By on December 5, 2017

2019 Lamborghini Urus

Back in the spring of 2012, I penned a sort of existential whine about the absolutely unnecessary idea of a Lamborghini SUV. In the five-and-a-half years since then, it’s often looked like the “Urus” would be canceled or at least shelved indefinitely — and why not? Under the protective umbrella of VW Group, Lamborghini had absolutely no need to balance the books with a Me-Too Iguana Mommytruck.

Even more importantly, the company’s core product has become absolutely first-rate. If you haven’t driven a Huracan, you owe it to yourself to at least try three rental laps in Las Vegas or elsewhere. The Huracan Performante is, quite possibly, the most exciting and emotionally involving exotic car since the demise of the Ferrari 458 Speciale, while the Aventador S neatly balances the demands of outrageousness and everyday usability.

If you’d put a Urus in showrooms next to the tired-looking-from-Day-2 Gallardo and just-a-bit-plain Murcielago, there might have been a bit of sad synergy across the product lines. Maybe. Half a decade ago, Lamborghini wasn’t second fiddle to Ferrari so much as it was the weekday shift janitor at the symphony. But now it’s Ferrari that struggles with issues of public perception and dealer gouging and unfocused product offerings while the German-Italians from Sant’Agata keep raising the bar to stratospheric levels.

The Urus will be an exception to this new tradition of excellence. It’s a deeply compromised product, a sort of mish-mash between the Audi S8 and VW Tiguan and God knows what else. Its primary competition in the marketplace will surely be the related-under-the-skin Bentley Bentayga and Porsche Cayenne, two vehicles that I suspect are made deliberately gormless for the same reason the so-called “419 scams” are so obviously fraudulent — to weed out the cognoscenti and ensure that only the least discerning customers make it through the purchase experience. It’s not good news for anybody except my colleagues at the buff books, who will have a chance to escape the winter blahs with a trip to Italy. As a genuine fan of the Lamborghini brand and lineup, however, I can’t say that I am anything other than disappointed at Lamborghini’s decision to develop and sell this product.

Which raises, for me at least, a question: How can I continue to respect Lamborghini in a world where the Urus is providing the bulk of the sales volume? The answer is simple.

I am a bit of a watch collector and, as a result, my e-mail inbox is usually chock full of watch deals ranging from interesting (30 percent off an Omega Planet Ocean?) to ridiculous (low, low prices on the latest nautical-themed stillbirth from Ulysse Nardin, ugh).

In the past few years I’ve seen a lot of “once-in-a-lifetime” sales on Tonino Lamborghini watches. If you haven’t kept up on the Lamborghini family story, Tonino is a son of Ferrucio Lamborghini and the owner of his own independent “design company.” If that sounds like a familiar story, it’s because F.A. “Butzi” Porsche set up Porsche Design after leaving his father’s company. The difference appears to be that Butzi was a legendary designer who gave us the Porsche 911’s silhouette and the Targa model while Tonino doesn’t appear to have much of an eye for design. The vast majority of Tonino Lamborghini watches are fairly horrible-looking.

Predictably, the Tonino Lamborghini watches are sold by retail outlets who are in no big hurry to educate you on the difference between the automaker and the design firm. As far as I can tell, the customer base for Tonino Lamborghini watches is women who think their significant others will really like a “Lamborghini watch.” I’ve never seen one worn openly in public. Just as predictably, they have very little resale value.

The Venn diagram of Lamborghini car owners and Tonino Lamborghini watch owners probably looks like a pair of binoculars. Which is why Lamborghini the car company recently announced a partnership with another, slightly more reputable, watch firm to create actual Lambo-liveried timepieces. I’m not expecting great things from that partnership. The early examples I’ve seen are no better-looking than the Tonino stuff while likely costing 10 to 50 times as much.

In reality, the Lamborghini Huracan or Aventador owner probably owns watches from brands which have established themselves as watch brands first and foremost. Most of the Lambo owners I meet are wearing Rolex Submariners, with a sprinkling of Patek/Audemars/Vacheron sightings from time to time. These people would have no interest in Lamborghini watches, particularly not the kind that are no-bids on eBay at less than the price of a single Huracan tire.

In other words, Lamborghini watches are non-canon. This phrase (in modern usage anyway, spare me your comments regarding the Pelagian heresy) comes from the comic-book and sci-fi fan subcultures and it means “not part of the real story.” For example, if you’re in your 40s like me, chances are that you eagerly read the novel Splinter Of The Mind’s Eye when it came out. It was published in 1978 and was considered the first sequel to the Star Wars movie. However, some of the stuff that happens in the book directly contradicts things that happened in The Empire Strikes Back. So the rather tidy solution arrived at by fans of Star Wars stuff is to consider it “non-canon.” Not real.

That doesn’t mean people do not continue to read, and enjoy, the book. It just means that future Star Wars movies or books do not have to make allowances for things that happened in Splinter. The same is true for many other artistic works up to and including the most recent Pink Floyd albums, which many fans of the band consider “non-canon” because, as Roger Waters once said, “it’s just Gilmour and his wife now.” I personally think that any Journey albums without Steve Perry are “non-canon,” and although this won’t make many TTAC readers happy, I’m afraid the same has to be said regarding the band known as “Van Hagar.”

For many years, Ferrari owners have had to deal with the Ferrari merchandising machine that has sold billions of dollars’ worth of tracksuits, hats, laptops, and other junk to people who have never even so much as sat in a Ferrari. The way they generally do this is to consider Ferrari clothing and the F1 team’s fan gear as a sort of “non-canon.” If you own an F12 Berlinetta and a 458 Speciale, chances are you don’t own any Ferrari tracksuits. The reverse is also the case. The clothing, the calendars, the touristy junk, the roller coaster — it’s all effectively non-canon. It doesn’t exist.

After some considerable thought on the matter, I’ve decided to apply the same thinking to the Urus. It’s the same as Tonino Lamborghini watches or Hot Wheels cars or a tracksuit that you would buy from a streetside vendor in New York. It’s non-canon. It does not exist. And what argument can you make to the contrary? The engine is Audi, the platform is VW Group, the styling is a despicable pastiche of cliches from sources as disparate as the BMW X4 and the Ssangyong Rodius. It has nothing to do with the Huracan or the Aventador or even the oft-reviled Gallardo. Certainly it has nothing to do with a Miura or Countach. It’s non-canon, plain and simple.

Many years ago, a discouraged Porsche 944 owner wrote to the Porsche club magazine to complain that he’d attended a meeting of his local PCA and had a very good time — but when the club members decided to take a photograph, he was told to move his Audi out of the way. Future owners of the Urus should expect the same level of disregard from Huracan Performante drivers. I won’t blame them. We may live in a world where branding is king, but that doesn’t mean we have to bow and scrape before the royal personage. You can call your new Urus a Lamborghini. I will call it something else.

[Image: Lamborghini]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

98 Comments on “No Fixed Abode: They Did It, But It Didn’t Have to Be Done...”

  • avatar

    Meh, this kinda rings of “Not my President!”

    • 0 avatar

      100%. Comment thread could have stopped here. I like Jack, but if he told me my $230K car wasn’t real I’d tell him to GFHS. American self importance has reached a fever pitch and needs a couple of reality check back slaps.

    • 0 avatar

      Hey Jack (and Mark) Baruth –

      “Trade deficit soars on record imports from China.”


      Trump is a year into office and the MAGA is so strong!!!

      • 0 avatar

        Trump’s quotes (promises) on China trade imbalance and “how HE ALONE,” could correct it (MAGA):

        Campaign event in Bluffton, S.C. – July 21, 2015

        “I beat the people from China. I win against China. You can win against China if you’re smart. But our people don’t have a clue. We give state dinners to the heads of China. I said why are you doing state dinners for them? They’re ripping us left and right. Just take them to McDonald’s and go back to the negotiating table.”

        Campaign rally in Staten Island, N.Y. — April 17, 2016

        “China’s upset because of the way Donald Trump is talking about trade with China. They’re ripping us off, folks, it’s time. I’m so happy they’re upset.”

