RE: Aston Martin caps DBX production at 5,000 a year
Discussion
So this is what the Cygnet grew up to be!
People are currently asking ~10x the price of a Toyota iQ for a Cygnet - £35-grand! I think that's pretty close to the new price 7-8 years ago.
But still, I'm just a keyboard warrior and will never have the ££ for an Aston (apart from the gold James Bond DB5 owned from new, but kept hidden away.)
People are currently asking ~10x the price of a Toyota iQ for a Cygnet - £35-grand! I think that's pretty close to the new price 7-8 years ago.
But still, I'm just a keyboard warrior and will never have the ££ for an Aston (apart from the gold James Bond DB5 owned from new, but kept hidden away.)
RobDown said:
3. Or my particular favourite half-wit comment “they’re too late to the SUV party”. As though future buyers of SUVs (you know people replace them regularly just like normal cars?) will somehow say “oh we can’t buy an Aston Martin SUV because Porsche started making them some years ago”.
Genuine question here. I may have brought it up before, but as no one has answered it I'll go again;Why are sports/super cars brands building SUVs? Actually, that's not my question, as I know the answer. My question is; Why are they now building SUVs? We've had decades and decades of car companies like Ferrari, Maserati and now Aston and recently Lotus existing as solely sportscars. And now they've announced them. Why 20 years ago was there no Estate car? Estate cars sell and were popular? The answer to that is it wouldn't have fitted into their range? Well, how does an SUV fit now? Ironically, an estate car is more fitting as it is lower vehicle and easily adaptable as a sports car. An SUV has to be reverse engineered to be lower yet completely misses the point - case 1 is the Lamborghini Urus looking like a crushed down hatch with a tall body.
I'm not averse to SUVs - all I want to know is why these companies that have made sports cars all their history suddenly want to make SUVs but didn't go down an estate car, or hatchback or other popular model type in the past? I'm slightly less harsh on Aston as they have had a saloon and a small car (albeit badge engineered..) but such an odd choice of model that they may regret going down in the future..who knows?
PRND said:
RobDown said:
3. Or my particular favourite half-wit comment “they’re too late to the SUV party”. As though future buyers of SUVs (you know people replace them regularly just like normal cars?) will somehow say “oh we can’t buy an Aston Martin SUV because Porsche started making them some years ago”.
Genuine question here. I may have brought it up before, but as no one has answered it I'll go again;Why are sports/super cars brands building SUVs? Actually, that's not my question, as I know the answer. My question is; Why are they now building SUVs? We've had decades and decades of car companies like Ferrari, Maserati and now Aston and recently Lotus existing as solely sportscars. And now they've announced them. Why 20 years ago was there no Estate car? Estate cars sell and were popular? The answer to that is it wouldn't have fitted into their range? Well, how does an SUV fit now? Ironically, an estate car is more fitting as it is lower vehicle and easily adaptable as a sports car. An SUV has to be reverse engineered to be lower yet completely misses the point - case 1 is the Lamborghini Urus looking like a crushed down hatch with a tall body.
I'm not averse to SUVs - all I want to know is why these companies that have made sports cars all their history suddenly want to make SUVs but didn't go down an estate car, or hatchback or other popular model type in the past? I'm slightly less harsh on Aston as they have had a saloon and a small car (albeit badge engineered..) but such an odd choice of model that they may regret going down in the future..who knows?
SUV’s handle pretty well nowaday’s, not compared to sports cars but they’re not too bad, my mothers hybrid RAV4 is alright, it won’t set your world alight but it doesn’t feel terrible after coming out of my 4 series BMW.
I imagine a Lamborghini/Aston Martin SUV with 600+ bhp being astonishing
Edit
Using a BMW X6 as an example, 40d variant, it’s not an off-roader the way a Suzuki Jimny is, it’s a big high riding 4 wheel drive BMW with a 313hp diesel, 22 inch wheels wrapped in bridge stone potenzas with 275mm at the front and 315mm at the back with a gap barely big enough to fit your fist in in the arches. It’s a big car that’s supposed to be an off roader without being an off roader. It’s benefits is sitting higher up, being more comfortable with more space and the bonus of looking ‘cool’ without the pitfalls of a proper off roader like a slow Mitsubishi Shogun or Suzuki Jimny.
Edited by Chestrockwell on Saturday 29th June 00:30
Edited by Chestrockwell on Saturday 29th June 00:31
PRND said:
My question is; Why are they now building SUVs? We've had decades and decades of car companies like Ferrari, Maserati and now Aston and recently Lotus existing as solely sportscars. And now they've announced them. Why 20 years ago was there no Estate car? Estate cars sell and were popular? The answer to that is it wouldn't have fitted into their range? Well, how does an SUV fit now?
Because an SUV is today an essential pillar of the luxury car segment. The automotive market has moved on. Today 69 percent of all new cars sold in the US are either an SUV or a pickup truck -- and luxury buyers want these vehicles:
https://www.autonews.com/sales/light-trucks-take-r...
Although the US is not the UK, we must acknowledge that luxury is no longer defined by a saloon hero car. An SUV hero car is now of equal or greater importance.
Conversely... The luxury segment has never been defined by a posh estate or a posh hatchback.
Edited by unsprung on Saturday 29th June 00:35
unsprung said:
PRND said:
My question is; Why are they now building SUVs? We've had decades and decades of car companies like Ferrari, Maserati and now Aston and recently Lotus existing as solely sportscars. And now they've announced them. Why 20 years ago was there no Estate car? Estate cars sell and were popular? The answer to that is it wouldn't have fitted into their range? Well, how does an SUV fit now?
Because an SUV is today an essential pillar of the luxury car segment. The automotive market has moved on. 69 percent of all new cars sold in the US are either an SUV or a pickup truck:
https://www.autonews.com/sales/light-trucks-take-r...
Although the US is not the UK, we must acknowledge that luxury is no longer defined by a saloon hero car. An SUV hero car is now of equal or greater importance.
Conversely... The luxury segment has never been defined by a posh estate or a posh hatchback.
My point was more from a rational perspective, imagine an Aston Martin 4x4 30 years ago
RobDown said:
Typical PH thread full of miserable idiots who either:
1. Try to judge a car wearing heavy camo (like duhhhh)
You can’t seriously argue that the form of this monstrosity is being covered by this camo wrap, surely? The shape and all its details are there to see. 1. Try to judge a car wearing heavy camo (like duhhhh)
The more I look at it, the more it has in common with a Mini Countryman than an Aston Martin.
They’re arriving to the party too late and under-dressed. Others have already done it better. Even the Maserati Levante and Bentayga have more going for them than this desperate effort. How they went from the edgy style of the Vantage to this is truly baffling.
unsprung said:
Because an SUV is today an essential pillar of the luxury car segment.
The automotive market has moved on. Today 69 percent of all new cars sold in the US are either an SUV or a pickup truck -- and luxury buyers want these vehicles:
https://www.autonews.com/sales/light-trucks-take-r...
Although the US is not the UK, we must acknowledge that luxury is no longer defined by a saloon hero car. An SUV hero car is now of equal or greater importance.
Conversely... The luxury segment has never been defined by a posh estate or a posh hatchback.
However, at the luxury end people round here seem to buy FFRRs/RRS *and* have something fast as well. Personally I don’t really see buying a DBX/Urus/Bentayga when the FFRR does its job well and allows fewer compromises to be made with respect to the proper toys. Maybe it’s a city vs country thing...The automotive market has moved on. Today 69 percent of all new cars sold in the US are either an SUV or a pickup truck -- and luxury buyers want these vehicles:
https://www.autonews.com/sales/light-trucks-take-r...
Although the US is not the UK, we must acknowledge that luxury is no longer defined by a saloon hero car. An SUV hero car is now of equal or greater importance.
Conversely... The luxury segment has never been defined by a posh estate or a posh hatchback.
The look, subjective as it is, has to be compared to it's peer group and are there any beautiful SUV's ? Personally I think a Macan is about the best of the bunch, and the best to drive too but for me it ends there. I think that in some of the pre-release renderings without the camouflage this Aston will probably take the crown, such as it is, for the best looking SUV. Will it be ruined with a shoddy gearbox, thirsty engine and poor plastics in the interior - well I will have to wait and see. Aston is just a brand I can't get into though. Seems to trade on heritage too much but unfortunately is is a patchy heritage. Especially from Aston's business performance perspective. So Aston lacks the trust Porsche customers have in the brand, and a brand is a promise. Just my peneth worth of ramblings of course
And all of these discussion points will have been played out over and over again in the boardroom at AM I am sure.
Nothing is guaranteed, but I guess the Board thought it less risky to have a go, rather than ignore that sector all together.
The sports car segment is crowded too (so sales are always going to be a challenge) and may even soon be seen as anti-social in some quarters, whereas the family orientated ‘SUV’ may be looked upon as less so.
Time will, as ever, tell.
Nothing is guaranteed, but I guess the Board thought it less risky to have a go, rather than ignore that sector all together.
The sports car segment is crowded too (so sales are always going to be a challenge) and may even soon be seen as anti-social in some quarters, whereas the family orientated ‘SUV’ may be looked upon as less so.
Time will, as ever, tell.
unsprung said:
PRND said:
My question is; Why are they now building SUVs? We've had decades and decades of car companies like Ferrari, Maserati and now Aston and recently Lotus existing as solely sportscars. And now they've announced them. Why 20 years ago was there no Estate car? Estate cars sell and were popular? The answer to that is it wouldn't have fitted into their range? Well, how does an SUV fit now?
Because an SUV is today an essential pillar of the luxury car segment. The automotive market has moved on. Today 69 percent of all new cars sold in the US are either an SUV or a pickup truck -- and luxury buyers want these vehicles:
https://www.autonews.com/sales/light-trucks-take-r...
Although the US is not the UK, we must acknowledge that luxury is no longer defined by a saloon hero car. An SUV hero car is now of equal or greater importance.
Conversely... The luxury segment has never been defined by a posh estate or a posh hatchback.
Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 29th June 00:35
I just think it's odd for all the sports/Superbad brands to be going down this route, especially when it doesn't fit and the finished article is so ugly and contrived. Of course there's a market for them and the whole US and China markets etc, but it seems these brands are now selling out to make cash quick. I guess it comes down to who is actually controlling these companies.
Let's face it - they simply HAD to develop this car. Even with Mercedes help, the car business is all about economies of scale and without the hoped for volumes this will deliver, they would have really struggled. They have a share price to support now....
Hard to tell from the pics though whether they have succeeded on the design front. A lot of companies - Porsche, RR, Bentley - have struggled to transfer their design language to this format.
Hard to tell from the pics though whether they have succeeded on the design front. A lot of companies - Porsche, RR, Bentley - have struggled to transfer their design language to this format.
PRND said:
That still doesn't answer the question, sorry. You say the SUV Is an essential pillar of luxury segment - so was the luxury saloon years ago. Why didn't Ferrari build one then? Probably as it didn't fit with brand...a bit like an SUV doesn't now..
I just think it's odd for all the sports/Superbad brands to be going down this route, especially when it doesn't fit and the finished article is so ugly and contrived. Of course there's a market for them and the whole US and China markets etc, but it seems these brands are now selling out to make cash quick. I guess it comes down to who is actually controlling these companies.
sorry... but I'm happy to try further! I just think it's odd for all the sports/Superbad brands to be going down this route, especially when it doesn't fit and the finished article is so ugly and contrived. Of course there's a market for them and the whole US and China markets etc, but it seems these brands are now selling out to make cash quick. I guess it comes down to who is actually controlling these companies.
Before I continue: I have no monopoly on this topic, and I assume that others will continue to comment this thread.
Today the luxury SUV speaks of the indomitable.
And no other vehicle can achieve this in quite the same way.
OEMs are not "selling out" by making swish SUVs. They're acknowledging that the SUV is less and less "one of the choices available" and more and more the very definition of motoring. This is historic. It is true both for a large percentage of the population as well as up and down the socio-demographic ladder.
It's fair to ask, as you do, "Why didn't Ferrari build a luxury saloon when luxury saloons were the pinnacle of the luxury segment?"
a. We are different. And we are rich.
People in the UK and other Western nations are living further up Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs than even a generation or two ago. Consider how our grandparents approached things like work, home, a holiday, and so on. We are likely to find that expectations were relatively low and remarkably homogeneous. This is all but gone.
In its place are needs, products, and brands that are far more existential, more expressive, and more individualised. Moreover there is the matter of money. Today's car buyer is offered more features and more performance -- at a lower price -- than ever before. There are also more "well to do" people, both nominally and as a percentage of the population, than ever before.
b. Luxury has been democratised.
This is not merely about the rise of Lexus and, now, Genesis. It is also about "entry level" cars offered by the Germans. It is about Ferrari announcing that its California was made "easier to drive" with female buyers in mind. And it is also about middle-class brands having quite a lot of comfort and clever kit in their own middle-market offerings.
In important ways, a Ford saloon of today is markedly superior to a Mercedes-Benz saloon of years ago. Quite simply: all car buyers, including luxury car buyers, expect more from their cars today as well as more from the OEMs who produce these cars.
We no longer assume that OEMs will fit into discrete boxes; instead we find that OEMs are perched somewhere along a spectrum of experiences which blend, one into the other. If a Lamborghini owner enjoys a two-seat performance car, he or she is not wrong to turn to the OEM and say, "I adore the weekend toy you've given me. Why can't you make me your version of these posh SUVs that my friends and I like?"
Years ago there were essentially no such people.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff