Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Flybrian

TE-based SAAB 9-4x to get Motori diesels

33 posts in this topic

Saab 9-4X to bow in Detroit
[size=3Cadillac to get variant[/size]
Posted Image
09/14/07, 03:06pm, EDT | Link to Original Article @ LeftLaneNews


Saab is close to completing the developmental stage of the all-new 9-4X we reported on just a few days ago. Based on a mix of the re-engineered Theta and Epsilon 2 architectures, the mid-sized crossover will make its debut at the Detroit Auto Show in January. It has also been revealed that Cadillac will get a version of the vehicle to help spread development costs.

According to Saab boss Jan Ake Jonsson, both models are expected to get GM's new diesel engine co-developed with VM Motori, which puts out 250 horsepower and 406 lb-ft of torque. Jonsson also said that both models will be made in Mexico and will be exported to the U.S. and Europe. Engine choices will include a range of gasoline powerplants as well as the aforementioned diesel.

The 9-4X is also slated to be equipped with Saab's XWD all-wheel drive system.

Jonsson also indicated that Saab is considering a 9-1 model to compete against the BMW 1-series and Audi's upcoming A1. Although Saab is taking a serious look at the small car market, nothing has been confirmed.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

will people that buy the audi name their car abrams? i would. lol

this will be interesting when they show it, be it good or bad, previous released models show promise, keep that in mind.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any Saab product is a waste of money at this point, especially this one. They lose money every year, their sales shrink every year, but GM figures they better keep spending money on a car no one wants, while ignoring segments like minivans or a 40 mpg car.

The Cadillac BRX is a horrible idea as well, front drive, transversely mounted engines need to be banned from Cadillac, as well as any transmission that isn't 6 gears or more. Cadillac can't build credibility with a dressed up Equinox, a 90s platform DTS, '04 9-3 wagon rebadge BLS, and a corvette rebadge XLR that is slow, not that luxurious and costs $80,000. The CTS is their only good car, aside from the soon to be cancelled SRX, which is the most awarded vehicle they built in 15-20 years. The BRX is basically like saying we give up, we'll compete with Lincoln and make MKZ and MKX type cars.

Edited by smk4565
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Cadillac BRX is a horrible idea as well, front drive, transversely mounted engines need to be banned from Cadillac, as well as any transmission that isn't 6 gears or more.

Yeah, and Lexus has had so little success with the RX, a very similar vehicle, I have no idea why Cadillac would want to do something similar :rolleyes:

The BRX is going to be AWD-only, I'm pretty sure. It's not necessarily a performance-oriented vehicle like the SRX, it's more of a mommy-mobile, which means it will sell much better.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not a fan of the BRX idea either, but with real AWD, i think it could do it's job.

it's competing with the RDX, x3, Q5 or Q3, that ugly new infiniti, and whatever else fits the small suv crowd. Don't expect a 3rd row or anything.

Edited by jbartley
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any Saab product is a waste of money at this point, especially this one. They lose money every year, their sales shrink every year, but GM figures they better keep spending money on a car no one wants, while ignoring segments like minivans or a 40 mpg car.

I'd like to see those numbers. This says otherwise regarding '06 sales, and don't forget that integrating Saab in GM Europe helped lower their breakeven point.

The Cadillac BRX is a horrible idea as well, front drive, transversely mounted engines need to be banned from Cadillac, as well as any transmission that isn't 6 gears or more. Cadillac can't build credibility with a dressed up Equinox, a 90s platform DTS, '04 9-3 wagon rebadge BLS, and a corvette rebadge XLR that is slow, not that luxurious and costs $80,000. The CTS is their only good car, aside from the soon to be cancelled SRX, which is the most awarded vehicle they built in 15-20 years. The BRX is basically like saying we give up, we'll compete with Lincoln and make MKZ and MKX type cars.

I don't think the Cadillac will offer a FWD version. IMO TE should be shared between Saab and Buick: I think Buick could use a smaller than Enclave crossover. Cadillac should get a 2 row crossover (based on their RWD platform) that would compete with the X3 (what I believe the SRX would have been if they hadn't redesigned the Vizon's rear end to accomodate a 3rd row), and have a larger unibody 3-row crossover that would eventually take the upper-SRX and Escalade's spot. Edited by ZL-1
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a big fan of the BRX idea, and I agree that AWD is the only way it should be. Small luxury SUVs are an emerging market and Cadillac needs to be right in there in the thick of it with a great product. A diesel would be a bonus, as would the DI 3.6 as the top engine. I hope they can keep the weight down though. GM vehicles tend to be piggy lately.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, and Lexus has had so little success with the RX, a very similar vehicle, I have no idea why Cadillac would want to do something similar :rolleyes:

The BRX is going to be AWD-only, I'm pretty sure. It's not necessarily a performance-oriented vehicle like the SRX, it's more of a mommy-mobile, which means it will sell much better.

