Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 00:03:32 GMT From: "Al" <alistairdorenospamo.com> Subject: Re: Maintain Your Identity - Saab
"Grunff" <grunffnospam.com> wrote in message news:42bb0806$0$16465$db0fefd9nospam.zen.co.uk... > Al wrote: > >> Ah the purists... >> >> "There's never been a better train than the Flying Scotsman" >> >> "The spitfire was the last true fighter plane" >> >> "The supermarket has killed the corner shop" >> >> "LP's sound so much better than CD's" >> >> "Good music died in 1970" >> >> Whilst I drive a C900 Aero, and love it to bits, I am grown up enough to >> realise that time moves on. We own a NG900 too, and I've said it before >> and I'll say it again, it has been a superb car, reliable, tough, >> comfortable, safe and actually a bit of a head turner with my clients. I >> work in Civil Engineering, most engineers I work with drive Focus or >> Mundeo type vehicles it's not a rich business. I keep trying to spread >> the word, Saabs are well priced on the second hand market here in the UK. >> >> Yes the NG is a GM car, so what, it's a good car. As was my 1996 9000. >> Currently thinking about buying a 1999/2000ish 9-3. >> >> I am bored with all the negativity here about newer Saabs, read the posts >> guys, many of our posters are drivers of NG900's, 9-3s and 9-5s. >> >> The C900 was actually the car that made Saab, it was the car that moved >> Saab from a vehicle driven by quirky eccentric head teachers and >> vegetarian college lecturers to a vehicle bought by company directors. >> Rather than the obligatory Jags and Beamers of the 80's. >> >> The C900 was the beginning not the end, and the NG900 was not the >> beginning of the end. > > > You're missing the point Al. Yes, the NG900, and the 9^3 and 9^5 are > perfectly usable cars. But the real point is how do they compare with > their competitors? Hows does a 9^3 compare with a same-year BMW 3 series? > Or even an Audi A4? On the other hand, how did the C900 compare with a > same-year BMW 3 series? > > I've spent a lot of time looking at recent Saabs, and driving them, and > I'm just not impressed - which is why when I needed newish car, I bought a > BMW. > > > -- > Grunff Point missed? you did. To answer your questions though:- A Saab 9-3 is, IMHO far superior, £ for £ to a BMW 3 series. I admit to quite fancying a 328, but frankly a 318 or a 320? Nah, doesn't come close. Audi A4?!? What! Generally driven by young sales managers with quiffy highlighted hair. Yes I love my stereotypes, but as an ageing fat bloke with a goatee I get stereotyped and judged all the time so who cares. The 9-3 is in a different league to some of the cars I mentioned previously, Mundeos etc. I also made the point that on the second hand market Saabs represent tremendous value in the UK. I don't know about other markets, US or European, so I won't comment. The NG900 is again streets ahead in terms of value compared to equivalent aged Beamers, and at least it came with a stereo when new. An old work colleague of mine had a new 318 every 4 years, I couldn't believe how spartan they were for the money. BMW's are fine cars, image problem aside which I do not want to go into again, but there is no doubt about it the equivalent 2nd hand Saabs offer much better value for money. UK residents have this idea that Saabs cost alot to run. Which we all know isn't really true. However, I am happy for the general population of the UK to carry on thinking Saabs are expensive to run, it means I can afford to buy a 5 year old 9-3 SE for less than £5k. Try getting a good beamer or merc for that money. At the end of the day I love Turbo Grin, and only Saab can do that. Well so can Subaru but I don't want a car that looks like an accident in a body shop! Cheers anyway. Al By the way Saab Guy, I actually quite enjoyed the link, though I can't see how it would make anyone want to buy a Saab or anything else come to that!
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
