In 1989, when GM took over, Saab was losing around $4,000 for every car they built. Swedish analysts (sure, børk børk børk) agree that Saab's car building arm has never been anything but a huge loss machine.
In the fifties and sixties, the airplane manufacture was used to underwrite car production. Later, Scania's profitable trucks paid for the cars. By 1989 the situation had become untenable, but GM was convinced to shoulder the burden - not really a good idea for anyone involved.
Saab would have been dead for twenty years if it wasn't for GM, but I think that might have been better than Saab's zombie existence as of late. The 9-7X is better not mentioned at all.
I think that in a world where everyone who spends premium money demands nineteen-inch wheels, racing suspension, racing heritage, 500 horsepower and a slushbox and pretend off-road capability, Saab (just like Lancia) loses its raison d'être. You cannot make a Saab to compete with the 3-series without removing what made it a Saab to begin with, Koenigsegg or no Koenigsegg. The world made itself to stupid to appreciate Saab, and thus, Saab has to cease to be.
@Mr.choppers - Delenda Carthago Est: I've said this before - in the 1980s, Saab tried to go upmarket into BMW and Audi territory with the 900 and 9000 models, all in the quest for greater profits. Saab's natural market - quirky, fun, and relatively-inexpensive cars - was abandoned so that it could become a "luxury" make. The ploy worked for a little while, but it ended up driving Saab into the wall by 1989.
@tonyola:
Well, Saab was losing money in the fifties, sixties, seventies and most of the eighties too. It was essentially just the pride of the Wallenberg family that kept Saab running as long as it did, and the Wallenbergs' willingness to plunder the profitable bits of the Saab-Scania corporation. Saab managed a (very) few profitable years early in the eighties but were unable to afford the continuous development necessary to the luxury buyer. V6, 4WD and a new Sonett would have made things different, but there wasn't any money. By the time GM arrived, it was already too late, and GM went on to make bad things worse.
Another problem was that Saab was always meant to be an everyday car in Sweden but marketed as luxury abroad. The size of the Swedish market helped make this an impossible situation. Today perhaps a classy and smart compact Saab might have a chance, aiming for Mini or VW buyers in the US, but as a prestige brand I think they're well and truly done.
The Mother of all Clunkers? Shoot, looks almost showroom fresh compared to some of what I drive. I mean, you can still sort of make out the original lines of the car!
Gavin claims the last really good Saab was a 99 Turbo? Seriously? (900 SPG, 9000 Aero).
As far quirky goes, my 2001 9-3 is about as quirky as they come. GM didn't quite get rid of the individuality. But they did get rid of the quality.
Saab's not the only one. Both Lancia and Citroen are basically dead to me, even though their brands live on (they can thank their home market brands for that). Saab's brand will probably live on, but those who have driven the original won't recognize the Saab-ness.
@brandegee: While I agree with your assessment of SAAB (boring rebadged GM), I don't agree with your dismissal of Lancia and particularly Citroën. Citroën is still one of the biggest manufacturers all over Europe (#7 in my country, the Netherlands, far ahead of brands like Honda and BMW [www.autoweek.nl] ) and elsewhere (just not NA), and although they've lost their quirkiness around 1990 (with the exception of the XM), they've somewhat regained it in recent years. Lancia has the new Delta and until last year the Thesis.
@brandegee: To an Englishman, the 9-3 will hardly qualify as quirky, as it's not much more than a reskinned and reengined Opel/Vauxhall Vectra with the ignition on the floor and a really good heater.
@duurtlang: Yeah; it's hard to look at a C6 and not think quirky. It's got some weird features on it too, none of which I can think of at the moment. Which I suppose means they're both complicated AND petty. Perfect!
Up until this car came out, I used to adjust engine timing at the distributor by ear, and smelling the exhaust, and it was usually one or two degrees from spot on compared to the strobe. And then I would lean out the idle mixture to hold revs, and I was done.
The problem with these things, was that the CVCC would still fire the main charge even when the timing/mixture was WAAAAY off. They would even get pretty good performance that far off mark too. In fact, the only way you knew you were messing up, was when the valves burned, and the internals in the head started going to pieces. I think it was this model Honda that actually taught me to use the book, and use the tools the right way.
For that alone, I salute you, Little Honda! Long may you run!
@ontarioroader: Back in the day, I never had the $50, but the car was always in decent shape so it wasn't an issue.
I read about the passing of the inspection era, and I want my cumulative total of ~$120 in inspection fees back. I want to be retroactively grandfathered, bastards.
Maybe, just maybe they should be sending in pictures of GM cars still on the road after 30 years. Those ever brilliant GM staffers really aren't doing themselves any favors.
@Miscellanea: That's because the only GM cars that are still on the road after 30 years have either:
a) only been driven to and from car shows.
b) been rebuilt so many times that it no longer qualifies as being the original car
Really. I see a hell of alot more 40 (even 50) year old GM and Ford products on the road than just about any imported models. The only exceptions are probably air coold VWs.
@RandomArt: Take a drive in the midwest US, out in the country. 30+ year old pickups, worked hard and beat up, paint faded from sitting outside all the time, but still running (most often on the original, un-rebuilt engine) and being used.
It's funny really. My wife, who is only as much of a car enthusiast as I can make her, was mentioning the other day how disappointing SAAB has become. She is the quirky individualist that associates with other such brands like VW. However, she was lamenting to me that the 9-7x is a nothing but tarted up "chevy blazer" and wondered what happened to the unique hatchback turbos of yesteryear. She was clearly bothered by the demise of brand with which she associated herself. If SAAB didn't become a re-badged, overpriced and boring brand, she would in fact consider the purchase of one. Sadly, it did.
