If you can’t beat them... Lamborghini joins the SUV set

Status
Not open for further replies.

Statistical

Ars Legatus Legionis
55,300
Reggiani also stated that there is a second SUV in the works for Lamborghini, but using a plug-in hybrid drivetrain exclusively and will arrive around 2020.

Wasn't all the early rumors that the Urus would have a hybrid powertrain or I am misremembering? Disappointing that this wasn't the case.

Why is Lamborghini so allergic to hybrids? Hybrid doesn't mean econobox. Electric powers provide impressive power to weight ratios and excellent low end torque.

On edit: or is the keyword in the quote above "exclusive" because it looks like there are reports the Urus has a hybrid option.
http://www.motortrend.com/news/lamborgh ... owertrain/
 
Upvote
3 (5 / -2)
I really don't get the market for this. If you want a track car, you don't need an SUV. If you want to go offroad, you wouldn't use this either. If you want to move your family around, there are far more luxurious offerings at a much lower price.

All well, I guess there must be some perpetual 12-year-olds that inherited a lot of money out there.
 
Upvote
28 (31 / -3)
I really don't get the market for this. If you want a track car, you don't need an SUV. If you want to go offroad, you wouldn't use this either. If you want to move your family around, there are far more luxurious offerings at a much lower price.

All well, I guess there must be some perpetual 12-year-olds that inherited a lot of money out there.
If you have more money than you know what to do with,
AND you don't really want to drive a supercar because they're low-slung and cramped and impractical and can't fit kids or a dog or baggage,
AND you look at a class 8 Freightliner and say "you know, I think I want more torque & power than that thing",
AND you want the cameras to swing your way when you pull up to the Ritz-Carlton for a Saturday night gala,
then this car is kind of an obvious choice.

If none of the above apply to you, then of course it won't make sense. It isn't supposed to.
 
Upvote
41 (42 / -1)

ZhanMing057

Ars Praefectus
4,640
Subscriptor
There weren't any pictures of the front in this article, so I decided to go look for some. I now understand why you didn't post pictures of the front.

Seriously. How did we ever get to this point in automotive styling?

The LM002, on the other hand, is kind of charming in a utilitarian way.
 
Upvote
9 (10 / -1)

biffbobfred

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,173
I really don't get the market for this.

You're not one of the 3000. They're not selling 100,000 and it needs to make sense to you. I saw two Jaguar SUVs this morning in a 15 minute drive. SUVs make a lot more sense to marques that I never would have thought 10 years ago.

Don't think of it as an offroader. Think of it as a fast minivan, a car that can actually haul stuff while hauling ass. A tall Panamera.
 
Upvote
6 (12 / -6)

CraigJ ✅

Ars Legatus Legionis
27,010
Subscriptor
The LM002, or "Rambo Lambo" was one of the weirdest and coolest cars from the 1980's.

lamborghini-LM002-luxury-SUV-racer-designboom-newsletter.jpg
 
Upvote
28 (30 / -2)
Judging by the console, it looks like Lamborghini hired away some of Razer's designers.
That's not entirely fair, Razer's designs tend to be quite muted compared to other gaming hardware. I'd say this looks more like they hired the designers that Asus hired to make a gaudy competitor to a Razer product.
 
Upvote
4 (5 / -1)
I really don't get the market for this. If you want a track car, you don't need an SUV. If you want to go offroad, you wouldn't use this either. If you want to move your family around, there are far more luxurious offerings at a much lower price.

All well, I guess there must be some perpetual 12-year-olds that inherited a lot of money out there.

You could look at it a different way... cars like this cover multiple use-cases, and could actually be a " value-play" at $200k (assuming a certain perspective).

Look, I'm not going to spent $200k on a car. But I like fast cars, that are fun to drive. Family can't fit in a Porsche 911 though at $120k. So you have to add something like a Range Rover for another $120k+. And frankly, I like the look of this thing more than a Range Rover.

$240 vs. $200? Eh?

No?

Maybe I'm the 12 year old.
 
Upvote
5 (7 / -2)

hominesstulti

Smack-Fu Master, in training
79
I really don't get the market for this.

This vehicle satisfies someone who wants the prestige and power of a Lamborghini, but that is also practical for everyday use such as shuttling the children around. Sure, there are way more practical SUVs at far less cost, but they don't carry the prestige of this vehicle. If you care about that, this car will deliver that. Lamborghini is hoping that some rich doctors and lawyers will want to spend their money on this new pony, so their neighbors feel relative deprivation when they get into their Porsche Cayenne.
 
Upvote
6 (8 / -2)

Belisarius

Ars Legatus Legionis
12,219
Subscriptor++
I really don't get the market for this. If you want a track car, you don't need an SUV. If you want to go offroad, you wouldn't use this either. If you want to move your family around, there are far more luxurious offerings at a much lower price.

All well, I guess there must be some perpetual 12-year-olds that inherited a lot of money out there.

It's for the crucial market of people who find themselves with entirely too much money, an overwhelming need to show the world the depth of that wealth, and the total lack of taste to understand how hideous the Urus is.
 
Upvote
14 (15 / -1)
I really don't get the market for this. If you want a track car, you don't need an SUV. If you want to go offroad, you wouldn't use this either. If you want to move your family around, there are far more luxurious offerings at a much lower price.
It's for the person who wants a Lamborghini that can haul a family.

BTW, off-highway use is not necessarily a criterion for an SUV. When I was a kid, we had SUVs. They were called "station wagons" and looked like this:



They were not meant for off-highway use, but in every other way they served precisely the same purpose as the modern SUV (they were also, like modern SUVs, highly profitable for the manufacturers).

Another early SUV was the Ford Ranchero or the Chevrolet El Camino (what the Australians call the "Ute," and which they still drive Down Under):

 
Upvote
13 (14 / -1)
Post content hidden for low score. Show…
It's for the crucial market of people who find themselves with entirely too much money, an overwhelming need to show the world the depth of that wealth, and the total lack of taste to understand how hideous the Urus is.
For the last 15 years or so that market has been well-served by Cadillac with the Escalade.
 
Upvote
6 (7 / -1)
I really don't get the market for this. If you want a track car, you don't need an SUV. If you want to go offroad, you wouldn't use this either. If you want to move your family around, there are far more luxurious offerings at a much lower price.
It's for the person who wants a Lamborghini that can haul a family.

BTW, off-highway use is not necessarily a criterion for an SUV. When I was a kid, we had SUVs. They were called "station wagons" and looked like this:



They were not meant for off-highway use, but in every other way they served precisely the same purpose as the modern SUV (they were also, like modern SUVs, highly profitable for the manufacturers).

I miss the contact paper on the sides that looked like real wood!
 
Upvote
4 (5 / -1)
Status
Not open for further replies.