Here’s a fun little mystery that EduSaab has begun unravelling.
EduSaab is the Saab enthusiast world’s premiere patent researcher. Every story I’ve come up with here that’s involved registering a patent or design or whatever has come through his work. And here’s his latest effort.
He was looking around this weekend and having some trouble finding anything Saab related. GM are now registering new stuff as “GM” rather than “Saab” so it’s getting tougher to find things, though not impossible. By some clever use of search filters, EduSaab managed to come up with a new patent labelled as an “automobile” that he hadn’t seen before. The applicant were Anthony Lo and Anders Gustafsson and the applicant was GM Global Operations, Inc.
It gets even more interesting – the patent application was registered very recently – on the 4th November 2008, in fact.
There were no drawing with the initial page that EduSaab found, but he kept digging. A few searches later, he came up with these by searching via the patent number.
Now, those of you who are relatively new here at Trollhattan Saab might be seeing this vehice for the first time.
Those of you who have been here since the early days would recognise a very strong similarity between these images and the Saab 9-6x that was being proposed back around 2005.
These were the days of the 9-2x, when General Motors still owned part of Fuji Heavy Industries. The proposal was for a second Saab-Subaru collaboration, one that would provide Saab with a midsize SUV largely based on the Subaru B9 Tribeca.
These were amongst the first ever spyshots I showed here at Trollhattan Saab, back in August 2005:
The vehicle in the patent is a five-door vehicle and the one in the spyshots is a three door vehicle but the similarities are obvious and undeniable.
It’s an interesting development and one can’t help but be curious about why they’re lodging a design patent in 2008 on a vehicle that was canned back in 2005/2006.
The other interesting angle is to pause and reflect on a vehicle that was widely regarded with a tinge of caution (to say the least) a few years ago. As you know, the 9-2x was critically panned because it was way too much Subaru and too little Saab. Enthusiasts viewed these photos with a certain amount of cautious optimism, fearing that the 9-6x would be more of the same – too much Tribeca and not enough Saab.
The sale of GM’s interest in FHI took care of everyone’s concerns as the plans were cancelled. We’ve still got the 9-7x as we wait for the 9-4x to come to market.
Again – why register the design now, in November 2008?
——
Many thanks to EduSaab for the excellent detective work!!
–
Not my cup of tea ….
Hmmm, my theory is GM is planning for a big brother to the 9-4X. And while this doesn’t mean they’re committed to building, the application may simply be a gesture to put a placeholder for that potential new model.
Now …… looking at those CGIs my first impression is
http://blogs.thecarconnection.com/blogs/marty_blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/09_traverse_profilem.jpg
http://image.motortrend.com/f/8492940/112_06nyas_04z+2007_saturn_outlook+photos_side_view.jpg
http://image.automotive.com/f/features/news/6695399/0607_z+2007_gmc_acadia+side.jpg
http://cache.jalopnik.com/cars/assets/resources/2006/11/Buick-Enclave-TOP.jpg
Look at the profiles of the Lambda family (Traverse, OutLook, Acadia, Enclave) above and you’ll see very similar size, proportions and lines. I would say the Traverse and the Enclave are the most similar esp. around the C- and D-pillars.
This may be simply another expansion of GM’s crossovers stable based on the Lambda platform.
I think it could have been better than the 9-7x, but it’s still not really a Saab. The rear especially looks just like the Subaru it’s derived from.
Take a look at the lights and the fog lights, in this pictures are more “Saabish”, identical to the 9-3ss Aero MY2008.
cheers
Wow, interesting indeed. Great detective work, Edu!
I’d say GM is protecting its intellectual property by patenting the design. Hard=pressed to imagine a Subaru-derived SUV is back on the table.
Unless, of course, Fuji Heavy Industries has expressed interest in acquiring the brand from General Motors. Now here’s a twist for ya.
Toyota has recently increased its stake in Subaru:
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/02/toyota-to-double-stake-in-subaru-parent-fuji-heavy/
I doubt Subaru has any interest in Saab, although both brands have always been quirky. AND both brands are the only two in the world whose names begin with S and contain a B.
SaabKen — don’t forget about Studebaker! oh, wait… never mind.
Would have rather GM had come out with this super-sized Saabaru than the 9-7x, but that isn’t saying much!
I doubt if the 9-6x would’ve been much bigger than a 9-4x. Neither of which are cars that Saab really needs any more than it ever needed the 9-7x.
I’m just curious… What exactly is the patent application about? A metal thing with 4 wheels and 5 doors?
A big brother or a small brother??? The 9-4x is similar in size with the ML, X5 and so(the Q7 its like the GL). Now there are the Q5, Tiguan, GLK, X3 that are smaller, and the strategy of GM for Saab is to do compact cars, like the new 9-3 using the delta platform.
I think the idea of the 9-6x, will be using it as a compact Crossover.
regards
ctm: The patent is a “Design patent” (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_patent). A design patent protects the design of the vehicle so another manufacturer cannot simply copy its look. It’s different than a “utility patent” which protects a novel new idea that has usefulness, e.g., a new process.
By the way, the patent was filed June 15, 2007 (EU) and June 29, 2007 (US). So they were still working on the design at that late date. Maybe they are planning on transferring the “look” to a GM platform?
saabyurk:
Thanks. I thought there were some EU regulations that would not allow patents to include designs as such. I know there have been a lot of discussing on car manufacturers protecting the design of a simple spare part, thereby prohibiting any other company to copy the design and make a (cheaper) copy allowing the consumers a choice. But I’m not sure what the current situation is at the moment. Do you know how well the design is protected? What if someone copied the whole design except the tail light? Or is it just discrete design elements with a clear impact on usage that are protected?
I’m behind SaabKen, even in these uncertain times you still need to look to the future and protect your assests. A larger Lambda based SUV would make a very good Saab MPV. I really dislike MPVs but a seat Allroader to go up against the X5 and Q7 would be good for Saab outside North America.
Just like Swade, I’m not interested in the CGI that has been registered but more as the why.
I remember writing on GMinside news a couple of years ago that wouldn’t it be ironic that the silver lining in the big cloud that was looming over GM at that time, would be the little Swedish that most call out to be sold or killed. A company that’s future is in small displacement high powered turbo-hybrid engines running on e85.
I am so glad that they didn’t make that car. It’s ugly! It is a good idea to protect your ideas though. You really think that it would have sold?
ctm: “Do you know how well the design is protected?”
I can’t really answer that, I work at a law firm (not a lawyer) where I write utility patent applications (reviewed and signed by a real lawyer), but I’ve never dealt with design patents. I’ve often wondered myself though.
You will notice, however, in the U.S. Patent, a list of references cited which are references the examiner thought were closest to the Saab patent, but which the Saab patent is considered not to infringe. The references listed are design patents D479491, D505890, D508436, D510543, D533809, D538710, and D570736. Interestingly, these are all Toyota patents except for one Volkswagen and one Honda patent.
Bernard said: “The rear especially looks just like the Subaru it’s derived from.”
Ahh Bernard, the rear looks like the current Tribeca. If you look back to the first Tribeca you might recall how ugly it was and how poorly it was received. Luckily for Subaru, GM sold it’s stake in FHI and Subaru was able to take all the 9-6 design work and hastily change some of the minor details to use for a major Tribeca refresh in the next model year. SO the Tribeca was derived (front and rear) from the more tasteful (relative term) Saab 9-6!
They definitely should have kept the Subaru link. Those brands would work well together. You can’t tell me this wouldn’t have been better than the Saablazer.
I think it’s about a little housekeeping- perhaps something they should have done some time ago but didn’t, and are now doing so for covering themselves.
Alternatively, it could be in relation to the redesign of the Tribeca- it took on a lot more Saaby features after going under the knife. Could even be a “clarification” of sorts as part of GM having divested itself of the stake in FHI- tying up a loose end so to speak. I wouldn’t be surprised if things like that happen frequently…sometimes divorces get messy.
My thoughts were along the same lines as Sport Mode. Just staking claim to the design features that GM put in play rather than FHI being able to use them freely.
Of course, the better rumor is that Saabaru lives!
Very interesting detective work, great job EduSaab!
I’m going to have to do some searching of my own….
Eggs, as I said above FHI has already used the features but maybe not ‘freely’. The Saab design work was likely handed over as part of the divorce and as Sportmode suggests, there were some loose ends to tie-up.
Now the big question!!
Where is this prototype??, it sounds stupid, I know, everybody will say………. in trollhattan!!! but, they have any garage to place those prototypes?? any place where someone like us, will stay an entire week looking cars and crying of what we lost??
It will be interesting to see that place.
regards
Eduard,
You must have a Swedish version of “Area 51″ [wink] ……………..
then I should find it with google maps, jejejeje
regards
How can a design be patented if 50% of it is clearly made by someone else ?
Doesn’t make much sense.
… except when Saab is being sold by GM at the Japs !
These picts not only recall the tribeca, it shares clearly some design clues with the rather ugly Ford Kuga.