finding the signal in an industry filled with noise
...until the revised interior is released.
(With most revisions, there’s a lot more upgraded than they release to the press so you can expect improved reliability and refinement as possible bonuses).
Before GM took over Saab was a company led by engineering. Drive a late 80s 900 or 9000 and you’ll see how little the marque has advanced since they’ve been forced to use parts designed for other, lesser cars (and in some cases entire cars).
Audi’s Roadjet concept hints at what the next A4 might look like – note the 9000 style hatch profile.
Given the revival of the wagon, it stands to reason that product planners are finally figuring out one of the reasons people gravitated towards the SUV in the first place: the cargo capacity of the ‘two-box’ shape.
Many of you may have observed that GM has a serious problem when it comes to managining its brands. This is especially true of companies it buys into. Wheras companies adopted by Ford tend to improve in quality (e.g. Volvo, Jaguar), GM tends to run the brands into the ground by forcing them to use existing components.
The result: the Trailblazer based Saab 9-7x and WRX based 9-2x. (Some have argued that Subaru and Saab have more in common than youd think – after all both companies have histories rooted in eccentric cars built by aircraft engineers. But while the 9-2x outhandles any Saab in history, you have to question why the 9-7x wasn’t based on the Tribeca. Perhaps a 9-2 based on a shortened version of the Legacy platform would have fared better in the marketplace…)
Anyone who’s driven a Subaru (or Porsche 911 or Boxster) can appreciate the way the flat engine enhances both ride and handling response, while the equal length halfshafts of the Symmetrical AWD layout benefits steering feel. Despite all this, Motor Trend’s Mike Connor reports in the Jan. ‘06 issue that GM’s descision to liquidate its 20% share in Subaru was in reponse to Subaru’s insistence that these singular distinctions be retained in future products.
One Motown analyst… slammed Fuji’s conviction that the boxer engines are an integral part of Subaru’s brand character, saing few U.S. Subaru buyers knw or care about what’s under the hood of their cars. Julst like all those Oldsmobile buyers who didn’t know or care when GM fitted their cars with Chevy engines…
We wonder if those at GM who were so insistent in platform sharing ever drove a Subaru. (If they did, perhaps GM would move towards flat-fours and sixes and away from overpowered, clumsy handling front wheel drivers).
In our eagerness to report on the mechanical changes to the Subaru line for ‘06, we failed to convey what gives us pause when considering the actual purchase of one (aside from the unavailability of stability control). In this write-up, Autocar’s Jaime Corstophine reminded us of one vintage Subaru characteristic that’s been lost:
something’s missing from the typical Impreza experience. The signature off-beat engine rumble is noticeably muted; a casualty of new equal-length manifolds fitted for better economy and emissions.
and the one that remains and keeps us from seeing the Impreza (or the Saab 9-2x for that matter) as a long-term satisfier…
when the driving is done cracks soon appear in its appeal… despite this latest update, the rest of the car is dated and outclassed. The cabin design, packaging, materials and finish are simply not good enough for a car at this price. The Impreza architecture is now five years old and the game has moved on. For Subaru, 2007 – when the all-new model is expected – can’t come soon enough.
Saab has just introduced a ‘new’ 9-5.
Unfortunately, now that Saab is a division of GM, new doesn’t mean what you’d expect.
In this case, “new” means new headlights, a new hood, new taillights and – if they’re feeling generous – perhaps even a new steering wheel (There are detail changes to suspension components but nothing more than a tweaking, really. The next complete redesign isn’t expected for another few years despite the fact that the car was outdated by the late 90s…)
This is actually quite a lot of newness for a GM product – the ‘all-new’ Monte Carlo coupe was only given a new nose…
The V6 isn’t terribly refined, though, and you certainly won’t rev it just for the sensual experience. Nor is it particularly characterful, a feature that has traditionally marked out Saab turbo units – it feels a bit too GM-corporate. And while its power and torque are impressive, there’s no disguising which wheels are driven as you’ll feel it through the steering wheel, especially on tight, twisting roads. Otherwise, the Saab’s handling is composed and well balanced, but just not as engaging and entertaining as the best.