The SU Hi-Po Challenge
January 29, 2011 in Editorial
I’m away for a couple of days, but this ought to give you something to chew on…..
——
Consider this the oiling of squeaky wheels as far as SU is concerned.
There are a number of people who frequent this site who think that Saab should definitely build a high-powered, performance-oriented halo version of one of its cars. Whilst I count myself as a frequenter of this site, I do not count myself as an extreme halo car advocate at this time.
From my perspective – and noting that I’d love to see a higher spec Saab if it were realistically possible – what Saab need to do at this point in their history is improve, refine and expand their existing product line. They nearly died just 12 months ago and have a lot of basics to cover in order to get to a position where they’re self-supporting, financially healthy and stable for the future. They need to walk before they try to run.
Whilst I personally consider this sort of model to be an extravagance that Saab can’t afford right now, I’m open to being proven wrong.
The SU Hi-Po Challenge.
If you are one of the Hi-Po advocates, then I offer you a front page opportunity to state your case.
We’ve frequently been told by Hi-Po advocates that such a car must have 350hp minimum, so that’s your baseline (but of course, you should always go 50hp more than the expected amount).
I want you to lay out how you’ll achieve that sort of power, where you’ll source the engine from, what other modifications you’ll do to the interior, exterior, suspension, etc, in order to make this car 1) buildable, and 2) marketable.
I want you to state your timeframe for testing this car, to make sure that the company can warrant the vehicle in all markets with confidence.
I want you to tell me the expected sale price, based on current pricing in your market. Along with that, state how many of these vehicles you think Saab could realistically sell, given current challenges and the reduced marketing budget they might have as a result of this project (your decision, see below).
Remember, they had trouble selling 2,000 Turbo X’s in 2008. I’m not sure if they sold many more Viggens than that back in the early parts of the decade, either. Your car is going to have to be more compelling than those (which means $$$$) but for not much, if any, more money.
And speaking of money…… of course, it’s absolutely essential for you to tell me how you’re going to fund the engineering, development and testing of this project. The Saab 9-3 Viggen was based on an existing model but still took several years to develop before coming to market. All that development work has to be paid for somehow.
Saab have a very limited pot of funds, so if we’re to add a Viggen-on-steroids-style performance version, with all of the work such a project entails, then something’s got to go from the current priority list. Given the EIB funds are for efficiency projects only, EIB money is out of the question.
And by the way – this is done as if under Saab’s current circumstances. There’s no “we’ll go and float on the Stockholm exchange” or “Antonov will give us the money” stuff. You have to fit it in to the current program by telling us which current priority is less important than a performance car.
There are no prizes for this challenge. All you get is the satisfaction of being keen enough to rise to the challenge.
Please be aware that your entry may be critiqued with similar vigor as if it were one of Saab’s own plans for a product offering (and if you hang around here frequently enough, you know that that’s pretty tough scrutiny). Please be prepared to accept that level of scrutiny, just as you expect Saab to live with the scrutiny you apply to them.
All entries should be sent to my email address (swade99-at-gmail.com) and I’ll post them here on site, as is. If we get more than half a dozen then I’ll put up a poll and people can vote on them.
Saab is involved in a real business. If you can make a real business case then maybe they’ll see it and act accordingly.
Jake said on January 29, 2011
While I might join on the fun, I doubt it.
This is gonna be one tough challenge!
Good luck, peeps!
North Toronto Punter said on January 29, 2011
Talking about Stacking the Deck!
Costings, Blueprints, Sourcing…”given Saab’s current financial position”.
Let’s keep the Playing Field level then: What exactly is that?
The Business Plan seems to be enormously flexible. I read here [Jan. 26-11 : 'DI.se cover the Saab sale anniversary'] that even if the Government enforces the 110 million Kroner Debt from the wage guarantee, Victor Muller himself says “we have the money to pay for it” .
The Turbo X ran into problems precisely because it was not halo enough! Saab let the car go out the door with less HP than (for instance) it’s Opel Vectra cousin and by time they were able to deliver most of the cars (late by the way and with a variety of delivery issues that were very well documented on this site) the company was becoming increasingly shaky and rumours were flying . I still found it a compelling buy but I’ve had to tune it to the 325 HP that Saabs own Peformance Team thought it should have had Out The Door.
John Carter said on January 29, 2011
Well said on the TurboX; Steve Shannon (then head of Saab US) came by our dealership about a month before the car was due to arrive and asked me, as the “young guy” (I was 25 at the time, and sales manager) how super duper I thought the car was going to be. I said, “Steve, I think you guys shorted me about 50 horsepower, and this is coming from the guy who ordered more of those than anybody else in the country.” (I had ordered 15 of them at that time, only 8 made it to us.) “I don’t think anybody but a real Saab fan will buy the car, and even then I think we’ll have to discount the hell out of it, because I can sell them an Aero for thousands less and they can tune it to 400+hp with the leftover cash.”
It apparently wasn’t the answer he and the yes men he brought with him were looking for, because they kind of looked at each other and started with the “well, market conditions aren’t right for a real sports car of a Saab…” to which I replied, “Then why build a FAKE sports car of a Saab?”
I don’t get invited to meetings anymore.
This is absolutely not to say that the TurboX was a BAD car, it’s a fantastic drive and a real blast around an autocross track- I just mean that for the extra money, exclusivity and an appearance package isn’t enough to differentiate it from the Aero- It should have been special, it should have been faster, it should have been a little CRAZY… it should have been a Viggen with XWD,
Mark said on January 29, 2011
I still love my TurboX . By a wide margin the most fun of the six Saabs I’ve owned. I truly enjoy the extra HP, but agree that if you are going to build a vehicle and highlight the HP then you do need to be in at least the 350 range. I’ve still got my eye on a tuning package from Vermont Tuning to bring my TurboX up to that range.
Michael said on January 30, 2011
Agree on TurboX, they’ve had trouble selling 2000 of them because it just was not crazy enough (even the interior was pretty much the same!) and people just refused to see why should they pay extra money for the car which is not very different from Aero. I think TurboX should have been added this 50hp, called Aero and non-limited in quantities. This is an Aero level car, not halo.
In current circumstances I think a halo car may be built by some semi-foreign company, like Spyker or Hirsch, like AMG used to do this for Mercedes. This should be much faster and will give better result. Quantities and price are not very important if the car is absolutely crazy and exclusive. You may notice lots of small-sized tuner companies building gorgeous versions of usual cars and they are making profit. So what I think could be done is building a tuned exclusive car which is officially a Saab and could be sold in dealerships. Or maybe the Spyker’s technology and platform is flexible enough to build a car that may be a slightly simplified Spyker on the technical side, but has a body of a Saab. Even if you sell 50 or 100 of them annually, it’s still called a Saab, it’s gorgeous, it gets in all those TopGear shows, Clarkson smiles and laughs, everybody wants it, and the posters are on the wall. Teenagers get their dream and then some years after buy a regular car that bear a spirit of their dream.
And a note to Saab US. Please ditch this disgusting, phony and shameful corporate practice of trying to shut your eyes and ears from people telling you what they think and start inviting John again.
saabdude said on January 30, 2011
Spot on with the Turbo X assessment.
Also, SAAB were competing with the BMW 335xi with the Turbo X…and the BMW actually cost LESS than the Turbo X. And the BMW had more power.
From Car and Driver back then…
“Turbo X sedans start at $42,510; add $800 for the SportCombi wagon. At those prices, the Turbo X is by no means the deal of the year, especially with faster cars such as the $41,575 BMW 335xi on the market. But exclusivity always carries a premium, and Saab loyalists will likely snap up the whole lot.”
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/08q2/2008_saab_9-3_turbo_x-first_drive_review
I was in the market for a new car in the late Summer of 2007, and the Turbo X had been in the pipeline for a while before that. The release date kept getting pushed back and back, with no firm date set in September 2007, when I finally leased an ’08 9-5 SC Aero. Just couldn’t wait any longer, as my ’90 9000T was a money pit.
I took that car for the shortest lease period I could get…27 months…so I could then move into a 2010 XWD 9-3 SC Aero in December 2009, which I figured would be the natural progression from the Turbo X.
Well…we all know what happened in December 2009…SAAB nearly vanished…and an XWD 9-3 SC Aero STILL hasn’t materialized…and probably won’t until the model refresh. At least I hope it will appear.
So onto the subject at hand.
It should HEAVILY involve Hirsch from the start. Hirsch are an established SAAB tuner, and SAAB can send cars directly to them for upgrades, or Hirsch could build an upfitting “factory” near SAAB in Sweden (probably a more cost effective way to go).
Let them take a car, probably the next 9-3, although eventually the ENTIRE SAAB range should be “Hirsched”, and let them modify it the way AMG does for M-B, the way BMW Motorsport does with the “M” Series cars, etc. Those companies seem to have it working fairly well.
Put a full factory warranty on it, with FULL COVERED maintenance for 4 years & 50k miles, and sell it through the dealer network…just like M-B & BMW do.
Price it 10-15% above comparable standard cars, and see what happens.
BrianL said on January 30, 2011
John, good job on telling Shannon what he didn’t want to hear. Someone in his position should know that the truth can hurt. You are spot on in your assessment.
I love my Turbo X SC, but it is far from being a halo car. It is nothing more than a special edition car perhaps marketed and priced as a halo car, which is where I think they went wrong. It comes off as half baked and full of hype, and when you can get basically the same car in Aero trim, it just erodes credibility.
They might be able to pull it off now that you can’t get the V6 in a 9-3 anymore, but they would need to tune it to at least 325hp with a 0-60 under 5 seconds and refine everything much more than they did with the Turbo X. Someone looking to buy a halo car wants it to be a sports car in disguise. The CTS-V pulls this off very well. SAAB just doesn’t sell enough cars to cover the cost of developing this type of car.
That being said, I would much rather see SAAB focus on making their cars better. SAAB has plenty of soul, but it has always been lacking. Their cars absolutely need to be better than their chosen competition in terms of performance (power AND efficiency), refinement, reliability, quality of materials and build, and very importantly, customer experience.
When SAAB can achieve this they can use Spyker as a halo car to draw people into the showroom.
Iiari said on January 31, 2011
Wow, miss a day of posting, and you end up on the tail end of 160 comments…
I agree about the Turbo-X. I crazy-love my TX SC, but it’s NOT a halo vehicle and, frankly, I think ALL Saabs should drive like the TX out of the factory…
So, a true Aero-X or even M3 like halo vehicle right now? Absolutely not, I agree with Swade and others. There are FAR more important things to work on right now…
What Saab SHOULD do is the following:
Aero: Should be the equivalent of the standard top level A4/6 and 3/5, up on power and performance and with standard XWD. You can have the appearance package available for other, lesser Saabs (like the TX goodies are for Aeros now…).
Hirsch: For about $7500 more than the top line Aero, you should be able to do a “full Hirsch” of any Saab that adds 50+ HP at least and more dramatic performance, interior and exterior mods than Hirsch currently provides. This should be the equivalent of Audi S or emerging BMW “is” designation.
Saab should not aim for BMW M’s or Audi RS’s until much later when the company is more secure…
Saab may also be able to make some money doing a BMW style customization program… Any word about that earlier initiative about being able to follow your Saab as it’s built?
Peter Gilbert said on January 29, 2011
We can all dream but let us be real. I was at my gym this afternoon and no one was even aware of the NG 95 let alone the 93 Combi and one guy was car shopping.
When I purchased my Viggen in October 2001 I went o a couple of dealers to look for one because it was my dream ride. One salesman dressed in check pants and white shoes tried to sell me a 2000 base 93 ,automatic because he thought I was too old for a Viggen. Then Concours Motors, in Glendale, WI were all too happy to have me choose the Viggen of my dreams, which happened to be in rare red.
That poor orphan had been on the lot for 10 lonely months. Right now it make sense to get the folks into the showroom and offer Hirsch upgrades for those that want to buy a hot Saab, without having to have stock in the “Orphanage.”
74stingray said on January 29, 2011
I think this is a great idea and it should really make people sit and think.
Saabheart said on January 31, 2011
+1 !
Tiago do Vale said on January 29, 2011
If I recall it correctly, Marchionne made the Alfa 8c possible by subtracting its development budget from Alfa’s marketing/advertising budget: he realized that a halo car such as the 8c would do a brilliant brand advertising job in itself, and didn’t weep for the lost ads…
Not that I think that Saab is in the same position that Alfa was… (though Saab could use Spyker technology in the same way Alfa used Maserati technology to lower the costs). Alfa was in perfect health, with a consolidated range and great products.
As Swade said, now it’s still the moment to relearn to walk.
Patrik B said on January 29, 2011
Interesting; I haven’t thought about it in that way before. But such a car must be so much more than a 350 hp version of the ng 9-5.
Michael said on January 30, 2011
Agree with both of you!
Mailr said on January 30, 2011
If Saab is about to build a halo car, I also think this should be seen as a marketing tool. But I don’t think high power is the mark of a Saab halo care (but may as a side effect of an interesting technology). I think that a Saab halo car should be showcasing tomorrows technolgy and have more in common with what’s popped up from Googles 1 day a week tinkering time, elegantly hidden chrismas tree of gizmos, Citroën SM and the Teslas. Kind of, you can buy our technicians wet dream prototypes, maybe manufactured by Spyker and/or rebuilt by Hirsch (because that’s the numbers we’re talking about). While maintaining an understated look. By keeping a high price and a low series count, things can be hand built, and a budget for fixing and maintaing the cars to the highest standard (Lexus style+) after delivery as the strategy will inevitibly lead to more infant problems. Hopefully, it will make motor jouranalist flock in Trollhättan.
OTOH, Volvo let TWR make the V70R halo car, which I belive worked fairly well. Saab 9-5 Aero E by Hirsch?
signs said on January 31, 2011
I’m with you, high power isn’t Saaby on its own, there has to be one or rather several unique ideas, executed very well too. And there’s always so much to learn from Apple – the whole brand is like one big halo! That’s what you get for daring to make choices. If you make something exclusive it should be so because it is doing something new, showing the way, is doing the right decisions in matters nobody even thought of before, but costs more because the technology is new. There should be no fluff.
Yes, Saab can’t make everything on their own … but neither does Apple. They don’t make their own processors (strictly speaking) or hardly anything. It’s software and ideas they are into, and they design hardware around it. Saab could do the same, unhampered by GM-like ambitions of dominating by numbers, there’s space to do things right.
If they had been able to make the 9-X concept into a production car, that would have been a start back then, for example! It would have been saying that Saab is not into the massmarket, but into making cool stuff the right way. It’s not the only time Saab was among the first to catch, or create, a new trend. But it’s not as if we’ve run out of future to invent… the future’s just begun!
zippy said on January 29, 2011
You wont be hearing from me Swade as Im with you on this subject.
Jeff said on January 29, 2011
I’m definitely not anti-halo car, but I’m far more interested in seeing how Saab can build compelling cars that use hybrid tech. For all the diesel lovers out there, I’m sorry, I’m not going to debate you on its merits- Americans don’t like diesel, and electrification is a far more elegant and compelling way to achieve higher mpg in the next few years. Instead of focusing on how Saab can build faster cars with more built in insanity, I’d like to see how many horsepower and XWD tech they can squeeze out of the electrification of their cars. I’m not sure that performance and eco-driving characteristics are mutually exclusive anymore; BMW has the efficient dynamics prototypes coming out, Audi has its E-drive, I think Saab needs to attack that niche like its no one else’s business. A hybrid rear axle combined with some mild hybrid and start/stop tech and a transmission that can give temporary torque on low end acceleration for sportier driving characterstics should be enough to provide the performance characteristics people are looking for. Perhaps it could be as simple as putting a high performance version of that out could do it, I don’t know enough about the technology but I know that they’re working overtime on it in Sweden and Boston with the ePower fleet. I wonder if going in that direction, performance+electrification, could allow Saab to tap into the EIB funds while simultaneously providing us with a car with acceleration on demand and miserly fuel numbers on the highway. Thoughts?
GerritN said on January 29, 2011
I was thinking along the same, almost exact same, lines. The first thing that jumped out from Swades challenge was that Saab is not allowed to tap into the EIB funds. That strikes me as rather odd, innovative and efficiency don’t exclude a relatively high power car, many concept are around by now.
I also have a bit a problem with describing a halo car as a car which has just a lot of horsepower. This doesn’t have to be the case, a nimble car can be much more satisfying to drive than a huge monster with a big engine. I would go for a light 2 seater with 4 high torque electric motors and a light turbo engine to supply the juice. But, that just my personal opinion and I don’t have all the knowledge handy to back up any claims of technical and financial feasibility nor whether such a design would be marketable.
And here we get at the crux of my problem with this challenge. I am and have been involved with reasonably complex technical projects. What Swade is asking is a feasibility study that simply cannot be pulled off by a single person. There are just too many different facets to this halo project that are very unlikely to be combined in one person. Its equally unlikely that anyone here can spend the amount of time to pull something off that is even close to satisfying, i.e. most proposals will be shaky. What is more realistic is that groups of us pool together to supply the different aspects (marketing, budgeting/scheduling, engineering, bright ideas, etc.) for such a complicated proposal.
Jeff said on January 29, 2011
I’m down
It’s slightly nuts to think that we could do any better than the actual Saab team (read: we can’t), but at the very least we could offer up something different.
Saabluster said on January 29, 2011
“What Swade is asking is a feasibility study that simply cannot be pulled off by a single person.”
That’s his point. He is frustrated with so many people making grand statements about Saabs doom if they don’t do (fill-in-the-blank) and yet have no idea ,and can’t , what it would take to see it to market.
74stingray said on January 29, 2011
BINGO! that’s why I love it so much.
Kjellejon said on January 29, 2011
I want that halo car to be the new 9-3. 350 hp is not enough. I want 7-800hp. Let koneigsegg prep the car with their own engine. I want the halo car to trash all the other halo cars, like Nissan Skyline, Bmw M5, Mercedes SLR. Not just be one of them.
Hans H said on January 29, 2011
Are you serious?
Saab does not have the money for that. Hardly anyone has.
On the other hand, you can beat those cars, but not by adding horsepower, but by adding lightness. As Colin Chapman stipulated.
And to be able to do that, I think Saab needs help from Koenigsegg. Is there still a contact between the two companies?
Kjellejon said on January 30, 2011
Of course I am serious. Koenigsegg are willing to sell their engines, and they will be able to prep the 9-3. Even if it is produced in small numbers, it will be a halo car. Koenigseggs plan for saab was also to introduce a koenigsegg edition of the 9-5. And when they talk about koenigsegg edition, I promise you, its not about 350 or 400 hp.
