Show Us Your Motors!
- Thread starter Lopéz
- Start date
Underboss
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,762
- Location
- Oxfordshire / Bucks
Lol
Welp, sorry Nath. You better sell up. FlapR has spoken!
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 11,364
- Location
- Cheshire
Don't worry, we all like different things.
The point? Well it's luxurious, fast, sounds great, practical, comfortable. All good qualities I'd say.
Last edited:
I'm sure the Aston is amazing and objectively a very good car in many ways, however for me the styling and presence is just not there. I feel the same about all the other premium SUV/CUV type offerings though. Even saw a Urus the other day and felt the same. If you want a supercar or something of that ilk, why not get the supercar styling, looks, performance of the traditional cars and also then buy yourself a practical runaround? Maybe you do already. If you can afford the SUV you can probably afford another car, you may even come out cheaper with the 2 car garage depending on what you chose. I would also be scared of parking dings and leaving it anywhere if I was just going to the shops and so on. I respect the choice, we all like nice cars here, but it's not for me for those reasons. I'd rather choose the precision instrument for each task than a 'does everything' approach. The market is doing the opposite to me, though, with SUVs doing amazing and many upcoming BEVs taking that silhouette as well, so I'm aware I'm the minority. Enjoy!
I generally despise SUVs in all forms, but the DBX is growing on me. Nice one mate.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 11,364
- Location
- Cheshire
I struggle with the Urus as Lamborghini is very much not a practical brand, so the Urus is the furthest thing from being a "Lamborghini" as possible. That being said, my main issue is that the Urus is just another VAG product with a different skin, you can see where Lamborghini wanted to take the design but were limited by the hard points of the shared platform. The new Supra also shares this issue.
My other car is a 2016 Honda NSX, so I've got the super car performance box firmly ticked.
Agreed on that. I saw a Supra this morning and was a little underwhelmed. It's also a bit of a fussy design in the flesh. The DBX is not.
I really like the NSX, you are clearly winning!
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Actually it's closer to their core and original business than any of the rest of the range...
Totally the opposite for me, the DBX is stunning, a powerful useful luxurious car which you can pound down country lanes, which I'd love if i could afford one. The NSX is a near useless car for where i live, which I'd not want if it were free (well, other than to immediately offload it to WBAC!
).Funny how opinions differ so wildly even among enthusiasts!
Totally the opposite for me, the DBX is stunning, a powerful useful luxurious car which you can pound down country lanes, which I'd love if i could afford one. The NSX is a near useless car for where i live, which I'd not want if it were free (well, other than to immediately offload it to WBAC!
Funny how opinions differ so wildly even among enthusiasts!
Like people have said though, if we all liked exactly the same thing then there would only ever be one model/make of car.
To me the DBX is just wrong and a waste of money. The interior is awful (IMO). Its a £158k car but doesnt look like it is f it wasn't for the Aston Martin badge.
When you can have a Porsche Cayenne GTS which gives the same performance and costs £88k so you get £70k to spend on options or go for one of the bonkers e hybrid Turbo models which give you 3.1s 0-60 time and still up to £17k cheaper plus the Porsche has a far superior gearbox etc. I bet the Porsche is a better drive as well.
And I think the Porsche looks nicer to boot.
Actually it's closer to their core and original business than any of the rest of the range...
But the Porsche is an every mans car. The Aston, isn't. I imagine the interior of the Aston, whilst it may not appeal to you, is significantly better put together than a mass produced Cayenne that is constrained by the machinery on the line's ability at the time.
But the Porsche is an every mans car. The Aston, isn't. I imagine the interior of the Aston, whilst it may not appeal to you, is significantly better put together than a mass produced Cayenne that is constrained by the machinery on the line's ability at the time.
£70k specs you an awful lot of leather and carbon on the Porsche and still leaves you tonnes of change. Plus what makes you think Aston Martins are better put together nowadays than Porsche's are?
I have to put the price aside, the price of a DBX is the sort of money that for me to allocate it to a car I'd need to have a fair few million of spare capital around for it to be relatively purchasable.
Putting that aspect aside though, as the value of money is a relative construct and not a constant between different people, and viewing it as a car without any value attached, i think that it is a superb thing.
I mostly agree - however the whole "rich stay rich" thing is very true. I imagine the relative depreciation on a nearly-new one of these things isn't too bad as to require multi-millionaire status. I mean, you can own an Urus and only lose £15k if you believe the latest depreciation stats.
For a chap wearing a £30k Rolex Daytona I imagine that is a rounding error
. Especially if your other investments (see; NSX) has netted that out at zero.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 11,364
- Location
- Cheshire
I mostly agree - however the whole "rich stay rich" thing is very true. I imagine the relative depreciation on a nearly-new one of these things isn't too bad as to require multi-millionaire status. I mean, you can own an Urus and only lose £15k if you believe the latest depreciation stats.
For a chap wearing a £30k Rolex Daytona I imagine that is a rounding error
My cars aren’t investments, nor is my watch. So the value they lose/gain is largely irrelevant.
Granted I “made money” when I traded the C63 in but wouldn’t of stopped me if I hadn’t.
On that basis I would rather have a Maserati Levante then. At least you get a Ferrari v8 engine from the 488 and the glorious Ferrari V8 sound and Italian styling of the car. Or go the full hog and get the Ferrari Purosangue for £200k with its naturally aspirated 6.5-litre 800hp V12 engine from the 812 if we are ignoring money.
I mostly agree - however the whole "rich stay rich" thing is very true. I imagine the relative depreciation on a nearly-new one of these things isn't too bad as to require multi-millionaire status. I mean, you can own an Urus and only lose £15k if you believe the latest depreciation stats.
For a chap wearing a £30k Rolex Daytona I imagine that is a rounding error
Astons are awful for depreciation compared with other luxury brands. A DBX will lose £47k in 3 years compared with only £30k lost by the much more expensive Urus. People dont buy Astons for financial reasons, purely with their heart.
Errrrm, have you ever sat in an Aston? The build quality is nowhere near Porsche and never has been.
I assume Nath got an amazing deal. It's not secret AM as struggling and the DBX is not selling what they need, they gave out silly silly Vantage deals last year and the DBX is presumably next. It's a nice car in that segment if you want it, not as flash as a Bentayga but probably a better drive and half the price of a Urus. I get it.
I don't think they need to be investments to enact reasonably financial due-diligence. Would you have spanked 150k on a DBX if the depreciation was 80%? I'd wager not, unless you really, really, really love that thing.
Right, but can Porsche name the Doris' that knitted the seatbelts?