Oh my, we agree. That's nice! :AH-HA_wink:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, and Lexus has had so little success with the RX, a very similar vehicle, I have no idea why Cadillac would want to do something similar :rolleyes:

The BRX is going to be AWD-only, I'm pretty sure. It's not necessarily a performance-oriented vehicle like the SRX, it's more of a mommy-mobile, which means it will sell much better.

Lexus's reputation and image is far superior to Cadillac's. They have some high end products like the LS460 that convey status, Cadillac doesn't have that. Cadillac is supposed to be performance-luxury, not mommy mobiles, even the X3 and X5 are longitudinal engines and more performance based. Cadillac could make a Malibu with a nice interior and sell a ton too, but that won't make them the high status brand they want to be.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saab has lost money 15 of the 17 years GM has had half or full ownership (since 1990). They sold 130,00 units worldwide last year, and lowered their forecast for this year and next. Mercedes and BMW each sell over 1 million units per year, why do Cadillac and Saab combine to sell 400,000 or so, that is pathetic. If they didn't dilute their money into so many brands and cars, and had 6 world class Cadillacs, they would sell more, and make more.

The BRX, just like the CTS should have the 3.6 DI engine STANDARD. They are Cadillac, they should not have weaker engines than CamCords, Infiniti has a 306-330 hp V6 standard. The only reason to not have a 300+ hp engine standard is if it is a diesel or a small V6 plus hybrid that is 250 horsepower, but averages well over 30 mpg. Having high mileage vehicles could be key for them in getting conquest sales from the turbo-4 and diesel Euro cars, plus if they want to sell a car in Europe they need high mileage engines anyway.

The BRX better be good too, the Mercedes M-class hybrid has 340 hp and gets 32 mpg average. I realize the M-class is a different price/class, but the RX400h gets 30 mpg as well, the competition is getting fierce. I want to see Cadillac on top, but their future product plan doesn't have enough bullets in it, they once again are bringing a knife to a gun fight like they did with the 05 STS. Upping the warranty to 5/60,000 bumper to bumper would be a good idea too.

Edited by smk4565
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lexus's reputation and image is far superior to Cadillac's. They have some high end products like the LS460 that convey status, Cadillac doesn't have that. Cadillac is supposed to be performance-luxury, not mommy mobiles, even the X3 and X5 are longitudinal engines and more performance based. Cadillac could make a Malibu with a nice interior and sell a ton too, but that won't make them the high status brand they want to be.

What? So you're saying because Lexus has the LS, the RX sells better? Why did the old MDX sell so well then? They don't have a LS-like vehicle. It was a FWD-based mommy-mobile, too.

Who says that the BRX can't be relatively sporty? Give it AWD, the 3.6 DI engine, and I'd say you have plenty of performance for that segment.

Saab has lost money 15 of the 17 years GM has had half or full ownership (since 1990). They sold 130,00 units worldwide last year, and lowered their forecast for this year and next. Mercedes and BMW each sell over 1 million units per year, why do Cadillac and Saab combine to sell 400,000 or so, that is pathetic. If they didn't dilute their money into so many brands and cars, and had 6 world class Cadillacs, they would sell more, and make more.

The BRX, just like the CTS should have the 3.6 DI engine STANDARD. They are Cadillac, they should not have weaker engines than CamCords, Infiniti has a 306-330 hp V6 standard. The only reason to not have a 300+ hp engine standard is if it is a diesel or a small V6 plus hybrid that is 250 horsepower, but averages well over 30 mpg. Having high mileage vehicles could be key for them in getting conquest sales from the turbo-4 and diesel Euro cars, plus if they want to sell a car in Europe they need high mileage engines anyway.

The BRX better be good too, the Mercedes M-class hybrid has 340 hp and gets 32 mpg average. I realize the M-class is a different price/class, but the RX400h gets 30 mpg as well, the competition is getting fierce. I want to see Cadillac on top, but their future product plan doesn't have enough bullets in it, they once again are bringing a knife to a gun fight like they did with the 05 STS. Upping the warranty to 5/60,000 bumper to bumper would be a good idea too.

