DBX sheds some disguise
Discussion
CSK1 said:
This looks as much like a Vantage as the Cayenne looks like a 911.
Not something I'd dream about owning.
Nothing to love about this ugly duckling.
Comments on the look of DBX are going to be along those of the "new Vantage".Not something I'd dream about owning.
Nothing to love about this ugly duckling.
To save us all the negativity on the exterior aesthetics can we please concentrate instead on the functionality of the vehicle against it's competitors, none of which would win a beauty contest.
avinalarf said:
Comments on the look of DBX are going to be along those of the "new Vantage".
To save us all the negativity on the exterior aesthetics can we please concentrate instead on the functionality of the vehicle against it's competitors, none of which would win a beauty contest.
Unless of course opinions on functionality are also negative, in which case, discussion of that is also politely requested to be withheld. To save us all the negativity on the exterior aesthetics can we please concentrate instead on the functionality of the vehicle against it's competitors, none of which would win a beauty contest.
In fact, the Ministry of Pistonheads Aston Martin Forums has decreed that any form of response besides the “thumb-up” emoji to be tiresome and therefore, in the name of engaging discussion, is not permitted.
Edited by Venturist on Saturday 19th October 14:17
avinalarf said:
Comments on the look of DBX are going to be along those of the "new Vantage".
To save us all the negativity on the exterior aesthetics can we please concentrate instead on the functionality of the vehicle against it's competitors, none of which would win a beauty contest.
To save us all the negativity on the exterior aesthetics can we please concentrate instead on the functionality of the vehicle against it's competitors, none of which would win a beauty contest.
I don't have the knowledge about big SUVs, to be able to discuss the 'functionality of the vehicle against it's competitors'.
My observations are that they do seem to sell in large numbers (very good for AML) and that many, when viewed from the rear, look almost the same. I admit that Range Rovers have a distinctive rear, but with many of the others, if they had rear badges removed, I don't think I could tell which was an Audi, Hyundai, Kia, VW, Seat, Skoda, Ford, Porsche, etc.
Perhaps SUV owners don't mind 'wearing a uniform'. I quite enjoy repeatedly driving 200 mile journeys, and never seeing another car the same as mine.
avinalarf said:
CSK1 said:
This looks as much like a Vantage as the Cayenne looks like a 911.
Not something I'd dream about owning.
Nothing to love about this ugly duckling.
Comments on the look of DBX are going to be along those of the "new Vantage".Not something I'd dream about owning.
Nothing to love about this ugly duckling.
To save us all the negativity on the exterior aesthetics can we please concentrate instead on the functionality of the vehicle against it's competitors, none of which would win a beauty contest.
So the message is clear fellow PH'ers: this thread is only to say nice things about the DBX and to discuss the functionality of the vehicle against irs competitors.
I'm looking forward to a passionate debate.
CSK1 said:
avinalarf said:
CSK1 said:
This looks as much like a Vantage as the Cayenne looks like a 911.
Not something I'd dream about owning.
Nothing to love about this ugly duckling.
Comments on the look of DBX are going to be along those of the "new Vantage".Not something I'd dream about owning.
Nothing to love about this ugly duckling.
To save us all the negativity on the exterior aesthetics can we please concentrate instead on the functionality of the vehicle against it's competitors, none of which would win a beauty contest.
So the message is clear fellow PH'ers: this thread is only to say nice things about the DBX and to discuss the functionality of the vehicle against irs competitors.
I'm looking forward to a passionate debate.
I don't like it.
Teacher says write 100 lines for bad behaviour.
When I feel the need for a SUV I'd go for a RR because it's the most practical solution and ticks the boxes for me.
I was watching a TV programme last night about supercars and their owners.
The presenters were awful and the owners came across, in the main, as having more money than brain cells.
I love a bit of car exotica but these guys were well OTT, horses for courses I suppose, but it's only a blooming car not the meaning of life.
avinalarf said:
I was watching a TV programme last night about supercars and their owners.
The presenters were awful and the owners came across, in the main, as having more money than brain cells.
I love a bit of car exotica but these guys were well OTT.
The presenters were awful and the owners came across, in the main, as having more money than brain cells.
I love a bit of car exotica but these guys were well OTT.
So pleased that I did not know the programme was on. I might have thrown something at my TV yet again.
Please reassure me that the cars featured, were of the shouty type.
Surely no understated Aston Martins, with their sofisticated owners like wot we are, appeared in that programme ?
Edited by Jon39 on Saturday 19th October 17:23
From those pictures I think the dbx looks good. It is very similar in styling/size to the other mid sized suv cars out there (cayenne, macan, glc etc) and if the price point is around £150k I think the price is going to be the problem. It doesn’t stack up against the opposition at that price. At below £100k I think they would have a fighting chance of making it a volume seller.
avinalarf said:
<clip> can we please concentrate instead on the functionality of the vehicle against it's competitors, none of which would win a beauty contest.
Well not unless you are the self appointed Aston section police 
p.s. It does nothing for me, indeed if you remove the Aston wings it could be a Ford of any other run of the mill Japanese 4x4 jus bland and derivative. That said we've all got to hope it does well for the sake of AML else we get our knuckles rapped for not having a laugh.
RichB said:
avinalarf said:
<clip> can we please concentrate instead on the functionality of the vehicle against it's competitors, none of which would win a beauty contest.
Well not unless you are the self appointed Aston section police p.s. It does nothing for me, indeed if you remove the Aston wings it could be a Ford of any other run of the mill Japanese 4x4 jus bland and derivative. That said we've all got to hope it does well for the sake of AML else we get our knuckles rapped for not having a laugh.
Having seen the, almost revealed, DBX image and a following comment I could see that this thread might well follow the same pattern.
There were many contributors to the AM forum who were discombobulated by all the negativity so I thought I would suggest a less controversial approach i.e. to judge the vehicle as an overall package, not just on it's body work styling.
I find it somewhat amusing that the styling of the new Vantage was criticised for straying too far from the usual subtle evolution of design that has been an AM tradition for many models and here we have a SUV with a rather traditional interpretation of AM styling looking a lot like the old Vantage on steroids and it's being judged as being rather bland a judgement with which, I'm sorry to say, I'm in agreement with, no pleasing some folk.
However the styling is quite pleasant, if not earth shattering, and if matched by good performance and the level of interior luxury and technology one might expect of an SUV costing £150/200K it might sell well to its intended audience.
Edited by avinalarf on Saturday 19th October 21:28
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff