NEVS 9-3 is up for testing!

FH-355This week three Swedish car-magazines has visited Trollhätttan for a test-drive of the 2014 9-3 Aero. As we all already know it’s basically a 2012 9-3 Griffin Aero with the two-litre Turbo4 220hp petrol-engine, but with some changes by NEVS. All the three magazines had put a little sneak peek from the test-drive on their websites, and I will here sum up the most important from the sneak peeks.

First out was the magazine “Vi Bilägare“, one of Sweden’s biggest car-magazine. Their tester Calle Carlquist drove a car with the automatic transmission, and he thinks the driving experience is completely modern and he also think NEVS has succeed with their idea that the car should feel sporty but still be comfortable. So he has a positive first impression and think it’s a good car that don’t feel ready for retirement, but the drawback is that it’s missing some of the latest techology.

Next up is “Teknikens Värld“, maybe most known for their “moose test”. I don’t know if they set the 9-3 up for a moose test, but their testers Hans Hedberg and Glenn Lindberg think it’s noticeable that the 2014 9-3 is older than the competitors, but it’s cope pretty well anyway. The chassis is comfortable and resilient, but not “Aero-resilient”, and the 220hp engine is pleasant to drive as always (Täknikens Värld tested a car with manual transmission). They also think the long-distance comfort feels as good as in the old seats, and a tip from them if you don’t want to wait for the new infotainment-system from NEVS you can simply change the headunit to a more fancy aftermarked headunit at your nearest SAAB-garage.

Left is “Auto Motor & Sport“, a magazine well known over all Europe. They sent Thomas Berggren and Pär Brandt, and they think “it feels very much SAAB”. As Teknikens Värld they think the chassis is convenient and comfortable rather sporty. It don’t feels bumpy, it eats bumps in the road very nice and the the chassis will get a high score. It’s is great for Swedish roads! The engine is strong at low revs and have a nice torque, but it’s not the most fuel-efficient car on the market. AMS think the car have a old infotainment system, and it’s missing the latest safety systems as brake-assist, sleep-warning, lane-warning and so on.

So if we sum up what the Swedish car-magazines think about the 2014 9-3;
The 9-3 still have a great chassis and a very nice engine. The stuff that is not so good is the lack of a better infotainment (rumors says a new one is on it’s way), and the fact it’s not a new car so it’s missing some of the latest safety systems.

If you want to read the original articles and see a few images, click on the links under. (sorry, Swedish text only)
Vi Bilägare
Teknikens Värld
Auto, Motor & Sport

108 thoughts on “NEVS 9-3 is up for testing!”

  1. All of those comments seem as positive as we could have hoped for. I like the fact that they just drove and gave an honest evaluation without sarcasm about the age of the model, etc., assuming that’s not in the full articles, that I haven’t read yet.

  2. “AMS think the car have a old infotainment system, and it’s missing the latest safety systems as brake-assist, sleep-warning, lane-warning and so on”

    Some people should definitely take the bus…

    • If this is all they have to nitpick about, I’d say the car is perfect for me and for most drivers. I’m wondering if anyone complained that only two colors are available—-or if they even know that.

    • Chek, I suppose that’s true for a car in that price range at least here in the US. What safety systems does SweGov/PRC require?

      • Sweden complies with the standard EU requirements which are pretty close to the US, however the pedestrian impact rules are much tougher in EU in which the manufacturer need to build a special hud that pops up and catches the pedestrian or create an impact zone which is large enough not to cause leg injuries. Another issue that is more strict in the EU is whiplash protection. If you search for Euro NCAP results you’ll find out more.

        Environmental regulations are also tougher in the EU but that mostly applies to diesel engines. However with the Euro6 requirements coming soon, gasoline cars will suffer a big hit as well and a lot of modifications to the engines and exhaust cleaning will be required by the manufacturer.

    • How do the others implement “sleep-warning”? I’ve only heard of one implementation, and it is a simple timer that goes off every x hours.

      For me, such an approach is a complete dud. I am often somewhat sleepy as I leave work. After an hour of driving I reach the border to Sweden where the speed limit increases a bit (and where I don’t have too many points on my license). The faster speed and lower traffic density usually wakes me up.

      • The timer version is quite old. FWIK current systems measure how you drive the car, it means how you press the gas pedal or move the steering wheel. They must have some test-data that allow them to conclude that you may feel sleepy if you press the gas pedal in this or that way. This said, a colleague of mine does always get a sleep warning when he drives the car of my boss, so that test-data is not 100% reliable, nor is the “sleep-warning”.

        The same is also valid for the lane departure warning as it gets quite confused with all the lines, old lines, cracks that you can find in a road.

      • Current driver drowsiness detection systems mainly based on two technologies.

        First type of them – examples: Volvo, Mercedes Benz, VW and Ford’s technologies – detect drowsiness up to driver’s steering behaviors by checking lane departures, vehicle position in the lane or steering inputs. In some conditions such as very high cross-winds, roads with old lines or cracks -like Red J emphasized- these systems may incorrectly characterize the steering pattern as that of a drowsy driver.
        Second type – example: Lexus’s one- of technologies consist of a driver-monitor camera which is designed to recognize when the driver’s eyes closed and the driver isn’t facing forward. In this system, error occurs when the sensor or the driver’s face is exposed to intense light such as sunlight. There are also some other proposed systems which detects drowsiness by monitoring the heart rate of the driver. Weak side of these systems is that driver sets the threshold value.

      • Saab has developed a Driver Attention Warning System somewhere in 2005-2007. It was a system with 2 cameras. I can’t find the official press release, or official details. Maybe someone saved something about it?
        I don’t know if GM eventually introduced it on other models…

  3. I am sure most already know but the LHU engine is extremely powerful. My 2011 BioPower on 91~E85 9-5 is safely tuned to 280hp and 300ft/lbs without any new hardware and the AF-40-6 transmission is good for at least another 20ft/lbs once I add some supporting mods. If Hirsch or MapTun is prototyping anything please let me know!!

    Makes you wonder why they didn’t just up the power a bit more? They are no longer competing with Buick/Caddy. I guess they are still more worried about MPGs though. If my 9-5 gets 19-30 the 9-3 must do so much better with less weight!!

  4. I think the car’s biggest competitive disadvantage is its CO2 levels and fuel efficiency. The first one alone would be a showstopper in most European markets.

      • The problem in Europe is that most taxes are purely based on emissions so the car could become pretty expensive to own… Thats not really the case in Sweden yet fortunately but I think we’ll get there soon enough as well…

        • It’s amazing to read the comments on this thread TIm—-seems that grown men and women have accepted being children again, with overlords dominating what we can buy, how much it costs, what we can have or not have, etc. It’s coming to the U.S. too unfortunately. I do think if the scales tip too far and enough people feel the nasty pressure, there’s going to be another revolution of sorts to rebel against it. The Boston Tea Party can become the Regulatory Resistance. Why not start it with cars?

            • I have to be cryptic to avoid being edited 🙂 In short, I’m too old to be subject to “Big Brother” deciding what I can drive based on CO2, fuel economy, etc.

              • I would call it a factual rant, but this is not really the place to get hot and heavy into those kind of arguments. 🙂 Suffice it to say that people in Europe have permitted the Greens to take over their government(s) and there are consequences to that, including citizens having to pay exhorbitant taxes on cars that are deemed to emit “too much CO2” [sic]. That’s just the way it is. This is not likely to change any time soon as governments do not typically give up power once it is acquired. NEVS will have to deal with this reality in the European marketplace so it is a concern for Saab moving forward, no matter what the underlying merits. We in the U.S. really have nothing to say about the way that Europe governs itself. (Well, assuming that Germany doesn’t go funny in the head again. Not much chance of that of course, we taught them a lesson in 1918 and they’ve hardly bothered us since then. But I digress…)

                In the U.S. we may still have time to avoid the “green” fate that Europe has opted into, but once again those arguments are beyond the scope of this site. 😉

                • China is putting some window dressing on their industrial juggernaut—-by saying the right things about “Clean energy” and moving a few pawns on the chessboard (charging stations that are a fraction of a fraction of an investment of their GDP). I admire that aspect of the Chinese drive forward—-they are ramming factory production through at breakneck speed to fill consumer desires—-at the same time, holding off the pests by claiming to be acting “responsibly.” Mexico and India haven’t gotten the memo yet that they’re supposed to act like they’re green. Anyway, maybe NEVS has it right after all—-Europe seems like they’re already spent and the U.S. is in deep trouble with similar Draconian measures on the table—–China is too smart at this point in time to do that—–maybe, just maybe, they’ll get their foot in the door with “clean cars” and the plan right now is to produce gas engine cars for China when the new factory is built in China and they can shed these pressures. How jealous I’ll be at that point—–seeing thousands of Saabs with gas engines being sold in China without the ability to buy one here.

                • I dont think we have let the green take over, in europe almost everyone agree that negative climate change is a product of humans and we need to do something about it…

                  • As the politicians tighten the screws, more question arise as to the consequences. (see for an interesting take on this issue)

                    Norway is often used as an example on how the taxation should/could be. But Norway had a harsh taxation on ICEs in place long before anybody had even heard about man-made climate change (in one or the other direction). Our government has gradually added more and more unreasonable taxes since the 50s.

                    If e.g. Germany decided to adopt an identical taxation scheme, a lot more people (and scientists from other disciplines) would ask questions. And… That would not end well for the IPCC in my opinion. The current pause is problematic, because our CO2 emissions have continued to rise without affecting temperatures. (almost 20 years worth of pause, compared to a little more than a century’s worth of half-decent data, of which only ~40 years is reliable satellite data — yeah, use that to project temperatures into the next century… We need to ask more questions…. Maybe other emissions play a bigger role than CO2? What happens if we are looking in the wrong place?)

                    • The idea of “human controlled global warming/climate change” is a government’s wet dream, as it gives an excuse to ramp up taxation and control nearly every aspect of life. I respect Tim’s position, but believe if one were to follow the flow of money and power that arises from European governments following the “green” path, a different picture will arise.

                      I also have the advantage of age, having lived through and been part of the first wave of environmentalism ~40 years ago. (“Global cooling” was the threat then, with Time magazine publishing a cover showing the earth overwhelmed by glaciers). I know the type of people that lead the environmentalist movement, how they operate, and what their real agenda is. To say that I don’t trust them is an understatement.

                      The central idea that the earth’s climate is hospitable and stable but for human activities is ludicrous on its face. Our civilization developed during a fortuitous pause between natural cataclysms, which are the norm.

                      We now leave our rant and return to the discussion of Saab… 😉

                    • There have been made a lot of studies with the focus on pollution from cars etc and different illnesses for example asthma, cancer and respatory infections and where the amount of pollution from cars has drastically decreased these illnesses were also drastically decreased. So its not only about making the plants a bit more green but also about the health of the people living in the area. Europe had some seriously polluted areas in the ex-soviet region after the cold war which were heavily polluted and people were very ill, life expectancy was a lot shorter than the western parts, now, after about 20 years and tough environmental improvements these regions have become a lot healthier.

                      So in the end its not just about getting more tax money for the government…

                    • Well, the problem with politicians is that they conveniently forget about the harmful emissions that you correctly identify as problems.

                      Case in point: The Norwegian government made diesel cars more popular a decade ago. Their reasoning was lower CO2 emissions. The result: worse conditions for people with asthma, etc. CO2 is not a pollutant and reducing CO2 emissions do not necessarily help in the fight against real health hazards.

                      That said… I would have thought that big trucks are responsible for vastly more particle emissions than personal vehicles. Especially if you factor in the dust from the road surface (a recent report concluded that heavy transport in Norway is solely responsible for the observed damage to the road surface, yet they end up taxing all cars with studded tyres in Oslo).

  5. Teknikes Värld has disclosed the donor of the new seats of the 9-3N. I think Tim gave, in his post about the seats, enough details, so any of us could have discovered it before. 😎

  6. I think it pretty much sums up the feeling every 9-3 customer experiences when they drive their car. This chassis has never been outdated, it’s outstanding. The lack of active safety features is understandable, but sleep-warning and lane departure warning are not the features I would chose. I would chose a blind spot information system, Collision Warning with Full Auto Brake and Pedestrian Detection (with night vision) in a HUD.

  7. When are we going to see the ‘hood lifted’ petrol SC? Week 20 was mentioned some time ago, but was that for the EV introduction.

  8. That´s what I thought. Nice to hear it from the journals. Anyway I don´t like too much of these electronic gadgets. So the 9-3 Nevs is up to date except fuel consumption. But for example 210hp and 9.8 l fuel consumption is that really too much for this engine ? Comparable cars produce similar CO2 levels I think.

    • That may be true but 210 bph engines and emissions that go with them are – while great to drive (I drive one) – not really the trend in automotive industry today. Little future there, no money to be made as no volume.

      All NEVS are doing is starting production and using up engines they got on the cheap.

      Forget about this car, it’s existence is if no importance for NEVS. The current body/platform will be used for EV’s mainly.

      Then will – eventually – come a new body/platform which should (must if they want to sell it) have totally different/efficient/competitive engines.

      The current production is irrelevant, but fun for a handful enthusiasts.


      • 2T This is nothing more then the consortium learning the in and outs of assembly (production), sourcing parts,, some very limited engineering.. I test drove one today mine, same car which I do like very much..

        . A new face lift with updated interior and tech may give them a chance until the Phoenix is ready.. If the plan is electric with little effort given into petrol, in my opinion The Saab company we hoped for is dead. The new image of Saab will be in a complete new direction. If so, there will be options for many with excellent new cars. from other makers.

        The pre- production may be relevant to learn how to become a car builder.

  9. The real good new here is that with the help of some updating on various systems, the essesence of this construction is so good that it will be a fully modern car. I guess/hope the facelift later this year wil do just this to the 9-3, and if they also put the SC back in production I might be a customer.

    In addition: I do not think this engine i more fuel consuming than any other with similar output IN REAL LIFE. It is just that Saab has not made a “fuel test cycle beater” of it. Will be very intersting so see the fuel comsumption in media tests compared with for example Volvo S60 T5.

  10. The simple truth “Saab” is a Chinese company. The technology will be provided from the Japanese and Chinese for Ev’s With the assistants of Sweetish manufacturing . The Company is going in a complete different direction with China the focus.

    Saab happen to be up for sale at the right time, and the sale of Saab accommodated Nev’s plan to gain knowledge in manufacturing.. Nev’s was already involved with the Battery company and the building of the battery plant and moving in the direction to build EV’S for China, with China partners.

    Another words, they (Nev’s) were already doing things regardless, and The Saab sale was their for the taking (timing). The value was the plant, tools,Phoenix platform, development department etc. and people (human resources) who previously worked their, because of their knowledge. Not a bad business move. The Brand name was a bonus not the focal point.

    What I am saying Nev’s business plan is for a complete new market, China the focus,,, The heritage, pedigree of Saab, the iconic brand, had very little to do with this purchase. The assets did.

    Do I believe Nev’s would like to sell EV’s for the masses? Yes, But China the focus for 3-4 years.

    Do I think they want to build decent Vehicles? sure.

    Do I think Saab history and engineering influences will be incorporated in the Vehicles not so much.

    I think they will attempt to build quality Vehicles EV’s, but not the Vehicle’s past Saab loyalist want. Its a new era. Chinese and Japanese influences will be abundant.

    If your a Saab loyalist looking for past Saab influences, pedigree, history etc. you may be disappointed. time will tell.

    I still think it’s important we voice our opinions as to what we want.. Will it have any influence not sure..

    Many still haven’t faced it

    • Speculate all you want, but worth pointing out that the S in ‘NEVS’ stands for ‘Sweden’. The company was formed in anticipation of the bankruptcy as I understand it.

      What NEVS’ owner wants is probably to make money. From the looks of things: Long-term.

      Also worth mentioning again: The name ‘SAAB’ is licensed from SAAB AB. The terms dictate cars being produced and sold in Sweden.

      As for bracing for disappointment: We will see. I have no crystal ball and currently, as a fan of the NG 9-5, I am already a little disappointed. A hybrid Phoenix complete with e-AAM technology will change that. A sporty long-range EV might also do the trick. Only the future will tell.

      • Rune: If Saabs are selling in healthy numbers in China and NEVS pulls up stakes to move manufacturing to China—-what do you suppose anyone is going to do to force them to stop using the Saab name? What courts are going to order them to stop? If they refuse, what will be done about it? Believe me, they have the name Saab on their terms NOW, regardless of what the agreements say.

        • NEVS AB which owns all the rights to the SAAB brand is a SWEDISH company and is applicable to SWEDISH laws, SAAB AB can easily bring them to a Swedish court and thus stop them from using the brand! All the production licenses, all the certificates etc etc etc are registered in NEVS AB. So NEVS isn’t going to move production because they paid too much and they fought too hard in order to get that brand name, all of those licenses etc.

          In the bankruptcy administrators internal documents published by P4 West, its stated that the whole sale of Saabs bankruptcy estate would take place only IF Nevs got the usage of the brand name, otherwise they would not continue and the whole thing would have ended up in the toilet.

        • They won’t be able to use the name in Europe or North America given that scenario. I imagine something like the Samsung vs Apple case if they try.

          But yeah, if everything ends up in China, then different laws apply. Which is why I asked earlier: If that has always been the plan, then why waste precious time negotiating for the name at all?

          • I’m intimately familiar with people/companies who have done business in China—-with provinces/factories. These were not little mom and pop shops, but large mergers/acquisitions. I’ll say it again: NEVS/China partners will win, if in the future, they want to move production to China (even all production) and keep the name Saab on their cars. They will win by being nice if that works. They will win by being not so nice if being nice doesn’t work. I’ll leave it at that. They now have the name Saab on cars that they are selling through a company that they own. That is not going to change unless they want it to change. But other aspects of the agreement—-if they want to change, they will. And any resistance will be handled to their favor.

  11. Rune you said,, Speculate all you want, but worth pointing out that the S in ‘NEVS’ stands for ‘Sweden’. The company was formed in anticipation of the bankruptcy as I understand it.

    That isn’t true and that is coming from Nevs… As I pointed out they were very active with China and Japan prior to the Sale.. Fact. Far as the name, its unclear,,what the detailed provisions are in the agreement… That said, the value of the name had less to do with the purchase and value of the plant. The plant served their business plan which was already being implemented. Saab’s bankruptcy had nothing to do with Nevs moving forward building EV vehicles with China it was going to happen regardless.. That is straight from an interview from Nevs.

      • Rune Not sure what your asking … The principles of the consortium were doing business prior.. Nevs was formed from the collective group,,, to purchase the Assets. so whats the point your making..

        Its like we have, company A, company B, company C and we merge A B C to become x company a Consortium of sorts. (Nev’s) just like the below states.

        National Electric Vehicle Sweden AB (NEVS) has been established for the purpose of acquiring the assets of the Saab Automobile bankruptcy estate”

        I don’t see any specific details about the name,, far as detailed provisions and clauses just a general overview.

        • Well, for one thing you wrote “Nev’s was already involved with the Battery company”. What you might have meant to write is that “NEVS’ majority shareholder was already involved with…” or something to that effect? Or were you discussing something owned by a guy called “Nev”?

          Your comment also seemed to insinuate that the average Saab fan is out of touch with reality and that moving R&D and production to China is inevitable.

          If that was the plan from day one, what is possibly gained by hiding that plan? It is my belief that the receivers sold the bankruptcy estate to the highest bidder — regardless of future plans. Wasting time on negotiating a licensing agreement for a name that can’t be used in case production is moved away from Sweden, seems unlikely.

          Yes, things could really go tits-up before long (I assume that to always be the case), but I don’t see any reason to believe that outsourcing is on NEVS’ agenda for the foreseeable future. It is a move that incurs some penalties.

          • Rune,,, doesn’t change the points I made the principles of Nevs were already going to build EV’s for China and is a Chinese company. you were debating that to be fact… and implying Nevs was buying the plant to continue it Saab roots. The principles Of Nevs prior to the name were going forward regardless.

            You said: Speculate all you want, but worth pointing out that the S in ‘NEVS’ stands for ‘Sweden’. The company was formed in anticipation of the bankruptcy as I understand it.

            If you think because Nevs stands for National Electric Company of Sweden changes the direction of what I said your wrong and has absolutely no bearing on what I said.

            • Technically NEVS is a Swedish company, it is registered in Sweden. It is owned by a Chinese company and a Chinese governmental body, but this doesn’t make it a Chinese company. If we follow this kind of logic then Volvo is a Chinese company too, Lamborghini is a German company, Jeep is Italian and Nissan is French.
              I don’t think we can say that Jiang has been preparing to build EVs for China and the bankruptcy of SAAB just happened right in time for him to acquire some useful assets. Mattias Bergman has said that they’d been following the situation around SAAB long before the bankruptcy. Kai Johan Jiang has mentioned in an interview that he started focusing on SAAB around the time it was acquired by Spyker. So I assume he’s been having the idea of producing EVs for some time and has been looking at different possibilities and have found SAAB to be a good possibility. Then he built a team using his connections in Sweden and started working for acquiring SAAB and becoming an EV maker. So the current business plan of NEVS is build around SAAB. Probably if they had failed to acquire SAAB they would search for other possibilities and would have made another business plan. To say that they have had a developed business plan for producing cars for China and just squeezed SAAB into it just because there were some good assets available is naïve. The battery factory was built in 2012 or 2013 (don’t remember clearly right now), long after they’ve become interested in SAAB.