Do you realize MB and BMW sell economy cars in other countries? First, you say Cadillac shouldn't be selling these cheap Malibu-based cars, then, you complain that they don't sell as many cars worldwide as MB and BMW (who sell economy cars). Please make up your damn mind.

Get you head out of your ass. The 3.6 will have plenty of power for most people. People aren't drag racing at every stoplight, you know. 260HP is plenty to get out of your own way.

Who says the BRX won't have a hybrid? Hell, I'd bet it will do 35MPH average with the 3.6 and two-mode hybrid. You assume so much, yet you know nothing at all, so shut up and complain only once you see the final product. Every time you post you act as if you know exactly what every person could ever want, and act as if you know that GM is not going to offer anything decent for anyone. You want more warranty? Do some research. Cadillac has 5/100k on the powertrain and the same standard 4yr/50k as every other manufacturer.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What? So you're saying because Lexus has the LS, the RX sells better? Why did the old MDX sell so well then? They don't have a LS-like vehicle. It was a FWD-based mommy-mobile, too.

Who says that the BRX can't be relatively sporty? Give it AWD, the 3.6 DI engine, and I'd say you have plenty of performance for that segment.

Do you realize MB and BMW sell economy cars in other countries? First, you say Cadillac shouldn't be selling these cheap Malibu-based cars, then, you complain that they don't sell as many cars worldwide as MB and BMW (who sell economy cars). Please make up your damn mind.

Cadillac has 5/100k on the powertrain and the same standard 4yr/50k as every other manufacturer.

The RX does sell better because of the image of Lexus, which stems from their flagship. They have a reputation for long lasting, nothing breaks, and high resale value. Just look at what 5 year old Lexus or BMWs go for compared to a Deville or Seville. The MDX sold well because Honda has the same reputation of lasting forever and high resale value, the Accord and Civic have that too. And the MDX won several magazine comparos and awards over the years.

I fear the BRX is Cadillac's version of the Lincoln MKX, they are taking a big shortcut basing it of Chevy that isn't even a good vehicle. I think it will look good on the outside, if the interior is better than the CTS it should look good on the inside, but driving dynamics will lack, and the GM bean counters will penny pinch somewhere. Cadillac's aren't sought after status symbols like Mercedes or BMW, they need more high end, less Chevy hand me downs.

I am aware of the BMW 1-series and Mercedes A and B class, the Euro market requires tiny cars like that, but those cars don't lack fit and finish, and Mercedes has $150,000 SL and S class cars and the SLR McClaren in the showroom, so their overall image is high. Plus the E-class is a huge seller for them, about 250k a year, 3-series sells over 500k a year, so they aren't totally relying on low end cars for sales.

Lexus has a 6 year, 70,000 mile powertrain warranty. Hyundai has 10/100k powertain even. That won't make me buy one, but GM's warranty is nothing special. I like having a good warranty, but it isn't making me pick one brand over the other. I would however like to see Cadillac increase the bumper to bumper warranty to try to convince people that their cars are reliable and long lasting. What I see with Cadillac is renaissance 1 didn't work, sales are declining, BMW and Lexus are up every month. They can't do the next 5 years the same as the last 5, they need something new.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saab has lost money 15 of the 17 years GM has had half or full ownership (since 1990). They sold 130,00 units worldwide last year, and lowered their forecast for this year and next.

True, they lost money because their structure was too heavy, and that heavy stucture means earnings are more elastic to swings in volume and/or contribution margins. Integrating Engineering, manufacturing, and so on means they do not need to sell as many cars as before to earn a competitive return on capital. Which leads me to a question: why is lowering sales targets a bad thing in itself? Are 250K sales at a loss worth more than 150K sales at a profit?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The RX does sell better because of the image of Lexus, which stems from their flagship. They have a reputation for long lasting, nothing breaks, and high resale value. Just look at what 5 year old Lexus or BMWs go for compared to a Deville or Seville. The MDX sold well because Honda has the same reputation of lasting forever and high resale value, the Accord and Civic have that too. And the MDX won several magazine comparos and awards over the years.

The SRX won several magainze comparisons and awards over the years, too. But, apparently people didn't want a sporty people mover, they'd rather have their mommy-mobiles. The buying public made Cadillac's choice for them. Don't tell me that Cadillac can't sell the BRX because they don't have an LS-like vehicle (Cadillac has the Escalade, that has to give them some prestige in the SUV arena). That's ridiculous. Going by that, Cadillac can't sell the CTS to BMW buyers because they don't have a 7-Series and Buick can't sell the Enclave because they don't have anything more prestigious.

I fear the BRX is Cadillac's version of the Lincoln MKX, they are taking a big shortcut basing it of Chevy that isn't even a good vehicle. I think it will look good on the outside, if the interior is better than the CTS it should look good on the inside, but driving dynamics will lack, and the GM bean counters will penny pinch somewhere. Cadillac's aren't sought after status symbols like Mercedes or BMW, they need more high end, less Chevy hand me downs.

Again, you show you know nothing. TE is much more sophisticated than Theta, which is quite obvious if you take a second to think that only Cadillac and Saab are getting vehicles on it. The interior has to be better than the CTS to be good?? Right... if it's as good as the CTS it will be as good as anything in the class. How do you know driving dynamics will lack? This is a premium platform. Everyone penny pinches somewhere, if you hadn't noticed. This is not a Chevy hand-me-down, so get some facts and stop spewing mindless bull$h!.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 3-series outsells the CTS more than 2-1 in the CTS's home market, worldwide is is more like 7 to 1, so I wouldn't say the CTS is successful in getting BMW buyers. The CTS interior could easily be better, I sat in one the other day at the dealership, there is a ton of plastic in there. Anything gray is not metal, it is plastic, the shifter was also plastic, and I sat in 2 different models each with an MSRP over $46,000. The interior is better than many cars, but not the best, and the car's performance is class average.

The SRX doesn't sell because it looks like a wagon and had a bad interior at first. The SRX can also get pricey, and Cadillac's image is not strong enough to drop money on one when they can get a BMW or Mercedes, which gives much higher social status amongst the country club types. I just tried to talk someone looking for a used SUV into an SRX, and she liked the vehicle, but didn't like Cadillac's image and worried about reliability of an American car, and bought an older, much higher mileage Lexus instead because she trusted it to last longer. Image is everything with luxury cars.

I fully expect the BRX to be better than the 9-4x, and they'll probably sell 40,000 a year because it will be cheap, but that still doesn't fix the image problem. Small SUVs do have a mommy-mobile appeal to them, and women generally don't like Cadillacs that much because they have made land barges and grandpa cars for 20 years and still do with the DTS. Could be tough to get 20 year import buying women to out of the blue go look at a Cadillac, unless the product is ridiculously good, and their image is strong.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worldwide the 3-series is used as a taxi cab in 2 liter diesel, cloth seat, hand crank window form.

In the US market, the 3 series is sold as a sedan, couple, convertible, and wagon and is available in AWD.

The CTS offers only a sedan and for the first time this year offers AWD.

I think the proper way to say what you're trying to say is "The 3-series sells in 4 different versions with AWD available, yet only outsells the CTS 2-1"

As for getting 20 year import buying women out of their RXes and MDXes.... well, I suppose Cadillac could ask Buick for advice on how do it since that's what Buick is doing with the Enclave.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 3-series outsells the CTS more than 2-1 in the CTS's home market, worldwide is is more like 7 to 1, so I wouldn't say the CTS is successful in getting BMW buyers. The CTS interior could easily be better, I sat in one the other day at the dealership, there is a ton of plastic in there. Anything gray is not metal, it is plastic, the shifter was also plastic, and I sat in 2 different models each with an MSRP over $46,000. The interior is better than many cars, but not the best, and the car's performance is class average.

The SRX doesn't sell because it looks like a wagon and had a bad interior at first. The SRX can also get pricey, and Cadillac's image is not strong enough to drop money on one when they can get a BMW or Mercedes, which gives much higher social status amongst the country club types. I just tried to talk someone looking for a used SUV into an SRX, and she liked the vehicle, but didn't like Cadillac's image and worried about reliability of an American car, and bought an older, much higher mileage Lexus instead because she trusted it to last longer. Image is everything with luxury cars.

I fully expect the BRX to be better than the 9-4x, and they'll probably sell 40,000 a year because it will be cheap, but that still doesn't fix the image problem. Small SUVs do have a mommy-mobile appeal to them, and women generally don't like Cadillacs that much because they have made land barges and grandpa cars for 20 years and still do with the DTS. Could be tough to get 20 year import buying women to out of the blue go look at a Cadillac, unless the product is ridiculously good, and their image is strong.

CTS has one variant, 3-Series has 4, plus models with AWD. CTS sedan vs. 3-Series sedan would be a much better comparison.

The interior has lots of plastic? OMG! What interior that in the CTS class doesn't have a lot of plastic. The difference is good plastic vs. poor plastic. Every car has lots of plastic.

The person you tried to talk into an SRX obviously knows very little about vehicles.

The BRX will sell way more than 40k/year. That's merely 3.3k/month. It will do 60k/year no problem, and probably closer to 70k/year. Even if it only does 6k/month that's 72k/year.

Cadillac's image has been improving for some time, and if the BRX is as good of a vehicle for it's class as the Enclave, there's no reason it won't do well. Cadillac's image is much better than Buick's.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the CTS is a little big for a coupe or convertible, although they chose that size, they chose sedan only, they chose rear drive only in 2003. So it is their own fault that the 3-series has so many variations and the CTS doesn't. It is like Nissan saying that the Titan can't compete because they have 1 engine choice and the Silverado has 5.

No Cadillac sold 70,000 units in 2006 or will achieve that in 2007, I doubt an entry level SUV will come in and be the #1 selling Cadillac. Cadillac's image has improved but not nearly enough.

The CTS gray plastic is a lot like the Lincoln MKZ's center console. That's fine if you want you want to sell $33,000 vehicles, but I thought Cadillac was aspiring to more than that. GM always relies on SUVs, which is a crowded and shrinking market, they can't just launch a new SUV and think Saab or Cadillac will be fine, they need cars that people want and never have a $5000 off tag on them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the CTS is a little big for a coupe or convertible, although they chose that size, they chose sedan only, they chose rear drive only in 2003. So it is their own fault that the 3-series has so many variations and the CTS doesn't. It is like Nissan saying that the Titan can't compete because they have 1 engine choice and the Silverado has 5.

We're just saying that we don't expect the CTS to outsell the 3-series, <leader in it's segment for what, 15 years now?>, but it's still doing very well considering that it's just one body style and one drive configuration compared to BMW's 8 possible combinations. Nissan doesn't expect the Titan to outsell the Silverado either, however if Nissan sold half as many Titans in only one configuration as Chevy sells Silverados in 5, I'm sure Nissan would be shouting from the rooftops and Ghosen would be hailed as a saint.

Think about it for a second. To come in with no entry at all to challenge the 15 year leader of the segment and suddenly win sales that are around 50% of the 15 year leader..... that is a major win for ANY company.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the CTS is a little big for a coupe or convertible, although they chose that size, they chose sedan only, they chose rear drive only in 2003. So it is their own fault that the 3-series has so many variations and the CTS doesn't. It is like Nissan saying that the Titan can't compete because they have 1 engine choice and the Silverado has 5.

No Cadillac sold 70,000 units in 2006 or will achieve that in 2007, I doubt an entry level SUV will come in and be the #1 selling Cadillac. Cadillac's image has improved but not nearly enough.

The CTS gray plastic is a lot like the Lincoln MKZ's center console. That's fine if you want you want to sell $33,000 vehicles, but I thought Cadillac was aspiring to more than that. GM always relies on SUVs, which is a crowded and shrinking market, they can't just launch a new SUV and think Saab or Cadillac will be fine, they need cars that people want and never have a $5000 off tag on them.

So because the CTS doesn't have the variants it's their fault it doesn't sell as well? You're comparing BMW's sum of apples, oranges, and lemons to Cadillac's apples only. The CTS's success vs. the 3-Series should not be based on how it sells compared to the sedan, coupe, convertible, and wagon 3-Series but rather just the sedan.

The RX is the #1 selling Lexus, why can't the BRX be the #1 selling Cadillac? How do you know Cadillac's image hasn't improved enough? Again, you act like you know what everyone thinks about everything, yet you don't.

So the CTS's plastic is a lot like the MKZ's center console? That makes little sense. I'll sit in it myself when I have time and make my own opinion, not listen to yours, since you seem to spew mucho bull&#036;h&#33;. Last I checked, the crossover market was the fastest growing market, you were saying...?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crossover sales are just replacing body on frame. SUVs on a whole are not a rapid growth market.

If The CTS selling half of the 3-series is a success because the 3-series is a 15 year leader, then what is Lexus? Cadillac lead the US in luxury sales for 55 years in a row, Lexus started making cars 88 years after Cadillac started, and Lexus is selling about 150% as many units. That sickens me. I don't want to see Cadillac introduce 8 models just for the sake of having volume, total brand sales I don't worry so much about, but I'd like to see 5 products that are world class and sell worldwide.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0