Saab-Spyker's Success Plan: New Cars, Cheaper Cars, And More Outlandish Cars

saab spykers success plan new cars cheaper cars and more outlandish cars

With Russian financiers offering up to $100m to back the new Saab-Spyker project, it’s not surprising that the internet is awash with glad tidings of new cars from the new Dutch-Swedish venture. On the Saab side, CEO Victor Muller and company are teasing analysts with news that Saab is “already working on plans” for a new compact car, tentatively named 9-1. Having quoted Muller as saying the 9-1 had a “better than average chance”of being built (whatever that means), Automotive News Europe [sub] filled in the blanks:

[The 9-1] would be needed to help achieve Saab’s stated goal of closing the gap with BMW and Audi. Saab debuted a concept for an entry-premium car at the 2008 Geneva auto show. ANE sister publication AutoWeek named the 9-X BioHybrid the best concept at that year’s event.

First of all, nice pimp there guys. Also, too bad the guy who led design on the 9-X BioHybrid (and most Saab design work of late) has gone to work for Renault. Especially considering the rumors are swirling that a deal already exists for GM to supply Opel Corsa components to Saab for the vehicle, which would theoretically debut in 2013. Even though the 9-1 is not part of the as-yet not completely funded $1b development program announced by Saab, meaning more money would have to be raised to go beyond Muller’s current in-house scribblings.But hey, let’s speculate about the extent to which the 9-1 will “resemble vintage Saabs” anyway. And why not. After all, touting 9-1 rumors is considerably better than speculating that the ultimate result of the Saab-Spyker deal might be a mid-engined, Saab-badged supercar. Or “reporting” that Spyker now “plans” to put its four-year-old Peking-to-Paris SUV concept car into production. Or that the way to make this all happen is to cut prices on new models by 8-12 percent and not even try to mass-market.Not that Muller is sweating any of it. As far as he’s concerned, he snagged himself a real live automaker for “the cost of a windtunnel.” Or, as he put it to caradvice.com.au:This has all been given to us as a nice package, saying, ‘Good luck with it,’Considering the recent history of Saab, isn’t it possible that this might not be such a good sign? Sometimes it’s hard to tell if hope dies last, or if sanity just dies first.
Comments
Join the conversation
 1 comment
  • Mpresley Mpresley on Mar 08, 2010
    ...the 9-1 ha[s] a “better than average chance” of being built... Really? But what are the odds of anyone buying? My guess is that in less than 5 years SAAB is dead again.

  • MaintenanceCosts The sweet spot of this generation isn't made anymore: the SRT 392. The Scat Pack is more or less filling the same space but it lacks a lot of the goodies, including SRT suspension, brakes, and seats. The Hellcat is too much and isn't available with a manual anymore.
  • Arthur Dailey I am normally a fan of Exner's designs but by this time the front end on the Stutz like most of the rest of the vehicle is a laughable monstrosity of gauche. The interior finishes suit the rest of the vehicle. Corey please put this series out of its misery. This is one vehicle manufacturer best left on the scrap heap of history.
  • Art Vandelay I always thought what my Challenger really needed was a convertible top to make it heavier and make visability worse.
  • Dlc65688410 Please stop, we can't take anymore of this. Think about doing something on the Spanish Pegaso.
  • MaintenanceCosts A few bits of context largely missing from this article:(1) For complicated historical reasons, the feds already end up paying much of the cost of buying new transit buses of all types. It is easier legally and politically to put capital funds than operating funds into the federal budget, so the model that has developed in most US agencies is that operational costs are raised from a combination of local taxes and fares while the feds pick up much of the agencies' capital needs. So this is not really new spending but a new direction for spending that's been going on for a long time.(2) Current electric buses are range-challenged. Depending on type of service they can realistically do 100-150 miles on a charge. That's just fine for commuter service where the buses typically do one or two trips in the morning, park through the midday, and do one or two trips in the evening. It doesn't work well for all-day service. Instead of having one bus that can stay out from early in the morning until late at night (with a driver change or two) you need to bring the bus back to the garage once or twice during the day. That means you need quite a few more buses and also increases operating costs. Many agencies are saying for political reasons that they are going to go electric in this replacement cycle but the more realistic outcome is that half the buses can go electric while the other half need one more replacement cycle for battery density to improve. Once the buses can go 300 miles in all weather they will be fine for the vast majority of service.(3) With all that said, the transition to electric will be very good. Moving from straight diesel to hybrid already cut down substantially on emissions, but even reduced diesel emissions cause real public health damage in city settings. Transitioning both these buses and much of the urban truck fleet to electric will have measurable and meaningful impacts on public health.
Next