 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Saab Cars / June 2005Maintain Your Identity - Saab
Has anyone seen this site yet? Saab - Maintain Your Identity http://www.maintainyouridentity.net/ The video clips are really good! I did notice that many if not most of the videos seemed to come from the East Coast. SaabGuy > Has anyone seen this site yet? I love to sing and dance in my car?? I love my Saab because it's 15 years old and isn't covered in rust... > > Has anyone seen this site yet? > > I love to sing and dance in my car?? > > I love my Saab because it's 15 years old and isn't covered in rust... Nasty Bob, That is good to hear! However, we're not the best ones that should hear it, it will be those in the general public and Saab Cars Inc. Can you please make a video of you and/or a photo of you and your Saab? - Ryan > Has anyone seen this site yet? > > Saab - Maintain Your Identity > > http://www.maintainyouridentity.net/ That is the lamest attempt at viral marketing I've seen this year. Moreover, it made me really sad. This is really what it has come down to. "Buy a Saab because Saabs are different" - no longer "Buy a Saab because Saabs are good". The irony is there is far less differentiation now than there was before, when they were good...  SignatureGrunff > > Has anyone seen this site yet? > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > because Saabs are good". The irony is there is far less differentiation > now than there was before, when they were good... To be fair, Saabs always have been *different*. Quirky, interesting etc... You're simply saying they're not good anymore ? Graham > To be fair, Saabs always have been *different*. Quirky, interesting etc... Yes, but it's always been different /for a practical reason/. Many of the innovations were either safety or performance led. It seems now the spin is that you should buy a Saab because they're different, with "being different" as an end in itself, not just a result of practical engineering decisions that make the car better. > You're simply saying they're not good anymore ? There's more to what I'm saying than just that - 'good' is a relative term. SignatureGrunff > > Has anyone seen this site yet? > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > because Saabs are good". The irony is there is far less differentiation > now than there was before, when they were good... Grunff, What years do you think were the good years? It seems like everyone I talk to had different opinions. Such as the Stroker groups, as those were the only REAL last SAABS or the V4s were the only last SAABS, or the 1980s. SaabGuy > What years do you think were the good years? They ended when the C900 died. Before that, all good. The 9000 Aero helped, but they even had to give that the bum's rush in the end. Signature"Sorry Sir, the meatballs are Orf" The poster formerly known as Skodapilot. http://www.bouncing-czechs.com > > What years do you think were the good years? > > > They ended when the C900 died. > Before that, all good. > The 9000 Aero helped, but they even had to give that the bum's rush in > the end. It is sad that they had to END the 9000 altogether. SaabGuy >> > What years do you think were the good years? >> > >> They ended when the C900 died. >> Before that, all good. >> The 9000 Aero helped, but they even had to give that the bum's rush in >> the end. >It is sad that they had to END the 9000 altogether. The 9000 isn't a GM design, so GM probably don't want to keep stuff that they can't claim 100 percent ownership over the design of since that would allow a 'hole' in their oil company prop-up masterplan for other manufacturers to exploit down the track. 8-) Craig. SignatureCraig's Saab C900 Page --> http://lios.apana.org.au/~c900 Sydney, NSW Australia Craig's Saab C900 Workshop -- For all Saab C900 Enthusiasts world-wide! http://www.saab900classic.net http://www.saab900.org c900@lios.apana.org.au Come and explore our site, and check out our web-forums, mailing list, etc. > oil company prop-up masterplan Could you elaborate on that please? It is interesting :) SaabGuy >> oil company prop-up masterplan >Could you elaborate on that please? It is interesting :) Basically GM, being a large multi-national car company, has a vested interest in it's product because it supports the large multi-national oil companies since both depend on each other for continuing growth and development of the auto business. I don't quite know how Saab is positioned in this, but since Saab is not a prime GM product in terms of sales volume, it might not factor in like the US domestic car brands under the GM banner no doubt would. Craig. SignatureCraig's Saab C900 Page --> http://lios.apana.org.au/~c900 Sydney, NSW Australia Craig's Saab C900 Workshop -- For all Saab C900 Enthusiasts world-wide! http://www.saab900classic.net http://www.saab900.org c900@lios.apana.org.au Come and explore our site, and check out our web-forums, mailing list, etc. > Basically GM, being a large multi-national car company, has a vested > interest in it's product because it supports the large multi-national oil > companies since both depend on each other for continuing growth and > development of the auto business. Huh? Given GM (not to mention virtually every other car company) has spent billions/milliards of $ USDs researching/developing alternative-fuel vehicles, I would hardly say they are planning a longterm future with petroleum based fuels. If car companies want to sell cars to the 75% of the world's population who do not currently own vehicles do you think that they actually think they can do it purely by selling them fossil-fuel powered vehicles? For them, "continuing growth" means moving _away_ from oil-dependent vehicles. > I don't quite know how Saab is positioned in this, but since Saab is not a > prime GM product in terms of sales volume, it might not factor in like the > US domestic car brands under the GM banner no doubt would. Google: saab biofuel - tex > What years do you think were the good years? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > or the V4s were the only last SAABS, or the 1980s. You're of course correct in that everyone will have their own take on this. My personal opinion is that the C900 was the last real Saab. The 9k was a pretty good car - I enjoyed owning one for several years, but it could very easily have been another make. The C900 was the last car produced by Saab which incorporated a long list of design features aimed at making the driver's life better. This was done with little regard for convention - the designers did what they did because they believed it was the right thing to do, just as they had on the 99, the 96, and all the previous models. Today's lineup leaves me distinctly unimpressed. With the single exception of turbocharging, the Saab range is really very close to the lineup offered by other mid-range euro brands. There's nothing about the way they are built, or the way the drive, that makes me want to own one. SignatureGrunff >> What years do you think were the good years? It seems like everyone I >> talk to had different opinions. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > offered by other mid-range euro brands. There's nothing about the way they > are built, or the way the drive, that makes me want to own one. Ah the purists... "There's never been a better train than the Flying Scotsman" "The spitfire was the last true fighter plane" "The supermarket has killed the corner shop" "LP's sound so much better than CD's" "Good music died in 1970" Whilst I drive a C900 Aero, and love it to bits, I am grown up enough to realise that time moves on. We own a NG900 too, and I've said it before and I'll say it again, it has been a superb car, reliable, tough, comfortable, safe and actually a bit of a head turner with my clients. I work in Civil Engineering, most engineers I work with drive Focus or Mundeo type vehicles it's not a rich business. I keep trying to spread the word, Saabs are well priced on the second hand market here in the UK. Yes the NG is a GM car, so what, it's a good car. As was my 1996 9000. Currently thinking about buying a 1999/2000ish 9-3. I am bored with all the negativity here about newer Saabs, read the posts guys, many of our posters are drivers of NG900's, 9-3s and 9-5s. The C900 was actually the car that made Saab, it was the car that moved Saab from a vehicle driven by quirky eccentric head teachers and vegetarian college lecturers to a vehicle bought by company directors. Rather than the obligatory Jags and Beamers of the 80's. The C900 was the beginning not the end, and the NG900 was not the beginning of the end. Al > Ah the purists... > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > The C900 was the beginning not the end, and the NG900 was not the beginning > of the end. You're missing the point Al. Yes, the NG900, and the 9^3 and 9^5 are perfectly usable cars. But the real point is how do they compare with their competitors? Hows does a 9^3 compare with a same-year BMW 3 series? Or even an Audi A4? On the other hand, how did the C900 compare with a same-year BMW 3 series? I've spent a lot of time looking at recent Saabs, and driving them, and I'm just not impressed - which is why when I needed newish car, I bought a BMW. SignatureGrunff >> Ah the purists... >> [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > I'm just not impressed - which is why when I needed newish car, I bought a > BMW. Point missed? you did. To answer your questions though:- A Saab 9-3 is, IMHO far superior, £ for £ to a BMW 3 series. I admit to quite fancying a 328, but frankly a 318 or a 320? Nah, doesn't come close. Audi A4?!? What! Generally driven by young sales managers with quiffy highlighted hair. Yes I love my stereotypes, but as an ageing fat bloke with a goatee I get stereotyped and judged all the time so who cares. The 9-3 is in a different league to some of the cars I mentioned previously, Mundeos etc. I also made the point that on the second hand market Saabs represent tremendous value in the UK. I don't know about other markets, US or European, so I won't comment. The NG900 is again streets ahead in terms of value compared to equivalent aged Beamers, and at least it came with a stereo when new. An old work colleague of mine had a new 318 every 4 years, I couldn't believe how spartan they were for the money. BMW's are fine cars, image problem aside which I do not want to go into again, but there is no doubt about it the equivalent 2nd hand Saabs offer much better value for money. UK residents have this idea that Saabs cost alot to run. Which we all know isn't really true. However, I am happy for the general population of the UK to carry on thinking Saabs are expensive to run, it means I can afford to buy a 5 year old 9-3 SE for less than £5k. Try getting a good beamer or merc for that money. At the end of the day I love Turbo Grin, and only Saab can do that. Well so can Subaru but I don't want a car that looks like an accident in a body shop! Cheers anyway. Al By the way Saab Guy, I actually quite enjoyed the link, though I can't see how it would make anyone want to buy a Saab or anything else come to that! > A Saab 9-3 is, IMHO far superior, £ for £ to a BMW 3 series. I admit to > quite fancying a 328, but frankly a 318 or a 320? Nah, doesn't come close. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > old 9-3 SE for less than £5k. Try getting a good beamer or merc for that > money. The above seems to indicate that your main criteria are image and price. If that's the case, then maybe Saab are hitting the target after all. > At the end of the day I love Turbo Grin, and only Saab can do that. D'y know, I love that turbo grin too - but I haven't managed to get one out of a 9^3 yet! SignatureGrunff >> A Saab 9-3 is, IMHO far superior, £ for £ to a BMW 3 series. I admit to >> quite fancying a 328, but frankly a 318 or a 320? Nah, doesn't come [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > The above seems to indicate that your main criteria are image and price. > If that's the case, then maybe Saab are hitting the target after all. Hmm, yes I guess image is somewhat important, but the main reasons we choose saabs are, (in no particullar order) Strength/safety (Again old saabs are IMHO safer than most other cars of their generation) Cockpit layout/ergonomics Looks Driveability I guess brand loyalty comes into it too.(stick with what you know) Finding a SAAB specialist I can trust. High mileage achieveable I am not however ashamed to say I like being seen driving a SAAB, it has kudos for me. I wear Primark clothes, I eat Morrisons food, but I draw the line at what I drive. >> At the end of the day I love Turbo Grin, and only Saab can do that. > > D'y know, I love that turbo grin too - but I haven't managed to get one > out of a 9^3 yet! True, maybe not out of the box, but Abbott and others can turn them into monsters if that's your desire. Anyway I have my C900 Aero for that....which I guess supports your line eh? :-) Al >>> At the end of the day I love Turbo Grin, and only Saab can do that. >> >> D'y know, I love that turbo grin too - but I haven't managed to get one >> out of a 9^3 yet! > True, maybe not out of the box, but Abbott and others can turn them into > monsters if that's your desire. Anyway I have my C900 Aero for > that....which I guess supports your line eh? :-) The seemingly endless torque on the C900 turbo is something quite special. The relentless acceleration of a straight six BMW is something, too (and quite noisy with a Grüppe M intake) :) I, too, have not felt either in an NG900 or a 9-3. Now, a tuned 2.3 9000 (or even a standard Aero) is very nice and IMO, more smooth and more relentless than either the aforementioned and that said, a shame that the 9-5 could not quite match that feeling ... and perhaps why people start to look away from SAAB at that point. It is interesting to note that Maptun offer up to 340 BHP for the mighty 9-5, yet the 9000 has tuning kits offered up to 500 BHP. Paul Var tog vägen vägen? SAAB : Nothing on earth comes close > I am not however ashamed to say I like being seen driving a SAAB, it has > kudos for me. I wear Primark clothes, I eat Morrisons food, but I draw the > line at what I drive. They do turn heads and a certainly still considered to be the thinking man's marque. Just :) I continue to drive my C900 because, to borrow a phrase, I can't find a reason not to. I adored the car when I was younger and vowed to own one ... now I do, I'm simply not interesting really in anything as a replacement. Paul 1989 900 Turbo S http://saab.go.dyndns.org/ > The 9-3 is in a different league to some of the cars I mentioned previously, > Mundeos etc. I also made the point that on the second hand market Saabs > represent tremendous value in the UK. I don't know about other markets, US > or European, so I won't comment. You are quite right about Mondeos and 9-3's being in different leagues. The Mondeo has one of the best suspension systems available on a medium priced car. Forget the Saab name and look under the skin. Its a matter of Ford engineering versus GM engineering. Fortunately for the Saab division a lot of buyers are guided by hype. The best thing about Saabs is their low second hand value for people who want something cheap that appears to be better than the big sellers. Fleet buyers know otherwise. > You're missing the point Al. Yes, the NG900, and the 9^3 and 9^5 are > perfectly usable cars. But the real point is how do they compare with > their competitors? Hows does a 9^3 compare with a same-year BMW 3 series? > Or even an Audi A4? On the other hand, how did the C900 compare with a > same-year BMW 3 series? Actually, it's good you brought this up. I bought a 2004 9-3 aero in February. Meanwhile a friend of mine was shopping for a new car as well. He was driving a 1999 328 bmw. Hearing about the new 3-series BMW he waited and waited til it finally arrived. He went to the dealership the day they started taking orders. Placed an order, waited three months and finally got his new 330 just this week. Needless to say he's been espousing this thing for months. Got really annoying. In any event, perhaps it was because he had built it up so much, but I was thoroughly underimpressed. Having paid significantly more for his beamer than my aero, in my view, he got significantly less of a car (save for perhaps the larger v6/255hp engine vs the aero's 210hp 4 banger). I found the BMW's dash to be too conservative and not the least bit driver oriented. A small display on the radio, well below driver's view (forcing the driver to look down), with even smaller controls made it difficult to navigate basic system display info (DTE, trip info, temp, etc). This stands in stark contrast to the 9-3's head-up, driver-orientation, of display information. The seats were comfortable but felt too low and did not give a commanding driving view. The trunk/boot space was a bit better with an extra well of space available since there is no spare tire (car has run-flat tires). However, the 60-40 rear seat pulls were unintuitively placed hidden under the rear deck. The key fob was awkwardly unintuitive and my friend found us locked inside the car w/o any clear way of unlocking the doors from inside...could be a bit dangerous. There was a noticeable lack of unencumbered "cubby" space in the front console area. There is however a flip-up covered cubby awkwardly placed in a small area between the tall gear shifter and the console. The climate control display has a chintzy knob interface with the seat heater controls seemingly tacked on as an afterthought. No nightpanel. No default auto-on lights. Engine and gearbox were smooth and supplied more than adequate power for quick-response acceleration. BMW has slight edge here. But it comes at the cost of lower fuel economy. I was excited to see the new "engine start" button. I was under the impression they used all RFID technology....meaning, you get in car with key in pocket and the car wirelessly authenticates the key and allows driver to simply "push" start the car. Nope. You still have to manually insert the key and _then_ press the start button. Neat, but more gimmicky than useful. This is vs. the Saab RFID key which allows the driver to place the key in the console ignition, turn and start the car...all in one motion like any standard key. Looks: The new 3 is a pretty car. Nice subtle styling changes from the old 3. I guess it's personal preference for looks. - tex > This is vs. the Saab RFID key which allows the driver to place the key in > the console ignition, turn and start the car...all in one motion like any > standard key. You can also start the car with your thumb if the remote is close enough to the ignition. > In any event, perhaps it was because he had built it up so much, but I was > thoroughly underimpressed. Having paid significantly more for his beamer > than my aero, in my view, he got significantly less of a car (save for > perhaps the larger v6/255hp engine vs the aero's 210hp 4 banger). <spit> v6 in a bmw? That'll be the day. Straight 6 Tex. > Engine and gearbox were smooth and supplied more than adequate power for > quick-response acceleration. BMW has slight edge here. But it comes at the > cost of lower fuel economy. Yes, but how did the drive compare? To me, that's what matters - not how the seats fold down! I spend 99% of my time driving the car, not messing about with interior bits. How did it drive? Did it feel good? Did you feel in control? Was there always plenty of power there? SignatureGrunff > v6 in a bmw? That'll be the day. Straight 6 Tex. yes. sorry. clarification..._straight_ 6. > Yes, but how did the drive compare? To me, that's what matters - not how > the seats fold down! I spend 99% of my time driving the car, not messing > about with interior bits. How did it drive? Did it feel good? Did you feel > in control? Was there always plenty of power there? Fair enough. Being my friend's car I didn't exactly give it a thorough driving test. However, I did manage to gauge its performance from taking it on local roads and the highway (a 25 min ride to the movie theatre). As I had expected, the engine lacked the Saab's inherent turbo lag and provided clean, smooth, confident acceleration as needed. I found the high speed cornering to generally be clean (ie, it kept the track i fed to it) but with a slightly noticeable body roll. The articles i've read about it, indicated they've improved the steering, however, from a driving experience, i didn't notice any perceptible improvement (vs his old 3 nor my 9-3). As for raw, standing start, vehicle power/acceleration, the edge goes to the BMW (due to inherent advantages of the larger engine and rwd). For passing power, the BMW has an ever so slight edge. However, at speed, the Saab's turbo kicks in quickly providing the boost needed for confident passing/lane changes. For cornering, I give the edge to the Saab. The 9-3 tracks any corner you give it w/o so much as a flinch. As for braking, my friend got a little nervous when i actually had to put them to serious use. On the highway, the car in front of us decided to make a last second turn off, but yet remained squarely in lane (there were cars backed up the ramp), forcing me to give the the brakes a good workout. They provided solid stopping power. Having really put the Saab's brakes successfully through even much more serious braking tests it's hard to say. I know the 9-3's brakes can stop the car on a coin. Perhaps the BMW's can do the same. For the sake of honest comparison, I'll say braking is a tie. Whilst the interior "bits" may not give a car incredible road performance/control, it is the first place a driver becomes oriented with the vehicle. A bad first impression will assuredly not lead to a worthy driving experience. The Saab's cockpit lends itself to a more pleasurable driving experience. The two cars both pack a punch in certain areas. However, they are from two very different design philosophies and have inherent differences (fwd vs rwd, 6 vs 4 cyls). While the fwd may provide better winter traction, the rwd counters with better standing start performance. Both engines proved well refined, smooth and quiet. But given the dumb marketplace, people automatically assume that more cylinders must be better (whether this is technically correct is subject to much debate). Regardless, GM & Saab recognized the marketplace demand for a 6 cylinder offering and will be providing that with the 2006 model. - tex > For cornering, I give the edge to the Saab. The 9-3 tracks any > corner you give it w/o so much as a flinch. You apparently did not push them very hard. The BMW, with its RWD and 50/50 weight distribution, is relatively neutral with only a touch of understeer, which can be modulated with varying the input to the (rear) drive wheels. The SAAB being a FWD wants to plow through corners with incredible amount of understeer and pressing the accelerator only makes the situation worse. -Fred W >> For cornering, I give the edge to the Saab. The 9-3 tracks any corner >> you give it w/o so much as a flinch. >> > You apparently did not push them very hard. OK..._you_ tell me if I pushed the 9-3 hard enough. On several runs I got it up to 60-65 mph (100 km/h) then, at short distance (less than 40 ft...about 1/2 sec of drive time) and w/o braking (and other runs w/braking but f/higher speeds / & w/& w/o esp), steered it around an object directly in the line of travel. Now, I can't say it was easy doing this maneuvre, but the car definitely followed my command unhesitantly. > The BMW, with its RWD and 50/50 weight distribution, Actually, under hard braking (typical of an emergency accident avoidance situation or simply coming into a curve/corner at high speed w/brakes applied) a car will naturally lurch forward, shifting its weight distribution directly onto the front tires. This is good because this is exactly where the car needs the best traction (both for steering control and braking). So whilst from a topical viewpoint, a car with a 50/50 weight distribution _sounds_ good, in reality a car which has a slight weight bias towards the front wheels will indeed provide the driver better control in both steering and braking. > is relatively neutral with only a touch of understeer, which can be > modulated with varying the input to the (rear) drive wheels. The SAAB > being a FWD wants to plow through corners with incredible amount of > understeer and pressing the accelerator only makes the situation worse. And you've experienced this firsthand? While this may be true for other fwd cars, it's definitely, not true for the 9-3. You're bringing this topic up with the right person. Having driven the 9-3, 9-5 and 9-2x under conditions which should have lead all three to illustrate severe understeer, I found neither of them to display severe understeer. I actually did find the 9-2x a bit unruly in the slalom (w/late apex turns) but eventually managed to get it to perform well. The 9-3's and 9-5's both performed very well. Despite its fwd platform, the 9-3 displayed no understeer at all. It gripped amazingly well through the turns w/o even having to tap the brakes once for additional downforce (which I had to do numerous times with the awd 9-2x). I had an accompaying professional race car driver whilst doing these maneuvres and he walked away saying the same things about the car (yes, he was driving it as well). - tex > OK..._you_ tell me if I pushed the 9-3 hard enough. On several runs I got > it up to 60-65 mph (100 km/h) then, at short distance (less than 40 > ft...about 1/2 sec of drive time) and w/o braking (and other runs w/braking > but f/higher speeds / & w/& w/o esp), steered it around an object directly > in the line of travel. Now, I can't say it was easy doing this maneuvre, > but the car definitely followed my command unhesitantly. I took our 2001 9-3 on a drive through some very tight S-curves on a steep uphill, under full turbo boost. This resulted in a real wresting match between me and the torque steer. Fortunately I won :) I've driven the same thing in a 2.5 L 6 cyl BMW Z3 convertible, and found myself with an understeer problem (rear wheels breaking free of the road a bit). In both cars, the traction control system kicked in. On the whole, I think the BMW has the advantage. It definitely would if I had more experience driving RWD cars. I guess my impression of the 9-3 is that it can easily generate more torque than I can control in tight curves (due primarily to torque steer). I bet the 9-3 could take the 2.5 Z3 in out-and-out acceleration, which is impressive given that the 9-3 is a way heavier car. I don't know what the actual 0-60 time of each car is, so this is all utter speculation. John >>OK..._you_ tell me if I pushed the 9-3 hard enough. On several runs I got >>it up to 60-65 mph (100 km/h) then, at short distance (less than 40 [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > John It is probably not a very fair comparison as the Z3 is a sports car (2 seat roadster) and the SAAB is a sport sedan, but you do confirm my assertion about the handling characteristic difference between FWD and RWD. Just for fun... from the following web page: http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60times.html The fastest SAABs: 2000 Saab 9-3 Viggen 6.4 sec 1999 Saab 9-3 SE Conv. 6.6 (I had a 2000 and I think it was faster) The Fastest BMWs: 2002 BMW M Roadster 4.5 sec 2002 BMW Z8 4.5 2002 BMW M3 4.7 A "standard" SAAB sedan: 1999 Saab 9-3 SE 6.8 sec 2000 9-5 Aero 7.0 sec A "standard" BMW sedan: 1999 BMW 328i 6.9 sec 2001 BMW 330i 6.1 sec 1997 BMW 528i (manual) 6.8 sec So, you can see that the BMWs elite cars are far faster. Even with the turbo vs NA, they are quite close in terms of 0-60 acceleration when you look at the models that we "mere mortals" might be driving... though my Z3 does have some pretty good numbers: 1997 BMW Z3 2.8L 6.2 sec -Fred W > >>OK..._you_ tell me if I pushed the 9-3 hard enough. On several runs I got > >>it up to 60-65 mph (100 km/h) then, at short distance (less than 40 [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > > -Fred W Fred, Yea sure, but who the heck wants a BIMMER??? I mean, I can't be associated with that. If I bought one, ALL of my friends would officially call me an *SSHOLE and now I'm like "one of those jerks" out there.. No way..too much of a negative association for me, plus Saab is really starting to get good with the news I have been hearing recently. News that includes the 9-4x, 9-6x and so forth as well as Saab keeping a "Swedish Design Center" in Sweden regardless of a Russelheim factory being used to build Saabs is very motivating! SaabGuy > News that includes the 9-4x, 9-6x and so forth as well as Saab keeping a > "Swedish Design Center" > in Sweden regardless of a Russelheim factory being used to build Saabs is > very motivating! i have to agree...if nothing more, the press on saab does seem more upbeat in recent weeks. after the past two years of negative press surrounding lackluster lineup (the aging 9-5, the controversial 9-2x and 9-7x), sagging sales and finally the trollhattan loss to russelheim. saab finally has restarted its product launch to beef up its lineup starting with the 9-3 combi (a welcomed return of the sport-hatch concept). then in 2006 an overdue refresh of the veritable 9-5 along with new engine/trim options for the 9-3 series. - tex > > News that includes the 9-4x, 9-6x and so forth as well as Saab keeping a > > "Swedish Design Center" [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > - tex Tex, I hear you, it's all sounding really positive! I can't wait to hear the continued news at the Saab Owners Convention in August as well. In addition, 2006 is Saabs 60 year anniversary, so big things are planned next year as well! SaabGuy >>News that includes the 9-4x, 9-6x and so forth as well as Saab keeping a >>"Swedish Design Center" [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > overdue refresh of the veritable 9-5 along with new engine/trim options for > the 9-3 series. Why do you consider an aging 9-5 to be negative? From MY2004 Saab now seems to finally get control of the weaknesses like SID display, crankcase ventilation, headlight wipers etc. and the car should now be a better buy than ever. Signatureth > >>News that includes the 9-4x, 9-6x and so forth as well as Saab keeping a > >>"Swedish Design Center" [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > crankcase ventilation, headlight wipers etc. and the car should now be a > better buy than ever. TH, He said nothing of the 9-5 being negative. He said it is aging in it's current form basically. If old meant negative then, old people are bad, old cars are bad, old habits are bad, old wine is bad, etc. :) There is nothing wrong with old anything, so remember bad=bad, good=good, new=new and old=old and that's that. SaabGuy > Why do you consider an aging 9-5 to be negative? From MY2004 Saab now > seems to finally get control of the weaknesses like SID display, crankcase > ventilation, headlight wipers etc. and the car should now be a better buy > than ever. That may be true, however most buyers, myself included don't see it that way. Compared to other vehicles in its class it lags behind in features and modern design. It's a good car. In fact, I could have bought one cheaper than a 9-3, but I still opted for the 9-3, because it was a fresher design. The 9-5's interior, while comfortable, just appeared to be of an older design. If I'm going to spending a bucket load of bills on a new car, I want it to feel as new as can be. - tex > > Why do you consider an aging 9-5 to be negative? From MY2004 Saab now > > seems to finally get control of the weaknesses like SID display, crankcase [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > - tex Tex, Newer isn't better, plus newer generally has more bugs, then again some newer things have the bugs worked out. It's six or a half dozen... :) SaabGuy > Newer isn't better, Correction: Newer isn't _always_ better. But generally speaking, designers & engineers leave behind old designs for a reason...b/c the newer design/engineering simply is better than the old one. Now you could argue, that management also plays a role in design/engineering, in that, they want to control costs. This forces designers/engineers to improve the product while keeping costs low (perhaps, e.g, at the expense of better quality materials). > plus newer generally has more bugs, then again some newer things have the > bugs worked > out. It's six or a half dozen... :) Agreed...as a programmer, I'm well aware of bugs. New code is always buggier than older, more tested code. But the nice thing about new code, is that while it may have bugs, it generally adds functionality or improves on existing functionality. The same goes for car design/engineering (albeit on a different scale). - tex > > Newer isn't better, > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > - tex Tex, I know. This is all true. It's always a mixed-bag so to speak. SaabGuy > Fred, > > Yea sure, but who the heck wants a BIMMER??? I mean, I can't be > associated with that. If I bought one, ALL of my friends would > officially call me an *SSHOLE and now I'm like "one of those jerks" > out there.. No way..too much of a negative association for me, I've heard that all before, especially from European folks, but not so much here in the US. See, I don't really care all that much what other people think, one way or the other. I don't buy my cars so people think I'm wealthy (I'm definitely not) or important, and I don't care if somebody thinks I'm an *SSHOLE because I drive a particular brand. Those people are the ones who have problems. I belong to the BMW CCA and there a lot ( a really lot) of "just regular folks" who are truly automotive enthusiasts and appreciate the car for what it is. Sure, there are people who own BMWs as a "status symbol", but there are just as many (here in the US) who do the same thing with SAABs. Let's face it, a loaded 9-5 Aero ain't cheap! The big difference between the status grabbers and the "regular folks" is not the trademark on the hood, it rests entirely in the nut behind the wheel. -Fred W > I belong to the BMW CCA and there a lot ( a really lot) of "just regular > folks" who are truly automotive enthusiasts and appreciate the car for > what it is. Sure, there are people who own BMWs as a "status symbol", > but there are just as many (here in the US) who do the same thing with > SAABs. Let's face it, a loaded 9-5 Aero ain't cheap! I get so much of this over here (UK). The stupid thing is, I paid significantly less for my used 528i than those same people (those who deride BMW owners) pay for their brand new 1.2l Ford Fiestas. Do you have Fiestas in the US Fred? SignatureGrunff >> I belong to the BMW CCA and there a lot ( a really lot) of "just >> regular folks" who are truly automotive enthusiasts and appreciate the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > deride BMW owners) pay for their brand new 1.2l Ford Fiestas. Do you > have Fiestas in the US Fred? Not anymore. THey never caught on here and got some really bad press. The lowest model Ford here is the Focus, which was the replacement for the Escort I believe. My daughter had to leave her 9000 at the body shop (long story, but a neighbor backed into one of the rear doors) and the insurance paid for a rental loaner for the duration of the repairs. They gave her a new(ish) Focus 4 door hatchback. While she had it I gave it a spin. Not a terribly bad car considering how inexpensive they are. I have no idea how it will stand up to 200k miles, but it drives pretty nicely off the lot (not like a SAAB or a BMW mind you...) -FRed W > They gave her a new(ish) Focus 4 door hatchback. While she had it I gave > it a spin. Not a terribly bad car considering how inexpensive they are. > I have no idea how it will stand up to 200k miles, but it drives pretty > nicely off the lot (not like a SAAB or a BMW mind you...) Actually I had a 2001 ZX3 hatch prior to my current 9-3. I loved my it! For my needs it was perfect and the performance wasn't bad at all for an engine pushing out 130hp. It plowed through deep snow like no tomorrow. The SVT model had a bigger 170hp engine, but didnt come out until after I had bought mine. When I sadly gave it up it was still in perfect shape at just 46k miles. Only needed fresh brake pads, otherwise flawless. Unfortunately, last year Ford stupidly broke design development into separate Focus models for both the US and European markets. Sadly, the US models became far more conservative/boring than their European cousins. - tex > > Fred, > > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > -Fred W Fred W, That's funny. :) I like it! SaabGuy >>>For cornering, I give the edge to the Saab. The 9-3 tracks any corner >>>you give it w/o so much as a flinch. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > towards the front wheels will indeed provide the driver better control in > both steering and braking. A smart driver tries *not* do his steering and hard braking at the same time. It's better to get the majority of braking done *before* entering the corner and the only light braking if any, transitioning to acceleration on the exit. Yes, under heavy braking almost all of any car's weight will be toward the front. And in the reverse situation, under acceleration, the weight is shifted toward the rear, which is another reason that it makes a lot of sense to have the drive wheels back there, huh? The 50/50 weight distribution thing is a very salient measurement. >>is relatively neutral with only a touch of understeer, which can be >>modulated with varying the input to the (rear) drive wheels. The SAAB [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > And you've experienced this firsthand? While this may be true for other fwd > cars, it's definitely, not true for the 9-3. Of course. > You're bringing this topic up with the right person. Having driven the 9-3, > 9-5 and 9-2x under conditions which should have lead all three to illustrate [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > - tex I must confess that I have not driven one of the newer 9-3SS, and perhaps these are better. But I have my doubts as I *have* owned a 2000 9-3SE CV and it had serious under-steer, as well as torque steer, cowl shake and host of other handling ills. I got rid of it 6 months after I bought it. I also currently own a '98 900SE and a '93 9000CSET and have in the past owned a '93 9000T and a '90 C900. These all pushed pretty somewhat in the corners, though not as bad as the '00 ragtop. I also presently own 3 RWD BMWs, all of which handle far better, IMO. It is simply the physics of Front vs Rear wheel drive. It is a personal preference, I suppose, but the contrast is so stark *to me* that I have difficulty understanding anyone preferring FWD *handling* to RWD. There are other attributes that I could see could make one prefer a SAAB over a BMW, but I just don't see handling being one. -Fred W > >>>For cornering, I give the edge to the Saab. The 9-3 tracks any corner > >>>you give it w/o so much as a flinch. [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] > > -Fred W No TORQUE steer PERIOD in the 9-3SS, a completely different and stiffer drive! Saab did it well, using this platform. SaabGuy >>>>>For cornering, I give the edge to the Saab. The 9-3 tracks any corner >>>>>you give it w/o so much as a flinch. [quoted text clipped - 79 lines] > > SaabGuy Hmmmm. That is news to me, good news. I will have to test-drive one then. Especially considering the fire-sale prices they seem to be going at these days. I've been tempted to go to the local SAAB stealer anyway and test-drive a 9-2 turbo just for grins. I think the AWD would be kind of fun to play around with and a boxer engine seems attractive to me, even if it is a Subaru. It appears you can pick one of those up for a very short song. -Fred W > >>>>>For cornering, I give the edge to the Saab. The 9-3 tracks any corner > >>>>>you give it w/o so much as a flinch. [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] > > -Fred W Fred, Also you won't be able to pick up any more 9-2x's after the end of next year. It 2004, 2005 with 9-2x Linear and Aero models, and then in 2006 will just be a Linear model then that's history, no more. You should have seen the Saab Performance Team driving the 4 red 9-3SS's in Sweden at the 2005 Saab Festival! Amazing the stunts they could pull there with those! SaabGuy > You should have seen the Saab Performance Team driving the 4 red 9-3SS's > in Sweden at the 2005 Saab > Festival! Amazing the stunts they could pull there with those! No video? - tex >> You should have seen the Saab Performance Team driving the 4 red 9-3SS's >> in Sweden at the 2005 Saab >> Festival! Amazing the stunts they could pull there with those! > > No video? There are a few snippets here: <http://dreamparty.se/~warguardian/Mrloof/Kinnekulle20050618/> You might be able to stitch a few together. Paul Var tog vägen vägen? SAAB : Nothing on earth comes close > >> You should have seen the Saab Performance Team driving the 4 red 9-3SS's > >> in Sweden at the 2005 Saab [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Var tog vägen vägen? > SAAB : Nothing on earth comes close Paul, I've got about 5 minutes of video from the team, so I will look to getting it together in high quality but compressed from the original DV raw format. In the meantime, I also took some photos. http://securearchitecture.com/saab/performance/ SaabGuy > > You should have seen the Saab Performance Team driving the 4 red 9-3SS's > > in Sweden at the 2005 Saab [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > - tex Tex, I got the video now, uncompressed in high quality. It is like 200MB. I have no idea where to store it. It looks great! The footage is amateur, but it's decent. SaabGuy > I was excited to see the new "engine start" button. I was under the > impression they used all RFID technology....meaning, you get in car with key > in pocket and the car wirelessly authenticates the key and allows driver to > simply "push" start the car. Nope. You still have to manually insert the > key and _then_ press the start button. Neat, but more gimmicky than useful. I think doing it wirelessly could be dangerous in some situations. Wireless transmissions can be broken by objects in the way or interference. What if your car stalls (say on a railway crossing), you press the start button and nothing happens? You then have to troubleshoot your wireless link before you have a chance to get out of the way of that approaching train ;) > This is vs. the Saab RFID key which allows the driver to place the key in > the console ignition, turn and start the car...all in one motion like any > standard key. Sounds like a much better and more intuitive way. They could have used start buttons decades ago (don't know when the button was invented) but I'm guessing they just thought the turn key ignition was simpler and safer. X. > >> What years do you think were the good years? It seems like everyone I > >> talk to had different opinions. [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > > Al Al, I completely agree with you. I have moved on myself. The best way to judge someone is how well they transition from situation to situation thus, how they grow as a person. I continue to live in the present, looking forward to the future not to the past, and not what to wait for, but what to contribute to. I think that it is time that others here and elsewhere grow up as well. SaabGuy [...] > I completely agree with you. I have moved on myself. The best way to judge > someone is how well they transition from situation to situation thus, how > they grow as a person. I continue to live in the present, looking forward > to the future not to the past, and not what to wait for, but what to > contribute to. I think that it is time that others here and elsewhere grow > up as well. But we don't want to hear that "quality is patchy" for the 9-3 (The Independent 21/06/2005). There should be absolutely no reason for that in a modern Saab!!! > But we don't want to hear that "quality is patchy" for the 9-3 (The > Independent > 21/06/2005). There should be absolutely no reason for that in a modern > Saab!!! I had a number of annoying little problems with my 2004 9-3. All of which I have previously discussed here in this group (namely, some initial quality defects). Those were all covered under warranty. It's annoying that the car had these problems at all. However, Saab's biggest competitors have, by their own admission, had many of the same kinds of quality problems...Mercedes and BMW. Namely, electronics and other technology feature failures. This is not to say these problems are excusable...just that if you want to compare Saab to its competition, you have to recognize its competitors shortcomings as well. In this area, Japanese cars far outpace all of their euro-competitors. My biggest "quality" problem with my 9-3 is the number of rattles and buzzes in the interior. I've identified them not as manufacturing defects but rather as inadequate "quality" engineering. All of the buzzes and rattles in the car are inherent design/engineering flaws/shortcomings. It's clear, they simply didn't do enough build-testing to identify and prevent rattle prone parts and materials. This would hopefully be fixed in a later build/model year. - tex > > But we don't want to hear that "quality is patchy" for the 9-3 (The > > Independent [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > - tex If Saab want to distinguish their cars from e.g. Fords and Vauxhalls, then they must eliminate rattle and squeaks. My 1993 9000 CSE has none! My Fiat Croma had quite a few rattles and it took all the pleasure away. The folding rear set mechanism was a source of rattle, I fixed it myself by jamming some cloth into the stops. The fascia always rattled, I think a small washer was left behind somewhere and produced the rattle like a rattlesnake. Motoring journos often write about cheaper plastics being used nowadays, even in quality cars such as Volvo, Mercedes. The explanation given, or maybe the excuse, is that the materials must now be re-cyclable. One more reason to hang on to my 9000. > If Saab want to distinguish their cars from e.g. Fords and Vauxhalls, then > they > must eliminate rattle and squeaks. My 1993 9000 CSE has none! My Fiat > Croma had > quite a few rattles and it took all the pleasure away. I couldn't agree more. It is very annoying. I am actually working on fixing at least a couple of the more major door rattles this weekend. Will post my results. > Motoring journos often write about cheaper plastics being used nowadays, > even [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > hang > on to my 9000. I've read that as well. Given Saab's involvement in auto recycling programmes in the UK, it fits. - tex > If Saab want to distinguish their cars from e.g. Fords and Vauxhalls, then > they Actually my prior Ford Focus was quiet as could be...not a squeak or creak anywhere - tex > I completely agree with you. I have moved on myself. The best way to judge someone is how well they transition from situation to situation thus, how they grow as a person. I continue to live in the present, looking forward to the future not to the past, and not what to wait for, but what to contribute to. I think that it is time that others here and elsewhere grow up as well. So 'growing up' means sticking blindly to a brand regardless of quality? Continuing to buy the latest offerings when competitors are out-competing your favourite brand by a mile? SignatureGrunff > > I completely agree with you. I have moved on myself. The best way to judge someone is how well they transition from situation to situation thus, how they grow as a person. I continue to live in the present, looking forward to the future not to the past, and not what to wait for, but what to contribute to. I think that it is time that others here and elsewhere grow up as well. > > So 'growing up' means sticking blindly to a brand regardless of quality? > Continuing to buy the latest offerings when competitors are > out-competing your favourite brand by a mile? Grunff, Yes, I know it may sound a bit strange or whatever, but I believe in loyalty even in today's society. I also believe in not hoping on the bandwagon with the #1 baseball team even if your home team is not doing as well. SaabGuy > Yes, I know it may sound a bit strange or whatever, but I believe in loyalty even in today's society. I also believe in not hoping on the bandwagon with the #1 baseball team even if your home team is not doing as well. I'm deffinitely big on loyalty. I'm loyal to my family, my friends, those I work with etc. But do I feel any loyalty towards giant multinationals? Hmm... SignatureGrunff > We own a NG900 too, and I've said it before and > I'll say it again, it has been a superb car, reliable, tough, comfortable, > safe and actually a bit of a head turner with my clients. OK, for someone contemplating returning to Saab ownership, having owned an early square front C900 T16S (yes it really was a 1984 T16S), unless an exceptional Carlsson, Ruby or T16S convertable is willed to me, the tinkering is something I could do without for now (maybe, I have said that before). I also drove a 9000 CDE LPT for a couple of weeks. I liked it. Was thinking of an NG900, but can't get away from the Cavalier tag. WHat are they really like to drive and live with compared to a C900? Which model in the NG900 range was the sporty one? Don't think I would want a NG900 convertable. They don't have the presence of the C900 convert on the road, even though they look nice enough. Or would I be better hunting down a 9000 Aero, or CS Carlsson. Probably won't be for another year unless something stupid happens, as the Celica has just gained itself another years MOT, and there are some bits I've bought that I could do with fitting (decat, braided brake lines, manual boost controller), and some bodywork scrapes, dings (carpark stuff) and laquer flaking, that I would want to sort before trying to move it on. I do really miss my C900, even though the Celica has a sportier driving position, and more power. SignatureCarl Robson "Sorry Sir the meatballs are orf" (The poster formerly known as Skodapilot) http://www.bouncing-czechs.com > "The spitfire was the last true fighter plane" Of course not - it was the English Electric Lightning ! ;-) http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/lightning/index.html Graham >> "The spitfire was the last true fighter plane" > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Graham No No No! I was merely trying to point out that "purists" don't move on. As an air show buff, (see you at Waddington?) as well as a Saab fan I see where you're going, the Lighting was indeed a superb aircraft, certainly speed-wise. Did it ever see action though? (I don't know) The Spitfire did, and the sound of that Merlin, well I defy anyone to say it doesn't move them! I have to admit the roar of any jet fighter on a low attack run can also be pretty stirring! Al > >> "The spitfire was the last true fighter plane" > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > No No No! I was merely trying to point out that "purists" don't move on. And I was just pulling your leg ! ;-) > As an air show buff, (see you at Waddington?) I haven't made it sadly. I do appreciate nice aircraft though. > as well as a Saab fan I see > where you're going, the Lighting was indeed a superb aircraft, certainly > speed-wise. Did it ever see action though? (I don't know) Apparently the only aircraft shot down by a Lightning was a rougue Harrier whose pilot had ejected but the damn Harrier just kept on flying ! They sent a Lightning to shoot it down safely before the Harrier had a chance to do any damage ! > The Spitfire did, and the sound of that Merlin, well I defy anyone to say > it doesn't move them! > > I have to admit the roar of any jet fighter on a low attack run can also be > pretty stirring! Not to mention a Vulcan too. See same web site. "At its operational height the Vulcan can outfly and outmanoeuvre any fighter in squadron service today." - Air Ministry Press Release (1958). For the benefit of US citizens unfamilar with the Vulcan, the Vulcan was a bomber ! Graham > Not to mention a Vulcan too. See same web site. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > For the benefit of US citizens unfamilar with the Vulcan, the Vulcan was a > bomber ! The Vulcan was awesome;) I used to see that thing at the Dayton Airshow in Ohio. If any airplane can rattle fillings out of teeth, the Vulcan is it. The last time I saw a Vulcan was ~1982 and shortly after the same bomber crashed at an airshow in Chicago:( I still remember hearing about the Black Buck raids during the Falklands! But the last great fighter was the F-8 Crusader..."When you're out of F-8's...you're out of Fighters" and "Last of the Gunfighters" >> Not to mention a Vulcan too. See same web site. >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > But the last great fighter was the F-8 Crusader..."When you're out of > F-8's...you're out of Fighters" and "Last of the Gunfighters" There is a group in the UK raising money to put a Vulcan back into flight. http://www.vulcan558club.com/ Another UK preservation society have recently done a fast taxi run:- http://www.xm655.com/ I understand from my brother-in-law who witnessed it that it was indeed worthy of the term 'Awesome' which tends to be a little over used these days IMHO. Al > >> "The spitfire was the last true fighter plane" > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Al No action IIRC only escorting Russian planes away from the UK coast. I witnessed the Lightning when the prototype was being flown from Preston. Its ability to flick roll was astonishing and to an engineer it was a joy to watch. It was in a different league to a Spitfire which was a toy in comparison. Incidentally if you are interested in Merlins read 'Not Much of an Engineer' by Dr Stanley Hooker. The coincidence which enabled the Merlins power development is surprising. > I have to admit the roar of any jet fighter on a low > attack run can also be pretty stirring! Especially if you're the target! >> I have to admit the roar of any jet fighter on a low >> attack run can also be pretty stirring! > > Especially if you're the target! True, but if you're the target, by the time you've heard it you probably don't have any ears/brain/anatomy left to register the sound! Al >> What years do you think were the good years? >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> >> or the V4s were the only last SAABS, or the 1980s. >You're of course correct in that everyone will have their own take on this. >My personal opinion is that the C900 was the last real Saab. The 9k was >a pretty good car - I enjoyed owning one for several years, but it could >very easily have been another make. >The C900 was the last car produced by Saab which incorporated a long >list of design features aimed at making the driver's life better. This >was done with little regard for convention - the designers did what they >did because they believed it was the right thing to do, just as they had > on the 99, the 96, and all the previous models. >Today's lineup leaves me distinctly unimpressed. With the single >exception of turbocharging, the Saab range is really very close to the >lineup offered by other mid-range euro brands. There's nothing about the >way they are built, or the way the drive, that makes me want to own one. Well given that Saab's are now made by the same company which makes parts for most of the other Euro brands (and in the case of Subaru, makes the whole cars too), that is not a surprising conclusion. Craig. SignatureCraig's Saab C900 Page --> http://lios.apana.org.au/~c900 Sydney, NSW Australia Craig's Saab C900 Workshop -- For all Saab C900 Enthusiasts world-wide! http://www.saab900classic.net http://www.saab900.org c900@lios.apana.org.au Come and explore our site, and check out our web-forums, mailing list, etc. > >> What years do you think were the good years? > >> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Craig. Craig, Any word on the server? for Saab Videos? SaabGuy >Any word on the server? for Saab Videos? Yes. Coming along. I'm setting up BitTorrent after some advice from others and that should help with making the video file sharing better to manage. I'll contact you privately to nut out details. Craig. SignatureCraig's Saab C900 Page --> http://lios.apana.org.au/~c900 Sydney, NSW Australia Craig's Saab C900 Workshop -- For all Saab C900 Enthusiasts world-wide! http://www.saab900classic.net http://www.saab900.org c900@lios.apana.org.au Come and explore our site, and check out our web-forums, mailing list, etc. > That is the lamest attempt at viral marketing I've seen this year. agreed SignatureJDS | jeffrey@go.away.com | http://www.newtnotes.com DJMBS | http://newtnotes.com/doctor-jeff-master-brainsurgeon/ >> Has anyone seen this site yet? >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > That is the lamest attempt at viral marketing I've seen this year. The overall message seems to me: I don't like cars so I buy a Saab. > Moreover, it made me really sad. This is really what it has come down > to. "Buy a Saab because Saabs are different" - no longer "Buy a Saab > because Saabs are good". The irony is there is far less differentiation > now than there was before, when they were good... Sometimes when I'm in my Saab, stuck in traffic and they play one of the Dutch elitist "Look at how different I am!" commercials on the radio I actually feel a sense of shame for driving one. Then, in the parking lot at the university where I work, I sometimes have trouble seeing which one of the black 9-3's is mine. What do I do now to be different? The irony of it all... :( X. > Has anyone seen this site yet? > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > SaabGuy That's some great marketing work being put out by General Motors. Too bad the cars don't get equal attention... Wanna maintain your identity? by an old SAAB, and maintain that. -Fred W > > Has anyone seen this site yet? > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > -Fred W Fred, That's quite funny of you! :) SaabGuy |
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.