@AustinMiniMan: Wow, that's some serious cloning. I would put an Envoy Denali at 3 points, the Ascender at 8 (they sold what, like 10 of them), the Rainier at 6, and 9-7x at 9. Reserve 10 points for the 9-7x Aero!
@F1Morgan: Saabarus are definitely full of win. The problem with WRX's is they're ugly and have shitty interiors, and the 9-2x fixed both of those problems. The thing that kept my from buying one was I was scared to get an orphan car. Saab dealers didn't know how to work on them, and Subaru dealers wouldn't work on them, so...
I can't help but wonder if anyone actually read the original story, certainly the summary isn't helping at all. This guy Richards quit because he got a counter-offer from his previous company, I guess they really missed him, and he wasn't comfortable with the management shakeup at GM.
I probably would have done the same. Who the hell knows what's going on at GM right now. It might be for the better, but given the past few decades I'm not particularly confident. They've got a few great cars but they just seem unable to set things right, for a ton of reasons.
02:00 PM
12:31 PM
12:13 PM
In the fifties and sixties, the airplane manufacture was used to underwrite car production. Later, Scania's profitable trucks paid for the cars. By 1989 the situation had become untenable, but GM was convinced to shoulder the burden - not really a good idea for anyone involved.
Saab would have been dead for twenty years if it wasn't for GM, but I think that might have been better than Saab's zombie existence as of late. The 9-7X is better not mentioned at all.
I think that in a world where everyone who spends premium money demands nineteen-inch wheels, racing suspension, racing heritage, 500 horsepower and a slushbox and pretend off-road capability, Saab (just like Lancia) loses its raison d'être. You cannot make a Saab to compete with the 3-series without removing what made it a Saab to begin with, Koenigsegg or no Koenigsegg. The world made itself to stupid to appreciate Saab, and thus, Saab has to cease to be.
01:29 PM
01:43 PM
02:19 PM
02:45 PM
Well, Saab was losing money in the fifties, sixties, seventies and most of the eighties too. It was essentially just the pride of the Wallenberg family that kept Saab running as long as it did, and the Wallenbergs' willingness to plunder the profitable bits of the Saab-Scania corporation. Saab managed a (very) few profitable years early in the eighties but were unable to afford the continuous development necessary to the luxury buyer. V6, 4WD and a new Sonett would have made things different, but there wasn't any money. By the time GM arrived, it was already too late, and GM went on to make bad things worse.
Another problem was that Saab was always meant to be an everyday car in Sweden but marketed as luxury abroad. The size of the Swedish market helped make this an impossible situation. Today perhaps a classy and smart compact Saab might have a chance, aiming for Mini or VW buyers in the US, but as a prestige brand I think they're well and truly done.
11:34 AM
11:14 AM
10:47 AM
As far quirky goes, my 2001 9-3 is about as quirky as they come. GM didn't quite get rid of the individuality. But they did get rid of the quality.
Saab's not the only one. Both Lancia and Citroen are basically dead to me, even though their brands live on (they can thank their home market brands for that). Saab's brand will probably live on, but those who have driven the original won't recognize the Saab-ness.
11:20 AM
11:44 AM
12:08 PM
And it's not half bad looking either.
10:46 AM
* - I know it has been revised quite a bit but still...
10:43 AM
The problem with these things, was that the CVCC would still fire the main charge even when the timing/mixture was WAAAAY off. They would even get pretty good performance that far off mark too. In fact, the only way you knew you were messing up, was when the valves burned, and the internals in the head started going to pieces. I think it was this model Honda that actually taught me to use the book, and use the tools the right way.
For that alone, I salute you, Little Honda! Long may you run!
10:42 AM
I bet it even gets pretty good mileage. Those little Civics were surprisingly thrifty even when stuff was broken.
I'd like to point out that DC also requires annual inspections, so even though it looks like oxidized buffalo exhaust, it's mechanically okay.
11:32 AM
02:05 PM
I read about the passing of the inspection era, and I want my cumulative total of ~$120 in inspection fees back. I want to be retroactively grandfathered, bastards.
04:31 PM
I think you need to take your time machine to Fleshbot.com for that.
10:26 AM
Also a 1986 Dodge Caravan (my wife: "Hahaha...you took your driver's test in that? Hahahaha!)
The 1st-gen Civic spits on your CAFE standards. But even if you survive a wreck in this, you're probably going to have tetanus.
10:25 AM
10:13 AM
10:18 AM
a) only been driven to and from car shows.
b) been rebuilt so many times that it no longer qualifies as being the original car
10:19 AM
Really. I see a hell of alot more 40 (even 50) year old GM and Ford products on the road than just about any imported models. The only exceptions are probably air coold VWs.
10:27 AM
10:29 AM
10:35 AM
10:54 AM
10:00 AM
12:12 PM
Trailblazer! 2 Points
Envoy! 1 Point
Envoy Denali! 2 Pointss
Trailblazer SS! 5 Point
Bravada! 8 Points
Ascender! 6 Points
9-7x! 10 Points
Rainier! 7 Points
It can be tough riding somewhere with the two of us.
12:48 PM
Maybe we should look at sales numbers...
01:41 PM
02:29 PM
12/10/09
12/10/09
I probably would have done the same. Who the hell knows what's going on at GM right now. It might be for the better, but given the past few decades I'm not particularly confident. They've got a few great cars but they just seem unable to set things right, for a ton of reasons.