Printable View
Why is the first time i'm hearing about this on Yahoo? I woulda never expected that but then again i don't visit Edmunds as much as i really should
[URL="http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/lamborghini-not-secret-suv-leaks-early-urus-153631899.html"]http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/lamborghini-not-secret-suv-leaks-early-urus-153631899.html[/URL]
That car looks really amazing...:)
It's okay, as long as they keep making their normal cars, I'll just imagine that this doesn't exist.
Same thing with Porsche.
An "exotic" SUV done right, I suppose.
[quote=PRC777;983223]An "exotic" SUV done right, I suppose.[/quote]
The only one I'd consider somewhat done correctly is the G55 AMG.
They couldn't make the Estoque but they had the resources to make THIS?
What's with Lamborghini and their CGI images? Same with the Sesto Elemento... no official real images of the car.
As for the look, well... it looks much better than the Porsche/BMW and that Bentley offroader I guess?
[quote=kingofthering;983226]They couldn't make the Estoque but they had the resources to make THIS?[/quote]
My thought exactly... a Lambo sedan makes more sense than this. Guess market polling in the mid-east indicated otherwise.
This is horrible, what the hell were they thinking?
[quote=092326001;983239]This is horrible, what the hell were they thinking?[/quote]
The sad answer is, their pocketbooks.
*In before Ferrari SUV.
I am somewhat fine with this. The LM002 was awesome, and although this was not that, there is precedent.
The G63 and G65 are also fun; just pure stupidness.
In general, I am staunchly anti-SUV.
[quote=kingofthering;983226]They couldn't make the Estoque but they had the resources to make THIS?[/quote]
You know, they could base it off the Panamera. :D
I call for a name change. Urus spoken out loud sounds too much like a British person saying uterus. Come to think of it, that may not be such a bad decision at all, because this vehicle will probably be purchased mostly by wealthy soccer moms looking to pose.
From a financial standpoint, I guess its a wise decision to broaden the range with a vehicle that offers that. I may not agree with it, but I'm not Lamborghini's bank account. I feel like with a regular Lambo, you still have the excuse of using it on weekends for a track car, but this leaves you with nothing other than I'm rich and I'd like to make sure everyone knows that. I'm slightly disgusted.
[quote=Kitdy;983244]I am somewhat fine with this. The LM002 was awesome, and although this was not that, there is precedent.
The G63 and G65 are also fun; just pure stupidness.
In general, I am staunchly anti-SUV.[/quote]
Goddamn! For the second time in your existence you make a good point.
When I first read about this, I had the knee-jerk car guy reaction; I was angry. However, as a child I was, and am, a big fan of the LM002 and I'm not sure how to reconcile that with the recent trend of exotic manufacturers adding lifted high-powered bricks and blobs to their lineups, which I am resolutely against.
I still do not like this, in fact it weakens my respect for the LM002, but it makes sense in a weird sort of way.
[quote=DesmoRob;983263]II feel like with a regular Lambo, you still have the excuse of using it on weekends for a track car, but this leaves you with nothing other than I'm rich and I'd like to make sure everyone knows that. I'm slightly disgusted.[/quote]
Lamborghinis aren't really meant to be track cars.
[quote=f6fhellcat13;983274]Goddamn! For the second time in your existence you make a good point.
When I first read about this, I had the knee-jerk car guy reaction; I was angry. However, as a child I was, and am, a big fan of the LM002 and I'm not sure how to reconcile that with the recent trend of exotic manufacturers adding lifted high-powered bricks and blobs to their lineups, which I am resolutely against.
I still do not like this, in fact it weakens my respect for the LM002, but it makes sense in a weird sort of way.[/quote]
What was the first time?
I'd've much prefered this if it was more AMG G-wagon/LM002 - actually [kind of] meant to go offroad but totally ludicrous in the drivetrain department. This is kind of.. boring, really. Makes as much sense as a Cayenne [all of our customers have a SUV, so why not sell them one] and will probably do well for Lambo. Given it'll help fund the models we all want to see, I'm not going to complain.. too much.
[quote=pimento;983282]I'd've much prefered this if it was more AMG G-wagon/LM002 - actually [kind of] meant to go offroad but totally ludicrous in the drivetrain department. This is kind of.. boring, really. Makes as much sense as a Cayenne [all of our customers have a SUV, so why not sell them one] and will probably do well for Lambo. Given it'll help fund the models we all want to see, I'm not going to complain.. too much.[/quote]
It is a Cayenne.
I agree with your thoughts on off road capability. The first generation Cayenne actually could go off road.
The new one probably still can, but it probably won't be as good.
[quote=Kitdy;983276]Lamborghinis aren't really meant to be track cars[/quote]
likely not, but at least a sports car does a better job of it than an suv :o
GTRish profile, I like.
[quote=P3RG4R3C;983339]GTRish profile, I like.[/quote]
It actually reminds me more of a smushed Range Rover Evoque, in a bad way though.
Beltlines on cars are way too high now.
I remember Lamborghini as a low, sharp and sporty beast. Now this? Total opposite. But maybe it is just that I am old-fashioned, or that I used to play with Diablo and Countach scale models ))).
Agreed on the high beltline in today's cars (GT-R). I also feel the same for ride height.
Don't like it at all, it looks awful. Lamborghini was so good in the 90's but then when VAG bought them, it has been all downhill ever since. OK, Lamborghini made the LM002 20 years ago and it was great - let it be. The tasteless, styleless, corporate businessmen who now control Lambo have no obligation to attempt something similar.