              • “Technically NEVS is a Swedish company, it is registered in Sweden. It is owned by a Chinese company and a Chinese governmental body, but this doesn’t make it a Chinese company. If we follow this kind of logic then Volvo is a Chinese company too, Lamborghini is a German company, Jeep is Italian and Nissan is French.” ABSOLUTLEY. All true. “Technically” is the key word here because make no mistake about it, the owners control the purse strings and make the most meaningful decisions. I don’t care what the name of the company is or where it was registered—-Volvo is a Chinese company for all intents and purposes. Ditto, Chrysler being Italian. When they were Daimler-Chrysler, the German influence was overwhelming—-the Germans owned Chrysler.

                • Yes, it is owned by Chinese and they say what to happen. And? American said what to happen with SAAB for quite some time. If some here have problems with SAAB not being Swedish, OK. It has not been for very long. If anyone here doesn’t trust the Chinese, OK. I just hope they don’t expect everyone not to trust them just because they are Chinese. By the way, we don’t know who “the Chinese” are. Some assume there are some people behind Kai Johan Jiang and he is only a smiling face. He may be just some very ambitious and capable businessman. We can assume whatever we want.

                  • Avelik: It’s not that I don’t trust the Chinese. Quite to the contrary, I buy tons of products made in China and happen to have great respect for China’s history and culture. The idea of a Chinese company taking over operations at Saab doesn’t bother me at all. What bothers me is THIS Chinese company—-who has upset me and quite a few others in the Saab community for reasons that have already been explained too many times. Suffice to say, if the Chinese company that now owns Saab has no plans to ever sell Saabs again in the U.S.—–or at least has no plans to sell them in the next 5-6 years, they’re of no use to me whatsoever. They are hollowing out Saab as we knew it. If I can’t buy one, I’m offended. Ditto for all the other countries who used to have Saab and love Saab and now won’t. It’s not about China, it’s about NEVS. I see zero evidence of any capable business people in this mix, zero, zilch, nada.

                    • You know, it has been said many times that Nevs will be coming to USA when there is a business case for them. Do you have a business case for them right now? And sentences like ‘’America is a big market’’, “People would buy good affordable cars’’, ‘’I know people that would buy the 9-3’’’are not business cases. When you have concrete facts and data, then you’ll have a business case. When you have numbers based on facts, surveys and statistics, when you say what cars, what models, with what specs and features, what price range, when you say what people to target, what number, what age, what education level, what income, when you calculate what resources will be needed to successfully bring cars to the market, when you have done all this and compare it with what they have in China, if then going to America would make more sense than to China, then you can go to them and tell them they are wrong. And explain why, with facts.
                      And don’t tell me they have to do this at once. They need a focus, no one does things at once. There are steps to be made, there is a reason why it is called ‘’business development’’ and not ‘’business revolution’’ or whatever else. And don’t tell me that because they are not going everywhere at once, they are small incapable and bad businessmen. Give me one example for a start up company that has built factories on 3 continents and has started to sell hundreds of thousands of cars on every of these continents in 2 years. No, forget about the two years. Tell me of a start up that has made these things simultaneously, not step by step, even for 10 years. Give me one example of a company that has started from almost scratch, has acquired a factory, has built two more on two different continents, has put them to work and have managed to produce and sell a few hundreds of thousands of cars on every of these continents. One example only. Kia and Hyundai that you like so much were already established on other markets before entering US. They have very long history of development before becoming what they are now. And it is absolutely the same for every company out there. There is no fast lane to becoming huge.
                      So, if you think their first step should be in USA and not in China, please base such an assertion on facts, real facts and data. Before you do so, all you say is just the empty talking of a fan who is not getting what he wants and is upset about it, all you say does not have real life meaning.
                      There is one thing you are right about. They are not managing the communication with the fans very well (no, don’t say they are not managing it at all, they’ve given interviews to SU and visited Festivals). I understand that you want them to talk more to the fans. But have you talked to them? You could write them an email, or a letter, or both. Explain them what would you like to hear from them. Tell them you wanna talk with them. You have some marketing and public relations experience, right? Then you should have some ideas to offer them. Tell them what you think they should do to keep the fans interested. Communicate directly with them. Have you done anything like that? If yes, what happened? If no, why don’t you try?
                      P.S. One more remark. The fact that you have problems with THIS company for whatever reasons and are upset by THIS company does not give you ANY right to claim things about it that you cannot prove with facts. Do you have any facts to prove that THIS company is going to move the production to China? Do you have any facts to prove that THIS company WILL NOT build cars worth of the name SAAB? Do you have any facts to prove that THIS company WILL NEVER sell cars in USA? If you have ANY facts to prove any of these claims, please step ahead and share them with us. If you don’t, please STOP making such claims. Otherwise, all you say is just words by an upset person with no relevance.

                    • They say laughing adds years to person’s life. I’ll live to 100 now thanks to this one: “They’ve given interviews to SU and visited Festivals.” Thanks for the extended lifespan.
                      What incredible outreach to the Saab world—-visiting festivals. Any plans to do the car show circuit? How about interviews with car magazines and other automotive press? Nothing to say yet? Wow. As for making a case for them to come to the U.S., gee, I don’t know. Maybe they can call Mercedes, Audi, Lexus, Infiniti, Acura (Toyota, Nissan, Honda), Subaru, Volkswagen…those parties might be able to tell them the path to profits in North America. I didn’t say they need to simutaneously sell in China and the U.S. at the outset (though walking and chewing gum would be a nice skill set). They should already have made a decision to enter North America and be preparing for it—-early preparations, including talking to former dealers, dealers, owners, etc. What did Tesla start with? Not with a factory and not with a recognizable name either. But there was a vision at least. Oh, and nobody here is giving facts of any consequence when it comes to discussing Saab’s future. There are no facts—-just conjecture. Saab isn’t talking, so facts are in short supply. Oh, and I wrote in an entry two weeks ago that I would expect their first EV to be built in the Fall of 2014, not “early 2014” as has been the gospel. We’ll see where the facts fall on that one.

                    • Angelo, I’m really happy I made you laugh, really.
                      They don’t need to ask Mercedes, Audi, BMW or whoever else about how to make money. I suppose they’ve made the calculations needed to answer this question. You haven’t. When you have numbers to show that they can make money in the US, or at least not lose huge amount of money, with the current 9-3, now, this year, then you can say they are bad businessmen with no vision. Until then you are talking nonsense.
                      You are admitting that you don’t have facts, but this does not stop you from claiming what they WILL do in the future. Not saying what you THINK they’ll do, but what they will. You have claimed that they WILL move production to China and nothing is going to stop them. You have claimed that they WILL NEVER sell cars in USA. It is perfectly OK to suppose, assume, and speculate about things we don’t have facts about. But you have CLAIMED things about them as if they are absolute facts and on the base of these claims you’ve proclaimed them to be bad businessmen with no vision. Are you seriously saying you don’t see any problems here? Or you’re gonna tell me that because there is a chance that you’ll guess correctly when their first EV will be build, you can foresee every move of theirs? Seriously?
                      How do you know they haven’t made early preparations? So you assume that if you don’t know that they’ve made a decision to enter the US market, they haven’t? You don’t know everything. I’m not saying they have. I don’t know. But the fact we don’t know things does not necessarily mean things are not happening. I’m not telling you to believe they are happening, just have the maturity to admit you don’t know things.
                      You think that if they are preparing to enter USA they have to tell you, right? So in the end it is again a problem of communication. Why didn’t you answer my question about your communication with them? Have you had any communication with them? Direct communication. Or you prefer to laugh at them through comment on SU? So you have problems with them communicating with the SAAB community through SU, but you are refusing to talk to them directly. They have a customer relation officer, you know. You are a customer. And you’re not alone. So why don’t you all write to them and tell them what you want.
                      You know, I made a lot of remarks in my comment but you picked only some small thing about NEVS visiting festivals and made fun of it. You didn’t show any understanding of what I said about your use of facts. I think it’s sad. At least you’ve prolonged your life.

                  • And you bring up Americans/GM having owned Saab. Exactly. And we all talked about how compromises were made under American owners—-that stole from the DNA of the brand. But at least we could still buy the cars.

                    • So what do you say, the only way to keep the DNA is by having Swedish owners? I don’t remember any Swedish companies bidding for SAAB. The only time SAAB was close to being acquired by Swedish was when von Koenigsegg tried to buy it but for a lot of reasons he didn’t. And even then the big money was coming from non-Swedish players.

                    • Absolutely the only way to keep Swedish DNA (pure) is/was with Swedish owners. That doesn’t mean other owners can’t build great cars (The Italians have improved things at Chrysler in a big way, at least as far as interiors go.), but make no mistake who’s controlling the purse. In this case, it’s not the fact that we have Chinese owners that’s troubling. I think Chinese owners could be remarkably good—better than GM. The problem is that their plan is to build cars for the Chinese market, EVs, as their focus. Saab as we know it is gone at this time. Buried? Maybe. They can still be dug up, but in time, that window can close too.

                    • reply to Avelik. You’re absolutely right that it takes time to grow a business from scratch. But the fact remains, when NEVS bought Saab from the trustees, it wasn’t exactly like starting a company from scratch. It was more like someone moving into a furnished house with food on the table where the former inhabitants had mysteriously disappeared. They bought a fully functioning factory that basically just had the lights turned off, and apparently it included a substantial trove of parts. The bought a company that had a loyal customer base. They bought a company that had a parts distribution system,. They bought a company that had a network of good dealers. They bought a company that has various SOPs for shipping, ordering, payroll, and all the myriad things that a new company has to invent from scratch. And they bought a company where many of the important key people and workers were living almost on their doorstop; many still not employed. What they didn’t have was arrangements with suppliers who were nervous having been burnt by GM and SWAN. But money could have solved this. It really seems to me at least, they could have in a few months at most, made the deals and cranked up the factory to produce 9-3s which had already passed regulations in the US. They could have pushed to do whatever was necessary to engineer changes to the front that would pass Euro pedestrian regulations. They didn’t.

                      They had a different vision, and for many of us, that’s the death knell of Saab as we know it. But to say, they couldn’t have come back quickly, is, I think, not true.

                    • Only one thing to add Hugh—it was indeed more challenging for NEVS than just just turn the lights on and start making cars again. They had a lot to do to get 9-3s back in production. But aside from that, you nailed this post—-home run/grand slam. The reason they aren’t exporting 9-3s to the U.S./Canada and selling them in Sweden and other parts of Europe isn’t because they can’t by this time—-it’s because it’s not their vision. We’ll just have to wait and see (what else, right) if their vision of luxury EVs for China is going to put them on top or be the final blow to KO Saab once and for all.

                    • I Imagine a large part of why they didn’t just keep on sending cars they couldn’t sell to the US was – oh.. perhaps that was it?

                      When they have a product they can sell in the US and elsewhere, I do hope they return asap. But until that time, why continue with a failed business model?

                    • Hughw, I haven’t said they have started from scratch, I said ‘’almost from scratch’’. Yes, they have acquired a lot of useful assets, but they are really not a huge percent of what is needed to run a company. They are important thing, but are not making NEVS any less start up. Didn’t Tesla also buy a ready-made factory? Or I’m mistaken? If they have that didn’t make them any less start up.
                      The supply chain wasn’t there. To say that the suppliers where there waiting to give parts to NEVS is not true. Some of them were. Some of them wouldn’t want to work with NEVS. Some of them didn’t exist anymore. So it wasn’t an easy task to rebuild the supply chain. I don’t think they could have managed to do it faster than they have. Even if it was possible it wouldn’t be more than a couple of months faster. I don’t see any reason to believe that it took them the time it took them because they were lazy or incapable.
                      They could not produce 9-3s that have passed the regulations because NEVS is a new company. All the previous certifications were made by SAAB Automobile AB, not NEVS AB, so they would have to make the certifications again. It has been said many times. That’s the rules.
                      So let someone here make the calculations. What money would be needed to support the system, pass all the certifications, sell the cars. How much money would they lose? Or if someone thinks the would earn money, how much again? But neither of the companies Angelo is mentioning all the time are not having 1 model only. So how much? 700 000 million? 1.3 billion? 3.5 billion? Before having real numbers it is useless to say f it’s doable or not. If the loss is small then they should’ve done it (be doing it). If the loss is huge, I don’t think we have the right to say that they are out of their minds for not doing it.

                    • And a thing about the brand DNA, Angelo. Why do you think a Swedish company couldn’t deviate from the brand DNA? Are all Swedish acting the same way? Volvo and SAAB are both Swedish (at least have been created by Swedish and have been owned by Swedish for very long), but they are different. They share a lot, but have many differences nevertheless, they don’t have the same DNA. If the target market determines, what will stop a Swedish company from deviating from the brand DNA if the market the company targets demands that? And why do you think it is certain that a non-Swedish company will not keep the DNA of the brand ‘’pure’’? Swedish market is too small, so whoever is the owner, it will target other markets. You suggest that the owner will put greater emphasis on the market it is coming from, therefore a Swedish owner would put more emphasis on the ‘’Swedishness’’ and not on the ‘’Chineseness’’, ‘’Americanness’’, ‘’Europeanness’’, ‘’Indianness’’ or whatever other ‘’ness’’ is there? Possibly, but not necessary. So why is it absolutely needed to have Swedish owners to keep the brand DNA ‘’pure’’?

                    • If you believe that the cars themselves were the reason for slow sales or as you say, a failed business model, then you’re right, no need to come back. Me? I think the cars were the least of the problem in why Saab failed. There are a lot of other moving parts in a business plan and they had a lot of those wrong. Time will tell if selling Saab electric cars in China is the path to success.

                    • I did not say the cars were the reason for the failure and I did not say they don’t need to come back. Neither did i say selling electric cars in China is a way to success. What i say is that there is no reason to say that they could have come back successfully ”quickly”. There is no reason to say that they could have turn a losing system into profitable one ”quickly”. There is no reason to say they could have become profitable with the current 9-3 now, when they have failed having 3 models back then. There is no reason to demand that from them. That’s what I’m saying. If someone here thinks they could have done what I said above, please elaborate on that, but with facts and sound reasoning.

              • “They will, I’m sure, keep selling in various countries around the world, but if you think your demands for a $20K electric hatchback for the US are going to be heard and heeded, please think again.” I didn’t ask for that. I asked for a gas or diesel entry level hatchback—-25K, not 20. That’s more than double. But maybe not for this company.

              • I’ve read the interview. I don’t see how it changes what I said. Of course they have “been developing the technology around the batteries and battery management in Japan and China for quite a while”. As I said (no, as they have said) they have been preparing to buy SAAB for quite a while. You can’t start searching for battery tech after you’ve bought the assets. You don’t buy a factory and then go to Kjell ac Bergstrom or someone else and say: “Hi, do you know some battery manufacturer in the neighborhood, cuz we’re gonna make some EVs after all, you know”. This only says that they’ve made their preparations. It doesn’t in any sense show that they haven’t been preparing the tech for SAAB. Probably they’ve had plans B and C for the case they wouldn’t have managed to acquire the assets. That’s what any serious businessman would do, you can’t expect them to sit there and cry in case of failiure.
                If you draw your conclusions that they don’t care about the brand from the fact they haven’t discussed any “brand stuff” in the interview and haven’t said: “We’ve come to save SAAB and make it the greatest brand on Earth as it deserves to be”, OK. None of the bidders was there “to save the brand”. All of them had some plans and thought SAAB suites their plans. Some had better thought out plans, some worse. That’s it.

              • I think Swade is drawing some wrong conclusions or at least some conclusions that are not obvious from the very interview he’s made. “Engineering will primarily come from Japan and China.” That was not said anywhere in the interview. Mikael said very clearly what the Japanese and Chinese engineering will be about – battery tech and light-weight materials. “Swedish vehicle design” to me doesn’t mean that some Swedes will draw the looks of some cars engineered in Dark Asia. To me it means that Swedish engineers will engineer vehicles using the batteries and materials developed in Asia. I don’t see anything wrong with that. The head of engineering department at NEVS is called Stig Nodin, not Masato Sato or Li Chenglong.

                • Avelilk: I found a different interview,, can’t find it, where it was said Nevs, purchased the plant and the timing was right for its Assets etc. The Saab name was not even discussed..

                  Besides that Nevs is targeting China. (market focus),, A country where Saab only sold 2,000 plus Vehicles from 2007-2011. There is fierce competition in China from other makers in addition to Chinese state makers.

                  VW, BMW, GM.etc. all fighting for a position in the EV segment.. The Chinese people don;t even want it, The government is pushing it. Beijing auto news.. pull it up.

                  So here we have Saab entering the Chinese market were they couldn’t literally sale before with a dated car in the premium segment.. OK.

                  If you think that Nev’s focus, target market is Previous Saab owners be my Guest.

                  Oh lets not forget They are a pure EV company.

                  It truly makes no sense. One thing we do know the Chinese Government is spending Billions in Subsidies for the EV movement something their people aren’t embracing. Hmm wonder who may also benefit from the push and the Billions being spent.

                  Check this out.

                  • I don’t know what interview you are referring to, but the fact is that we’ve been told many times that they’ve been interested in SAAB long before the bankruptcy, so I still don’t think you’ve proven what I said to be wrong.
                    I’ve never said anything about Nevs target market, nothing of the things I said had anything to do with discussing what Nevs target market is or should be. I made remarks on what you said about their interest for SAAB and the conclusions Swade has made about the way they will make cars. I think I made myself clear.

                • If Masato or Li is signing his check, he will design as Masato or Li directs. Also, in my comment, I typed “doable” but my spell check must have changed it to “double.”

                  • And the purpose of this comment is? Of course he will design and engineer according to what the company is trying to do, he is not going to make planes if the company is producing ships. I don’t see how the fact that he’s having non-Swedish bosses makes his engineering less Swedish. What I tried to say is that we don’t have any reasons to suggest engineering in Nevs will PRIMARILY come from Japan and China. Or you’re implying that the fact that the engineering task is given by a person called Masato or Li would make it impossible for Nodin to engineer a car that is worth of calling SAAB or “a piece of Swedish engineering’’? You don’t know that, you cannot possibly know that.

                    • The comment was to assert that the Chinese are in control of Saab, not the Swedish. The fact that they have a Swedish engineer doesn’t mean he won’t follow directives to make the car suitable in needs and taste for their primary market, China. That’s all I was saying. And the car will most definitely be worthy of being called Saab because the Chinese now own Saab. Swedish engineered for the Chinese market isn’t Swedish engineered for the Western market. I’m not saying better or worse, just different.

                    • Guesses are all we have TIm. I “guessed” on that post you responded to based on hearing that China is the focus. My assumption/guess is that if the company wants to sell cars and China is the focus, they’ll want to offer cars that people in China will like. Right now, they have the 9-3 to offer, which was already designed/built. When they put their own stamp on their first model that is really theirs, we’ll see if the traits of the car are more in line with what will be popular in China or in the West. Without real communication/renderings/substantive interviews—-guessing is the order of the day.

                    • You tend to assume a lot of stuff Angelo, and the sad thing is that you base most of what you write on what you assume rather than what you know! I know a lot more about NEVS than you can ever hope to imagine, a lot more than anyone and even more than NEVS would like me to know, but I dont write it here since not even I have the whole picture yet…

                    • Tim, you’re in good company because I don’t think NEVS has the whole picture yet either. In fact, I’m certain of that. If you know a lot about NEVS, please let me know this: Am I right that they won’t sell the electric 9-3 until late Summer/Early Fall, while we’ve been told it would be “early 2014?” Is my “guess” right on that, or is the gospel we’ve been reading for over a year right?

                    • We’ve been told that production would start early 2014 and it has already begun actually, but unlike the gasoline 9-3, the electric version needs a lot of certification, that should be completed before the summer. According to NEVS sales of the electric car to a pre-selected customer would start in a few months.

                    • Tim, I think what you wrote above is why some of us are a bit frustrated with not only NEVS but also you and SU. You constantly say that you know stuff that you can’t write about….that’s really bothers a lot of us. If you can’t write about it, perhaps it would be better if you just didn’t say anything at all. And if you have found out things through unofficial channels that NEVS doesn’t want made public, you really have no obligation to NEVS not to write about it. Part of being a good journalist, whether automotive or political or whatever, is to shine a light in dark places, to ferret out information that is hidden. And there’s way to write about things without compromising your sources. You often see articles where “a senior official” is attributed without naming the source. And Swade was quite skillful in navigating this difficult issue with his “Djup Struppe” sources. Thomas Jefferson, one of our revered founding fathers said it best. “An enlightened citizenry is indispensable for the proper functioning of a republic.” And perhaps more to the point, he said “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” And although, I have not a religious bone in my body, the bible says “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” At the end of the day, NEVS will be stronger for it.

                    • Hugh: He has to walk the line of delivering news we might find interesting without upsetting his sources to the point where he’ll never get any information from them again. That is not an easy thing for a journalist to balance, so I give Tim the benefit of the doubt that he knows what he can write and what he shouldn’t. My bigger concern is why NEVS would not want him to share what he knows? It’s crazy, unless what he knows is damaging to them in some way. All of this could easily be solved if NEVS themselves were more forthcoming with their vision, what they hope to accomplish with Saab—-serious conversations with current owners around the world about what Saab might be in the future. It would be nice if the owners were warmer and seemed genuinely interested in building on Saab’s following instead of destroying it.

                    • NEVS doesn’t know all that I know and they have never asked me not to share things, they know that I wont share things that could be damaging to the company… NEVS has never told us what to write or what not to write, they know that they have no authority to do that anyway.

                      Thanx for your support! =)

                    • I don’t agree with that. Your only obligation is to write what you feel like writing—-it’s a privately owned and managed website as far as I know—-you and the others can contribute whatever you want to. If it were my decision, I would say the obligation would be to tell the truth, whether it was flattering to Saab or damaging. I don’t think it’s good for SU’s credibility to operate under an obligation not to hurt the Saab brand. By that standard, if you knew there was going to be a bankruptcy—-but didn’t want to “damage” Muller’s Saab brand, so you masked it and tried to look on the bright side of things—-that could have caused people to go out and buy a new Saab, which in very short order, would have no warranty and an enormously diminished value. That’s why I think the obligation should be honesty, not protecting Saab. And let the chips fall where they may.

                    • I dont care if you agree with it or not, thats the policy we work by… and its been the policy of this website since it was first started back in 2007, remember this was long before I got involved in SU and its one of the core pillars this website stands on and if people dont trust us, then thats their problem, but I’ve got the visitor ratings to prove otherwise since we’re still the worlds biggest Saab website with many thousands of visitors each day… so regardless if people trust us or not, they keep coming back and thats proof enough that we’re still doing a good job and that people have faith in the things that we write!

                      And yes, this is a privately owned website

                      Just to give you a hint of how big this site actually is, we’ve had a bit over 27,3 million visits since 2007, that averages over 10k per day!

                    • Tim make no mistake buddy we know its not easy balancing everything… No matter what we want everything to work for the best,for you/,, But I feel we need to voice our opinions…

                    • You can voice your opinion all you want, but I don’t have to abide by them =)

                      We’ve got very few rules here at SU and trust me, its been many times that I’ve wanted to write stuff or disclose details where others have stopped me saying that it might not be good for the brand, even though it would generate a huge amount of visitors. But in the end thats what differs us from other website, we dont want to get tons of clicks to one single article, we want to maintain long lasting relationships with Saab and do whats good for the brand, and for the past 7 years, that concept has proven to be a good one! =)

                    • Tim; I think you’ve made it clear in the past that your vision for this site is a “Saab Fan website”. Understanding that, it puts this conversation in context.

                      I have been vilified in the past for espousing my opinions that were considered to be derogatory and negative. I did that only because I was under the misconception that this site was for a free and open exchange of ideas and opinions.
                      Now that I understand the primary mission here is to promote the brand and it’s success in a purely positive light, I keep my big mouth shut, and just read the “news” as its doled-out.

  12. I would gladly take it in its current state. Don’t care about infotainment – driving is the primary use of an automobile! If you want to listen to music, sit in your easy-chair with some good headphones on.
    There is still some proud (stubborn?) dealers here in New England in the U.S. who fly the SAAB logo and colors – even showing the NEVS 9-3 on their web sites. Let them bring in a few and see what the interest level is.

    • > driving is the primary use of an automobile! If you want to listen to music, sit in your easy-chair with some good headphones on.

      I spend on average 20 hours per week in my car, very often more than that. I want a good infotainment system.

      Don’t project your needs on others. Happy with an AM/FM radio with a crappy interface and no frills? Order it then. Those of us who are on the road a lot want something a bit better – and none of that “no highs no lows it must be BOSE” crap either.

      • “Don’t project your needs on others.”
        Who’s talking…? I am saying that I am happy with what’s there. If you want to shell out money for an infotainment system, go for it!

      • Agreed. If they want to offer electronic gadgets, high tech and the like, let them offer it—-make the base car more affordable and sans junk. If there are a lot of owners who want that stuff, they can buy overpriced packages to get it.

      • “Infotainment” as far as I can tell is not even a real word. It is certainly not in my Funk & Wagnalls.

        I’m on the road a lot and find that an AM/FM radio with tape player and/or CD player suits me just fine. (I have 8-track tape in the C900, cassette and CD in the 9000.) The last thing in the world that I want is the distraction of a TV screen in the middle of my dashboard that I have to figure out and diddle with to operate things.

        • Hey, JerseySaab –

          There is something to say about “yesterday’s technology” – as far as the ergonomics of some of the interfacing/controls for the driver, with a dedicated analog or selector/push button for the function.
          In my book a far better system than a digital display with menu selects where you have to take your eyes off the road to make a selection.
          “Back then” when you were used to a car, your hand would just find the button/dial and you knew what to do without looking at it.

          Nostalgia section: Do you have a “mechanical” radio where you pull out and push in your station select buttons to program them?

          • I don’t have a mechanical radio of that type in either of the Saabs. The C900 has an aftermarket Clarion 8-track AM/FM stereo, but no presets for the radio, you need to manually tune in stations. The 9000 has its original factory radio/cassette head unit with electronic tuning, plus the separate CD deck. I do have other, older vehicles equipped with mechanical pushbutton radios though. I’m fine with those as well, they’re easy and intuitive to use.

            When the factory radio in my 9000 died I could have installed a new aftermarket unit, but they all look like something out of a science fiction movie to me and could not play tapes. So I had my original radio refurbished, and it works great. (Being an old phart I have a lot of tapes and mainly wanted to retain the cassette player. I’ve just recently started using CDs in the last couple of years if that tells you how far behind the “infotainment” curve I tend to be. 🙂 )

  13. I hope that NEVS comes to the global market with a viable global car…I really do. At this point I’m going to stop holding my breath. If the ICE 9-3N gets more market attention than the EV car, will that mean NEVS goes in a new direction or even a parallel direction? It’s been said here many times that the market will dictate what the manufacturer will do. i doubt the deepest pockets will side step that eventuality…whatever it might be.


  14. Tim, these people are only saying these things due to the loud silent coming from NEVS. NEVS has given publicly no hope to Saab fans from north America, for that matter, most of the world. Remember we are only here because we are all Saab fans, and for no other reason. For even the diehards, patience is running thin. Selling a few Saabs in Sweden for the homey’s is not cutting it.

    • Nope, its not cutting it, but right now there is nothing else to do for NEVS. Think about it Chris, how much would you be willing to pay for a brand new 9-3 Aero from NEVS as it is right now, 30’000 USD?, thats about 10’000 too low compared to what it’ll cost NEVS to bring it to you. The sad truth is that due to the bankruptcy, Saab has been set back for at least 5-7 years compared to where it could have been had it not gone bankrupt.

      NEVS cant bring the 9-3 back to the US-Market because its simply too expensive for them, they need to go where the money is in order to rebuild the company once again. So why are they not making any promises on the US market? Simply because they dont know themselves if they can return or not, once they have a new product then it might be viable to return but until then, they wont make promises they cant keep!

  15. Tim: Your statement is ambiguous, Like you said you don’t have the whole picture yet, but yet you know more things than anyone, even more than Nev’s would like.

    Not sure what that means other then confusion of their direction (join the masses)… Why would Nev’s not like it.? what are the secrets you hold?

    My point is this, You are in a very precocious situation with all this. You have much riding on the Success of Nevs… The Saabs United forum, your dedication to Saab fans around the globe,etc. I get that.,, I am sure you want a positive out come. Sometimes when one has so much riding on something, we can become blinded, or at the very least overly optimistic about the direction of that thing that we’re holding onto. It becomes harder to look at things more objectionable.

    The problem is however, that Saabs United has been successful because of Saabs customers who have a Saab, or had one, and are looking to the future. That is why this forum exist.

    The situation as it stands,,,is changing,, The reality is many Saab fans wish Nevs/Saab well but have lost interest or have moved on.. Just search the web and it is voiced loudly that Nevs, has shown 0 interest to past customers ( they haven’t reached out) in a real sense. and on top of that .many feel they have very little chance of success with the current business model and even so, they will never see cars for years or ever..

    The third problem even if they see cars in 5-6 years they will be electric which the majority have no interest in purchasing.. Like I said many hope for their success but are no longer interactive in it.

    My final point,, make no mistake Nev’s knows this,,, The simple fact is it doesn’t matter to them, because it’s new era, a different focus,, New target market, and most importantly a EV company. This is where it is. You can’t deny that..if your truly objectionable.

    This forum is SAABS UNITED,,, In my opinion the few fans who still care enough, must voice their opinion as to what they want,, it may be in vain,, but if voices aren’t herd, the history of Saab as we knew it, is finished.. Every day that passes is one step closer to that reality.. Unless Nevs spells it out or deviates from their current direction its over for 90 percent of its past and current customer base,
    and maybe this forum.

    You will need to change gears and reach out to the EV movement and not so much the Saab base. You will be forced to,, if you want a larger following , maybe not a bad thing.

    If Nevs stays on the current path,, it doesn’t mean they won’t have success as a company within the EV market . I want to make that clear,, But SAAB as a whole will be lost for the most part… at least the old focal group.

    • Doug: I think you meant to say “objective” instead of objectionable. Except—-maybe “objectionable” is a better way to characterize how the Saab brand has been handled the past two years. A lot of the things the new owner could be doing to salvage the loyalties of enthusiasts don’t cost very much—-in fact, are practically free. All it would have taken is interviews and press releases giving us hope. I guess a functional website would cost a few bucks—-so little though, that if they can’t manage that, they shouldn’t have bid on the company. I guess it’s easy to conclude that if they won’t throw us some hope (for free) maybe they don’t want us to have any hope.

      • Angelo I made a few typo;s in that rant LOL…. I think Angelo you know why they haven’t… Why would they? New vision new focus group etc. They have nothing to say…We have been contending it .

        Al we can do is voice our opinions… I do feel bad for the Guys at Saab United… tough situation, . Saab means a lot to them. Precarious situation for Tim.

    • I assure you that my situation is nothing new, many of us at SU have known a lot more about Saab than the management wanted us to know, the reason is simple, people like to talk and people need someone whom they can trust to talk to, that just so happens to be me and a few others within SU.

      We early on gained the respect for keeping our mouths shut and not causing anything to damage the Saab brand with the information we knew and we could relay the right information to people at the right time by drawing the right conclusions, sure we weren’t always right but I doubt anyone is correct 100% of the time. Even so, we’ve gained equal trust within and outside people at NEVS which I appreciate a lot!

      Rest assured that I’m not blinded at all, I’m actually more pessimistic than most fans I encounter but I know enough to give these guys a chance and so far, most of the time, I like what they do.

      The simple fact is that NEVS cant do much about the fans, they’ve shown a lot of appreciation towards the fans, remember that their first ever public statements were made at the 2012 SaabsUnited Octoberfest! They didn’t go to a newspaper, they went to US! And who were the first ones who were allowed to show the first ever built NEVS 9-3, it was US! But there is a limit to what they can do for fans when they’ve got more or less nothing to sell… if people dont feel that they are doing a good job, then move on! What NEVS does isn’t going to change by people “bitching” on the internet about it. I’ve said it tons of times, they’ve got the keys to the place and they are paying for it, so we have to find our selves in what they are doing!… simple…

  16. @Angelo V . Avelik is totally right. What part dont you get about the economics (or uneconomics) of Saab selling 9-3’s in the USA? Just for your info – 9-3 sales numbers of the current model peaked in the US over a decade ago in 2003 (at 34075) ! By 2008 they had dropped to 15000, and by 2011, 3800. See a trend ?

    Dealers cant survive on that kind of volume. You cant advertise effectively, the monthly turn rate of cars isn’t enough to justify more than a handful (if that) of new cars on the lot at any given time. So you just fall off the radar.

    And furthermore – you are as loud a supporter of Saab as anyone – but I kind of doubt whether you would pay more than $20 – 25K for a new one (Because you have repeatedly mentioned that figure as a where they should be) At that level I guarantee you they would be losing bucketloads per vehicle. So where is the sense in that ?

    Many euro manufacturers don’t bring their entire range into the US, leaving many otherwise desirable cars unavailable to us. Why ? Because we all say we want x, y or z car…but then wont pay an economic price to make a business case for it.

    You see the same comments on VW forums (Scirocco) Audi forums (RS4, RS6 wagon, A1) And so on.

  17. “…sales of the electric car to a pre-selected customer would start in a few months.” Sales to a pre-selected customer??? Is this NEVS-Speak for “Not sure what, when or where, but this might sound okay, so let’s say it.”? It sounds like double-talk to me. If they’ve already started production of the EVs, it would be great to see a few photos, particularly of the interior/dash. If they’re proud of what they’re doing, they should upload that to their website.

  18. What you do here is highly appreciated by this 43 yr SAAB owner, Tim, but the constant blathering and pontification that’s allowed to occur by certain highly opinionated individual(s), has made visits here, except for the occasional important NEVS news flash, a complete waste of time. Sorry that SU has come to this.

    • RAnderson Could you explain the blathering, and pontification allowed by opinionated individuals is or what? Can you elaborate? Maybe voice your opinion as to the context of the discussions and why that is.

      • If the only thing printed here was the occasional important NEVS news flash, it wouldn’t be a website, it would be a match book. I don’t consider anyone here to be blathering and pontificating and that includes people who disagree with my point of view. I consider everyone’s opinions to be worth reading and considering. I don’t want anyone to be silenced, whether I agree with them or not.

  19. Joe: Tim (and the other administrators) have allowed discourse—-disagreement—-criticism of how the brand is being handled. I understand that they don’t want the site to devolve to being all negative viewpoints and constant questioning of Saab’s new owner. People seem to use the site as a resource for a lot of things that aren’t related to new Saabs by NEVS. There is club news, news about model cars and other things like sections on maintaining your Saab, etc. One thing I’ve noticed though, is that the volume of comments on any entry about NEVS far outweigh anything else posted here. A single entry about “the new Saab” business plan or production estimate will bring over 100 comments quickly. I think it’s natural/understandable that there is a lot of anxiety about all of this—-people who come to this site generally love their Saabs or love the brand. They want to be able to consider a new one in the future. That, coupled with the fact that the brand was/is known for turbocharged gas engines—-and now the plan is electric vehicles for China—-has led to a lot of skepticism and even anger. We express that in comments. On top of everything else, not hearing from the owner in a meaningful way throws gasoline on the fire. If we can’t discuss our feelings about the news or lack of it—-then the site will truly become a Saab tribute site, not a place for enthusiasts of the brand. I consider “the brand” to be evolving and current. If that can’t be discussed—-good, bad and ugly—-if all that’s allowed is happy/positive, I think it diminishes much of the function here, at least in my opinion. I do think we should be respectful, but at the same time, honest about how we see things unfolding.

Comments are closed.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.