SAAB sold to Koenigsegg [Archive] - Ultimatecarpage.com forums

demonrunning07

06-16-2009, 11:00 AM

I guess I never considered that there might be positive results to GM filing for bankruptcy. All the small European car companies they bought up were morphing into the same corporate, generic garbage. Should this deal go through, they'll be back in their own country and they should have most of their own creative freedom to do whatever it is that Swedes do... The only thing that worries me is that $600 million of the deal is coming from an investment bank which will expect fast results and will be quick to pull the plug if things don't appear to be going their way.

It's nice to know that Opel has also been taken out of GM's hands. Maybe now they won't be just a rebadged Vauxhall.

Matra et Alpine

06-16-2009, 11:05 AM

For many years now the Vauxhall's have been the rebadged OPELs :)

f6fhellcat13

06-16-2009, 11:54 AM

Yay!
I am very cautiously optimistic that SAAB will do good things and endure. I hope that Koenigsegg don't just focus on sports cars, as SAAB will still need its bread and butter cars to stay solvent. However, hatches that seem all too willing to deposit you in a ditch would be much appreciated. I think Koenigsegg's work with biofuels and hybrids might also trickle down, and that should be good for SAAB.

LeonOfTheDead

06-16-2009, 12:12 PM

Hmmmm

I am not sure this is good news for Saab. Ok Koenigsegg make supercars, but I'm not sure that they know how to manage in the non-supercar business...

The good thing is that for a while they will have access to GM's platforms/engines/gearboxes, but as soon as this period ends, they will have to work with someone else.

Anyway, all the best for Saab, as I really like their cars.

Maybe they can make an 2.0T version of the Koenigsegg???? :D

Ever wondered how Koenigsegg himself financed the supercar adventure? He is a business man in first place, managed to establish a rather profitable import/export company which helped him in surviving while developing a car for 7 years without earning a single dollar out of it.

So did Pagani, for the record. Modena Design is as profitable as Pagani Automobili.

I guess I never considered that there might be positive results to GM filing for bankruptcy. All the small European car companies they bought up were morphing into the same corporate, generic garbage. Should this deal go through, they'll be back in their own country and they should have most of their own creative freedom to do whatever it is that Swedes do... The only thing that worries me is that $600 million of the deal is coming from an investment bank which will expect fast results and will be quick to pull the plug if things don't appear to be going their way.

It's nice to know that Opel has also been taken out of GM's hands. Maybe now they won't be just a rebadged Vauxhall.

The 600 M $ comes from a bank, which in turn has a close tie with the Swedish Government, so it's a bit different.

Ferrer

06-16-2009, 12:54 PM

Ever wondered how Koenigsegg himself financed the supercar adventure? He is a business man in first place, managed to establish a rather profitable import/export company which helped him in surviving while developing a car for 7 years without earning a single dollar out of it.

So did Pagani, for the record. Modena Design is as profitable as Pagani Automobili.
Someone at Autoblog commented that this was like Pagani buying Fiat.

More like Lancia I thought. Which would be brilliant actually.

Do it.

LeonOfTheDead

06-16-2009, 01:19 PM

Someone at Autoblog commented that this was like Pagani buying Fiat.

More like Lancia I thought. Which would be brilliant actually.

Do it.

I'd say Alfa, considering the sportscar heritage, rather than rallying.
I'll call him tomorrow in the morning :D.

lightweight

06-16-2009, 01:24 PM

Ever wondered how Koenigsegg himself financed the supercar adventure? He is a business man in first place, managed to establish a rather profitable import/export company which helped him in surviving while developing a car for 7 years without earning a single dollar out of it.

So did Pagani, for the record. Modena Design is as profitable as Pagani Automobili.

I don't doubt the financial backing. At this point the money is certainly there.

I am sceptical towards Koenigsegg's ability to take on the new role. The figures now are much bigger and competition is hard. They are entering a completely new territory with Saab.

Sure hope they make it, as they have a tough job ahead.

Ferrer

06-16-2009, 01:52 PM

I don't doubt the financial backing. At this point the money is certainly there.

I am sceptical towards Koenigsegg's ability to take on the new role. The figures now are much bigger and competition is hard. They are entering a completely new territory with Saab.

Sure hope they make it, as they have a tough job ahead.
It won't be easy, that's for sure.

But I have hope definitely. These days of economic globalisation and moar because moar a lateral thinking aproach may just do the trick.

LeonOfTheDead

06-16-2009, 02:23 PM

it can be hot even in Sweden

Roentgen

06-16-2009, 05:22 PM

I have read somewhere that Saab needs HUGE financial assistance. Koenigsegg apparently has no where near enough to support themselves and Saab together.

If this is the case, I'm not sure whether this is good news or bad. But generally, I'm excited by this news. Hopefully the new Aero models will be incredible, and the Aero X concept will see production as Saab's first true supercar!

Roentgen

06-16-2009, 05:30 PM

Dino Scuderia

06-16-2009, 05:33 PM

It's extremely surreal to see the name 'Koenigsegg' roll across the crawler on the news channels here.

Bob

06-16-2009, 08:22 PM

I was hoping this would happen...I think it'll be interesting to see what happens with Saab's performance models (and the brand in general, no pun intended:))...maybe even an actual sports car in the future! Anyway, glad to see them back in Sweden. I always thought they lost some of their identity when GM took over.

I enjoyed the line in the article that said GM would be supplying engine technology to Koenigsegg!?...hmm :confused:

*The new Saab 9-3, available with either the 806hp 4.7L V8 from the CCX...or...the 1.2L I4 from the Aveo!* :D

AFAIK Koenigsegg's current line of engines would not be very suitable for most saab models - so it makes a lot of sense for GM to supply them. :p

cargirl1990

06-16-2009, 10:39 PM

good riddance to Saab. i never liked 'em anyways. Keoniggsegg on the other hand. flippin awesome. but, i think this might get interesting. ( i likes MRR's avatar. )

Roentgen

06-17-2009, 03:29 AM

good riddance to Saab. i never liked 'em anyways. Keoniggsegg on the other hand. flippin awesome. but, i think this might get interesting. ( i likes MRR's avatar. )

I have a Saab. :mad:

Ferrer

06-17-2009, 03:32 AM

I have a Saab. :mad:
Don't worry Saabs are brilliant. Or they used to be at least.

IBrake4Rainbows

06-17-2009, 04:19 AM

Saabs are great and it's going to be nice having someone a little braver in charge than GM.

fingers crossed it can actually lead to some interesting cars.....

Roentgen

06-17-2009, 04:47 AM

Don't worry Saabs are brilliant. Or they used to be at least.

Thank you! FYI, they still are :D

They're just far too under-rated.

ScionDriver

06-17-2009, 05:49 AM

I heard about this deal on Conan last night, he had a joke about it "GM sold Saab to a company that only makes a dozen cars a year. GM said 'Well that's great because we only sell a dozen cars a year.'" and when he said that I thought Koenigsegg but thought "No it couldn't be! I think this could be good, get's the company back in the hands of swedes, it will be interesting to see what happens but I hope it works out for the best I like Saab.

Ferrer

06-17-2009, 05:51 AM

Thank you! FYI, they still are :D

They're just far too under-rated.
What Saab do you have, by the way?

cargirl1990

06-17-2009, 08:04 AM

I have a Saab. :mad:

im sorry! i just never liked them thats all. i didn't mean to make you angry. my apologies.

LeonOfTheDead

06-17-2009, 09:28 AM

Here's another article I found,

GM Announce Tentative Agreement to Sell Saab to Koenigsegg - Worldcarfans (http://www.worldcarfans.com/9090616.007/gm-announce-tentative-agreement-to-sell-saab-to-koenigsegg)

and it asks the question, "what will happen to the new Saab 9-5?" ... a question I hope will carry the answer, "still coming out in september."

And don't worry about Koenigsegg not knowing what to do with non-supercars. They are planning to build the Quant.

And where did you get those pictures from Leon?

Autoblog.com :D

Don't worry about the 9-5, is the only reason why someone bothered buying Saab, and yes, it's still coming out in September

General Motors and Koenigsegg Group AB Reach Tentative Agreement on Saab

Deal will secure Saab’s future
EIB expected to provide $600 million financing with state guarantee by the Swedish government
GM reinvention achieves another milestone

Zurich. General Motors Corp. and Koenigsegg Group AB, a consortium led by Koenigsegg Automotive AB, today confirmed the details of a memorandum of understanding for the purchase of Saab Automobile AB that secures Saab’s future.

The sale, expected to close by the end of the third quarter of this year, includes an expected $600 million funding commitment from the European Investment Bank (EIB) guaranteed by the Swedish government. Additional support is to be provided by GM and Koenigsegg Group AB to fund Saab's operations and product program investments. This includes plans to launch several new products that are in the final stages of development. Saab had filed for reorganization under Swedish Law on Feb. 20, 2009. This tentative agreement is a key milestone for Saab to successfully emerge from its reorganization process.

“This is yet another significant step in the reinvention of GM and its European operations,” said GM Europe President, Carl-Peter Forster. “Saab is a highly respected automotive brand with great potential. Closing this deal represents the best chance for Saab to emerge a stronger company. Koenigsegg Group's unique combination of innovation, entrepreneurial spirit and financial strength, combined with Koenigsegg's proven ability to create world-class Swedish performance cars in a highly efficient manner, made it the right choice for Saab as well as for General Motors."

As part of the proposed transaction, GM will continue to provide Saab with architecture and powertrain technology during a defined time period. Additionally, Saab plans to produce its next generation 9-5 models in the Saab production facility in Trollhättan, Sweden.

“The proposed agreement will enable us to maximize the brand’s potential through an exciting new product line-up with a distinctly Swedish character. Today’s announcement is great news for Saab’s current and future customers, dealers, suppliers and employees around the globe, said Jan Åke Jonsson, Managing Director of Saab Automobile AB.

The sale will be subject to customary closing conditions, including receipt of applicable regulatory, governmental and court approvals. Other terms and conditions specific to the sale are not being disclosed at this time. Deutsche Bank acted as financial advisor to General Motors Corporation.

switters78

06-17-2009, 10:17 AM

Thank you! FYI, they still are :D

They're just far too under-rated.

You can thank GM for that.

NicFromLA

06-17-2009, 12:40 PM

In the US Saab uses the tagline "Born From Jets". In comparison to the CCX, jets seem really boring.

Sledgehammer

06-17-2009, 01:08 PM

Ferrer

06-17-2009, 01:16 PM

So, has it been since 1990 that Saab has lost its appeal? People keep mentioning that GM's international push for Saab is a reason that sales and interest has been down despite customer loyalty. Can someone shed some light on this for me.
I'd say it has been mainly focused on product, Saab's loss of appeal.

Since the 90's Saabs have been getting mainstream, losing with every generation more and more distinctive treats.

And then there are monstrosities like 9-2X and the 9-7X.

demonrunning07

06-17-2009, 01:19 PM

The 600 M $ comes from a bank, which in turn has a close tie with the Swedish Government, so it's a bit different.

Yeah, that sounds a lot more reassuring. Thanks for clearing that up!

lightweight

06-17-2009, 02:23 PM

And then there are monstrosities like 9-2X and the 9-7X.

What happened to the 9-2X Saabaru? It was quickly forgotten. Is it still in production?

Ferrer

06-17-2009, 02:29 PM

What happened to the 9-2X Saabaru? It was quickly forgotten. Is it still in production?
IIRC it was discontinued because nobody bought one. In any case it was based on the old generation Impreza.

cmcpokey

06-17-2009, 03:05 PM

IIRC it was discontinued because nobody bought one. In any case it was based on the old generation Impreza.

it was discontinued, but having known an owner, it was pretty cool. you got the engine from an STi, the less aggressive suspension from the WRX, and a way better interior. wife was interested a few years back, but they discontinued it by the time we were in the market for her car.

Ferrer

06-17-2009, 03:39 PM

it was discontinued, but having known an owner, it was pretty cool. you got the engine from an STi, the less aggressive suspension from the WRX, and a way better interior. wife was interested a few years back, but they discontinued it by the time we were in the market for her car.
I don't think the problem was that it was a bad car, but rather that they tried to pull a 159 with it. Likewise with the 9-7x, if at the other end of the scale.

Roentgen

06-17-2009, 04:20 PM

What Saab do you have, by the way?

I have a 1999 9-5 SE, with a 2.3 Lt Turbo engine. It's a very nice car, and a dream to drive :p

Roentgen

06-17-2009, 04:24 PM

im sorry! i just never liked them thats all. i didn't mean to make you angry. my apologies.

Haha, no worries :p

Have you driven one before? You should try, and you can't seriously say it can't match BMWs and Mercedes of the same class.

Kitdy

06-17-2009, 04:55 PM

Have you driven one before? You should try, and you can't seriously say it can't match BMWs and Mercedes of the same class.

Really? What if you are looking for having the rear wheels driven? Or natural aspiration? Or higher a higher performance model?

It seems to me that Saab leaves you high and dry on those three fronts for the most part.

Also consider: what's nicer looking across the ages? Maybe it's just me but I have a massive dislike of Saab's designs throughout it's history.

I think it's a pretty bold claim to say that a Saab is the equal of a BMW or Benz of that same class frankly - and I personally doubt that the automotive press would share your sentiments.

Roentgen

06-17-2009, 06:03 PM

Really? What if you are looking for having the rear wheels driven? Or natural aspiration? Or higher a higher performance model?

It seems to me that Saab leaves you high and dry on those three fronts for the most part.

Also consider: what's nicer looking across the ages? Maybe it's just me but I have a massive dislike of Saab's designs throughout it's history.

I think it's a pretty bold claim to say that a Saab is the equal of a BMW or Benz of that same class frankly - and I personally doubt that the automotive press would share your sentiments.

Let's just say Saabs have very distinctive designs, and that liking it or hating it is very subjective.

And not all cars in the world are made for performance. Anyway, I'm sure their Aero models can't be that bad for a sports saloon of it's price range.

Honestly, I maybe biased cos I have one, but I have been in/driven cars of the same year, and same price/class, such as pre-2000 Merc C classes, and BMW 3 series of 2001/2002, and the Saab I have is far superior in terms of quality and comfort. More space, better equipment eg. sound system, and better safety.

Cyco

06-17-2009, 07:33 PM

Part of the financing of the project is via a court approved debt reduction of Saab's debt to GM of 75%

Saab gets debt reduction (http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-business/saab-gets-75-debt-writedown-20090618-cipf.html)

cargirl1990

06-17-2009, 10:18 PM

Haha, no worries :p

Have you driven one before? You should try, and you can't seriously say it can't match BMWs and Mercedes of the same class.

oh! i didn't say anything about Saabs and Bimmers and Benz's. you must of got that off of somewhere else. :):D;)

Roentgen

06-17-2009, 10:21 PM

oh! i didn't say anything about Saabs and Bimmers and Benz's. you must of got that off of somewhere else. :):D;)

I know, I was just using them as a comparison. :)

cargirl1990

06-17-2009, 10:22 PM

I know, I was just using them as a comparison. :)

oh ok! :)

Ferrer

06-17-2009, 10:43 PM

I have a 1999 9-5 SE, with a 2.3 Lt Turbo engine. It's a very nice car, and a dream to drive :p
Excellent, the one with the proper Saab engine. :)

ScionDriver

06-18-2009, 07:39 AM

I just realized the next time someone on the forums buys a new Saab the thread title will be "Just bought a Koenigsegg."

cargirl1990

06-18-2009, 08:29 AM

I just realized the next time someone on the forums buys a new Saab the thread title will be "Just bought a Koenigsegg."

thats a good point.

Ferrer

06-18-2009, 09:55 AM

I just realized the next time someone on the forums buys a new Saab the thread title will be "Just bought a Koenigsegg."
Or when someone buys a Koenigsegg, "Just bought a Saab"...

cargirl1990

06-18-2009, 11:11 AM

Or when someone buys a Koenigsegg, "Just bought a Saab"...

oh man... * sighs *

Ferrer

06-18-2009, 01:44 PM

More good news.

Koenigsegg: We'll give Saab back its "soul" (http://www.autoblog.com/2009/06/18/koenigsegg-well-give-saab-back-its-soul/)

Roentgen

06-18-2009, 08:33 PM

More good news.

Koenigsegg: We'll give Saab back its "soul" (http://www.autoblog.com/2009/06/18/koenigsegg-well-give-saab-back-its-soul/)

That is great news! Hopefully this isn't a case of "easier said than done," because as the article states, it is a tall order.

LeonOfTheDead

06-19-2009, 04:03 PM

Let's just say Saabs have very distinctive designs, and that liking it or hating it is very subjective.

And not all cars in the world are made for performance. Anyway, I'm sure their Aero models can't be that bad for a sports saloon of it's price range.

Honestly, I maybe biased cos I have one, but I have been in/driven cars of the same year, and same price/class, such as pre-2000 Merc C classes, and BMW 3 series of 2001/2002, and the Saab I have is far superior in terms of quality and comfort. More space, better equipment eg. sound system, and better safety.

Actually, a 9-5 is a 5 Series and E-Klasse contender, for those listed a 9-3 would be better as a comparison.

Roentgen

06-19-2009, 08:57 PM

Actually, a 9-5 is a 5 Series and E-Klasse contender, for those listed a 9-3 would be better as a comparison.

Price wise?

MRR

06-20-2009, 09:20 AM

I think it's a pretty bold claim to say that a Saab is the equal of a BMW or Benz of that same class frankly - and I personally doubt that the automotive press would share your sentiments.

As a BMW owner I am biased but will make the "bold" claim that their current product line can't even hold a candle to the offerings of BMW, Mercedes, Audi, etc (at least in the US...Europe always has more engine and model choices than we do).

At the very least we can hope that we will never see a trailblazer rebadged as a SAAB again.

Ferrer

06-20-2009, 09:31 AM

As a BMW owner I am biased but will make the "bold" claim that their current product line can't even hold a candle to the offerings of BMW, Mercedes, Audi, etc (at least in the US...Europe always has more engine and model choices than we do).

At the very least we can hope that we will never see a trailblazer rebadged as a SAAB again.
Well they do. Altough that rather depends on what you expect from a car...

LeonOfTheDead

06-20-2009, 09:43 AM

Price wise?

basically yes, even if it's a bit pointless, as an Elise isn't a a 3 Series or even 5 Series contender, despite having a price range in the same territory.
I'm pretty sure the Kia Opirus was cheaper than an E-Klasse, but it was definitely design after such a reference.

Kitdy

06-20-2009, 11:30 AM

Well they do. Altough that rather depends on what you expect from a car...

If price were no issue, then can you honestly tell me you'd take a 9-3 over a 3? A 9-5 over a 5? I'd be very surprised if you said yes. The autowriters don't seem to share your sentiments over Saab's quality.

Ferrer

06-20-2009, 11:52 AM

If price were no issue, then can you honestly tell me you'd take a 9-3 over a 3? A 9-5 over a 5? I'd be very surprised if you said yes. The autowriters don't seem to share your sentiments over Saab's quality.
The Bimmers are probably the best driving (normal) cars of the premium brands currently on sale, so if I wanted the ultimate drive, no I wouldn't.

But, if I could have two cars, one for the weekends and another to cruise the motorways then Saabs start to make sense. Suddenly you don't need the ultimate drive. And then I wouldn't need a BMW.

Kitdy

06-20-2009, 12:09 PM

The Bimmers are probably the best driving (normal) cars of the premium brands currently on sale, so if I wanted the ultimate drive, no I wouldn't.

But, if I could have two cars, one for the weekends and another to cruise the motorways then Saabs start to make sense. Suddenly you don't need the ultimate drive. And then I wouldn't need a BMW.

So... would you cruise the highways in the BMW or weekend drive in it? And why would you want something worse to drive than BMW if it was an option? You said it was the ultimate drive then if you had two cars you'd accept a lesser substitute? I think if you could have two cars you'd go for something like a 335i and a Miata/Mini/Z4 M. Why bother with Saab at all?

Ferrer

06-20-2009, 12:40 PM

So... would you cruise the highways in the BMW or weekend drive in it? And why would you want something worse to drive than BMW if it was an option? You said it was the ultimate drive then if you had two cars you'd accept a lesser substitute? I think if you could have two cars you'd go for something like a 335i and a Miata/Mini/Z4 M. Why bother with Saab at all?
If I can have an MX-5 (or similar) I don't need a 335i. There's cars that can do most of what it does for a lower price.

Furhtermore Saabs used to have many good selling points, like the design, practicality and turbocharged oomph amongst them. They also used to have interestin engineering solutions. The 9-5 Aero still has some of them I'd say (and costs less than the 335i).

Don't get me wrong, I think BMWs are excellent, but they aren't the only option out there.

Kitdy

06-20-2009, 12:47 PM

If I can have an MX-5 (or similar) I don't need a 335i. There's cars that can do most of what it does for a lower price.

Furhtermore Saabs used to have many good selling points, like the design, practicality and turbocharged oomph amongst them. They also used to have interestin engineering solutions. The 9-5 Aero still has some of them I'd say (and costs less than the 335i).

Don't get me wrong, I think BMWs are excellent, but they aren't the only option out there.

But amongst all the potential cars out there, do you really see room in your garage for a Saab?

Don't get me wrong, I think Saabs are shit, but they aren't the only option out there.

Ferrer

06-20-2009, 12:56 PM

But amongst all the potential cars out there, do you really see room in your garage for a Saab?

Don't get me wrong, I think Saabs are shit, but they aren't the only option out there.
Why not? Of course I'd have to try it out, but I wouldn't discard it at first like I would with a... I don't know... an Audi.

Revo

06-20-2009, 01:14 PM

So... would you cruise the highways in the BMW or weekend drive in it? And why would you want something worse to drive than BMW if it was an option? You said it was the ultimate drive then if you had two cars you'd accept a lesser substitute? I think if you could have two cars you'd go for something like a 335i and a Miata/Mini/Z4 M. Why bother with Saab at all?
Well at least over here Saab has a very strong cult following because of its aeronautical roots (and maybe because Sweden is such a nice place).

Despite all of its connections to GM and outdated offerings, Saab is considered as a choice for individuals whereas BMW-Audi have a chavistic image problem and MB is a car for oldsters or taxi drivers.

You see, rational thinking gets you nowhere here. Saab rules and that is the fact!

Kitdy

06-20-2009, 01:46 PM

Despite all of its connections to GM and outdated offerings, Saab is considered as a choice for individuals whereas BMW-Audi have a chavistic image problem and MB is a car for oldsters or taxi drivers.

I don't think you should ever buy or not buy a car based on the image associated with said car.

LeonOfTheDead

06-20-2009, 03:21 PM

I don't think you should ever buy or not buy a car based on the image associated with said car.

but certain images are well founded, such as those quoted by Revo.
they can't be blindly applied, but in most cases they work.

Ferrer

06-20-2009, 03:45 PM

but certain images are well founded, such as those quoted by Revo.
they can't be blindly applied, but in most cases they work.
Even if they are it should not affect your buying decision as Kitdy says.

LeonOfTheDead

06-20-2009, 03:53 PM

Even if they are it should not affect your buying decision as Kitdy says.

maybe theoretically, but when something may in some way be a problem for you, you should care about it.
Say I like the Audi A3, but I'm not a complete moron as A3's owners are.
With the very bad image they have, I think I would definitely want to avoid to be seen as one of them, to be considered as one of those who bought the car just to get more chicks, who doesn't know a damn thing about cars and so on (which would prevent me frm buying an A3 in first place, hypothetically).

There us a limit between what is recommendable, and what is doable.
It's like saying a car maker shouldn't listen to the silly requests of the buyers, which is correct as they don't know basically what they are asking, but they are also those who pay your bills.
So it's a trade-off, which may be different for every single person, but it's still a trade off.

Ferrer

06-20-2009, 03:59 PM

maybe theoretically, but when something may in some way be a problem for you, you should care about it.
Say I like the Audi A3, but I'm not a complete moron as A3's owners are.
With the very bad image they have, I think I would definitely want to avoid to be seen as one of them, to be considered as one of those who bought the car just to get more chicks, who doesn't know a damn thing about cars and so on (which would prevent me frm buying an A3 in first place, hypothetically).

There us a limit between what is recommendable, and what is doable.
It's like saying a car maker shouldn't listen to the silly requests of the buyers, which is correct as they don't know basically what they are asking, but they are also those who pay your bills.
So it's a trade-off, which may be different for every single person, but it's still a trade off.
You know that I drive a 1er and it's brilliant. And most BMW owners are twats as well.

And yet that didn't prevent me from getting one. Yes, sometimes I may have been seen as an stupid asshole, but everytime you get the bimmer down a mountain road it's clear why anyone who likes cars and driving should at least consider it. And I certainly wasn't going to pass up on the best drivers C-segment hatchback out there because some imbeciles drive it. That'd be like admiting defeat, and that'd annoy the hell out of me.

LeonOfTheDead

06-20-2009, 04:15 PM

You know that I drive a 1er and it's brilliant. And most BMW owners are twats as well.

And yet that didn't prevent me from getting one. Yes, sometimes I may have been seen as an stupid asshole, but everytime you get the bimmer down a mountain road it's clear why anyone who likes cars and driving should at least consider it. And I certainly wasn't going to pass up on the best drivers C-segment hatchback out there because some imbeciles drive it. That'd be like admiting defeat, and that'd annoy the hell out of me.

I know, but the 1-series doesn't have an owners' issue as large as the A3's.
And despite being quite sure the 1 would do the job excellently, I'd probably go for something more "peculiar", like a Civic, which reflects me more than other cars.
Saying I'd "need" the best performing C segment car, I'd still avoid the 1, just because it would be the "easy" path, and I don't like BMWs in first place.
In this segment of cars, I'd definitely look for something insanely FWD.
I'd buy a Boxter/Cayman though, regardless of the images they have, but it's something less common in my age-range, so less afflicted by this problem and less talked about among the people I'd frequent.

It's like, I don't dress in a certain way because I don't want people to look at me I'm a damn emo, for example, even I like black shirts and so on. It's like a message.

There are things which are ruined by the people who own them, being cars or other things.
It's not a defeat, it's a fact.
Knowing they are fine with that, I'm also sure I can find something else to satisfy my tastes and as good as the first option.

The 1 could be the only RWD hatch out there, but it isn't the only choice.
What other people think isn't on the first page of the reasons why I'd buy a certain cars, but I'd definitely avoid a pink Continental GT after seeing Paris Hilton has one.

Ferrer

06-20-2009, 04:21 PM

I know, but the 1-series doesn't have an owners' issue as large as the A3's.
And despite being quite sure the 1 would do the job excellently, I'd probably go for something more "peculiar", like a Civic, which reflects me more than other cars.
Saying I'd "need" the best performing C segment car, I'd still avoid the 1, just because it would be the "easy" path, and I don't like BMWs in first place.
In this segment of cars, I'd definitely look for something insanely FWD.
I'd buy a Boxter/Cayman though, regardless of the images they have, but it's something less common in my age-range, so less afflicted by this problem and less talked about among the people I'd frequent.

It's like, I don't dress in a certain way because I don't want people to look at me I'm a damn emo, for example, even I like black shirts and so on. It's like a message.

There are things which are ruined by the people who own them, being cars or other things.
It's not a defeat, it's a fact.
Knowing they are fine with that, I'm also sure I can find something else to satisfy my tastes and as good as the first option.

The 1 could be the only RWD hatch out there, but it isn't the only choice.
What other people think isn't on the first page of the reasons why I'd buy a certain cars, but I'd definitely avoid a pink Continental GT after seeing Paris Hilton has one.
I don't care about what others think of me. It does certainly annoy me seeing twats in cars I'd like to own or drive, but that certainly wouldn't prevent me at all from getting them. If you do so it's like giving them reason, and why possibly car manufacturers do monstrosities as they've been doing recently. Because normal human beings have stopped buying their cars and only twats remain within their costumers. And twats love SUV, folding metal roofs and flappy paddle gearboxes.

I also don't want different for the sake of difference. I want the difference to be there for some reason, to be useful. Like hydropneumatic suspension in Citroëns or boxer engines in Subarus. Which is why the Civic won't do. Yes, it looks different, but essentially behind the pretty body you are getting a worse than the last gen middle of the road hatch.

LeonOfTheDead

06-20-2009, 04:32 PM

I don't care about what others think of me. It does certainly annoy me seeing twats in cars I'd like to own or drive, but that certainly wouldn't prevent me at all from getting them. If you do so it's like giving them reason, and why possibly car manufacturers do monstrosities as they've been doing recently. Because normal human beings have stopped buying their cars and only twats remain within their costumers. And twats love SUV, folding metal roofs and flappy paddle gearboxes.

I also don't want different for the sake of difference. I want the difference to be there for some reason, to be useful. Like hydropneumatic suspension in Citroëns or boxer engines in Subarus. Which is why the Civic won't do. Yes, it looks different, but essentially behind the pretty body you are getting a worse than the last gen middle of the road hatch.

Even with "normal human beings" being still among a certain brand's customers portfolio, twats are definitely more of them, and therefore still driving their choices.
Also, considering how I'd use a car, a Civic would make more sense than a 1 Series. let alone the fact I don't think the car is worse than it's previous gen, I think journalists were expecting something else, a turbo maybe (like for the Clio RS), more power even if it wasn't necessary.

Ferrer

06-20-2009, 04:34 PM

Even with "normal human beings" being still among a certain brand's customers portfolio, twats are definitely more of them, and therefore still driving their choices.
Also, considering how I'd use a car, a Civic would make more sense than a 1 Series. let alone the fact I don't think the car is worse than it's previous gen, I think journalists were expecting something else, a turbo maybe (like for the Clio RS), more power even if it wasn't necessary.
So why downgrade the car with torsion beam suspension, when everyone is moving towards IRS?

LeonOfTheDead

06-20-2009, 04:42 PM

So why downgrade the car with torsion beam suspension, when everyone is moving towards IRS?

it's like "why using a manual gearbox when everyone is moving towards DSGs?".
Because every solution isn't necessarily better than the previous one, and each of them is better suitable for a specific appliance, which may not be the final product/car on which it's installed, but perhaps the very area in which it' working, the material with which it's working and so on.

The only thing I read actually bad, despite being personal, on the Civic is the lack of power. Now I accept cars are getting heavier, but saying a 140 bhp 1,8 engine is underpowered on an everyday Civic is just a nonsense.
Cars are heavier, it's a fact, for a lot of reasons which aren't bad engineering but necessities, as safety just to call one. But the power/weight ration isn't the right parameter to adopt when calculating what id sensed to adopt on a common road car, what's safe. An Hummer weighting 3 tons with 300 bhp is still more dangerous than a 500 with 100 bhp, regardless of the shapes.

Ferrer

06-20-2009, 04:47 PM

it's like "why using a manual gearbox when everyone is moving towards DSGs?".
Because every solution isn't necessarily better than the previous one, and each of them is better suitable for a specific appliance, which may not be the final product/car on which it's installed, but perhaps the very area in which it' working, the material with which it's working and so on.
I disagree with that view. The DSG may be better but for the driver a proper manual still can offer a pleasure and enjoyment that a DSG gearbox just can't, no matter how advanced it is. The same isn't quite true with the torsion beam v IRS setup. Yes a torsion beam can work very well, and there are many excellent hot hatches that have it, but in general the IRS layout is considered to offer better driving characteristics with no "enjoyment" issues.

And the old Civic had independent rear suspension.

LeonOfTheDead

06-20-2009, 04:53 PM

I disagree with that view. The DSG may be better but for the driver a proper manual still can offer a pleasure and enjoyment that a DSG gearbox just can't, no matter how advanced it is. The same isn't quite true with the torsion beam v IRS setup. Yes a torsion beam can work very well, and there are many excellent hot hatches that have it, but in general the IRS layout is considered to offer better driving characteristics with no "enjoyment" issues.

And the old Civic had independent rear suspension.

you still would like a Mustang right? ;)

Kitdy

06-20-2009, 05:08 PM

Roentgen

06-20-2009, 05:30 PM

But amongst all the potential cars out there, do you really see room in your garage for a Saab?

Don't get me wrong, I think Saabs are shit, but they aren't the only option out there.

Kitdy, have you driven a late model Saab, and seriously compared a Saab to a BMW of the same price range? I don't know the pricings in other countries, but in NZ, for the same price, you can get a mid range 3 series for the price of a 9-5. For very bottom 5 series, you can get top model 9-5, with cash to spare.

-Performance wise, you can't say a 9-5 Aero is worse than a 325d.
-Comfort-wise, ok, tbh, I've never been in a late model 3 series, but I have been in a 2001/2003 model, (my Saab is 1998/1999) and it was cramped. Seats are hard, equipments are far inferior (sound system, air-con for rear pessengers, etc.).
-Design wise, well that's very opinion-based. Saabs are generally considered as designer's cars. BMW on the other hand... well, the new ones are pretty weird... not ugly, just weird. Rofl.
-Safety wise, well, Saabs are renown for their safety. So don't need to go there.
-Practicality wise, I'm not too sure. All I know is that in a Saab, you can fold down the seats completely. I'm sure the BMW can do that too.
-What else?

Now if I wanted an executive car for under $90,000 NZDs, here are my options:

-Saab 9-5 Aero (191 kw)($89,900)
-BMW 325d SE (145 kw)($85,900 for model with Steptronic)
-Audi A4 2.7 TDI S Lline (140 kw)($85,500)
-Mercedes C 220 CDI Avantgarde (125 kw)($88,900)
-Lexus IS (website down, can't find prices or similar model)
-Volvo S80 3.2 AWD (175 kw)($89,990)
-Jaguar X-Type Sport 3.0 litre AWD (169 kw)($79,990)

Saying something is shit is a very very bold claim, and unless you can back it up with sufficient evidence, your argument/statement is what is truely shit.

Kitdy

06-20-2009, 06:00 PM

Kitdy, have you driven a late model Saab, and seriously compared a Saab to a BMW of the same price range? I don't know the pricings in other countries, but in NZ, for the same price, you can get a mid range 3 series for the price of a 9-5. For very bottom 5 series, you can get top model 9-5, with cash to spare.

-Performance wise, you can't say a 9-5 Aero is worse than a 525d.
-Comfort-wise, ok, tbh, I've never been in a 5 series of the same year, but the last 5 series I was in, which is slightly newer than my 9-5, can't match comfort of my car. Seats in the 5 series are too hard imo, very performance based. In an executive car, performance isn't everything.
-Design wise, well that's very opinion-based. Saabs are generally considered as designer's cars. BMW on the other hand... well, the new ones are pretty weird... not ugly, just weird. Rofl.
-Safety wise, well, Saabs are renown for their safety. So don't need to go there.
-Practicality wise, I'm not too sure. All I know is that in a Saab, you can fold down the seats completely. I'm sure the BMW can do that too.
-What else?

Saying something is shit is a very very bold claim, and unless you can back it up with sufficient evidence, your argument/statement is what is truly shit.

I have not driven a late model Saab. I have only driven a handful of cars in my life - including one E46 BMW (which surprisingly, I didn't like very much).

My main beef with Saab is they are ugly as sin. I despise so many of their designs I can't get over it. I also don't really like their philosophy, and I think they are too expensive for what they are (I'd rather a BMW that did it's job much better).

You equate a 9-5 Aero to a 525d in "performance." What exactly are you talking about in performance here? I've read some magazines and they are pretty universal on the quality of BMW's performance credentials. And this is more than just straight line acceleration.

You also say a Saab is more comfortable than a BMW but I don't care much - drive means all to me and based on what I've read, the fact is BMWs are class leaders for driving experience - and if you do want to track your car, which I may want to do, I'd prefer to have my rear wheels driven. Besides, I enjoy doing donuts in the snow and this would only help me more. I also enjoy drifting - how am I gonna do that in a front wheel drive car? I also like straight sixes and V8s. How am I going to get one in a Saab? Uhhp I'm not.

I realize you like Saabs and are trying to defend Saab's honour here, but from my point of view, Saabs are shit. I hate them. Maybe if I drove one I'd have a different point of view but I somehow don't think so (as I think you;d agree from my list of wants). When I see someone driving a Saab, I wonder why they didn't wait a few months more and save their money to buy a BMW.

I also don't care for Volvos. Maybe I'm a raging racist against Swedes or something and I don't even know it.

Roentgen

06-20-2009, 06:29 PM

I have not driven a late model Saab. I have only driven a handful of cars in my life - including one E46 BMW (which surprisingly, I didn't like very much).

My main beef with Saab is they are ugly as sin. I despise so many of their designs I can't get over it. I also don't really like their philosophy, and I think they are too expensive for what they are (I'd rather a BMW that did it's job much better).

You equate a 9-5 Aero to a 525d in "performance." What exactly are you talking about in performance here? I've read some magazines and they are pretty universal on the quality of BMW's performance credentials. And this is more than just straight line acceleration.

You also say a Saab is more comfortable than a BMW but I don't care much - drive means all to me and based on what I've read, the fact is BMWs are class leaders for driving experience - and if you do want to track your car, which I may want to do, I'd prefer to have my rear wheels driven. Besides, I enjoy doing donuts in the snow and this would only help me more. I also enjoy drifting - how am I gonna do that in a front wheel drive car? I also like straight sixes and V8s. How am I going to get one in a Saab? Uhhp I'm not.

I realize you like Saabs and are trying to defend Saab's honour here, but from my point of view, Saabs are shit. I hate them. Maybe if I drove one I'd have a different point of view but I somehow don't think so (as I think you;d agree from my list of wants). When I see someone driving a Saab, I wonder why they didn't wait a few months more and save their money to buy a BMW.

I also don't care for Volvos. Maybe I'm a raging racist against Swedes or something and I don't even know it.

As I said, looks are very opinion based. YOU think they're ugly. That's fine. You're different.

Performance wise, come on, can you seriously say a diesel is as good as a turbocharged petrol? Really? Seriously? A top of the line, sports-tuned car vs a economically tuned car?

As for your want of Straight 6 engines, you might as well say you want the BMW badge.

Also, with your list of wants, donuts/drifiting, why would you even want an executive car to do that in? That's like buying a Phantom purely for taking it to a track. I mean it has a V12! ...this is getting ridiculous.

Where I live, and surely in many other countries, we don't see snow much. But if you REALLY want to drift in snow, who said Saab can't do it?! (see pic)

And I don't think you're racist against Swedes. Are you telling me you hate Koenigseggs as well? They're Swede.

I just think you're a classic case of buying a car for the badge. Nothing else matters. As long as it comes with a BMW badge, it'll have to be the best in class. Sorry to say, but I, in my most humble and honest opinion, don't think so.

Kitdy

06-20-2009, 06:44 PM

clutch-monkey

06-20-2009, 06:53 PM

i will say this for saab - they've at least kept their design heritage, whereas after the E46, BMW rolled theirs up into a ball, set it on fire and threw it at some hobo's.

Roentgen

06-20-2009, 07:44 PM

Yeah this is getting out of hand now. You've now started putting words in my mouth and I'm not pleased with that.

I don't want a BMW because of the badge - I don't want any car for the badge. I want BMW because time and time again the auto press have regarded them highly. I don't want a 5, I want a 3. I would take a 330Ci I think over any Saab. The 9-5 Aero to a 525d I misinterpreted, the 9-5 would be superior no doubt. However, I don't want a diesel, and I don't want turbocharging. However, the current 9-5 and 5 are not cars that concern me.

I would rather pay more for an E46 than I would for a comparable Saab. Why?

1. The E46 is a legend and has been praised almost universally by the automotive press. What Saab of that era has that regard by the press?

2. The BMW is rear wheel drive.

3. The BMW has a straight 6 - I appreciate the technological beauty of this inherently balanced engine configuration.

4. The BMW is a coupe.

5. The BMW is a performance automobile.

6. The BMW is rear wheel drive.

The donuts bit was largely a joke. I think this has gotten a bit too serious and you are frankly bordering on personal attacks here when you call me "different" as if that's a bad thing.

The racist about Swedes was a joke.

Why are you so defencive about me liking a BMW over a Saab anyways, whats it to you? I don't want a front wheel drive car, and I don't like turbocharging. These tow things are ingrained in Saab's DNA. I do not like them. Couple that with the styling (If you are considering modern cars, then the two I would be interested in from each company would be the 9-3 and 3 coupe and I love the look of the 3 coupe and hate the look of the 9-3.)

I don't like getting pissed off at people I talk to on UCP but if I come off as a bit short it's because you've angered me; I apologize for this. Do you understand that Saab is not my taste at all? BMW may not be the perfect car for me (I doubt that they would be) but for my wishes, they are superior to Saabs.

I don't like getting angry over the internet either. So I too believe an apology is due here.

The things is, this thread is meant to be about Koenigsegg buying Saabs, but then you said "Saabs are shit" a few pages back. As a Saab owner, I was deeply offended. Cargirl1990 apologised about his dislike for Saabs. Because your claim is so bold, I felt apt to put my word in, never expecting this to get out of hand.

Anyway, I edited my post earlier, as I found that the bottom model 5 series costs considerably more than the top model Saab. The closest model in terms of price is 325d. Since the 9-5 is a sedan, so just consider sedans here.

For now, let me put a friendly answer to your 6 pts :)

1. Saabs are hugely underrated. They also don't make a big fuss about new models. So press never really mentions them, or worries much about them.

2.6.3.4.5. Executive Sedans is what my comparisons are based on. The list of cars I put down are all executive sedans. I don't think anybody would put a car of this class up against a sports coupe. Also, the price difference.

Sure, if it is your personal taste, that's ok. But to make such a claim as "Saabs are shit" is pretty ridiculous.

Anyway, let's end this argument once and for all.

PS. Sarcasm and jokes over internet = fail. I'm sorry I couldn't tell that you were joking.

Kitdy

06-20-2009, 08:06 PM

I don't like getting angry over the internet either. So I too believe an apology is due here.

The things is, this thread is meant to be about Koenigsegg buying Saabs, but then you said "Saabs are shit" a few pages back. As a Saab owner, I was deeply offended. Cargirl1990 apologised about his dislike for Saabs. Because your claim is so bold, I felt apt to put my word in, never expecting this to get out of hand.

Anyway, I edited my post earlier, as I found that the bottom model 5 series costs considerably more than the top model Saab. The closest model in terms of price is 325d. Since the 9-5 is a sedan, so just consider sedans here.

For now, let me put a friendly answer to your 6 pts :)

1. Saabs are hugely underrated. They also don't make a big fuss about new models. So press never really mentions them, or worries much about them.

2.6.3.4.5. Executive Sedans is what my comparisons are based on. The list of cars I put down are all executive sedans. I don't think anybody would put a car of this class up against a sports coupe. Also, the price difference.

Sure, if it is your personal taste, that's ok. But to make such a claim as "Saabs are shit" is pretty ridiculous.

Anyway, let's end this argument once and for all.

PS. Sarcasm and jokes over internet = fail. I'm sorry I couldn't tell that you were joking.

Fair and apology accepted.

As for Saabs being shit, how about I think Saabs are shit? Heheh.

It was a fun debate though I think even if it got a bit heated.

EDIT: I apologize as well - I didn't mean to cause any offence. And I have a good idea how important a car is to an enthusiast. Just understand me and Saabs do not get along well.

Roentgen

06-20-2009, 08:08 PM

Fair and apology accepted.

As for Saabs being shit, how about I think Saabs are shit? Heheh.

It was a fun debate though I think even if it got a bit heated.

Haha, it was fun yea :D

cargirl1990

06-20-2009, 09:11 PM

Leon, if you like wearing black shirts you should wear them. If you like pink Continentals, get one too - whatever. I mean I try to live and think that I don't care what other people think of me - but to an extent I actually do, and though I'm upset at myself for this what can I do?

That being said, if you like a car you should buy it regardless of the image associated with it as that is what you will enjoy. I wouldn't hesitate buying any car that I liked because of image problems.

You should live life your own way and carve your own path.

Another thing what Ferrer said reminded me of my philosophy - don't be different for hte sake of being different and don't be the same for the sake if being the same. Be who you are. If you happen to like some things that are popular and trendy - fine. If you happen to like other things that are obscure and elitist - fine too. Just don't subscribe to either way for the sake of it.

Off topic rant over - back to cars.

Ferrer, your 1 is awesome but sadly it has a diesel and is an ugly hatchback. There I said it.

its ok to be different. i see no wrong in that. i really like your philosphy though. it makes sense. i like to be different as well. i do have a tendency to care what other people think of me as i know and feel that first impressions are everything, BUT, i don't really care most of the time even if it hurts me. ( feelings wise ). i know, Ferrers car is awesome. but im not a big fan of the diesels but i am a big fan of the 1 Series and the rest of the lineup BMw has to offer. i also agree with what you had to say about the E46. the E96 should of had that beautiful, glorious, awesome, inline 6 engine instead of a
V8. i also personally find that the E96 looks ' overweight ' so to speak compared to its predecessor. long live the E46. :D

LeonOfTheDead

06-21-2009, 02:58 AM

Leon, if you like wearing black shirts you should wear them. If you like pink Continentals, get one too - whatever. I mean I try to live and think that I don't care what other people think of me - but to an extent I actually do, and though I'm upset at myself for this what can I do?

That being said, if you like a car you should buy it regardless of the image associated with it as that is what you will enjoy. I wouldn't hesitate buying any car that I liked because of image problems.

You should live life your own way and carve your own path.

Another thing what Ferrer said reminded me of my philosophy - don't be different for hte sake of being different and don't be the same for the sake if being the same. Be who you are. If you happen to like some things that are popular and trendy - fine. If you happen to like other things that are obscure and elitist - fine too. Just don't subscribe to either way for the sake of it.

Off topic rant over - back to cars.

Ferrer, your 1 is awesome but sadly it has a diesel and is an ugly hatchback. There I said it.

I can assure you I do.
Almost all my shirts are black.

But even if I agree we "should" not be affected by other people, but in reality we do, someone less than others obviously.
I'd buy a Ferrari California regardless of what Ferrer thinks or a McLaren F1 regardless it being the obvious choice.

And I like different things not for the sake of being different, but because I like them, when something is commonly liked I can't help but think it's an average product overall, and generally.
If everyone likes the same thing, that thing is like the basis for everyone's taste, the thing you obviously like. Some of us may surely be in love with it, that's fine, but for all the others, it would be just a choice made by the mass and by every single being.
Therefore choosing what other people don't choose, given that you really like it and all, it's like stating firstly to myself, I'm not a part of the mass. Then I could buy a Morgan Aero Sport without people recognizing it at all, which would clarify I didn't buy it for the sake of appear different, but to be myself.

Perhaps trying to find what I really like and what really represents me I could end up with the same car I rejected at first, which already happened, but at least now I could say it's a choice of mine.

Ferrer

06-21-2009, 03:17 AM

Ferrer, your 1 is awesome but sadly it has a diesel and is an ugly hatchback. There I said it.
Can't deny reality, can I? What a drive though, it really puts into perspective what can be done if you are prepared to sacrifice some aspects like practicality. Having driven both layouts for many miles now I can tell that for the ultimate driving experience you need rear wheel drive. It's not a case of tail out malarkey, altough it can do it if you want, but even at moderate speeds you can tell that it's meant to be a drivers car. It's inherently balanced, great steering and no undesteer whatsoever.

However that doesn't mean front wheel drive can't be fun, because it can. And you can get it just as sideways and you can crash into a tree backwards just as easily if you don't know what you're doing. Arguably the most fun I've ever had in a car was with a front wheel drive car. And then there's the case of the purpose of the car. If a car will only see the motorway it may have to fulfill diferent criteria from one that will be your weekend toy to charge up and down mountain roads. Therefore a Saab could make perfect sense. It still has decent handling, with good performance and does that comfortably.

clutch-monkey

06-21-2009, 03:23 AM

the hatchback shape suits the 1 series better than the coupe shape. or so it seems at times; it's not really a classically elegant shape i guess..

Ferrer

06-21-2009, 03:25 AM

the hatchback shape suits the 1 series better than the coupe shape. or so it seems at times; it's not really a classically elegant shape i guess..
Both are still quite ugly though, even if the hatch isn't as horrible and ill-proportioned.

clutch-monkey

06-21-2009, 03:35 AM

yeah. i can't help but wonder how would have looked if BMW had kept it's old theme (hopefully better than that 318 compact or whatever it was)

LeonOfTheDead

06-21-2009, 06:37 AM

I don't see as much differences between a Saab and a BMW to justify having both. If the BMW is the way to go during the weekend, having the Saab for during the week is a just a pretest. If it was a Lexus, or something more comfortable and so on, ok, but a Saab is just too average for being an actual second car once you got something else. At that point an Opel would still do the job.
Why not a Citroen?
It's just about personal taste in the end, but if I had a BMW because I prefer it, a second car would be something completely different, or much more comfortable and luxurious, or a proper sportscar, maybe even a hot hatch.

Ferrer

06-21-2009, 06:39 AM

LeonOfTheDead

06-21-2009, 06:51 AM

The BMW can be a sportscar. Or at least it could. And the Saab could be the comfy cruiser with interesting engineering solutions.

I know as sportscar I meant something extremer than even an M3, something like an Elise, or even a silly track day car.
And a BMW isn't uncomfortable enough to make you will to have a Saab during the week.

Ferrer

06-21-2009, 06:56 AM

I know as sportscar I meant something extremer than even an M3, something like an Elise, or even a silly track day car.
And a BMW isn't uncomfortable enough to make you will to have a Saab during the week.
I was thinking of the Z4M. That was a proper sportscar. And while you could live with it everyday, I'd personally prefer something more comfortable for weekdays. Even the Mini isn't entirely suited to everyday driving in my opinion.

LeonOfTheDead

06-21-2009, 07:01 AM

I was thinking of the Z4M. That was a proper sportscar. And while you could live with it everyday, I'd personally prefer something more comfortable for weekdays. Even the Mini isn't entirely suited to everyday driving in my opinion.

Agree on the Mini, which is way I don't like it. It's a good ride, but not a real and practical compact car, neither a precise and focused track car. I prefer something more simple as a Yaris or more extreme as an Abarth SS.

About fast BMWs, they are not my cup of tea in the end, even if a Z4 Coupe is an quite interesting purchase, but surely not a car to live with the whole time.
Still Saab makes little sense at the moment. Perhaps ten years ago, or five years in the future, hopefully.

cargirl1990

06-21-2009, 10:28 PM

yeah. i can't help but wonder how would have looked if BMW had kept it's old theme (hopefully better than that 318 compact or whatever it was)

are you talking about the 1980's theme cuz that would be flippin awesome!

4wheelsonline

06-21-2009, 10:58 PM

This could be a very good thing for them what do you all think?

Koenigsegg And Saab: Unlikely Bedfellows - Forbes.com (http://www.forbes.com/2009/06/16/saab-koenigsegg-gm-markets-equity-autos.html)

No wonder koenigsegg buys the SAAB. Because koenigsegg creates one of the fastest car in the world. ;)

fisetdavid26

06-21-2009, 11:46 PM

No wonder koenigsegg buys the SAAB. Because koenigsegg creates one of the fastest car in the world. ;)
Who/what the hell are you? A spambot?

All your replies are simplistic and utterly pointless.

clutch-monkey

06-21-2009, 11:51 PM

Who/what the hell are you? A spambot?

All your replies are simplistic and utterly pointless.

it's not so much that. i didn't understand his post above at all, i don't know what logic is behind it.

edit: same goes for the 'cayenne is elegant' comment

fisetdavid26

06-22-2009, 12:53 AM

it's not so much that. i didn't understand his post above at all, i don't know what logic is behind it.

edit: same goes for the 'cayenne is elegant' comment
Wait wat.

Elegant.

b&

clutch-monkey

06-22-2009, 01:00 AM

go look in the which cayenne is the worst thread.

fisetdavid26

06-22-2009, 01:04 AM

go look in the which cayenne is the worst thread.
I lol'ed at this: http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/889951-post65.html

I need to vote for that as my post of the year.

cargirl1990

06-22-2009, 11:05 AM

I lol'ed at this: http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/889951-post65.html

I need to vote for that as my post of the year.

totally the post of da year!

LeonOfTheDead

06-22-2009, 03:12 PM

Who/what the hell are you? A spambot?

All your replies are simplistic and utterly pointless.

I'm pretty sure you missed his threads:rolleyes:

fisetdavid26

06-22-2009, 03:20 PM

I'm pretty sure you missed his threads:rolleyes:
I've seen a few...

So pointless.

Ferrer

06-22-2009, 03:22 PM

Some had interesting discussion, though.

LeonOfTheDead

06-22-2009, 03:24 PM

Some had interesting discussion, though.

sure, but not thanks to him, who isn't even coming back to read all the comments against him.
If you are going to create a thread to raise discussion, do it well.
Copy and paste is for quickly-dieing blogs.

Ferrer

06-22-2009, 03:25 PM

sure, but not thanks to him, who isn't even coming back to read all the comments against him.
If you are going to create a thread to raise discussion, do it well.
Copy and paste is for quickly-dieing blogs.
Certainly, all of what you say is true.

However it's better than no discussion at all, I'd say.

LeonOfTheDead

06-22-2009, 03:30 PM

Certainly, all of what you say is true.

However it's better than no discussion at all, I'd say.

that's obvious.:)
We might as well post more important news before he does.;)

cargirl1990

06-22-2009, 04:42 PM

y'all should nominate me as the Worst Thread Creater Ever and the Worst Ultimate Car Page Member Ever.

Roentgen

06-22-2009, 05:00 PM

y'all should nominate me as the Worst Thread Creater Ever and the Worst Ultimate Car Page Member Ever.

well... at least you're friendly :)

Anyway, I reckon my perfect 2 car garage would be a Saab Turbo X sportswagon, and a Lotus Exige/Evora.

Not likely that I will afford any of them... but still... it's good to dream :p

cargirl1990

06-22-2009, 05:09 PM

well... at least you're friendly :)

Anyway, I reckon my perfect 2 car garage would be a Saab Turbo X sportswagon, and a Lotus Exige/Evora.

Not likely that I will afford any of them... but still... it's good to dream :p

aww! thank you! you friendly as well. infact many on here are pretty much friendly! yeah, a Saab ain't half bad. that wagon looks sick! ( in a good way sick. ) and a Exige/ Evora would be awesome too! :)

Dino Scuderia

08-18-2009, 03:50 AM

Finally final.

General Motors Co. has reached a binding agreement to sell its loss-making Saab Automobile AB unit to Swedish sports car maker Koenigsegg Group AB, though a number of funding hurdles still need to be crossed.

The move, announced early Tuesday, comes two months after the companies signed a letter of intent, and will give Koenigsegg rights to produce the next generation of Saabs free of charge.
[A Saab dealership] Bloomberg News/Landov

A Saab Automobile sign at a dealership; the unit is set to be sold to Swedish sports car maker Koenigsegg Group AB.

The deal ties up another loose end in GM's global restructuring as it nears the sale of a majority stake in its core Opel and Vauxhall European assets.

While the purchase price is effectively zero, a disposal of Saab hinges on the Swedish government providing guarantees for loans from the European Investment bank. "The reality is the deal needs to clear a few more hurdles," said one person familiar with the deal.

Saab sought protection from creditors in February amid GM's efforts to sell or spin off the unit. The U.S. company had hoped to complete a transaction in June, but is now targeting a September closing. Saab is one of four brands -- alongside Hummer, Pontiac and Saturn -- being sold or wound down by GM.

Saab's creditors in June approved the auto maker's proposal to pay 25% of about 10.5 billion Swedish kronor ($1.46 billion) in debts, including almost 10 billion kronor owed to parent GM, and the rest to auto suppliers and the Swedish government.

The sale agreement includes a pact on the transfer of technology and services between Saab's new owners and GM.

Dagens Nyheter, a Swedish newspaper, said the deal's terms would also see GM write off the money it used to support Saab earlier this year, and machinery and production equipment will be transferred to the new owners.

Saab last year sold fewer than 94,000 cars, down from about 125,000 vehicles in 2007. Its best-ever year was in 2006, when it sold 133,000 cars, making it a tiny player in the global auto industry.

WSJ

LeonOfTheDead

11-24-2009, 10:11 AM

...ops

After riding in on a white horse, Koenigsegg Group AB has pulled out of negotiations to buy Saab from General Motors, leaving the Swedish automaker's future very much in doubt. In a brief statement issued by GM (available after the jump), president and CEO Fritz Henderson says that the company is "very disappointed with the decision to pull out of the Saab purchase."

It is unclear what will happen to the brand now, but if Saab fans can hold on to any hope, GM says it will "take the next several days to assess the situation and will advise on the next steps next week." It is worth noting that this is different from the brief announcement that GM issued when Roger Penske's group pulled out from buying Saturn – GM immediately announced that they would begin "winding down" the brand. There was at least one other serious bidder interested in purchasing Saab previous to Koenigsegg becoming the preferred purchaser, but it isn't immediately clear if they are still interested, or if their financial backing checked out to begin with.

We suspect that even if Saab is unable to survive as a brand, someone will step in and purchase the assets to the already tooled-up forthcoming 9-5 sedan – perhaps the Chinese – and potentially the newish 9-3/9-3X as well.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/11/24/breaking-koenigsegg-backs-out-of-saab-purchase-brand-future-up

KFL didn't like what you did there.

DETROIT -- General Motors confirmed today that the proposed sale of its Saab subsidiary to Koenigsegg Group AB was terminated at the discretion of the buyer.

"We're obviously very disappointed with the decision to pull out of the Saab purchase," said GM President and CEO, Fritz Henderson. "Many have worked tirelessly over the past several months to create a sustainable plan for the future of Saab by selling the brand and its manufacturing interests to Koenigsegg Group AB. Given the sudden change in direction, we will take the next several days to assess the situation and will advise on the next steps next week."

Ferrer

11-24-2009, 10:54 AM

I hope Saab doesn't die.

KFL didn't like what you did there.
We may have to step in...

Kitdy

11-24-2009, 02:17 PM

LotusLocost

11-24-2009, 02:50 PM

I don't often make predictions but I think Saab is dead. I feel bad for the workers for Saab, but Saab was losing money I bet (maybe attributable to GM management) and I think Koenigsegg's purchase of Saab woulda just ended with them in the poor house too.

I think it's probably a good decision for them to have walked away from the deal. It woulda been a money pit and maybe woulda robbed us of future Koenigseggs.

Well, Saab hasn't had a positive result in the whole of it's history, except for one year.. Though, GM management hasn't done anything to improve that situation for sure. As far as I know, very few of GM's brands have made any good results at all, in the last few decades. (?).

And I think your assumptions of Saabs future with Königsegg is a bit shallow. A Saab management with the visions of the owners of Königsegg could have been fruitful for Saab, they have visions that suits Saab. The quantity over quality style that GM has been running isn't the best for a small brand like SAAB, it has practically ruined the small brand. The soul, the passion, the quality that it was ones known for, went out the window as fast as shared GM platforms and engines came inn. It might have been the only solution back then for Saab, so I don't blame them for going into it. Of course, the "new" Saab would share alot of components with someone, even GM. That's how the car industry works today. But, I think that the shared components would be under a more critical eye, before they would be picked.

I feel sorry for the deal going bust, though, I have a small hope still, that this is a move from Königsegg to speed things up. Reading what the owners are saying in media up here, things where very complicated and slow with GM from day one, and time was running out. Königsegg had set a deadline for the deal at 30. Nov, and they feel that they are so far away from the completion of the deal, that they backed out. I hope that we see another ending to this.

Kitdy

11-24-2009, 03:04 PM

And I think your assumptions of Saabs future with Königsegg is a bit shallow. A Saab management with the visions of the owners of Königsegg could have been fruitful for Saab, they have visions that suits Saab. The quantity over quality style that GM has been running isn't the best for a small brand like SAAB, it has practically ruined the small brand.

This could entirely be the case - maybe I'm not giving Koenigsegg's ownership of Saab a fair shake. But as far as I saw it, their plans were to increase the prices of Saabs and decrease quantity. I for one doubt that this would have been effective in North America where the market is already flooded with luxury vehicles and Saab does not exactly enjoy a great reputation.

Do you think that Saab's reputation in Europe coulda been turned around fast enough to make it profitable before it was forced itself and potentially Koenigsegg into insolvency?

You said Saab had never had a positive result in it's history - if this is true, then that pretty much means that even when Saab was a quirky, individual quality company it still didn't make money. Would a return to Saabs former ways and / or a move upmarket really save Saab? Could Koenigsegg with limited resources have made it competitive with the Germans, and in North America, the Japanese? I may not be an industry insider, but I don't think so.

Do you?

EDIT: I know you and I have much more limited information than the insiders in this former deal had, but let's say this was your company's money you were using to buy Saab. Would you buy them based on the information given and and track record that Saab has?

Ferrer

11-24-2009, 03:07 PM

I always though that Saab posted small profits back when it was independent.

LeonOfTheDead

11-24-2009, 03:40 PM

There are folks over the web claiming even Koenigsegg wasn't exactly profitable as well, but that the original business of Mr K. (import/export) was covering the costs.

I think K could have been the real deal for Saab, given they could stay alive as much as it would have taken to transform Saab from an Opel subsidiary in something perhaps more similar to Jaguar, if not even Maserati, considering their sedans.

Ferrer

11-24-2009, 03:57 PM

I think Maserati is aiming far too high for Saab. At most the lower end Jags. Realisitcally, big Cits, Alfas and Lancias.

LotusLocost

11-24-2009, 04:08 PM

This could entirely be the case - maybe I'm not giving Koenigsegg's ownership of Saab a fair shake. But as far as I saw it, their plans were to increase the prices of Saabs and decrease quantity. I for one doubt that this would have been effective in North America where the market is already flooded with luxury vehicles and Saab does not exactly enjoy a great reputation.

Do you think that Saab's reputation in Europe coulda been turned around fast enough to make it profitable before it was forced itself and potentially Koenigsegg into insolvency?

You said Saab had never had a positive result in it's history - if this is true, then that pretty much means that even when Saab was a quirky, individual quality company it still didn't make money. Would a return to Saabs former ways and / or a move upmarket really save Saab? Could Koenigsegg with limited resources have made it competitive with the Germans, and in North America, the Japanese? I may not be an industry insider, but I don't think so.

Do you?

EDIT: I know you and I have much more limited information than the insiders in this former deal had, but let's say this was your company's money you were using to buy Saab. Would you buy them based on the information given and and track record that Saab has?

Saab hasn't it's strongest market in NA, but Europe.
The "marriage" with Koenigsegg could have improved the cars enough to again make it a trustworthy and strong brand, in the upper middle price class.
Both in reputation and quality. And I think they could have turned it around fast enough to survive. Of course, I am not capable to see into the future, but still believe it could be possible.

Remember that this deal also contained large loan guaranties to ensure that Koenigsegg had enough resources to make the brand profitable, within their plans. I don't think that they are doing a deal like this blindfolded. There might have been some economic analysis behind this. Most certainly done by people who have some experience with this sort of things..

I don't hope that Koenigsegg was planning to go back to the pre GM way Saab was running things, cause that would be plain stupid. As I said, and you repeated, they hadn't been making money.. There is not only one way to make a quality car, with it's soul and identity intact.

If Saab could ever compete with german/french/japanese etc. cars.
In volumes no, but in quality, yes. Again, hard to see into the future, but I think they could reach profitable sales numbers, both in Europe and NA.

If I had the right people around me, and the deal that I was aiming for, I would certainly do a deal like Koenigsegg has been up to.

LeonOfTheDead

11-24-2009, 04:12 PM

I think Maserati is aiming far too high for Saab. At most the lower end Jags. Realisitcally, big Cits, Alfas and Lancias.

I'd have a look at a 100.000 € Saab developed under the Koenigsegg umbrella, and I'd find it more interesting than a 100.000 € Jaguar developed by Ford.
Surely they couldn't match the performance of the QP, but that's the kind of vehicle, market and price they should have looked at for their flagship. I'm not sure if I'd have developed a new 93, maybe something in that segment but a bit more luxurious and exclusive (no X-Type).

I'd aimed high, that's for sure.

LotusLocost

11-24-2009, 04:13 PM

I always though that Saab posted small profits back when it was independent.

You may be right about that. There was never much profit, or losses.
I saw a figure of that someplace, but can't find it right now.
A zero profit company as we say here. Back then Saab also was a institution for the country of Sweden, contributing with work for the people, and reasonably priced cars for the people. Like Volvo also once was.

Ferrer

11-24-2009, 04:25 PM

I'd have a look at a 100.000 € Saab developed under the Koenigsegg umbrella, and I'd find it more interesting than a 100.000 € Jaguar developed by Ford.
Surely they couldn't match the performance of the QP, but that's the kind of vehicle, market and price they should have looked at for their flagship. I'm not sure if I'd have developed a new 93, maybe something in that segment but a bit more luxurious and exclusive (no X-Type).

I'd aimed high, that's for sure.
I don't know, being a front wheel drive company rather limits the possibilities in my opinion. Yes they can go four wheel drive, but I don't know I'm still not quite sure. However as a quality alternative in the D and E segment (from 30 to 60 grand €), there I could see future.

Back then Saab also was a institution for the country of Sweden, contributing with work for the people, and reasonably priced cars for the people. Like Volvo also once was.
Like so many other companies, as Alfa Romeo, Lancia, BMW,... and then they became what we today know as premium brands. Sometimes I wonder if it could've stayed that way.

LeonOfTheDead

11-24-2009, 04:38 PM

I suppose the new management could have even made room for a limited production rwd platform (heck, even MG-Rover managed to do that before dying).

Ferrer

11-24-2009, 04:40 PM

I suppose the new management could have even made room for a limited production rwd platform (heck, even MG-Rover managed to do that before dying).
I wasn't implying that it's not possible, just that it wouldn't be very Saabish.

IBrake4Rainbows

11-24-2009, 04:43 PM

That was surely part of the Reason MG died. diverting seriously required funds for Follies of engineering that had no sale potential.

This is a disappointing outcome for Saab but it's better they try and find someone else than a company that can't afford to keep them and their parent alive.

Maybe some things aren't meant to last forever.....

LeonOfTheDead

11-24-2009, 06:35 PM

Actually MG-Rover was already dead when that car came out, and I'd say the rwd 75 diverted a few money compared to what was required to run the and refurbish the whole company.

Kitdy

11-24-2009, 11:14 PM

This blog post (http://blogs.motortrend.com/6610227/editorial/why-gm-cant-sell-saab/index.html) from Motor Trend thinks that the next step is insolvency for Saab.

LotusLocost

11-25-2009, 08:26 AM

I'm not going to speculate in what will now happen to Saab.
But it's speculated (from GM sources) that Koenigsegg pulled out of the deal, because there had been so much technical problems/difficulties with the shared Insignia platform and components who was going into the new 9-5. Also after looking closely to the hasty construction Saab has done of the new 9-5 they see trouble in the horizon with poor Opel components in a hasty designed "savior"..

It's also said from different economists that Koenigsegg Group is in financial trouble, seeing a cost of about 3,5 million euros so far, to try to make this deal with GM.

Koenigsegg Group themselves say that time was running out, and that's the reason for pulling out. The absolute deadline of 30. Nov. was very critical for the whole deal. As long as the deal is not completed they can't start the work of turning this around..

GM says that if this deal did not happen, Saab is without a future, in same manner as Saturn...

So, who is talking the truth? Maybe we will get some answers within the next few days.