47 responses so far ↓

• 1 ctm // Apr 23, 2008 at 10:52 pm

  Great to have the respons so quikly. Kudos to him!

• 2 MarkoA // Apr 23, 2008 at 11:46 pm

  10 points to Saab replying quickly! Interesting addition next year..? It must be 9-3 Coupe!
  Three door 9-3 with “fastback” shape rear a´la c900. I´ve seen that. …in my dreams

  Would be great. But if it will be TTiD XWD, the quicker the better. There´s no reasonable premium alternative at the moment. BMW/Audi/Merc do not offer small/effective diesels with four wheel drive yet. Audi will offer 170hp diesel and 211hp petrol A4 avant Quattro later, with no automatic option.
  There´s clearly a demand for such diesel fwd wagon.

  Btw, Audi´s new 2.0TFSI will move small turbo i4 to the new level. 350Nm 1500-4200rpm, 211hp and combined EU consumption 6.8liter/100km.
  Ack…

• 3 Pekko // Apr 24, 2008 at 12:03 am

  Hope that we see in production next year engine introduced in 9-4X concept. It is i4 DI 250hp/350nm by gas. After that VAG 2.0TFSI is not so great anymore…

• 4 conor // Apr 24, 2008 at 12:24 am

  Hinting to the ‘09 9-5 would be my guess.

• 5 David S. // Apr 24, 2008 at 1:01 am

  I just wanna say a big thank you to Eric Geers, it looks like there are some good people left in communications and PR after all.

  Very honest and forthcoming without spilling all the beans.

• 6 dan // Apr 24, 2008 at 1:02 am

  i think the “cross country” 9-3 would be what they were reffering to.
  Great responses though, thanks Swade for keeping the enthusiasts informed. Thats exactly why we come here on a daily basis.

• 7 Gordon Lindeen // Apr 24, 2008 at 1:08 am

  I love your blog swade.

  I am still eagerly waiting to see what I will have to replace my current 9-5, but with production not starting until fall of 2009, it would seriously hurt 2009 model 9-5 sales to show the new car this fall. That “significant” new car that is going to be shown this fall is probably the 9-3 that Eric is alluding to. I would bet that we will wait until next spring or summer to see the 9-5.

  As for the “new addition,” let’s hope it is not just the 9-3 XWD SportCombi Allroad/XC.

  I remember an earlier GM person saying that something special will happen for the last year (MY2009) of the current 9-5. What if that something special was something really big? They could without much expense actually take some of the not so busy 9-5 tooling and develop an enhanced sportier all independent suspension 9-3 (in a 3-door form?). Such a car could continue in production in Trollhattan where the 9-5 tooling is regardless of what goes on in Russelsheim. It could even be used to enhance the Cadillac BLS.

• 8 SaabKen // Apr 24, 2008 at 2:11 am

  What’s wrong with a “9-3 XWD SportCombi Allroad/XC” ? With high gas prices and more and more people flocking to non-SUV alternatives (ie: CUVs), a 9-3SC XWD “all-road/XC” would make an excellent entry model below the 9-4X. Almost every, if not all, premium automaker makes at least one CUV nowadays. Witness:

  VW just added Tiguan below the Touareg

  Audi just added Q5 below Q7

  BMW has X3 and X5

  Volvo just added XC60 to the XC90

  M-B now has GLK in addition to the ML

  Acura has RDX and MDX

  Infiniti just added FX35 below the FX45

  Lexus continues with its venerable RX

  Saab would be absolutely foolish to ignore this fast-growing and lucrative segment by providing only a single CUV. A 9-3SC XWD all-road would be a slam-dunk from a cost/engineering perspective. Volvo’s V70 XC was introduced around ‘97/’98, a whole decade ago and it really popularized the CUV (A6 All-Road was too “premium” at the time) and continues to do so.

• 9 J // Apr 24, 2008 at 2:39 am

  The 9-1 just got more competition with
  VW’s new Scirocco (which i know will be more
  successful than Volvo’s overpriced C30)! Google Image the Scirocco to see what i’m talking about.

  Patiently awaiting Saab to re-intruduce
  the 9-3 hatch, and a Viggen version of that.
  Since that will probably never happen, i’ll be shopping for a ‘99-’02 9-3 when the time comes.

• 10 Carlos // Apr 24, 2008 at 3:37 am

  I love saab but I think saab has a very important problem. Saab won´t be able to survive if the live cycle of their products is longer than the “standard” of the industry. Each model should have a life cycle around 7 years and not as the current 95 which has more than 10 years. This industry is very competitive and people don´t want to buy “old” cars, eventhough they love the brand.

• 11 vector220 // Apr 24, 2008 at 4:20 am

  I will be so bloody mad if there is a TTiD XWD in the fall…sooooo mad. Been waiting for it for a long time now, and I just gave up and signed up for aTTiD FWD…

  Good for Saab, to bad for me.

• 12 triple // Apr 24, 2008 at 4:29 am

  A Sportcombi “cross country” would have me trading in my ‘01 Pathfinder and ‘02 9-3 in a heartbeat. A turbo 4 with 6 speed and XWD? My ideal vehicle.

• 13 SaabKen // Apr 24, 2008 at 4:46 am

  Carlos: “Each model should have a life cycle around 7 years and not as the current 95 which has more than 10 years.”

  Japanese/Korean automakers generally adhere to a 4-yr product cycle. Actually even GM/Ford/Chrysler are too (and would be better at it if they didn’t have to manage a gazillion overlapping products and brands).

  4 years. 6 at the most. That should be what SAAB has to achieve.

• 14 Carlos // Apr 24, 2008 at 4:54 am

  Saabken, I´m speaking about all new models not re-stylings.

• 15 trogg // Apr 24, 2008 at 5:38 am

  Nice to get a response from Mr Geer. If only SAAB ran SAAB.

• 16 johnk // Apr 24, 2008 at 5:53 am

  SaabKen, nothing wrong with an “allroad” Sportcombi, it’s just that we’ve known this was coming for quite some time. In fact, the expectation was that it would arrive on dealer lots in summer or fall. That’s why it would be a disappointment if that was the “interesting addition” for next year.

• 17 Vector // Apr 24, 2008 at 6:47 am

  I do hope one of the “interesting additions” next year is an update of the taillamps on the 9-3. They should’ve updated them (more) for the 2008 model year.
  Yes, they’re now “ice block,” but they’re the same shape and size as they were from 2003-2007. I think the ice blocks look horrible with the black outline- they only look good if they are matched with black paint, like the Turbo X. If you’re going to update the headlights, update the tails too!
  And I agree with MarkoA, a 9-3 coupe would be awesome. But, an “allroad SportCombi” would be cool too.

• 18 rodney durso // Apr 24, 2008 at 6:51 am

  Saab is an interesting (if not frustrating) case to watch as a Saabophile and branding and design professional — and kudos to GM that they are waking up and smelling the Swedish coffee. There are some long term problems with the Saab brand, and not that Saab’s issues are insurmountable, but I am not convinced that GM is really looking to revive Saab and compete on the world stage as they are trying to do (and doing very well) with their Cadillac brand.

  As you know Saab has always had a passionate following and for good reason, it’s was a brand and product line with heaps of personality and lots to love, a brand that created Saab-evangelist, the kind that, like Apple computer customers, never really give up on the brand. Take me, I had ‘97 Saab 900 Turbo and it’s was the only car I have ever really had a crush on. What evoked those feelings? Well it’s similar to why I am a life-long Apple fan. The brand says something about me, that i am different in a smart and stylish way and that I appreciate products that are well thought out and executed, which Saab’s cars were for sometime.

  When GM bought the mark (for about $300M) they saw it as a way to compete with Ford and it’s then new Volvo brand. Well that sounds like a decent strategy, but let’s look what GM did and why their strategy never really quite worked.