        ‘Crippled America’ book – 2015

        “There are people who wish I wouldn’t refer to China as our enemy. But that’s exactly what they are. They have destroyed entire industries by utilizing low-wage workers, cost us tens of thousands of jobs, spied on our businesses, stolen our technology, and have manipulated and devalued their currency, which makes importing our goods more expensive – and sometimes, impossible.”

        ’Good Morning America’ interview – Nov. 3, 2015

        On labeling China an enemy

        “Because it’s an economic enemy, because they have taken advantage of us like nobody in history. They have; it’s the greatest theft in the history of the world what they’ve done to the United States. They’ve taken our jobs.”

        Twitter – March 30, 2013

        “China is the biggest environmental polluter in the World, by far. They do nothing to clean up their factories and laugh at our stupidity!”

        Campaign rally in Fort Wayne, Ind. – May 2, 2016

        On China’s trade policies

        “We can’t continue to allow China to rape our country and that’s what they’re doing. It’s the greatest theft in the history of the world.”

        Twitter – Sept. 21, 2011

        “China is neither an ally or a friend — they want to beat us and own our country.”

        Campaign rally in Manchester, N.H. – June 20, 2016

        “The single biggest weapon used against us and to destroy our companies is devaluation of currencies, and the greatest ever at that is China. Very smart, they are like grand chess masters. And we are like checkers players. But bad ones.”

        Twitter – Aug. 8, 2012

        “No surprise that China was caught cheating in the Olympics. That’s the Chinese M.O. – Lie, Cheat & Steal in all international dealings.”

        ‘Good Morning America’ interview – Nov. 3, 2015

        “But when you see China, these are fierce people in terms of negotiation. They want to take your throat out, they want to cut you apart. These are tough people. I’ve dealt with them all my life.”



        • 0 avatar

          I’m gonna bite… It took at least 6 years of Billy setting up Chinese influencers in the Lincoln bedroom to get the ball rolling, it may take a bit more to keep it from steamrolling us over…

  • avatar

    The Urus is the Lamborghini that zigs.

  • avatar

    Same was said of the Cayenne when it first came out. I’m sure Ferrari is next.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      +1, my thoughts exactly.

    • 0 avatar
      Jack Baruth

      Yeah, and the Cayenne is a disgrace.

      • 0 avatar

        Sounds like a personal problem, Jack.

        I don’t hate myself enough to ever buy a Porsche, but in a dreamworld where I have infinite money, it’d be a Cayenne, not a Carrera.

        We’re not all Boy Racer, you know.

        (No judgment on those that are, especially those that *seriously* take their Porsche to the track.

        But the idea that almosst-every-Porsche isn’t, in practice, bullsh!t, is untenable.

        Almost every Carrera never sees a track or really spirited driving, as far as I can tell.

        The Macan and Cayenne just *sdmit it*.)

        • 0 avatar
          Jack Baruth

          Speaking as someone who drove a Cayenne GTS six-speed for the better part of two years, it’s more a product problem. They’re not good products and they have a magnetic attraction to dealer service.

          • 0 avatar

            There is also the general issue of physics. You can’t make a tall heavy vehicle handle well without a fairly stiff suspension, making the ride quality suck.

          • 0 avatar

            Jack, I’ve been reading you since the epic Maximum Street Speed series and cannot recall you previously admitting to Cayenne ownership. Maybe it was a service loaner that acquired the opposite polarity of your Phaetons?

          • 0 avatar
            Jack Baruth

            Responding to cdotson:

            I had a partner in the dope game who picked up a stick-shift GTS and then wasn’t able to use it for a variety of reasons.


            I’d like to tell you more about it, but it was in the shop. A LOT.

        • 0 avatar

          Many Carerras may not ever see a track, but at least they are still a good tool for the job. An SUV isn’t so there’s no point pretending it is by putting a Porsche badge on it…

      • 0 avatar

        A disgrace that brings in money. Everybody loves the bohemian artist, but it always comes down to money. Look at all the art museums that are supported by family X. So charming and erudite. Let us stop pretending.

