Saab Sonett III

With all the news and hope of the survival and success of Saab and the upcoming release of their new 9-5, I'd like to pay tribute to the Saab that I hold dear and true. From my high school days of wanting a true "image" sports car, as well as getting away from all the same cars my friends had, I chased after the Saab Sonnet III more than once.

Its styling has been called Italian-inspired, and for good reason. These cars were, and still are, stunningly beautiful to the eyes. What other car could wear this shade of lime green and get away with it? In fact, the color and the car seem to compliment each other, in my opinion. This is the Euro version; after 1972, we got some really nasty bumpers on them (The last image here has the larger bumpers).

"Sonnet" comes from the Italian word sonetto, meaning "little song" or "little sound." But more accurately, "Sonett" is a Swedish slang expression, "Så nätt den är," translated as "how neat it is", or more literally, "so neat they are." Thank you, Wikipedia.

I keep talking about cars I wanted back in ye olden days. Obviously, there were very few sporty cars I didn't want back then! But as somebody much wiser than me said, "If you'd kept all the cars you had, you would have been a millionaire," to which one would respond, "No, If I were a millionaire, I would have kept every car I ever had."

Some quick Sonett history: There was a Sonett I, a Sonett II, the Sonett V4, and of course, our subject car.

Only six Sonett Is were made between 1955 and '57; two are in the United States. They were to be put into mass production, but economic circumstances dictated otherwise. It had a 748cc two-stroke engine with 57.5 horsepower and was fairly deft for the time. In 1996, a Sonett I set a speed record of 99 mph in the Under-750cc Class. These cars are now considered prototypes of the Sonett II.

The Sonett II and Sonett V4 were essentially the same car, save for the engine. The Sonett II had another two-stroke plant, but in 1967 it failed US emissions. So Ford's Taunus V-4 was fitted, necessitating the name change. A few quirks of these cars included a column-mounted four-speed shifter, front-wheel drive, and a freewheeling clutch.

But the fiberglass car's front-end had to be redesigned for the new engine because of the 1970 Clear Air Act, and that created the styling of the 1970 Sonett III. And while they were at it, Saab moved the shifter moved to the floor, a hinged piece of glass became the rear hatch, and dealers could finally install air conditioning for us sweltering Americans.

Only 8,368 Sonett IIIs were made, but they were surprisingly plentiful as used cars in the mid- to late-1970s. Virtually all of these cars were imported to America, so it was common to pick up a local (Nashville) used-car sales publication and find one or two. I had no fear of limited parts availability, no more so than a TR6 or MGB, even with this car's semi-exotic engine.

Which, by the way, was a V-4 with 55 horsepower. The 1970 and '71 Sonetts had a 1.5-liter engine, the same as the Sonett V4, and the 1972-74s had the 1.7-liter mill. But both engines had the same now-relatively measly power, due to the 1.7-liter being choked with emissions controls.

Yet that was still enough to get the car up to speed quickly for the time, and to exceed the 100-mph mark. Zero to 60 took about 11 seconds--not bad for a small sports car built during the Nixon years.

To say that the Sonett's interior rivaled or surpassed any supercar of its time would be an understatement. Few real sports cars could match or improve on what this car offered. Even as small as the car was, the interior looked open, elegant, and uncrowded.

Full gauges (yay!), sculpted bucket seats (look at those lumbar supports!), and a nearly flat floor, thanks to the front wheel drive, added to its exotic looks.

Also inside was a lever to manually open the flip-up headlights. This system was very similar to the one on the original Opel GT.

My bud Shawn told me about another unique Sonett III option, the "soccer ball" wheels. Designed in-house by Saab, but built by NAI, they have been called a "Swedish fashion statement." The jury is out on whether Pelé would be happy kicking one around. These first appeared on 1971 Sonetts.

Unlike British sports cars, the Sonett III was not killed by pollution controls, large bumpers, or raised driving heights. The 1973 Arab Oil Embargo slowed sales, and the car never recovered. Production of this suave Swedish sports car ended in 1974.

I lusted for a Sonett III in high school, and I lust for one now. If I saw one for sale at a car show in good condition, I probably should run. I just might have the checkbook with me.

The green Sonett III image is from Storm.OldCarManualProject.com. The blue Sonett photo and the interior shot are from MotorTrend.com, as is the Sonett II/V4 image. Our Sonett I photo is from Wikipedia. The Sonett III engine image is from Wikimedia.org. The final Sonett III image is from Hemmings. Some Saab "soccer ball" wheel information was also from Hemmings.

--That Car Guy (Chuck)

Comments

[Cookie the Dog's Owner on February 24, 2010 at 08:26 AM]

It's got that early-'70s jet-set car-of-the-future vibe that a lot of the Italians (e.g. Pantera) had at the time. I've always liked cars like that.

I totally agree with you. WANT!

[Jason on February 24, 2010 at 09:45 AM]

Love the Sonnett III. Love the soccer ball wheels, too. I beleive the Ford V-4 in question is still used in forklifts, improving parts availabilty somewhat.

[Anthony Cagle on February 24, 2010 at 10:10 AM]

That's funny, someone has one of these a few blocks away and after walking by it quite a few times I finally decided to see what it was, but all I could see was that it was a Saab. Neat looking little car, the proportions and various curves look a little funny, but it still works somehow.

I don't know if it runs or not, but I'll keep my eye on it for a For Sale sign. I could even purchase it for you. With suitable markup, of course. . . .

[Steaming Pile on February 24, 2010 at 10:44 AM]

"Nett," if it's the same as German, means "nice," as in "sei nett zu mir und hol' mir ein Bier." (Be nice to me and get me a beer.)

[David Colborne on February 24, 2010 at 10:55 AM]

The Sonnet III looks an awful lot like a period Datsun Z-series mated with an Alfa Romeo of some sort. I like it!

[Rob the Audi Guy on February 24, 2010 at 01:55 PM]

Please refrain from posting about this car; the less it is known, the cheaper it will stay.

[CJinSD on February 24, 2010 at 05:34 PM]

Where did those performance numbers come from? The best numbers I've ever seen for one included 0-60 in 14.4 seconds, which makes more sense. If you ever find one, make sure the subframes aren't rusted beyond recognition. Other than that and the electrical system, the only standard Saab failing that applies is that of the freewheel transmission. Good luck.

People used to stick Cologne V6s in these for ice racing, but the modifications include ditching the hood. On the one hand it makes them as fast as other cheap sports cars of their era, but it also ruins the looks.

[That Car Guy on February 24, 2010 at 06:17 PM]

To CJinSD: 0-60 From VSAAB.com:

11.8 seconds 1974 Sonett III (#97745001279) 100% stock 1700 cc motor, standard exhaust, 165x15 tires and a real smooth transmission.

[CJinSD on February 24, 2010 at 06:36 PM]

So not exactly something collected on a level track with a VBOX or similar accurate measuring device. It isn't really the same thing as a test result from Car and Driver or Road & Track.

[That Car Guy on February 24, 2010 at 07:12 PM]

To CJinSD: It's the best I had to work with. I figured that if a vintage Sonett III would do 0-60 in 11.8 seconds, then one nicely broken in, say a year old with 15,000 miles, should beat that. 0-60 should be in "about 11 seconds," as the post states.

Of course, your mileage may vary. :)

[CJinSD on February 24, 2010 at 10:34 PM]

That Car Guy, I think you're optimistic in assuming that owners' estimated times have any relation to the professionally measured performances generally referenced in print. I believe you looked for numbers in good faith, but I think that you should have specified that the numbers you found were claimed rather than measured.

[That Car Guy on February 25, 2010 at 05:32 AM]

CJinSD: As former technical editor of a globally-broadcast car show, and having run many tests on cars with the equipment as you suggest, I can say with full factuality that the equipment is never perfect. Once, we got a stopping distance of 99 feet in a Porsche 928 GT from 60 mph. That's crazy.

This is a light-hearted post, and I didn't get a dime for doing it. If you wish to nit-pick the post, that's fine. If you want to try to determine the true 0-60 times of a Sonett III, find me one that's a year old with low miles. I'll get some testing equipment, I have a place to do the test, and we'll go for it. Hopefully, the equipment will be accurate. Until then, this is the best we can do.

Moving on...

[CJinSD on February 25, 2010 at 08:20 AM]

Dan Neil is a pulitzer prize winning automotive journalist and he called the Ford Model T the Yugo of its day. Personally, I try not to mislead.

[Chris Hafner on February 25, 2010 at 08:48 AM]

Guys, life is too short and too stressful to have this much conflict on the 0-60 time of a Saab Sonett. Let's take things down a notch and try to remember that this is supposed to be fun.

CJinSD, are you saying that Chuck was trying to mislead? If not, please use less inflammatory and accusatory language. If so, I think you're off-base. What possible motive would he have to mislead readers into thinking a 1974 Saab Sonett III is a 11-second car to 60 instead of a 14-second car?

My read is that he used the best information he had at his fingertips. I think it would have been great had Chuck made clear it was an owner-recorded time without the same level of credibility as a C&D or R&T, but I think his point was less about establishing the authoritative Sonett 0-60 time as making the point that the Sonett is bone-achingly slow by today's standards but respectable for the time.

For the record, I'd tend to agree that a stock '74 Sonett is more likely to be a 14-second car, especially measured in the 1970s with the awful tires of the day. If I had seen this argument last night, I would have checked to see if I have a road test in my old C&D collection. Short of that, I'm seeing a 12-second 0-60 time for the '67 Sonett (with the same engine) on Car Folio, but without a cite on where the information came from.
http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=3817

Saab Museum.com calls it 14.4 seconds, with a cite that appears to be from Brooklands Books, without a year specified but with the V-4.
http://www.saabmuseum.com/sonett3/techspec.html

Saabnet.com - the best, most authoritative Saab resource on the web - has a Sonett page in which they claim the Sonett II did the run in 12.5 seconds *with the less-powerful two-stroke engine.* If that's true (they didn't provide a cite) then it's not unrealistic that the more powerful car would to the job more quickly.
http://www.saabnet.com/tsn/press/060929.html

I guess it would have been more clear had Chuck done extensive research and written the sentence to be a little fuzzy, but I'm questioning whether that distinction is really necessary in this context. We try to walk an interesting balance - we don't set ourselves up as serious automotive journalists, because that's a job and requires more time, research, and resources than we have available. We are essentially enthusiasts writing about things that we enjoy, with no compensation beyond the joy of doing it and the hope that others enjoy the work. Yet, because several of us have a background in journalism, we try to keep things factual and back up our facts whenever possible.

If we missed the balance on this, that falls on me as the blog's editor, not on Chuck.

[Chris Hafner on February 25, 2010 at 08:51 AM]

CJinSD: "Dan Neil is a pulitzer prize winning automotive journalist and he called the Ford Model T the Yugo of its day."

I'll go look for that piece; I'd be interested in seeing the context and wording that he used.

In one sense the Model T was the Yugo of its day, in that it was simple, basic transportation that was offered at a price that made a new car a realistic proposition for a larger proportion of the population. In another sense, of course, it's a completely specious comparison because the Model T was known for its durability and its popularity. In the end the Model T defined automotive success in its generation, while the Yugo defined automotive failure in its generation.

[CJinSD on February 25, 2010 at 09:02 AM]

Time magazine's 50 Worst Cars of All Time
1909 Ford Model T

Uh-oh. Here comes trouble. Let's stipulate that the Model T did everything that the history books say: It put America on wheels, supercharged the nation's economy and transformed the landscape in ways unimagined when the first Tin Lizzy rolled out of the factory. Well, that's just the problem, isn't it? The Model T — whose mass production technique was the work of engineer William C. Klann, who had visited a slaughterhouse's "disassembly line" — conferred to Americans the notion of automobility as something akin to natural law, a right endowed by our Creator. A century later, the consequences of putting every living soul on gas-powered wheels are piling up, from the air over our cities to the sand under our soldiers' boots. And by the way, with its blacksmithed body panels and crude instruments, the Model T was a piece of junk, the Yugo of its day.

