Friday 24th November 2017

Prior Convictions: Urus looming

Lamborghini has been industrially previewing its new SUV, which is apparently attempting to be all things to all men

---

Lamborghini has released some more details of its upcoming Urus SUV. (Along with an undisguised infotainment image it probably wasn't intending to reveal.)

In a series of new videos, available below, a still-disguised Urus can be seen driving on various terrains after flicking through some of its different drive modes, which are Strada, Sport, Corsa, Sabbia, Terra and Neve. (Or Street, Sport, Race, Sand, Dirt/Gravel/Land or something, and Snow.)

Lamborghini says the new Urus will be 'the most versatile Lamborghini for everyday driving in a range of environments'. Which, no, I don't think is particularly easy to understand, either - but I think means: it's rather capable, everywhere.

It's based on the same MLB evo platform as the Audi Q7, Bentley Bentayga and Porsche Panamera, sensibly, I suppose, because what with Lamborghini being a member of VW Group, what else would it be?

The 4wd system, according to reports, can and will put most of its power towards the rear, most of the time, but it can also shuffle most of it forwards, as the big - 2.3 tonne, or thereabouts - Lamborghini tries to make the most of whatever grip you have.

Which is where things will get interesting. Bentley tried to give the Bentayga one of the hardest briefs in the motor industry: be a capable off-roader that's able to tow a big weight one minute, and be a luxury car - and lightly sporting with it - not even at the next minute, but at precisely the same time.

It's possible that Lamborghini is asking more of this car again. Some of the luxury will inevitably go - hence the kerb weight should be lighter than the Bentley's, which will help things, I'm sure - but the track performance will, no question, be turned up.

And so the same compromises and demands will remain because, as an engineer who's himself currently developing a luxury, sporting SUV told me the other day, in true Scotty fashion, that's physics. So the Urus gets the 48v active anti-roll bar system you'll find in Audi's SQ7 and the Bentley Bentayga, which can slacken off the anti-roll bars in a straight line or off-road, to give greater wheel travel and whatever comfort 21-23-inch wheels deign to give you, or stiffen up if you're inclined to give this car a workout. It'll have air springs, and adaptive dampers too.

The Urus also gets a twin-turbocharged 4.0 V8 petrol engine, because, it says, big SUVs suit turbo engines but also more likely because that platform was never meant to house Lamborghini's naturally-aspirated V10 or V12 - sadly, but inevitably. Anyway, it'll make around 650hp, by all accounts.

But the physics issue will never go away. For going off-road you want a tall ground clearance, good approach angles, articulate suspension and serious tyres. Everything on top of that helps, but them's the basics. For going around a race track you want low mass, low height, stiff suspension and minimal roll.

Which is where I'm torn. In a way, I don't feel that I should like a car that tries to do both of these things to such high levels, because ultimately, it's absurd, isn't it? These things are the absolute extreme ends of the automotive spectrum. Why make a 2.3-tonne car and make it drive a) up a sand dune and yet also b) around a race track? The same tyres aren't suitable for both. The same body height isn't suitable for both.

And why the heck would you want car that can do all of those things, anyway? It'll never be as good as anything that's designed to do each one even half properly. It's a patently, blatantly, shamelessly ridiculous and, ultimately, completely pointless idea. I prefer the Audi SQ7 to the Bentley Bentayga for precisely that reason: it's designed to do fewer things, and therefore feels better at those it's set up for.

And yet, here I am, at the same time, thinking: well, why the hell not?

 

 

 

 

 

[Spyshots: SB Medien]

[PhantomPH]

Gonna cost a fortune....and look outrageous! Love it.

[PhantomPH]

Turbobanana said:

The thing is though, is it REALLY necessary to be able to do all that you describe? Do owners of (insert prestige SUV here) ACTUALLY want to go off road and round the 'Ring in them, or do manufacturers just think they do?

Do owners of [insert prestige sportscar here] ACTUALLY want to go 200mph+ and round the ring in them or do manufacturers just think they do?

[PhantomPH]

IanCress said:

Big GT said:

Also if a car is designed to go 200mph, you know it will be very good dull at 70mph.

Ha ha. (That's a joke edit, right?? Nobody with half a brain actually thinks that, surely?)

[PhantomPH]

NJ72 said:

ZOLLAR said:

I always mention the watches when this is discussed, my watch will stay working/pressurised down to 300M whilst remaining super accurate and is an automatic movement.

But it's completely irrelevant as the most water it comes into contact is washing my hands and I'm usually late so it doesn't matter how accurate it is.

Yet it looks good and it's nice to know it can do those things


Personally I hope Lamborghini do a limited mad run in the future and manage to fit in the V12, that would be great!

The difference is, your fancy watch isn't just a Seiko with a Rolex badge on it...

You understand what the MLB platform is, I assume? This is not 'Fiesta Mazda 121.

https://auto.ndtv.com/news/what-is-volkswagens-mlb...

Nothing about the Lambo (or any other car using that platform) is simply 'a Q7 with a different badge'.

[PhantomPH]

Quickmoose said:

PhantomPH said:

IanCress said:

Big GT said:

Also if a car is designed to go 200mph, you know it will be very good dull at 70mph.

Ha ha. (That's a joke edit, right?? Nobody with half a brain actually thinks that, surely?)

can go either way can't it?
A car engineered to do 200 will feel solid and totally in control at 70...that's good
But a car engineered that way is less likely to be as involving or as exciting...that's not good
A car engineered to perform at 71mph will be pretty lively/exciting at 70....that's good
It will also be on the brink of what it can handle...which is not good.

It's better for a car to feel alive regardless though right?
You can have dull 200mph cars as well as dull 70mph cars
You can have a class act 200mph car and a class act slower car...

True enough. My mind straight away went to the F40, which was designed to go 200mph. Not dull at any speed. Your point is (of course) totally valid.

I would wager that most 200mph+ cars, are certainly not dull at 70mph, tho. (none of the ones I've been in, anyway!)

[PhantomPH]

NJ72 said:

The main difference on the watch example is that a skilled crafts person puts together a Tag or a Breitling, whereas a Casio is mass-manufactured.

Erm...you might want to check that before making the statement, mate. ha ha. (Both of those - largely - use mass produced ETA movements. They are by and large, the watch version of what you are saying you hate!)

ETA: On the car side of things, if it were as black and white as you say, why would any VAG group bother testing a new car? After all it's just new body panels. Why waste time in development, track prep, cold/warm weather testing, etc, etc.....?

[PhantomPH]

Surely the bottom line is that every car manufacturer is a business. And businesses like to make money. And they have identified that they can make MORE money by building a new product in a different sector.

As someone has already stated, Lamborghini started off building tractors. By branching out into a new sector and a new product, we have Lamborghini cars. Then they made another leap by essentially inventing the supercar (Miura).

Given that, you could argue that traditionally Lamborghini have a track record of moving into new market areas so this is entirely in keeping with their heritage.

Just because 'you' don't like something, does not render it somehow pointless or not worthwhile producing. Hell, I cannot for the life of me get my head around handbags costing £12k...but some do. Live and let live, I say.