      • 0 avatar

        JB I admire your purity. Ever notice how many museums are “with the generous support of X”. The investment class does not care about heritage and history, if they can monetize it they will. We should be grateful to them that we can see any famous art at all.

      • 0 avatar

        I agree with you, Jack, but you’re arguing about what should be based on the assumption that a majority, or even plurality, of the buying public (the segment able to afford these monstrosities) has a bare modicum of intelligence, and the ability to make rational and sensible purchasing decisions based on the merits of particular vehicles, rather than running, sheeple-like, with the pack of other dumb animals.

        That is a losing proposition, as few (maybe none?) people have lost money UNDERESTIMATING THE STUPIDITY OF THE HUMAN RACE (especially badge-obsessed, debt-soaked, dumb, filthy Americans, who want to keep up with the Jones’s at all costs, even running voluntarily to the’edge of their 2nd or 3rd bankruptcy).

        And keep on MAGAing down the highway in that Hecho En Mexico CHEVY SILVERADO! (I’m sending you a Trump/Pence bumper sticker, Kid Rock mudflaps, Ted Nugent rear window decal, and Confederate Flag Berliner).

      • 0 avatar

        Right on. If we’re talking about the brand, Porsche absolutely diminished theirs with a bunch of CUVs and a disgustingly ugly sedan. The core of the Porsche brand has always been a two-door touring, racing, or sporting automobile. Having so much as a real convertible top is starting to stretch the brand. But they built their brand on the magnificent, legendary 911 in all it’s iterations of give it six decades. Meanwhile, it only took the VW corporate bosses about five years to turn the brand into just another luxury jalopy maker. They might sell as many as they can make and they might make more money that Croesus (for now) but I feel like the clock is ticking on their success. In ten years, what will anybody under 35 think of Porsche? An expensive compact CUV maker, nothing more. A Macan can be replaced by a Q5, an X3 or a GLC, from a branding standpoint. But think of what is a substitute for a 911, circa 15 years ago? From a bearing perspective, you could only look at an M3 or a Corvette and neither had the cachet or the performance of a 911. The M3 was properly fun, but it was still a step down from the 911. The Vette had a horrible interior for such an expensive car, and the brand was to much chesthair and gold chain.

        That was the brand. You went to Porsche to get something that you simply could not get anywhere else. That’s the whole purpose of the brand. To differentiate yourself. It helps if the product actually loves up to the promotional material. Now you’ve got a bunch of utterly-forgettable CUVs that don’t look any different than anyone else, and use a platform and engines that are found in other luxury CUV brands. What’s the point? There is nothing special about Porsche anymore.

    • 0 avatar

      It’s a dilemma for people inside the company too. You don’t want to dilute the brand, but as an employee of the corporation, it’s your duty to make the company as profitable as possible.

      Doing an SUV guarantees billions in additional revenue. OTOH you risk diluting the brand and alienating future buyers of your low volume halo product.

      Which scenario offers the greater risk to profitability?

      This is why even Ferrari won’t be able to avoid building an SUV.

    • 0 avatar

      And I’ve never seen a Cayenne (or Macan or Panamera) come to a PCA meet either.

      Just because something makes money, it doesn’t mean it also won’t dilute, or at least alter, the brand perception long-term. Whether that’s a good or bad thing is not necessarily for me to judge, but this dilution in my opinion partly why air-cooled Porsche’s have risen so much in value (and why we’ve seen the rise of Singer). For one reason or another, Porsche today is less special then it used to be.

  • avatar

    I’ve decided to apply the same thinking to the Envision.

    It has nothing to do with the Grand National or the Electra or even the oft-reviled Reatta. Certainly it has nothing to do with a Roadmaster or Riviera. It’s non-canon, plain and simple.

    In fact, Buick stopped making things in 2008.

  • avatar

    I like this idea very much. It also works for some “Jeeps” I don’t consider to be Jeep, some Star Trek spin offs I won’t name, and … there was only the one Matrix movie anyway.

