[this oldie goes back a few years, when Saab’s seemingly endless series of crises first started]
It’s hard to look at this old Saab and not get choked up. And it’s not just because this once proud and spunky company is on the ropes. Old Saabs just have a way of stirring the emotions. This is obviously going to be a Saab story.
The first time I encountered a Saab in Austria fifty years ago, I literally choked as an accelerating Swedish tourist engulfed me in a cloud of acrid blue exhaust from his two-stroke 93. But I was seduced (forever) by the purity of line on that svelte fastback as it gradually disappeared in its smoke screen.
The gutsy way a bunch of underemployed aeronautical engineers came up with the original 92 is truly inspirational, even if they were heavily inspired by DKW in what was beneath that slippery skin.
Erik Carlsson’s ballsy victories in his red 96 over the big guys at Monte Carlo left me in awe.
And the vivid memories of time spent in my good friend’s identical 96 are sweet. But the “For Sale” sign on this one just makes me sad. Who could break up with a car like this? Waves of regret engulf me as I remember all the cars I sold and wish I hadn’t.
Enough emoting. Saab’s initial adoption of the two stroke engine was highly pragmatic: the tiny engine fit perfectly in front of the transaxle and its lightness engendered good handling. But original it wasn’t; the engine, drive train and the whole layout of the 92 was heavily cribbed from DKW, the mother of all zweitakter.
Two strokes engines may have been fairly common in Europe at the time, but they reeked of eccentricity stateside. Yet there were several 93s and 96s whose comings and goings I followed with interest after we moved to Iowa City in 1960. It was a university town, and Saab’s reputation as a college professor’s car was already well burnished. Curious, how did the same crowd that adopted these smoky cars as a badge of auto-intellectual superiority later become early Prius adopters? Atonement for prior sins?
In 1967, nascent environmental awareness (and the EPA) forced Saab to finally abandon the stinky two-stroke. Finding a suitable four-stroke to fit in the six-pack sized space where the little popcorn-popper had long resided was no small challenge. As luck would have it, Ford in Germany had an ultra-compact 60 degree V4; a Cologne V6 minus two cylinders. Forty years after this Saab’s V4 first coughed to life, Mustang and Explorer Cologne V6 were still rolling off that same transfer line. Ford certainly amortized this design well.
Whereas a 60 degree V6 has a fairly high degree of harmonic and firing balance, cutting off two cylinders makes a V4 sound and feel exactly like . . . a V6 with two dead cylinders. A rougher and less even-firing engine would be hard to invent. Ironic too, considering how exceptionally smooth the little two-stroke had been. There was a good reason DKW and Auto-Union used the 3=6 slogan for their 3 cylinder two-strokes: they had the same number of power impulses and the smooth running characteristics of an inline six.
Nevertheless, the lumpy V4 was a good fit in the 96. And, unlike the two-stroke, it had a lusty torque curve, good mileage, a clean exhaust, and kept the Saab eccentricity quotient intact. Now I’ve always thought that the NSU or Mazda rotary would have been the perfect successor. It would have been a glove fit, and a rotary’s smooth running and off-throttle popping sounds almost like a two-stroke. I know there’s some out there somewhere.
As Saab slides into its final coma (or next incarnation), it’s both sad and amusing to hear of the heroic efforts of its resuscitation. Saab was a tiny European car maker, which along with so many others of its size, was long overdue to slip into the annals of history. Saab only created two unique platforms in its entire sixty year history: the 92/93/96, and its replacement, the 99 (900) of 1969. It never once designed a truly original engine. And everything since the 900 was begged, borrowed or shared: platforms from Fiat (9000), Lancia (600), and GM. Forget “Born from Jets”; try “Born from obsolete GM platforms.”
GM’s purchase of Saab was phenomenally stupid. There was nothing to suggest that they could bring lasting health and success to this then already moribund and broke marque. History has been harsh to smaller premium brands and the “rescue” of such (NSU by VW, Rover by BMW, etc.) were abject failures. Lancia is on perpetual life support by mother Fiat. But GM’s hubris was limitless, and there’s a sucker born every minute. Speaking of which, can I interest you in a well-used, slightly rusty 1968 Saab 96? It’s only $850, and I’m sure it’s got lots of life in it yet, especially with its proximity to the Healing Rooms of Eugene. Maybe they should bring the whole company for a session. They have an opening; my Saab emotions are healed.
My parents had a ’67 2-stroke wagon. I have great memories of trips from Philly to Rhode Island and Maine in that car, filled with Christmas presents or camping gear respectively. I watched them build the World Trade Center twin towers from I95 and the back seat… Ours actually had the rear facing thrid row seat. I recall my parents taking me, my sister and probably 5 of my 1st grade friends to a Howard Johnson’s for my birthday (remember their fried clams and black raspberry ice cream?). The biggest problem with the car (before the transmission exploded) was the ignition. If they even said “rain” on the radio, it would sputter and quit. Standed us more than once on the NJTP in a cold rain around Thanksgiving.
My parents had some other interesting cars too: my mom’s first car was a Renault Dauphine which she promptly rolled (like most of them I susupect); when I was born the had an Amazon; the Saab was replaced (in a hurry) with a new 72 Vega wagon. After two engines they actually stuck with Chevy and bought a 77 Impala wagon so my then-15 year old frame would fit in the back seat for a cross-country trip. (The Club Wagon they also considered was too tall for the garage.)
Nothing to do with SAAB’s, but yeah, the black raspberry ice cream at HoJo’s was the best.
My dad would never have had anything to do with a quirky car like the SAAB. Nothing but plain vanilla Detroit for him (literally plain vanilla – for a long time he only got white cars – cooler in the summer saith he – and to this day I won’t even consider a white car). I did, however, know some families who liked quirky; one had a Mercedes diesel in the 60’s, one liked Citroen DS’s, and one liked SAAB’s.
The late great Jean Shepherd once noted that the purple, 2 stroke Saabs were very popular in Maine and described them as angry turnips buzzing around the Maine roads.
In the 60’s my family would go to the Friday night fish fry at Howard Johnsons at a service plaza on the Garden State Parkway. You could park in a lot separated from the GSP and walk around to the front of HoJos. I thought the fried clams were great and would usually order them.
Listened to Shep on WOR and read his Car and Driver columns. Also thought he was great at story telling.
I used to see these once in a while in the 60’s and 70’s around Tacoma. A custodian where my wife worked had two or three of them and was always willing to tell us his latest Saab story about his efforts to keep at least one of them running.
Saab was never a volume brand as GM found out,.by now anyone who ever wanted one has got it from the early Swedish Trabants to Ford [powered V4s there was a Triumph engine in there too Paul, or the latest Swedish Vauxhalls pick which one you like grab a donor for parts and join the other orphan brands.
Or is there a lifeboat from somewhere to keep Saab afloat?
Somebody will know about this Im pretty sure when Triumph built their V8 for the Stag they used 2 4banger Saabs on a common crank it worked but BL made a hash of it sending blocks with casting sand still in them down the line, the cooling problems are legendary but the 4banger was ok ironicly it was an old Triumph design Saab had rights to
.BL had the Rover V8 at this time but Triumph figured they could do it better…..good luck with that.
The engines used in the early Saab 99s were built by Triumph and yes it shares many parts and basic architecture with the Stag V8. Eventually Saab started to produce the engine in house and then evolved separately from the Triumph produced version and actually out lived it too.
Once the ’80s yuppie Saab 900 fad died, that was the end of the road for Saab, or you could see it from there. I remember having a conversation with a very car-knowledgeable colleague a few years ago (’06?), right after Rover Group had tanked once and for all, and we both commented on how Rover was once British Leyland, at one point the second-largest automaker in the world (for about five minutes), and now it was utterly gone, and we both thought it was not out of the question for GM to follow the same path. One of our prime examples was how GM had utterly screwed up Saab and demolished whatever potential it had. And lo, it has come to pass…
Nice for you to put this out the day the 9-4x is being delivered to customers!
Might I go meta for a moment?
1. CC and the love of platforms: clearly, SAAB isn’t a great platform generator. Does that make it a bad car company? Or perhaps they are just good coach builders. Yes, my NG900 is a GM car. But they did manage to make it nice enough inside — and different enough — to sell. When I see a new 9-3 Aero convertible, I don’t think Pontiac G6.
2. Constant tinkering. Sure, my NG engine wasn’t “designed” by SAAB. But I doubt those 1970s triumph guys thought it was going to be turned into a 300HP turbo charged pony.
3. Value: Yes, the new 9-3 were a bad value for money. Never been a fan. But both the new 9-5 and 9-4 are a good value.
Ironically, I think GM had it right. You look at where SAAB sales are best right now: Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinnati. In the industrial heartland, there was a market for a cheaper European BMW. But you lost the college professors, New England and Colorado. Killing the hatch, and not moving earlier to AWD were the two big strategic mispositioning for GM. I’m fully in the camp that GM didn’t understand SAAB, but there was a market for those cars.
The first time I saw one of these in the north St. Louis county area where I lived back in the sixties, I almost died laughing! My buddies and I called them “Slobs” or “Scabs”, depending on condition (we also had an early trademark on the word “scud” in defining an ugly girl, but that’s a different story!).
I laughed even harder when I discovered there were such engines as V4’s and straight 3’s. I always wanted to experience one of each and assess how they drove. All I had was occasionally driving, but mostly riding in my buddy’s 1959 Volvo PV544 – that was a hoot!
European design has always intrigued me, as I could never quite understand it. I suppose it’s a case of designing to your surroundings.
hm… while it fits your premise there Paul it’s not entirely accurate to write off the 9000 as based on a “begged or borrowed” FIAT platform. FIAT/Lancia/Alfa would never have developed the Type Four chassis as it emerged without significant input from Saab.
Fair enough, it might not have been mechanically unique (how many late 80s designs were after all?) but I think the 9000 deserves a little more recognition as a product of (some) Swedish engineering, than being dismissively lumped in with the 600 and the GMSaabs like that.
I am biased of course: I bought an ageing ’96 9000 CD a couple of years back as a cheap short-term stop-gap car, and unwittingly began one of the more rewarding and unexpected automotive love affairs of my life…
You’re right. I just added “and shared” to that line.
This piece was first written when GM decided to kill Saab in 2009, and in an editorial style. That’s why “emotion” is such a strong component. Other times I write more analytically. My two brain side are always in a tug of war! Maybe I should have an icon on each piece I write telling folks which side is predominant today.
Truth is, if I just did one style or the other, it would be a problem; I need the variety, and it keeps you guessing, or correcting me!
Triumph stopped with the Dolomite Sprint Saab kept at it and turboed their version and won that hp race Unfortunately for Triumph BMW stole the fast 4 door market from them in reliability Triumphs in good order can be fast comfortable cars but the wrenching is too much for most people to keep em good
Here’s an interesting tribute video to Saab’s history.
Set (appropriately) to Shine On You Crazy Diamond, by Pink Floyd.