Re: Lamborghini Urus: how and why
Discussion
If anything this is Lambo returning to form rather than straying from it.
The (CAR) company was started in order to build comfortable, refined and powerful GT cars that were better built and more reliable than what Ferrari was producing.
The luxury SUV market segment didn't exist then, the super-saloon market was basically just the Shah of Persia and "V12 up front, two seats in the middle and drive at the back" was the accepted mould for a luxury grand tourer.
That market has evolved and expanded far beyond the handful of people that it catered to in the 60's BUT it does make sense that it forms Lambo's bread and butter now.
The potent SUV IS the modern do-everything grand tourer. I could never imagine owning one, and very possibly nor would the average PHer but the joy of the democratic nature of a free (ish) market society is that you are not forced to buy one.
The (CAR) company was started in order to build comfortable, refined and powerful GT cars that were better built and more reliable than what Ferrari was producing.
The luxury SUV market segment didn't exist then, the super-saloon market was basically just the Shah of Persia and "V12 up front, two seats in the middle and drive at the back" was the accepted mould for a luxury grand tourer.
That market has evolved and expanded far beyond the handful of people that it catered to in the 60's BUT it does make sense that it forms Lambo's bread and butter now.
The potent SUV IS the modern do-everything grand tourer. I could never imagine owning one, and very possibly nor would the average PHer but the joy of the democratic nature of a free (ish) market society is that you are not forced to buy one.
DanB7290 said:
joebongo said:
Souped up Toerag. It's not a real Lambo. More bling for the thickies. Say no more.
But if the cash from the thickness means we keep getting mental V12 things then I'm all for it.Lambo is a halo product and a tiny % of VW sales/earnings it's never actually going to make a "profit" as such on it's own...it survives because it's part of VW.
Some of the comments here are hilarious. Who suggested running Lamborghini at a loss as some kind of kudos thing for VAG?
How the hell would having a loss making super car manufacture help the likes of Skoda and Seat?
"Well mr Ibiza customer the profits from you buying this car will go towards developing stupidly fast super cars that we'll sell to the rich for a loss."
"ok I'll go buy a fiesta now, bye"
We're not the target market for the Urus, very rich people in Russia, india, the middle east and China are, and quite simply put they have very different wants.
VAG need to do what's best for its shareholders, not a load of car enthusiast on the Internet. Moan all you want they don't give a f
k!
How the hell would having a loss making super car manufacture help the likes of Skoda and Seat?
"Well mr Ibiza customer the profits from you buying this car will go towards developing stupidly fast super cars that we'll sell to the rich for a loss."
"ok I'll go buy a fiesta now, bye"
We're not the target market for the Urus, very rich people in Russia, india, the middle east and China are, and quite simply put they have very different wants.
VAG need to do what's best for its shareholders, not a load of car enthusiast on the Internet. Moan all you want they don't give a f
k!LuS1fer said:
The tractor division is long separated and the tractors came first and funded the cars which were only a furious riposte to Ferrari anyway.
The LM002 was really a creature of absolute desperation and life and death for Lamborghini - everyone knew that whether they liked it or not but fashion is a rather less compelling argument when you're owned by a massive corporation.
And that large corporation is the single reason the brand hasn't been consigned to the history books. The LM002 was really a creature of absolute desperation and life and death for Lamborghini - everyone knew that whether they liked it or not but fashion is a rather less compelling argument when you're owned by a massive corporation.
Say what you want but the fact remains under VAGs stewardship, Lamborghini are profitable, the cars are relatively reliable, liveable and dare I say it, viable as an ownership proposition; I know at least two people that run Gallardo's as daily drivers without complaint. How quick everyone is to forget the unstability of ownership under Chrysler (anyone remember their horrible Portofino concept from 1987?) or Megatech...
People really need to get over themselves; this car is not aimed at 'us', the Pistonheaders; as has been said earlier in this thread sporty SUVs are not going anywhere so all the Luddites need to let it go - it's here, it'll be a hit and it will allow Lambo to continue producing the wild, bad-boy cars we know and love!
