which would concede the fact that this is just a Subaru by another name, as opposed to a new Saab model.Originally posted by StanleyB:
[qb]Ahhh, what servicing tools? Can't they just send the 9-2X owners to a Subaru garage/dealership instead? [/qb][/b]
By the same token, I suspect that the same people will again be disappointed about a car that has been rushed to the US market as a stop-gap measure. The amount of development on the 9-2X can not be in the same league as the 9-3SS given the end result.Originally posted by StanleyB:
[qb]Yes, but you forget something Eric. Many of us waited for the 9-3SS, only to be disappointed with a number of aspects of that car. [/qb][/b]
Yes indeed! What happened to the VC engine ? It was on the website one day, gone the next!!Originally posted by StanleyB:
[qb]Yes, but you forget something Eric. Many of us waited for the 9-3SS, only to be disappointed with a number of aspects of that car. Who then fancy a 2 to 3 year wait for the new 9-2X? Having learnt from the Variable compression engine, the V8 9-5 engine, the 9-3X etc., etc., it would be a brave man to put faith in a release date for the new 9-2X. [/qb][/b]
Therein lies the problem. The 9-2X is a Scooby with a different nose and a different badge. This is not platform sharing, this is basic badge engineering. Ford Fester/Mazda121 stuff. Honda something/Rover 213/216 stuff. Same car different badge, maybe a different engine.Originally posted by Nige:
[qb]What about all the "Saab" owners driving around in rebodied Vectras/Cromas/Themas to say nothing of Audis/Skodas with Golf/Passat underpinnings?
As long as it's done well and the model sticks to the ethos of the brand,there's nothing wrong with platform sharing.