  LOSS OF THE HATCHBACK:
  American auto execs are convinced that we, here in the States, do not like hatchbacks, well perhaps the mass market does not, but the truth is that Saab owners loved their hatchbacks. You can track the decline of Saab early under GM”s ownership to cutting the hatchback from the product line. Why, do we as Saabophiles, need a hatchback to feel like this car is a real Saab, and what does that say about us as consumers? Well, it’s funny but it’s really simple. Saab owners are similar to Suburu owners in some key ways. We like to haul stuff around, all kinds of stuff, like the odd antique table from the roadside sale, or a harpsichord, or more basic life stuff like big sheddy dogs or cases upon cases of bottled water. But why is this important, my theory is that Saab owners are very, very independent and part of that independence is not having to rely of others for help doing something like hauling our stuff around. We can run off to home depot or ikea and buy 6 dinning room chairs and throw them in the hatchback and we’re done, we don’t have to ask others for help. If fact when you have a wagon or a hatchback people ask us for help, which is also part of the fun and having that untility and space. So you say the 9-7X is perfect for this? Wrong — bad trailblazer design, not interesting enough and has a very obvious big GM, SUV look and feel. Saab owners are smart and want to surround themselves with things that reinforce that intellect. We also see badge engineering as a bit of an insult, and though it most likely brought new buyers to the brand it also alienated some core Saab believers. So, is a hatchback the only way to achieve this? Well, lets just say that speaking to dozens of Saab dealers over the years, I can confirm that this is may in fact be the case.

  9-3 SPORTSCOMBI:MISSED OPPORTUNITY? STILL NOT TOO LATE:
  The arrival of the 9-3 SportsCombi was a welcome new product and seems to have filled a void in the Saab product line. In fact, if I were to become a Saab owner again, this is the car I would buy. But the missed opportunity is GM’s insistence on spending their marketing and advertising dollars not on the SportsCombi, but on the 9-7 instead, where I assume, GM has the fattest margins. The problem is that the SportsCombi not only is the most Saab-like vehicle that GM has produced it’s also the only real competitor to Volvo V50, V70, Audi A4 Avant, BMW 325x Wagon and others, this is really what they are missing. Their should be lots of marketing money spent on this product. In fact at the recent NY Autoshow (2008) they did not even have a SportCombi in site. Allocating more room for the 9-7 Aero instead. Come on GM, where are your Saab brand specialist? Well being in the Brand strategy business, I could have told you this was a mistake. A new 9-3 Sportscombi TurboX with a few mountain bikes on top would have really spoken to me and lots of other fans old and new.

  9-X AND 9-4X: BITS OF LIGHT ARE GETTING THROUGH
  The concept of the 9-x and the 9-4X are hopeful, though the 9-4X looks too bloated to appeal to my Saab design senses. It seems like a Lincoln Crossover or Ford Edge, but we will have to see what they do to make it special — and please, the center mount ignition key is NOT why we buy saabs. BioPower is a good start, why not license the Prius system from Toyota and create a hybrid 9-3 sedan? or go out to Tesla, the electric car start-up in Silicon Valley and develop an all electric roadster with them, as a follow up to the Saab Sonnet? Now THAT would be cool! You guys need a new brand director at the helm who can make sense of this dilemma that Saab is in.

  XWD, AND THE 9-3 TURBO-X: A MUCH NEEDED BOOST IN THE ARM.
  Finally, 4-wheel drive!!! this is a huge development and one where GM is extremely late to the game, but at least they are in now much more in the game. I have had three news cars since my last Saab and all have had 4wheel drive — so thank you GM, this is something that will make Saab a few clicks more competitive. Now people can look at Saab in the same breath as at least Volvo, unsure about Audi or BMW. The 9-3 X-Turbo is also a great adrenaline boost the Brand, sort of like the Viggen was back in the day. The price is a little much, but I can’t complain, it’ a short production run and I am told they are mostly sold out, so this makes me smile — and that’s all this really comes down to, a contemporary Saab that makes us smile, like the old 900 did.

