The Saab 9-3 That Never Was, But May One Day Be

[ne_one]

And that happened to be a pretty nice looking car.

Two decades ago.

[Jesda]

Two decades ago.

So?

This 9-3 looks modern.

[Ed753]

And that happened to be a pretty nice looking car.

In 1990...............................

Two decades ago.

Beat me to it!

[Jesda]

In 1990...............................

Beat me to it!

I don't see your point. Cadillac's tailfins date back half a century as does the Mini Cooper's white roof. The tapered flat-back tail is iconic Saab.

[desmo9]

While that rendering looks like a bad knock-off of the 1994-2002 900 / 9-3, no doubt what Saab needed was a modern 900 done with Saab quirks and individualism, sort of like Mini. Had Lutz put the energy and money used to rebrand the Trailblazer and Impreza into one homerun 900 product, Saab would be with us today without the spectre of returning under Indian or Chinese ownership. GM killed Saab with the kind of half-a$$ed, badge-engineered, be-all-things-to-all-people stupidity only GM can pull off.

[Ed753]

I don't see your point. Cadillac's tailfins date back half a century as does the Mini Cooper's white roof. The tapered flat-back tail is iconic Saab.

Sorry I'll type slower.



tombalas said:

Looks like an early 1990s Pontiac Bonneville.

And you followed up with:

And that happened to be a pretty nice looking car.

I actually saw the Bonneville look too, my mom and afterwards sister had a 1995 Bonneville (which was similar from MY 1992 - 1999).

Not sure what Cadillac tailfins or white Mini roofs have to do with my comment, which implied that generation Bonneville looked good then, but not now.

Hope that helped!

Ed

[Jesda]

Sorry I'll type slower.



tombalas said:



And you followed up with:



I actually saw the Bonneville look too, my mom and afterwards sister had a 1995 Bonneville (which was similar from MY 1992 - 1999).

Not sure what Cadillac tailfins or white Mini roofs have to do with my comment, which implied that generation Bonneville looked good then, but not now.

Hope that helped!

Ed

It may share a few styling elements with the 90s Bonneville, especially the tapered rear, but it looks like a modern car.


You can use pieces of history in vehicle design without being anachronistic.

[spd98]

And that happened to be a pretty nice looking car.

It was IN 1990! Not so much in 2013

[KingElvis]

And that happened to be a pretty nice looking car.

If you take it as the concave fastback roof line that was the appeal, the '68 Olds Cutlass 2dr had it in spades too. One of the best looking cars of all time IMO.

[mgescuro]

I don't see your point. Cadillac's tailfins date back half a century as does the Mini Cooper's white roof. The tapered flat-back tail is iconic Saab.

Cadillac's tailfins are a modern interpretation of a classic Cadillac heritage feature.

This "supposed" 9-3 is actually a 900 with a new face. It looks like a bad Chinese knockoff. It's not even an interpretation of a Saab design. It is a 900.

[Jesda]

Cadillac's tailfins are a modern interpretation of a classic Cadillac heritage feature.
This "supposed" 9-3 is actually a 900 with a new face. It looks like a bad Chinese knockoff. It's not even an interpretation of a Saab design. It is a 900.

No, it isn't.

I own a 900. It doesn't have the 9-5 influenced nose of this rendering or the fuselage shape. It shares a tail and a bit of a silhouette, but if you've seen the 9-5 in person (which this rendering is modeled after in part) you'll find that the entire body is one elliptical figure. The old 900s were very distinctly squared off. You may see a similar silhouette in a side profile view (and that's likely very intentional) but the three dimensional shape is entirely different.

Having similarities does not mean "the same"

The presence of a white roof on a Mini Cooper or tailfins on a CTS does not mean either car is "the same" as its long-ago predecessor.


The proportions more closely resemble the 9-3, and whether that's a good or bad thing can be debated.




Don't be so simple.

[mgescuro]

No, it isn't.

I own a 900. It doesn't have the 9-5 influenced nose of this rendering or the fuselage shape. It shares a tail and a bit of a silhouette, but if you've seen the 9-5 in person (which this rendering is modeled after in part) you'll find that the entire body is one elliptical figure. The old 900s were very distinctly squared off. You may see a similar silhouette in a side profile view (and that's likely very intentional) but the three dimensional shape is entirely different.

Having similarities does not mean "the same"

The presence of a white roof on a Mini Cooper or tailfins on a CTS does not mean either car is "the same" as its long-ago predecessor.


The proportions more closely resemble the 9-3, and whether that's a good or bad thing can be debated.


Don't be so simple.

all you've done is prove that the GM design is nothing more than a knockoff of a bad Chinese knockoff.

[germeezy1]

all you've done is prove that the GM design is nothing more than a knockoff of a bad Chinese knockoff.

You seem to be missing the point, and truthfully unless your visual acuity is ten times mine how are you able to truly discern what this very blurry picture exhibits as far as design?

[Jesda]

all you've done is prove that the GM design is nothing more than a knockoff of a bad Chinese knockoff.

The Phoenix concept was developed during Spyker's ownership of Saab.
Saab is now half-owned by the Chinese and half-owned by the Japanese.


If the article is accurate, little of this has to do with General Motors. You can critique Castriota or management at Spyker for the execution of this design (at least, as far as the blurry renderings will permit), but GM had wiped its hands clean of Saab when Castriota was hired.

[germeezy1]

Truthfully, and said as respectfully as possible I am not sure a certain Mr. Jason Castriota's design can be critiqued in the way that it has been.

May I present exhibit T?