On the September print edition of Autoweek, a US car magazine, has a two-sider, albeit with not much text, on Saab.
On the left side there is an article on Jason Castriota. It really doesn’t say much we doesn’t already know.
But they also say things I don’t know like this,
Castriota is now tasked with helping to generate buzz for the launch of the 9-4X crossover….
And a quote from Jason Castriota that makes me say, the next Saab convertible is mine.
You don’t want to produce the most provocative thing in the world when you’re trying to sell 500,000 [units].
And on the right side there is a small article on Tim Colbeck and his presentation in Los Angeles in August.
Tim Colbeck talks about a lot of things like finance, current models and new models, and there are two or three statements from him on new models that are quite interesting.
…That will be followed by a fresh 9-3 in early 2013. Colbeck described it as a car that takes design cues from the company’s heritage, but it has a bit of edginess to it.
This is about the next 9-3, but he also talked about the small Saab, I prefer to call it small Saab than 9-2/9-1.
Colbeck said that Saab CEO Victor Muller and design director Jason Castriota are reviewing about five designs for a modern reimagining of the 92.
And a last quote on the possible future naming convention for Saab cars. We talked about returning to the 900, or maybe getting rid of the dash so the 9-3 would become a 93, but what do you think about this option?
Future Saabs could also get names instead of numbers.
I’m confident that on Monday something has to happen, and after that we will talk more about the cars than on the finances.
And thanks to Jan H-F for the scans.
I like JC’s ambition – 500,000 units. This guy has a can do attitude.
Steve,
I think you got the quote wrong. Jason said that you will always design a Toyota or a VW if you want to sell at least that much per year, but Saab can have a more interesting design, more of the love it or hate it kind, as they don’t need to sell that many cars.
Yap, that’s the way I get it too …. given that you do not aim at the masses, you can be more adventurous in terms of design …. this gets me salivating already, I expect a real SAAB with a unique distinctive design …
It took me a while to get it, but it’s indeed a brilliant quote 🙂 Saab can do these things that others can’t… (Hello Audi?)
Start up the engines and let’s go in to the future of SAAB!
@redj: your words in god’s ear – as we would say in Germany 🙂
It’s funny isn’t it. We would do nothing rather than be able to talk about the cars here and leave this behind, yet how just how Saab goes through it is what makes it Saab, which is why we are here.
Yeah, this too will pass.
So true; so true…
I really look forward to the day when we can talk about cars and technology without having to worry about financing! I am interested in financial things, but I don’t want to be worried about Saab’s survival all the time…
I prefer a numerical naming convention. But that’s just me.
2013 seems so close ….. I wonder how SAAB is spending (if any) R&D monies on the development for the next 9-3. And I thought the 9-2/9-1 wasn’t part of their official business case, as stated by VM many many times ?
Alas, good to hear some behind-the-scenes goings-on than all the financial doom & gloom ……
saab have mou of npjv with youngman where saab designs and start manufacturing of 9-2, 9-6 and 9-8 and youngman gives needed financing…
Please, enough talk of the model name scheme change. We’ve been there so many times, each and every poll shows clear preference for the current one, and some of the press releases even explicitly mention future models as “9-6” and “9-7”. I think Saab should settle that and move on. The market and public have spoken.
Now, how about production – I’ve got two more people interested in a Saab now, neither can get one because the inventories are depleted.
Bravada, yes the current market and current public have spoken about the proposed name change. Unfortunately Saab has not and cannot exist with the amount of sales created by the current market and current public. Saab needs some conquest sales (sales from other brands.) In the the 1980’s when Saab sales were cranking upward it was from the sales that were being conquested from other brands both up and down the entry luxury segment. I am in favor of changing the 9-3 moniker as long as the change is still Saab identifiable. I could see a new 9-3 sized coupe/convertible with the Sonnet badge, or a Viggen badge. Something along those lines to make a break with the past (GM) yet maintain the Saab heritage. The bottom line is we need new customers as well as keeping our old faithful too!
+1
RedJ – ah I see the context and message now you have provided more of the quote 🙂 sorry for the stupid comment! Can’t wait to see JC’s 9-3 replacement. (sorry this isn’t a directly reply but I’m on an iPhone and mobile version will not switch off.
Steve,
sometimes I forget to put the quote in context. 🙂
And what do you think about 9-31 and then 9-32?
What would be a 9-31 and a 9-32??
2013 9-3 will be named 9-31, next generation of 9-31 be the 9-32 and on and on…..
Source? I hope you are wrong though.
+1, meaningless and awkward