Motor Trend gives the Saab TurboX a nod, readers don’t
Back in the day, a write-up in Motor Trend was the ticket to automotive notoriety. I was a subscriber in the 1970’s and 1980’s, and I learned a lot from reading those articles about cars that I’d never seen and perhaps never would see.
I think that a little of the gild is off the lily so to speak, but Motor Trend’s treatment of the Saab TurboX, while cursory, is mildly positive, and I’m assuming that they still have a large number of readers. That’s great. Good exposure.
The comments on the article, on the other hand, aren’t so kind. Only two at the moment, but they are sneering at the thought of spending US$42,000 for a Saab. One that in their minds isn’t as good as the competition based upon whatever criterion they consider foremost. There is something to be gleaned here: most people are ill-informed about Saab and they don’t care to be educated. That’s it. In selling parlance one would say that the “incumbent wins the close ones”. That is, the current favorite won’t lose unless the challenger wins out right. Saabs are not in the position to win outright. The BMW’s are more powerful. Subarus are cheaper. Toyotas are more reliable. Hondas hold their value better.
Saabs are great cars. But you have to value things that aren’t easy to communicate to the masses to appreciate them. That’s a real challenge for the Steve Shannons and Parveen Batishs to meet. How can you bring those values to fore in a 30-second sound bite? It’s not easy. Not easy at all.
More from this category
- One Owner’s Turbo X review
- Saab 9-3 Turbo X continues to generate press
- AutoExtremist on the Saab Turbo X
- NY Times on the Turbo X
More from this author
- EnG Monday AM Snippets
- Cadillac HUMMER Saab consolidation comes to the Music City
- The end of the world as we know it, part II
- A single EnG snippet that just won’t wait
Subscribe to this author
Recent Comments
- Jörgen Trued on Always carry your camera!
- Jörgen Trued on Tuesday night snippets
- mark_belfast on Tuesday night snippets
- sam on Tuesday night snippets
- PGAero on Saab stories - ever done a leave-behind?
- TTAero on Always carry your camera!
- Tedjs on Tuesday night snippets
- riku1100s on EnG Monday AM Snippets
- Tompa on Tuesday night snippets
- eggsngrits on EnG Monday AM Snippets
Yes, the ill-informed rejections by the readers are disappointing, but as we’ve discussed, what is the 1-3 word image of Saab? The best what, the most what? I don’t see any push to own a niche or value, like those brands do. Let’s give the GM brass some suggestions. Best designed? Well-rounded performance and luxury?
I agree, the perception of Saab is very disappointing. My 9-5 was $40k, and that was back in 2001!
“Born from jets”! Ooops, wait a minute…. I personally think, just commercials would do a lot of good. I have a 46 year old friend who saw a SAAB commercial a few weeks ago and felt the need to call and tell me. She said she had never seen a SAAB commercial in her whole life! That’s a problem. She knows they are nice cars but that’s it!
I used to subscribe to both Car and Driver as well as Motor Trend ‘back in the day’, however they seem to have lost a lot of credibility and generally have nothing really good or bad to say about most new vehicles. You might as well request a brochure online and save a couple bucks for the most part.
However, on a positive note, it is nice to see the blurb on the Turbo X though and you never know – it might encourage someone to go out and drive the vehicle before they form any opinion on it.
Any hey – did GM just throw some bonus cash on the hood of the Turbo X here in the USA? Well yes they did….
One thing I have learned since purchasing my Saab (almost a year now!) is that most individuals that have a negative comment about it have not driven a Saab product for years. The negative comments generally are related to quality however nothing noteworthy has gone wrong with the car in its first 13,000 miles. Honda owners ask why I am not driving an Acura, and Volkswagen owners tell me Audi vehicles are better. Toyota owners are generally so happy with themselves for purchasing a vehicle from ‘the collective’ they cannot even imagine that there are other cars out on the road still running.
A quick ride in my car usually surprises owners of those vehicles and if you cannot find a little senseless joy in spinning the tires off the line from a standing start and running that V6 through the gears then maybe a four cylinder Accord should be at the top of your shopping list.
I was looking over some Turbo X stuff the other day when someone from work saw that and started asking about it and the first question was are the new ones reliable. And as much as I can respect the engineering and design of many of the older Saabs, in the past they really weren’t all that great in that aspect but neither were a lot of other cars just a few years ago. (I know others have had perfect experiences but remember that quite a few haven’t and the loudest voices gather more attention, and when your market is small it doesn’t take too many people complaining bitterly to make the rest of the people think they’re spouting the truth.)
That’s an example of what Saab faces.
So how can Saab gain, let alone turn around public perception? I’d say by offering perfect products and a long, well defined advertising campaign. Question is will GM let them do that. They also need to get out and expand exposure in other ways (maybe supporting some forms of small racing, putting on more Performance Team events, offering weekend/evening driving clinics, etc.). We all know the journalists are supposed to be “unbiased”, but also offer great products and start working on improving that relationship.
