Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The End of SAAB
- Thread starter joepunk
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
GM does not need Saturn to bring in Opel models into the US. Chevrolet is a quite suitable brand. What was the point of having Malibu and Aura, from two brands that target the same audience in the same country? If one of them was an upscale brand such as Toyota vs. Lexus or a performance tuned brand, maybe, but dividing the limited marketing budgets among pointless brands is a big part of why GM went bankrupt. I still cannot believe this inept GM management survived for so many years by feeding the media the same "union contracts are killing us, there is no other reason" line.
Opel is more premium then Chevy is. The Insignia, Astra, etc will have to be stripped of the features in order to fit it into the Chevy lineup. The upcoming Buick Regal( a rebadged Opel Insignia) is probably going to start anywhere from $25-27K which is out of reach for a Chevy mid-size sedan unless you want the Insignia to be stripped of its features like the Saturn Astra was. GM was trying to take Saturn more upmarket to go up against Volkswagen. The first-gen Aura was a stop-gap( which was just a reskinned G6) until the Insignia was ready and would become the 2010 Aura.
We can all argue about why GM needs the same car over two different brands. Some of it is valid. GMC buyers wouldn't even think about buying a Silverado over a Sierra despite them being the same truck. Saturn buyers won't be caught dead in a Chevy. While I agree that GM needed to shed brands, you will see that Pontiac and Saturn buyers will not return to GM. Same thing happened with Oldsmobile. They went to Toyota. There are a lot of factors that went into GM's bankruptcy. Mismanagement, the UAW, bad dealerships, and to top it off the financial crisis/recession. Though mismanagement was the key factor( after all, they did agree to the UAW contracts back in the 80's that were hurting them today). Thankfully, the executives piloting GM today are new people like Ed Whitacre and just announced Chris Liddell or younger folk who went against the traditions of old GM( like Mark Reuss who is now head of GMNA who used to head Holden). Only executive remaining from old GM is Bob Lutz who is responsible for the better products we are seeing today.
Saab, Buick, and Pontiac at one time or another each made a badass car.
I have loved, no LUSTED after the Buick Grand National/GNX since I was in high school. This was another case of GM finally getting something right, then killing it. The last two years of this model were amazing. That turbo 3.8L was a beast of an engine. Then, in 1988, they downsized the Regal and its siblings to a front wheel drive platform.
I think I just have a soft spot for big, black, mean looking RWD cars. I also liked the last gen RWD Impala with the LS1 V8. Heck, I even liked the GMC Syclone/Typhoon, which also had the Buick turbo 3.8L engine.
This is what I was talking about with the rebadged Opels. The Astra was the first Opel import, and it backfired on Saturn because of its price. It was a good car, but for the same price or cheaper, you could get a Mazda 3 or several other models. GM faced an uphill battle trying to move Saturn upscale to go against the likes of VW. Ironically, VW ran into this same problem when trying to upscale.
You are also correct about buyers cross-shopping. GM actually did build some brand loyalty with Saturn, and many buyers did not cross-shop with Chevy.
FWIW, I drove the Saturn-badged Astra. It was not half-bad, but it was just not competitive with the Mazda3. The suspension was not great. The steering wasn't responsive. The interior fit and finish was not terrible, though. Certainly better than other GM small cars in the US market.
If you're referring to the pre-GM Saabs, they were very interesting cars for their time, but those old Saabs not compare well against even a 2009-vintage Honda Civic sedan--and that includes safety features!
Heh. I kind of feel sorry for GM when it comes to small cars. They have never been able to produce a good small car. Their small car lineup has been a history of failure. While some of them weren't bad (like the Cobalt), they weren't very good either. Then you have models like the Chevette and the Vega. Ugh. Even the early reviews of the Cruze haven't been that great.
Of course, Ford isn't much better. The current Focus isn't bad, but isn't great. And of course, from way back, there is the Pinto. The new Fiesta looks good, though.
Saturn was truly an amazingly great value brand. There are cheap cars that are just that; cheap. Saturn was the exception. They were extremely popular up until 2003 - when GM really took over, turned out the 5 different models, and offed the S and L series.
The Aura was ok, and the Ion before that ended up being decent. The Vue was popular as well, but in the end, the Sky was the epitome of GM - make something that shouldn't be made. A roadster from Saturn? That's like the Johnny Cash Remix cd. Just no.
Saab and Saturn: GM's fault, I say.
Nice.
Again a lot of features were not included from the Euro market due to the poor exchange rate. Plus, it was designed for the market for 2004 times. In 2008, in the US it couldn't cut it. The new Astra is much better and getting rave reviews in Europe. I hope it comes over as a Buick.
Yeah, I know, the Astra that Saturn got would not have been half bad five or six years ago.
Quagmire's logic is at least as good for Ford as it is for GM... the second generation Focus in Europe was well-liked. Oddly, after the bad call of not bringing it to the US, the old mildly re-tweaked Focus actually sold fairly well, which makes no sense. The Fiesta and the third-gen Focus will be good additions for Ford in the US, and sorely needed.
Darn
My first car was a Saab. A red one.
It was a model 96 with 3 cylinders.
You had to put snowmobile oil in the gas.
Come to think of it, it sounded and smelled like a snowmobile.
It had lousy heat in the winter.
Still, it only cost me $50 and it lasted a year or two until the clutch broke.
It was a great first car.
Guy friends couldn't figure out how to drive it. (But I read the manual).
Oddly, my current Toyota is almost the same color....
Keri
PS. On an unrelated topic, my Mother never failed to remind me that some of her cousins worked at the Volvo factory... (Mom! that's a DIFFERENT car! Saab ISN'T Volvo!)
PPS- My 3rd (or 4th?) was a Volvo. Oh great!
My first car was a Saab. A red one.
It was a model 96 with 3 cylinders.
You had to put snowmobile oil in the gas.
Come to think of it, it sounded and smelled like a snowmobile.
It had lousy heat in the winter.
Still, it only cost me $50 and it lasted a year or two until the clutch broke.
It was a great first car.
Guy friends couldn't figure out how to drive it.
(But I read the manual).Oddly, my current Toyota is almost the same color....
Keri
PS. On an unrelated topic, my Mother never failed to remind me that some of her cousins worked at the Volvo factory... (Mom! that's a DIFFERENT car! Saab ISN'T Volvo!)
PPS- My 3rd (or 4th?) was a Volvo. Oh great!
Sorrow for SAAB
I lived most of my life in NE Wisconsin, where winters are long and brutal. Like Sweden, I would suppose. In my home town, there was a ice-racer mechanic who owned a Saab repair shop, and it was more or less his mission to keep Saabs working and in circulation. Our town probably had more working Saabs in it than Stockholm as a result.
All my friends and I were enthusiasts. Even though I was broke about 90% of the time, over the years I have owned the following Saabs:
1969 (?) 96 (four stroke, not 2- stroke, but it did have the fantastically fun "4-on-the-tree" column shift manual transmission)
1976 99 GLE (Great car--a friend of mine smashed it into a West Virginia guard rail at about 50 mph and totalled it. We both walked out of the accident without a scratch.)
1986 900 SPG ("Darth Vader's Saab". It was my dream car. My wife totalled it in a huge t-bone accident--again, she escaped with no serious injuries.)
During the two decades of the 70's and 80's, Saab was a company that absolutely lead the world in automotive design innovation, albeit in their quirky Swedish way:
Turbocharging had been invented and used in higher performance vehicles, but it was Saab that implemented turbocharging in such a way as to boost performance in the 50-80 mph region, making the car great at passes on the highway without drinking gas constantly.
The dashboard design of the 1979 900 series, which would remain largely unchanged for a generation, was pure genius. The way heat and ventilation controls were designed back then is now how nearly every car maker does it (two twist knobs).
Handling was great and they were always fun to drive.
Saabs were always great winter cars. The older, the better, actually. My 96 was the best winter driver ever conceived by the mind of man. The underside of the unibody panel was like a giant sled--you just glided over huge drifts.
The demise of Saab was inevitable once GM got involved, so this lament for them I write now was a long time coming.
I wish there were some way Swedes could buy this thing back and run it again like they did in the day. Employee buyout? Unless Svens are designing Saabs, they aren't "Saabs". They're rebadged Subarus or bastardized GMs.
I lived most of my life in NE Wisconsin, where winters are long and brutal. Like Sweden, I would suppose. In my home town, there was a ice-racer mechanic who owned a Saab repair shop, and it was more or less his mission to keep Saabs working and in circulation. Our town probably had more working Saabs in it than Stockholm as a result.
All my friends and I were enthusiasts. Even though I was broke about 90% of the time, over the years I have owned the following Saabs:
1969 (?) 96 (four stroke, not 2- stroke, but it did have the fantastically fun "4-on-the-tree" column shift manual transmission)
1976 99 GLE (Great car--a friend of mine smashed it into a West Virginia guard rail at about 50 mph and totalled it. We both walked out of the accident without a scratch.)
1986 900 SPG ("Darth Vader's Saab". It was my dream car. My wife totalled it in a huge t-bone accident--again, she escaped with no serious injuries.)
During the two decades of the 70's and 80's, Saab was a company that absolutely lead the world in automotive design innovation, albeit in their quirky Swedish way:
Turbocharging had been invented and used in higher performance vehicles, but it was Saab that implemented turbocharging in such a way as to boost performance in the 50-80 mph region, making the car great at passes on the highway without drinking gas constantly.
The dashboard design of the 1979 900 series, which would remain largely unchanged for a generation, was pure genius. The way heat and ventilation controls were designed back then is now how nearly every car maker does it (two twist knobs).
Handling was great and they were always fun to drive.
Saabs were always great winter cars. The older, the better, actually. My 96 was the best winter driver ever conceived by the mind of man. The underside of the unibody panel was like a giant sled--you just glided over huge drifts.
The demise of Saab was inevitable once GM got involved, so this lament for them I write now was a long time coming.
I wish there were some way Swedes could buy this thing back and run it again like they did in the day. Employee buyout? Unless Svens are designing Saabs, they aren't "Saabs". They're rebadged Subarus or bastardized GMs.
I think SAAB should go back to their roots and be a small independent company focusing on compact and midsize luxury/ near-luxury sedans.
They should stick to the 9-3 and 9-5 and grow slowly from there.
They should stick to the 9-3 and 9-5 and grow slowly from there.
Luxury Schmuxury!
Saab's real roots are: UTILITY
Kinda like a Deux Chevaux or an original Beetle.
No Power-assisted ANYTHING.
Crummy Heat.
Clouds of Blue smoke.
The smell of Leafblowers and Snowmobiles.
A funny freewheel lever thing on the floor.
Odd, pivoting crank up windows that go up and down like THAT.
Always, always starts no matter what.
Never, ever gets stuck in anything.
No Oil Changes!
850cc? = 90mph (eventually)
Sven and Bjorn had better get hopping before someone else corners this end of the market!
I'd buy another model 96 if only I could... A Smart car is just too luxurious.
Keri
PS> Thanks to Uncle Karl for rides in all of his itty bitty funny looking foreign cars way back when.
Saab's real roots are: UTILITY
Kinda like a Deux Chevaux or an original Beetle.
No Power-assisted ANYTHING.
Crummy Heat.
Clouds of Blue smoke.
The smell of Leafblowers and Snowmobiles.
A funny freewheel lever thing on the floor.
Odd, pivoting crank up windows that go up and down like THAT.
Always, always starts no matter what.
Never, ever gets stuck in anything.
No Oil Changes!
850cc? = 90mph (eventually)
Sven and Bjorn had better get hopping before someone else corners this end of the market!
I'd buy another model 96 if only I could... A Smart car is just too luxurious.
Keri
PS> Thanks to Uncle Karl for rides in all of his itty bitty funny looking foreign cars way back when.
Personally, I don't believe Saab were ever "luxury" enough to charge their high prices. My friend's mum owned a 2002 Saab 9-5, and it was a nice car, but for the money, it really wasn't.
There's nothing wrong with buying a Saab for such a price. I guess there's some intangible thing about them that is worth paying the extra money for, similar to the 15" Powerbook G4s in the early 2000s.
I'll go ahead and call it "Saab tax", but call it whatever you want.
I have to agree with you actually.
Saab charges BMW prices for their cars, and that's the problem...at the lower end I think they can be competitive doing that to a certain extent, but at that higher end it doesn't make sense to me.
The 9-5 is a nice car but I don't think it really stands up to the German cars in the same class, especially when you start talking $40,000-$50,000 cars. The Saab 9-3 is more of a stretched Golf than a 3-Series competitor. Which isn't a bad thing, the Golf is an outstanding car. But I don't think the 9-3 is on the same level as the 3 Series in terms of dynamics....the 9-3 Viggen was and is an interesting and exciting car but was a torque steer monster.
Which isn't to say I think Saabs are junk. They've made some cool and innovative cars over the years and have a good tradition and brand image they can continue to build on.
I'm shocked.
Vauxhall/Opel (It's Vauxhall to me being British) is far from being a premium brand. They go after the fleet car market in the UK, which means cheap, reliable etc. Premium is left to the likes of BMW, Mercedes Benz, Audi and SAAB.
To be fair, he doesn't say Opel is a premium brand, just more premium than Chevy. Which in the UK anyway is probably an accurate way of describing the situation.
Regarding SAAB... to put it bluntly, GM don't have a f**king clue, and that's why they should have been allowed to fail.
Personally, I don't believe Saab were ever "luxury" enough to charge their high prices. My friend's mum owned a 2002 Saab 9-5, and it was a nice car, but for the money, it really wasn't.
There's nothing wrong with buying a Saab for such a price. I guess there's some intangible thing about them that is worth paying the extra money for, similar to the 15" Powerbook G4s in the early 2000s.
I'll go ahead and call it "Saab tax", but call it whatever you want.
That is the core of the problem with Saab (and GM in general). It lost its way. The older Saabs were known for their utility, but somewhere along the way, they decided to move upmarket into the luxury/sport sedan market. And, of course, here in the U.S., almost any European model is considered luxury. The problem was that Saab wasn't luxurious enough to be truly considered a luxury brand, and it wasn't sporty enough to compete with the likes of BMW in the sport sedan market. Sticking with front wheel drive also hurt its sport sedan abilities.
Yep, that is what I meant. Even in the US, Opel is better lined up with Buick now due to Opel's recent push further upmarket then Chevy. Again, the Saturn Astra barely got any of the features the Euro market had( the Astra was what? the 3rd or 2nd best selling vehicle or in its class at the time).
I can't wait for the Regal to get here. When I was in London at the 2008 British Auto Show where the Vauxhall Insignia debuted, I liked it and couldn't wait until it came here as the 2010 Saturn Aura. But, now it is the 2011 Regal. Reviews have liked the Insignia as well in Europe. Though nothing seems valid until Clarkson gets a hold of it.
Yep, that is what I meant. Even in the US, Opel is better lined up with Buick now due to Opel's recent push further upmarket then Chevy. Again, the Saturn Astra barely got any of the features the Euro market had( the Astra was what? the 3rd or 2nd best selling vehicle or in its class at the time).
I can't wait for the Regal to get here. When I was in London at the 2008 British Auto Show where the Vauxhall Insignia debuted, I liked it and couldn't wait until it came here as the 2010 Saturn Aura. But, now it is the 2011 Regal. Reviews have liked the Insignia as well in Europe. Though nothing seems valid until Clarkson gets a hold of it.
Now I've actually been fairly impressed with some new Buicks, but what overall is the progress on Buick's marketing appealing to people who are under 60? I take it they won't be reprising their Tiger Woods ad campaign, for all the good that did them even when he was not a pariah.
My parents bought two Buicks in 2004 when they were in their mid-50's, so it can't be that bad.
Now I've actually been fairly impressed with some new Buicks, but what overall is the progress on Buick's marketing appealing to people who are under 60? I take it they won't be reprising their Tiger Woods ad campaign, for all the good that did them even when he was not a pariah.
Younger people were buying the Buick Enclave when it came out. The new LaCrosse is selling well, but haven't heard any age info yet. Buick's goal is to go after Lexus, Acura, and Lincoln. Though I fear GM is making the same mistake as they always done with Cadillac trampling on Buick's foot by having the new FWD based SRX going against the RX and upcoming Super Epsilon II based XTS. Both vehicles should be Buick's and not Cadillac's.