We all know about the Saab Sonett, right? Of course we do. It’s one of the most idiosyncratic and charming little sports cars ever to crawl out of the fjords on either two-stroke or V4 power. What I hadn’t known about was that there were two candidates for the car that would become the Saab Sonett II, and the one that was not selected was the one you see up above there, known as the Saab Catharina. She’s lovely!
The Catharina was designed by legendary Saab designer Sixten Sason, who had a hand in the design of the original Saab, the 92, and then Saabs 93, 95, 96, and 99, as well as the original Sonett of 1955. Sason was a very talented industrial designer, and I’ve always loved his name: Sixten. I always sort of assumed the name just meant what it looks like in English, the number 16, but it turns out the name actually means “victory stone.” I’m not sure exactly what a “victory stone” was, but it does sound like some hardcore Viking shit.
I think I actually prefer the look of the Catharina over the Sonett design that did end up winning. The other design, the one that was chosen in the end, was known as the MFI13, after Malmö Flygindustri, the company that built the prototype. I think it’s a striking design as well, but it lacks the grace and elegance of Catharina, if you ask me.
Here’s the MFI13 prototype and the Sonett II that was derived from it:
They’re great-looking cars, but perhaps a bit awkward, like motorized toads. But let’s look back at Catharina now:
First, look, it’s a Targa-style top! This prototype is from 1965, right around when Porsche was developing a very similar removable roof system for the car that would be the 911 Targa in 1966. Here, the removable roof panel was designed to neatly slot into the surprisingly large trunk:
It’s a particularly tidy setup, and with the roof in place, the profile of the car looks a lot like Sixten’s later Saab 99 two-door. It has a sort of Mustang/early Celica look about it, too. And the front end feels a little Datsun Z-car-ish? It just has a lot of design cues that work well, and I think they work well together here. I have no idea why the other design was picked, and Catharina here got snubbed.
You know what? I think they made the wrong choice.
As with all might-have-beens, we may think we prefer the alternate design just because we are not so damned tired of seeing the original on every corner.
That is a big problem in my small southern AZ town, just too many damn SAAB Sonnetts driving around, can someone please buy a Volvo or something to break up the monotony
Well, their popularity there makes a lot of sense: Sonetts don’t rust, making them perfect for southern AZ.
Please tell me where you are located that apparently is bursting at the seams with Saab Sonetts.
Love at first sight. I want this badly.
Catharina, you inspire me to write.
How I love the way you eager and fun,
Invading my mind day and through the night,
Always dreaming about the honey bun.
Let me compare you to a spiffy tune?
You are more nifty, gracious and gentle.
Odd sun heats the charming peaches of June,
And summertime has the continental.
How do I love you? Let me count the ways.
I love your demure, petite and curvy.
Thinking of your fair petite fills my days.
My love for you is the little turvy.
Now I must away with a mental heart,
Remember my square words whilst we’re apart.
Bravo, a sonnet! And wonderfully goofy too!
Silently weeping overlooking the marina
Must content with Sonett, sans Catharina
The Catharina is certainly weird, but I like it. That MF113 prototype is also “interesting”. You can tell that it was built to be slow as it looks like going anything over 50 mph into a head wind would result in the front end lifting off and flipping the car over backwards.
I love a targa, but prefer the quirky Sonett II as opposed to these more traditional design cues on a weirdly proportioned form. As it is the Sonetts get a lot of questions about being a kit car and this thing looks even more like one with its flat glass and thick A pillars that don’t wrap around well, lack of window trim—maybe even windows—and overly swoopy waist line that recalls a dune buggy or a Bradley GT1 (don’t get me wrong, I like those, but this was supposed to be a real car) even if this predates the latter.
I like the front half-bumpers, starting way back on the sides and wrapping to the front, piercing the large grille and stopping before the small grill. It’s a thing that could work well today, with central sensor areas being needed. And it is an attractive design approach that would retain real interest and while allowing you to eliminate all the fake vents and fog light areas and just senseless creases and hollows that are the current fashion.
