Lamborghini SUV?

Discussion in 'Prototypes, Concepts and Electric' started by Vision K2, Jan 11, 2006.

  1. #76 naranhito, Jul 13, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    2 weeks ago http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?viewThread=y&gID=0&fID=2&tID=92988 <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/wink.gif"></A>
     
  2. Actually, this wouldn't be Lamborghini's first SUV, back in the 1980's Lamborghini made an SUV called the LM003
     
  3. you mean, LM002.
     
  4. Speaking of the NAIAS, any word if Pagani is allowed/or is going to show up there?
     
  5. or Koenigsegg
     
  6. enough with all these clay modeling, putting sedans on big wheels thing please! started with the cayenne, and the lunacy has seemingly spread. design something from the bottom up pls car designers...
     
  7. It would take some getting used to.
     
  8. Great. just god fricken great. A Lamborghini SUV. My opinion is that if Lamborghini can make SUV's, Ferrari can make airplanes. <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/disappointed.gif"></A>
     
  9. My opinion is that 12 yos should check LAmborghini's line up in the past and STFU
     
  10. an other suv would be nice but the pice would be somewhere in the range of 500 000-750 000 USD

    i alredy own a lm002 and i love it but i mean its a tank it not as fast as u would think so i hope that the make it ligt and fast
     
  11. Would you like to post some pictures of your car perhaps? To give yourself a little bit of credibility?
     
  12. I'm sure you do ...
     
  13. Shut up.
     
  14. #$%#, LAMBORGHINI ALREADY HAD AN SUV. There are like 3 non stupid members posting here. The rest have no #$%#ing clue and are born after 1990.
     
  15. The LM002 wasn't a SUV, idiots.
     
  16. Cheetah (destroyed by military in testing.. wonder why they didnt get the contract?)..LMA002, LM001, LM002, LM003, LM004.. only the LM002 was actually succesfully produced.

    And it is an SUV. Its civilian, its sport (countach engine..)... its utility (5000+lbs).
     
  17. They have to destroy vehicles during test you dumbass
     
  18. DESTROYED EARLY IN TEST. And they dont have to destroy anything. The MB(s) were knocked around for 3000 miles of some pretty mean tests.. they only attempted to acctually DESTROY one (but TESTED MANYMANYAMANY).. by droping it off a pier. Only reason for breaking one is to test its full limit, if it broke in regular testing like cheetah then it is UNsATISFACTORY.

    it was made from fiberglass you dick, how durable do you think it was.
     
  19. MB's ? there were no MB's in the run for the contract, it was just the lambo and the Humvee. Do your homework first before talking out of your ass
     
  20. wow you are truly a complete jerk off. MB as in 1941 Willys MB/1940 Bantam.. as in THE 1st contracted general purpose military vehicle... i was using it as a referance.. many came before the Bantam 'jeep' and were failed imediatly because they broke in standard testing.. basically the Rambo Lambo of course broke and military said "no good".. and never ordered others for testing.. unlike MB and M998...MB had like 70ish more ordered for testing and M998 had several ordered also (not sure on a number on that one, actually not MB either, i cant remember).
     
  21. Why the **** do you keep talking about MB are you completly retarded ? Can«t you read ?
     
  22. do you know what a referance is? a comparison? can you read? Do you even know what an MB is? Is it realy hard to understand how i was trying to connect the testing of the US military's MB/Bantam to the lambo rambo and M998?
     
  23.  
  24. "Because a picture is worth thousands of words"
     

Share This Page