The Saab name will not be used on electric cars made by brand owner NEVS, meaning Saab cars’ last bastion of survival has been extinguished

The chance of the Saab name being used on cars is gone, after parent company NEVS (National Electric Vehicle Sweden) agreed to not use the brand name.

This final confirmation follows years of uncertainty over Saab's future. NEVS’s agreement not to use the Saab name on any new cars comes after Saab AB, which now focuses primarily on the aerospace industry, revoked the brand name from NEVS.

Saab AB was parent company to Saab Automobile until 1990, when it sold the marque to General Motors.

According to a statement released by NEVS, the decision not to use the Saab name on its upcoming electric vehicles was made to give the NEVS brand more recognition, but Saab AB’s reclamation of the Saab brand name was undoubtedly an influential factor in the decision.

NEVS had previously produced a small number of cars under the Saab name: most notably the 9-3 of 2014NEVS had ownership of Saab Automobile since August 2012, just three months after establishing itself in Sweden as a registered company. Its acquisition of Saab followed various rumours and takeover bids from both Spyker Cars and Koenigsegg – both of which failed. 

NEVS is currently controlled by Sino-Swedish majority shareholder Kai Johan Jiang, who the company describes as a ‘biofuel industry pioneer’. NEVS plans to primarily serve the Chinese market at first, before catering for other global car markets later on. 

History of Saab - a picture special

Our Verdict

Saab 9-3 Sportwagon

Minor tweaks both simplify and improve the 9-3. Likeable, but lagging behind

Join the debate

Comments
17

22 June 2016
The way I see it, the NEVS brand is probably best kept separate from the SAAB brand name as in reality, other than the vehicle architecture, it shared nothing with the former company. There is no point in tainting the name with a product that isn't really a SAAB.

Sad to see the passing but I don't think this is the end.

 

 

It's all about the twisties........

22 June 2016
TegTypeR wrote:

The way I see it, the NEVS brand is probably best kept separate from the SAAB brand name as in reality, other than the vehicle architecture, it shared nothing with the former company. There is no point in tainting the name with a product that isn't really a SAAB.

Too late. GM already did. And killed it off. Anyone really that bothered?

22 June 2016
The disappearance of Saabs from our roads is sad but once GM took control and ruined the brand there is no joy in seeing the name applied Bugatti-style to other products which have nothing whatever to do with the original company or its founding principles.

22 June 2016
so sad and plainly down to GM mismanagement. Like Ford and Jaguar/Volvo/Aston they just didn't get the SAAB character and the SAAB customer bases aspirations. The killing stroke was using the underpins of the dreadful Vectra. This cars were totally devoid of character. Putting the ignition key on the floor isn't enough!
I remember driving the first Turbo and it seemed like a rocket ship - well, compared to my A40 most things were I suppose! Also the innovative F3 engine. Blomquist et al in the forests in the RAC. It seemed every architect in the UK drove a SAAB.
I walked past one of the last models last week. Looks pretty good to me - but too little and far, far too late. What a waste! You only have to look at Volvo today to see what a company that invests and lets the Swedes get on with things can do.

22 June 2016
johnfaganwilliams wrote:

so sad and plainly down to GM mismanagement. Like Ford and Jaguar/Volvo/Aston they just didn't get the SAAB character and the SAAB customer bases aspirations. The killing stroke was using the underpins of the dreadful Vectra. This cars were totally devoid of character. Putting the ignition key on the floor isn't enough!
I remember driving the first Turbo and it seemed like a rocket ship - well, compared to my A40 most things were I suppose! Also the innovative F3 engine. Blomquist et al in the forests in the RAC. It seemed every architect in the UK drove a SAAB.
I walked past one of the last models last week. Looks pretty good to me - but too little and far, far too late. What a waste! You only have to look at Volvo today to see what a company that invests and lets the Swedes get on with things can do.