So wrote Dan Neil. Of course the reality was that the Model T was the Honda Accord of the day, the most reliable and best engineered car on the market that just happened to also be the most affordable.

[Chris Hafner on February 25, 2010 at 09:08 AM]

Yeah, I totally disagree with all of that. Not to get *too* far off-topic here, but I think Americans have a notion of personal transportation (not necessarily automobility) as something akin to natural law, and I think they should. Whether it's a horse, a Model T, a Hemi Cuda, or a golf cart, I think Americans should feel a right to being able to move freely and inexpensively from place to place. Putting the consequences of gasoline-powered transportation on the shoulders of the Model T seems unfair and a bit myopic. And the Model T was far from a piece of junk; it was very simple and basic, but it was legendarily durable.

Anyway. I know Dan Neil's not here and reading my rebuttal, but I completely agree that he was off-base. For what it's worth, anyway - not much given the topic of this post and the comment thread.

[CJinSD on February 25, 2010 at 09:16 AM]

Chris,

I didn't mean to imply that the author was trying to mislead, just that he did. I've read comparison tests with the Sonett III and its competitors, and it wasn't even in the hunt on a dragstrip. Its competitors for your 32 to 36 hundred dollars 40 years ago were the Datsun 240z, Opel GT and Triumph GT6+. They were all much faster in a straight line, just in another order of performance. It would be like saying that the Mercedes 240D was no worse than other expensive sedans of the '70s in a straight line. The Saab had its appeal, just as the 63 hp Mercedes did, but it wasn't a car that could get "up to speed quickly for the time."

[Anthony Cagle on February 25, 2010 at 09:38 AM]

*working feverishly to check claims in my latest post*

[Rob the Audi Guy on February 25, 2010 at 10:02 AM]

Hey CJ. My Saab Sonnet does 200mph and 0-60 in 3.14 seconds.

[Shawn on February 25, 2010 at 10:27 AM]

Just think how this would all be different had Saab begun its forays with turbocharging with this model. I bet it'd have a much wider fanbase had it been been pretty (in an awkward way) AND fast.

[Mochi Mochi on February 25, 2010 at 10:47 AM]

Ah the Sonett. So lovely and so odd. A child's first sight, it was love pure and true. A sonett III, bright yellow - bathed in late day summer's sun. It's performance implied. it's beauty belied. All claims to track and clock, were quite simply for naught. My heart was undone. I so wanted one. And Lo I still do.

Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate:
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,
And summer's lease hath all too short a date:
Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,
And often is his gold complexion dimmed,
And every fair from fair sometime declines,
By chance, or nature's changing course untrimmed:
But thy eternal summer shall not fade,
Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow'st,
Nor shall death brag thou wander'st in his shade,
When in eternal lines to time thou grow'st,
So long as men can breathe, or eyes can see,
So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.

Oh RIGHT - SoneTT not SoNNet. Always get that wrong.

Fantastic car. I'd love it even if it had a top speed of 40 mph.

[Mochi Mochi on February 25, 2010 at 10:49 AM]

Oh and yes the Opel GT - also incredibly beautiful. I'd own a sonett and a GT if I had the room and the cash :)

[John Bono on February 25, 2010 at 01:48 PM]

I haven't seen a Sonnet in ages, but having read this, especially the weak 0-60 times for a 70's car, I think this is the 70's version of the Delorean. All swoopy good looks, the tease of awesome speed, and then...meh. For my 70's sports car, I'd vastly prefer a 240z, tr-7 or x1/9 to this.

[Just Some Guy on February 26, 2010 at 06:19 AM]

Gotta love any car with negative downforce.