Evolving Saab
By Steve Shannon
Saab Automobile USA General Manager
Few things remain in their original state. Nature, design, technology and fashion evolve. Not always for the better, mind you. Two words: bell bottoms. But that's fashion and not my forté, so I will stop with that casual observation. However, some things do evolve to become the best representation, yet.
Today, the Boston Auto Show hosts the North American unveiling of the Saab Turbo X. Aside from being very chicly designed, a virtual rocket in terms of performance, and a riot to drive, it's the debut vehicle of Saab's state-of-the-art all-wheel-drive system - which we're calling cross-wheel-drive, which in automotive acronym land will be represented as XWD.
Saab XWD possesses all the techno-wizardry that will set it ahead of its competitors. The real excitement is firmly grasped in the ability of torque to be transferred between the rear wheels as well as the standard transfer between front and rear axles. There's also an added bonus of pre-emptive launch control. Pre-emptive launch control is a nifty way of describing the system that monitors and reacts to the position of the throttle, rather than snooze and wait until wheel-slip is detected to react.
The Saab cross-wheel drive system uses the same vehicle sensors that are utilized by the electronic stability control system to monitor wheel speed, yaw rate and steering angle. Superb handling and driver control is maintained by directing the torque to the appropriate wheels as required … dramatically improving the performance capability of the chassis. This effectively tames understeer and oversteer, raises the threshold where electronic stability controls step in with braking or throttle interventions, and gives the driver more active involvement in hard driving situations.
Larger brakes and a special sport-tuned and lowered chassis have been incorporated to take full advantage of the cross-wheel drive system and high-torque powerplant of the Turbo X.
Available as a Sport Sedan or SportCombi with a 6-speed manual or automatic, the Turbo X delivers a sporty, all-wheel-drive performance package that enthusiastic drivers will truly appreciate. I do not hesitate to call the Turbo X the most satisfying Saab of all time.
The limited edition Turbo X hits the U.S. market this spring, starting at $42,510 for the Sport Sedan and $43,310 for the SportCombi. Order one today through Jan. 31, and you're invited to attend the Turbo X Academy Driving Program on Saab's dime.
Drive it and make up your own mind. I think you'll agree with me that the evolution of this 80s cult classic gives new meaning to back in black.
32 Comments
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
Indeed, the Turbo X is very exciting for Saab and a blast to drive apparently. But considering the competition, which have better appointed interiors and better reputations, one must admit, good luck selling it at MSRP.
2008 Audi A4 3.2 Quattro, Auto $38,400
2008 BMW 330xi (AWD) – $40,800
2008 Volvo S60 AWD – $32,735
2008 Mercedes C300 Luxury 4MATIC – $34,700
Do I dare ask–what kind of gas mileage are we talking about here. Call me a cynic (”Michael, you’re a cynic!), but when mileage figures are not included in a discussion these days, it’s usually indicative of a turbo gas guzzler of the highest order. In this day and age, is that really the wisest course to pursue?
Just asking, of course…
I like this new Saab, but I wish you’d concentrate more on getting the Volt into production. I just don’t get what’s going on with GM. I’ve always been a GM fan, but after all these years GM still isn’t close to selling a more than Mild hybrid, and has been beaten to the punch by Honda on offering hydrogen fuel cell cars, albiet in limited area by lease only. Even the sporty Camaro hasn’t come out yet, and the ponycar revival is long in the tooth now.
If it’s GM’s intent to kick Saab into the luxo market with some new tech and a higher price, congrats! You have succeeded.
While the techno-wizardy is indeed impressive, spending nearly $44K for a yet-to-be-proven Saab 9-3 (a model line in general having one of the worst reliablity records around) is a huge ask, especially with the tiny Saab dealer network. But then again, perhaps niche cars work fine being sold by niche dealers.
It would be great to see GM getting some of this technology at a more reasonable price point and in a more mainstream model! Why let Suzuki at $16K have all the fun?
Michael, you are right on but some people are already complaining the Turbo X is under the ¬´magic¬ª 300-hp number. Although I’m happy Saab has a limited production halo car to keep the interest going for a while, personally, I will get excited when they introduce a clean diesel-hybrid. Apparently, they are working on such a project. Obviously, this planet needs greener transportation more than any gas guzzling car, whatever it’s name.
“Corto” brings up a strong cases-in-point.
By abandoning the niche market of near-luxury hatchbacks that Saab once owned and delving into mass-market midsize sedan territory dominated by the usual suspects from Germany, who but the Saab Party Faithful will fork over forty large for a tuned-up Opel?
Indeed, the Saab Party Faithful already knows to buy used.
The Turbo X looks sharp, no doubt. But at up to $10K less, the competition looks sharper.
Carping aside, I still look forward to driving it.
Saab’s are nothing more than overpriced cheap GM cars, that have all but severed any ties with their rich history and roots. Just because the key is in the center console does not a Saab make. Setting the price much higher than it is worth does not mean that you are in some “exclusivity club” where people will aspire to own one. You need to deliver the goods, and you’re coming up far too short, you are way out of your league. And as long as the chief Swedish beancounter rules the roost at GM, Saab will continue to be counted among the “damaged” brands. Saab may have been born from jets, but you’ll die from lack of maintenance. Sorry Steve.
Corto, Those aren’t fair comparison prices. For example, the 335xi AWD (no such thing as 330xi) at $40,800 has Leatherette upholstery (aka vinyl). Leather upholstery, heated seats, fold down rear seats (standard on Saab) are extra cost options on BMW. I’d hardly call that better appointed.
bob,
The Tahoe and Yukon are not mild hybrids. Check it out for yourself.
The turbo X is a limited edition car that is loaded. I don’t think the normal 9-3 Aero will cost this much and it will likely be far cheaper than a comparable 335xi and faster than an A4 3.2 quattro. For those who dont follow the crowd the 9-3 is a nice entry luxury car. While it’s styling is conservative I still find the car very attractive.
very nice but a bit out of my budget.
like: styling, features & history of Saab.priced too high Saturn will/offers AWD at a much better price.One thing i don’t like in cars is leather or fake leather.Prefer sport styled cloth or micro fiber.
Wow, I see a surprising number of vitriolic pronouncements here, from people who would probably be better served by therapy than a keyboard. The SportCombi version of the Turbo X is quite probably our next vehicle, probably in May or June of 2008.
But we’re disappointed that the European delivery program is suspended until a revised program comes out, and probably too late for us. Not being able to maintain the old program while you come up with a new one is just incomprehensible.
Saabyurk, you make a good point. I guess I meant better quality interiors. I realize Saabs come better equipped than many ¬´base¬ª models from the competition, which on the other hand have a better reputation. Whether deserved or not, it’s the perception that counts, which leads me to believe the TurboX will be a hard sell at that price.
Although this post was marketing oriented, it would have more credibility and be taken more seriously if it gave a more complete picture. Fine, talking about new features. But when launching a new vehicle, where is the technical data. For example: MPG, 0-60 time, weight. The fact that none of these are discussed leaves one to wonder if the overly-heavy Saab is still laging in these areas.
Maybe I’m wrong. If so, perhaps you could post more complete data.
I second the price comparisons: a comparably appointed BMW/Audi/Volvo isn’t going to be any cheaper than the Turbo X.
That said, and as others pointed out, who but the limited (and dwindling) Saab faithful are going to cross-shop those models and come home with the Saab?
The competition have much nicer interiors and higher perceived value. Some, like the BMW, even include scheduled maintenance, which is nicer than paying $75 per oil change and $800-$1200 for new brakes.
I sincerely hope GM is listening to its customers. Saab has nothing special to offer except a little better gas consumption and whatever is left of its “quirkiness.” It can’t dynamically play in the same sandbox as the Germans, and it can’t compete with the refinement of Volvos and VWs. Nor does it have anywhere near the reliability of the Japanese.
The only advantage Saab has is that they’re a steal as used cars. But the fact that a $38k car can be had 3 years old with 40k miles for $15k should say something about its perceived value and reliability.
GM: We get it. The hatch isn’t coming back, fine. But if you don’t work out the bugs in a car whose architecture is 6 years old, and upgrade the interior to be on par with an “entry-level luxury” car, no amount of heritage-conjuring is going to help you. People want Saab to succeed; they’re concerned because it appears GM doesn’t.
Placing an SPG next to the Turbo X at the auto shows only hurts your case.
Some of these anti-Saab rants really are amusing. Where do you people find all the time and energy to muster up such hatred?
To sum up: overpriced, underpowered,none of the prestige of the other European brands, and none of tradition that previously made Saab unique. Rather disappointing.
@ Dan Polka:
“Where do you people find all the time and energy to muster up such hatred?”
While we’re sitting at the dealership, waiting to find out how much that horrible rattle is going to cost to get fixed.
Guess we should just shut up and read the complimentary issues of Bon Apetit?
I think Bob wants a car that gets more than 20 mpg. Maybe Bob wants a car that gets more than 40. I realize that makes him (and me) some sort of commie pinko hippie, but we are a market that GM is ignoring with their current crop of hybrids.
“I think Bob wants a car that gets more than 20 mpg. Maybe Bob wants a car that gets more than 40. I realize that makes him (and me) some sort of commie pinko hippie, but we are a market that GM is ignoring with their current crop of hybrids.”
GM is trying to make vehicles that save gas. Any hybrid does that, regardless of type of vehicle. BTW, in case you weren’t aware the Tahoe isnt a car. Its a large, heavy SUV that can hold a lot of stuff and tow a trailer. 20mpg in that kind of vehicle is significant when most V6 sedans get less than 20mpg in the city.
I have a solution for you: Get a Toyota Prius and call it a day. I don’t see the point of criticizing GM for not making a Prius and not criticizing Toyota for not making hybrid versions of their gas guzzling trucks and SUVs.
If you’ll do a little of your homework Paul you’ll see that the 2 mode hybrid available on the full size Yukon/Tahoe and on the Silverado/Sierra both enable these full size truck/suv vehicles to get well over 20 miles per gallon.
42K – seriously, is this some kind of joke? I’m sorry – but pricing it higher than a 335 AWD was a huge mistake. I drive a 2007 Saab 9-3 right now. But I paid under 30 for the current Aero before tax. 42, for a little more power and XWD, thats crazy.
¬´While we’re sitting at the dealership, waiting to find out how much that horrible rattle is going to cost to get fixed.¬ª
In case you were wondering, although the 2008 9-3 is better insonorised, it has kept the typical 9-3 rattles. Absolutely unacceptable. Even the 10 year old 9-5 has less rattles …
Stick a fork in it, Saab’s done.
It’s only a matter of time and how much money GM will lose before they choose to face reality.
Given that the one thing GM hates is reality, this is going to be a long and expensive shut-down.
Come on GM, merge Saturn/Vauxhall/Opel/Saab into one brand, and only market the best cars of the group.
Survival of the fittest is a reality in the free market, and either GM thins the herd on its own, or GM’s competitors thin GM’s herd in a more brutal manner.
Paul,
SO let me get this straight. You want a car that gets really good fuel economy, don’t plan on carring more than 5 people and never pull a trailer or boat. If this is correct then your right you are not the intended purchaser of a two mode tahoe Hybrid. This truck is intended for someone that needs to pull 6000 pounds. Or someone that has kids and/or when the kids bring a friend they don’t have to take 2 cars. This vehicle saves alot of fuel for someone that needs this type of vehicle. This is the point of hybrids right? Hybrids have turned into the status sybol that SUV used to be. Some people drove SUV beacuse of the attention. Now some people only want a Hybrid for appearences. My perception is many people that buy hybrids are just wanting attention, they don’t care about oil dependence or the Fuel Cost. Because at the cost of hybrids it would take several years to recoup the intial cost. So I ask, Do you want a car that gets 40mpg (to save money (only works if you keep your hybrid for at least 7 years) or do you want a car that gets you attention?
Bob, come on man. GM is selling the 2 mode hybrid SUV’s, the volt is waiting on battery technology, and GM already has hydrogen Equinox’s on the road.
Give SAAB a break.
Yes, $42,000 is ALOT to ask for this car. But, this isn’t the point here. If the car was meant to sell quantity, then it wouldn’t be so pricy. For the time being, SAAB needs some sort of “Halo” car. In reality, the 9-3 is long in the tooth no matter what is done to try to refresh it. The Epsilon platform has reached it’s max. The XWD is used in SAAB first to infuse some more excitement into the brand to buy time for new models to arrive, at which point, the XWD system will most likely trickle down to the rest of GM, (Although I think Cadillac should have it now).
GM doesnt have all the revenue in the world to give every brand new models all at once. I think GM is playing this great. Why pour money into SAAB when they dont have the product (at this point) to bring revenue back to GM? SAAB will be revitalized as soon as the new and upcoming Epsilon II debuts, and also when they get their 9-4X CUV. Then the fun can begin. But in the mean time, let them sell it at $42,000. It’s also a good way to test the system before the rest of GM gets it anyway. It is more important for GM to focus on the other main brands to get them up and functioning to capacity again before getting to SAAB.
So, stop hating on SAAB! And, enough with the “these are not real SAABs” bullcrap. When GM is done with them, they will be much, much better than the “original” SAAB’s….
Don’t kid yourselves SAAB-LOVERS,The originals weren’t even that good to begin with anyway…...
Steve,
It is apparent from the previous posts that you are not getting the message out about the XWD’s technical sophistication. For $44K you can choose from a number of very fine-handling AWD sedans from the competition. What incremental benefit does XWD offer over a standard AWD that justifies the price premium? Merely describing it in words is not very compelling.
>>When GM is done with them, they will be much, much better than the “original” SAAB’s….
Say what?
Everyone knows that GM is a low quality manufacturer (have you looked at Consumer Reports on the 9-3)? The 9-5 that was designed before GM took full control of SAAB is a far superior automobile.
What we have here is an turbo’d, AWD Opel, er, I mean SAAturn. Yawn at $30k. At $40+ k it’s “are they out of their freakin’ minds?”
All future “SAAB’s” are going to be badge-engineered Opels – what GM has done with Saturn, only at a higher price point … but with all of GM’s usual beancounting and below-average (to put it mildly) quality.
Think about it – would you be salivating at the prospect of a Volvo or BMW that was a badge engineered Opel? Of course not. So there’s nothing to salivate about with the new SAAB – they’ll be typical pedestrian GM vehicles masquerading as upscale European cars.
That is a huge price to pay for a very ugly car. The interior is dated, tired and old. Saab in general is dated, tired and old. Wasn’t that the same problem that you had with Buick, Steve?
Nobody in their right mind is going to fork over that kind of money. It won’t be long before you have to put $7500 on the hood to move these tired wanna-be’s off the lots. The only thing sorrier than these cars are the lonely dealers that are stuck looking at them every day.
We would really benifit if we had E85 as standard on all SAAB models for 2009. The 5.3 from the 9-7 has it, and the SAABs from Europe have it over there! Let’s get green SAAB! SAAB should be right there with Chevy on the e85/hybrid front!
Go SAAB
For those few whose comments attempt to put down Saab and the fantastic new “TURBO X”, I had the opportunity to test it compared to the BMW330xi and the Audi Quattro. The BMW at $8000 more was just slightly better off the line but Saab got it all back and then some through the rest of the tight course. The Audi never came close.
Jim Vickers
Wow, I was considering the Turbo X but I might not go ahead with the purchase. Even at a $10,000 discount, this doesn’t look good.