Part 1 of the automotive theory series was focused on the humanity of great cars and why it’s possible to love them. Just between you an me, I consider it to be the best piece of writing I’ve done here for some time.

Today’s instalment in the automotive theory series (I think it’s turning into a series) actually comes from ctm, our mate in Sweden. He brought up the Skoda Superb the other day, whose hatch/trunk I posted about earlier. This also concerns the Skoda and its relationship to VAG’s other brands.

The parallels with GM will speak for themselves.

Take it away, ctm…..

——

I came across a short review of the new Skoda Superb (sibling to the VW Passat and Audi A4). The reviewer is one of the more well-known auto journalists in Sweden, and he made some interesting remarks.

He talks about cannibalism - that is, the risk that one brand takes customers from another brand within the same company. I have long wondered just how VW is going to manage this, since all three non-premium brands (VW, Skoda, Seat) are moving up the premium scale.

He compares this Skoda with the new VW Passat CC, and notes how they share the technology under the hood but also how loads of stuff in the interior is the same in both cars. He compares the price of a Skoda Superb with an Audi A4. The Audi starts around 25% higher - and that’s for a car that actually shares components with the Superb. The DSG gearbox costs an extra 15,000 SEK on the Skoda but over 20,000 SEK extra on the Audi. And it’s the same gearbox. You also have the same engines to choose from as with the Audi. So he questions if all this stuff is worth the higher price in the Audi.

It’s an interesting dilemma. Skoda was considered “communist crap” only 20 years ago, but today it’s a really good car and they sell like hot cakes in Western Europe. That is thanks to VW, but how are they going to deal with it in the end?

I’m thinking the same about Cadillac. You know what we in Europe think about American cars like Cadillac. But what if they succeed in doing something useful with it? That IS what they want to do, otherwise they wouldn’t spend so much money on things like the BLS.

And then there is Opel. The real test comes now when both Saab and Opel are integrated, are being built in the same factories, share loads of components, and present new models based on the same platform at about the same time. How many “oh, but it’s just a premium Opel” quotes are we all going to have to read in every review? There hasn’t been much of that in Sweden, since the 9-3 is based on such old Opel parts that it’s almost forgotten, and the 9-5 is just - well, an old quirky Saab.

The bottom line: they will have to deliver something truly unique to Saab if people are going to continue to pay a higher price for it. But the uniqueness is probably not going to be in engines and gearboxes. Since they cost so much to develop they will want all brands to use them. So what will Saab get that is unique?

Safety? - “Oh yeah, we know how to do build a very safe car, but we’re not going to give that to those who buy an Opel. You will just have to sustain more injuries in an accident. Sorry.”

That will go down like a lead balloon, I’m sure.

Design? - Probably, but what is good design is not easy to measure on a scale. It could easily go wrong.

Technology and gadgets? - Probably, but they better get the quality right from the beginning.

He ends the Skoda review with an interesting remark. It’s a sedan - and a hatchback. They made a clever hatch, one that I was hoping to see in a new Saab. You can open the lower part as on a normal sedan, but also turn some switch and open it as a full hatch. Being Swedish, it wasn’t a long stretch to relate it to Saab:

“…Saab owners who live in a nostalgic dream of a hatchback could be turned on by Skoda’s clever solution where you get two models for the price of one”.

It’s gonna be a looong 15 months before the new models arrive…