IMO abandoning the small car and going BMW bashing was the worst mistake Saab ever made. Sure, the results were good such as 9000 but the competition in that market was just too hard. Being cheap, robust and well-built, the 96 had a solid fanbase and it was always the backbone of the business for Saab and had it been replaced by a proper successor - no late 80's financial troubles, no GM, no bankruptcy. Just good old Saabs, built like a tank.
i love old minis. but saabs are so cool. the two popper made then cool. i saw one once, at a vintage race.. a sonnet hardtop, purple i think. and it sounded like a moped. i kept waiting for my freinds moped to come into view, nto a funny looking saab coupe.
i started rallycross in a underpowered fwd toyota, and let me tell you.. few things are harder than making a slow car go fast, especially on traction limited surface.. you learn to never brake.
split windshield! sweet, you know you are old school with a split windscreen. the 3 cyl 2 poppers were not bad cars, for the period and the engine size, whlie small, it was a nimble and tuff little thing. like the dkw it was motored by, neat cars. i really like the 3=6 dkw too. pretty pretty car.
@tkaminsk I don't know where you get your info, but Koenigsegg has never owned any part of Saab. They were in the process of buying it outright, but backed out, and have had nothing to do with Saab design. The current 9-5 is still based on the GM platform; it was already almost completed when GM hit the skids. It was still "engineered in Europe" by Saab, using the GM platform. The upcoming 9-3 is indeed all new.
@miserablerottensmurf Have you ever tried the new 9-5?I did, and i also tried the 5-serie,the E-Klasse and the A6, and i do not unterstand how people can say this car is a crap.Germans cars are far too overrated,and they look sooo ugly and boring compared to this one .
@miserablerottensmurf Saab use the fourth generation Haldex system (VW is apparently doing something similar with Haldex now for the next Audi Quattro). There's a nice wikipedia entry describing it. Saab's rear limited slip differential can transfer 85% of the engine's power to any of the rear wheels. I have tested the FWD Vector without DriveSense, and it was quite good. But my XWD Aero w/DriveSense is better. It eats sharp corners for breakfast.
@miserablerottensmurf which configuration of the 9-5 have you been driving?!? The 2.0T handles like a dream. Quiet, yet powerful. It comes with a very sophisticated AWD system and is probably the safest vehicle you can find on any road. Admittedly, the dashboard fascia is a bit boring (it was supposed to be nicer, but the subcontracter went bust), but as a driver you're not looking at that anyway. The 9-5 provides the driver with an extremely nice environment.
@miserablerottensmurf ...wrong the 95 was engineered from the ground up by Saab/Spyker/Koneigsiegg engineers in Rotterdam, Gotenburg and Oslo. Spyker and Koneigsiegg own Saab, and GM has refused to sell the frams that the GM Saab was built on. The car is 100% engineered in Europe. They gave it major facelift yes but it will be worth it. The 93 is slated for 2012 and will be completely reengineered. There is talk that a 97 is coming back for late 2012 as well that will be from Gotenburg SWE.
Ok, that makes since. And the 9-5 had was supposed to be a bigger number than the 9000, because that was car to replace the 9000, but 90,000 didn't sound good so the 9-5 is actually 9^5 which equals 59,049 which is bigger than 9000 to signify that it was the replacement . That's what I heard, but the story isn't the same for the 9-3.
Look at the cars today, like '10 9-5, 9-X/9-X Air, Aero-X, 9-4X, and 9-3 and compare those to the old Saab's, 92, 96 and so on. So cool to compare those cars. Long live Saab, and their loving owners! Btw, what is the significance of the 9? I can't find the answer anywhere.
