Saab 900 OG vs NG
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 08. 2024
- Just a quick video covering my recent experience with a new generation Saab 900. I make some comparisons between the aesthetic changes in the design of the newer model.
Musical content courtesy of Epidemic Sound
To each his own. I'll be owning my first 900NG 2.0i next week, can't wait honestly. Would still prefer a Classic Turbo of course, most beautiful Saab ever built. Yet the NG i can drive as a daily and nobody would lift a finger trying to steal it. Yes, they are that much underappreciated over here.
If things were going swimmingly for SAAB, they wouldn't have needed rescuing from GM in 1990. GM hit the perfect balance from 1994 - 2002 with their NG900s and OG9-3s. They lost the plot in 2003, onwards, when they got rid of the hatch and moved manufacturing to the Opel plant on Russelsheim. They tried, and failed, to make a Swedish 3 Series...
As much as I love the unique style and engineering of the 900 and older SAABs, and as much as I've always disliked GM, I have to admit you're 100% right about SAAB already being in trouble.
@@drewzero1 GM had a baleful effect when they took over the design completely in 2003. Bland, cheap looking. But in the NG 900s and OG 9-3s, they sourced better, more reliable transmissions [Aisin-Warner] and turbos [Mitsubishi]. Under the skin, SAAB benefited from access to the GM supply chain. It's just they needed to keep engines and assembly in Sodertalje and Trollhattan, respectively.
they didn't move to Russelsheim... that was one of those "almost happened" things but the 9-3 was made on the epsilon in Trollhatten through its demise
Whatever it is, the NG900/9-3 is a fine car, especially in LHD non-bulkhead breaking guise..!
I've only owned the C900, and the newer models have always (until fairly recently) looked to me like other manufacturers' cars dressed up with some SAABlike trim. (Especially in areas like the adoption of a more conventional engine arrangement, replacing the unique reverse longitudinal design I've always loved-- except when replacing the alternator.)
*However* having said that, I'm really starting to warm to the newer designs, and see the ways SAAB were able to retain their unique blend of quirkiness and functionality even while using GM platforms. I can hardly tell that a SAAB 9-5 is the same platform as a Saturn L200, unlike other GM badge engineered models that didn't run as deep in the brands' identities.
I agree with many of your impressions and opinions. These were some of the most lean years for GM and I am sure there was a lot of pressure on Saab to minimize cost.
I have a 900NG Vert and it's Saab enough for me thanks very much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Probably makes more sense than an OG as a usable classic...and cheaper!!! It's also a Talladega so ultra rare..
Yeah the verts were always better just due to much higher quality in the build - have you compared your vert to a standard 900 NG ? However I own Saab 900 vert turbo OG - you know ? The real one 😂😂- don't think there's a true Saab person on the planet that would trade that for a NG vert
In og 9-3 and ng 900 you should check sills under the plastic ones. I have only 119 000km driven og 9-3 and there was three holes, at least clean dirt out if you are lucky and don't have rust there.
I drove a classic 900 for years and have access to a 1999 9-3 convertible. The 9-3 has a 2l softturbo and the 4speed Auto box what makes it a super comfy cruiser. But ride and handling make the 9-3 (which was already improved to the 900 NG) a much much less involving and enjoyable ride. The classic 900 was simply the best handling front wheel drive car of its time. And the successor just couldn’t match. How can you present a new car that handles worse than its predecessor without damaging the brand!?
My thoughts exactly !!
It's funny, I had a c900, and I remember when the NG came out those weren't "real" SAABs to SAAB drivers. Now I have a 2011 9-3 and I've had to laugh because now in 2022 I see people refer to the NG900s as "real" SAABs compared to the 9-3's... and then I've seen OG 9-3 owners call those "real" SAABs compared to NG 9-3s. Ah no, some will say the 2L but not the V6, THAT'S what makes a 9-3 a "real" SAAB, etc etc. Like you noted regarding 9000s in your video, most SAABs are some kind of collaborative effort to begin with. This was true with engines in other older SAABs as well - those ford and triumph genes. Then you've got the "it's a cobalt" brigade, who don't understand that SAAB actually co-developed the ecotec which made its way into the cobalt and that the 9-3 ecotec is in many ways its own saab thing. In my humble opinion, I think everyone just wants to feel that what they own is special - or at least less NOTspecial than some alternative. We all just need to appreciate that we like a weird dead Swedish brand of car, and that makes us all less notspecial than people who drive other brands ;-)
Well said ! Although, too throw in a conversational hot potato - I've owned or used for a long period of time - every Saab model since the V4 up to the last generation 9-5 and so In my opinion, whatever it is or wants to be named, for whatever in the million reasons we could try to convey, the original 900 was for me and for many I'm sure , some "centre of the universe" peak in Saab design - it's just a great car in so many ways and I don't think there's another Saab model that you can look at think "that's unique" - this is coming from a guy whose daily winter driver is a 9000 which is the most reliable and good looking workhorse one can use to transport vintage furniture and drag a trailer for miles on end ! Saabs are great cars I guess is the bottom line !
@@theclassicsaabguy236 i won't argue there - I miss my c900 dearly. When I had it they were cheap and everywhere on the road! Now I never see them, so I feel it will always be just a memory unless I get a truly vicious bee in my bonnet about it :-(
The classic was and is so distinctive and most people would recognise it as a Saab. To me the stand out models since were the convertibles , possibly better looking than the classic convertible and the estates especially the 95. Although all models appear to have a good reputation mechanically etc they are barely recognisable by their design. I would probably say it was a saab if the seats were extremely comfortable! Interesting so see what they would have been like without GM. Oh thanks for the channel.
Yeah I guess we'll never know what they could have been ! So glad for the classic 900 though ! An amazing anomaly in the history of car manufacture
95 2-stroke is my favourite
Nice video. Since March I own a Saab 9-3 Cabrio and indeed the question is: how much Saab is it in relation to the 96, 99 and 900 OG. Also because it is a postprocessed model of the 900NG. At te other hand it is a fantastic car, drives very smooth and there area lot of smart things in it. But discussing about the influence of GM is interesting. I will follow it. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Agreed !
I have 4 saabs i got two 900ng one coupe 2.0i, one convertible 2.3i and 2 9-5 one 3.0t v6 and a estate dame edna 2.3T
If i look at my Saabs, Hierbij they are all saabs they have their quirks like the key position or night panel. That whole GM thing doesnt bother me. There is Saab dna in all the saabs, even the GM ones.
I've had two of the 900/93 tids, they were quite well built things and robust, drove them in alpine winters, but the handling was not very involving, exciting which the original 99 / 900 was, also some issues with bulkhead cracking and front suspension creaking, it seems that if saab had spent a little bit more on quality issues it would have been a much better car. I now have one of the last new shape 93 convertibles which may be completely GM but Is a lovely car and has lots of Saab design cues ...
Yeah I don't have any major dislike for the NG 900 and 93s but agree with you the handling /driving experience doesn't compare to the OG. But that last gen 93 Vert is a beautiful machine in my opinion. There's a part of me that knows k could sell my 92 Vert and go and buy one them with money left over for another good OG 900 ....
The cars after GM came in the picture are still Saab. They are designed by Saab, build by Saab in same spot as the V4 and 900 classic. The engines in 92-96 and early 99 is not Saab. That is how I look at it. 🙂
The classic 900 was looking it's age but it's distinctiveness was unforgettable, the NG was still a fine car and I personally would be happy with one.
The 9000 was far too Conservative for my liking, it looked like any other executive car, best ignored tbh.
My all time favourite though was the 99, biggest mistake of my life was selling it, the only thing that really irritated my was the roof liner ( what were Saab thinking?).
The 9-3's were beautiful both generations so GM weren't all bad really.
It was a travesty letting Saab go to the wall, fuck sake, the Swedish government should have nationalised the manufacturer and sold it off when the time was right
Any info about the TrollR 95 that's a real Saab I consider the last real Saab less influence from GM
My dream is to one day get a Saab 900 OG, but living in Stockholm and thus having no garage I'm afraid the winters would kill it. Standing on the street, I'd also worry about it being stolen. For these reasons I've been thinking about getting an NG instead, for now. What do you think?
Yeah I agree that about parking an OG on the street - you can winterise a car to protect it , but only to a certain point and Sweden use a lot of salt, but as you say I'll be more worried about vandalism and theft. An NG might be a good compromise in this case as it's less conspicuous and wouldn't attract as much attention but I don't think you're really getting a Saab experience with that car - a 9000 maybe ? That's a great winter car
@@theclassicsaabguy236 Thank you Classic Saab guy for your input! I'll look into the 9000 a bit more. It's not as easy to break into? I've seen you speak highly of your 9000 in an earlier video.
I think NG900 is the ugliest and one of the poorest quality Saab there are. Talladega looks ok, but OG 9-3 looks a lot better. And the true Saab question.. 96 had Ford engine, 99 had triumph engine, 9000 is cross platform 🤷 i've had four OG 9-3's and they are super reliable and they are one of my favourite models, but the quality/driving experience just does not feel as good as older Saabs
2:22 it's an Alfa Romeo, not Alpha... It's not that hard.
Top marks for spotting the Easter egg in this episode ! People say I'm the most anal but I keep proving them wrong ! Case in point !
2003-2010 93 was more a Chevy cobalt 😂
no its a cadillac bls, and the ng900/og 93 is just a opel vectra b (even worst)
NG900 is objectively the superior vehicle... Minimal GM influence actually. And a much stronger drivetrain. Better looking too. Look at a well-spec'd NG900 coupe vs a C900 coupe. The NG coupe is the best looking body they ever made. It stands out no less than the old 900. They both have major influence from typical styling from their respective eras. If you look at the parts, it shares no more with any other vehicles than the C900 did. Certainly less than older Saabs witth their Triumph or Ford engines... I think most of the NG900 hate from "purists" comes from straight up ignorance and baseless lies. Even jealousy that the NG900s and OG9³s have proven to be the most durable car Saab ever produced.
Well for me, it's not necessarily NG 900 hate it's just that when you put them as side-by-side the original 900 just looks so much more classic classic and artistic in its design and that's where I'm coming from. I'm sure that's if it's the new car its going to be technologically better in some ways perhaps but as for GM influence - are you Europe based because Vauxhalls in the UK clearly had their parts bins shared with the NG 🤣
Well where to begin?!
1) minimal GM influence 😂 well besides the floorpan, the suspension, some engines (eg the lame v6), electric parts....
2) better looking? subjective NOT objective
3) better handling? certainly not, at least not without heavy modifications
4) triumph engines? the Saab Slant 4 was heavily modificated to the basic Triumph construction (and in fact, it was a Ricardo construction shared with the both OEMs), built in Sweden by Saab when Triumph didnt even exist anymore
5) the classic 900 is in many aspects and details a very unique construction. The 900 NG is as generic as it gets.
6) jealousy? come on. remind me, which of the both cars is a collectible?
So no, sorry, your opinion is not "objective" (and I dont share it).