The banner above is an advertisment - if it asks you to download software, please ignore.
Site News - 3/26 M Car Covers (by State of Nine) | 12/12 Make Amazon Pay Saabnet!
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 22:25:47 -0000
From: "Dave G" <nospamnopsamom>
Subject: Re: Saabs is Saabs


Truth is Saab is a part of GM now so we're finished in the terms you idealistically describe-having said that I looked inside,outside,underneath and on top of a colleague's latest "baby"- an Audi A4-horrible throughout IMO.Talk about uninspired If I had to make a choice between that and any new say "equivalent" Saab-no contest!!-fortunately I don't though and will stick to my 1986 90016vT for as long as it sticks to me. "pablo" <pablonopsamlyhombreNOSPAMnet> wrote in message news:ut4t2cconctv57nopsam.supernews.com... > > "Andrew Stephenson" <amesnopsamrak.demon.co.uk> wrote in message > news:1037198416snznopsamrak.demon.co.uk... > > > > Bravo. The funny thing is, if we look back through the history > > of engineering... VW Beetle, the Austin Mini ... > > The VW Beetle was an engineering feat in the 1930s. It was *not* a > well-engineered car in the 60s and 70s anymore. There were far more durable > and better engineered cars around - the fact so many of them are still > around is a testament to their owners' dedication and the fact it is easy to > fool around with the simple layout. My mother had a beetle, and it was a dog > with fleas - she was not the one to enjoy working on her car, and thus the > car was always broken. Same with the Mini -my sister had one-, which was > *not* a durable car, and required careful care for it to not fall apart. > Let's not glorify those "engineering achievements" of the past too much - if > they were on sale today, only die-hard-fanatic would dare touch 'em with a > long pole. You want unexciting econo-box, and Nissan or Fiat will give you > far better cars than the ones above ever were. If you want engineering > achievement, you have to come up with better cars than the ones described > above - their redeeming quality was $ - they sold by the tons, and it's only > today they have graduated to affordable classics. Back then, they were mass > production cars that were not particularly well-engineered for their time. > > Saab better stay away from being too utilitarian. You have to design in some > passion into cars that cost over $30k. If buying a car was just an equation > of good mechanical design, we'd all drive unexciting $12k boxes. > > As far as I am concerned, and for the period I can remember, Saabs have > offered a different proposition. While well-built, to claim they were at any > point in time superior engineering products compared to other leading brands > is to distort facts. They have always been good cars, and their owners > deemed them superior - which as a rule all owners have always done, and will > always do. The golden age of a brand mysteriously coincides with the model > year of one's own car in too many owners' eyes... > > The success of BMW does *not* rely solely on good engineering and > utilitarian appeal. Please. It relies on brand management in spades. To > claim BMW are honest-to-earth car engineers that got lucky is ridiculous, > and Saab better not be that naive if it wants to be around in 10 years. You > want to manage a brand only based on building solid cars, go manage Lada. > Even Toyota and Nissan are getting away from that. > > ...pablo > > > >

Return to Main Index
StateOfNine.com
SaabClub.com
Jak Stoll Performance
M Car Covers
Ad Available

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2024 - The Saab Network - saabnet.com.
For usage guidelines, see the Mission & Privacy Notice.
[Contact | Site Map | Saabnet.com on Facebook | Saabnet.com on Twitter | Shop Amazon via TSN | Site Donations]