  • avatar

    In the end, U r U. That should suffice.

  • avatar
    SD 328I

    Such a salty response to a car. Like the auto industry is somehow sacred that adding a non-confirming model taints the other ones.

    Doesn’t work that way. This Urus will probably go on to become Lambo’s best selling vehicle. The Cayenne effect will come in and bring in gobs of cash so Lambo can build even crazier more limited production cars that they couldn’t’ afford to do otherwise.

    Every Porsche enthusiast should have a small shrine in their homes with a Cayenne on it, where they light a candle it its honor. That modified VW SUV has not only helped Porsche survive, but thrive and have the money to build the billion variants of 911’s purist love so much.

    So get off your soap box Baruth, stop being so dramatic over this car. Its a good thing for Lambo.

    • 0 avatar
      Jack Baruth

      “Every Porsche enthusiast should have a small shrine in their homes with a Cayenne on it, where they light a candle it its honor. That modified VW SUV has not only helped Porsche survive, but thrive and have the money to build the billion variants of 911’s purist love so much.”

      I assume you’re making some kind of joke here.

      The money for the Cayenne was used almost exclusively for fiscal adventurism that ended up with the small-fish-big-fish VW-Porsche Piech drama.

      There’s been exactly ONE new Porsche sports-car platform in the solid decade since the Cayenne arrived. And it’s not great. And it costs more than ever. And the entry-level Porsches are now four-cylinder wide-bodies.

      For what am I supposed to be grateful again?

      • 0 avatar

        That Porsche isn’t just bankrupt?

        (I just checked the GCBC sales numbers – and what’s selling is the Macan and Cayenne.

        Hell, the Panamera sometimes outsells the 911 in any given month…)

      • 0 avatar
        SD 328I

        Really, you have proof all that money was used in the Porsche vs VW drama or just some sort of theory you developed?

        So what about 1 platform, how about all the great 911 and Cayman variants, low margin limited production cars that exist today.

        Regardless of how far you think Porsche has moved, you think Porsche would be where they are now without the funds generated by the Cayenne?

        Where would they be without it?

        • 0 avatar

          Like anyone thinks Porsche, home of the $3500 hand-stitched-leatherette-covered, Chinese-made, $.12-to-produce, digital quartz movement 2″ dash clock “Sport Chrono Package,” or $1500 hand-stitched-leatherette-covered, Valeo-developed, $1.19-to-produce keyless entry fob Luxury Tactile Package (or whatever) nonsense profit generation options wouldn’t be wildly successful simply making and selling sports cars. Maybe they tried (and failed) a world takeover fueled by the insane Cayenne money, maybe not. Point is, the rationale behind the knee jerk Cayenne defense (it bankrolls “cool” Porsches) is bunk. That’s justification for a blatant move away from core clientele in order to drive larger, cheaper to produce, wider-appeal profits.

        • 0 avatar
          Jack Baruth

          You can read the balance sheets year after year, as I did when I was covering daily news for SSL and TTAC. It’s plainly obvious.

          “how about all the great 911 and Cayman variants”

          Oh yah, the post-2008 911 and Cayman are just magic, that’s why a 1989 Carrera G50 with 150,000 miles is worth more than a new 911 Poorbo.

          “low margin limited production cars that exist today”

          You mean the ones that share 80% of their parts with a $49,995 Cayman but sell for $180k and up? My God, how could you sell cars at a 300% markup with having an SUV?

  • avatar

    The flared haunch just screams “BUICK” to me for some reason. Never what you want from a Lambo. It’s downright frumpy.

    • 0 avatar

      The look is… ummm kind of plain. I expect a Lambo to be crazy, this looks similar to every other SUV just with sharper edges. I know you can’t do much with the shape, especially considering its bones are from other VAG products, but the pictures aren’t what I would call the classic bedroom poster material Lambo is know for.

  • avatar

    Momentary Lapse of Reason is my favorite of Pink Floyd albums. Guess I’ll go run and hide now.

    • 0 avatar

      At least it’s not The Wall…

      (Or, God help you, The Final Cut.)

