2007 2.0T: The Best 9-3?

[Ghrankenstein]

2007 Saab 9-3 2.0T/6-Speed Manual

By Ghrankenstein

Strong Points: Driving dynamics. Good. Improved ergonomics and stereo. Safety comes standard. Effortless downshifts. Is the exhaust note better than before?

Weak Points: Deliberate upshifts. Average on paper. Some materials gripes and awkward adjustments. Interior improvements come at the cost of Saab distinctiveness.

Brief Summary: Light-handed, light-hearted, and uncomplicated. The base 9-3 is full of grins, and tough to beat as a thinking person's performance car.

Introduction

With only about eight months of hands-on familiarity, I’m still new to Saab. In that time, I’ve seen Saab’s North American struggle from just about every angle possible. I’ve seen the frustrations of owners frequently driving long distances to deal with sometimes fussy vehicles, and I’ve seen the Saabs with hundreds of thousands of miles and nary a problem. I’ve seen the safety fanatics, and the driving enthusiasts who refuse to own anything else, and I’ve seen everything from disappointment in the dilution of Saab’s unique qualities, to optimism in Saab’s deeper-pocketed future. More than anything else, I’ve seen a great deal of interest, and opinion, in the present and future products of Saab.

GM’s ownership of Saab has clearly been a benefit to both companies. In the case of Saab, GM’s global financial backing has ensured a clear and bright future for the Swedish manufacturer. For GM, little Saab has already contributed expertise with profound effects throughout the company. Saab’s understanding of front-wheel drive performance, as well as crash safety, has resulted in the global Epsilon platform, which has earned universal safety approval and has proven competent when tuned to be so. Saab’s expertise in four-cylinder, DOHC, and boosted engines has yielded the bulletproof Ecotec, and has provided guidance for the High-Feature/Alloytec V-6 engines. I suspect that readers will be willing to debate this, but I feel that only rarely has a recent automotive merger benefited both parties as positively.

In the short term, GM obviously considered the same corporate-pairing strategy with Subaru that it was implementing with Opel-Saturn, and Holden-Pontiac. The first products were thinly disguised Subaru Impreza and Impreza WRX wagons, the 9-2X 2.5i and Aero. They drove well enough, but they were unrefined brutes that appealed neither to the ricers or the Saab traditionalists.

Saab dealers desperately wanted an SUV, and while a Subaru B9 Tribeca derivative was being developed, GM granted a GMT-360 called the 9-7X. This traditional body-on-frame SUV is among the best of its kind, but clearly a dying breed. Midsize SUV buyers care less about towing 6500 lbs. and more about image and car-like driving dynamics. Unfortunately, the Chevrolet lineage and American production have largely failed to appeal to the Saab crowd, with the 9-7X selling best as an alternative to the Envoy Denali.

Saab’s core product line is aging, if gracefully. The 9-5, once a head-on competitor with the BMW 5-series and Mercedes-Benz E-class, is now a value leader. That’s a shame, because it’s now the favorite among hardcore Saab fanatics, as well as Consumer Reports. The 9-5 received over 2400 changes for 2006, and from driving comparisons worth several hundred miles (against a 2004 Linear) they were for the better, especially in terms of interior and stereo quality, performance, and arguably handling. The current 9-5 takes hits on refinement for personality. On this tangent, I’ll recommend that shoppers pass on the 2007 Aero (Sport Package for 2006), which handles beautifully but scrapes its long front overhang on pretty much anything questionable due to its lowered ride height. If you want to spend the extra money on a 9-5, opt for the sweat-free ventilated seats, or get the paddle-shift 5-speed Sentronic (e.g. Aisin-Warner) automatic transaxle and give up the 273 lb-ft turbo overboost.

The 9-3, the first of GM’s Epsilon-bodied vehicles, has been continually improved in terms of performance and handling. For 2006, the German-built 2.0L Ecotec, at a turbocharged 210 hp and 221 lb-ft, became the standard 9-3 motor, with the Aero model gaining the 2.8L 250 hp, 258 lb-ft turbocharged High Feature V-6 and an optional 6-speed Sentronic transaxle with paddle shift. More power, more gears, and Aero upgrades led to a resurgence of aspiration among import enthusiasts. It’s certainly an exhilarating drive, and the Aero model will remain the ultimate 9-3 to many.

