If Saab Would Have Made More Cars THIS Good Looking, They'd STILL Be Around. Volvo Take Note.

If Saab Would Have Made More Cars THIS Good Looking, They'd STILL Be Around. Volvo Take Note.
I know Saab has been gone now for a while and I know the thought of them returning is purely a pipe dream but after seeing THIS beauty today near my spy lair I couldn't help but write this diddy.

This is a Saab that MOST people wouldn't even know was built but in my opinion next to the concept car they showed a few years ago (Saab Aero X or as we liked to call it, the Swedish corvette), nothing they ever did was as nice as this.

The model you're looking at is a 1973 Saab Sonett III and it was supposed to compete against the original Datsun 240z.

Full 1973 Saab Sonett III Gallery



Only problem was the 'Z' had more power, features, cost less and yes, even better styling.

Hence the Buh-Bye to the Sonett.

Here is a short description from Wikipedia...

"The 1970 redesign of the Sonett V4, named the Sonett III, was initially undertaken by Sergio Coggiola, but Gunnar A. Sjögren altered it to fit the existing chassis without expensive manufacturing-line changes. Hinged rear-window glass replaced the Sonett II/V4 rear compartment hatch door. With the mandate for a "bulge-less" hood, the engine compartment opening evolved into a small front popup panel, resulting in more limited access than in the Sonett V4. Extensive engine work required the removal of the entire front hood section.
To help adapt the car to U.S. market tastes, the Sonett III featured a floor-mounted shifter (instead of the Sonett V4 column-mounted shifter) and optional dealer-installed air conditioning. Like the Opel GT, the Sonett III's hidden headlamps were operated manually using a lever. US safety regulations required new bumpers after 1972, significantly detracting from its Italian-inspired design.

While the 1970 and 1971 model years initially had the same 1500 cc Ford V4 engine as the Sonett V4, emission control requirements reduced the available horsepower. The model years 1971 to 1974 of the Sonett III used the 1700 cc Ford V4, but to meet increasingly strict federal regulations, net power output remained the same as the 1500 cc engine, at 65 horsepower (48 kW).[8] Still, the Sonett III accelerated from 0–100 km/h (0–63 mph) in 13 seconds, and—due to a higher differential gear ratio (42 teeth on the ring gear and 9 teeth on the pinion gear) than the standard 95/96 transmission (39:8)—achieved a top speed of 165 km/h (103 mph), aided by a low 0.31 drag coefficient.

Disappointing sales, especially during the 1973 oil crisis, led Saab to end production in 1974. A total of 8,368 Sonett IIIs were manufactured between 1970 and 1974."

Check out the photos of this beauty with 40 year old ORIGINAL Burnt Orange paint and chime in with your thoughts...

Oh, and BTW, the COOLEST feature on the car that you will see in the photos below is tha fact that the hideaway headlights were NOT electrically powered, they had a MANUAL lever under the dash that you pulled like an emergency brake to open and close them!

Special thanks to the owner Dick Rugge for letting us shoot the car.

AutoSpies.com is the number one ranked site for auto show and car photos.

Spies discuss...

Full 1973 Saab Sonett III Gallery































Full 1973 Saab Sonett III Gallery

MorePowerMorePower - 10/19/2013 9:36:22 PM
+2 Boost
NO!

Saab's problem was that it was always a "quirky" car that appealed to "quirky" people. Saab's biggest problems were their cost and their marketing always proclaimed performance instead of safety, which is what Saab had over most automotive manufacturers.


skytopskytop - 10/20/2013 9:44:15 AM
+2 Boost
Good looking? Better have your eyesight checked.

I remember the Sonnet well. In person, it was most unforgettable.


MattDarringerMattDarringer - 10/20/2013 1:01:01 PM
0 Boost
For the record, SAAB is back in business with pilot cars rolling off the assembly line. The problem with SAAB was that they were Sweden's answer to American Motors because they recycled their cars forever. When the 99 was doddering old, they lengthened the nose and made the 900. The 9000 became the 9-5 after it had run its course. Many vilify GM, but were it not for GM buying SAAB, it would have died two decades ago. Granted the SAAB "Vectra" wasn't exactly brilliant, but the problem with SAAB was not product so much as PRICE. The 9-3 was priced like a BMW and SAAB was so decidedly NOT of that caliber or panache. SAAB made no sense as a stand-alone company and even less sense inside GM. Even though the 9-5 (nee 9000) was as old as dirt, they had the audacity to price it $20K higher than any sane person would have.

Volvo and SAAB both lost having a purpose. At one time, they were grouped with Audi and a notch below BMW/Mercedes. Audi successfully moved up market. When Lexus came and went from being a brand with no legacy to being taken seriously as a premium brand in the blink of an eye, that put Volvo and SAAB at a greater disadvantage because they most decidedly lacked the quality that Lexus brought to he table and they were relying on retread products.

Ford was definitely wise to dump Volvo. They had Lincoln doddering in the market and Volvo not making significant sales gains. If Volvo is to survive, it needs to go down market to the Toyota/Hyundai/Kia/Honda range and leverage Geely as best they can. Take a Geely. Let Volvo make it reliable. Give it a Hyundai warranty and come to market right priced.

Volvo will be next. What you get for $45K in a Volvo simply is not as good as what you get from the same price in a BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Lexus, Genesis, Cadillac, or even Buick.


jemimallahjemimallah - 10/20/2013 6:33:09 PM
+2 Boost
matt, you're not otherwise wrong about saab, but the 1998 9-5 was a completely different, all-new car from its 9000 predecessor.

volvo going after the koreans, though? it's probably even less sustainable as a budget brand than it is as a luxury brand. they need to accept and embrace the upmarket-but-sub-premium position they've successfully ascended to over the last 20 years, and stop trying to reach ever higher (in the direction of audi). yes, gm saved saab in the first place, but it was subsequently run into the ground by their blithe refusal to play to its strengths. volvo need to learn that lesson


Car4LifeCar4Life - 10/21/2013 6:51:42 AM
+1 Boost
It's true, SAAB is reportedly back in business, but they have to make it worth it...don't waste millions on reviving a company that fell asleep in the 90s


HughJassHughJass - 10/21/2013 12:08:33 PM
+2 Boost
Isn't Volvo owned by China now? They'd bleed money for as long as it takes to bankrupt the competition and the Chinese government would never let its companies fail, they have to save face and pump as much money to support them as needed or else the government's illegitimate legitimacy would be questioned.

The new ones look pretty good though so I doubt they need to sell at a loss yet.


PCSRPCSR - 10/21/2013 5:07:43 PM
+1 Boost
Matt: I had to laugh a bit at your comment about Volvo not offering as much as other cars under 45K. Here is a competition (the 46,000 challenge) in which Volvo beat every car you mention, except the BMW 3 series. AND came in at a lesser cost than just about every one of those cars. But maybe you know better??

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/04/08/46000-sport-sedan-challenge-bmw-cadillac-acura-volvo-audi-mercedes-benz/2060349/
Copyright 2026 AutoSpies.com, LLC