      Jack is, however, completely correct about how David Lee Roth is a fundamental part of Van Halen.

      • 0 avatar

        My favorite thing about “The Final Cut” was, allegedly, that Gilmour’s response to Waters songs was “Not his******* mother and the ******* war again”.

      • 0 avatar
        Adam Tonge

        I’ll accept that Van Halen and Van Hagar are different bands. I still like Van Hagar, but Van Halen II is everything. I know Jack is also a big fan of DLRs Eat Em And Smile.

    • 0 avatar

      I do think of the Pink Floyd of the Division Bell and Momentary Lapse of Reason era as different and even less important than the Waters-era Pink Floyd, but they’re still among my favorite albums.

      • 0 avatar

        After Waters left and the styles became more perceptible, it bacame clear to me that everything I’d ever liked about Pink Floyd was Gilmour, and everything I’d ever disliked was Waters. I don’t give two shits about “authenticity”. Floyd produced better music after the split.

        (Bonus heresy: I think AC/DC’s best albums are Back in Black and For Those About to Rock)

        • 0 avatar
          Adam Tonge

          Mine is Highway to Hell. Shot Down in Flames and If You Want Blood are on that album. That’s all I need to know about it.

        • 0 avatar
          Jack Baruth

          Waters is Lennon, Gilmour is McCartney. The latter is always easier to listen to but it’s best when you have the former involved as well.

          • 0 avatar

            Early on in the CD era, I bought a copy of Dark Side of the Moon because Time and some of the other cuts are good for testing treble on stereos, but listen to Pink Floyd for pleasure? Heck, I can get depressed all by myself, I don’t need any help from Roger Waters. Besides, I don’t think Roger likes me or my people.

    • 0 avatar


  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    Non-canon. As an avid fiction reader, I like that.

    I’m of mixed opinion about the Urus. I think it’s kind of a good idea. It’s definitely a performance SUV in its own right. And I think some of your and other people’s ire comes from the clientele. Plenty of people buy these just for the looks, but are content to just put-put around town. Some of them—see urban Chinese dwellers—live in areas in which they will *never* get to exploit a tenth of the driving potential, and the car could have a Nissan Juke powertrain underneath, for all the difference it would make.

    That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t measure up to its promises. And it doesn’t mean there aren’t also plenty of other buyers who appreciate it and drive it accordingly.

    It’s basically going to be the same as some of VW Group’s other fast vehicles, but with more drama and flair, which is pretty much what modern Lamborghini is. That would have been a real failure twenty years ago, when there was clear room for Lamborghini to come in well above the performance of a Porsche, an Audi or a Bentley. But now…the other brands have arrived with cars that really push the envelope. There’s the R8, which opened up a whole new realm of performance for Audi. A sporting SUV doesn’t get much better–if at all—than the Cayenne. And even the Bentagya dances far better than its big nose-heavy self has any right to. So it’s easy for Lamborghini to come in and say, “Oh, well we’ll just do a version of that on the same MLB platform…but with Lamborghini theming.”

    Still, if they wanted to be Lamborghini of yore, they’d have done a bespoke platform with a stonking V12. Something truly unique to the Brand of the Bull. Even if it didn’t perform better than the Cayenne—even if it handled worse—it would be like nothing else in VW Group’s portfolio, or anywhere else. And that, I think is the Urus’s greatest missed opportunity. The things that make it unique are artificial…the dramatic styling, the tuning, and what I’m sure will be an extra-loud exhaust system.

    Of course, a unique one-off SUV platform wouldn’t be profitable.

  • avatar

    “It’s not good news for anybody except my colleagues at the buff books, who will have a chance to escape the winter blahs with a trip to Italy.”

    They might even pick a more tropical exotic locale for the press launch. Just think of all the ice they will need for the shrimp cocktail?

  • avatar

    The Urus’s main sin is that it isn’t a Mad Max’d Espada. It’s outrageous, but not outrageous enough. Then again, I haven’t had much interest in Lamborghini since my ten-year old self knew that the Diablo’s 202mph top speed made it the fastest car in the original Need For Speed.

