Saab Needs Help (Again) (Updated)

Cammy Corrigan
by Cammy Corrigan


Remember the 4 “dead brands” walking? Pontiac, Saturn, Hummer and Saab? Seems like a long time ago. Who’d have thought Saab would be the last brand standing? Arguably, the one of the weakest brands of them all. At least Hummer and Saturn had genuine interest. But Saab found a Dutch white knight (a white knight with a 3 legged horse and a rusty sword), in Spyker and survived. It really started heads scratching as to how a damaged brand and a never profitable car maker could survive in an industry where size is king. But it seems the Dutch-Swedish venture may be getting some help from an unlikely source.

Moneycontrol.com reports (via Reuters) that Dutch broadcaster NOS has learned via sources within both companies, that Saab will gain access to BMW’s technology and parts. NOS asserts that Saab wants to focus on building a smaller car (the 9-2?) and wants to use BMW’s technology to achieve that goal. Saab and BMW working together will be a win-win situation. BMW need to form alliances and joint ventures with other makers to get their quantities up. Quantities from Saab? Also, the matter is not quite new, but it always makes for good headlines.

[Update: Automotive news (sub) confirms that Saab has agreed on a deal to buy engines from BMW, for the 9-3 model due in 2012. Talks on other engines (diesel) and the use of the Mini Countryman platform are still on-going.]

Cammy Corrigan
Cammy Corrigan

More by Cammy Corrigan

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 13 comments
  • Krhodes1 Krhodes1 on Sep 27, 2010

    Note that Saab has a long, long, long history of buying in engines. The original two-strokes were copies of DKW units, the V4s were bought in from Ford, the first inline 4s bought in from Triumph then slowly developed over the decades. The current engines are GM with a helping of Saab original design tech built in. I do find it interesting that Saab wants to change from the GM Ecotec to a new BMW engine (for gasoline engines anyway) though. I can't imagine there is any technical advantage to it, the Ecotec is an absolutely world-class modern 2.0l engine. No contest in diesels though, GM has nothing to touch what BMW makes. I suppose it makes sense to have just one supplier, and not having to deal with GM has to have benefits too. When you come right down to it, why re-invent the wheel? Engines are mature technology, why spend billions to develop your own when you can buy something off the shelf that is world-standard and already certified? No different than transmissions - hardly anyone makes thier gearboxes inhouse anymore, manual or automatic.

  • Stationwagon Stationwagon on Sep 27, 2010

    Does anyone know if for the last few years Volvo Cars has been profitable ? Saab is like a zombie it is pretty much dead and doesn't know where to go. What is a Saab supposed to be ? Luxurious ? sporty ? safe ? All three. It is certainly quirky but that won't win you many customers, is it supposed to become mainstream and common or stay rare and quirky. I doubt it can be common and quirky or rare and profitable. Saab has been filling a very small niche in the automotive world and hasn't been able to derive a profit. If I were the head of Saab I'd make a good cheap common car that is a little bit quirky or has a very unique design to sell to the masses and derive profit from, then I would let the engineers and designers make a car for people like them and sell that at a loss to rich Saab enthusiast . I guess that is obvious and probably what Saab is trying to do. But for the Mini platform sharing to work I think the Saab 9-2 will have to be cheaper than the Mini. Saab enthusiast will buy it no matter what, but Saab needs non-enthusiast people to view it as a cheaper better Mini. The best way to sell something is to give it good value, or do what BMW and Porsche do and give it snob appeal. In the 1990's Audi was very unrelevant, now Audi is very successful. Why, and the sole and only reason why ? snob appeal, I don't know how they created it, snob appeal sure did wonders for an otherwise over-priced under-performing car. I wish Saab the best of luck, their pretty damn neat, just lost though. I tried to use paragraph breaks this time. BTW, what the hell causes my word to sometimes type like t h i s when I begin, before the tool bar loads it show

    , but after it loads they disappear and click on the eraser and it doesn't help
  • Grrr Grrr on Sep 28, 2010

    If Saab want to sell both gasoline and petrol variants of the same vehicles, it makes sense to ditch GM engines in favour of BMW - that way a standard platform can be used for both fuels.

  • Henrik B. Henrik B. on Sep 28, 2010

    Firstly a word of advice for the people who visit "thetruthaboutcars.com", and think they have to do with a knowable and trustworthy source of information: Don't! Thetruthaboutcars don't use actual facts! They just tell you, what their narrowminded american opinion is. About the article. The author: "Who’d have thought Saab would be the last brand standing? Arguably, the one of the weakest brands of them all. At least Hummer and Saturn had genuine interest." Well, spoken like a true american, who doesn't have any clue as to what is going on, outside the country! Take Europe, where Saab i selling most og their cars (75%+) and where Hummer and Saturn sells only a handfull of cars, each year. The author: "It really started heads scratching as to how a damaged brand and a never profitable car maker could survive in an industry where size is king." Again - how would you know? You don't have a clue, when it comes to the economy of Saab. All you do is running with the pack, and makes (false) statements about Saab! The fact is that Saab has actually made profits one or more years, within the last ten years. But the morons at GM conveniently moved the profits, to Opel in Germany. Get your fact's straight friends - and DO experience the world "outside"... Cheers!

Next