  CADILLAC, HUMMER, SAAB? AN UNFORTUNATE COMBINATION
  Well, this must be one of the greatest missteps that GM has made in it’s stewardship of Saab. Why? well a few key reasons. A Saab customer would never cross-shop a Cadillac and would really never cross-shop a hummer, it’s just not in the competitive set. In fact it’s quite off-putting to our senses to have to walk into a hummer -cadillac dealer. Are we snobs? you bet — but this kind of Brand snobbery and tribalism is what makes us such loyalists. What GM should have done, and can still do, is put Saturn and Saab together. Now, those are two demographics groups that really make sense together. In fact they are very similar. Even better, was that when GM had a stake in Fuji Heavy Industries (parent of Suburu) that combination would have been made in heaven, Saab-Suburu dealerships! I can’t imagine a better trade-up from an Outback to a SportsCombi wagon. I hope that someone at GM even considered that momentarily?! Well GM sold their stake and thankfully killed the 9-2x so that is past us now as an option.

  I have to say that I am and always will be ready to buy a Saab, when right one comes along. Like I said earlier, the 9-3 SportsCombi is on my short list, but with a couple of things that bum me out about the car, including a paltry sunroof (when I am used to the X3 mega-sunroof), I guess no one at GM is looking at trends, the trend is now insanely big sunroofs, and once you’ve had one, it’s very hard to go back. I can probably get over these other nick-picks: teeny Nav screen that can’t be had with the disc changer, no bluetooth phone hook ups at any trim level, and a dash that looks and feels a little cheap. On that note, here is a good indicator about how deeply (and effectively) GM cuts costs: the power seat controls on the driver side feel odd, when you pull the control to move the seat upward (straight up) the control lever bends in the direction you are pulling before the seat actually moves! and coming from a BMW owner, trust me, that would never fly in Munich.

  Rodney Durso
  Principal Brand Consultant,
  Stormhouse Partners, Inc.

• 19 SaabKen // Apr 24, 2008 at 6:56 am

  Carlos said: “Saabken, I´m speaking about all new models not re-stylings.”

  Um, many Asian automakers *do* produce all-new models every 4 years. Easiest way to look it up is via Wikipedia and to a specific model. Just off the top of my head:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Celica

• 20 SaabKen // Apr 24, 2008 at 7:00 am

  Carlos said: “Saabken, I´m speaking about all new models not re-stylings.”

  Many Asian automakers DO produce brand new models every 4 years. Since I can’t paste an URL here, just go to Wikipedia for quickest reference of models by generation (ie: “Toyota Celica”).

• 21 MarkoA // Apr 24, 2008 at 7:12 am

  Yes, allroad SC would be great. And mated with TTiD, it would be a hit.

  - XWD option with all the engine variants (+ Linear/Vector/Aero)
  - Allroad version of SC

  Should be easy and not so expensive to produce them.

  Of course, 9-4X, 9-1 and all new 9-5 are the ones were waiting for. Also new petrol turbo engine should be on the line too.

  Vector220, I had similar thoughts. But I could not wait at all, so I got me a TTID SC fwd. And I´m not going (hopefully) to trade it to another 9-3 before the next generation. Be it XWD or not.
  9-4X TTID sounds interesting, but I´m not sure if I can think of it as Saab, since it comes from Mexico.

  What I really wait to see is next gen 9-5 sport wagon. It´s VERY important model for Saab, at least in Europe. And it better be something more than Insignia in different clothes!!

• 22 Alex // Apr 24, 2008 at 7:38 am

  If a delta-based 9-3 means less weight (and more responsive/tossable handling), then I say “BRING IT ON!!”

  Personally I hope that the “interesting addition” they mention is two-mode hybrid availability for the 9-3. The 210 hp 2.0T coupled with a hybrid drivetrain would result in a car that could give a FWD Aero a run for it’s money while being capable of getting over 30mpg mixed. It’s really a no-brainer for Saab, luxury hybrids are still a relatively untapped market segment.

  A 9-3 SC crossover would be nice as well, but I’m hoping that they surprise us with something that hasn’t already been discussed yet. Since GM is already going to offer the two-mode hybrid system on the Saturn Aura, it would be relatively cheap to adapt it to it’s platform-mate, the 9-3 as well.

  And mark my words, a hybrid Saab would sell like no other Saab has in years, at least in the US and especially if they offer the SC as a hybrid.