    That said, I expect there will be a significant number of Gallardos with imminent E-Gear failure traded in on these.

  • avatar

    Are we completely forgetting that this is not Lamborghini’s first SUV. It was the LM002 built from 86-93. Ferruccio Lamborghini, the founder of Lamborghini also founded Lamborghini Trattori, which made tractors and is still a brand of tractor.

  • avatar

    ” Me-Too Iguana Mommytruck ” That’s priceless. It should be mandatory introductory wording for all SUV/CUV reviews.

    • 0 avatar

      Dunno. I like Jack’s focus on brand purity in this piece, rather than lost masculinity in the former piece linked above. But then this phrase is still a kick on moms, equating the non-pure with non-masculine. No need.

      I like the article very much, otherwise.

      • 0 avatar
        Jack Baruth

        For the record, I absolutely adore mothers, both married and single.

        Girls become mothers / then turn into lovers

        If you’re forty-six, as I am, it’s difficult not to have moms as three-quarters of the bench.

        But they have no business determining Lamborghini’s product line, any more than I have the right to tell Ann Taylor what their dresses should look like.

  • avatar
    Matt Foley

    This piece is best read in the Comic Book Guy’s voice.


  • avatar

    The problem is the damage to the brand takes a long time. So quite possibly these things work out just fine for the automakers as by the time the damage is really done there is a whole other generation of fools, I mean discerning customers to pick up the slack.

    I’m in my late 40s and remember seeing an S class Merc as a young kid, It was a statement of luxury and exclusiveness. What have all the A’s, B’s and CLA’s done? For me Mercedes is a brand I would never even consider and certainly wouldn’t say it is aspirational. My personal fave was Maserati but of course they have ruined that too.

    It may be apocryphal but I do wish the Aston Martin story about not selling Mike Tyson a car is true since they deemed it damaging to the brand. I for one like brands who have the courage to say if you want that then perhaps you should take your business elsewhere. We make these for people who want and appreciate these,

    Deep down I know that I am probably am just the one and that almost everybody else disagrees.

  • avatar
    Arthur Dailey

    JB, As a watch collector, can you provide me with an estimate for the North American value of my original IWC Porsche Design, black titanium, compass watch?

    • 0 avatar
      Jack Baruth

      I don’t want to be the person to give you this news.

      • 0 avatar
        Arthur Dailey

        Yeah, not exactly representative of what is currently in style.

        For some reason I own 4 Swiss made watches and have learned that unless they are Patek Phillipe, then they are not guaranteed to be an appreciating asset. And the cost of maintenance is ‘Mercedes like’.

        Mine are remnants of a previous lifestyle, when I used to change my vehicles on a whim and wore only bespoke clothing. A far cry from my current consumer profile.

        • 0 avatar

          Speaking of Swiss watches that don’t appreciate, NEVER buy a Tag Heuer.

          • 0 avatar

            Except things like the Daytona I would not expect any watch to appreciate however I do hope they hold value.

            I also think things like the Heuer Monaco are pretty decent.

            be that as it may, I’m in agreeance with Jack but this is a case of… “wasnt the first, wont be the last”

            Under Audi I expect them to merchandise the Lamborghini name much like Ferrari.

            As far as Ferrari and watches go, they had dalliances with Girard Perregaux and now Panerai but I mean… you can get a free “Ferrari watch” with a copy of Kaspersky anti virus so these are effectively worthless.

          • 0 avatar

            Modern luxury seems to be about sub-segmenting everything until you can come up with a luxury item tailored for nearly everybody. If your watch, car singing green-bird etc only appeals to a niche, then it cant possibly have that great of a resale value or broad based brand draw. Somebody out there likes the Rolex Daytona in rose gold with powder blue face, two tone strap and white indices, but that’s sure not going to make the majority of people want Rolexes in general.

        • 0 avatar
          Tele Vision

          I found a stainless steel Rado in a snow-covered Lake Louise parking lot. Loose clasp. I put up notices – no action. I gave it to my Dad who, after getting the clasp fixed, seemingly lost it.

