, but change the pieces of taillight on the trunk lids to make a strange and hideous design with an Audi-like kickup. That being said - there’s inexplicably a lot of Audi in this design. And there are no ties to Audi at Saab, so that’s some type of auto design plagiarism.
At first it seemed like a good deal. Saab hadn’t had a new version of it’s 900 model in 15 years, and was drowning in red ink. GM came to the rescue with the new for 1994 900 that kept many of it’s unique traits in a nice looking package. But the GM fingers were still in the mix. The first model out was the 4 (technically 5) door hatch, with the coupe and convertible coming a year later. The lineup featured the familiar turbo and non-turbo 4 cylinders, but GM added a V6 to the lineup. The V6 wasn’t well received due to it’s low output (lower than the turbo 4) and sketchy reliability and was finally dropped in 1998, just before the 900 morphed into the 9-3. The cars remained essentially the same as the 9-3 with only a revised look, mechanical improvements and more power. The Viggen was introduced as a sports car model with wads of horsepower (225hp), but also wads of torque steer.
Around the same time the 9-3 was introduced, the 9-5 was introduced to replace the 9000. This car had a large deal of GM intervention, and was looked at with wary eyes from Saab fans. After all - it was based on a GM chassis and no longer had a hatch. But at least it was attractive and looked very much a Saab. In addition to a turbo 4, a turbo 6 was available, and was relatively well received this time around.
After this comes the redesigned 9-3. And while it’s attractive and very Saab-like, gone are the coupe, and the hatch. Only a sedan carries on the Saab lineage, which was later joined by a convertible (and a wagon that’s on it’s way).
Now things get scarey. GM wants to fill out the lineup as cheapy as possible. Mainly, the reason for all this is those freaking SUVs. Everyone seems to need one nowadays, or at least some model with four wheel drive.
First of all though, the GM beancounters think that they need a smaller car under the 9-3 to attract younger buyers. Makes sense. I would love to own a smaller, cheaper Saab. But shucks - GM has no money! What to do… Badge engineering! It’s "worked" in the past for GM. And it "works" now - just look at the Trailblazer/Envoy/Bravada/Rainier, and the Terazza/SV6/Uplander/Relay. But who to rebadge? GM doesn’t have many good small cars. I don’t think they can rebadge a Cavalier and get away with it (again - remember the Cimarron?).
But wait - they own 50% of Subaru. And Subarus all have 4WD! And they have a good, reliable turbo 4! And a hatch (well - a wagon)! Bonus! The end product - the 9-2X. I have to say that it actually is a nice looking car, if you get past the fact that from the A pillar back it looks very similar to the Impreza on which it’s based. This is what the Impreza should have always looked like… (Wait a minute - look at the new face lifted Impreza. Very 9-2X like.) The sad thing though is that although it has Saab traits, it’s only because Subaru is Saab-like in that it makes quirky turbo cars. And although the engine is a turbo 4, it’s not a Saab engine but the Subaru boxer 4. In the end, the 9-2X was well received by the automotive press - as the Impreza was and is - but hasn’t sold well. Rumor is that the poor Saabaru (as the press has dubbed it) will be axed. If it makes it through alive, it will possibly be redesigned with the Impreza is in 2009. Oh - and this Saab is built in Japan. Very Swedish.
OK, so that was strike 1. But according to GM Saab still needs a fuller lineup. What next? An SUV of course! Because SUVs are so deep routed in Saab history (now THAT'S sarcasm). But what to badge engineer. Well crap - GM only has one SUV is it’s vast empire that fits into the size needed for an upscale SUV (the Tahoe/Suburban is a tad too large). So the Trailblazer it is, and out comes the 9-7X. The 9-7X irks me. It’s soooooo un-Saab. Besides that, the Trailblazer as an upmarket European SUV seems so wrong, but that’s what they’re attempting. It even looks bad. Like the Cimarron. You know what they say - you can shine up a piece of crap, but it’s still a piece of crap. And worse yet, it uses the same hardware. And a very un-Saab selection of V6 and V8 truck engines. That being said, they did a good job of banning the typically hideous GM truck dash for an elegant Saab design. Oh - and this Saab is built in Ohio. As Swedish as apple pie and baseball.
The last fug to hit Saab is the 9-5 redesign. I had heard of rumors of the new 9-5, and I had like the original a lot so I was looking forward to what the new clean sheet design would look like. However, was unveiled was a strange looking sedan on recycled paper.
To explain the origins of this hideous beast, we must look to previous Saab concept cars. In particular the 9X and the 9-3X from 2003. This is Saab/GM’s attempt at bring the concept to production, via an ill-fated attempt at facelifting it's aging figurehead sedan. Not explained is why the headlights evolved to have strange rounded edges that ruin the look of the concept's. Or why they stole the fog light design from the Audi A3. Or why they decided to cheap out and keep part of the taillights (and the rear fenders) from the old design, but change the pieces of taillight on the trunk lids to make a strange and hideous design with an Audi-like kickup. That being said - there’s inexplicably a lot of Audi in this design. And there are no ties to Audi at Saab, so that’s some type of auto design plagiarism.
No comments:
Post a Comment