Trollhattan Saab has changed!
The site you're viewing now is the original Trollhattan Saab weblog, though it's now an archive only and no new material is posted here. As of February 2009, all new material is posted at our new site - Saabs United.
Please join us at Saabs United and get your daily Saab fix from Saab sources all around the world.
Worst. Work day. Ever.
Am not in a good mood tonight. I am in desparate need of another job. Preferably in Sweden.
In happier news, I’m thinking of adding the Honda CRX and Toyota MR2 to the list of cheap fun cars I’d like to own for a short period.
——
President Bush wants more time before committing to loaning money to the Detroit carmakers. One economic agency is now saying there’s a 5% chance of a disorderly bankruptcy and fro the wording of the statements coming out of Washington, it sounds like their preference is to lead the companies into an orderly bankruptcy procedure.
From the Detroit News:
“I don’t know of an imminent announcement coming from us,” Perino said at her daily news briefing, suggesting that expectations for a quick decision were premature.
“If we’re going to use taxpayer financing to assist the automakers, all stakeholders are going to have to come to the table and be willing to show that they are capable and willing to make really tough decisions about the way forward,” Perino said. “We need them to become viable, competitive firms in the future, and in order to do that, concessions are going to have to be made by — by stakeholders.”
She said the prime goal remained to “prevent a disorderly bankruptcy.”
Here’s something I didn’t know.
The TARP fund from which the US government intends to provide loans was $700 billion in total. That fund was divided into two sections. The first section of $350billion has almost been exhausted. There’s only $15 billion left (I never thought I’d use the word ‘only’ in reference to $15billion).
The elephant in the corner of the room is the fact that in order to hand out funds from the second batch of $350 billion, the government has to get their reasons past the US Congress. We all know how well that worked last time.
So if the Whitehouse doesn’t get these emergency funds out of the remaining $15billion, things will look rather messy for the Detroit guys.
——
Here’s one of the best commentary pieces I’ve read about the whole crisis so far. It comes from a service called Gather.com
Detroit carmakers have been hammered about their decisions to produce large vehicles in preference to making smaller ones. Right or wrong, that’s been the view of many.
Enter Gather.com:
The facts are that Ford, GM, and Chrysler spend millions taking the pulse of just what Americans want. Why do you think they spend so much on the annual auto show ritual show casing not just their latest models, but a myriad of concept vehicles? The idea that corporations of any kind are focused on meeting the “needs” of its customers is incorrect. Corporations are focused on meeting the “wants” of its customers.
We have to face reality folks. The problems the auto industry is experiencing are due to the economic crisis all of us are facing…….It’s simple arithmetic ladies and gentlemen. People are losing their jobs by the thousands. And people without jobs do not buy cars. So in reality, blaming the auto industry for needing a hand up is like blaming a laid off worker for needing unemployment benefits.
It’s a recommended read.
——
On to something a bit more fun, eh?
Various Saab forums and websites have threads dedicated to tracking the appearances of Saabs in movies. this site my prove to be a great resource for that.
IMCDb is the automotive version of the Internet Movie Database. I don’t think they’re related, but no matter.
Click on Saab and you get a whole list models and even sub-models (e.g. they break down the 9000 into CS, CSE, etc). I’ve never heard of most of the movies or TV shows, but someone’s done their research as there’s some very obscure stuff in there.
Great pictures, too.
Thanks Golfhunter (via his Flickr a/c)
——
MSN Autos have had three of their writers take the Turbo X for a spin, with mixed reviews:
First:
…..the Saab 9-3 Turbo X SportCombi is a true Saab (not a Subaru) and it’s wonderful. It has a great interior, with one of the best dashboards I can remember…… After just a few hours in the SportCombi, I consider myself a new member of the cult of Saab, in spite of the lower-than-expected fuel economy.
Then:
Once you get moving… the character of this car changes. Torque really comes alive around 2,800 rpm, so keeping the tachometer around three grand provides impressive acceleration……However, with a cramped rear seat and a lofty price tag, there may not be enough performance to win over buyers in the tiny market for sport wagons.
And finally, maddeningly:
Saab does a commendable job of ladling their funkiness over the Opel products that General Motors hands them these days. I’ve owned half a dozen of Trollhattan’s finest, and there are plenty of Saab touchstones in this most enthusiastic of 9-3s.
This sort of thing will never go away, will it?
——
Autonet in Canada have had their hands on a 2009 Saab 9-3 Aero XWD, too.
The overall package for the 9-3 is one of conservative good looks with a bit of unique flair inside and out, and a sporty enough demeanour so that daily use remains fun. Detractions from the whole experience are few, and my main niggling complaints are much the same as for similar models in its class.
Not a sizzler of a review, but a decent way to kill a few minutes.
–
11 responses so far ↓
1 ctm
// Dec 17, 2008 at 7:50 pm
I don’t agree with Gather.com.
The point of having a product portfolio with different brands must be to spread the offerings. Some brands for this, some brands for that. So wherever the market goes, there is a brand with the right product. Here, GM failed. They have brands all over the world, all different kinds of them, and yet the whole company seems to depend on one single market. And it’s not that the problems came from nowhere regarding that market. They have been losing it to Asian and European brands for years now. Why didn’t they do anything? But even companies with only a few brands can make it. Look at Toyota. Yes, they are having a hard time but are not on the brink to bankruptcy. And look at Europe. The first brands in desperate need of some sort of financial help are *surprise* all owned by GM or Ford.
It’s true that corporations are focused on meeting the “wants” of the costumers. But, successful corporations also meet the “needs”. Corporations with a spirit also give the costumers what they didn’t know they needed. They create new markets and thereby staying ahead of the costumers. Again, Apple is a very good example of this. One should think that a company like GM should at least have one brand to do that in every part of the world, thus spreading the risks. But this whole giant corporation only has one single thing, one single model, they say is the future – the Volt. And it’s not even on the market yet. It’s pathetic.
2 Markac
// Dec 17, 2008 at 8:02 pm
“She said the prime goal remained to “prevent a disorderly bankruptcy.””. Perhaps Washington can assist GM in achieving an orderly bankruptcy?
3 swade
// Dec 17, 2008 at 8:10 pm
That seems to be where they’re thinking of leading them, Mark.
ctm, I think the fundamentals of what he said are sound. He’s addressing the US market, not the global market. GM didn’t prepare for higher fuel prices properly, but the US market didn’t buy with high fuel prices in mind either until earlier this year. The F150 or F100 or whatever was still the best selling vehicle in the US until just earlier this year. They prefer to buy big and are doing it again now that gas is back to $1.70 a gallon.
Where GM really let themselves down over the years is crap quality. They’re starting to address it now but have a lot of years left before they erode the goodwill built up by the Japanese.
4 mr_ebbot
// Dec 17, 2008 at 10:24 pm
CTM,
I think you hit the hammer on the nail… But the trouble GM and the others have is the same in many other companies. They have not been saving money for development and making production more efficent. This must always be in the spotlight even when you make heaps of money because one day you don’t.
GM, Ford and Chrysler have been bleeding long before the big crisis. They just haven’t done anything about it.
5 Bernard
// Dec 17, 2008 at 11:39 pm
You are right Swade. GM offers plenty of cars with decent, competitive fuel economy. What’s really hurting them is their reputation for poor quality, especially long-term quality (as opposed to the JD Powers 90 day kind of quality).
Americans really want to buy American cars, but not if they are going to spend thousands extra in maintenance and depreciation compared to a Honda.
6 Edonis
// Dec 18, 2008 at 1:21 am
If the 9-5 is to be built at Russelheim, that kind of talk won’t ever stop.. “It’s really an Opel in disguise, on an Opel platform, made at the Opel factory, but at a higher price” I’m pretty fed up with that already as it is. How come other brands get away with this, but Saab doesn’t? I’d like someone to bash on Audi for being priced up Skodas or something like that.. Not that I have anything against Audi, but when car reviewers bash Saab like that, they should do so to everyone. Or simply stop.
7 Richard
// Dec 18, 2008 at 1:43 am
I’m not sure if I’m in the minority here or not, but even if American/domestic vehicles were of decent build quality I still wouldn’t buy one. The design language of domestic vehicles forever seems to be 10 years behind what is offered from the import markets. And when compared to what is actually available in other markets, the domestic offering looks completely outdated and bland. These are some of the reasons that the import markets have also done so well. Buyers want vehicles that are not only reliable, but have the appearance of being designed by someone other than a focus group.
8 Kurt W. Krauss
// Dec 18, 2008 at 2:42 am
Wait-I thought Audis were fancy Volkswagens.
9 gordon
// Dec 18, 2008 at 5:17 am
mr_ebbott has it right, I think. Since the early ’90’s Detroit has been selling dressed up simple trucks for more and more money. First the Explorer was $20,000, now it’s $30,000 and the Lincoln Navigator is $55,000. We all knew the profit margins for SUVs and pickups were large. What’s more the prices were higher than any car. There is no $30,000 Ford (OK but the Mustang starts at $20,000) or $55,000 Lincoln. So where is all that money now? It did not go into perfecting existing cars, nor trying out brash new segment busters, nor world class powertrains. It did not even go into perfecting the SUVs. Foreign competition has virtually matched those with much less practice and effort. Squandered the surplus, they have.
This may actually indicate that the short term focus of the US stock market is fundamentally flawed for heavy manufacturing and high technology. We now see that it is also fundamentally flawed even for banking and investment brokers.
10 gordon
// Dec 18, 2008 at 6:04 am
It might be all doom and gloom. On the other hand, maybe the good times were too easy. Maybe what they need is hard times, to push them to excel. Afraid to take risks? No matter, now you are having the risk forced on you.
11 zippy
// Dec 18, 2008 at 7:53 am
“Mmmmm, I dont think I want to spend my hard earned cash on a VW with a four ring logo.” Thats what I told some b**ch of a sales manager at Audi a few years back when we were looking at possibly of a new A4. What precipitated my comment? An up-and-down look at me followed by “are you sure you are in the market for a car of this class?”.
Back on topic, Audi TTs are built in Hungary! And GM quality does suck! The current US Administration has nothing to lose by letting the Big Three die, it’ll be Obama that will face the wrath of voters in 2012! GM is 50pc to blame for their own predicament and if it werent for Saab Id say let them die.