• 23 ck1x // Apr 24, 2008 at 9:14 am

  Rodney, I have to agree with alot of the points that you make. Saab is a lost sheep right now and I think because Cady’s CTS is doing so well the new 9-3 would probably take sales away from that market. Lets face it Saab isn’t known as an extreme sports car brand, but that’s probably the direction they should have been taken in. I would like to have seen the brand do alot of things that BMW are doing right now. Have smaller and greener variation of engines for your model line-ups, but also sport driven performance engines that show your heritage. Saab should have been the first player to have put out a twin-turbo anything. could you imagine that as a high end choice of engines for the 9-1,9-3, 9-4, & 9-5. (TTDI inline 4) & (TTDI inline 6). Cady should be the more upscale luxury player while Saab should be placed at the helm of GM’s Euro-Sport Lux model. Maybe what we might see is a new engine offered in the new 9-3 later this year. Either TTid or the first DI engine from Saab.

• 24 zippy // Apr 24, 2008 at 9:50 am

  New 9-3 may have to be smaller because of CO2 concerns, what a load of rubbish. High CO2 emissions come from the engine and have very little to do with the size of the car itself. Case in point a 525i produces about 30g/km less CO2 than a 9-3 2.0T. For Saab to build a 9-3 on a platform any smaller than it is now is suicidal – unless that is GMs intent of course. The only reason I say that is GM keeps trying to ram Cadillacs down the throats of Europeans that clearly dont want.

  What Saab really must do is improve quality and do it quickly.

• 25 Markac // Apr 24, 2008 at 11:41 am

  When I first saw the MY08 9-3 I new that the car wouldn’t be replaced for a long time. When a car company alters a car that much, it’s not for 1, 2 or even 3 years. It’s safe to say it probably has to last to 2012. As to a 3 door hatch, I’d love one too, but it’ll never happen. I think Saab once planned a 2 door coupe version of the 9-3SS, but that was stillborn. I doubt now, that it could ever be exhumed?

  As to the comment “We wouldn’t have shown the 9-X Biohybrid in Geneva if we hadn’t any serious plans with it.”. I wouldn’t take it with much more than a grain of salt. Remember the 9X and the 9-3X concepts? Saab never had too much intention of building those either, but it still showed them. It’s called “keeping up interest in the brand”.

  I still think GM’s plans for Saab are pivotal on the new 9-5 and I’m sure, although cloudy at the monent, that the full picture will develop over the next 18 months or so.

• 26 ck1x // Apr 24, 2008 at 11:51 am

  The Turbo X should have been a sports coupe and over 300hp. No combi just a limited edition coupe! Now that would have been hot..

• 27 Markac // Apr 24, 2008 at 12:04 pm

  ck1x: I agree with you. A 2 or 3 door Turbo X would have gone my wishlist instantly! Unfortunately we’ll have to wait for the next 9-3 for that to happen. In the meantime we all have to convince GM that coupes and hatches are what we want!

• 28 Alex // Apr 24, 2008 at 12:08 pm

  GM just needs to admit they were wrong to kill the hatch and at least OFFER it on the next 9-3. You know, like Mazda did with the 6. Give the consumers the option of a 9-3 Sport Sedan, a 9-3 Sport Wagon, and a 9-3 Sport Hatch and that will answer once and for all whether switching to sedans only was a good idea or not.

  But that kind of common sense, “give the consumer what they want” way of doing things is completely alien to the boneheads running GM, I think that’s pretty obvious at this point.

• 29 Markac // Apr 24, 2008 at 12:21 pm

  Alex: I agree totally as long as there’s a 3 door Sport Hatch option. Unfortunately it’ll be a long wait and in the meantime the 9-1 hatch probably only has the slimmest of chances of being built?

  I’d also like to see the 9-1 and the next 9-3 both built at Trollhattan. I think a stretched Delta II platform will be fine for the next 9-3.
  We haven’t seen anything on Delta II yet so it’s too early to critisize it. Anyway Saab will be able to improve it over the basic Opel/Vauxhall/Saturn/Holden versions.

• 30 Kroum // Apr 24, 2008 at 12:24 pm

  Ah, here we go back to GM thrashing and blame-shifting. Coupes, hatches, 2 doors, 3 doors, twin turbo 20-engine lineups… Better build quality than BMWs but at half the price – please, if possible. And don’t make ‘em in Mexico.

  Have we all lost our common sense? Yes, all these models would be great, and I’m sure there is market for all of them. However, for Saab to get any major investment from GM, it must first stand on its own feet.

  So before they start rolling an expanded model line-up, Saab need to focus on improving the bread ‘n butter models, e.g. the 9-3 and the 9-5. It is those two models (and their ancestors respective – the 900 and 9000) that have carried the brand through.

  Just think – how long did Audi take to introduce a proper coupe, built on its own architecture? The A5/S5 comes years after the brand turned profitable and successful – which, by the way, was largely thanks to the A4, and its sporty incarnations S4 and RS4.

  But they did take very good care of their most important product before they started stretching their resources. In Saab’s case, with sales 1/7 of Audi’s and with a cash-starved corporate parent, this would most likely mean brand demise.

• 31 zippy // Apr 24, 2008 at 12:29 pm

  Very well said Kroum.

• 32 Markac // Apr 24, 2008 at 12:38 pm

  Kroum: I was talking about the next 9-3 (circa 2012) and the need to convince GM what we need to see in it. Any thoughts of a coupe in the current version are only pipe dreams. We all know that.

  As to Audi coupes, I’m sure the original Quattro was a proper coupe. It certainly wasn’t a Volkswagen!

• 33 Alex // Apr 24, 2008 at 1:02 pm

  @ Kroum, Markac put it perfectly, Audi defined itself based on it’s quattro coupe in the 80’s. If anything, the A5/S5/RS5 is a return to what was for a decade Audi’s greatest model.

  And yeah it relied on the A4/S4/RS4, but the difference is that since it’s inception the A4/S4/RS4’s have been able to drive circles around their Saab equivalents in every possible way. I’d have died and gone to heaven if Saab gets a car that can reverse it’s fortunes the way the A4 did for Audi in the 90’s.

• 34 Kroum // Apr 24, 2008 at 1:31 pm

  Markac, I precisely meant the introduction of a “proper coupe” after the “reversal of fortunes”, as Alex nicely put it. My bad for not being clear enough.

  The Audi 72 of the ’60s was a coupe, too, but of course that was not the point I was trying to make.

  Alex, how Audi defined itself to you specifically is a separate manner – the brand has been in existence long before the Quattro, albeit not as successful. And even Audis of the ’80s were not that successful in the U.S. – as you most likely know VAG nearly pulled the brand from the American market. (Hey, at some point, Simca was a great car, too… So what?)

  Indeed, it was the A4 that saved the day for Audi, and it still is the holy cash cow that makes all the side fanciness possible. Which brings me to what my point was – make the 9-3 and the 9-5 the great cars they should be, and build upon a solid foundation.

• 35 Markac // Apr 24, 2008 at 1:46 pm

  Kroum: I think the next 9-5 could have the pontential to be a great car if GM allow Saab to get it right and not make merely an upgraded Opel. The current 9-3 has been a dissapointment to me since it’s inception and whilst it has recently improved, I don’t think it’ll ever be great.

  The point I was trying (badly) to make was that we need to show GM which direction it should head with the next 9-3. I honestly beleive that GM has never had any idea which direction to take Saab and that has been the main problem.

  If the next 9-3 is to be a more sucessful car then we need to show GM how it could be more sucessful. In the meatime it needs to realize that Saab has to make the 9-1 for so many reasons. Reasons GM seems reluctant to recognize.

  By the way, I really liked the Audi 100 coupe of the early seventies. I was too young to drive back then!

• 36 Swade // Apr 24, 2008 at 1:50 pm

  I honestly believe the 9-3 is only a really good interior redesign away from eating the A4’s lunch. They are so over-rated, esp here in Australia.

