Re: Lamborghini Urus: how and why
Discussion
I do understand their business case...
BUT I wish they would rather have followed the road to built the ESTOQUE !!!
THIS is a real stunning Lamborghini! And very different form other sedans.
The Ursus is just as one would expect it from Lamborghini...
It is not stunning, and certainly not much different than other SUVs.
It is rather disappointing, really!
But if this is producing the profits to engineer and built the ESTOQUE, so be it.
BUT I wish they would rather have followed the road to built the ESTOQUE !!!
THIS is a real stunning Lamborghini! And very different form other sedans.
The Ursus is just as one would expect it from Lamborghini...
It is not stunning, and certainly not much different than other SUVs.
It is rather disappointing, really!
But if this is producing the profits to engineer and built the ESTOQUE, so be it.
Vantagefan said:
Justices said:
Gadgeroonie said:
what is the demographics of the type of person that would buy one ?
- Rich- Want a brutally powerful SUV
- Lambo customers who want a more than two seats
- Exclusivity
- Clients who don't want a typical Chelsea Tractor
- Want a big flashy car, the bigger and flashier the better.
- Lambo customers who want a more than two seats - No. Unless Lambo customer for reason above. Other cars fit the bill better.
- Exclusivity - See two above/see below.
- All of their acquaintances already have Ranges/Cayennes.
EFA
Cannot see a reason to buy this over a Range unless you want people to notice you.
That said, I do think there is a gap at the top of the market for super-premium SUVs now, I'm surprised there aren't some more V12s kicking about.
HighwayStar said:
Rather pointless SUV to sell to footballers and overseas millionaires wives. Very rarely do you see a Cayenne being "driven" and I'm sure this will be the chelsea tractor of choice for the super rich.
How often do you see most cars being "driven", all recent Lamborghinis for example are far to fast to use maximum potential performance on the road, step on the accelerator for 4-6 seconds and your topping 100mph, most will never see a track too.Ultimately most fast cars spend most of their time making their owner fee good by having the capability to do something in theory, that goes for most of the cars pistonheaders own too.
Vantagefan said:
Edited to remove repetition. I used to try and pad out my argument at school by repeating what I said too.
Not argument to make, merely answering the question and repeating the two major reasons for the purchase. Those two reasons are perhaps the only ones that get the cheques, or suitcases full of cash in China, out.I'd rather they do it this way to be honest. Mint it with the SUV then bring out the Quattroporte rival. The SUV would have to be very bad to flop as I think less is expected of it over a sedan/sports car which has to be VERY good. And SUV just need to be stable, fast, decent space, nice interior and doesn't have to look very good. The car has to be up to Ferrari 612 levels at the very least which I think takes a greater effort.
After seeing a few Aventadors in the wild within the last 24hrs.. they could make a tricycle and I wouldn't bat an eyelid. All would be forgiven.
I like it, and given a reasonably huge lottery win there would be garage space for it.
Apart from the Cayenne turbo there isn't anything else to compare with something this fast.
Rangerover? Lacking the ballistic speed on offer here, they're quite common and I don't want to spend that much time in the dealer waiting for the thing to be fixed.
It's a feel good car, so what if it won't be spectacular off road. It's a 5 seater Lamborghini with a big boot that you can take up farm tracks or through city centers without bashing anything..
How many supercars get driven really hard regularly? That's their selling point, they're faster than normal cars but the large majority of them will never be used in anger.
As for the 'they should just build a big estate car' argument, they're not selling as well as SUVs. Sorry if this upsets you buy people want cars like this, and the company exist to make money.
Apart from the Cayenne turbo there isn't anything else to compare with something this fast.
Rangerover? Lacking the ballistic speed on offer here, they're quite common and I don't want to spend that much time in the dealer waiting for the thing to be fixed.
It's a feel good car, so what if it won't be spectacular off road. It's a 5 seater Lamborghini with a big boot that you can take up farm tracks or through city centers without bashing anything..
How many supercars get driven really hard regularly? That's their selling point, they're faster than normal cars but the large majority of them will never be used in anger.
As for the 'they should just build a big estate car' argument, they're not selling as well as SUVs. Sorry if this upsets you buy people want cars like this, and the company exist to make money.
Twincam16 said:
jackwootton said:
But yeah, it's actually decent for a first attempt at a 4x4/SUV. Looks a damn sight nicer than the Evoque
It's not their first attempt:However, this was a Lamborghini through-and-through, not a cynically rebodied VW.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff