Auto blog

Saab has ruined all Swedish cars for me

It's easy to dismiss my hatred of all Swedish automotive manufacturers as a simple result of bad experiences. I mean, we're all products of our own experiences, some we learn from, others we don't, and some we need to be hit over the head with time and time again. I've been hit over the head too many times with Saabs (and one lonely Volvo), and as a result, I can't bring myself to buy a Koenigsegg. It started with a 900 Turbo sedan. You know, the ugly duckling sister of the beautiful two-door coupe that spawned the Aero, which managed to look stunning from the front, and like a child with a full nappy (diaper) at the rear. I bought it at an auction (mistake number one) for $6,500 (AUD) because as a bloke in his early twenties, I wanted to be noticed – and a greasy-haired bespectacled musician driving a turbocharged Swedish luxury car was my way of standing out. On the drive home I noticed two things: one, it handled like it was on rails – it just gripped! And two, the turbo wasn't working. I took my new wheels to the mechanic, who promptly told me a custom exhaust system would solve the problem – mistake number two. During the fitting, Mr. Shonky's Repair Shop managed to fry some computer thingy. I won't try to remember or understand what it was, but he did tell me that it should have been replaced and that I would have to pay for it. I agreed. Mistake number three. Twelve months later I had spent more than double the original purchase price on repairs, and the turbo still wouldn't work. I sold it for about $4,000, and moved on to something more sensible. But the beautiful handling and quirky design had left an itch that I just couldn't scratch. Many cars and motorbikes later, I sold my Mazda RX-8 because it was too perfect. You know those cars that have spotless paint, an unmarked interior, low kilometers, and you're just too damn scared to park it anywhere? Yep, it was one of those. I would spend 30 to 40 minutes trying to find a vacant spot with vacant spots on either side, and even after leaving the car I would walk back to check if anyone had parked next to me. If they did, I moved. Not a low-anxiety vehicle. So I bought my second Saab – this time a 9-5 turbo wagon – from an auction. Wasn't that mistake number one? This one had reasonably low kilometers, and was even on LPG (a fairly common conversion is Australia – just not on Saabs) and only set me back $2,200. I drove it home, and low and behold, the turbo worked!

GM recalling 524k vehicles over hood latches and toe link nuts

Just hours after confirming to Autoblog its intention to recall 97,540 vehicles in the US (117,651 in North America) for a possible manufacturing defect in the chassis control module of several models, General Motors is issuing two more campaigns that affect another 379,401 units in the US (524,384 in North America).
One campaign covers 290,107 US examples of the 2010-2015 Cadillac SRX and the 2011-2012 Saab 9-4X because the "rear toe link adjuster lock nuts" may be improperly torqued. If not up to spec, the toe adjuster link could separate and allow the wheel to shift while driving, making the handling unstable. GM says that it knows of three crashes and two injuries as a result of this problem. Dealers are inspecting the nuts and installing a new link assembly, if necessary. Autoblog first reported about this potential issue when it showed up on a list of recalls from Transport Canada.
The second recall is for 89,294 examples of the 2013-2015 Chevrolet Spark in the US manufactured from January 17, 2012, through July 29, 2014. According to GM, "corrosion can cause the secondary hood latch striker to stick in the open position." If this happens, and the primary latch also isn't engaged for some reason, the hood could fly open while driving. About 13,000 of these affected Sparks are at dealers and are being held until repaired. The fix requires replacing the hood striker. GM isn't aware of crashes, injuries or fatalities caused by this problem.

Boeing, Saab introduce entry for T-X trainer program

This post is appearing on Autoblog Military, Autoblog's sub-site dedicated to the vehicles, aircraft, and ships of the world's armed forces. Boeing and Saab revealed their entry for the US military's T-X trainer replacement program. The new jet, simply called T-X, is like the lovechild of a F/A-18 Hornet and an F-16 Falcon, and as Boeing tells it, will provide "performance, affordability, and maintainability advantages" over the competition. "Our T-X is real, ready and the right choice for training pilots for generations to come," Leanne Caret, Boeing Defense, Space, and Security's President and CEO said in an official statement. And Caret isn't not kidding about the Boeing T-X being both real and ready – Boeing is so confident that it built two examples before the official unveiling on Tuesday. The first jet, which Defense News reports will fly by the end of the year, debuted to media with the kind of pomp usually reserved for automotive debuts. Boeing/Saab will use the second jet – also featured on Tuesday – for structural proof testing. The needs of a training aircraft are quite different than those of a traditional fighter. The T-X features stadium-style seating, so the instructor riding in back has nearly as good a view as the student in front. Student evaluations should be easy, too, as the open software transmits data effortlessly between ground training systems and the jet itself. Functionally, Boeing claims the twin-tail layout provides more agility than a single-tail design – remember, the military's newest jets, the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II both use twin-tail layouts – while the Air Force can mount two weapon hard points on the jet's wings. According to Defense News, four manufacturers – Boeing/Saab, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin/KAI, and Raytheon/Leonardo/CAE – are vying for the contract to build 350 new trainers to replace the Air Force's fleet of aging T-38 Talons. Featured Gallery Boeing/Saab T-X Entry News Source: Boeing, Defense NewsImage Credit: Boeing Saab Military