Date: 18 Feb 2005 15:15:35 GMT From: Dave Hinz <DaveHinznospamcop.net> Subject: Re: new saab motor for 9-3 series
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 05:53:26 -0500, Tex <texnospamm101.org> wrote: >> Dave Hinz" <DaveHinznospamcop.net> wrote in message >> news:37f1q9F58s60aU1nospamvidual.net... >> On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:42:38 +0000, Colin Stamp >> <col.dustbinnospamp.plus.com> wrote: >>> On 15 Feb 2005 16:42:38 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinznospamcop.net> wrote: >> >>> Now, if the 9-3 were RWD... Hmmm, that would be a nice car... >> >> Now, you're just pulling my leg. RWD is anti-everything that Saab >> is about. If you live in a climate with lots of snow, and you've >> driven both, you couldn't possibly make a statement like that. > > OK...so you're saying that Saab is destined only to sell cars to people who > live where it snows a lot??? Not at all. The iffy benefits of RWD in ideal conditions aren't worth contaminating the brand for. The real benefits of FWD in everything but perfect conditions is why Saab has always been FWD. > That's fairly self-limiting and I don't agree > that that's what Saab is all about... Well, since it's your point and not mine, I'm not going to disagree that it's a bad one. Please don't try to tell me what my point is and then why you disagree with it; that's a cheap rhetorical tactic. > especially since it sells a popular > convertible model. What does a roof have to do with where the driven wheels are? > I'd get used to the idea. I've heard rumors that a RWD car is not far off > in the future for Saab, particularly if GM wants its "premium luxury brand" > to compete against BMWs and Audis. If it's RWD, it won't be an actual Saab, it'll be a badged thing like the Saaburu. > While an AWD model would be ideal, I > don't think that Saab has the kind of financial/time resources to develop > one on its own (I don't seriously view the 9-2x as part of that equation). That's how I feel about any RWD they try to pretend is a Saab. If you want a nice RWD, consider a Volvo or a Beemer.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
