Saab, the brand- will it ever return?

Status
Not open for further replies.
No-simply no room or reason anymore....

Adding to the fact the Chinese brands and are their way- will crowd the market even more....
 
Originally Posted By: TexasVaquero
I don't think so. They were pretty useless.


"Useless" depends.

Pretty useless on making money, that is true. On making great cars, however...
 
Well, I think they were far from useless. SAAB kind of killed themselves, GM would give them a platform and say "build a car on this chassis" and the SAAB guys would nod their heads grimly, then ignore every word, building the car they wanted to build instead, with zero parts interchangeable from the General's parts bin. GM simply lost patience with them.

Probably the safest cars ever built, outstanding rollover protection ... the roof never collapsed in an accident; you had what amounted to a roll bar in the monocoque construction they used ... , easily the most comfortable and the safest seats found on anything outside of Volvo (1), but that's not enough to make a car company in the 21st century.

What are the chances that a car company with the highest per-unit cost in the industry will rise from the ashes? Not very high, I'm afraid.

(1) US FMVSS for seats was developed in 1968 and has not changed since, with the exception of adding truck seats to the spec in 1974. Lots of cars you can buy off the lot today barely make the spec but SAAB seats always came out strongest and was No1 at exceeding the spec every year when tested for compliance.
 
I would highly doubt it for a couple of reasons first you need to rebuild the brand and the dealer network and second much of the technology used in the later model Saabs was developed by GM and GM refused to license it to possible buyers. It was a great niche brand the GM destroyed.

FYI, I had 3 saabs over the years.
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad
Well, I think they were far from useless. SAAB kind of killed themselves, GM would give them a platform and say "build a car on this chassis" and the SAAB guys would nod their heads grimly, then ignore every word, building the car they wanted to build instead, with zero parts interchangeable from the General's parts bin. GM simply lost patience with them.

Probably the safest cars ever built, outstanding rollover protection ... the roof never collapsed in an accident; you had what amounted to a roll bar in the monocoque construction they used ... , easily the most comfortable and the safest seats found on anything outside of Volvo (1), but that's not enough to make a car company in the 21st century.

What are the chances that a car company with the highest per-unit cost in the industry will rise from the ashes? Not very high, I'm afraid.

(1) US FMVSS for seats was developed in 1968 and has not changed since, with the exception of adding truck seats to the spec in 1974. Lots of cars you can buy off the lot today barely make the spec but SAAB seats always came out strongest and was No1 at exceeding the spec every year when tested for compliance.


I was very pleased with my Saab, even if it shared a gm platform. Excellently designed and built car, great combo of efficiency and performance. I miss that car a lot.

Anything brought back would likely not be the same.
 
Saab was never associated with SUVs except for mediocre rebadge attempts.

The mass market has little interest in sedans.....
 
The old 900 was a great automobile. It was fast, safe and durable. I saw many with hundreds of k"s on them. To me ist was the first car with turbos that would last a long time. When they stopped making them, their decline started. They were done when GM bought them. They weren't dependable cars after that.
 
I categorically dislike turbocharged engines, cars that send any power to the front axle, and cars that aren't near the top of the class in terms of handling and fun factor -- with VERY few exceptions. One of those exceptions was the '06 Saab 9-3 Aero I test drove when it was new. Dynamically, at 7/10ths or above, it barely held a candle to the Germans. And of course, it wasn't as nice inside or out. But when it came to just getting from A to B, it was more of a joy somehow. In terms of ergonomics, comfort, and safety, it was easily equal-or-better. Great example of having it where it counts, getting the job done without being too flashy about it, focusing on details that matter regardless of their visibility.

I can see why the brand died. Too expensive to make, not nice enough in a photo or capable enough on paper to run with the Germans, too pricey to compete with mainstream cars. But dang if I don't miss it. Its demise is an example of how little sense people's preferences make sometimes.
 
MY GF had a SAAB 96 4 on the tree, three cylinder 2 stroke triple carb noise machine. That was a unique car.

Her father had a "William of Orange" SAAB 900 3 door I recall . Always in the shop BC of auto trans issues. roomy in the back when we went on family jaunts. Nice utility from the hatch.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: pharden
It was a great niche brand the GM destroyed.


I disagree. Saab destroyed themselves and came begging to GM for money. GM just kept them on life support

New York Times articles from the day GM purchased half of Saab.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/16/business/gm-to-buy-half-of-saab-car-unit.html

"Saab's sagging car business lost $188 million in the first eight months of this year."

"Saab has been looking for a partner for several months as its sales and profits have dwindled"

"Instead Saab approached G.M."
 
Last edited:
I really liked the last gen Saab 9-5 and 9-4x. I've seen a couple on the road, definitely unicorns!
 
Originally Posted By: E365
Originally Posted By: pharden
It was a great niche brand the GM destroyed.


I disagree. Saab destroyed themselves and came begging to GM for money. GM just kept them on life support

New York Times articles from the day GM purchased half of Saab.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/16/business/gm-to-buy-half-of-saab-car-unit.html

"Saab's sagging car business lost $188 million in the first eight months of this year."

"Saab has been looking for a partner for several months as its sales and profits have dwindled"

"Instead Saab approached G.M."





You are correct that GM didn't ruined SAAB company, but they did ruined cars.
As a company SAAB never really was healthy, all their engines were from other manufacturers, either Triumph, Ford , GM or FIAT (diesels).
 
I agree, GM did not destroy SAAB, they destroyed themselves. If anything GM kept the brand going for an additional 20 years when it should have died in 1990.
 
Dead and buried!

I will say the classic 900 was a cool car...felt like a light airplane with the narrow tall interior and flat floor (no raised rocker panels to catch my foot on. Cool, quirky engineering that I found endearing.

The GM-related ones were just an Opel/Vauxhall with the ignition switch on the floor.
 
Saab just never found a market outside of their niche - educated folk who thought Audi/BMW/Mercedes were too "snobby" and Volvos being drab boxes. They were quirky, but people who drove them loved them. Subaru was in that same grain - both were based in aviation, both were quirky but found their niches. Just that one was able to expand beyond that.

A college friend will drive nothing but Saabs - he now has a GM-based 900 just before it morphed into the 9-3. I thought some of the features like the nightpanel option were pretty cool.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top