An apology from an enthusiast Saab blogger
I love driving.
I had my first car sitting in my driveway for four months before I got my driver’s licence. The first thing I did after passing my test was to get in my Holden Gemini, go pick up a mate of mine and fly down the Greensborough Bypass at 160 km/h. It was totally stupid, but fun.
The ensuing years saw a number of cars that were always a little bit different. I’ve never owned a Holden Commodore, a Ford Falcon, a Toyota Camry or a Mitsubishi Magna and I hope I never do. I’ve never been one for the standard three-box sedan and once I had my first experience with a Saab I knew I’d discovered something that was quite special.
Like I said, I love driving. A lot. I love the interaction with man and machine. I love seeing different parts of where I live in comfort and at speed. I love twisty corners. They don’t even have to be taken fast. I just love the act of driving. And I love driving in a Saab.
I consider myself to have been a Saab enthusiast, probably since the mid-1990s. I wasn’t in a position to buy one, though, until the late 1990s. Either 1999 or 2000. And even that was just a $1,000 Saab 99E from 1972. Shortly thereafter I got my 99 Turbo, got divorced, got a better paying job - and that’s when things really took off for me and the brand I’ve come to love.
Between my own readings and research, car purchases and most of all, publishing this website, I’ve invested a bucketload of time and a reasonable amount of money on Saab. It is, in the truest sense of the word, an extra-ordinary relationship.
I’m convinced that I only have around 20 years of driving left, if i’m lucky. Whether it’s bad genes or peak oil that stops me driving first is yet to be determined, but I really do think that driver’s cars will become a luxury item by 2028. The line of “those who can afford a luxury SUV don’t care about the cost of fuel” will seem a little ludicrous. In fact, it’ll probably be re-written to suit anyone who chooses a petrol/electric hybrid over whatever space-age vehicle is the norm by then.
It’s my passion for driving combined with my love for Saabs and my concern for the future of driving that colors many of my opinions on this site. If I seem harsh about the prospect of it taking another 4-5 years to get a good Saab 9-1 to market, it’s because that’s 4-5 years that I don’t get back. That’s 20% of my prospective driving future down the gurgler. If I’m harsh on Cadillac for eating Saab’s dollars in a fruitless and wasted attempt to conquer Europe, that’s because I want those dollars to go to Saab development in order to see great, well thought out Saabs come to market instead of luxo-barges that defy conventional thinking about where vehicles should be heading, and are likely to sit un-owned on dealers forecourts around Europe.
Incidentally, one of the great ironies of the Cadillac experiement is that the advertising execs, all freshly stuffed with cash thanks to GM’s desperate attempt to sell Cadillac to Europe, will pass those homeless vehicles by as they head on down to the Audi and BMW dealer to secure their next purchase. But I digress……
I don’t want to be all doom and gloom but I’m genuinely concerned for Saab’s future, and my own. I love driving and I want to drive Saabs but I’m concerned that they’re not going to get what they need in the future to make the cars truly progressive.
——
So where’s the apology in all this?
In my concern for Saab’s future I often become critical of the organisation as it stands now. Some of that is quite deserved, by the way, but that’s not the point.
The point is this: I allow that critical attitude to bear too much weight towards the cars. It’s the cars that get driven and it’s the cars that matter. It’s the cars that ignite something in people and the truth is that Saab cars still do that today.
The Saab 9-5 is now 11 years old. Regular 9-5 customers are now on their 3rd or 4th lease of what is basically the same car, but with a few updates. That situation isn’t great and management need to take responsibility for it……..BUT…….. I wouldn’t begrudge anyone the delight they take in their Saab 9-5 because despite it’s age, it’s still a fantastic car to drive. A constant critique of the 9-5 is going to make anyone who bought one feel like they’ve bought a dud where the complete opposite is true. The 9-5 is an awesome drive and those who have one should be absolutely rapt with it.
The Saab 9-3 has probably borne the largest load in all this. The poor nature of some of the organisation reflects badly on the car and when that car comprises around 70% of sales, it takes a fair whack. The Saab 9-3 took a fair hit around 2006 when some of the issues of the first Sports Sedans really came to light. Saab took a hammering for that.
What hasn’t been said enough, though, is that in 2008 the Saab 9-3 is one heck of a good motor car. It looks distinctive, it’s exceptionally safe (as it’s always been), it’s well appointed, has two great engine options in the US and some great extra variants in other markets. It’s quieter, more comfortable, more sporting and more advanced than it’s ever been.
From 2008 the Saab 9-3 has a brilliant TTiD engine and it will have the most advanced AWD system on the market. It has a great new look, better acoustics management and road feel, cornering headlamps that do a brilliant job and all that with a new sport mode in the auto version and a little extra grunt in the Aero (plenty of extra grunt if you go XWD).
The 2008 Saab 9-3 won’t suit everyone. Saabs never have. Even when they were aspirational vehicles in the mid 1980s and regarded as ‘the future’ they didn’t sell as many units as they did in 2006. They don’t lead the entire class in many areas, though they do in a few. What they are is a great all-round package.
The outer-limit tolerances of a Saab 9-3 are well beyond 97% of people’s ability to drive hard in a competent manner. If you think that you need something that goes harder, then go get it. Enjoy it. Don’t be miserable and blame Saab for your own desires on the road if those desires exceed what Saab engineers make the cars capable of.
The Saab 9-3 is an excellent car in 2008. I’ve seen it, sat in it, driven it and reviewed it and I’d happily recommend it to anyone looking for a great sporting drive in a well appointed, distinctive package.
Can it be improved? Of course. Anything can, and I’ll keep taking Saab and GM to task when they don’t take an opportunity to improve it. I said it just the other day - the Saab 9-3 is just an interior revision away from eating the A4’s lunch.
But none of that should take away from the fact that Saabs are great cars right now. If I’ve let my own writing get too negative in such a way as to negatively reflect on the quality of the current offerings, then I apologise.
I consider this site and others like it to be defacto custodians of the brand heritage. You people who spend your hard-earned on the cars and look forward to the next one are the keepers of the flame. I’ll try and do my bit to keep my mind focused on what matters most. You guys please feel free to keep me there.
More from this category
- Holiday Mode
- Monday Snippets
- Saab retro-perspective: Lance Cole on the Saab 90
- Call yourself hardcore? The ink edition
More from this author
- Holiday Mode
- GM Employee Discount for Everyone coming back this week
- Monday Snippets
- Saabs O The week - collection edition
Subscribe to this author
Recent Comments
- wilfried on Holiday Mode
- Barry on Saabs O The week - collection edition
- Grackle on Saab retro-perspective: Lance Cole on the Saab 90
- john on Monday Snippets
- Dippen on Holiday Mode
- fred on GM Employee Discount for Everyone coming back this week
- ctm on Holiday Mode
- Golfhunter on Holiday Mode
- Danni on Holiday Mode
- Swade on Holiday Mode
Thanks Swade, good bit of perspective there.
I have my ‘98 9000 and ‘06 9-3SC and love driving the wheels off them. If you need an indicator of this then both fuel readouts are in the 11-13l/100km range and the cars are never stuck in traffic. Time permitting I will be taking a ‘08 9-3 Vector 2.0T for a drive tomorrow. Really looking forward to it.
I don’t think there’s a need to apologize.
The first Saab I ever drove was a “Dame Edna” ‘06 9-5 Aero wagon, and I flat loved it.
How could a station wagon be so much fun? How could a fun car be so safe? How could a safe car be so fast? How could a fast car be so relaxing?
My love for the brand was ignited by these “new” Saabs, the ones that weren’t supposed to be relevant to anyone anymore.
Well, excuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me.
So it’s like, “All you people who’ve been shot by 9mm rounds, get up!!! You were hit by an ineffective, inferior bullet!”
i agree with david s. i first started liking saabs newer models, but when i started learning about the brand i began to appreciate the older models.
i don’t believe you’ve been negative at all, just pointing out the facts as you usually do.
I think it’s more the comments that tend to bring the tone to that level on occasion but the simple fact of it is, we wouldn’t be here if we didn’t love em, oh and you Swade….!
I frankly do not know nor can fathom why you have to apologize. I was a lucky sod to own two MY01 9-5 Aeros and besides having bought a MY08 Honda Civic VXi sedan for the Mrs in February 2008, it is being traded in for a 2006 9-5 Aero sedan as we speak. I visit this site a minimum of 4-5 times a day, it is my favorite on my desktop as well on my mobile handset with an RSS feed updated twice a day. If your negativity was getting out of hand, I would not have been here.
Thanks for this write Swade. No need to apology! Definitely not.
I´m afraid that in the very close future (say, in 5 years) we will miss todays 9-5. It´s so much Saab as it simply can be. There´s some features that are already missing in 9-3, like window switches on central console. That is a Saab feature and I miss it in my 9-3. I REALLY hate that they had to move them to the doors just because of the costs. I felt really comfortable having them in the center on C900 and 9000.
9-5 has been around nearly as much as C900 was. That, to me, tells much about the car itself. It´s still able to stand proud against a lot newer competitors. People blame it because of it´s age, but if you think of it really, what is too old in it? Not so much I guess.
It has gutsy, real Saab 2.3 liter fourbanger which is able to put many three liter V6 engines in shame by it´s torque and horsepower. Get a Hirsch version and it´s starts knocking 4 liter territory. A True Saab Turbo.
I do afraid that these are some details we are going to miss in the future. But we´ll realise the value of them when it´s a bit too late already.
I wish they´d make an anniversary model 9-5 with Hirsch tuned engine and simply call the model Saab 9-5 turbo. Only “turbo” badges, one at the back and two on the sides of bonnet.
Honestly, every now and then I feel like I should´ve bought 9-5 instead to have one of the very last Saabs.
But lets hope that this all is just BS and the next 9-5 will be the Best Saab Ever.
Swade. You doo have a way with words and that´s why many of us are here reading and browsing. Many other sites have new modelinformation and links to nice reviews etc.. But this is one of the few Saab enthusiast sites with a huge heart for the brand and the people around the brand. And that´s why TS is so renowned and gets so much respect from GM/Saab and various carmagazines.
I wish I were a publicist.. Then I would ask you to write a book about yourself, the Saab brand, the TS Blog, executive interviews and about us.. the Saab enthusiasts. It´s a shame that Saab friend Kurt Vonnegut passed away last year.. He would have made a splendid co-writer
No need to apologize Swade. I agree with you about the 9-1, it needs to be here in 3 years tops, or perhaps it’ll be too late?
Everyone whose read my comments knows I’ve never liked the 9-3SS, but I’ll admit it’s a much improved car now. Still not one I want in my driveway though! I hope for MY2012 or thereabouts when it’s replaced, they get the formula right. There are some good ingedients in the current car, but the mix has always been wrong for me.
Sometimes it feels like the 9-5 is the last true Saab and that makes me nervous about it’s replacement. Unfortunately the 9-3SS demonstrated the effects of trying to make a Saab too mainstream and recent efforts have tried to reverse that. I just hope the same thing dosn’t happen with the new 9-5. Surely GM have learned by now?
I agree with MarkoA completely. The 9-5 is what sucked me in to Saab fandom, and now I’m hooked. It’s a great car, which is why I’m driving my 1999 9-5 SE and trying to maintain it for as long as I can despite the fact that it needs a lot of work. I hope my next car will be a 9-5 as well and hope that Saab can continue to make interesting, relevant cars in the future. Like many here, though, I have my doubts, but I hope for the best.
While some complain about the 9-5 and its long-awaited replacement, it is amazing how a car they started developing in the mid-nineties still can keep up with many of todays offerings. It is proof Saab really is capable of building amazing, long-lasting cars with a timeless design.
I have only had Saabs for little over two years, started with a 9-3 and now have a 9-5. I actually like the older interior compared to the flashy, plasticky interiors of many other newer cars. 100K miles and still no major rattles or squeeks. I certainly hope Saab will continue with these high-quality interiors in the next 9-5. But looking at the 2006 interior refresh, I certainly hope they will do the right thing and not repeat that GM (radio, climate controls) and 9-3 (steering wheel) interior patch job.
And this brings me back to the original topic of Swade’s post. Sometimes you have to be critical of the things, products and people you love in order to protect them from mistakes in the future. I think TS is an excellent source of information about what is going on in the hearts of the real Saab fans. I understand they want to make Saabs more attractive to the general public but their loyal customers should come first. I don’t really see many of the posts and comments being negative. It’s more being critical of the cars and brand we love. Apology not needed and not accepted.
There’s something to be said for a model that still sells after 11 years.
Andy - well said. I got the old mule circa 2001 still running strong at 224,000km and it still turns heads wherever I pop up. Journalists have decried the “old drivetrain,” the not so “road dynamics” and the “dated design” as a sign of the times according to them. Heck, this car turns more heads in my neck of the woods then any new A4/C-class or MB combined. Needless to say, it does not help to be confused with a Subaru. Nonetheless, whenever I turn that ignition on, I feel that special aura of connection between me and my 9-5 Aero. Am adding a MY06 to the stable, having lusted after this version for a while now. Pity it is an auto, but I hope I will be converted and a neophyte soon.
The classic 900 lasted for 15 years if you count the last year of convertible-only availability. Were people complaining in 1993 that the 900 was outdated like they are now about the 9-5? Surely the 900 was at least as “outdated” then as the 9-5 is now.
On the other hand, the 9-5 really doesn’t sell that well anymore despite several refinements and improvements from the original offering. The question is why.
I got one Finnish car magazine (Super Car) from ´87 where c900 T16S was tested and they complained that it was ancient. Mostly they complained about the interior and the looks. Take any other car of the same price range from ´87 and see which one looks dated now!
Too bad they really don´t offer any discounts or special models lines of 9-5 in Finland. They´ve got Nordic edition which has actually nothing special!
[insert standard defense of Cadillac here]
I started with an NG900, and I got into the older cars that way. I love old Saabs, but I’d never want to own one as my daily driver. Too slow, too old. I want an OG9-3 (preferably a Viggen, but that will probably never happen), and maybe when I’m rich (ha), a 9-3SC or 9-1. Sure, I’d love a C900 vert as a secondary car (or maybe one of those vertified 96’s), but I definitely prefer newer Saabs.
So no apologies neccessary.
Too slow?? You´ve never driven slightly tuned T16??
I don’t know if it really was fast, but the C900T felt fast with that thrash of turbo charging — a much better feeling than the LPT NG900 covertibles I’ve been privileged to test drive.
Every car I’ve ever driven has been stock and I doubt I’ll ever drive anything that isn’t stock.
My NG was slow. It wasn’t even a turbo. But it felt quick anyway, considering I’d only driven a Saturn Vue up until I got it.
So, ok, “too slow” wasn’t the right phrase. I was trying to be succinct :p Newer ones are a little quicker and they’re easier to maintain.
You know, there really is no reason for you to apologize. The apology should be coming from GM! You have been doing their job for quiet some time now. There is a reason that they don’t sell the way they SHOULD! Cadillac sucking up funds is one, the interior is another. You are calling them on it. Someone has to, so why not you? I also check in a few times daily, and there is a reason. Your honest and call it like you see it. Rare now a days! TS is now what I do on my iPhone. That would be because of you Swade (and I have faith that SAAB will make a comeback). No apology necessary, but thanks. I know what you mean.
Swade I feel that 99% of what you write is pretty much on the ball. Like others that come to this site we, like you; have a passion and want to know what is going on.
I didn’t get the information from Saab direct and that is my reason for searching the internet and stumbling upon your blog.
I think most of us tune in 2, 3 times a day.. because this blog is that fast moving.
But sometimes we do write things that on occasion we wish could be erased later.
I too am guilty of such acts which doesn’t even make up 1% of all the comments and articles I have had posted here.
I think I understand your reason to apologize, but be rest assured.
Take you page loads per day as a gauge that we haven’t been offended.
Keep it up Swade
Swade, no apologies necessary. I for one do not think you have been negative at all. Perhaps brutally honest (which is exactly what is needed) but not negative.
I appreciate your efforts and I love the site. I log in every day to get a “daily hit of my Saab addiction” all due to your hard work, research and time. THANK YOU for all you do!
I do feel GM has let Saab languish too long - with too few models and too many half hearted attempts to provide new ones (9-2 / 9-7X anyone?). I advocate for a competitive full model line up to restore Saab at the forefront of the sport/luxury market to compete with the likes of BMW & Audi (which they gratefully are doing now….albeit very slowly).
I truly feel GM has committed the time and re$ource$ to Saab to do this, unfortunately it just took longer for them to realize how great Saab cars are than it did us. They’re on the right track, just not the fast track…….Keep the faith my Saab Brethren and Swade keep up the great work!!
You have nothing to apologize about, if anything I think you can be way too soft on some of Saab’s more glaring problems. For one I’ll say that the 9-3ss is an interior, a steering rack and a shift linkage away from being an Audi killer.
I look at Saab today as being a bit like Britney Spears. Britney today is like the 9-3ss, she’s still pretty and I’d be more than happy to take someone like her home from the bar. Likewise the 9-3ss is a perfectly good car for most of today’s car buyers and alot of the US would be more than happy to drive a car like the 9-3ss. Even so, when you look at what Britney and Saab once were, you can’t help but wish that they could somehow manage to reclaim their former glory.
Now the 9-5, that’s more like Whitney Houston at this point…
What I’d like to see from a GM-owned Saab are just a few more signs that GM cares about Saab as much as they say they do. Not big things, just little things, like letting a platform or engine make it’s debut in a Saab for once, instead of letting the Caddy or Opel hit the streets before their Swedish counterparts. GM makes a fuss about how they developed the CTS on the Nurburgring, how about letting Saab tune the 9-3’s chassis there as well.
I see no reason why Saab can’t break 500k sales or even 1 million a year in sales with the right kind of investment. Remember Audi was once in the kinds of straits that Saab was, and they were able to pull out of it.
The way they did it though was not with campaigns, concepts, or cash incentives, but with actual products. In the 90’s, Audi fired off the A4, the A8, and the A6 and instantly transformed themselves from also-rans to the first legitimate BMW competitor.
What irks me about Saab today is that I just don’t see GM investing in the kind of dynamic products that Saab desperately needs. Forget “good enough” like the 9-3ss and 9-5, Saab needs cars that are “fantastic”.
And about the performance issue, I agree that most people will never be able to drive even a Turbo X to it’s limits, but that’s beside the point. The point is that Saab continues to try to make cars like the Aeros and Turbo X’s, so they obviously want to be seen as a sporty brand. My point is that if you’re going to build a high-profile, high-performance car like the Turbo X, do it right and build a true M3 killer instead of the lukewarm car that we got. If Saab wants to be “responsible” then they should save face and not even bother with trying to build sporty cars altogether.
Alex - the 9-3SS as Britney? I’m not sure if I’ll be able to look at them quite the same way again…
With Audi though, one of the problems they were facing was that through VW they had a large local government shareholding, and agreements which made it difficult for them to lay off surplus workers. So their solution was to build their way out of trouble with lots of new models. Luckily with Dr. Piech they had a CEO able to bring great designs to market. Rallying success and great adverts did them no harm either (sound familiar?)
Though it would be great to see Saab do the same, they aren’t in the same circumstances that Audi were. With a cash strapped corporation rather than a politically-motivated local government for a shareholder, investment to increase production on that scale seems a long way off.