Jeff said on January 29, 2011
Hahahahahahahahaha.
No.
Thylmuc said on January 29, 2011
Based on the 9-5 as a big limousine, I would say that halo need not necessarily be i the field of engine power, but interior refinement, sound dampening and specifically picked, smooth running engines (or honed to become smooth).
That said, more engine power apears to be possible with the 2.8 l V6 up to 400 hp, as demonstrated by the Aero-X (assuming that this engine would be durable enough,and further assuming that this is a “real” engine). Hoping that such engine requires little additional development costs.
As this is an unreasonable car, I would unreasonably un-restrict the top speed. This is about high numbers. In order to achieve an impressive number, I would further optimize the aerodynamics by streamlining the frontal face and cladding the underfloor etc. Bring the drav coefficient down to 0.24- 0.25. An interesting exercise that should be done anyway ,thus avoiding extra development costs.
Jeff said on January 29, 2011
I understand what you’re saying about refinement, but I think it’s walking a shaky line to sell a car with more refinement and charge more for it. Customers might be left scratching their heads thinking, “You’re going to make me pay more for something that should have come standard?”
And as for the speed limiting, I thought that had to do more with the tires than what the engine was capable of?
Thylmuc said on January 29, 2011
There are a lot of refinement options for cars, like full leather, built-in bars, wood veneer all over etc. that nobody would consider should be standard. I do see however (and that is presumably what you pointed at) a notable absence of sound dampening packages (that could include engine refinement). But as Saab should think out of the box, why not?
Concerning the tyres, they will be more expensive
(speed index Y (300 km/h) instead of W (270 km/h))
Thylmuc said on January 29, 2011
Addendum: speed index Y will actually limit the speed to 285 km/h in the EU. Considering that the Hirsch V6 already has a maximum speed of above 260 km/h (as seen on a HUD photograph on this site a couple of days ago), and that lowering the drag to 0.25 will give another 10-15 km/h, this speed should easily be possible, maybe even below 400 hp.
Or use speed index ZR.
Red J said on January 29, 2011
Jeff, the 250 speed-limit of high spec. European cars in Europe is a voluntary limitation of the industry, showing that 250 is enough in most cases. There is no technical background for that limitation in most cases.
Jeff said on January 29, 2011
Good to know, thanks for the info. Why do they do the car companies do it, insurance?
Red J said on January 29, 2011
Being that a “German” Problem, the Teutonic 3 started with that voluntary limit, I would expect that it is more like a signal to the politicians; We put a voluntary limit to ourself, and you (the politicians) don’t impose a speed limit on the Autobahn.
Many things work like this here.
Daniel G said on January 29, 2011
Autobahn
Although the supercars (Lambo, Ferrari, …) don’t have this limit…, I think.
Jeff said on January 29, 2011
Good to know.
Must be a nice problem to have, debating whether or not to push past 155mph? I usually have an issue of going 72mph or 80mph so as not to attract radar.
Steve C. said on January 30, 2011
The specified engine, 7sp transmission and all-wheel drive that were assoicated with the Aero X concept car were never real. The Aero X was more of a design exercise but the desired powertrain attributes were mentioned in the descriptive materials as part of the vision for the car if it were to be produced.
The Aero X does have a nondescript engine and can be driven – but more for taking it from the transporter to where it will be displayed. There is nothing special about the way it drives except to watch it in low-speed motion.
And, I agree with the surrounding comments as to why Swade posed the challenge. It certainly brings interesting discussion to keep busy while Swade is off for a few days.
Thylmuc said on January 30, 2011
Sad, that will probably ruin my concept, even though there are upgrade kits avaiable to make V6s biturbo. In the meantime, I failed in finding such tuning kit for the Insignia OPC. Maybe the engine is just not suitable for such high power output and would just explode. Just improving the aerodynamics will probably not be sufficient to impress the masses.
Kanundrum said on January 29, 2011
Well Guys, this is right up my ally. I am all about performance a lot of show accompanied by a lot of Go. Saab is starting to move in in the right direction by reducing the weight. Next up, adding power, as North Toronto Punter said, these car can handle 325hp all day along with out breaking a sweat from factory with a bit of a retune. Add in some exhaust lighting up the car and you have a formidable fighting machine right there. I am doing my process slowly but surely my self in terms of practicing my driving skills with auto crossing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPfcLGHQRsk) and making real world modifications(3″ Exhaust that results in 11whp on the dyno) available to everyone (http://www.saabcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=196500)
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ3nPLrEeRk
We need more suspension components to accompany that power, we need to brake faster, harder, easier. Tie it all together we need more reliability so we ensure that our coil packs don’t blow on a weekly basis (big issues with the 2.8t v6)
You want a Plan? Take it back to the streets of Tuning.
Dynos, Dirty Hands Mechanics. Setup the car for TRACK first and then throw in some bits to make life more comfortable.
Plan-
First Increase Power while keeping reliability, team up Brian from V-Tune, the BSR Folks, the Maptun Folks and let them have at a few cars with some extreme testing.
Second: Reduce weight, the smallest bits here and there will help, we don’t need no stinking engine cover, if your going to give us a can of fit a flat and a air compressor don’t bother. Save your self money and just not throw it in. Take off all the luxuries first and them add the ones that you think are needed only. After all we want a comfortable hard core car.
Third: Make the thing turn and stop like no other, proper vented brakes with upgraded suspension setup for what its suppose to be setup for. Either driving hard all the time, or driving hard some of the time, both on road and off road.
Last: Test it, Take it to the track, take it to the track, take it to the track, take it to Nurburg, then take it back to the track.
Keeping all old tuning methods with a bunch of guys in a shack. We don’t need boffins (except for the motor tuning folks) everything else is pure track day setup in which any track guy enthusiast will tell you what you need to make the car faster and more agile.
Kanundrum said on January 29, 2011
Now if we are actually talking about specs, it really all depends on the options we have. Ideally the best setup in the world would result in something like the Veyron but we need to know out limits, where are parts coming from etc. If we only get to work with what we have then i think that would be a easy place to start otherwise the possibilities are limitless.
TTAero said on January 30, 2011
This is not my way, but I hear those tuned exaust pipes loooong way. And it doesn’t make me feel warm and fussy…
Any how, I see you all focusing on engines, exaust and roadhandling. All this will ofcoarse give a more fast and firm ride, but what about gearbox? What about drive train from gearbox too the wheels? What about all that stuff that keeps the engines, drive shafts in place. Doesn’t those also need to be stronger? At least if it is going to hold for some time.
Gb9x said on January 29, 2011
Steve
Sorry about the lack of blueprints in my response – but are you not a little bit pessimistic here?
It seems to me that there are opportunities. Sure SAAB have to get back on their feet but when you consider that they are now in the camp of a supercar producer and have the support, in principal – going by what is reported at least, of a number of a number of previous bidders for the marque and genuine enthusiasts – well anything is possible. I think we could see something halo-like at some stage – sure its a matter of when – but the support and talent is there I am sure
GB
Jörgen Trued - SUHRT said on January 29, 2011
First things first.
Before even talking about performance, the marketing of the brand needs to get a focus on, and not excluding performance. Building this needs to include the rally & racing halo history. Make a performance car parallel with the real competition car. SUHRT are talking to investors and engineers on some interesting new thinking. Sorry, can not reveal more on that here now.
All of Saabs market competitors are into competition and performance departments, Hirsch is not really in that division yet
–
When making performance / halo cars. Here are some musts: If a limited series do not make more than the limited ones. Ferrari did too many F40´s once upon a time.
SAAB TurboX never became unique, the special parts can now be added to any 9-3 in TX version.
As a customer of a TurboX this has not pleased me at at, i am quite upset to be honest. That is not an honest way to treat the most loyal customers. I would be more than reluctant to buy a SAAB Halo model again. You only cheat me once…
I had to add the Hirsch parts and their tuning that should have had com standard on the TurboX. The Hirsch exhaust system was not ready when I bought the car so I had to go to Swedish Ferrita , not bad but not the “factory” real thing.
Timing is crucial, the factory options needs to be there when a performance car is launched. So it is a must that future models are launched as Aero or whatever halo models will be called on the SAME day as the budget models. Do not wait with the aggressive looks and performance. Bring it out from the first day.
Phoenix said on January 30, 2011
Well it happens with most brands. BMW offering M package and Audi the S-line. And don’t think a M3 buyer is dissapointed becuase other people can buy M-package to their 318i. You still have the wonderful sound, larger breaks, more HP than other 9-3 drivers + some extra bits.
Edis said on January 30, 2011
The difference here is that BMW and Audi never have claimed their M-models and S-models were limited. If it is a limited series, it’s very important to stick to that – if not, don’t claim it to be a limited series (the best solution I would say).
Secondly, a M-package or a S-line package don’t make a car and M5 or an S6 it just makes them look a bit more like these cars which is okay given that some buyers just like the look – but aren’t looking for a car with a 500 hp class V10 engine. With the TurboX you could get essentially the same car as an Aero about a year later. Had I payed a lot of money for a exclusive limited car model, that would have made me upset.
SaabHost said on January 29, 2011
It would be more useful for SAAB to (re)join WRC with one or two crews.
Red J said on January 29, 2011
Because it is for free, and not having a car that would meet the challenge, nor a engine that could be used for WRC it is only a lesser problem.
nolltre said on January 29, 2011
Off topic, this press release, allegadly, from Herb Chambers Saab of Boston has two interesting claims. First is that there will be both diesels and the 1.6t engine available in the US but also that the Adaptive Cruise Control will be made available as an option. Anybody know of if this feature finally will be made available?
Jörgen Trued - SUHRT said on January 29, 2011
Hey guys we miss out on the most important issue there is, THE DRIVER component.
As with Eriks victories in the 60ies with 70 bhp vs. Eugens 180 bhp in the Merc 220 SE.
We can make Saab driver the best drivers. To drive a car safely and when allowed to bring up the speed a bit is also possible with a car that produces less than 400 bhp.
There has been activities in the past especially in the US called the AERO/Viggen academy and SAAB in Sweden has invited corporate drivers (leasing drivers) to different drive events.
I was looking at the following page from a Saab competitor http://www.audi.com/com/brand/en/experience/audi_driving_experience.html this is son nice a whole palette of driving events as well as cultural events. This is what Saab should seriously look into. It does not have to be a cost for SAAB people are willing to pay for great experiences and brings the Halo of the brand up many notches.
—
Selling a car is one thing. But this is where the journey starts. Keeping contact with the owner offer experiences develop skills and make the driver the best he or she can be,
That is another side of the Saab spirit that we together must help Saab to find back to!
Jörgen Trued - SUHRT said on January 29, 2011
…. just look at to what countries Audi take their customers to for training experiences. Follow the thread above. Interesting…….
Rune said on January 29, 2011
I love the idea of driving events.
Saab do have the arctic adventure tie-in, but… Curiously enough, you have to spend the night at their resort, which means the price automatically doubles. (there is no way you can fly in, attend the event and fly out again the same day – - they seem to have deliverately timed this so that would be impossible)
LarsJorge said on January 29, 2011
Compete with these?
Audi S4 333 hp 55000€
BMW M3 420 hp 73000€
Mercedes C63 AMG 457 hp 72000€
Approx prices in Sweden
Saab 9-3 AeroX Hirsch 380 hp 55000€ ???
Saab 9-3 Rally 750 hp 95000€ ???
I think that Per Eklunds car had about 750 hp but what about warranty?
Rune said on January 29, 2011
How far off is the Aero-X from production..?
It has a superior exterior. Probably weighs a bit too much, but not sure how many would mind given the way it looks.
That E100 V6 engine would be an interesting beast to watch in action. In my little world, the development of a green V6 should qualify for some EIB love.
My personal belief is that nothing can happen until 2012 brings us the new 9-3. The 9-5 is a long way from being a sports car and the existing 9-3 has already been souped up once.
Edis said on January 30, 2011
It’s so far off from production that you would need binoculars to even see it! Aero X is not really a car – it’s more of a sculpture on wheels. The engine and drivetrain only exist on the paper the technical specifications are written.
So, to make an Aero X we are basically talking about developing a completly new car. Perhaps one of the aluminum chassis of Spyker can work, then we only need to rebody the car which isn’t that expensive.
The Aero X body is made in carbon fibre so it’s shouldn’t be that heavy – but very expensive to produce in series.
I would think that a GM LF3 engine in the 9-5 Aero would be a good start – perhaps with some refined handling and forged magnesium wheels and Brembo brakes as standard. Interior changes should be minimal – the idea is not to select interior for the customer.
The output of the LF3 has not been officially disclosed yet but is expected to be in the 350-400 hp range.
I would of course also want to see a certain italian diesel V6 in the 9-5…
signs said on January 31, 2011
Well Aero X was far from production, but not THAT far – there were several very happy and satisfied test-drivers
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/firstdrives/65985/saab_aero_x.html
http://www.teknikensvarld.se/provkorningar/saab/aero_x/index.xml
http://www.automotorsport.se/biltester/2006/0607/060701.pdf
Nobody was allowed to make a video of it in action or?
Mike P said on January 29, 2011
This car, to a degree, is already available in the form of Hirsch tuned & more products are on the way for the new 9-5.
I think that Saab should offer a factory supplied car with all the Hirsch goodies as part of the model portfolio.
This would significantly reduce any investment costs for Saab but give customers a car straight off the shelf.
Here in the UK many company car drivers simply have a maximum figure to play with & cannot buy cheaper cars & then add the bits. So we could have a Saab in each model range that competes, more or less, with the BMW msport & Audi S series with very little effort or investment.
Fliptop said on January 29, 2011
Unsurprisingly my Dad and I are thinking alike on this! No need for any extra engineering, Hirsch already have type approval in Europe and now it seems in the US.
The Turbo X didn’t sell well because it was quite expensive, and frankly the colour scheme chosen was not very appealing. It was also too gimicky with the “ready for take off” thing. If it had been available with a red interior like the original 99 turbo, perhaps it would have seemed more special.
To my mind, more important than a mega-horsepower “halo” car is a genuinely performance focused range of models with all engines, just like the M-sport and S-line models. But if the Saab had better ride comfort (which the Hirsch suspension does have!) that would give a real competitive edge.
Oh, and factory fitment of these tweaks would obviously be far cheaper than after-sales fitting, Hirsch wouldn’t lose out, in fact they would gain some volume and Saab could still make a decent margin. Job done!
RS said on January 29, 2011
Maybe we should clarify the term ‘halo’ to begin with. To me it means an engine level for both 9-3 and 9-5, even the 9-4x. Not a new model or a variant.
It’s not about the engine size either, but ‘adequate’ performance to actually compete with Saabs competitors that have been named since the start of the new era. Take on Audi with a 2.8 in a 2 ton car?
I just think Saab needs a broader engines range, that wouldn’t change Saabs philosophy in any way. There are Saab tuners all over the place simply because there’s a demand and many feel these cars are underpowered (just look how much Hirsch, Maptune etc. is discussed here). I don’t see many Hyundai or Toyota specific tuners around.
The Turbo X or Carlsson for that matter are the worst examples of ‘proof’ why Saab shouldn’t have upscale cars for reasons stated here earlier, but has anyone (at Saab) ever counted how many base cars where sold thanks to the 2.3T and 2.8T -not everyone could afford- and all the tuned 400-800+ hp Saabs that have been built around the world the past 20 years?
My gut feeling tells me Saab wouldn’t be around without those, proving the company’s worth.
Tune a base Mazda or a KIA and it will probably explode in your face, or fall apart the next week. Saabs don’t.
Getting a (3.6-4 Liter) engine is not a problem in itself. Let the engineers do their magic in Trollhättan. They tamed the turbo 30 years ago FGS. It can’t cost that much more to develop a big engine to a smaller extremely frugal one.
It doesn’t cost much to make a sporty front and a rear spoiler. The interior upgrades are coming anyway, add some carbon fiber to the dash if you want and that’s done. If an old 9000 chassis can handle 400 hp for highway use I don’t believe for a second Saab couldn’t tune the 9-5′s (JC 9-3) suspension and steering in a heartbeat to work perfectly for what ever power.
To say Saab must now learn to walk is untrue. This is a company with hundreds of engineers and few thousand workers overall already in place. They where able to come out with a class leading 180 hp, 119 CO2 TTiD in no time. They have 60 years of history and heritage of building performance if they want to. Yet they haven’t said ONE word about higher power engines during the independence, but claim to be in the same class as the Germans. Guess what the German trio is about power.
It’s good to have a 1.6T but 2.0T (220 hp) being the high-end for the 9-3, come on. Sounds worse than… (fill in make) to be honest.
One more thing. A bigger (550-600 Nm) diesel anyone? (call it Halo or not, I don’t)
Donkey Dynamite said on January 29, 2011
SAAB was under GM control for years. Now SAAB is free, It is perfect time for SAAB engineers to show everything they can.
If SAAB limited on different kind of agreements or ecology – no problem to sell high power cars under HIRSCH name.
I read somewhere that vtuner 390 HP Turbo X makes 0-100km in 4.4sec under perfect condition. I want my future 9-5 do the same. Some more power, gearbox which switch fast, can handle more than 450Nm and able to make launch control start @ 7000RPM will help
Argosy said on January 29, 2011
I would go for two Halo cars…
One would be based on the Spyker C8 Aileron. This would be a competitor to cars like Audi R8 and Porsche 911, everyday supercars. To avoid competition with Spyker, it would be styled in a entirely different fashion, following the base design of the Aero X concept. It would be RWD and not XWD. Possible engine would be the 2.8 V6 Turbo uprated to around 400-450 hp. Asking price should be around the base price of the 911/R8 V8, even if that means loosing money on every single car produced. This is a image maker, not a money maker.
The other car would be based on the future 9-3. This car would be an extreme version of the 9-3 aimed at cars like the Audi S4(note, not RS4). This means around 350 hp, dual clutch transmission, XWD. It would be, IMHO, better to use a 6 cylinder design rather then a tuned 2.0T in this price range.
Erunas said on January 29, 2011
I am sorry but RWD is a bad American habit, it’s not even functional. If SAAB were to even consider building a car of the 911/R8 V8 calibre it would NOT be RWD. It is not part of SAAB’s image nor would it fit well into SAAB’s product range.
It would have to practical in some sense and RWD is therefore completely inappropriate.
/End-rant
Tiago do Vale said on January 30, 2011
I’m afraid you are right… A RWD Saab doesn’t make sense (I think that’s why there wasn’t a Kappa platform Sonett: they didn’t manage to fit AWD and still have room for a fuel deposit, apparently: RWD was not an option).
74stingray said on January 29, 2011
How many are you actually working on this plan as Swade suggested and will email him a proposal?
74stingray said on January 30, 2011
crickets chirping…
Doctor Donk said on January 29, 2011
Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT600 – that is perfect example of what 9-5 should be. Not sport car but damn fast
Pat h said on January 29, 2011
Not enough time to formulate A proper plan, but I’d like to see a ng 9-3 high performance version
.
74stingray said on January 29, 2011
I didnt see a time limit?
Kikaluka said on January 29, 2011
Head up display standard in every Saab is a much more solid image- and sales builder than a halo that will never be on par with those of the much richer competition.
Erunas said on January 29, 2011
I would like to point out that this is obviously a trap from Swade to make you think about the realism of your demands.
I am not even a supporter of the “HALO-car” if it means not putting the absolute main focus on the development of greener tech. We need the cars to become environment friendly rather soon if we are to survive as a species at all.
BUT, that said. Could I just point the previous news of SAAB’s planned weight-reduction thoughts().
That should be the obvious basis of a proposed halo-car if it’s to be even remotely possible to combine it with SAAB’s company philosophy.
Erunas said on January 29, 2011
Failed link try.
It works but looks bad, enjoy
Troels, Denmark said on January 30, 2011
In my opinion Saab shall not compete with ugly and vulgare “monster-cars” from the Germans.
Instead they should refine their cars under their motto; “responsible performance” and concentrate on making cars more and more eco-friendly – yet “fun to drive”.
Among the means are:
- Hybrid-technology with 4-wheel-drive
- weight-reduction
- improving of cw-coefficient
- refinement, tuning, optimizing
- new, unknown, innovative, intelligent, unexpected technology, in the true Saab-spirit
Thilo said on January 30, 2011
+1
Jeff said on January 30, 2011
Is it just me or isn’t this what most people on here think is the logical way to go and the path Saab is on? I get how annoying it must be for Swade to keep hearing the same arguments from the few “squeaky wheels” but for the most part I don’t think many people take them seriously. Spyker derived RWD halo car? Does anyone seriously think that’s a solid idea? Responsible performance and low break-even point that involves selling and licensing tech is the name of the game now. I’m willing to design our own Saabs United performance car with some of the reasonable commenters on here that involves talking about designing a car with some form of alternative energy propulsion with low development costs. Or about a driving academy component that is included in the sale price like it was a few years ago. But I have a feeling Saab engineers have a plan for all thus up their sleeves anyway, it’s just a matter of timing. As Victir says, “we have to learn to walk before we can run.” So yes it’s fun to speculate about what can be, but it’s also good to have patience. I think that’s all Steven is trying to show here, not animosity.
Jeff said on January 30, 2011
That’s what happens when you write quickly on an ipad folks. Spelling errors ‘r us. In other news the Saab website looks great on an iPad. I was excited to see that wood is the standard material in the 9-5 aero. I think most buyers will end up thinking that’s more premium, fake or not (though I’d rather it be fake obviously).
RS said on January 30, 2011
I agree, there’s no need for monster V10 and V12′s. Just something that’s sufficient to keep Saab in the premium-league. Spyker can build the more ‘crazy’ stuff.
Jeff said on January 30, 2011
Apparently gm will be building the engines for spyker (LS1). That will be fun to listen to, but definitely does not belong anywhere near a Saab engine bay.
Anders said on January 30, 2011
Now that is exactly the type of car I think SAAB deserves.
Lightweight, part-electrified, turbo-charged, good aerodynamics and still usable when shopping at IKEA
Red J said on January 30, 2011
The problem is, this car will be delivered to market by Volvo at least 6 moths before Saab can do it.
max said on January 30, 2011
Build a Saab that we can all sell and be profitable. After we have that (profitability) then ok build a dream car, but until then……….
Sandy said on January 30, 2011
So, are we talking something similar to a Viggen here?
I test drove a Viggen and a more in sane (factory made) car I have never driven. The torque steer was out of this world, but I am sure you can get used to that with a bit of experience. I did not buy one due to a lack of funds, but it is now a sought after model, used…
I have been searching locally for a well maintained used Turbo X. When they arrived I did not have the funds (again) but got my used 2006 9-3 Aero ss, with which I am very happy. But after studying the specs of the Turbo X, I realize that there is a case for it – bigger brakes, sportier chassi setting, XWD with the eLSD. And the exclusivity, now a bargain. Still, the engine would have to be souped up at least to 350bhp/550Nm (gearbox/transmissions allowing).
So what does this have to do with Halo HiPo Saab? I believe, while the 9-5 is to big, that you could make a nice setup with the still beautiful & soon facelifted 9-3, though an outgoing model (as the Viggen was). I would like to see a:
9-3 ss & sc (the SC is sooo cool as TurboX)
HiPer sport suspension and active dampers, unique rims (Inca?)
XWD + eLSD
2.8T with 350bhp/550Nm ++
Huge ventilated brakes rotors, steel brake lines.
Aggressive “face” (front spoiler, air intake)
Some kind of exclusive leather interior, maybe alcantara (my favorite, non-slip, non-sweat).
Choice of colors (Black, Silver, Racing green, Java, maybe even individual.
This would not cost an arm and a leg for Saab to put together, be a unique “halo” car and would possibly help the face out of the 9-3 in general. Remember, it is still at least 18 months to the replacement…
This probably sounds like a Hirsched TurboX, with some new detailing, but yes – why not????
turbokalle said on January 30, 2011
Saab should pull a Lotus if anything. A light twoseater with 150-250 hp (4 cyl) and outstanding roadhandeling. In my dreams they should.
Jörgen Trued - SUHRT said on January 30, 2011
Here is a Swedish company that can make Your idea come true Kalle. http://www.s2ab.se/s2ab/home.html
The company is managed by ex- Saab Chassis Boss Magnus Roland*, the driving and technical evaluator is done by our very on The REAL Stig, Stig Blomqvist.
S2AB are working with state of the art pinnacle automotive technologies. Make sure to look into their webpage.
* Magnus work at SAAB
1971 – 1979 Manager Chassis Test & Development
1979 – 1989 Manager Vehicle Test & Development
1989 – 1993 Executive Program Manager Advanced Vehicle Concepts
1993 – 2002 International Service Program at GM Detroit (Corvette rear axel/racing rear axel)
2002 – 2005 Special Projects
Mark Orr said on January 30, 2011
I say forget about a Viggen with a hot engine, The next Viggen should have a slightly larger battery and a much larger electric motor. All this stuff will need to be developed for electrics anyway. So keep the BMW engine stock and instead of 15 hp electric motor, dual 30 HP hub motors or something to that effect. Much lower R&D, Euro bank funds can be used for electric dev. Completely unique.
Thylmuc said on January 30, 2011
While I would generally agree on the future of automobiles, an electric car is just not “right around the corner”, irrespective of what so called pundits and some manufacturers promote. Electric motors and their controls are well understood and no problem at all. Batteries however are far into the future. We will need batteries that store tenfold more energy per weight, reload tenfolf faster, but cost one tenth.
The situation is pretty frustrating, and agrofuels also won’t cut it.
Mark Orr said on January 30, 2011
I am not saying it should be electric, it should be a hybrid, with dual 30 HP hub motors that will bring it to around 310 HP. Add a 2 or 3KWH battery and you will get superb acceleration, superb fuel economy and Euro bank funds for development. Plus this is technology that can be used throughout the SAAB lineup.
Thylmuc said on January 31, 2011
oops, now understood. You are right! Sorry; and I should get some sleep
Jeff said on January 30, 2011
Again you’re thinking right along the lines I am. The R&D is all on the transmission side of the equation, electric motors are pretty standard creatures, few moving parts and relatively easy to design. It’s the transmission that shifts the power around that holds all the cards. Given that Saab has been working with designing a transmission to give “extra power when needed” I think that this is the strategy we should be examining closer. I can imagine it like an extra boost of power that feels seamless, and adds 150-200NM of torque instantly from 0 revs. You could even market it with a shot of Swedish vodka in an ad, “What do these two things have in common?” I think this is the best way to go, beef up the battery and/or transmission to handle that capability and market it as such. Only enable it via a drivesense like button, so you have to be in Sport or SportPlus mode to get the extra boost, otherwise it stays on a Normal or Eco setting to keep everything in check. How this gets funded I don’t really know other than to say it’s still part of the Euro loan, or shared with American Axle, right? Anyone buying this?
GerritN said on January 30, 2011
If you stick an electric motor on each wheel you don’t have to worry about transmissions anymore. Everything will come down to controlling and feedback from the 4 motors, pretty straightforward. As someone mentioned before the big issue is to have a means of energy storage, batteries are in their infancy still. I’m a big supporter to keep things simple, so storage like hydraulics or pneumatics don’t really appeal to me. A pure electric based on batteries alone doesn’t work yet, doesn’t have enough range. Frankly I would be very nervous to get on the road with a full electric car. So, it still needs a gasoline engine. Diesel would be an option, but I’m not sure how well that can be marketed in the US. Sounds a bit like a Volt, doesn’t it. Except that with real independent four wheel drive this car should blow your socks off.
Technically breaking it down:
– Get a 100-150hp electric motor driving each wheel, shouldn’t be a problem.
– Get the 4 motors controlled, that’s just some micro-controllers, shouldn’t be a problem.
– Get some efficient energy storage. Anyone knows the status of the batteries that Saab was collaborating on with Boston Power?
– Get a highly efficient gasoline or diesel engine to charge the batteries. Something like a mild turbo-charged small 2 cylinder should work.
Jeff can do the exterior design.
Jeff said on January 31, 2011
Gracias Gerrit. You can help too, I like the way your Viggen looks, after all, nice wheels
I’ve been reading pretty intensely about the Boston Power batteries over the past few hours. They seem pretty good but I’d love a real comparison of them vs. all these battery startups (for example Envia which apparently can increase storage by 1/3 at a cheaper price). I know Saab has joined fairly tightly with them, but I hope as groundbreaking technology comes out that allows for more energy densities, Saab hasn’t signed a long term contract that prevents them from using the best tech from cycle to cycle.
I’m not sure that it’s necessary to go with 4 motors, while I agree that’s a cool idea. Michelin had a concept with hub motors not so long ago that worked like that. Locating 2 motors on the center of the rear or front axles and having them geared in such a way to provide torque independently in each direction seems to be the way Saab is going, which is just fine to me too. So long as each wheel can accept its own torque vectoring, it’s groovy. One extra important piece of the puzzle is the planetary gear which links the electric motor to the ICE. I think going the Volt route, as in allowing them to work together, is the best of both worlds. I hope Saab can improve upon this yet work it in, it just makes sense. Recharge the battery and/or give an extra boost of power. Instead of using a low HP recharging motor, put in a high power engine capable of cylinder deactivation, something the new M5 will be using. That way, you can have incredible performance or great economy on demand. It seems like the best of all worlds.
100%Saab said on January 30, 2011
I think I would prefer really good “bread and butter.” Higher price equals harder sell.
Just a thought.
Phoenix said on January 30, 2011
If they would build this halo car I get the feeling that most people would say the same as with the 9-5 V6, “I would not pay this and that for this car”. Because of the currency they are not doing any profit on the US market. So trying with a Halo car is just out of the scope right now. But of course I’m interrested to see the suggestions Swade will put up here..
andyb said on January 30, 2011
why are people thinking in terms of the halo car being all petrol why not a powerful biopower electric hybrid in aeroX form this would demonstrate Saabs responsible performance credentials and enviromental responsibility,I would like to see Saab make such a car.
Phoenix said on January 30, 2011
Because people are expecting a car in the near future. Forget about a hybrid halo car within at least the next 5 years. We’ve seen some hybrids from Porsche, Mercedes, Lexus etc but this is only for show off. Responsible performance bla bla to show the public we care for the environment..NOT. If we are talking about halo cars I guess we are talking near future otherwise we could continue this debate in four years and spare us some time. Only realistic halo car right now is a traditional car with a petrol engine. If start to talk about light weight material and hybrids we are already in the sky. So for you who asks for a halo car soon, please start to get your plans together and send them to Swade. I can’t wait to see them.
GerritN said on January 30, 2011
The reason to go for something environmentally responsible is that this opens up a lot of extra pots of money. Saab already has the EIB loan, I’m sure that, like in the US, there is more EU money for innovative projects.
tmjr said on January 30, 2011
In terms of a halo car, I remember, a long time ago, a guy with a Ferrari pulled into my shop. I don’t recall the model , but, I do remember looking under the” trunk “and seeing a V-8. But what struck me was that it was like having two SAAB slant 4 engines under the hood? This was a long time ago, but, there were 2 fuel distributors(made of magnesium), 2 warm-up regulators, 2 cold start valves, etc.(Bosch CIS). I remember thinking that Ferrari was powered by 2 SAAB engines .If SAAB could “double-up” on some existing technology, then they would have their halo car. It was good enough for Ferrari maybe 25 years ago.
Gen Jackson said on January 30, 2011
I would say hirsch 9-5 aero sc and sedan tune the engine 2.8v6 to at least 350 hp or 375 if possible keep xwd in
also make it a stick shift.
I probably would not be aiming it at BMW m3 as it is a different league vehicle
realistic targets are infinity m35/37 with 330 ponies; lexus gs may br is-f
price target should be around 50-52K if possible
I don’t think saab can pull more at this time
Greg Abbott said on January 30, 2011
Short-term – offer a Hirsch’ed-up 9-5 Aero through the factory. Use Hirsch as Saab’s AMG. Nothing else makes sense financially.
Medium-term – some sort of hi-performance hybrid or electric variant of the 9-3 replacement.
Jeff said on January 30, 2011
I agree with you on all of that, makes a ton of sense. But then I crunched some numbers Saab and Hirsch would just have and almost insurmountable obstacle to compete with the Germans– a 550HP (578HP next year) BMW M5 sells for around $82-90K off the lot, so I figure a Saab 9-5 Hirsch with its 330HP should go for $60K max). The Mercedes gives you 520 HP, the Saab squeaks out 330. But then I checked and saw that the BMW 550i has 400 HP and goes for $60K, so the 9-5 would even be struggling in that class. I just don’t think that there is a viable way for Saab to go up against the Germans and beat them at this point in speed or agility. While Saab was languishing under GM and not getting badly needed or deserved funds, BMW and Mercedes were out developing twin turbo V8s using Saab trickery, complete with cylinder shut off and stop/start technology. I don’t think we can compete up there yet.
That said, your medium-term suggestion is where it starts getting more exciting. Electrification = instant torque = speed. Hi performance hybrids are pretty damn exciting, and we know Audi, Porsche, BMW, and even Ferrari are actively working on them. Saab should be in that class, and should whoop their asses. This is their chance.
GerritN said on January 30, 2011
Yes , just forget trying to be halo by cranking up the power. The competition has been there and done that already.
RS said on January 30, 2011
Gerrit, the competition hasn’t been there, done that. That is where they’re currently sitting and doing very well. Saab doesn’t even offer a 6 cylinder engine for the 9-3 whilst that’s the BASE engine for the C Merc in the US.
Saab is honestly the better car of the two especially in the winter but it loses in these two critical areas that people (not car enthusiasts) will notice the most, interior materials and engine spec. Just look which one is doing better in terms of sales. The same thing goes for the 9-5. If you don’t have anything to put up against the 550i it just eats up you credibility.
How many times haven’t we heard “-Aaah, yes back in the days when Saab was competing with Audi, Bimmer and Merc”.
The 9000T was halo at one time. (I’m going shut up now
Jim said on January 30, 2011
Viggen type cars are only needed when your base model is perfected. Saab must first focus on correcting the 9-5 and 9-3′s shortcomings for 2011.5 or 2012. That means improved interior in 9-5 with wood trim, and many improvements for the 9-3.
It is hard to engineer a hi-performance model. My stand is, they should properly engineer their base product first. Then, by all means, please create awesome halo models with incredible styling and performance.
Rob in Loudoun said on January 30, 2011
Here, here! We must have been typing at the same time. I couldn’t agree more with your thoughts.
MarcB said on January 30, 2011
I couldn’t agree more … let’s get the company to a point of long term viability first. Finish the 9-5, launch 9-5SC and 9-4X, build the new 9-3 with full Saab DNA, and if the company starts to sell 100,000 cars per year, the new 9-2 is next, and then look at re upping for a new 9-5 in 2015.
With all of that going and with cash flowing … now it’s time for the halo model … defining the future and broadening the Saab brand … something along the lines of the Aero X concept car, but now with future power plants. 350hp is not the key. 50 to 100 mpg and fun and practical to own is where Saab must aim because that is the future.
Sorry race fans, Saab must be all about practical, responsible, reliable transportation that still is fun!
Jeff said on January 30, 2011
I agree and I disagree. What I’ve seen about the development process of BMWs M division, I hear that it’s a very small but elite group of the company’s engineers that work hand in hand with the product development team but jump on the process not too far down the line, basically when the car is somewhat defined but not completely. So to say that the base model has to be perfected I don’t think is necessarily right. In fact, the BMW teams often find efficiencies to share with each other in both directions. I remember suggesting something akin to this years ago on here or trollhattansaab, but I think that Hirsch and Saab should be working even closer in this BMW/M division type arrangement. I’m sure it’s tricky to marry the two camps especially only a year or two after the company was rescued, but I think it would be a rewarding process. Not only Hirsch tho, I think Spyker engineers should be part of this team, and vice versa. Porsche just became responsible for designing the entire VW group’s future sports car platform, Audi got the midsize platform, and VW engineers got the compact. I think if Saab were to take a similar path it wouldn’t necessarily be with platform but instead with certain cars, in other words Saab performance division (made up of the few Saab, eAAM, Spyker, and Hirsch engineers) get the sport cars (take your pick, 92, 9-3, 9-5, etc), and Saab engineers work on the nuts and bolts of the rest. It’s more organizational, but I think that’s sort of the way they seem to be going anyway when I hear about all these new teams within Saab designed to be able to sell technology. I just wonder if they should explicitly be bringing Spyker and Hirsch guys into the fold if possible.
GerritN said on January 30, 2011
There was an interview with the director of BMW’s M division a couple of weeks ago. What stuck with me is that he said that to attract young and promising engineers etc. you need to have exciting models. I totally agree with him. Improving your base is always commendable but also kind of boring. Saab needs something new to keep the adrenaline flowing. I can’t wait to see their next concept car.
Rob in Loudoun said on January 30, 2011
I like the idea of a SAABish Halo car – one that combines unusual and innovative technology to achieve superior levels of performance while still making a nod to economy, safety, and practicality. I am thinking of how the original SAAB Turbo seemed in the 1970′s. 500 HP monster cars that sacrifice everything to pure performance are completely antithetical to SAAB’s entire ethos.
Nonetheless, it is simply too early for SAAB to divert it’s limited financial, engineering, marketing, and managerial resources away from creating a truly world-class next-gen 9-3 and improving the 9-5 and 9-4X. All of SAAB’s “normal” models must be brought up the level of the competition. Building a gonzo-performance “Halo” car at the present time would only be putting lipstick on a pig if the bread and butter models are not up to snuff.
What seems doable in the near term would be to offer from the factory a SAAB with Hirsch tuner bits and a significantly upgraded aesthetic package. SAAB has already said it will honor it’s warranty with Hirsch componentry installed and it seems Hirsch components have already been approved by the regulators in the major markets. While not as “halo” as some might like, this would be a realistic interim measure until SAAB was on more solid footing and it resources were less pressed.
SAAB + Rugby said on January 30, 2011
Dude your al wrong. Saab has to make a car that blow away a m3 or s4. You must be old. Any1 less than 30 wants to blow away the other dude. Saab has to make a Beemster killer or it will die.
Ken H said on January 30, 2011
This is irony, right?
fred diesel said on January 30, 2011
The era of throwing a big honkin motor with way too much HP is/has been overdone and its over. When Saab released a V6 XWD in ’08, oil was headed to $150 and looks like it is again.. Bad timing? Poor planning? Bad luck? That dosent mean a puny little(possibly diesel) engine with too many turbos and electric rear-drive is out of the question.
And saying Americans dont like diesel cars, is like saying you hate chocolate mint ice cream without ever trying it. On cars that are driven constantly, they rule. Remember when there were Saab cop cars in US? There easily could/should be again.
74stingray said on January 30, 2011
Another point to the price of Oil….
There are a few fans here who think that people who buy a $50K+ automobile really isn’t concerned with the price of gas or MPG ratings. While they are free to have that opinion and i respect their thoughts, i disagree. I thought Saab was supposed to be the flagship for the more educated, environmentally concerned and financially aware shopper?
I’d love to see a 350+ HP Saab branded street pounder…. but I don’t know how that would fall into the corporate identity. I am not saying they should not / will not produce such a thing… IMHO it’s not a large part of Saab’s DNA and nothing they should strive for now.
Those who bought TurboX, good on you… you knew you were getting shafted in the power and resale departments when you could have bought Audi or BMW. Knowing this you stuck with Saab and that’s admirable. Being different appealed to you and maybe being different is just enough for Saab.
RS said on January 30, 2011
Stingray, I don’t think we can or should judge Saabs corporate identity based on the last 20 years of GM treatment. The last time we where on a level playing field the M5 had 252 hp (9000T 200 hp and a V8 was ready for the US). BMW is now up to 500! while Saabs ‘best’ model is still under 300, when it should be at least 4 imho.
I’m convinced that as long as Saab doesn’t have a 400 hp engine it will not be able to compete image wise against its natural rivals.
Fords and Hondas are just lesser cars but people now take them for Saabs competition mostly because of the engine range. A premium brand must have a certain amount of prestige. There’s no way around it. If sensible and bland would be the winning formula Saab should have blossomed under GM.
I just want to see Saab increase sales by lifting its profile in peoples eyes. That’s what sells all those Audis.
74stingray said on January 30, 2011
I am not too proud to say you have a valid point. OTOH I feel this is not the best time to be nagging Saab for such a car when Saab is gasping for air day in and day out.
I think we’re on the same side and just splitting hairs about this topic however. Logical talk is always good but you have to admit in regard to this topic, there has been plenty of unrealistic chatter and demands placed on Saab.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to slap down money on a 350+ HP AWD laser red SS.
But somewhere in Saabs logic tree they say right now is not the time. (unless someone here can produce the logical business plan as Swade suggested.
MarcB said on January 30, 2011
If the Saab brand makes sense to a segment of the market, why are we worried about who compares us to what?
40,000 cars in the United States in an 11 million unit market represents a market share of 0.0036%. I assume the International Market share at 100,000 units is similar.
Exclusivity is one of the brand values of Saab.
As VM says, to hit our numbers we need to attract Saab and ex Saab enthusiasts. If the company can be profitable at this level of volume, than we really must avoid the comparison game
RS said on January 30, 2011
I’m just afraid that too many of the enthusiasts have moved on (got used) to “bigger and better” things and won’t come back to something that’s not on par on paper with their current vehicle. People never downgrade willingly. That’s why comparisons are so important or we need to come up with a completely new smart Saab customer base real quick.
Edis said on January 30, 2011
The cost of gas is not a significant issue for a high end automobiles. Here I can agree with Swade – fuel consumption is from the devil. When you compare the value loss of a high end car with the cost of gasoline the first few years, the cost of gasoline will look insignificant.
ivo 71 said on January 31, 2011
Robust fuel consumption may perhaps not be significant to the first owner but it certainly will be to the second one and those after that. Which, of course, will negatively affect the resale value.
Ivo
North Toronto Punter said on January 30, 2011
Chirp, Chirp…
Would distinguish ‘Halo’ from ‘Gonzo’ too. Gonzo is Aston Martin/Koenigsegg [Spyker?] territory and not at (my) issue.
Project Scope:
In respect of the 9-3: To be merely competitive (aka refinement of existing platform) with a 335i (never mind M3…) and the Audi and Merc equivalents. Right now we have nothing — and it Dominoes down the line in terms of brand enthusiasm. BTW: The next M3 is likely a twin turbo 6…so to invoke the Spectre of Monsterous Fire Breathing Beasts, Sporting V12s is Ridiculous.
As for the 9-5, the same: In this day and age 400 HP is hardly The Race to the Moon. 350+ should be a cakewalk.
Some legitimate questions, pre- RFP submission:
1. Why has Hirsch not been able to go beyond 330 HP? To get safely above that (with the existing V6 engine) presumably they’ll have to go further than a simple tune…. and change some hardware, right (pistons for instance)? Are they legally restricted from doing so (as a result of the GM covenant)? Or has it been deemed too expensive (either by Saab or Hirsch). If deemed too expensive what are those figures? Can the Aisin transmission handle 350 to 400 HP or will they have to change it? Can that tranny be fortified?
2. We’ve gone to BMW for a small diesel in the next 9-3. Fine. Have we engaged discussions to buy their other latest Ward top 10 engine (Saab had, at a time, a ‘Top 10′ offering too…)?
[3.0L N55 Turbocharged DOHC I-6]:
“With a single twin-scroll turbocharger, the 3.0L I-6 produces 300 hp and 300 lb.-ft. (407 Nm) of torque with ridiculous ease and efficiency, while boosting fuel economy up to 15%.
Why put your engineers through such an exercise merely to achieve the same output as an older engine?
Because the N55 delivers up to 15% better fuel efficiency, and every auto maker, particularly luxury-oriented BMW, is under the gun to achieve a 35.5-mpg (6.6 L/100 km) corporate average fuel economy by 2016 in the U.S. and meet tough carbon-dioxide emissions limits in Europe.
During our test drive, Ward’s editors didn’t baby the 335i but managed 23 mpg (10.2 L/100 km), impressive for a 6-cyl. luxury sport sedan.
Either way, the single-turbo N55 is no patsy: It sprints to 60 mph (97 km/h) in 5.4 seconds”. [Ward's Automotive]
Audi seems to have managed ok with their Ward Top 10 offering: “With a 6-speed manual, the all-wheel-drive S4 now is rated at 18/27 mpg (13-8.7 L/100 km). Its 333 hp is less than the V-8’s 340 hp, but the V-6 produces 23 lb.-ft. (31 Nm) more torque than its predecessor and allows the car to sprint to 60 mph (97 km/h) in 4.9 seconds, 0.4 seconds faster than the V-8.
Most importantly, the V-6 has a fatter torque curve than the V-8, which gives it better all-around drivability.
….It shows you don’t have to pay a performance penalty when you downsize,” says WardsAuto.com Editorial Director David Zoia.”
More on the 9-5 in later posts (there’s no time limit, right?).
In respect of ‘learning to walk.’ (put me in RS’s camp here) I’d frame the dilemma thus: We hobbled off the mark alright;but the rehabilitation scheme is inadequate to the injuries suffered. A new training strategy needs to be brough forth. Some weight bearing exercise is called for. I’m wondering if the disability isn’t, at base, psychosomatic. Time to lose the crutches before the muscles atrophy completely…
As regards the DNA arguments: I’m old enough to remember well Road and Track multi car Matches that faced off BMW vs. Saab. vs. Alfa etc and Saab would consistently place 1st or 2nd in most categories. Problem is the competition has moved on. It is ‘Saab Saab’ to be equal (or better) than any of those (whether that’s achieved through HP or weight reduction, electric, petrol or hybrid or combinations thereof). When it comes to MPG or Performance– we’ll have to lose that See-Saw thinking . Have to Walk and Whistle, I’m afraid. Just like our German and Swedish based adversaries.
To offload the burden and challenge of producing a compeitive car onto the Squeaky Wheels (a badge I don’t sport proudly…but necessarily) is an abrogation of Management’s Responsibility. It’s about Their Decision and Vision. Ultimately the punters will decide.
Phoenix said on January 30, 2011
I haven’t heard of a diesel for the 9-3 though I heard about the 1.6 petrol. That engine is meant for the fwd BMW’s. The engines you are talking about isn’t just to be thrown in like that. And just fitting 400hp in a car means that you have to look over the whole car from front to rear. It’s like designing a new car. And the bottom line, what would you like to pay for a new 9-3 halo car. 50k for a 9-5 XWD V6 Aero is too much according to some people here so what would a 350hp 9-3 be worth?40k 50k?
Aero said on January 30, 2011
Sure I would love to see a production 400hp++ version but for the image I think its even more important to stay off the low power versions like Volvo and Audi has. 106hp in a V70 or 136hp in A6 kills more potential customers than the R or RS versions gives. So please Saab let 180hp be a minimum in the future!
Tomas TL1000R said on January 30, 2011
Lets think this over!?
Tight budget.
Exclusive car.
Very Saaby.
Hmmm! Does it work in reality! Probably not but I would have tried this!
We have the concept car Areo X and it was absolutely gorgeous!
That´s where we start, We have the design and we don´t have to change that.
How can we go from there? Okey we deside that it has to have 350-400 hp is a 4-cylinder engine. We develop eAAM at this moment and use this of course. It means that we use
technology already develop in the house.
All that is on the way , anyway so why not go for it. But the cost? Next decision is, is it worth it?
The answer is no if you look at it as a investment that will bring the money back. Then why! Because it raises the Saab brand to heights never seen before. Advertising and just to have it in the showroom. Then a car for about $ 50 000 is legitim and not so much. How many shall we produce and to what cost? well, lets say we produce only 365-1000/year and the cost each is $ 125 000 -135 000 ( less than a 911 turbo). But that´s to little you say. I know but we raise the value of Saab and have opend a totally new world.
The thing is that this will never happand and therefor it´s so much more unexpected. All decision that comes to real is cowardly and not stand out for real. This is the oposit and therefor so right. we do it with a Phoenix platform and use a conventional engine.
The only problem is that it will never happend cos noon think it´s worth it. Maybee there right and I think it´s a pitty. But if you have a car that “cool” and futuristic you can use it in every possible way in advertising and the status of the Saab brand is lifted to a much higher level.
That is maybee the best way to meet the future for a niche brand like Saab. Just a thought.
PS. This is just dreams but a few beers in a saturday night can end up this way you see!
(some Russian money is needed, but instead of buying a football club or something els I prefer this don´t you!)
David C said on January 30, 2011
I hope Saab can develop and market cars that will increase their volume and fill their factory. Let the Tuners provide extra HP for the small minority that would use it.
There seems to be no awareness that the Auto world is moving to smaller 2 liter and below cars. Even racing. This is because of the tighter carbon emission requirements. Yesterday is gone. The overpowered freak hobby cars are a low volume market.
Personally I hope to see a sub 3,000 Lb car with all around attractiveness for men and women. I would also like to see Saab make a good penetration volume-wise into Russia which is expected to be the largest European market very soon.
Talladegan said on January 30, 2011
Completely off-topic, but I thought you should know that I have today seen my first NG9-5 on the road here in the UK.
Scary that it took so long but great to see it all the same.
Fred in Chicago said on January 30, 2011
Halo cars are great and might be something to consider, but being realistic, Saab needs to concentrate on building and marketing the absolute best cars it can that are more than competitive in the market place to build sales momentum. Come on…let’s stick to basics. I ordered a brochure from saabna in early december and nearly two months later still have heard nothing from Saab. If Saab can’t handle the daily function of selling their stock cars…what the he’ll are they doing working on a halo car?
CraigSu said on January 30, 2011
The only way I see this happening is for the halo car to be a Spyker Saab. Use the Aero X as the starting point and go from there. I’ve been lobbying for this on Jalopnik.com for some time now since I think the Aero X deserves to live. If Spyker were to take this on it would allow for cost sharing between the two companies.
That being said, I completely agree with Swade’s intent with this challenge; that is, it can’t be done, nor should it be. Saab should be focused on making the base models as good as possible then moving upscale with content and engine management upgrades. Hirsch can be a valuable partner in Saab’s quest for top line performance and should be, IMO.
Tomas TL1000R said on January 30, 2011
Could be something! Let Spyker produce the Aero X, and use synergy effects. Se it as the 9-4X Mexican built car. Spyker build and price the car and Saab buy them from Spyker.
Spyker does not sell to many cars and this could be a good deal for both.
But the cost is enormous and it´s just dreams.
(My second post was about Aero X)
J Fan said on January 30, 2011
lol, Swade, looks like you found a topic to keep us occupied
Okay, it’s after 3 a.m. here and I’ve just arrived back from a pretty crappy night. I’m a little drunk, but here’s my thoughts.
Regarding the halo car, I’m with you. I don’t get it. Even if they had enough money, I still don’t get it.
My main problem with Saab doing a ‘Hi-Po’ car is that there would be too many compromises. There is only so much you can do with a big FWD car. You can stick in a turbo and some fancy bodykit. But it’s still a big FWD car. I want sporting cars to have rear wheel drive. I want them to have the gearbox in the back. I want them to have a V8 or a V10 engine. Okay, not everyone wants this. But I suspect most people would want this, or else Ferrari, Maserati, Beemer, Merc etc. would find themselves out of business pretty quick. They, however, are not out of business. Also, racing car are usually RWD. Did anyone here ever watch the BTCC back in the 90′s? The RWD and 4WD cars used to have to carry a weight penalty over the FWD cars. That says something.
So, then you argue for 4WD. It might be great, I grant you that – there are however connotations of a car maker who has looked into the book of ‘how to make a performance car’, and has found that adding 4WD is a go-er. It adds weight. Quiet a lot. And then there are these safety conscious so and so’s who make it all boring by putting a 90% front 10% rear bias on the torque – up to 50/50 when the going gets tough etc. I want it the other way round! Understeer, understeer. This is why I quite like Subaru. Audi did great when branding the Quattro. Saab would need to do something similar with the XWD, but they do seem to be doing well with it. I’ve yet to try one so I should really shut it.
The engines. If Saab are phasing out the 2.8T Six, I don’t know what engines they’ll have left. There is only so much you can do with a blown 4 or 6. Ok, the XJ220 had the 6R4 engine, but it doesn’t carry the same aura as a V8 say. But everyone is downsizing now, aren’t they? Isn’t BMW about to do some smaller higher output engines? So, is this what you would want also? The 9-5 in the range that really gets me excited is actually the 1.6T – because it’s the lightest. I’d love to see Saab make a really light car rather than a brute. Anyone remember the Peugeot 106 Rallye with their painted steel wheels? In this day and age, I’d love to see that kind of thing – I’m sure it would be much cheaper to do than a HI-PO car.
Everytime this is brought up, I think of ROVER/MG with their silly X-POWER Qvale thing or whatever it was, and the other cars they blew all their cash on. It was NEVER going to compete against the sophisticated competition, especially with an inflated price tag. If Saab created a Hi-Po car, it also would need a big price tag. Would people warm to it? I don’t know. Then you have Volvo with the S80 4.4 V8. What was the point? A transversely mounted short V8, with the gearbox beside it? Heavy handed. I just don’t think it’s necessary. As you said, Saab needs to be able to walk first.
I’m rambling
btw., today I was in a multi- storey car park and I saw a little old lady leaning on her car as she searched for her keys. She then got inside the car. It was a Lexus IS-F…!!!!
Chris Hansel said on January 30, 2011
I agree with Greg Abbott, there is little that can be done until the new model 9-3 is ready. But then I think you might have some fun. I do not agree with the halo car set, however if you think Saab needs a pocket rocket, then like the old British sports cars of old, build it out of your existing parts bin. The factory can jack up the performance as well as anyone else, but if you want to use a tuner, and that helps cost factors then that’s fine. As long as you put more horsepower per buck than anyone else. Assuming the new 9-3 can be made as a true coupe, cut as much weight out of it as possible and make it into a hatchback.. If needed use roll up windows and offer it only as a stick. If you can reduce the overall weight by 300 to 500 pounds and increase the horsepower into the 300 range, you might have something to appeal to the kid market, and that would be a great tool to develop long term loyalty from new buyers. Look to better your 0-60 time to match or beat a similar BMW and you might produce a niche car that would help drive non- Saab buyer into showrooms. This is the only way you could do such a project. And using the new 9-3 would be the key to holding down developmental costs. Think Datsun 240 Z, or first Mustang, and you might have something.
CJ said on January 30, 2011
Engine source? Trust me, Kjell ac and his team at Saab powertrain can do a twin turbo. They are the best in the business. BMW anyone?
Engine source? Ford has a nifty twin turbo v6, made in Cleveland, that they put in the Taurus SHO. Just below 400hp. Taurus SHO is >$50,000.
I like the Hirsch idea.
Torque sells
Sexy sells,
Finish and quality sell.
Puts Saab back on the map. “Dead cars don’t scream!”
Not as hard or costly as you think and it would make a BIG statement but will only sell in limited numbers.
North Toronto Punter said on January 30, 2011
Cowboy Up!
[Lest we forget: One of the few people who got to peek at The Financials in the original bidding process, no?]
Jörgen Trued - SUHRT said on January 30, 2011
CJ,
If just Powertrain was Powertrain.
Now the bulk of old Powertrain is https://www.avl.com/avl-speab-tech-centre-sodertalje-sweden
Saab offered the employees to move 500 km west to Trollhättan, just a fraction moved….
The knowledge is in Europe’s new Tiger economy Sweden.
For chassis and axels Saab should really take a good look at S2AB http://www.s2ab.se/s2ab/home.html They are already spearheading new technologies for one of europes largets and smallest car manufacturers.