I really liked some of the US marketing when the 9-3 SS first came out but the current “Born from jets” campaign and the same soundtrack music for the last couple of years doesn’t cut it any more. It’s as if they’re trying to produce flashy ads but they don’t have any content that tells you anything about the brand and what they stand for. And while I don’t have a problem with bringing up that heritage (although they always note in not so fine print that Saab is no longer affiliated with the makers of aircraft), they’ve been hit for as far back as the ’80s from what I can remember. At least back then their advertising also talked about the qualities and aspects of the cars. Now it’s just some pretty pictures and fast-paced music hoping that will draw a customer into the showroom. Then I look at some of the European and international advertising and just shake my head wondering why we don’t run the exact same ads here (such as the latest turbocharged/bioethanol spot shown on the international site, but oh wait, we don’t have any BioPower models here in the US even though GM was pushing Ethanol when it was the hot item of the week).
Related to that, what does it mean to be born from jets? The future products inspired by the Aero X concept to include the 9-4x, for example, have turbine shaped wheels and a cockpit style cabin, but is that what it means to have an aircraft heritage? To me aeronautical engineering stands for precision, high quality in engineering, state of the art technology (think turbocharging), sometimes function over form, and things like safety. Instead, it’s as if GM and Saab hope that people will see a couple of those design cues that are kind-of taken from the appearance of a jet and then hope to sell cars based on that. If those cars were perfect and class leading then maybe that would work. I have high hopes for the new models that are in the pipeline and I think they will be great, but I’m not sure they’ll be “better” than *every* other car out there. But as long as they look good and perform well they should have the potential to do okay on the market, but GM and Saab need to start building a real brand identity if they want the overall brand to grow and attract and then keep new customers. To draw customers in because it *is* a Saab.
Swade nailed the situation squarely by highlighting the sheer ignorance about Saab. I drove for the first time an 07 Aero with the V6 Turbo under the bonnet two days ago. I was overwhelmed by its performance, road dynamics and overall feel. On the road handling department this car has addressed all the ailments of all the previous 9-3 including the Hatch. I would dare to say that it felt better than my 9-5 Aero 01. The interior is simply fantastic. And yet, the press pesters it and bags it when as a package it leaves the B 3 and A 4 equivalents for dead. After the drive I was simply flummoxed trying to understand why this vehicle is not being heralded in par with the other Tectonics and outselling these. Again, the underselling and ignorance out there is mid blinding !!!
My apologies, I meant to state Eggsngrits not Swade !!! Maybe I am already missing his write ups already even though its not 5pm her in OZ !!!
Zoom in on the pic on MT - that driver is smiling!
One by one all the people that thought I was crazy to get the Turbo-X are now coming around and drooling over it: Acura, BMW, Audi, Lexus owners all wondering why they spent more than 42.
What Saab needs to do is ditch the “jets” and sell cars. Put on a serious driving ad on TV. Get Per to drive this car like a madman and put that on TV and get pics in mags.
Turbo-X is a machine that redefines driving on turns, banks, and real world driving.
…is anyone surprised? several readers on this site have been saying exactly this for a while now. But again, it’s a limited edition car and there are a lot of people out there with money too burn.
Wish I was one of them….!
I think the best virtue of our 5 year old 9-3SS Vector is that it is relatively uncommon, although a not-to-nice aspect is that while we see 9-3s regularly, most are of the cheaper variants. That says something about what people buy Saabs for - it’s cheaper, not because it’s better than a BMW.
I have had a lot of issues with it. Nothing major, but annoying, even if it provides me with a bit more confidence than the older 9000 which had an overheated engine. There is too much road noise and rattling to be considered a premium car. Even my 2002 Subaru WRX was more rattle free. The 9-3 is also feeling a little ancient - the chassis feels wobbly next to our WRX replacement - the Tribeca. The driving experience is only relatively mediocre next to the finest in sporty cars and a long shot from thoroughbred RWD vehicles.
I like the uniqueness of Saab, and the values it represents, but when Audi is rapid succession comes out with A1 thru A8 (with soon to be, the A7), and then the Q cars, you know Saab really really needs to have some products.
I fully agree with Beren’s view/points on the promotion side. As for the opposition drivers coming in wonder clearly proves what we have been stating all along. Despite the price Tag in all markets the X is still a hard to beat package. No matter what the bottom line is within reason, there is demand !!!
JoeMa: I’m not surprised at the readers, I’m surprised that Saab can’t seem to articulate the message even when there’s a superlative example like the TurboX.
I blame Saab/GM. a little advertising that actually talks about the merits of the car might be good. Everyone knows the history now give it a rest. Yesterday is gone tell us about today!
My wife was saying to me yesterday she believes she has seen maybe one Saab commercial over the past couple of years. When you get to BMW’s cred you can skip mentioning the car as the name itself will have weight.