Silver T Top Stingray Great Cond Muncie 4 Speed Dual Exhaust Runs Great on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Greetings from Trollhattan. I'm Emily, but I'm not a Saab.

What’s Swedish for “never give up”? Saab, apparently. The fondly-remembered car company formerly called just that — and now named NEVS — is only a shell, employing just a limited crew in the land of trolls. But itÂ’s got something to sell, and that something seems like it's really something. ItÂ’s called Emily. The Emily GT exists as six prototype electric cars, according to NEVS, with a combined horsepower rating (per car) of 484 powered by an enormous 175-kilowatt lithium-ion battery thatÂ’s good for 600 miles of range. In development almost since Saab's demise — the company, once owned by General Motors, was closed down in 2010 — the Emily is a very real product and needs a real sponsor, according to NEVS CEO Nina Selander, speaking to Carup. “It is for sale, it is also a joy to be able to show it. It should be allowed to live on, itÂ’s too nice, too good and too modern a car for nothing to come of it. Interested parties are welcome,” she said. Photos of the car show a modern, forward-thrust profile with handsome lines, a look similar to the last Saab 9-5 and VolvoÂ’s S60 (must be a Swedish thing) and a fashionable, sci-fi-ish interior. A hopeful engineer on the project estimates that the car is less than two years away from some kind of series production, but according to the modest NEVS website, the company is currently in “hibernation” even as it continues to solicit buyers for the Emilys. Said Peter Dahl, the Emily project manager, “Many have asked us what we have been doing for 10 years. We have developed 13 different car projects, this is one of them.” Related video: Volvo Saab Automotive History Electric Future Vehicles Classics

Are orphan cars better deals?

Most folks don't know a Saturn Aura from an Oldsmobile Aurora. Those of you who are immersed in the labyrinth of automobilia know that both cars were testaments to the mediocrity that was pre-bankruptcy General Motors, and that both brands are now long gone. But everybody else? Not so much. By the same token, there are some excellent cars and trucks that don't raise an eyebrow simply because they were sold under brands that are no longer being marketed. Orphan brands no longer get any marketing love, and because of that they can be alarmingly cheap. Case in point, take a look at how a 2010 Saturn Outlook compares with its siblings, the GMC Acadia and Buick Enclave. According to the Manheim Market Report, the Saturn will sell at a wholesale auto auction for around $3,500 less than the comparably equipped Buick or GMC. Part of the reason for this price gap is that most large independent dealerships, such as Carmax, make it a point to avoid buying cars with orphaned badges. Right now if you go to Carmax's site, you'll find that there are more models from Toyota's Scion sub-brand than Mercury, Saab, Pontiac, Hummer, and Saturn combined. This despite the fact that these brands collectively sold in the millions over the last ten years while Scion has rarely been able to realize a six-figure annual sales figure for most of its history. That is the brutal truth of today's car market. When the chips are down, used-car shoppers are nearly as conservative as their new-car-buying counterparts. Unfamiliarity breeds contempt. Contempt leads to fear. Fear leads to anger, and pretty soon you wind up with an older, beat-up Mazda MX-5 in your driveway instead of looking up a newer Pontiac Solstice or Saturn Sky. There are tons of other reasons why orphan cars have trouble selling in today's market. Worries about the cost of repair and the availability of parts hang over the industry's lost toys like a cloud of dust over Pigpen. Yet any common diagnostic repair database, such as Alldata, will have a complete framework for your car's repair and maintenance, and everyone from junkyards to auto parts stores to eBay and Amazon stock tens of thousands of parts. This makes some orphan cars mindblowingly awesome deals if you're willing to shop in the bargain bins of the used-car market. Consider a Suzuki Kizashi with a manual transmission. No, really.

Spyker files $3 billion lawsuit against General Motors over Saab's demise

"Smack." That's the sound of Spyker's process server dropping a big ol' pile of legal documents on the doorstep of The Renaissance Center, home of General Motors - or wherever GM's attorneys live during business hours. Contained therein is a Complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan and demanding a jury trial, that seeks $3 billion in damages due to "the unlawful actions GM took to avoid competition with Saab Automobile in the Chinese market." Spyker accuses GM of "tortiously interfering" with Saab's business relationship with Chinese automaker Zhejiang Youngman Lotus Automobile (Youngman), actions that Spyker CEO Victor Muller (above) said "deliberately drove Saab Automobile into bankruptcy."
(From Wikipedia: "Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when a person intentionally damages the plaintiff's contractual or other business relationships.")
The interference in question specifically refers to the very last potential deal, called the Framework Agreement, that Spyker worked out with Youngman. With lots of GM engineering embedded into the 9-4X and 9-5, The General had the right to approve any Saab partnership that would involve the transfer of GM intellectual property. Spyker had been rebuffed over every previous deal with a Chinese firm, including two bids by Youngman, due to GM concerns over its IP getting into Chinese hands and having to face Chinese-market competitors using its technology. The Complaint alleges that the Framework Agreement would have put a firewall around all GM IP - Youngman would only work on Saab's Phoenix platform, said to be just about free of GM tech, and would have no access to 9-3, 9-4X or 9-5 technology until after Saab ceased all ties to GM.