Saab halts next 9-3 development, may radically downsize next-gen
Click image above for a high-res gallery of the 2008 Saab 9-3
Tougher emissions and fuel economy regulations in Europe and the United States have forced Saab to put the brakes on development of the next-generation 9-3. The current Saab 9-3 is built on GM's Epsilon platform (shared with the Opel Vectra, Chevrolet Malibu, and Pontiac G6). The next-gen model was set to be based on the longer and wider GM Epsilon II platform (used for the 2009 Saab 9-5). However, Saab and parent company General Motors are considering radically downsizing the model to fit GM's upcoming 'Global premium compact' platform - a size rivaling the Audi A3.
GM design sources told Autocar that a smaller chassis would dictate new technologies to maximize interior room. These would include a slim modular roof assembly and slimmer doors with advanced side-impact technology. General Motors has also hinted that the new 9-3 could be manufactured in the United States. Many European automakers are feeling the impact a weak dollar is having on profits and, like BMW, are moving or increasing production in the States.
Gallery: 2008 Saab 9-3
[Source: Autocar]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
f3rg 9:44AM (5/10/2008)
Cool. I hate the fact that cars continue to grow in size with every generation.
Reply
AmericanTruckGuy 9:49AM (5/10/2008)
The cold reality with the impending squeeze in emissions and mileage requirements is that either we will see the death of many sports/performance cars or the taxes on them will sky rocket putting them out of reach of even more people like you and me, not that many people on here have the money to buy most of the exotics/high end cars featured on here.
Reply
Derek 10:51PM (5/10/2008)
People said this in the 70's too. IMO, the 80's gave birth to some of the most fun sports cars produced in a long time. They may not have had sub 5 second 0-60 times but they also weren't oversized and overweight.
James Sonne 10:12AM (5/10/2008)
How does this affect the 9-3 Aero XWD model?
Reply
Benfolio 10:12AM (5/10/2008)
Yup, you know your car is too big when you need three washer nozzles to clean the windshield.
Reply
Doug 10:21AM (5/10/2008)
So how might this affect the 9-1 or 9-1x (whatever it might be called), the car that would supposedly be on the Global Delta (Compact) platform? Push it down to the Global Small Vehicle platform (a la Aveo, etc.)?
Also, US mfg. possibility is another strange call, though I suppose it's not that strange with the 9-4x to be built in Mexico.
Reply
psarhjinian 3:18PM (5/10/2008)
While the idea of a turboed-till-its-eyes-bulge subcompact is a good fit for Saab, the Aveo is really a piss-poor platform for such an endeavour. That the Aveo can make the Yaris seem fun to drive is indicative of this.
Now, a dressed up Opel Corsa with a 260hp+ turbo four, that's something else.
nezromatron 10:29AM (5/10/2008)
Awesome! I've been wanting smaller cars forever and all it took is hyper inflation and skyrocketing fuel costs. Maybe car companies will figure out how to make 250hp engine go 30mpg now instead of wasting time with 500hp ones that get 15.
Reply
Benfolio 10:44AM (5/10/2008)
How small do you want to go??? Nothing wrong with the Fit/Versa/Yaris/Aveo selection currently available.
Well, MAYBE the Aveo.
Can we count the SX4? Sure, why not.
TigerMil 10:58AM (5/10/2008)
The obvious answer would have been to call the next gen 9-3 the new 9-5!
Of course, I'm in favor of calling an E92 M3 V8 and M5 but WTF. A tii 1 series BMW with a Dinan turbo upgrade to the 335 engine would be sweet.
Reply
Bondtastic 11:16AM (5/10/2008)
That is a bit ridiculous, the 9-3 was going to be the small car on the 9-5's old platform. I know cars have gotten bigger, but man I am just happy this happened so you don't have whale sized "compacts"
Reply
Soccer Mom 11:27AM (5/10/2008)
Does it means that Saab wouldn't be able to reach its annual sale target of 4 cars now?
Reply
Esprit bird 2:01PM (5/10/2008)
I have wanted a Saab for a while, but until they lose a little weight and cleans up its complicated interior, i still search for a replacement for my Aurora.
Reply
psarhjinian 3:16PM (5/10/2008)
The interior was cleaned up for 2007 in both the 9-3 and 9-5; the switchgear is basically a slightly nicer version of standard GM fare and isn't nearly as problematic as the 2003-2006 split-SID.
You've hit on one of my biggest beefs with GM: the unwillingness to let Saab be Saab, especially in terms of design and marketing. The interior, under GM, has gotten fussier and fussier since the GM900/9-3 was introduced. It's better, but gimmicks like the chrome instrument surrounds and metal batwing trim on the steering wheel have no place in a brand that defined itself by sensible, if unconventional, ergonomics.
Worse, still, is how Saab doesn't yet have a hybrid, nor a commercial implementation of BioPower. Saab, more than any other brand, should have gotten a hybrid powertrain--it has the perfect demographics for it. So what does GM do? Puts it in the Escalade, a vehicle only eclipsed in anti-green appeal by the Hummer.
GM flat out does not understand Saab's market (or marketing in general, it seems). Selling the Cadillac BLS in Europe (heck, selling Cadillac in Europe at all) and the 9-7x in America just shows how fundamentally clueless GM is at product planning . For another example, see the colossal failure that is Pontiac's portfolio.
The cars aren't bad--some are excellent--but the management is thoroughly useless.
Derek 11:11PM (5/10/2008)
Unfortunately, Saab makes the lightest cars in that market segment. BMW, Merc, Audi, etc are all 100+ pounds heavier.
psarhjinian 2:26PM (5/10/2008)
Hey, the original 99/900 was around for fifteen years, wasn't it? This is typical Saab product lifecycle.
On that note, isn't this the 9-5's tenth year?
Reply
Dinger 12:19PM (5/12/2008)
15? Try 26. The 99 came out in late '67 as a 68 model and then that basic body ran through to the '94 900 convertible. 1968-1994. 26 years. That's getting your money's worth.
James 4:32PM (5/10/2008)
I would be totally more receptive to an A3-sized Saab, than a 9-5 sized one. Good move. Now, make it looks as good as an A3, and we might be talking.
Reply
Derek 11:11PM (5/10/2008)
As long as they don't make it A3 weight. How Audi makes the 168" A3 weigh as much as a 9-3 or 9-5 (depending on the A3's options) which are 14" and 22" longer is beyond me. I think Audi must make large portions of their frame from lead or depleted uranium.
steve 4:39PM (5/10/2008)
a3 sized turbo 300 horse 4x4 because audi is too friggin lame to bring it here and instead sends a 3700 pound luxo cruiser with an anemic 6cylinder and low 20s mpg
Reply