Comments on: Down to business – part 1

By: Swade

Swade — Sun, 24 Jul 2005 05:54:21 +0000

The ‘classic’ 900 has inherited that title for a reason. It is a classic shape and pretty much defined the company for a long period of time.

I’ve got to agree with Sam though. You can’t cling to coattails of now unused design and say that it is the only thing that typifies the brand. the 900 had DNA from the past and it supplied DNA for the future.

More on this tomorrow, but in essence, the challenge is for Saab to bring cars to market that incorporate elements of the past but innovate intelligently – this is what previous models have always done.

By: sam

sam — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:09:02 +0000

An interesting post, but I think what he suggests is totally unrealistic. The future of car making is by large multinationals that share and reuse as much development and parts as possible, while differenciating individual models and brands. An independent, or semi-independent SAAB is dead meat, unless they can sell their cars for $90,000 (US) like Porsche can. GM bought SAAB to get a brand and reputation that they couldn’t get from Pontiac or Buick. SAAB’s future, like it or not, is as GM’s “Euro-sporty” division. By all means, they need to be competitive with their Japanese and European competition, but pining for the past (totally Swedish designed and built) is a waste of time.

By: JeffD

JeffD — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:21:45 +0000

This is something that’s been bugging me for awhile as well. It’s like when VW redesigned the Beetle. To me, the new Beetle’s are something different, as the engine is in the wrong place and the vehicles have working heaters. The new SAABs (expecially the 9-7) just don’t say “SAAB” to me. Granted, the 9-3 is growing on me, but I’d still feel better if it had the classic SAAB roofline (i.e. a hatchback) and a Viggen model.

I’m reserving judgement. Until then, I’m sticking with my classic 900 convertible.