Why are Gallardos so expensive...
Discussion
toppstuff said:
Very fair points, well made. And all credit to you for actually putting the readies down and buying and enjoying a Gallardo !
They are indeed very special cars and a welcome arrival to the scene.
I think the arrival of the Gallardo has made Ferrari raise their game- the Lambo does indeed outpoint the Ferrari on all counts and this must explain the launch of the 430.
It is great for enthusiasts everywhere that Ferrari and Lamborghini are competing for our attention !
From My perspective, I reckon this is one of the most sensible things to have been said in this thread.
I am a car tart - like many of us here at PH. If the Gallardo has succeded in raising Ferrari's game (and IHMO I reckon you are right - and it has) then we ALL will gain - your final comment is spot on - without manufacturers competing for our attention, nobody would develop the next best thing. Without such competition we wouldn't have the gorgeous cars we have now.
My reckoning is that If this kind of competition continues I will probably end up alternating backwards and forwards between F-cars and Lambos. Parting with the readies along the way, taking the hit financially but still reflecting on the value for money I have realised as a result of the inherent fun i get from driving the beasts.
allanlambo said:
Ferrari creates a false market, holds back production.
Supply and demand. It's not a false market, just economics and a particular company's ethos.
allanlambo was well known on Ferrarichat.com. He has some pretty strong views on Ferraris and despite the odd double edged praising of Maranello's finest, if you cut him in half it says Lamborghini all the way through
So you must take a somewhat measured view of his opinions.
Without wishing to come across as xenophobic, he also has a typically American view of what constitutes a performance car.
Gallardos will inevitably fall in price pretty quickly IMO, as a direct result of Audi's "true market" for the cars.
The technology is there for every manufacturer to make stonkingly fast cars these days, even Hyundai. But supercars have never been about just this.
The Gallardo is a nice car, but not for me. The Murci....now that's a different story. And I would sell body parts to be able to fit in a Miura.
toppstuff said:
A very good point you make !
Ferrari vs Lamborghini
PC vs Mac
Nikon vs Canon
Linn vs Naim
All similar debates over a central theme !
And I can understand how Lambo are the cool, alternative angle on a sportscar theme, challenging the mainstream.
As a Mac, Nikon ( and Leica ) , and Linn fan I can relate to that..
Your analogies are a bit out of sync.
PC vs MAC (more like Ford vs Ferrari or Lambo)
Nikon vs Canon (Canon is at least one generation ahead on digital SLR's, ie FF sensor/MP's. Just look at the photographers at any F1 event, most have white lenses)
Your tone would suggest that you consider Ferrari are not innovators, I think you need to rethink that one :-) Are the F50,F40,Enzo and CS mainstream?
felix66 said:
like I say, IMHO ;-) (BTW This is an outstanding similie for the Mac vs PC debate of value for money and performance and yes you guessed it, I am posting on a Mac - hey ho, will I never learn LOL)
I use a Mac also, so what does that prove :-)
Does this mean we're both right?
That would depend on the track. You seem to really rely heavily on the Top Gear stats. Are Nurburgring lap times not a better indicator? How about Hockenheim? How about Best Motoring?
As for if you split me in half, you better believe it would be Lamborghini through and through. But im biased from experience, not by other peoples opinions. Ive owned enough Lamborghinis and Ferraris to draw my own conclusions. Ive owned many directly competeing Lambos and fcars, like the TR and Countach. Inmo, both of the founders of these companies succeeded in what they set out to accomplish, Enzo only built street cars so he could race, and Ferrucio wanted the best street cars. Since i drive on the street, you know which one i choose.
sjn2004 said:
like I say, IMHO ;-) (BTW This is an outstanding similie for the Mac vs PC debate of value for money and performance and yes you guessed it, I am posting on a Mac - hey ho, will I never learn LOL)
I use a Mac also, so what does that prove :-)
Does this mean we're both right?
It proves nothing other than the point I thought I had made. Each to their own. You make your choices and you pay your money, I'm not complaining about my choice or trying to justify the expense. I thought I could never be happier than when I drove my Ferrari - I was wrong as I discovered when I bought my Gallardo.