I don't think the principle of sharing GM platforms was an issue. For example you'd never know looking or sitting in them that the last two 9-3s shared their platforms with the Mk 3 Cavalier and Mk 2 Vectra or that the last 9-5 was based on an Insignia. If perhaps the way they drove put off buyers then I can understand that but unless the GM platforms were that dire, it probably wasn't beyond Saab's capability to make their cars drive well (or feel Saab-ish). Unless the knowledge that these Saabs shared their platforms with other GM cars was a turn-off. Not that platform sharing affected Saab in the 1980s with the 9000/CD. I suppose it didn't help matters when models were left on sale for years on end yet other cars in the GM family were being replaced every 6-7 years.

22 June 2016
I fully agree. Apart from fundamentally misunderstanding the brands they also applied the same unsophisticated badge engineering approach used for so long on Ford-Lincoln-Mercury and Chevy-Buick-Cadillac-Olds-Pontiac products. To give Ford some credit though, at least their brands received life support and got to live another day. Volvo's latest products are looking good, JLR's are not to my taste but are clearly popular, Aston is spluttering along and Daimler's takeover can't come soon enough.

22 June 2016
...It may sound, I really hope that the name of SAAB will be allowed to die,without the threat of a half hearted, half baked and cynical 'resurgence' at the hand of another company.
SAAB were unique, until GM got their paws on them - and it's death under the tenure of Spyker... well, what a fiasco that became.

There have been 2 SAAB in my life: a 900T16s: the 'Flying Slipper' which I still own... and a 9-5: nice but lost out to a Lexus (LS460, if you please).

SAAB (cars) were idiosyncratic (wilfully different, if you like). The name had a history behind it. Allow it to go with the dignity denied it

Take no notice... I'm only here for the biscuits

22 June 2016
Agree. Saucerer, I completely disagree. Saabs were very innovative, unique and interesting. Putting them on a GM platform was absurd -- counter to EVERYTHING the marque was about. It comprehensively destroyed Saab -- the cars and the company. It was wrong in EVERY way, and we've seen the result.

23 June 2016
Speedraser wrote:

Agree. Saucerer, I completely disagree. Saabs were very innovative, unique and interesting. Putting them on a GM platform was absurd -- counter to EVERYTHING the marque was about. It comprehensively destroyed Saab -- the cars and the company. It was wrong in EVERY way, and we've seen the result.

It has been many many years since Saab were innovative, the last model. The 9000/CD wasn't innovative, sharing its platform with a Fiat Croma, Lancia Thema and Alfa 164 but it looked and felt like a Saab and sold relatively well. As did the Cavalier-based 900/9-3, no-one would ever confuse this Saab for a Cavalier inside or out. Sure, GM could have done a lot lot more and they could have saved Saab, but I disagree with comments saying by simply being based on a GM-platform was the nail in the coffin because it diluted Saab. The last Saab that could be classed as interesting, unique and innovative was the first 900.....launched way back in 1978, way way before GM took control of Saab which was at the beginning of this century.

JJ

22 June 2016
...maybe a future there for the brand, should a serious backer recover its naming rights and attach them to a forward thinking, alternative-feeling product. It's an evocative name, and we're headed for a lot of innovation in general that's well suited to it...

Pages

Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week

  • Hyundai Kona
    First Drive
    18 October 2017
    Hyundai's funky-looking Kona crossover with a peppy three-cylinder engine makes all the right noises for the car to be a success in a crowded segment
  • Citroën C3 Aircross
    First Drive
    17 October 2017
    The Citroen C3 Aircross has got funky looks and a charming interior, but it's another small SUV, and another dynamic miss. Numb steering is just one thing keeping it from class best
  • Skoda-Karoq 2.0 TDI 4x4
    First Drive
    16 October 2017
    Diesel version of Skoda’s junior SUV is unobtrusive and undemanding, but we’d still go for the silkier petrol version of the Karoq
  • Audi Q7 e-tron
    First Drive
    16 October 2017
    Expensive and flawed but this understated diesel-electric Audi Q7 has a lot to offer
  • Citroën C3
    First Drive
    16 October 2017
    Is the third gen Citroën C3 ‘fresh and different’ enough to take on its supermini rivals? We spend six months with one to find out