 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Saab Cars / June 2004Saabs with Pontiac Parts? Is this the end?
I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB that it had before. Is this the beginning of the end? > I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that > quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB > that it had before. Is this the beginning of the end? I suspect that you will find GM parts in Saabs that are a few years old. This was one of the advantages of the GM takeover of Saab - common parts could be purchased in much larger volumes at a reduced cost. As long as the common parts are of good quality, this is not a problem. Even as long as 20 years ago, Volvo and Saab shared parts. I know the power lock solenoid was common because I replaced both in a 1982 Volvo and 1986 900. >> I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that >> quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB >> that it had before. Is this the beginning of the end? > > I suspect that you will find GM parts in Saabs that are a few years old. My classic 900 had a GM rack in it, and that predates any involvement with GM on a corporate level. Of course, it needed to be replaced... > This was one of the advantages of the GM takeover of Saab - common > parts could be purchased in much larger volumes at a reduced cost. As > long as the common parts are of good quality, this is not a problem. > Even as long as 20 years ago, Volvo and Saab shared parts. ...for values of "20" which equal "40", yes. > I know the > power lock solenoid was common because I replaced both in a 1982 Volvo > and 1986 900. I once took a voltage regulator out of a '73 Sonett parts car to use on a '77 BMW R100/7 motorcycle. Same part. The blower fan in the '60s Saabs and Volvos are the same, and I bet we could find heater valves, etc etc etc that overlap. I don't care if it has a GM part number, but if it has a GM part number and it's crap, then I'd be unhappy. Not sure what the deal is with the lug wrench someone mentioned here a month or so ago, I don't remember if that turned out to be OEM or something the dealer put in. > > Is this the beginning of the end? no, that was the NG 900 in 1994, > ... The blower fan in the '60s > Saabs and Volvos are the same, yes, both made by the Swedish Electrolux company, so it's no big surprise that they are the same > and I bet we could find heater valves, again yes, only the entry tube is at a 90 deg angle, otherwise the same (but made in UK) ------ MH '72 97 '77 96 '78 95 '79 96 '87 900T8 > My classic 900 had a GM rack in it, and that predates any involvement > with GM on a corporate level. Of course, it needed to be replaced... Damn, you beat me too it.  SignatureCarl Robson (The poster formerly known as Skodapilot) http://www.bouncing-czechs.com > I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that > quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB > that it had before. Is this the beginning of the end? I heard that Pontiac was going to use Saab's SAHRS system in one of their models (I don't remember which one). I don't know if it made it into a production car, but it was just called "Active Head Restraint System". The initial S for "Saab" was dropped from the Pontiac literature. >> I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that >> quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB >> that it had before. Is this the beginning of the end? > I heard that Pontiac was going to use Saab's SAHRS system in one of their > models (I don't remember which one). I don't know if it made it into a > production car, but it was just called "Active Head Restraint System". The > initial S for "Saab" was dropped from the Pontiac literature. LOL :) Personally, I don't see a big problem ... So long as we are talking about the odd component part, rather than entire engines. That said, GM/SAAB missed a golden opportunity when they released the new normally aspirated GM 1.8 engine SAAB *without* the bi-fuel option; something GM have been offering for Vauxhall (and presumably Opel) for at least a couple of years now ... Or would that've been unfair competition for SAAB's "eco-turbo" engines :) Paul 1989 900 Turbo S http://saab.go.dyndns.org/ > That said, GM/SAAB missed a golden opportunity when they released the > new normally aspirated GM 1.8 engine SAAB *without* the bi-fuel Saab shouldn't have released that engine in the first place. I find it's just to small for a car with a 1400 kg curb weight. This will mean either annoyingly short gears or massive shifting to keep the revs up. If they wanted a normally aspirated engine, why didn't they opt for a normally aspirated version of the same 2.0 engine used in the other models? I also think the 9-3 2.0 (the previous model) was underpowered. I owned one for about 2 years. In everyday driving my current 9-3 Tid is much quicker, without having to floor it everytime you want to accellerate. Mark >> That said, GM/SAAB missed a golden opportunity when they released the >> new normally aspirated GM 1.8 engine SAAB *without* the bi-fuel [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If they wanted a normally aspirated engine, why didn't they opt for a > normally aspirated version of the same 2.0 engine used in the other models? Oh, without doubt it should not have been used in a SAAB. SAAB themselves have made perfectly adequate normally aspirated variations of their B201,B202 and B204 engines. The old normally aspirated B201 was perfectly capable of pulling the classic 900 around and IMO would easily out-run one of the late classic 900 LPT models. The normally aspirated GM 900s were not especially slow either. But ... 120 BHP on cars that heavy nowadays just doesn't cut it, so I kind of understand your point. GM/SAAB politics aside - the decision was made and an established GM engine was used. Since there is a bi-fuel variant of that engine, it seemed idiotic not to at least offer that as an option; especially for a car brand that has made such a fuss about its "eco" power engines. A missed opportunity, more for SAAB who could have used it to gauge the market for their own bi-fuel offerings. > I also think the 9-3 2.0 (the previous model) was underpowered. I owned one > for about 2 years. In everyday driving my current 9-3 Tid is much quicker, > without having to floor it everytime you want to accellerate. You'll need to enlighten me - was the 9-3 offered as a non-turbo? Presumably that would have been one of the older GM 900 engines. Also, where did the TiD engine come from? Which other cars is that one used in? Paul 1989 900 Turbo S http://saab.go.dyndns.org/ > > I also think the 9-3 2.0 (the previous model) was underpowered. I owned one > > for about 2 years. In everyday driving my current 9-3 Tid is much quicker, > > without having to floor it everytime you want to accellerate. > You'll need to enlighten me - was the 9-3 offered as a non-turbo? Presumably > that would have been one of the older GM 900 engines. Also, where did the > TiD engine come from? Which other cars is that one used in? Nope, the 9-3 is only turbo-powered. The TiD-engine is also an Opel engine. It's a crappy engine and Saab has had a lot of probs with it - like with the 3,0 V6 Opel engine. That's the reason Saab opted for the Isuzu 3,0 V6 diesel engine for the 9-5 and now the 1,9 JTD Alfa-Romeo diesel for the 9-3 - with 120 Bhp and 150 Bhp. Cheers! > Nope, the 9-3 is only turbo-powered. No. For the first model years the 9-3 was also sold in some markets with the 150hp 2.0i engine. SignatureG?ran Larsson http://www.mitt-eget.com/saab/ > If they wanted a normally aspirated engine, why didn't they opt for a > normally aspirated version of the same 2.0 engine used in the other models? Saab didn't want a N/A engine, they wanted a CHEAP engine. Just removing the turbo does not make the engine much cheaper. SignatureG?ran Larsson http://www.mitt-eget.com/saab/ >> I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that >> quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >production car, but it was just called "Active Head Restraint System". The >initial S for "Saab" was dropped from the Pontiac literature. How much are Pontiacs influenced by European GM models? In the late 1980s/early 1990s there was a Pontiac Le Mans (if I remember rightly) which was essentially the Astra of the same period adapted for the US. Around the same time I remember renting a Pontiac in Canada (can't remember the model) which seemed to be based on the European model sold in the mid-to-late 1980s as a Cavalier in the UK (Opel Ascona in other European countries). So if there are parts in common between Saabs and Pontiacs it's most likely a sign of them both being based on Opel/Vauxhall models Martin > >> I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that > >> quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Martin We had a Pontiac Le Mans over here for a few years that was a Korean built car IIRC. It was not a success!! SignatureRichard Sutherland-Smith 19 Webb Road, Wanganui New Zealand > > >> I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that > > >> quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > We had a Pontiac Le Mans over here for a few years that was a Korean > built car IIRC. It was not a success!! The US Pontiac Le Mans was also built in Korea (so it probably was the same car) and was equally unsuccessful, primarily because of poor build quality and reliability, IIRC. Walt Kienzle > I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that > quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB > that it had before. Is this the beginning of the end? I have a similar question, so I thought I'd post it in this thread. I've owned two SAABs in my life - an early 80s 900 8-valve Turbo, and an 1986 9000 Turbo. Both were excellent, excellent cars, with the 900 giving me over 300K stress free miles and the 9000 close to it. I'm currently driving a TDI Volkswagen, which, although nice enough, just has me yearning for a SAAB again. Here's the thing - I've been looking online at a couple of 1995 900 Turbo convertibles. The one thing I can't seem to figure out on my own is - what would I be getting if I bought one of these? Specifically - who made the engines? Are they similar to the old B series engines in my other cars? What about the transmission, suspension, brakes, and other important parts? I'm not necessarily against GM products, but before I part with my hard earned money, I want to make sure I'm not buying a Saturn with nicer trim. If the mid 90's 900s aren't SAABs as I remember them to be, I'll probably just stay with my diesel VW. I've tried researching this on my own, but I can't find the information I need. If anyone could help me out or point me to a good source of data, I'd appreciate it. Thanks! Rob Snyder > Here's the thing - I've been looking online at a couple of 1995 900 Turbo > convertibles. The one thing I can't seem to figure out on my own is - what [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > engines in my other cars? What about the transmission, suspension, brakes, > and other important parts? The engines are pure Saab engines (petrol). No probs there. I would however get af 9-3 instead. It has a much stiffer body, which means that the car has less flexing. Cheers! This is from the NY Times and offers some clues as to what your new car is made of: For Saab, Some See the Beginning of the End. Others See the Middle May 24, 2004 By JAMIE LINCOLN KITMAN Saab loyalists have predicted the worst ever since General Motors bought its initial 50 percent stake in the Swedish automaker, for $500 million, in 1990. But an announcement last week by Saab Cars USA - that it would relocate its home office from Norcross, Ga., to G.M.?s world headquarters in the Renaissance Center in Detroit ? was seen as the final bit of proof that the odd little automaker, an upstart not so long ago, has indeed been integrated into the world?s largest industrial company. G.M. did not complete its financial takeover of Saab until 2000, but longtime fans of the brand ? known for its early adoption of front-wheel drive, innovations in turbocharging and its longstanding commitment to air quality and safety ? started grumbling loudly when the company?s first product under G.M. ownership, the Saab 900 of 1994, made its debut. Based heavily on the Opel Vectra, the 900 handled clumsily, suffered alarming quality lapses and was later reported to have done poorly in Swedish crash testing. A freshening for the 1999 model year was said to incorporate more than 1,300 improvements - reflecting, critics said, a car that needed a lot of improvement. The 9-5, also introduced for that year and still in production today, was based on Opel underpinnings, too, but was less underbaked and better received, though it, too, has yet to become a significant object of Saab aficionados? desire. Among other turnoffs, it was the first Saab to offer a V-6 engine, a lightly re-engineered version of an Opel power plant that seemed rather less sophisticated than Saab?s trademark turbo four-cylinders. Like all post-G.M. Saabs, the 9-5 retained the company?s signature center-console placement of its ignition switch. Naysayers wonder if that minor character trait has become the marque?s sole distinguishing characteristic in the eyes of Saab?s new masters. While the ignition switches all remain on the consoles, the proof of Saab?s lost independence has come in waves. In 2002, Debra Kelly-Ennis was named president of Saab?s American operations. With just three years? experience in the car business (most of it at G.M.?s moribund Oldsmobile division, where she was charged with turning out the lights), she had little prior exposure to the Saab culture. Far more worrisome to the keepers of the faith, last year G.M. laid off 1,300 engineers and designers at Saab?s world headquarters in Trolhattan, Sweden, effectively eliminating the company?s in-house ability to engineer a car. And just recently, Saab?s head of design, a rising star named Michael Mauer, quit to work for Porsche. The inevitability of the mass firing in Sweden can be understood by reference to Saab?s most recent product. A new 9-3 released last year was largely designed by Opel. It shares G.M.?s Epsilon platform with the Pontiac G6 and the Chevy Malibu, as well as the newest Opel Vectra and a Saturn model yet to come. The new 9-3 sedan is a conventional three-box design, losing Saab?s distinctive and roomy hatchback configuration. Also, the car?s American-German engineering has chafed some loyalists, though in fairness not nearly so much as the two newest Saabs, the 9-2X and 9-7X. The former is a lightly retouched, duller handling and slightly more expensive version of Subaru?s subcompact Impreza WRX sedan and wagon, built for Saab in Japan by Subaru (of which G.M. owns 20 percent). Authenticity issues aside, the turbocharged, all-wheel-drive WRX is, at least, the sort of car that Saab might have built today if it had only received enough financing in the 1990?s. Like the rally-winning Saab 96?s of the 1960?s, the 9-2X wrings maximum advantage from being a light car with a small engine and loads of grip. The 9-7X, by contrast, is a lightly restyled Chevrolet TrailBlazer built in Ohio. In its bulk and its cumbersome ways, with its optional V-8 engine?s thirst and heavy carbon-dioxide emissions, it is the very antithesis of the Saab ethos. (But, hey, check out the ignition hardware in the center console.) A former Saab executive who was at the company when General Motors first took over has suggested that Saab?s failure to retain its identity is not so much the fault of G.M. as of the Wallenberg family. The former majority owners of Saab, the Wallenbergs agreed to sell G.M a half interest with the clear understanding that they and their minions would be abdicating any meaningful further role in Saab?s future. ?When they sold it, they should have insisted on input, using their executives and remaining true to the company?s ideals,? this executive said. ?But they rolled over and said, ?You run it.? G.M.?s got its problems, but it?s the Swedes? fault. They gave away their heritage. General Motors is just doing what they know how to do, the way they know how to do it.? The former Saab executive added that a ?powerful industry watcher? told him at the time: ? ?You know what a Ghia badge looks like on the side of a Ford? That?s what?s going to happen to Saab.? I?ve carried that thought for almost the last 15 years and I?m sorry to have to say, at the end of the day, he was right.? http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/24/automobiles/24dt-autolog.html?ex=1086770366&ei =1&en=df22385b2266b03e --------------------------------- Get Home Delivery of The New York Times Newspaper. Imagine reading The New York Times any time & anywhere you like! Leisurely catch up on events & expand your horizons. Enjoy now for 50% off Home Delivery! Click here: http://homedelivery.nytimes.com/HDS/SubscriptionT1.do?mode=SubscriptionT1&Extern alMediaCode=W24AF HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company > The 9-5, also introduced for that year and still in > production today, was based on Opel underpinnings, too, but [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Opel power plant that seemed rather less sophisticated than > Saab's trademark turbo four-cylinders. Wrong. There's was already a V6-engine in the later 9000 models. Cheers! >> I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that >> quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > >Rob Snyder For what it's worth, I just purchased a 97 900s 5-dr with a blown engine (the owner didn't know oil needs changing.... 117,000 miles, (1) spun bearing/wiped crank. The engine is definitely the big?(2.3L) brother of my '86 900s(2.0L) non-turbo. The blocks/internals could interchange if the transmission wasn't moved :-). Trans is a European design. Axles/wheel brngs are similar. The body "seals" are non-existant (hatch gasket & windshield to cowl seal are jokes... Thanks GM.....) The headliner appears that it will STAY UP!!!!! Electricals look good. It isn't a Saab Quality Vehicle though. SignatureGreg using Agent 1.93/32.576 Opera 7.50 3778 & news.individual.net for sale: Apple//,Auto Parts/Equip/Manuals: http://pages.cthome.net/geardoc36 > I read recently that new saabs are going to contain pontiac parts, that > quality is declining and that GM isn't maintaining the integrity of SAAB > that it had before. Is this the beginning of the end? Pop the hood of a recent Saab and note the big ol GM stamped into the firewall. <shudder> TBerk |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.