Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 01:28:31 GMT From: Saab Guy <nothingnospamo.com> Subject: Re: C stands for Classic and here is the "Historical Timeline"
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 00:56:26 +0000 (UTC) Craig's Saab C9000 Site <c9000nospam.apana.org.au> wrote: > Johannes <johsnospam-gets-lost-sizefitter.com> writes: > > >> So here is the Historical Timeline for the 900 and 900. > >> > >> The years may vary depending on country > >> > >> I believe the years indicated below are internationally accepted > >> > >> 1979-1994 (C900) - Classic 900 > >> 1994-1998 (NG) - New Generation 900 > >> 1999-2001 9-3 > >> > >> 1984-1992 (C9000) - Classic 9000 > >> 1993-1998 (NG9K) - New Generation 9000 > >> 1997-2005 (C9-5) - Classic 9-5 > >> 2006-? (NG9-5) - New Generation 9-5 > > >These are obviously not Saab's own descriptions, so I can't see this > >having some kind of international status. They may be convenient labels > >for the purpose of discussion, but NG9K is not a label I would want to > >see in general use when there is already the CS/CSE labels. But that's > >just IMO. > > I think that the timeline splits are pretty much universally accepted in > Saab enthusiast circles, but yes they're not Saab's own definitions and I > bet that GM is even less keen to see distinctions made between model changes > introduced since they took over the company. > > However, it's a lot easier to distinguish the models using the most common > terminology, particularly when chatting amongst other enthusiasts. > > >The C900 and NG900 are very different cars, whereas C9000 and CS are > >not. The NG900 are build on a platform shared with GM Opel cars at the > >time, whereas the CS carries on with the same platform as C9000. This > >platform was superficially shared with Type 4 cars, but Saab used their > >own Panhard rod rear suspension. The CS was a facelifted C9000, unlike > >the NG900 which was a completely different car from C900. As said, > >Haynes manual is titled 'Saab 9000 1985-1998', indicating the mechanical > >continuity of the range. There is no merit in distinguishing the CS > >as a different creation, the difference is cosmetic. Some people like > >the C9000, others think the CS looks cleaner. It's a matter of taste. > > But the fact remains, IMHO anyway, that the pre-1993 and the 1993+ 9000's > are different in ways that do distinguish them as being seperate build > series. They're not a totally different car like the C900's and NG/GM900's, > but they are different in body styling, and other areas as well. If it was > simply just a body style change, then there would be plenty of contention > for saying the two builds of the 9000's were not different enough to be > given seperate 'enthusiast titles'. > > Regards, > > Craig. Here, here! By the way, do you know of Mr. Wade from trollhattensaab.net, your fellow Saab Enthusiast also from Australia? SG out our web-forums, mailing list, etc.