As to whether or not that means we are both right - I think most would have derived that from my earlier comments. You think the F-cars are better. I feel the same about my g-car. Both applying our own criteria, can justify our statements so yes - we are both right. Its not an argument and probably not necessary to point score - its actually a matter of personal choices - like I said: each to their own.
From one apple user to another - time to APPLE Q ;-)
sjn2004 said:
A very good point you make !
Ferrari vs Lamborghini
PC vs Mac
Nikon vs Canon
Linn vs Naim
All similar debates over a central theme !
And I can understand how Lambo are the cool, alternative angle on a sportscar theme, challenging the mainstream.
As a Mac, Nikon ( and Leica ) , and Linn fan I can relate to that..
Your analogies are a bit out of sync.
PC vs MAC (more like Ford vs Ferrari or Lambo)
Nikon vs Canon (Canon is at least one generation ahead on digital SLR's, ie FF sensor/MP's. Just look at the photographers at any F1 event, most have white lenses)
Your tone would suggest that you consider Ferrari are not innovators, I think you need to rethink that one :-) Are the F50,F40,Enzo and CS mainstream?
Not at all. My preferences lean toward Ferrari over Lambo right now. If Lambo Gallardo was a little more edgy, a little less of a daily driver, I'd be more tempted.
I prefer Mac to PC by a massive margin.
I prefer Nikon to Canon also by a massive margin. Nikon have better wide angles and better handling for the reportage kind of work that I enjoy. I'm not a sports photographer, so why should I care that sports guys use Canon?
But back to thread - Do I see Ferrari as innovators? Oh Yes !
As I said before, I really applaud Lambo's arrival onto the scene, but the Gallardo is not my current cup of tea. But that may change, as I am something of a car tart !
Gallardo's ARE expensive, but thats not my point. As Felix has accurately pointed out, that is something which, as such as nearly everything else in life, completely relative. £10K is expensive to one man, whereas £100K is not to another.
I do think however, that they are "overpriced". Certainly UK RHD supplied cars are. £117K on the road, is dear. Especially when the car costs £93-96K in Europe. RHD cars can be ordered and delivered to UK, after paying UK VAT for circa £103K. So why the difference?
I think the Gallardo at £90K odd is decent value. At £117K not loaded with goodies, its dear. The Murci on the other hand, is good value. Even at £172K.
IMO, Lamborghini UK dictated the price based on Ferrari, and the intention was to be slightly more expensive, perhaps to give the notion that its the better car. I personally dont think that was a good idea. Many still believe in the Ferrari cache. They should have started off cheaper, close to the £105K or so, similar price point to Ferrari (ideally, to me, just below), then worked the price upwards as it gathered exposure. It would have helped residuals too, naturally.
But then I'm being an armchair general, and I'm sure Audi have some very sensible people working for them. It wouldn't be the first management feck up in history though
I do think however, that they are "overpriced". Certainly UK RHD supplied cars are. £117K on the road, is dear. Especially when the car costs £93-96K in Europe. RHD cars can be ordered and delivered to UK, after paying UK VAT for circa £103K. So why the difference?
I think the Gallardo at £90K odd is decent value. At £117K not loaded with goodies, its dear. The Murci on the other hand, is good value. Even at £172K.
IMO, Lamborghini UK dictated the price based on Ferrari, and the intention was to be slightly more expensive, perhaps to give the notion that its the better car. I personally dont think that was a good idea. Many still believe in the Ferrari cache. They should have started off cheaper, close to the £105K or so, similar price point to Ferrari (ideally, to me, just below), then worked the price upwards as it gathered exposure. It would have helped residuals too, naturally.
But then I'm being an armchair general, and I'm sure Audi have some very sensible people working for them. It wouldn't be the first management feck up in history though
allanlambo said:
That would depend on the track. You seem to really rely heavily on the Top Gear stats. Are Nurburgring lap times not a better indicator? How about Hockenheim? How about Best Motoring?
As for if you split me in half, you better believe it would be Lamborghini through and through. But im biased from experience, not by other peoples opinions. Ive owned enough Lamborghinis and Ferraris to draw my own conclusions. Ive owned many directly competeing Lambos and fcars, like the TR and Countach. Inmo, both of the founders of these companies succeeded in what they set out to accomplish, Enzo only built street cars so he could race, and Ferrucio wanted the best street cars. Since i drive on the street, you know which one i choose.
