2000 Saab 9-5 Aero Sedan 4-door 2.3l,very Good Condition,turbocharged,119k on 2040-cars

Auto blog

NEVS' reorganization plan approved after all?

What a difference a day makes. Thursday, we reported that current Saab parent National Electric Vehicle Sweden had its application for creditor protection denied by the Swedish court for being "vague and completely undocumented." But NEVS was back in court on Friday, and this time the application was granted. However, the story continued to get weirder as defense contractor Saab AB allegedly revoked NEVS' rights to use the Saab name.
NEVS did put out a brief press release confirming the court decision saying: "The District court of Vänersborg, Sweden, today August 29 approved the application for reorganization from National Electric Vehicle Sweden AB." The company allegedly has over 90 creditors, and according to Reuters, it owes them roughly 400 million Swedish krona ($57.56 million). The business says that it is in negotiations with two, unnamed companies to get additional funding.
Also, according to Reuters, Saab AB, best known for making fighter planes, has revoked NEVS' rights to the Saab brand name because the company's application for creditor protection gave the defense contractor that right. When NEVS bought Saab, it only acquired the automaker's physical assets, and had to negotiate for the rights to use the name.

What would you drive in 1985?

Bereft of live baseball games to watch, I've turned to the good ship YouTube to watch classic games. While watching the 1985 American League Championship Series last night, several of the broadcast's commercials made its way into the original VHS recording, including those for cars. "Only 8.8% financing on a 1985 Ford Tempo!" What a deal! That got me thinking: what would I drive in 1985?  It sure wouldn't be a Tempo. Or an IROC-Z, for that matter, despite what my Photoshopped 1980s self would indicate in the picture above. I posed this question to my fellow Autobloggists. Only one could actually drive back then, I was only 2 and a few editors weren't even close to being born. Here are our choices, which were simply made with the edict of "Come on, man, be realistic."  West Coast Editor James Riswick: OK, I started this, I'll go first. I like coupes today, so I'm pretty sure I'd drive one back then. I definitely don't see myself driving some badge-engineered GM thing from 1985, and although a Honda Prelude has a certain appeal, I must admit that something European would likely be in order. A BMW maybe? No, I'm too much a contrarian for that. The answer is therefore a 1985 Saab 900 Turbo 3-Door, which is not only a coupe but a hatchback, too. If I could scrounge up enough Reagan-era bucks for the ultra-cool SPG model, that would be rad. The 900 Turbo pictured, which was for auction on Bring a Trailer a few years ago, came with plum-colored Bokhara Red, and you're damn sure I would've had me one of those. Nevermind 1985, I'd probably drive this thing today.   Associate Editor Byron Hurd: I'm going to go with the 1985.5 Ford Mustang SVO, AKA the turbocharged Fox Body that everybody remembers but nobody drives. The mid-year update to the SVO bumped the power up from 175 ponies (yeah, yeah) to 205, making it almost as powerful (on paper, anyway) as the V8-powered GT models offered in the same time frame. I chose this particular car because it's a bit of a time capsule and, simultaneously, a reminder that all things are cyclical. Here we are, 35 years later, and 2.3-liter turbocharged Mustangs are a thing again. Who would have guessed?

GM wins appeal, dismissal of $3B Saab-related Spyker suit

It's been a long time since we last heard of the legal battles between Spyker CEO Victor Muller and General Motors, the automaker from which Muller's company purchased the embattled Saab brand back in 2010. To refresh your memories, after struggling through 2011 and entering into bankruptcy, Spyker attempted to save the Saab brand by selling it to a Chinese consortium. General Motors, though, blocked the sale because it did not want any of its intellectual property, of which Saab was in possession of from its days under the GM umbrella, in the hands of a potential rival automaker. Spyker then sued GM for intentionally blocking what it said was Saab's only chance of survival. The $3-billion suit was dismissed after a judge ruled in favor of GM, which apparently had granted a license to Saab to continue building cars using its technologies, but reserved the right to cancel that agreement if Saab again changed hands. Spyker appealed, and, according to Reuters, the appeals court upheld the previous ruling, again siding with GM. National Electric Vehicle Sweden, the company that eventually purchased Saab out of bankruptcy, managed to restart production for a short period before itself falling into financial trouble. We have at least another month to wait before hearing how Saab's next chapter may read.