Back to the Present

The 2007 model 9-3 gets an interior makeover similar to the one given to the 2005 9-5. That means some materials improvements to the already attractive 9-3 interior. Leather seating remains standard, and an advantage over Audi and Volvo. The 2007 model gets new dial-based HVAC controls, and the number of pushbuttons is reduced drastically. On the dash, premium enhancements are subtle, such as aluminum rings around the dash at large, along with the vent airflow joysticks.

The radio will be an unfortunate source of controversy. It’s a GM “Black-Tie” radio, but it has a broad faceplate that is still unique to Saab. In terms of uniqueness, it’s a letdown. In terms of ergonomics and function, it’s a huge improvement. Benefit Number One is an improved equalizer, which allows a midrange audio adjustment along with treble and bass. The auxiliary input jack is moved to the head unit, and the radios are now compatible with XM satellite radio, with its superior heavy-metal programming over Sirius.

Gone is the phone-dial preset system, and the fiddly push-dial radio information center. In its place is the programmable Black Tie menu, which can configure any number of radio stations from 6 to 36 presets, in multiple bands. The revised steering-wheel controls make full use of this new power, which must be used with equal responsibility to maintain balance in the universe.

Where the negative manifests is in the movement of the DIC from the upper center of the dash to a window just below the speedometer. I think it’s a reflection of the open-mindedness of the Saab clientele to such a non-mainstream display choice, and the fact that Saab had chosen such a unique previous location for the DIC. In function, if not spirit, the new setup is completely superior, since its controls are now via the steering wheel, rather than the long-reach push-knob. Fortunately for Saab folks, the same programmable options remain.

Some of the controls are the same. The Saab “Nightpanel,” control keeps its vigil to the right of the gauge cluster, and eliminates all other static interior readouts, except for 90 mph worth of speedometer. Near it is the “dash” button, which is a pushable dummy in place of the convertible top-lowering switch.

The Lovecraftian dash-mounted cup holder is still present. It actually does a pretty good job with medium sodas, but its main function is amusement as it spirals out and unfolds. It provides perfect cyclopean choreography for twisted, undulating bridges of Swedish death metal, and the perfect opportunity for weirding out passengers, suspecting and unsuspecting alike. Would the 9-3 be a Saab without it? Maybe, maybe not, but I like it.

I have a few criticisms of the 9-3’s interior, all of which could have been addressed with the interior upgrade, but weren’t. Most maddening is the steering wheel release lever, which allows the wheel to tilt adequately, and telescope semi-adequately. It’s better than nothing, but the lever itself is awkwardly placed, well below the base of the steering column, and it’s so flimsy that I fear of breaking it every time I use it. Yuck.

Remaining gripes center around the seat adjustments. In the base 9-3 and no sunroof, I have plenty of headroom, and the foot wells are considerably more generous than in either the 9-2X or the 9-5. I’d really like to be able to tilt the front of the cushion up more, for better thigh support. Instead, I have to raise the whole seat up, scoot it back, and sit more upright. It’s not all that bad, but I’d just like to have a bigger comfort range of adjustability. Rounding out the seating, that lumbar adjustment is weak for American tastes, and the back seats are cozy, if relatively competitive, at best. Read on, and I’ll assert that the back seat’s room is a compromise that I’ll take, in the name of agility.

Overall the changes have been for the better, even if some of the quirkiness has been sacrificed. Regardless of opinion, the new interior changes have no effect on the performance and handling of the 9-3.

Let the Car Do the Work

The 9-3 emphasizes handling over all else. Since the Epsilon-bodied variant debuted, it has been praised for its agility, with mixed reviews going to other aspects of its performance. I don’t think that Saab ever engineered the car with quantitative performance in mind, and it’s certainly not the car of choice for fans of brute force, quarter-miles, and lateral-g’s. The 9-3 is about the qualitative aspects of driving, such as response and feel, which as usual, I try to interpret in terms of driving language.

The 2.0T is powered by the German-built 2.0L Ecotec. Detractors of GM’s global four-cylinder engine family probably haven’t experienced this engine, and until I can get ahold of a SIDI-2.0 Solstice GXP for comparison, it remains my favorite Ecotec. Its ratings are certainly modest, at 210 hp and 221 lb-ft, but like BMW’s exquisite inline sixes, it always seems to feel more powerful than it is. Part of that is due to the fact that all 221 lb-ft is available from 2000 rpm, and part is due to the Trionic engine management system.

Trionic is a Saab trademark for its powerful 32-bit Powertrain Control Module (PCM). I don’t know exactly how far back it goes, but it’s also present in the earlier Ecopower 2.3L 9-5, and it was so-named because it integrated the engine’s ignition timing and fuel-air mixture with the turbocharger’s wastegate pressure to create a seamless, linear response from a small-displacement turbocharged engine. Later, and in the case of the current four-cylinder 9-3’s and the 9-5, that system also incorporates electronic throttle control.

It works. The 2.0T builds boost smoothly, and has a usefully flat power curve through most of its rev range. Acceleration, while not pavement-ripping, is enjoyably strong, and the turbo does not detract from smooth driving.

The turbo always seems ready. In the realm of refinement, the Ecotec is also quiet, with an exhaust note that seems deeper and richer than before. It’s the spoken word of the 9-3’s informative driving language, and it’s easy to measure what the engine is doing in order to tell it what’s next.

The drivetrain’s biggest, and perhaps only, change for 2007 is the upgrade to a six-speed manual transaxle in the 2.0T. I never got to drive one of the older five-speeds in a 9-3. The closest I ever got was driving the same transaxle in the Cobalt SS/SC, where I found it to be poorly matched to the Cobalt’s enthusiastic torque, but familiar in its feel and action. That familiarity returns in the 6-speed.

The gearbox is not a Miata-style masterpiece of short-throw precision, and its feel, especially on upshifts, is quite rubbery. Like the Getrag boxes with which I’m well acquainted, the upshifts are smooth, but with long throws and a spongy delay mid-shift. Rubbery? Spongy? Long-throws? Why on earth would a respectable self-shifter like this thing? I’ll tell you.

The box has merits. In the context of the car, it’s an action that rewards smooth, precise driving, while letting the car do the work. The throws are deeply, but widely, gated, which makes gears easy to find and shifts nearly impossible to miss. Linear throws, such as 1-2 and 3-4, are thus very deliberate, and ask for a light touch for maximum speed.

The transaxle is at its spring-loaded best in cross-gate upshifts and two-gear downshifts. The centering action makes these shifts effortless, with a fractional throw out and corresponding nudge in. Letting the shifter do the work is the key, and easy, accurate control is the reward. Learning the car, knowing the car, and knowing when to take control is a lot of the fun. The buyer of this particular 9-3, new to Saab, noticed the same qualities of the shifter without me having to point them out. That's good.

Despite the platform similarities, which make up the underpinnings of several safe and competent, if comparatively mundane vehicles, Saab has managed to hold something back for itself. Beyond the neat turbo Ecotec, and the nutty 6-speed manual, the 9-3 keeps its weight down and adds some ingenious suspension tricks, while thankfully avoiding some common American-market pitfalls.

Much of the engineering knowledge comes from Saab’s own safety protocol. This includes seventeen different in-house crash-tests, including the fabled moose-vs.-windshield test. Furthermore, all total-loss Saabs in Sweden are repurchased and analyzed; the database numbers in the thousands. The benefit to the consumer is a bevy of highly crashworthy vehicles, as well as an exceedingly strong, stiff front-wheel drive platform from which to tune a performance car.

The 104-inch wheelbase of the 9-3 sacrifices some backseat passenger room, but it holds the curb weight down. Historically, I’ve preferred the lack of directional inertia to the supposed ride-quality benefits of long wheelbases. I suppose the shorter wheelbase also contributes to greater beam strength, but I doubt that contribution is more than marginal. More important is the restraint by Saab in not dubbing the 9-3 with the heavy, oversized wheels and long (112”) wheelbases that negatively affect the handling of the [long-wheelbase] G6 above all other Epsilons. The modest sixteen-inch 215-tread wheel/tire package retains the best subjective agility, though the Aero’s 17-inch/235 tread still feels better than other 17-inch Epsilons.

Saab’s exclusive component is the Re-Axs rear suspension geometry, which is similar in function to the Mazda DTSS of the second-generation RX-7. This elegant multilink setup allows passive rear-wheel steering, and contributes greatly to the subjective agility of the 9-3. Read on.

I’ve said it before, but it was the 9-3, namely the Aero, that taught me to drive with my fingertips and not by white-knuckling the steering wheel. Since most “civilian” performance drivers are white-knucklers, I now find, frustratingly, that most “performance” cars are now tuned to provide feedback through effort rather than sensitivity. Nissan has mastered this approach, and Pontiac mimicked it on the Grand Prix. The 9-3 is not such a car.

I’ll go so far as to say that the “visceral” model of high effort and high feedback is desensitizing and counterproductive, though it might be in the same way that manual transmissions are counterproductive. I’ll leave it to you, the reader, to decide what you want, and what you like. I can appreciate the visceral, but I appreciate the delicate and the sensitive even more.

To that end, the 9-3’s steering is devilishly quick. It’s also light. That combination has been the reason that previous reviews have run the gamut in terms of driving impressions. Once again, it’s a matter of learning the 9-3, and its language. It’s a matter of adopting a fingertip driving style to a sweaty-palm style. In the 9-3, it’s the difference between understanding and disappointment.

Despite the quickness and the lightness, the 9-3 easily communicates front-wheel loading, and the 54%/46% front-rear weight bias is happily neutral and controllable. Steering is easy with appropriate sensory application, and the 9-3 is effortlessly placed at a desired cornering attitude. Couple that with the previously mentioned downshift quality, and excellent heel-and-toe pedal placement, and it takes little practice to effectively correlate braking, steering, and rev-matching in order to optimize the 9-3’s performance out of a corner. When that decreasing-radius curve says, “No way!” You’ll be saying, “Dude, yes way!” And that’s because you’ve all seen at least one of the Bill and Ted movies.

The Aero model offers more power, more stereo wattage, more amenities, and a bit more aggressive setup. But is it worth the five-grand premium? I won’t debate that here, other than that I think the 6-speed paddle-shift Sentronic (Aisin-Warner) transaxle is the way to go on the Aero.

I just like the simplicity of the base car. At least one member says that I have no standards (smack), but I have always preferred fewer frills diluting the elemental experience of driving.

Summary and [More] Commentary

I take no shame in saying that, despite the gripes, I’m sold on this most basic incarnation of the Saab 9-3. It’s eager, exuberant, and despite the evolution, it’s heart is in the right place. In this day and age, how many cars even have a heart at all?

With the current 9-3 in its twilight, GM would be wise in treating the little Saab as its 3-series, especially in not allowing the future car to balloon in weight and price. The current 9-3 represents an outstanding value in terms of safety and handling-oriented performance. Despite its electrical gremlins, which hopefully will be rectified in the latest 9-3, the Ecotec’s durability record strongly suggests that it will be able to continue the tradition of Saab longevity.

With Epsilon II, Saab will make or break the 9-3. Hopefully Saab will have had the same hand as in designing the original Epsilon, and retain the compact dimensions and modest curb weight of the current model. If that’s the case, the current 2.0L turbocharged Ecotec will remain a fine base powerplant, with Aero models eligible for the 2.0L SIDI motor and over 250 hp without sacrificing weight. If we really had our way, we’d also see a North American diesel, and its own amusing qualities. Save the V-6 for the 9-5, but throw in the heads-up display and all-wheel drive as options.

I think that the incorporation of Hydramatic transaxles, namely the new six-speeds, into the Epsilon II will prove to be an advantage over the current Aisin-Warner automatics. The new six-speeds use a novel clutch-to-clutch system outside of the first upshift that works rather like a bicycle’s front and rear cogs. They’re very smooth, and they represent a logical extension of the Hydramatic groundplan. They might not have the new-tech appeal of the Audi-VW DSG, but Hydramatic remains the industry standard for automatic transmission shift quality and durability.

Protect agility at all costs other than safety, keep the price low, and new customers will continue to join the Saab clientele. Fail to do so, and the European customer base will abandon the make.

The death knell of the Epsilon II 9-3 would be an opulent, over-equipped Cadillac CTS-sized cruiser with Lexus levels of performance-inhibiting technology. The next CTS will have its own merits, and plenty of customers. Let it have them.

Most importantly, keep the 9-3 as an affordable premium driver-oriented car, and Saab will continue to have a winner.

Thanks, as always for reading.

Insane W. Ghrankenstein

[DuSpinnst]

I can vouch for it being EASY to find the correct gear with the 6-speed. I don't even have to think about what gear I have to put it in, I just nudge it in the right direction and it finds the right spot.

[throwback]

Nice review. I own a 2005 9-3 Linear with 38K miles now. Highs: balance, ride, poise. This is a very good handling car, I agree with your assessment completely. Mileage has been outstanding, I never get less than 30MPG, most of my driving is rural 2 lanes and interstates. The engine is a gem even though I only have 175HP. The turbo makes two lane passing a breeze. Lows: shift linkage (i am looking for a short shift kit), suspension is a little soft for my tastes. The base radio is the worse OEM radio I have heard in years. Reception is poor, sound quality awful. My car has been completely reliable, nothing has gone wrong. I do like the new interior for 2007, and I still think the exterior looks good, if a little bland. This is my first SAAB and if it was not for the GM employee fire sale last year I would not have purchased it. It was a great value, I paid 22K for my car with no options. However, the base car came very well equipped, power everything, traction and stability control etc. All in all I would buy another for the right price.

[McG]

I'm a huge fan of my 2006 9-3 Aero. I grabbed the '06 because I prefer it's more "cluttered" interior.

The 6-speed auto is definitely the way to go in the Aero. The handling is nothing short of sensational, and you only realize you have been taking it for granted when you jump into a car that is less accomplished in this area.

[jbernie]

I joined the Saab club 3 months ago this coming weekend, with an 06 Aero w/6sp auto. Compared to the 04 Grand Prix GT this car is amazing.

As much as I have a cluttered dash, i just can't be sold on the stock radio on the 07s, I don't think it is any different than a base model Cobalt. Saves money where money shouldn't be saved. The new nav system though wins with the change as it has a much bigger screen.

Some gripes... no ipod integration just yet, no factory bluetooth setup for the integrated phone features on US models.

Handling is great... love the power as it pushes you back into the seat, great response all round.

Saab has all these quirks, like not being able to lock all doors from the drivers side when exiting the vehicle.. is this button working?? do i have a big? nope its a feature to stop you locking yourself in .

Three months of very happy driving.. my biggest complaint... I don't get to drive it enough...curse that 3 mile drive to work in traffic.

[DuSpinnst]

Originally Posted by jbernie

Some gripes... no ipod integration just yet, no factory bluetooth setup for the integrated phone features on US models.

The 2007's will have the iPod integration shortly. Bluetooth should be around the corner as well.

[nadepalma]

Originally Posted by Ghrankenstein

GM’s ownership of Saab has clearly been a benefit to both companies. In the case of Saab, GM’s global financial backing has ensured a clear and bright future for the Swedish manufacturer. For GM, little Saab has already contributed expertise with profound effects throughout the company. Saab’s understanding of front-wheel drive performance, as well as crash safety, has resulted in the global Epsilon platform, which has earned universal safety approval and has proven competent when tuned to be so. Saab’s expertise in four-cylinder, DOHC, and boosted engines has yielded the bulletproof Ecotec, and has provided guidance for the High-Feature/Alloytec V-6 engines.

Well stated. Just looking at it from this perspective, GM has gotten an awful lot from Saab and vice versa. Saab has some excellent engineers and planners that have benefitted GM as a whole -- and Saab has had an advocate (in most cases) and continues to be committed to seeing the brand prosper thanks to a renewed interest by folks like Bob Lutz and others.

No doubt Saab has had a great deal of input into the next EpII platform and how it will perform.

[nadepalma]

Originally Posted by Ghrankenstein

The radio will be an unfortunate source of controversy. It’s a GM “Black-Tie” radio, but it has a broad faceplate that is still unique to Saab. In terms of uniqueness, it’s a letdown. In terms of ergonomics and function, it’s a huge improvement. Benefit Number One is an improved equalizer, which allows a midrange audio adjustment along with treble and bass. The auxiliary input jack is moved to the head unit, and the radios are now compatible with XM satellite radio, with its superior heavy-metal programming over Sirius.

Well even if folks criticized how it looks, I'm glad to know that it works well and has good "performance" for a radio. I hope that others will see this as a positive before going negative....

[nadepalma]

Originally Posted by Ghrankenstein

I have a few criticisms of the 9-3’s interior, all of which could have been addressed with the interior upgrade, but weren’t.
............
Overall the changes have been for the better, even if some of the quirkiness has been sacrificed.[/size]

I was thinking the same thing Ghrankenstein -- perhaps they are waiting for a more dramatic interior update (the center console, door panels, center arm-rest, et al. to match the changes in the dashboard) for next year when the 9-3 gets an exterior refresh?

It's definitely plausbile that GM is looking to deliver a more dramatic note to the exterior of the 9-3 next year and will add these changes then...

That's the only thing I can figure...but I agree, more shoudl have been done. Thought I must say that I really like the simplicity of the new interior and the ergonomics, at least, seem to be good.

[nadepalma]

Originally Posted by Ghrankenstein

The drivetrain’s biggest, and perhaps only, change for 2007 is the upgrade to a six-speed manual transaxle in the 2.0T. I never got to drive one of the older five-speeds in a 9-3. The closest I ever got was driving the same transaxle in the Cobalt SS/SC, where I found it to be poorly matched to the Cobalt’s enthusiastic torque, but familiar in its feel and action. That familiarity returns in the 6-speed.

So the 6-speed manual in the 9-3 and the updated 5-speed manual in the Cobalt SS/SC are related? It kind of makes me wonder if GM won't upgrade the Cobalt's own gearbox to 6 cogs in the near future? I know that cost is an issue with the Cobalt, but certainly most of the other cars in this segment (at least "performance" variants) are moving this direction. With only 10 less hp, I'm sure that technological shortfalls are not an issue. Maybe when the MCE arrives for the Cobalt in '08?

But looking at it from another perspective, the Nissan Versa and Sentra BOTH come with a 6speed manual STANDARD -- so I'm not sure how much more expensive it is to throw another cog in there from a purchasing/logistics perspective, but if other companies are moving to do this in light of fuel costs and braggin' rights, GM might consider following suite.

Of course that is must my opinion.

[DuSpinnst]

Originally Posted by nadepalma

I was thinking the same thing Ghrankenstein -- perhaps they are waiting for a more dramatic interior update (the center console, door panels, center arm-rest, et al. to match the changes in the dashboard) for next year when the 9-3 gets an exterior refresh?

It's definitely plausbile that GM is looking to deliver a more dramatic note to the exterior of the 9-3 next year and will add these changes then...

That's the only thing I can figure...but I agree, more shoudl have been done. Thought I must say that I really like the simplicity of the new interior and the ergonomics, at least, seem to be good.

Having both the 2006 and 2007 interiors at my disposal. I can say that from a driving perspective the new radio and HVAC controls are much easier to operate. The only thing I miss from 2006 was the ability to switch radio source on the steering wheel (you now have to reach over to switch from Radio to CD to Aux, and to switch Radio bands). I can scroll thru my presets with the buttons on the wheel though.

[FightingChance]

I do love the look of the 9-3.

Hey, all you owners in this thread - drive to Best Buy or Circuit City and drop 200 bucks, get a nice aftermarket deck and kiss that oem thing goodbye.

[nadepalma]

Originally Posted by Ghrankenstein

With the current 9-3 in its twilight, GM would be wise in treating the little Saab as its 3-series, especially in not allowing the future car to balloon in weight and price. The current 9-3 represents an outstanding value in terms of safety and handling-oriented performance. Despite its electrical gremlins, which hopefully will be rectified in the latest 9-3, the Ecotec’s durability record strongly suggests that it will be able to continue the tradition of Saab longevity.

With Epsilon II, Saab will make or break the 9-3. Hopefully Saab will have had the same hand as in designing the original Epsilon, and retain the compact dimensions and modest curb weight of the current model. If that’s the case, the current 2.0L turbocharged Ecotec will remain a fine base powerplant, with Aero models eligible for the 2.0L SIDI motor and over 250 hp without sacrificing weight. If we really had our way, we’d also see a North American diesel, and its own amusing qualities. Save the V-6 for the 9-5, but throw in the heads-up display and all-wheel drive as options.

The death knell of the Epsilon II 9-3 would be an opulent, over-equipped Cadillac CTS-sized cruiser with Lexus levels of performance-inhibiting technology. The next CTS will have its own merits, and plenty of customers. Let it have them.

I think you make some good points here Ghrankenstein. But as for the 9-3 specifically, I think it's been rumored or stated in some articles that the 9-3 will eventually get a bit larger as it moves to the EpII platform to make room in the lineup for the "9-1" down the road.

Consider: the 9-3's wheel base (according to Edmunds) is 105.3 inches while the Cobalt's wheelbase is 103.3. Now assuming that the 9-1 will be based off the next Delta platform and that the next platform will have the same basic size as the current model, the 9-1 and 9-3 would be stepping all over each other's feet. I'd assume that the 9-3 will get slightly longer and wider to better accomodate it's role as the 3-Series fighter (per your comments). This also makes sense in light of the fact that the 9-5 is due to return to it's "stated" role as a 5-Series fighter. As such, it makes a great deal of sense to better position these products to fill their respective niches.

But that's only my interpretation of this, and I could be wrong. But from a logistics and product planning perspective, I think it makes sense.

EpII is supposed to be flexible enough for a variety of wheelbases and widths -- so having a "smaller-ish" product sized for the 9-3 makes sense if it mimicks the general size of the 3-Series sized vehicle, etc.

Your comment about the "CTS sized cruiser" etc is right on the money -- I don't think that Saab and Caddy need to necessarily chase the same customer. But I think that the "CTS" sized vehicle will be left solely to the 9-5 and the 9-3 will continue to be the A4/3-Series/Alfa 159 chaser -- albeit with a bit more room to better compete.

Again, only my point of view, but I thought to add to the discussion.

[DuSpinnst]

Originally Posted by nadepalma

I think you make some good points here Ghrankenstein. But as for the 9-3 specifically, I think it's been rumored or stated in some articles that the 9-3 will eventually get a bit larger as it moves to the EpII platform to make room in the lineup for the "9-1" down the road.

Consider: the 9-3's wheel base (according to Edmunds) is 105.3 inches while the Cobalt's wheelbase is 103.3. Now assuming that the 9-1 will be based off the next Delta platform and that the next platform will have the same basic size as the current model, the 9-1 and 9-3 would be stepping all over each other's feet. I'd assume that the 9-3 will get slightly longer and wider to better accomodate it's role as the 3-Series fighter (per your comments). This also makes sense in light of the fact that the 9-5 is due to return to it's "stated" role as a 5-Series fighter. As such, it makes a great deal of sense to better position these products to fill their respective niches.

But that's only my interpretation of this, and I could be wrong. But from a logistics and product planning perspective, I think it makes sense.

EpII is supposed to be flexible enough for a variety of wheelbases and widths -- so having a "smaller-ish" product sized for the 9-3 makes sense if it mimicks the general size of the 3-Series sized vehicle, etc.

Your comment about the "CTS sized cruiser" etc is right on the money -- I don't think that Saab and Caddy need to necessarily chase the same customer. But I think that the "CTS" sized vehicle will be left solely to the 9-5 and the 9-3 will continue to be the A4/3-Series/Alfa 159 chaser -- albeit with a bit more room to better compete.

Again, only my point of view, but I thought to add to the discussion.

I'd like to point out that the 9-1 may be smaller than a Cobalt, but not in the wheel base. It may be a short rear overhang hatchback. Delta supports various lengths as well, from the Astra Wagon to the Cobalt.

[superstreet]

Originally Posted by DuSpinnst

The 2007's will have the iPod integration shortly. Bluetooth should be around the corner as well.

thats right