Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 18:38:01 +0000 From: Grunff <grunffnopsam.com> Subject: Re: Best built recent Saab?
pablo wrote: > Don't be sorry. I don't see an issue with introducing some German car > engineering DNA. I'd still rather own a 2002 model year than an early 90s > Saab. To claim the later is better built is an illusion. I, for one, think > today's Saabs are fat better than any early 90s product - I would have never > considered Saab back then, but now I do. And I have been in 900 > convertibles, and the 9-3 I won is far, and I mean *far*, more solidly > built. > > My point is Saab has to improve moving forward - to move backward would kill > it. ts past is exactly what lead it to *need* GM money to survive. Superior > cars as a rule do not result in a company that needs to be saved: Saab was a > shell and a name, but the cars by then were behind the times. Moving forward does not equate to essentially rebadging a Opel/GM Vectra - which is what a 9-3 is. There are so few differences between the two cars (except for price), it's quite depressing. What is the point in ending up with a load of different cars which are targeted at different segments of the market purely based on the badge they carry? -- Grunff