  The A4’s base model is a few $K more than a 9-3 Linear Sport but has no turbo and performance would be crapola. You’ve got to spend another $11K to get a turbocharged A4, that’s around $14K more than the base 9-3, and even then the power and torque numbers don’t reach the Saab’s.

  It’s just an interior away…….

  And yes, I know that’s in Aus, and our market’s not the same, but both Audi and Saab sell the majority of their cars in places not named USA.

• 37 Kroum // Apr 24, 2008 at 2:01 pm

  Markac, I agree with you that communication between Trollhattan and Detroit needs to improve. A lot. No subsidiary can survive without properly communicating its needs to the corporate parent. Pardon the silly comparison, but when babies poo their pampers or need to be fed, they cry.

  Swade, spot on about Audi interiors – very overrated. Call it good marketing. But at the same time, they don’t squeal and rattle nearly as much as my 9-3 sedan.

• 38 turbin // Apr 24, 2008 at 2:13 pm

  “they don’t squeal and rattle nearly as much as my 9-3 sedan.”

  My 9-3 Sportcombi and 9000 only sqeal and rattle when my baby boys are in the back ; )

• 39 ck1x // Apr 24, 2008 at 2:20 pm

  Remeber Kroum were not talking about what Audi would do or has done. GM is in a entirely different situation than Volkswagen. They have 3 premium brands struggling for their fathers attention and only 2 hands to feed them. Each is trying obtain it’s own identity and it’s like being on a speed dating show. GM doesn’t have forever to figure out which brands are going to do what for them. Volkswagen only had Audi to grow and get profitable. So as it’s main priority they could afford to take the time with Audi and get it right. All that most of us are asking is that GM give Saab at least 1 car treatment in the vain of the CTS. Cady isn’t exactly where GM wants them to be either but that doesn’t stop them from producing a coupe version of Cady’s most popular selling car! The fact is if GM really wanted the sales of the 9-3 to really spike then the restyle should have been a little more drastic on the front and rear ends and a 260hp and 300hp XWD Aero and Viggen(Turbo) spec should have been at launch. I think most of us would be forgiving that the interior is dated if these were options to choose from..

• 40 Bruce // Apr 24, 2008 at 2:42 pm

  Rodney D made several good points. Saturn and SAAB share most shops in Canada (a few remote Saturn dealers do not sell SAABs). The combination works very well, now GM’s Euro-shop in this market. The brands are complementary. Hummer and Cadillac belong with Buick and Pontiac. Credit to GM for responding.

• 41 Markac // Apr 24, 2008 at 2:58 pm

  Swade: I think you’re right. We a decent interior makeover and improved quality control, the 9-3 stands a good chance of lasting to a MY2012 replacement arrives. It probably has to? Any later than that though, it will encounter the same problems as the current ancient 9-5, namely minimal sales.

  I was once a strong VW/Audi fan, but Saab lured me away twenty years ago!

• 42 mark_belfast // Apr 24, 2008 at 6:18 pm

  Whether the 9-3 can survive without huge fall in sales is not the question – I believe it is a certainty that the 9-3 sales will start to fall after next year as the underlying motor is by then 8 years old and the facelift we all think was dramatic has actually gone relatively unnoticed by non-Saabists, the people we need to convert to the brand.
  That’s one bad thing about a facelift, it actually serves to highlights the age of the vehicle (and I think the 9-3 had gotten away with its age fairly well) and puts in people’s minds that it had received some vital cosmetic surgery before it bows out gracefully.
  Someone above made comment that major changes dont occur unless several years are expected til replacement. Depends on your resources of course since Audi’s A4 was only required to last a further 2 years on its last facelift and it was still ahead of the 9-3 at that stage in terms of build and range of models.

  If GM don’t get a new 9-3 to market by late 2010, then the credibility of the brand is fatally wounded, sales of hte core model will be in nosedive like the 9-5 now, and Saab will be cap-in-hand for GM’s charity to tide them over. I really fear if this is the future and can’t believe the 9-3 will be allowed to suffer the ignominy of the 9-5’s painful demise.

• 43 progolf // Apr 24, 2008 at 6:46 pm

  It’s the Allroad/XC version of the SportCombi with XWD that’s coming early next year (confirmed by a dealer). XWD will eventually filter through to the TTiD and other versions of the 9-3, but it will take some time, because the multilink rear axle is modified to incorporate the XWD. The diesel versions may not get the XWD before they switch from the FIAT/Alfa 1.9l engines to GM’s own new 1.6/2.0l diesel engines (due to launch in Opel this fall). Next with XWD will be 2.0l BioPower.

• 44 J // Apr 25, 2008 at 3:00 am

  Rodney Durso wrote:

  ” Well, it’s funny but it’s really simple. Saab owners are similar to Suburu owners in some key ways. We like to haul stuff around, all kinds of stuff, like the odd antique table from the roadside sale, or a harpsichord, or more basic life stuff like big sheddy dogs or cases upon cases of bottled water.”

  *raises hand*

  except i never hauled a harpsichord in my outback wagon.
  

  i’m a subaru owner who (given the chance) will trade UP for
  a ‘99-’02 9-3 hatch.

• 45 albert // Apr 25, 2008 at 6:47 am

  Well, I’m glad mr. Geers took the chance to react. But are we any wiser now?
  The 9-1: I hope this will be not a project of the same kind as the 9X and the 9-3X concepts. Nice plans but how long did it take before something came out of it?

  9-3: Mr. Geers quotes Bob Lutz “….said at the Geneva auto show that we study the possibility to build the 9-3 of a new premium compact architecture. One of the reasons being the C02 legislation as we would be able to reduce weight.”
  It would be nicer to focus on things like direct injection, two clutch gearboxes etc. Current 9-3 is about the worst performer where it concerns the fuel consumption. At least on paper; I am not unhappy with the fuel consumption of my 9-3, but where I live sales tax is (among other things) determined by fuel consumption.
  Weight reduction me be a good point, regarding the fact that the Insignia is 100kg heavier than the outgoing Vectra.

  When that new premium compact architecture would be different from the Astra platform no one would be complaining, but I fear that won’t be the case. Even now people are teasing “hey, you ‘re driving a modified Vectra, right? And that will only be worse when a smaller (read: lesser) platform will be used. I can’t picture a new 9-3 based on an Astra and bringing that to the market for a higher price than an Insignia costs. Buyers will not accept that.

  If Saab has made a decision about the 9-1, than the smaller 9-3 is already in the making. No need for two smaller cars. Or will the 9-1 be based on the Corsa? Than we can have interesting discussions about the usage of the next Gamma platform developed by GM DAT (think Aveo).

  According to the Auto Motor und Sport of today the decision has already been taken. Mr Geers tells us that nothing has been decided yet. Let’s hope mr. Geers is right. OK, than rethink the whole thing on the basis of where you want to be with your brand image. If you want to be premium than think and act premium. Be the best or be on par. There are no prizes for middleclass.
  That’s what mr. Piëch did with Audi in the nineties. It was Piëch that had the vision to visualise the feeling of quality and only after that Audi got on the way up.

  Some bad thinking: Is there a need for a 9-3 that will not grow the much needed few centimetres because the new 9-5 will not have much more extra space than the current one?

• 46 ck1x // Apr 25, 2008 at 9:12 am

  I think people are taking this way out of context here. Just because they are looking at a smaller platform to use doesn’t mean they will be sacraficing it’s size by much if any. Plus if they reduce the weight they can use smaller turbo charged engines, hence the term “Right sizing” the engines. Most people would never know that the Ford Focus and Volvo S40 share the same platform. Our current 9-3 just looks big on the outside, as far as the inside goes it might as well be a compact car. I love my 9-3 and all but I think Saab would be going in the right direction to differentiate the 9-3 from the 9-5, they compete with each other.

• 47 Markac // Apr 25, 2008 at 9:56 am

  A more space efficient 9-3 with similar proportions to the current one would be good. It could use a stretched Delta II platform with significant changes over the next Astra’s so I don’t see a problem. It could end up being the most customized Saab platfrom in existence by then?