Yes, that does look more like something that could be a Lotus. Still not sure how to make a station wagon look like a Lotus, though.I'm quite optimistic. Let's glance at a project shelved from the makes of Jaguar AND Williams. Several key personnel who are now with Lotus and/or working closely with Lotus. Burgess also worked directly with Ian Callum who was head of design for the C-X75 project.
No argument. But do you think about fun on that twisty canyon road when you look at a Macan?The patent pix of the crossover look as good as the Macan. IMHO
I do think the Macan is a sharp vehicle. Their sales figures also prove it's sharp in the eyes of their customers. If you've driven a GTS or Turbo, they can easily make you smile and they stick pretty well too. If Lotus gets the SUV right and it handles well, and build quality is improved so much that we all are blown away by it, then it should sell 'well'. A great example is the Fiat Stelvio How many of your friends own one? One maybe two? How many friends do you know with a Quadrifoglio? At $80k there's many other product they'll be cross market/price shopping. Only folks I know who own one worship Alfa and the other owner has ties to the family who owns the dealer.No argument. But do you think about fun on that twisty canyon road when you look at a Macan?
Lotus is a minority brand with fading relevance in the marketplace worldwide. Unless it's just as good (and I admit 'as good' is a complex concept) and cheaper than a Macan, why wouldn't the customer just buy a Macan instead if they're in the market for an overpriced Audi Q5?