Don't read Top Gear. Too expensive and full of ads out here
'Ring times are obviously of some interest, but the difficulty is always in getting truly representative times. Same driver, conditions, same experience at the wheel of each car etc etc. True comparisons are rare. And 4secs difference on a track the length of the 'Ring is nothing. Change any one of the factors I noted (and potentially lots more besides) and 4secs is chewed up no problem.
Hockenheim's a garbage circuit. Spa times I'd be interested in.
Truth of the matter is that all these cars are too quick to be used to their full potential *safely* on public roads.
And on track I'm pretty sure a decent spec Caterham would give all of them a bloody good scare.
So what are you left with? Looks, noise, interior ambience and cachet. These are all pretty subjective areas.
Anyway, I'll hopefully be able to appreciate your preferences more directly in the next 12mths or so as my wallet's itching and a pearl orange Murcielago would be a good way to scratch (and empty) it.
jamesketchell said:
Your right I count four wheels and two doors.
Its the profile of the side windows and the relationship between the front headlight assembly and the bonnet line. These aspects are similar...
Of course the cars are completely different in height, width, wheel size and stance etc , but I can see where some people see a similarity.
They certainly could never be confused with each other !!! But I think the point that they share styling cues has some merit...
Does'nt mean that I don't still adore the Gallardo and still consider getting one sometime , funds allowing !
>> Edited by toppstuff on Saturday 28th August 17:25
And the rear light assemblies also share cues with the MR2 and one of the Corolla/Carina/some other model.
As noted, you're never going to mistake one for the other. But then I'd never mistake a 550 for a Supra or vice versa, despite there being some obvious similarities.
Nice cars all the same.
As noted, you're never going to mistake one for the other. But then I'd never mistake a 550 for a Supra or vice versa, despite there being some obvious similarities.
Nice cars all the same.
Firstly : LOL @ the Celica / Lambo. I don't see ANY similarity.
The G is, in my humble opinion, the best looking car in a long, long time. As I've mentioned before, I think the current crop of Ferraris are bland, lack imagination and generally don't do anything for me.
I agree with someone's posting earlier about a "supercar" being a true exotic - a Diablo, F40, etc are, to me at least, true supercars. However, that doesn't make the 911T or G a "sports car".
The fact the G is driveable, hopefully reliable and is a true contender to the 911T makes it a realistic aim for me. I would not own something that I couldn't use properly - I'd put a Diablo and F40 in this class. As much as I adore the 288GTO regardless of how much money I had, I wouldn't own one. I wouldn't dare drive it to it's limit and no doubt I'd be disappointed in the driving experience - I'll leave it on it's pedestal!
Good thread - reasoned discussion without name calling, etc.
The G is, in my humble opinion, the best looking car in a long, long time. As I've mentioned before, I think the current crop of Ferraris are bland, lack imagination and generally don't do anything for me.
I agree with someone's posting earlier about a "supercar" being a true exotic - a Diablo, F40, etc are, to me at least, true supercars. However, that doesn't make the 911T or G a "sports car".
The fact the G is driveable, hopefully reliable and is a true contender to the 911T makes it a realistic aim for me. I would not own something that I couldn't use properly - I'd put a Diablo and F40 in this class. As much as I adore the 288GTO regardless of how much money I had, I wouldn't own one. I wouldn't dare drive it to it's limit and no doubt I'd be disappointed in the driving experience - I'll leave it on it's pedestal!
Good thread - reasoned discussion without name calling, etc.
allanlambo said:
Yes, i can see the resemblence now. If you saw the Celica 10 miles away, you may mistaken it for a Celica. No resemblence inmo, other than they both have 4 tires and a steering wheel, now the Ferrari 612 and Hyundai Scoop! Theres a resemblence!
Come now Allan, you're just being facetious and those Lambo tints are affecting your vision.
sorry Allen...am huge Lambophile...think the Gallardo is wonderful and (personally) disagree with it being voerpriced....you egt a shed lot more for your money than the competitors if you ask me...but....not being able to see 'any hint of toyota celica' in it is just silly. Same way the Lotus M250 shared a fair few cues with the Ford Cougar!
gorgeous colour on that one topstuff posted though!
gorgeous colour on that one topstuff posted though!
Gassing Station | Supercar General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff