Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General General thats disgusting

Capability has nothing to do with reality. Reality is 99% of SUV buyers are only ever going to drive them on normal paved roads that they could just as well drive on with a wagon or minivan. And that is why they are building what are essentially wagons and minivans and calling them suvs (or "cross-over" now I guess...some of those are like what used to be called hatchbacks).

People spend 200,000 on ferraris that will never go over 70 MPH. What is the difference?

The biggest complaint I hear is that people don't like them because they can't see around them and teh drivers are negligent. The second part is universal regardless of vehicle type. The size issue holds true for trucks, vans, minivans, etc.

True, but Mercedes also makes trucks, and has a history of being a "full-range" manufacturer. Only in the US are they more of a niche brand. The G-Wagen (pronounced Voggen) is a military derivative, like the Hummer. The M-class is cushier and meant to market to the off-road posers.

In contrast, Porsche has always occupied the sports-car niche. They've never even made a 4-door sedan, for Pete's sake, and now they're jumping on the SUV bandwagen? Or rather, VW corporate is jumping on, trying to leverage decades of sporting history into the marketing of a bloated station wagon with big horses. In other words, the soul of Porsche is in serious jeaparody.

(all misspellings intentional.)

Well, apart from spending way too much on a car....

1) Find a Ferrari that's never been over 70 mph. Go on. Find it.
2) A Ferrari is built for the environment that it occupies--the road. SUVs are built to project an image of suitability for an environment that they often never see. Worse, many of them acknowledge their own status as posers, and focus on the "image of a sporting life."
3) IOW, a Ferrari is over-capable for where it runs. An SUV is under-capable for where it is 99% of the time, and only marginally suitable (with rare exception) for the "off-road" environment.

That's the difference.

I saw one of those lambo trucks parked on the street once. I must have done a triple or quadrouple take because I couldn't believe it was a lambo. But it was alright, forest green and looked like a thinner Hummer. Not something I would buy, that goes for any SUV. AWD is great but you hardly ever need all that cargo room and where the hell is off-road in New York? :rolleyes: Although my Dad does drive an explorer. He loves it, I could take it or leave it.

I'll stick w/ sedans and coupes and hopefully a convertible someday.

EDIT: BTW, This excellent quote from RogerB basically sums it up:

gelandewagen, or as reference below, g-wagen....until this year, it was only available recently in the US through gray-market importers for something like $130k. MB has decided to officially bring it over this year as the G500 priced somewhere around $80k, iirc. its off-road capabilities are definitely far superior to its on-road dynamics, though, from what i've read. it has the aerodynamics of a brick and the finesse of any other former-military body-on-frame "real" SUV.

Quote:

and Europe and what i remember my older brother's calling "the rambo Lambo" (don't know the true designation)made by Lamborghini (sp?)

LM002, i believe it was called.

Try your boss out for a VW Touraeg....it's the same underneath, I believe.

Loads of details on The Vortex

The front end looks nicer, no stick however,

What's wrong with this pic?

What's wrong with this pic?

No idea ?? Looks quite nice to me, except for the wood, which I hate in a car.

I believe the water in the rearview mirror; however the car could be on an island!

I agree with the water in the rear view mirror. Also, is the map in the center display accurate? It doesn't look like it indicates such a close proximity to the water!