RE: Spyker: Yes, We Do Want BMW Engines For Saab

[tgx4776]

Saab already has new engines that are going to be announced at the Paris auto show which are best in class emission wise. (better then bmw even)It is also rumored that they will announce a partnership with another company on engines and the 9-2.

Secondly a lot of interior issues are being fixed now that suppliers have ramped up production. They thought Saab was dead so they didn't ramp up for production when they were supposed to. thats why the new 9-5's interior is soo drab. The 2011 model will have all of that fixed and is what a lot of Saab buyers are waiting for.

Saab also needs a good advertising campaign

Saab has XWD which I believe will replace front wheel drive (for saab) and has partnered with a drive train company to make an XWD system that is more efficient then a FWD setup and is slated to be released with the New 9-3.

The 9-4x Hasn't been released yet which will sell extremely well in the USA especially with rumors of good diesels for it. If people bought a lot of the original Saab 9-4's when they were utter ste they will buy this.

Finally I doubt Saab would just throw a BMW lump in it and call it a day. I am sure that they will mess about with it. Whether it will make it better is yet to be seen. However 80% of car buyers will never know that it is a BMW engine in there.

And finally remember that Saab cannot change all of GM's mistake in such a short time with limited money. We won't know how good they can be until the new 9-3 is released.

Edited by tgx4776 on Tuesday 28th September 14:38

Edited by tgx4776 on Tuesday 28th September 14:39

[fatboy b]

Article said:

Swedish luxury car maker

When did Saab start doing that then? My brother had a little diversion away from Audi/Porsche into a 2.8 Saab. He had to get rid because the interior was so bad.

[tgx4776]

fatboy b said:

Article said:

Swedish luxury car maker

When did Saab start doing that then? My brother had a little diversion away from Audi/Porsche into a 2.8 Saab. He had to get rid because the interior was so bad.

In the 80's before GM screwed them.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-437983929...

[annodomini2]

900T-R said:

annodomini2 said:

900T-R said:

5lab said:

The other option is longditudally mounted fwd cars. Saab were famous for this before the platform sharing began - now if we assume the sharing is over - is there any reason why they wouldn't go back? Would give the cars a nicer (long bonnet) profile..

A more practicable option would be to reverse the drivetrain 180 degrees as per the Saab 9-X and Buick Whatchamamcallit concepts of the early 2000s, creating a transverse front mid engined FWD set up. Both concepts were based on the then-new Epsilon architecture of which Saab's Phoenix platform is a development, so it can be done. Also, Toyota's iQ uses this layout.

You wouldn't want the engine longitudinally mounted in this configuration, it would need to be transverse, with a transaxle behind you can slide it back under the bulkhead.

An inline config with the engine behind you either lengthen the nose or encroach on cabin space.

Um, that's what I said...

The way you worded your post in relation to the above post, it would be 90 degrees not 180, you then later mention tranverse, which would be 180.

Edited by annodomini2 on Tuesday 28th September 15:03

[ArtVandelay]

900T-R said:

ArtVandelay said:

I thought the MINI used a Peugeot/Citroen unit or is that just the case in the Cooper S

Diesels were PSA units, since a couple of months replaced with a lower-capacity (1.6l rather than 2.0l), transverse development of the BMW four pot (as in x16d, x18d x20d, x23d etc)...

Ah, didn't realise the diesel was now a BMW unit, a 123d engine in the MINI would be like the old Skoda Fabia VRS in ethos, only quicker I'd imagine.

[900T-R]

annodomini2 said:

The way you worded your post in relation to the above post, it would be 90 degrees not 180, you then later mention tranverse, which would be 180.

I meant 180 degrees from the current situation - which is standard transverse FWD slung out in front of the axle.... So instead of turning the engine 90 degrees to make for a longitudinal set up, one would rotate it 180 degrees to keep it transverse, but behind the axle line.

Edited by 900T-R on Tuesday 28th September 15:09

[J4CKO]

fatboy b said:

Article said:

Swedish luxury car maker

When did Saab start doing that then? My brother had a little diversion away from Audi/Porsche into a 2.8 Saab. He had to get rid because the interior was so bad.

Did he not sit in it before he bought it ?

They arent the best but nobody "has" to get rid of a car as its interior didnt meet my standards, its not like its dangerous or hazordous to health, if that were the case Subaru would never sell a car, mine looks ok inside but granted its not very well made, there are reasons I want to get rid of it, but it isnt the interior, utter boredom being one.

Dont for a minute think any engines of over four cylinders will make it from BMW into a Saab, all the talk at the moment is about downsizing, so it will be three and our pot turbo's.

[infradig]

I've just had a brilliant idea,get some cheap V8's from,say,Ford.Spend loads of money thay can ill-afford changing to RWD,perhaps paint them lairy colours and badge them as Spyker 400's or something. It wont save the company but at least it will be an instant classic for a few enthusiasts. On second thoughts no car company would be that crazy.

[saaby93]

J4CKO said:

I dont want no crappy BMW lump in my Saab !

+1

If anyone wants a BMW lump they can find something with an appropriate badge on the front

[tgx4776]

Press conference set for tomorrow with a BWM spokesmen being there. http://www.saabsunited.com/2010/09/saab-press-conf...

[KAB888T]

infradig said:

I've just had a brilliant idea,get some cheap V8's from,say,Ford.Spend loads of money thay can ill-afford changing to RWD,perhaps paint them lairy colours and badge them as Spyker 400's or something. It wont save the company but at least it will be an instant classic for a few enthusiasts. On second thoughts no car company would be that crazy.

:-) Brilliant!

[bencollins]

annodomini2 said:

900T-R said:

annodomini2 said:

900T-R said:

5lab said:

The other option is longditudally mounted fwd cars. Saab were famous for this before the platform sharing began - now if we assume the sharing is over - is there any reason why they wouldn't go back? Would give the cars a nicer (long bonnet) profile..

A more practicable option would be to reverse the drivetrain 180 degrees as per the Saab 9-X and Buick Whatchamamcallit concepts of the early 2000s, creating a transverse front mid engined FWD set up. Both concepts were based on the then-new Epsilon architecture of which Saab's Phoenix platform is a development, so it can be done. Also, Toyota's iQ uses this layout.

You wouldn't want the engine longitudinally mounted in this configuration, it would need to be transverse, with a transaxle behind you can slide it back under the bulkhead.

An inline config with the engine behind you either lengthen the nose or encroach on cabin space.

Um, that's what I said...

The way you worded your post in relation to the above post, it would be 90 degrees not 180, you then later mention tranverse, which would be 180.

Edited by annodomini2 on Tuesday 28th September 15:03

often wondered about this myself, also it doesnt lengthen the car, merely the wheelbase.

[Alfanatic]

bencollins said:

annodomini2 said:

900T-R said:

annodomini2 said:

900T-R said:

5lab said:

The other option is longditudally mounted fwd cars. Saab were famous for this before the platform sharing began - now if we assume the sharing is over - is there any reason why they wouldn't go back? Would give the cars a nicer (long bonnet) profile..

A more practicable option would be to reverse the drivetrain 180 degrees as per the Saab 9-X and Buick Whatchamamcallit concepts of the early 2000s, creating a transverse front mid engined FWD set up. Both concepts were based on the then-new Epsilon architecture of which Saab's Phoenix platform is a development, so it can be done. Also, Toyota's iQ uses this layout.

You wouldn't want the engine longitudinally mounted in this configuration, it would need to be transverse, with a transaxle behind you can slide it back under the bulkhead.

An inline config with the engine behind you either lengthen the nose or encroach on cabin space.

Um, that's what I said...

The way you worded your post in relation to the above post, it would be 90 degrees not 180, you then later mention tranverse, which would be 180.

Edited by annodomini2 on Tuesday 28th September 15:03

often wondered about this myself, also it doesnt lengthen the car, merely the wheelbase.

A few have done it over the years, notably Renault in the '80s on some or other car - can't remember which. It works well for balance but lengthens the car a bit because it puts the engine where you would otherwise put the front passengers' feet.

[Petemate]

900T-R said:

annodomini2 said:

The way you worded your post in relation to the above post, it would be 90 degrees not 180, you then later mention tranverse, which would be 180.

I meant 180 degrees from the current situation - which is standard transverse FWD slung out in front of the axle.... So instead of turning the engine 90 degrees to make for a longitudinal set up, one would rotate it 180 degrees to keep it transverse, but behind the axle line.

Edited by 900T-R on Tuesday 28th September 15:09

You mean like the old Renault 4, 5, (old 5), 6, and 16? I had an old 5 and an old 16 years ago - on my 16 and on a mate's 6 I cut an H in the bulkhead & pulled the metal flaps back for access to replace the timing chains ha ha..........

The engines in these were against the bulkhead with the gearboxes sticking out in the front.

Edited by Petemate on Tuesday 28th September 20:45

[va1o]

900T-R said:

ArtVandelay said:

I thought the MINI used a Peugeot/Citroen unit or is that just the case in the Cooper S

Diesels were PSA units, since a couple of months replaced with a lower-capacity (1.6l rather than 2.0l), transverse development of the BMW four pot (as in x16d, x18d x20d, x23d etc)...

Yeah thats right. The petrols on other hand have been jointly developed PSA/ BMW units since 2006, but recently BMW stopped using the 1.4 in the First/ One and replaced with detuned version of the 1.6 petrol.

The PSA diesels must hold the record for been used in the most number of cars. On top of the MINI its found in Citroens, Peugeots, Mazdas, Volvos, Fords and a Suzuki.

[va1o]

The Hypno-Toad said:

I keep saying it but to me its fairly obvious. The Saab business model needed the New 9-5 to be an enormous sales success. It hasn't been. They're doomed.

its far too early to be coming out with comments like that, the new 9-5 has barely been out for 5 minutes

[va1o]

tgx4776 said:

Saab already has new engines that are going to be announced at the Paris auto show which are best in class emission wise. (better then bmw even)It is also rumored that they will announce a partnership with another company on engines and the 9-2.

Thats probably the 1.9 TTiD in the 9-3 your referring too? Yes it very impressive, 180bhp and 119g/km CO2 so does indeed currently beat BMW but only fractionally. Quite a dated engine (gm 1.9) but still not a bad effort, hopefully should increase sales a bit if its priced right.

[peter450]

saaby93 said:

J4CKO said:

I dont want no crappy BMW lump in my Saab !

+1

If anyone wants a BMW lump they can find something with an appropriate badge on the front

BMW do make some very nice engines, i think the problem here is there not the ones there selling to Saab, my money is on them getting the inline 4's, which correct me if i'm wrong, but these units are more or less the same standard as other inline 4's found in Fords, Vauxalls etc, in which case i say whats the point?, they may aswell just stick with GM unless there getting them cheaper from BM

[Carpie]

J4CKO said:

Civic Type are

What?

[va1o]

peter450 said:

BMW do make some very nice engines, i think the problem here is there not the ones there selling to Saab, my money is on them getting the inline 4's, which correct me if i'm wrong, but these units are more or less the same standard as other inline 4's found in Fords, Vauxalls etc, in which case i say whats the point?, they may aswell just stick with GM unless there getting them cheaper from BM

Whats wrong with the BMW inline 4's? The economy/ power combination offered by the BMW 4-cylinder diesels is simply the best of any manufacturer. The 18d, 20d ED, 20d and 23d units are all untouched by anything else.