Cheib said:
In the interview Mr Winklemann likes to portray that it was a long thought out process by Lambo themselves. More like they got a phone call from VW HQ.....either that or it's an amazing coincidence that Bentley launched a similar car at almost exactly the same time.
Er, no. It was common knowledge from when the Estoque was unveiled that Lambo were considering doing either a sedan or an SUV; they couldn't afford to do both however.Comfortably Dumb said:
Some of the comments here are hilarious. Moan all you want they don't give a fk!
I wholeheartedly agree.k!Edited by mrclav on Wednesday 25th April 13:43
RichTBiscuit said:
"The sedan market is stable but dull. An SUV is more emotional"
What a load of bks. I think there are lots of people who realize they should have just built the Estoque.
I see great irony in this statement. If an SUV is indeed "more emotional" then you just proved the point...What a load of b
ks. I think there are lots of people who realize they should have just built the Estoque.Stephanie Winklepicker said:
"It is the segment of the future," says Winkelmann. "The sedan market is stable but dull. An SUV is more emotional. And it has to be a Lamborghini. It has to be dynamic, the design has to be extreme even if it is on a group platform."
It's not the 'segment of the future'. SUVs have been around for decades and their sales have been all over the place. All it takes is an oil price shock and they drop through the floor, plus half the motoring public seems to find them obtrusively offensive.Secondly, if the sedan market is 'stable', then surely it's a safer bet than the SUV market.
'An SUV is more emotional' - in what way? What conjures up greater emotions - clipping apexes in a supercar, threading Alpine roads together in some lovely GT, wafting along in comfort in a real design-icon luxury saloon, or lumbering around looking tasteless and getting in everyone's way in a VW-Group SUV with opaque window tints and wheels the size of Boeing jet engines?
'It has to be a Lamborghini, therefore we're basing it on a VW'.
I think what this translates as is 'the all-powerful VW Group want to wring every last drop from their shared platforms and as a result virtually insist that every one of their brands uses it whether it fits or not.
'Has to be a Lamborghini' - I doubt this will even be built in Italy.
mrclav said:
as has been said earlier in this thread sporty SUVs are not going anywhere so all the Luddites need to let it go
How does not liking this monstrosity make someone a Luddite? SUVs are practically anti-engineering in themselves thanks to them possessing the aerodynamic efficiency of the Grand Canyon. Also, re-using and re-using the same old platforms for everything is hardly groundbreaking is it?From a technical point of view this is a big backwards step for Lamborghini.
mrclav said:
I see great irony in this statement. If an SUV is indeed "more emotional" then you just proved the point...
You are correct, I think 4x4's that are not really designed to go off road are quite frankly pointless blingy bks. Although i doubt this emotional response is the one Mr Lamborghini is looking for 
cookie1600 said:
I don't hear anybody moaning about Lamborghini's previous efforts at alternative lifestyle vehicles.......
Thats because the LM002 was not a 'lifestyle' vehicle. It was made to conquer deserts and traverse any terrain - a true off road vehicle. I believe it was even designed for army usage.I love the LM002 because it's a GREAT 4x4 - brilliant offroad, and with a fantastic engine. The Urus is not a real 4x4 and therefore has no credibility.
RichTBiscuit said:
cookie1600 said:
I don't hear anybody moaning about Lamborghini's previous efforts at alternative lifestyle vehicles.......
Thats because the LM002 was not a 'lifestyle' vehicle. It was made to conquer deserts and traverse any terrain - a true off road vehicle. I believe it was even designed for army usage.I love the LM002 because it's a GREAT 4x4 - brilliant offroad, and with a fantastic engine. The Urus is not a real 4x4 and therefore has no credibility.
If Lamborghini wanted to do something genuinely radical in the SUV market, they would have produced a true LM002 successor that pissed all over the current wave of lumpen vision-botherers by being perfectly capable of driving straight over the Himalayas without stopping.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff