[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
Ahh yes, gotta love revisionist thinking where the sins of the past are covered up... Let's take a look at some of Paul's statements:
>Back before GM owned half of SAAB, SAABs were well liked, quirky vehicles
Oh? So Saab was "well liked" by the masses? Hardly. They got the "quirky" badge of honor back then and unfortunately it stuck. Just like Apple makes a superior computer, God forbid the public would want to buy something "quirky"!
>The 900 Turbo regularly was in the "Top Ten" cars list at Motor Trend
Oh? I recall that happened once or twice... Not regularly. (And Motor Trend isn't a REAL magazine anyway... ;-)
>and many automotive columnists drove Saabs everyday.
Oh? Name ten... Or rather, name TWO. I certainly doubt it was more than a couple... They were too busy fawning over German cars (as they do to this day)
>Once GM took over, they had the Saab designers abandon their new 900 design and base it on an Opel.
GM didn't force them to do anything... Saab KNEW that they couldn't develop a whole new platform (that they desperately needed) on their own. Saab didn't have the $$$ that it takes. Heck, they just kept recycling the same old tired platform from the mid 70's right up to '93... Ever heard the phrase "the C900 could be called the 99B"?
>The result was a big yawn.
Maybe to you it was... but things like the Trionic engine management system and the <shock> modern integrated electronics systems in the NG900 was a big step for Saab. Some people just look at the surface sheet metal... I look underneath.
>The 900 fell off the "Top Ten" lists. Consumer Reports reported "there are better alternatives"
Who gives a rats a** what Consumer Retorts says... That magazine would have us all driving Camrys.
>In "Sedan Comparison" tests, the NG900 and 9-3 placed dead last all the time.
In what magazines? Certainly not in some of the ones that *I* subscribed to... The 900 Turbo certainly kicks butt and was competitive. The venerable Audi A4 1.8T is weak in comparative performance...
>The NG900 and 9-3's safety ratings fell.
Bull@#$%! Study the statistics... The "new" Saabs are safer than ever. I can show you conclusive numbers of REAL WORLD accident data that proves the NG900 is a far safer car than the C900 ever was... Just because you think the sheetmetal LOOKS somewhat thicker in the C900 doesn't prove anything.
>SAAB became a company that has to provide heavily discounted leases to move product
True... I'll agree with this... but do you know WHY this is happening? Because there is a LOT more competition in the luxury car market these days. Lexus, Infiniti, and Acura didn't EXIST back in the heyday of the C900 (early to mid 80's). The car biz is a lot more cut-throat now than ever. The C900 would be the laughing stock of the car business if it was offered today... It's totally out of date.
>Thankfully, the 9-5 came along and breathed some life back into the company.
Amen.
posted by 205.188.2...
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |