There's plenty in store for Saab in the coming years, with a substantial revision of a current model, a new crossover, and a new entry range all in the works. Saab USA's GM, Steve Shannon, chatted up the editors at Inside Line to spill some of the beans. The 9-5 is slated for a complete redesign sometime between 2009 and 2012, where the car will get updated styling and a selection of new powertrains.
That same general time period will also see the introduction of a new crossover dubbed the 9-4X and a new entry model named the 9-1, the latter of which IL believes will target the Volvo C30. The look of all the new Saabs will be penned at GM's European design center, which spawned the awesome Aero X concept (above) whose influence has already been felt in the redesigned 9-3 range. Expect more Aero X-tinged goodness in terms of styling as new Saabs make their debuts in the coming years. Head over to Inside Line for additional details and speculation.
[Source: Inside Line]
Reader Spy: Chevy Volt caught on set of Transformers 2
Spy Shot: Production interior of Chevy Volt (maybe)
Rumormill: Lexus LF-A... Stillborn?
Ford reveals 2010 Mustang badge
REPORT: Chrysler may sell Dodge Viper rather than kill it
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Nissan Murano
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Dodge Journey R/T
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Jeep Compass Sport 4x2
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Porsche Carrera S
First Drive: 2009 Honda Fit Sport
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Stephen @ Jun 24th 2007 3:59PM
They still exist?
Rolf B @ Jun 24th 2007 4:15PM
And the General (in it's financial state) will let them do it? I wish thay had shown the same dedication to Olds or putting some styling snap in Chevy or even MAKING Buick take the rear drive car they need to survive in the US. Oh well I guess SAAB is more important.
Petey @ Jun 24th 2007 4:41PM
Saab has become another platform for which GM can do their brand badging. So sad. Saab is completely lost. Might as well sell it to the Chinese.
Hansi @ Jun 24th 2007 4:53PM
Then how come they will be releasing four brand new cars in the next few years (the next 9-3 wasn't mentioned in the article) and the 9-2X and 9-7X will both be axed.
Hello @ Jun 24th 2007 4:54PM
Saab 9-1 eh? Could be interesting if it's not sourced on the GM Ecotec/Cobalt platform or something similarly atrocious.
PiCASSO @ Jun 24th 2007 5:18PM
Hello... you are an idiot.
"Ecotec/Cobalt platform or something similarly atrocious"
Ecotec is an engine, not a platform.
Cobalt is based on the Delta platform, which the Opel/Vauxhall Astra is based on. The Astra has won numerous awards in Europe... so I wouldn't call the Delta II platform for the 2009 Saab 9-1 anything "atrocious".
Hello @ Jun 24th 2007 6:06PM
No need for name calling. I'm perfectly aware that ecotec is an engine, though I was not aware that the delta platform was shared by the astra. That doesn't excuse the cobalt with its junky styling and interior though. My point is that saab shouldn't put economy car components like the ecotec engine in any future cars. If they want to use the delta platform, so be it.
SaabFan @ Jun 24th 2007 8:14PM
Re: "economy car components like the ecotec engine"
I never liked the name "ecotec", but it's not an economy car engine like the misleading name might imply. It takes a tough engine to be pushed to 1,400 hp without breaking.
http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/more/37898
Saab's 210 hp version is not shared by any other GM model as far as I know.
Hello @ Jun 24th 2007 8:53PM
Is the 2.0T in Saabs lineup based on the ecotec? I'd guess that Saab uses their own engines? I suppose it isn't that bad, but when you buy a saab you want some exclusivity in components. Then again going with an established engine in the 9-1 might cut down development costs as well as consumer cost. I have heard dubious things about the ecotec based cars such as the cobalt in terms of reliability, but I'm unsure as to if it's the engine's fault or other little bits going bad.
Mattlach @ Jun 25th 2007 9:29AM
There is much much more to a car than the platform.
As long as the platform provides enough rigidity, you can make a completely different vehicle with com-pletely different dynamics off of the same platform.
While I am not exactly an Ecotec fan, I did like what Saab did to it. I drove a 9-3 with the 4 cyl and a 6 speed not too long ago, and it was a peppy little engine, despite only being 185hp.
JC3 @ Jun 24th 2007 4:55PM
Bring back the curved winshield.Distinctly SAAB.
Jeff @ Jun 24th 2007 5:23PM
Inside Line is a little late. Trollhattan Saab reported this timeline months ago, and they had everything down to the year instead of a three year window.
This link goes to TS commenting on the Inside Line article, and not TS's initial reports on the timeline. Those were posted some time ago and it would take too long to find the exact post. This one says the same stuff though:
http://www.trollhattansaab.net/archives/2007/06/saturday_night_4.html
Also...anyone saying Saab is a lost cause or useless obviously has no idea what they're talking about and is just repeating what they've heard on other misinformed websites. Go drive a new 9-3 when they hit dealerships and then tell me Saab is a useless, dead brand.
Hello @ Jun 24th 2007 6:08PM
^^ What he said. I'm very impressed by the 9-3. Here's to hoping that the very dated 9-5 gets an update soon as well.
dave @ Jun 25th 2007 9:38AM
I second--no, third--that. My wife and I just bought our second 9-3. Excellent cars. Are they as refined as an Audi or BMW? No, but you can't get a better combination of thrust, amenities, styling, fuel economy, and (enough) cache for the money. Plus, with certification, we're warranted up to 100,000 miles, so .... folks need to stop parroting other magazines, and actually drive the car.
Yago Bal @ Jun 24th 2007 6:03PM
SAAB's importance for GM has nothing to do with the cars it sells!!!
SAAB is developing the future turbo-engines for the entire group (and that's the future, just look at VAG), all the E85 engines (future again, even in the US you'll see ethanol gaining importance), plug-in hybrids (yes, the Volt was developed by SAAB) and the XWD all-wheel-drive for all the group, besides, of course, the safety concepts.
As you see, the entire group's future is being prepared by SAAB, so it's not that importante for GM the cars SAAB develops for itself or the cars it sells.
Wich means that SAAB will not dye, but probably won't have any good cars either...
Gregg W. @ Jun 24th 2007 6:36PM
That front end looks an awful lot like the new Camaro. Don't the headlights, air intales, and mirrors match up? Should we expect a Saab Transformer?
Jeff @ Jun 24th 2007 8:51PM
@Hello: True, the 9-5 is an ~8 year old car. But what does that mean? It means all of the kinks and problems were ironed out about 4 years ago. I agree that it needs an update, but remember, it started out as a great car, and is nearly perfect since it hasn't been screwed with in a negative way in years. Test drive one, they're seriously a great ride.
@Gregg: Personally, I think that a Saab Transformer would be pretty badass, but aside from that...I see what you're saying about the Camaro resemblance, but that's only because of the heavy brow look created by the new hood. The styling is pulled from the Aero-X concept car, not the Camaro. The front ends don't have much in common once you get past the fact that both cars look like they're glaring at you.
Hello @ Jun 24th 2007 9:10PM
True on the quirks being ironed out, but the issues I speak of are platform specific. The chassis dymanics in particular are (from reading reviews) quite dated. Around 2000 I remember riding in and driving a rented Saab 9-5. It was incredible, and a revolution from the horrible little Cavalier I owned at the time.
As an example, Shortly after that I purchased a Ford Contour (Mondeo), which at the time was praised for its excellent chassis, handling dymanics, and power for its class. Fast forward 7 years, and even though I've maintained it perfectly, the flex in the chassis and the handling dynamics compared to the other cars I've test driven and rode in feel ancient. I'd be willing to bet that a side by side with a new A4/3 Series vs. a 9-5 would put any doubts to rest on that issue. The thing is, I really have a fond outlook on Saabs, and so I hope they come back with a fantastic and updated product line.
JP @ Jun 24th 2007 9:35PM
#13 -
So the LNF Ecotec direct injection turbocharged engine was developed by Saab? Nope.
So all those E85 trucks and full size cars are built on Saab technology? Nope.
So the series-hybrid Volt was developed from Saab's parallel-hybrid BioPower? Wrong again.
Since when has Saab been a leader in AWD? Did they ever even have AWD before the 9-2x (subaru) or the 9-7x (chevy trailblazer)???
And vehicle safety is about $$$, not any special technology. Everyone has the same access to vehicle design concepts and airbag/seatbelt suppliers.
Like post #1, I struggle to find a financial reason for GM to continue funding Saab, or ever purchasing it in the first place.
Steven T. @ Jun 25th 2007 12:06AM
I can give you one very good financial reason for GM to have purchased Saab: It was a more cost-effective choice than buying Jaguar. If you're going to go on a binge, why not choose the low-cal alternative?
Remember back in the day when GM was trying to buy Jaguar but Ford managed to snatch it away? Apparently the wounded egos at GM figured that they needed to buy SOMETHING, and there was poor little Saab.
Ford has lost a boatload of money on Jaguar, but it has at least done a fairly decent job of taming the beast. Given how badly GM has handled Saab, it would have likely lost much, much more money on Jaguar.
Mental exercise time: Imagine all of the lovely badge-engineered wonders that GM could have slapped the Jaguar name onto!