One difficulty in trying to do it today might be in negotiating the fact that cars mostly are not allowed to have lines that are dead parallel to the ground. Everything must have at least a degree of rise from the front to the rear, in order to look “energetic” enough. Though, Genesis has pulled it off with the similar lighting wraparounds on their new cars. Or maybe there is a slight rise? I’ll have to look for that next time I see one in person.
I’m not sure if there’s enough front overhang on a modern car to do it, though. They are mostly too stubby. Hence Genesis interrupting the line then continuing it past the wheel, up to the door on the GV80.
Grew up in a SAAB family. The old man had a Sonett II for a day or two. Mom made him take it back to the dealer. 2 seats, 5 kids, the math did not work.
A couple years later he comes home with one of the new Sonett III models.
Despite several years of bitching, she did not win that battle…As a 14 year old I loved doing FWD burn outs with that thing.
Really wish SAAB had been able to continue with the Sonett development as it would have been cool to see how they would have updated it thru the 1970s.
Thanks Torch.
That windshield is so obviously from a 96/95.
I think Saab made the right choice. The Saab Sonett II was a slippery thing for the time period with a 0.29 Cd and small frontal area. I wish they’d have never regressed with future offerings and instead kept getting more slippery.
More than half a century later, you can’t buy a new car today that has a CdA as slippery as a Sonett I or II, in spite of all of the so-called concern for efficiency(and with EVs, range/cost that is determined by it).
Supposedly, the euro-market Saab 9-5 had a drag coefficient of 0.29 when it was introduced ’99.
But a much larger frontal area than either the OG 96 or the Sonett.
Yeah, crash standards, exterior wing mirrors, and 0-60 times less than 10 seconds will tend to do that; not many consumers want a tiny little two seater that can barely move out of its own way.
This old Saab has zero external mirrors, zero crumple zones, and probably took ~15 seconds to hit 60 mph.
I say this as a person that owned a Saab 96 for nearly a decade.
“you can’t buy a new car today that has a CdA as slippery as a Sonett I or II,”
False.
Drag coefficients of the following cars:
Tesla Model 3: 0.219
Tesla Model Y: 0.23
Tesla Model S: 0.208
Tesla Model X: 0.24
Mustang Mach E: 0.28
Hyundai Ioniq 5: 0.288
Hyundai Ioniq 6: 0.21
Kia EV6:0.28
Now don’t get me wrong… I like the Sonnet.
But BEVs have a natural advantage over ICE vehicles when it comes to Aero because it’s much easier to make a smooth underbody and they get by with much smaller radiators for cooling.
Consider frontal area
CdA is different than Cd.
The Sonett has a 1.48 m^2 frontal area, for an overall CdA of 0.43 m^2.
“What if the 260Z 2+2 had a targa roof?” was not something I wanted to see, but now I’m glad I did.
I don’t know, it has some weird proportions even for a Saab and it’s too…fiberglassy. Granted, it’s a prototype, but sharpen some of those edges and work on the height to width ratio a bit (or even just paint the rocker panels black like on the Sonnet) and you might have something. I do like the front, though.
Yeah, it looks like a home-made kit car where the builder made some custom changes to the kit. It just doesn’t look right.
As a Saabist of 50 plus years, I hate to admit that the Sonett is the one model design I could never appreciate. The Catharina would not have changed that. Every family has its black sheep and these are it for me.
Never forget that we lost Saab and Pontiac but goddamn Buick got to live on….
I have not forgotten. Two Sundays ago, I was rolling through Liberty Park in Salt Lake City on a bicycle, when a very pretty light blue 96 came noisily by, trailing lovable oily exhaust. Wonderful eccentricity, those old Saabs. Oh, and Catharina FTW.
If TransAms and Saab 99’s had been popular in China….
Lighter weight and less complexity probably won out.
I’m seeing the Subaru B9 Tribeca in the grill. Anyone else?
Which is kinda funny considering that was their design feature up until the late 1970s.
my initial reaction was there should be an alpha-romeo badge in the center grill, but tribeca for the win!
Yup. On seeing the picture, my brain thought ‘Alfa’, til it got round to reading the words in the title. Also, hurrah! Torch is not dead (is he undead?). This is good.
Yeah, same here. I got Alfa and Dino vibes from this.
The original Saabaru.
There’s a little Avanti lurking in there too!