3 ms·

I loved my SAAB 900, my first vehicle... but as the article pointed out, GM killed the soul of SAAB and should be viewed as a warning when buying a company. Cul

I loved my SAAB 900, my first vehicle... but as the article pointed out, GM killed the soul of SAAB and should be viewed as a warning when buying a company. Culture matters!

bluetomcat 7y ago
Nobody wanted cars like the Saab 900 by the mid 1990s. Volvo did away with the boxy design and started catering to a different demographic. Mercedes stopped producing Panzerwagens like the W140 and vault-like vehicles such as the W124. Handling and design were prioritised over long-term durability and build quality. It is still a cultural matter, but a one that pertains to the tastes of car buyers in general.
- linksnapzz 7y ago
  "Handling and design" and "long term durability and build quality" are pretty orthogonal. The 900 and Volvo 240/7x0/9x0 were old designs by the '90s; a mechanical refresh was neccesary even if the styling was to remain largely unchanged.
  - bluetomcat 7y ago
    > a mechanical refresh was necessary even if the styling was to remain largely unchanged No, a mechanical refresh only would not be sufficient. At the time, the styling of a Saab 900 or a Volvo 850 would look hideously outdated next to more modern German contemporaries like the first Mercedes CLK or an E39 5-series. They needed to rethink and redesign the layout of the car for the new era, rather than come up with mechanically-revised 1970s throwbacks.
    - linksnapzz 7y ago
      I'm sure that post '95 Saabs and Volvos also became more streamlined due to the demands of aerodynamic optimization. As for styling...de gustibus non est disputandum. I happen to like the squared-off Bruno Sacco era Mercedes look; it has the additional advantage of being a car that you can see out of. Many of the newer "modern, contemporary" European cars, to say nothing of the American ones, are claustrophobic rolling pillboxes in comparison.
bonestamp2 7y ago
I had a GM era SAAB (9-3) and I loved it. I was looking for something fun, relatively inexpensive and different. It satisfied all of those. I can see how GM's changes were a turn off for traditional SAAB buyers but I can also understand that GM was trying to make it profitable and that means some things had to change. It's too bad they couldn't make it work. Side note: many of the SAAB engineers ended up at Volvo and I love how Volvo now puts the ignition between the seats. Now they need "night panel" mode. :)
- linksnapzz 7y ago
  Sadly, GM was never very good at integrating acquired companies, and finding economies of scale between Saab, GM Europe, and GM North America was a bridge too far. Not only that-Sweden is an expensive place to build anything. Volvo has been making cars for years in places like Benelux, Nova Scotia and now South Carolina, whereas Saabs only came from Trollhattan and maybe Uusikaupunkki in Finland for 900/9-3 convertibles.
- Japhy_Ryder 7y ago
  Night panel and the funky pop-out drink holder were EVERYTHING!

I loved my SAAB 900, my first vehicle... but as the article pointed out, GM killed the soul of SAAB and should be viewed as a warning when buying a company. Culture matters!

bluetomcat 7y ago

Nobody wanted cars like the Saab 900 by the mid 1990s. Volvo did away with the boxy design and started catering to a different demographic. Mercedes stopped producing Panzerwagens like the W140 and vault-like vehicles such as the W124. Handling and design were prioritised over long-term durability and build quality. It is still a cultural matter, but a one that pertains to the tastes of car buyers in general.

linksnapzz 7y ago
"Handling and design" and "long term durability and build quality" are pretty orthogonal. The 900 and Volvo 240/7x0/9x0 were old designs by the '90s; a mechanical refresh was neccesary even if the styling was to remain largely unchanged.
- bluetomcat 7y ago
  > a mechanical refresh was necessary even if the styling was to remain largely unchanged No, a mechanical refresh only would not be sufficient. At the time, the styling of a Saab 900 or a Volvo 850 would look hideously outdated next to more modern German contemporaries like the first Mercedes CLK or an E39 5-series. They needed to rethink and redesign the layout of the car for the new era, rather than come up with mechanically-revised 1970s throwbacks.
  - linksnapzz 7y ago
    I'm sure that post '95 Saabs and Volvos also became more streamlined due to the demands of aerodynamic optimization. As for styling...de gustibus non est disputandum. I happen to like the squared-off Bruno Sacco era Mercedes look; it has the additional advantage of being a car that you can see out of. Many of the newer "modern, contemporary" European cars, to say nothing of the American ones, are claustrophobic rolling pillboxes in comparison.

bonestamp2 7y ago

I had a GM era SAAB (9-3) and I loved it. I was looking for something fun, relatively inexpensive and different. It satisfied all of those. I can see how GM's changes were a turn off for traditional SAAB buyers but I can also understand that GM was trying to make it profitable and that means some things had to change. It's too bad they couldn't make it work. Side note: many of the SAAB engineers ended up at Volvo and I love how Volvo now puts the ignition between the seats. Now they need "night panel" mode. :)

linksnapzz 7y ago
Sadly, GM was never very good at integrating acquired companies, and finding economies of scale between Saab, GM Europe, and GM North America was a bridge too far. Not only that-Sweden is an expensive place to build anything. Volvo has been making cars for years in places like Benelux, Nova Scotia and now South Carolina, whereas Saabs only came from Trollhattan and maybe Uusikaupunkki in Finland for 900/9-3 convertibles.
Japhy_Ryder 7y ago
Night panel and the funky pop-out drink holder were EVERYTHING!