GM is pulling the plug on Saab. Starting January, the Griffith will start to disappear from the face of the earth in stages and never return.

Since I'm not a lawyer (the Bar is so high), a doctor (sight of blood makes me queasy) or an architect (no concept of "space"), I do not fit in the Saab archetype.

Should Saab really pass on – Spyker is putting up a last ditch effort to salvage talks – it isn't just the turtleneck-wearing clever people who will mourn the loss.

Granted, Saab has lost much of its lustre. It may have popularised turbocharging but the likes of VW and BMW have moved the game on. The oft-used association with jetfighters is also a bit limp since the aeronautical arm sold its stakes to GM – 10 long years ago. Having a "night panel" to switch off an entire bank of lights hardly transform a 9-3 into a fighter jet on wheels, even if it really is inspired by those terrors of the sky.

In fact, there are probably only two things proprietary to Saab that many will remember: the flip-out cupholder and the ignition key barrel sited behind the gear lever. Hardly things to mourn over.

But you have to understand the constraints Saab had to work under. Its volume was too small to afford engineering a car from the ground-up (that said, GM could at least have given Saab current technologies). Within whatever room there was, the brand has tried to exude its essential Swedish-ness. I'll probably never know if Swedish massage really comes from Sweden but Saab does know how to make good seats that's a real boon for long jaunts.

Okay, so a chair that's good for the back is hardly fertile ground to argue for a car brand's survival but what defence will you pose if Toyota pulls the plug on Lexus? Deafening silence?

• Comment
• Print
•