Friday Snippets
GM head honcho Rick Wagoner showed off some of GM’s future offerings a few days ago, including the Saab 9-4x. The image that went around at that time was small and got very blurry when enlarged.
A new version of the image has popped up at Edmunds and whilst still not print quality, it gives a much better idea as to what the front quarter profile of the production car will look like. It’s not much different to what we’ve already seen in the concept car, to be honest. The greater interest will be in the back, where they’re sure to tame down those tail lights.
Click.
——
I got a few emails overnight about this one: Mercedes Benz to Introduce Fully Turbocharged Lineup by 2010.
I’ve been saying for a long time that Saab should have established ownership of the Turbo segment ages ago. First BMW brought out their 335i and now Merc are going to go full-on into it too. I guess everyone is.
It’s pleasing to see some Saab defenders in comments there (Go David!)
It’s good to see Saab emphasising turbocharging in their recent advertising. They really, really need to hammer this home.
And speaking of that…..
——
Saab History has noted that SaabUSA have made some modifications to the “Recycle” TV ad that was featured here last week.
The voiceover, which repeated the script three times in the initial ad, has been edited to cut it down to two repeats (it’d definitely have potential to get on your nerves showing six times an hour during the Tour de France coverage) and the tagline at the end has changed as well.
——
Andy Rupert is the voice behind the “Release Me” video, a former Saab 900 owner (and I know deep down he really, really misses it) and as of a few months ago - a Volvo sales guy.
With the recent featuring of “Release Me” in the video widget (see the right sidebar), the song got a new lease on life, especially at Andy’s workplace, where they managed to entertain themselves with some high-volume repetition and a Volvo adaptation.
——
There’s been a bunch of recent Turbo X reviews come in:
* You can click here to download Go Auto magazine, an excellent Aussie publication, which has a review of the Turbo X based on the same session as the one I attended at GM’s proving grounds here in Australia. If you only read one of these reviews, make sure it’s this one.
* Drive.com.au cover the same event:
The test drive finished with a burst around the dirt circuit, where the Turbo X demonstrated a higher degree of sure-footedness than the front-wheel-drive Aero we were benchmarking it against.
A lap of the dirt track at rally car speeds with Johansson behind the wheel shows just how capable the Turbo X can be in skilled hands.
* Walkerton.com, from Canada, give a great insight into the good old days of Turbo in the X-review:
Count one, two, and then bang as the boost came on. You had to anticipate this rush because there was a phenomenon called torque steer.
Those were the days…..
Potent and sexy, the only real problem with the Turbo X is that only 100 are allotted to Canada and most are already spoken for.
* Autoweek have a “short stint” as well:
Most impressive is how it handles rounding turns. The all-wheel-drive system and sport-tuned suspension do a great job of keep the car planted when attacking corners. There are some signs of understeer when you push it hard, but for normal to semispirited driving, it provides all the grip you need. The stiffened suspension isn’t too harsh, either, for day-to-day motoring.
——
And finally……some Japanese Chinese towing images that I got via email. Unbelievable.
Thanks to Ying for the correction!
More from this category
- Wednesday Snippets
- Saab rumours abound….
- Saab multi-car review in Boston Globe
- Update on Euro Delivery Program for US market
More from this author
Subscribe to this author
Recent Comments
- Markac on Saab Oz sales - October 2008
- Kurt W. Krauss on Awaiting the GM news
- Eduard on 2009 Hirsch pops up on Flickr
- alaero on Saab Oz sales - October 2008
- PT on Saab Oz sales - October 2008
- Tompa on Awaiting the GM news
- mark_balfast on 2009 Hirsch pops up on Flickr
- kdsaab on Saab Oz sales - October 2008
- Tompa on 2009 Hirsch pops up on Flickr
- van god los on Awaiting the GM news
Daimler’s sensible decision about turbocharging shows why they’d make a good new corporate parent for Saab. Owning Saab would give them a two pronged weapon against BMW and Audi. I wonder what will happen to their superchargers though?
Swade, one correction, those are Chinese police and I guess, Chinese issued bikes - the bikes are likely made by Honda, I don’t know who makes the tower.
Thanks for the correction, Ying. Post will be amended accordingly - SW
If you live in the U.S. - you see the 9-4X on every street corner. Its 1 part GMC Acadia, 2 parts Chevy Equinox, a dash of the Saturn CUV, and a tad Buick Enclave. This CUV is American as apple pie. Are we sure Anthony Lo isn’t originally from Detroit?
A few small Saabish styling cues does not make this vehicle a Saab - not even close! Wow, slap a malformed three hole grill on the front, paint the A-pillars black, put the key in the center console, angle the dash a little toward the driver, and voila - a Saab? I don’t think so. The 9-4X is just another poorly proportioned moon-buggy CUV that screams “me to” with a pseudo Yankee/Swedish accent. Yuck.
Take two: Slather the interior in fake wood, plasticized chrome, put a big sparkly chrome grill on it, chrome the wheels make and them 22″, move the key to the steering column and voila - insta-Cadillac and it will sell like hot cakes to Americans with no taste.
This is badge engineering at its worst.
That fender vent is ridiculous. Here’s hoping the remaining bean counters at GM see fit to produce the 9-4X without it, saving Saab the embarrassment and GM some money. If it is so desirable, sell it as an accessory.
On a more positive note, it seems that the Aero-X-style wheels will finally see production. This is a plus.
VW beat Saab to the punch with the wheels!
http://www.volkswagen.de/vwcms_publish/vwcms/master_public/virtualmaster/de3/modelle/passat_cc.html?csref=home-teaser-links-passat_CC_me
Joe: You’re a being a bit harsh, but in some ways I have to agree. More and more GM seem to be trying to make a car it thinks people want and then as an afterthought it tries to make the thing Saabish. It just doesn’t work that way. It’s a hard lesson that they should have learnt by now.
I have no particular love of SUVs and CUVs or softroaders as some people call them, I like even less. If I really needed an SUV, I’d certainly buy a more capable 4WD vehicle.
I think the 9-4x is a replacement for one of the two cars that should never have carried the Saab name, and it’s a segment of the market that Saab should never have entered. I guess they were clutching at straws when they did, but it shouldn’t have happened.
Crossover vehicles are another case entirely and as Saab demonstrated with it’s 9-3X concept car in the early part of this decade, it’s an area that Saab could’ve done extremely well in. It’s a crime that the 9-3X Crossover Coupe never went into production and it’s also a crime that we’ve had to wait so long for a crossover version of the 9-3SS.
Very grown-up new format Swade. Sooner or later you really should do this full time ( winces as he touches a nerve……) even if its not for GM.
Congrats and don’t forget to keep the beast on a short leash: One. Post. A. Day.
Here’s a LINK TO THAT VIDEO so that when somebody reads this post in 3 months, and the video on the sidebar has changed, somebody can still find it.
New Saab comercial…. “One german just got the idea, another german saw the light a couple of years ago… Saab has used turbochargers to boost both performance and economy for the last 30 years.”
Ok…alittle long perhaps but you get the idea…
Just saw the new episode of Burn Notice and have to admit the SAAB 9-3 Aero Convertible looked great! They even showed the “Recycle” tv ad and it also looked great! I’m going to try and win that free convertible online! It is really nice to see some advertising! Someone has been listening!
Eh? Merc going totally TURBO? But they’ve put so much into the supercharged Kompressor…? (which doesn’t even get mentioned in that link…)
Boring 9-4X is boring. What happened to the great looking concept? The 900-esque rear hatch is cool though.
As I noted before, little change other than it appears turning indicator light has been moved to mirror housing (copycat move that one, was better where it was, let likely to be damaged) and the remaining space seems to house a Freelander style vent.
All said, still looks good, will look better in darker colours I think. My 9-3 lease expires in December so looks like no new models before then - 9-3x doesn’t interest me and 9-5 and 9-4 taking forever to be released. A6 avant or C-class estate looking likley sad to say.
Oh, forgot to mention the inevitable addition of the roof rails. And the body coloured mirrors.
I cant agree less with those of you thinking just that (less) of the 9-4X. It realy feels good to look at an old Saab man like Jan-Åke speaking of the 9-4X with a huge smile. I guess if he is satisfied with the 9-4X and belive it to be a Saab then who am I to criticize the vehicle. But ok, I bet that he would smile even more if there were to be an Aero-X style Sonett made in Trollhättan… Just dreaming..
There is one of those towbikes in Stockholm. It operates on the highly trafficed “Essingeleden”. It´s a four lane highway made up of two briges spanning the mainlands over two islands.
If the 9-4x indeed is going to have a Saab powerplant (Turbo 4), then it is a Saab. Maybe even more of a Saab then my V4 (Ford powerplant) or early 99s (Triumph powerplant)!
Joe - Both the 9-7X and the 9-2X were products of badge engineering. The 9-4X is a product of plaform sharing and not badge engineering. The only other model currently sharing the same platform(Premium theta platform) is the upcoming Cadillac SRX. Until GM releases pictures/options for either vehicle, one can not confirm the similarities between the two.
One thing that has been bugging me on this site is how automatically people define the upcoming Saab’s as not Saabs. Saab has been making vehicles for almost 60 years, during that time they have re-defined what a “Saab” is. Saab’s have evolved from 2 stroke engines to turbocharged engines. Saab has made 2dr coupes, 2dr hatchbacks, 2dr station wagons, 3dr combi’s, 4dr sedans, 5dr combi’s, roadsters, convertibles, etc. Even as KWK has said, Saab have even come with other manufacturer’s engines. At the end of the day, does that make them any less of a Saab? See what I am getting at?
9-4x is boring and ugly. It doesn´t look lika swedish car, and actually it isn´t. And it´s going to save Saab brand? I liked 9-2x more.
Per Gilbrand (Saab turbo engineer) said 30 years ago that there will be no cars without turbo in the future. And he was so right.
I really don’t see a reason why everyone is bashing. First of all, this is not a real pic as you all know, but despite that, I think it still looks good and will probably look a 100 times in person. I mean yes looks are important, but what the car has to offer is even more important. I really can’t think of a better looking SUV in that segment to begin with. SO with the right engine and fuel economy, this thing has a great possibility to pull through. The key here is that GM/Saab are trying, and honestly it is not a bad attempt - at all.
Just by looking at the 9-7x (no offence to owners) and then looking at this, you should simply say…”ahh, much better” aside from the fact that this is not a re-badged SUV.
One more thing - does this picture make the 9-4x look extremely squished and stretched out? Or am I seeing things?
NineTwoX,
The Cadillac BRX photos have been released and wow how much it looks like the Saab 9-4X.
http://www.edmunds.com/cadillac/brx/review.html
In fact, the Caddy will debut BEFORE the Saab so the 9-4X will be a rebadged Caddy. Other CUVs will follow from Saturn and Opel all using the Caddy BRX as their base. It’s just a shame that in the past, while Saab were sometimes given platforms to work with from other GM lines (9-5/Vectra Platform) and (9-3 Epsilon platform Chevy Malibu, Saturn Aura, et al) Saab made the platform their own. The end products were completely different from any other cars they shared platform similarities with. As a result, safety was better, all driveline components were engineered to Saab’s demanding standards, in-car entertainment systems were purpose built for Saabs by their own engineers, ergonomics were terrific, functionality was spectacular, and styling was unrecognizable from its platform mates, everything down to the now defunct door handles said Saab. Now, the “New” generation of Saabs will only have styling tweaks that are suggested by a “design center” located in Sweden. The new 9-4X will roll off the same Mexican line that the rest of its stable mates do. This may be the same story for the new 9-5 - a glorified Opel Insignia with some nice “Swedish-like” touches. The new 9-4X is like faux wood furniture to me - may be nice to look at but it’s not the real deal. All I’m saying is that, with every new generation of Saab, the cars are becoming more and more homogenized. They are totally loosing their basic appeal of being truly different, purpose built machines.
I know this is an old rant but seeing Saab’s “new” face in the 9-4X, I just had to bring it up again. This vehicle is far from being what Lutz described as the “most Saab-like Saabs in 30-40 years”
Yes, I know GM let many great engineers go and slimmed down the Trollhattan development budgets. It’s all market driven and Saab can’t afford the free reign to develop their cars like they used to. They can’t totally alter their platforms like they use to. They can’t have their own in-car entertainment components, or even their own door handles - it is a components sharing game and adding styling cues and Saab-specific gizmos is the way The General thinks they’ll win that game. I’m just really disheartened at the winds of change. At least Saab is still alive as GM struggles on life support.
Joe - Obviously you do not understand the whole concept of badge engineering and platform sharing. Badge engineering is when a manufacturer takes an existing product, makes minimal changes to it, and sells it under a different brand. Usually it includes different body panels, lights, and interior. Vehicles that have been badge engineered typically share similiar dimensions as well. Once again, the 9-2X and the 9-7X are great examples of badge engineering.
However, platform sharing is different in that the vehicles only share the platform. These platforms are flexiable and can be made wider, longer, shorter, and accommodate different drivetrains. These platforms are designed to be global and be built in any factory.
Comparing the 9-4X to the SRX, we have the following dimesions:
Wheelbase: 2814mm to 2906mm
Length: 4775mm to 4580mm
Width: 2080mm to 1840mm
Height: 1684mm to 1702mm
They may look similiar to you but they’re different vehicles dimension wise. Until we see an interior shot of the SRX, we will not know just how similiar it is to the 9-4X.
Just on a side note, platform sharing allows for safer vehicles than one off platform since manufacturers can invest more money into research than developing X amount of platforms.
NineTwoX,
The current SRX is NOT the BRX that the 9-4X is based on. The SRX is on a different platform called Sigma. The BRX (SRX replacement {it will be called SRX when released}) and 9-4X will be badge engineered cars on the Theta-Epsilon (TE) platform. They will roll off the same line just like the Cadillac BSX and Saab 9-3SS do in Trollhattan (BTW, both the 9-3 and BLS have different dimensions in every category minus the wheelbase yet they are essentially the same car). Different tail lights, interiors and sheet metal, perhaps a few tweaks to the the suspension but overall, same story we’ve had from Detroit for years. Other GM re-badge jobs have shared platforms and had different dimensions due to different suspension setups and different sheet metal stampings but still this is a rebadge job in my book. The lines are blurring way too much when it comes to the 9-4X and BRX (new SRX)
http://www.seriouswheels.com/pics-2006/2006-Cadillac-BLS-FA-1280×960.jpg
“Just on a side note, platform sharing allows for safer vehicles than one off platform since manufacturers can invest more money into research than developing X amount of platforms.”
The platform that the 9-3 is built on (Epsilon) is so different from than any other Epsilon platform that it can only be built in Trollhattan. It has undergone so many changes it could be called a stand-alone platform. Saab totally redesigned everything about Epsilon and made a truly remarkable car line from it. That’s why the 9-3, in all variations, is far safer than its other Epsilon brethren. Same goes for the 9-5 which was a combination of Vectra and 9000/Lancia platforms so completely redesigned that it too could only be built in Trollhattan. Those day are over. We will probably never see Saab so dramatically transform base platforms like they did on the 9-3SS and 9-5.
Joe: I don’t think Saab will be allowed to transform platforms like they once did, but in the past it was something they had to do. The NG900’s platform was a composite of Astra, Cavalier and Calibra components, none of them really suitable for a premiium car. It wasn’t until the OG9-3 was released that Saab managed to make the platform perform to a satisfactory level and even then, they couldn’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
With the 9-3SS they were able to adapt the Epsilon platform into something quite decent. It’s a crying shame that had to build such a boring, conventional car on it though.
I remember Saab used to advertise about “not conforming”. It’s a shame they forgot about that with 9-3SS. In fact, they seem to have forgotten about that in general.
Seeing that one of your key opposition and benchmarkers adopts your own moves means that somehow you are leading the way in some departments/areas. I guess that carrying on delivering Turbo engines has been one of many key decisions for Saab that has kept the brand going/alive. Accordingly, Saab will have to leverage on this fact in an aggressive way as the A brand has even withdrawn their turbo line up in favor of V8/10s to satisfy the Yank market. No doubt that very soon they will be forced back to their roots. How dumb will that plan look ???? Saab has made many mistakes and miscalculations but knowing that now Merc is heading their way is sweet !!!!
Well…every time I tell people I used to drive a Saab (good memories…), they say one of two things:
1. I’ve never heard of that
2. Oh, turbo?
Saab does own turbo in the minds of a lot of people…but many, many more people have never even heard of them…which is worse.
This is not about one of the topics here, but I just checked out the Australian Government’s Green Cars Guide and noticed that a SAAB has made it into the top twenty cars to check out. I have no idea how they judge it, but it’s good to see a SAAB in there (A SAAB 9-3 SportCombi to be precise) … http://www.greenvehicleguide.gov.au
By the way, if you keep an eye on Audi and VW over the next couple of years you will find that there will not be many purely turbocharged engines in their line ups as they will be moving away from Turbos to Superchargers or a combination of both.
Why is there a fender vent?! This isn’t a Caddy…
Detroit has been sold on the idea that fender vents are essential to make a car or SUV sporty. To me, they are the the curb feelers of the oughts.
In the old day, Saab would never ad soemthing that created more drag and served no function. This is why I’m sure this car was designed by someone with HEAVY American influence. This bling is awful and completely out of line for Saab’s design ethos. Just ad some 22″ chrome spinner wheels and the 9-4X goes gansta! Detroit at its finest.