GM, unfortunately is guided by the oil industry. This symbiosis has existed since Standard Oil, GM, and Firestone Tire essentially bought up the major US urban cities street railroad systems to convert them to buses for obvious profit reasons. This same profitable oil, rubber, vehicle combination has GM and big oil looking for any solution other than PHEV hybrids, which are the best quick energy solution.

PHEV hybrids do not need expensive new infrastructure plants. They can utilize any current engine type, gas or diesel, and their technology is proven. They drastically improve the MPG figures for the user at the expense of the oil companies. These PHEV hybrids will have lower vehicle maintenance costs because brake wear is reduced, transmissions are used more lightly, engines are less stressed. This has been proven by Canadian Taxicab usage.

The biggest problem – IT WASN’T GM’S patentable idea.

Guess who made Mercedes remake the chassis of A-classe…

Quote from the article:

“To optimise the availability of ‘Zero Mode’, a plug-in-feature is available which allows the battery bank to be connected to a mains electricity supply for additional charging in the garage. This would, for example, allow a driver commuting in heavy traffic to immediately resume in ‘Zero Mode’ the next morning after arriving home the previous evening having used up all its range. A neat socket is located behind the Saab badge on the 9-3 BioPower Hybrid Concept’s trunk lid.”

What I’m cheesed off about is that whilst Saab have had some time in the sun this last month, they’ve bloody well deserved it and more. If they’ve developed this hybrid system then they should get a chance to debut it and lead the corporation in this field.

They’re capable and they certainly could do with the bolstering of their brand reputation in the marketplace as an innovator.

I know GM has every right to take technologies developed under their umbrella and do with them as they please, but if what Aftonbladet are reporting has actually happened, then I think Saab are definitely getting the rough end of the stick.

Aftonbladet is the biggest paper in Sweden, although it’s a “evening paper” (lots of stuff about famous people, sport, pleasure…). Collin is a good journalist, and when testing cars he usually seems to write what he really thinks. He is not the “it’s German, it’s expensive, it’s really good at speeds above 120 mph and therefore it’s good”-type, like they are in car magazines like Auto Motor & Sport. He has been in the game for a long time (at least 15 years, I think). As I said earlie…Maybe he has some really good sources at Saab.

But the again. I agree with eggsngrits. Maybe GM put the lid on and “took it away” from Saab. But Saab has got all the attention for over a month now with Aero-X and hybrid. One has to understand that GM have other brands that need something at a show, and since the next big show is in N.Y. then one of the U.S. brands getting the attention now.

To most of you, I agree with the negative vibe that we are getting from GM. Something is amiss and it can’t hold much longer. The shake-up at GM HQ is real — two of my friends that work at Saturn (the plant is only 10 miles from me) have commented on the unexpectedly severe consequences — at least 400 project managers, program managers and engineers were summarily fired last week over a lack of results. 400 doesn’t sound like much, but these people weren’t the rank-and-file — they were in the middle levels of corporate management and development. They are hurting, sure.

I also agree that Saab’s leadership in technology is sometimes muted for the percieved greater good. Not always a satisfying play. Definitely it defies logic at times. However, there are perfectly legitimate reasons for pulling back on a feature like this….

1. To enhance the technology prior to introducing it. It amazes me that people will announce an inferior product with fanfare when a competitor has a superior product. Perhaps GM knows something about the competing products that Saab doesn’t, and they were saving Saab from a blunder.

2. GM wants the GM ‘family’ to benefit from the announcement, not just Saab. A rising tide raises all ships.

3. Perhaps there were patent issues to investigate. GM’s been burned on this one.

4. Perhaps GM knows that a competitor is planning a big announcement at the upcoming shows and GM wants to counter with news of their own.

There are as many reasons as you could care to dream up — so why should we assume the worst? GM’s ownership has been more or less benevolent until now — why would that stop? Certainly, Saab has become less Saaby with the demands of GM ownership and changes seem to come slowly, but don’t go all paranoid just because Saab answers to a higher power.

And, for the record, I’m NOT a huge fan of GM’s track record, either. I’m not a GM appologist. On the other hand, I recognize that Saab benefits from the GM relationship, too.

Good and bad aren’t always opposites — they have to coexist in most areas of life.

Is this “Aftonbladet” a reliable paper? Do you have some other sources?

Thanks, Jón Gunnar Kristinsson, icelandic SAAB club.

GM didnt hide fusion reactor or something. There has been rechargeable batterys for over 100 years.

Its well known that plug-in is very sensitive subject in the USA as there are energy problems.

Well Saab gets double attention now, for free.