  • avatar

    When I first saw the pictures, I thought it was a new Lexus RXWhatever, right down to the semi predator grill. Pretty disappointing. I was hoping they would have gone for a 21st century LM002. At least with the LM002, you could picture some aspiring 3rd world dictator or minor Saudi Prince doing a Tony Montana impersonation in the showroom; “Bullet proof it here….and here…Mount some .50 calibers in the back.”  But this thing? All it says is there’s a new pecking order at the Starbuck’s drive through in Plano/West Palm/Malibu. I’m sure they’ll sell every single one they can build. 

  • avatar

    Other than the ground clearance, there’s not much SUV in these SUVs. Good on Lamborghini for that.
    The wheels are too large (except for the purpose of being needlessly trendy and expensive to replace). The roofline is too low for any useful cargo space.
    This is just another overpriced Gucci bag for wealthy old men to buy for their esco-, I mean, younger wives, in the (mistaken) hope that they will sleep with them again.

  • avatar

    So do we call it a Lamborgaudi? Porchini?

  • avatar
    Jeff Zekas

    Jack, remember the guy who sued Porsche, claiming his 924 was not a “real” Porsche, but rather an Audi, and thus, he was defrauded, and deserved compensation? Ironically, the court ruled “Anything Porsche puts its name on, is a Porsche.” After that decision, I said to my buddy, “See that Ford F-150? If Porsche put its badge on it, then you’d have a real Porsche truck! Cos that’s what the court says1”

  • avatar
    Daniel J

    As someone who likes a good quality lighter, I just laugh at the Porsche designs butane lighter.

  • avatar

    Oh boy, Van Hagar– you had to go there.

    Can’t we like the Urus and the Huracan as two different things? Can’t we like the Huracan’s drunken assless-chaps performance AND the versatile competence of the Urus? And can’t we enjoy the Espada’s bad haircut and backup vocals without replacing him with an Aventador?

  • avatar

    It looks like a lifted 3rd gen CRX on dubs.

  • avatar

    The front wheel drive M100 Lotus Elan is definitely non-canon. Interestingly, the Lotus Cortina, sold by Ford dealers, and Lotus Carlton, a Vauxhall/Opel, are considered canon. The Isuzus with “handling by Lotus” are kind of quasi canon. The DeLorean is not canon but regarded as a close relative by some, an abandoned stepchild by others. They might let a Jensen Healey in a Lotus show since it was their money that paid for the development of the 2.2 Lotus engine.

  • avatar

    This things not a Lamborghini at all. It has some queues that loosely speak to the Lambo brand but proportions scream corporate parts bin sharing. It’s a shame that they feel the need to have an SUV. It’ll probably be wildly popular because they are trendy and for no other good reason. Shameful bastard child.

  • avatar

    I’m not so loyal to a brand that I have to own their cars only. I like Porsche for the 911/718 cars. They are special enough, especially their GT3/4’s. It’s why I own one.

    Their SUV’s are solid offerings, but for a daily car, I like something different. I don’t want to see the same dash, switch gear and seats. Same problem exists with only buying BMW/AUDI/MB. If you own a 3, the X is the same feel.

    Variety is good and for a daily, I like more modest offerings. Keeps the sports car special, even if I don’t get to drive it daily and year round.

  • avatar
    Compaq Deskpro

    Rappers had a habit of talking about luxury SUV’s that don’t exist.

    Jadakiss: “The Ferrari truck parked in the back is all black”, “Now you might see me in the Jag truck”

    Nas: “Sick with the bread, Lamborghini trucks topless”

    This seemed like a rediculous fantasy back then, now it is all coming true.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • JLThom: lol but so real!
  • JLThom: brand identity, perception, legacy means so much more in the US. M-B, Lexus, BMW can sell utter junk for...
  • FreedMike: Maybe the fuel tank is protesting fuel costs.
  • JLThom: ouch! but seems like you hadn’t really sat in or driven the last K900. i tested a 2020 Kia K900 that...
  • Verbal: Electrical gremlin in a German car? Didn’t see that one coming.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber