or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Bentley v Rolls Royce
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bentley v Rolls Royce - Page 11

post #151 of 168
^^
Linux-Pro,

I think I have a better understanding of what you're conveying, Toyota's build quality is almost second to none. They put a lot of emphasis behind their engineering and design. It's easy to understand, how their engines would be more reliable, however their materials used are often just run of the mill. Don't get me wrong, the materials in my wife's car are pretty nice, however it wouldn't likely compare to that of RR (but because of price, I guess it shouldn't).

Don't get me wrong, I've never thought neither RR or Bentley were all that great, and like you, if given a choice, would likely take something else; ie Aston Martin.

I'm eager to see how the Supra will turn out, from the information gather in a magazine, it's supposedly quite pricey...maybe I'm wrong, but it's suppose to be closing in at the 6 figure mark. Regardless, I'm almost positive the new Lexus supercar will be quite amazing.

It's funny you mention the lack of torque in the S2000, I've heard someone else say the same thing.
post #152 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon View Post
I am with you a little (just a little) on the Bentley part. The current Bentley sedan (Continental) is based on the VW flagship (Phaeton), so under the skin is not so special. Still, the Lexus remains a great VALUE car. There are tons of cheap cars that will run without problems in 10 years, so that is not really a barometer for being the best built for a luxury sedan (that is more like a given). Even if your personal barometer for good build is just reliability, RR has been known for 100 years for building the most reliable cars on earth. No matter how old, they are all still running in very good shape and remain the absolute benchmark of luxury sedans. You are probably right that some people buy RR just to show off, but there are many others that buy them because they remain the best built luxury sedans in the world. In the today`s lineup of new sedans, there is probably no other car that is better built than the Phantom.
All the Euro motorheads I've talked to have almost unanimously agreed that the best engine put in a European sedan went into the Mercedes 300 Turbo Diesel. You regularly see these things puttering about with 500k on the odo, without a rebuild, running crappy sulfur-heavy American diesel. And yeah, the Rolls Royce has a gorgeous, hand-built interior. No arguments there. For pure craftsmanship, of course Rolls-Royce is going to take the trophy. But when it comes to mechanicals, it's hard to compare Lexus and RR. RR's are not daily driver vehicles. Most, I'm sure, are maintained by staff dedicated to this purpose and taken care of differently than a Lexus LS. So it's really hard to make that comparison. However, the UZ-FE is an engine that is universally regarded for its light weight, miserly fuel consumption, high performance, and mechanical durability. I would be interested to see a comparison of the RR Phantom's engine (a BMW 6.7L V12) and the Lexus V8 UZ-FE. If I had to guess which engine will offer better reliability over the long-haul: a BMW V12 or a Lexus V8, I would go with the Lexus V8. The reasons should be fairly obvious.
post #153 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
^^ Linux-Pro, I think I have a better understanding of what you're conveying, Toyota's build quality is almost second to none. They put a lot of emphasis behind their engineering and design. It's easy to understand, how their engines would be more reliable, however their materials used are often just run of the mill. Don't get me wrong, the materials in my wife's car are pretty nice, however it wouldn't likely compare to that of RR (but because of price, I guess it shouldn't).
Agreed. There is a reason I moved on from Lexus. I love their cars, but driving them is so damn boring. I'm forced to use an automatic, and the interior is about as exciting as a trip to see ol' Uncle Ted, the 99-yr-old great uncle in the retirement home. BOOOORING. Beige leather and vinyl everywhere. And in this regard, the Bentley and RR are so much better than any Lexus, any comparison is silly. But that's really it, that's what the RR offers. You're spending 5x as much, for a more posh interior. Oh, and my LS430 had massaging rear seats and a fridge. I bought it with those features on purpose, because they impressed me before buying it. Then, I bought the car and started driving it to work. I soon realized how stupid it was to have such a great backseat when I never used it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
Don't get me wrong, I've never thought neither RR or Bentley were all that great, and like you, if given a choice, would likely take something else; ie Aston Martin.
Amen to that. The DB12 is one hell of a car. If I could have any car I wanted in the world, no holds barred, it'd be a tough choice between a number of Astons, Ferraris, and Porsches. Not just because they're sporty, but because they justify those crazy prices with some features not found anywhere else. When it comes to downright sexy, I think Aston-Martin is probably king of the hill. For insane performance, you can't really beat the GT3, the Carrera GT, the 993, the F430, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
I'm eager to see how the Supra will turn out, from the information gather in a magazine, it's supposedly quite pricey...maybe I'm wrong, but it's suppose to be closing in at the 6 figure mark. Regardless, I'm almost positive the new Lexus supercar will be quite amazing.
Without a doubt. From what I've read, the price should be in the 80-90k range, like you've said. Not too bad. Still makes it cheaper than a 911 Turbo, and slightly higher than the Nissan (this time a GT-R). Its performance should easily justify its price tag.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
It's funny you mention the lack of torque in the S2000, I've heard someone else say the same thing.
It's a common complaint, and it's pretty true. Up to about 5k RPM, the S2000 just feels kind of slow or sluggish. Not sure how to exactly describe it, but its low-RPM performance really didn't impress me. In this regard, I found the MX5 to actually be a bit better of a car - it's peppy, has great handling, and isn't nearly as loud.
post #154 of 168
Have you checked out the interior (especially rear seat ) of the LS460 yet? It's quite nice, as I said earlier, they had a fully loaded long wheelbase at the dealership where we take me wife's car. Needless to say (and I'm about to get flamed) some of the features were somewhat reminiscent of the Maybach, without the more upscale materials. You have the same reasoning as I, why put all those luxurious features in the backseat of a car, in which the driver would likely never enjoy? Between the mini fridge, massager and pull out leg rest in the rear seat, I was utterly impressed.
post #155 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
Have you checked out the interior (especially rear seat ) of the LS460 yet? It's quite nice, as I said earlier, they had a fully loaded long wheelbase at the dealership where we take me wife's car. Needless to say (and I'm about to get flamed) some of the features were somewhat reminiscent of the Maybach, without the more upscale materials. You have the same reasoning as I, why put all those luxurious features in the backseat of a car, in which the driver would likely never enjoy? Between the mini fridge, massager and pull out leg rest in the rear seat, I was utterly impressed.

Yeah, I was just saying my LS430 had those same features (minus the leg rest). Before I bought my LS, a previous business partner had been talking non-stop about his LS for months, saying how much he loved it, etc. I test drove one and was seriously impressed - it has so many cool and useful features. My favorite features were probably the park assist, the auto-tilting reverse mirrors, the laser cruise control, and the heated/cooled seats. Loved the massagers and fridge, but never got to use them.

But I'll tell ya, once gas hit $4.00/gal, I was done with the V8. I think anything over a V6 on a public street is worthless overkill. I always ended up taking the 930 to work, as it gets better mileage and is fun to drive. Buying the SLK was a compromise for me - I was able to sell the LS430 and my 1979 Porsche 930, and get one car that fit both bills (somewhat). A lightweight two-seater V6 with good gas mileage, fairly basic frills (I found the LS430 to be a bit tech-heavy after a while, rarely used most of the features and wanted to lose those to save weight in my next car), a power hardtop for the sunny days, and a good sporty attitude for fun. The SLK filled my needs perfectly, and I am loving every second with it.

If I were forced to drive a big, heavy V8+ car again, I'd be dreading it. Not just the total ass-raping you get at the gas station, but I just hate sitting in traffic in a big sedan. Forget about merging or changing lanes. Numerous problems with larger sedans - too many to even list. Let's just say I've owned one, and am done with those. I don't even think I'll ever buy a car with 4 seats again. Now, if Toyota would just bring back an MR2 like the SW11... I'd be set.
post #156 of 168
Who buys a RR or Bentley with reliability in mind? In late 2007, Top Gear reviewed the RR Phantom Drop Head (if I remember correctly, James May drove it). To paraphrase, he said it was sweetest car on the planet.

Lexus and MB make very nice cars. But, to compare RR and Bentley to Lexus or MB is feeble. It's a whole different league of car.
post #157 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
Good point, it can be used in high performance applications, however you've only named a few, there are far more V6-V12 variations. As you sited earlier, the size of an inline 6, is somewhat of a hinderance. You have to take into account, the more modern TVR's are considered to be large displacement, some of their engines are similar in size to the smaller "large" displacement V8's.
Large displacement is fine. It's not my cup of tea, I prefer a higher revving engine (which is harder to do with larger displacement per cylinder). My point was just Inline is not bad. It's just a bit big and not popular due to this. It's still a fine layout for an engine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
As for the Supra, it has been well documented that the car is reliable, however that has nothing to do with the application, it's much more based on the design of the iron block, the same can be said of the LS1 and the 5.4 in the Ford GT's (which uses an aluminum block, but still has a bottom end capable of accepting over 1000 hp).
With larger displacement. It's easier to make more power with more ccs and stay reliable. A truck engine can make thousands of horsepower. The Supra can make 1000hp with 3.0ltr and 1200+ with 3.2, and still be reliable. That's saying something. Not that I'd want a 1000hp Supra. The lag would be a killer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
I have nothing against inline engines, my mothers SUV has one, and the idle and pick up is quite smooth. I myself drive a blown V8, and couldn't be happier (except at the pumps). I can understand where you're coming from in regards to rednecks who equate the size of their engine, with their cars performance (that bothers me as well), however I'm just as annoyed by guys in FWD 4 cylinder Civics who continously talk about engine technology, without first taking into account, the final output of the engine and automobile (this was not a reference to you).
I get annoyed at people who go nuts when they find out my car has VTEC too. They don't understand that VTEC doesn't actually help top end performance. You can make a non VTEC engine rev to 8500rpm, and make just as much power per cc. VTEC, or any variable cam technology (almost ALL car manufacturers have it now) just means the engine is still usable below 6000rpm. So I know what you mean.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
In all honesty, some of my favorite cars are smaller displacement 4-6 cylinders and rotary; S2000, 93-95 RX-7's, Porsche 911's, not to mention the TVR Sagaris (easy favorite outside of the Ford GT and AM Vantage).
Yes, I love the S2000, but I'm a bit of a Honda fanboy. I wish Honda made more RWD cars. My next car will probably either be an S2000 or Supra RZ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by linux_pro View Post
Southern-Nupe: Actually didn't care much for the S2000. It has to be driven like a motorcycle, or it feels like a bland Civic. When I drove the S2000 (4 times), it just didn't feel good; too buzzy, loud and harsh at speed, and too bland in the lower RPMS, like an econobox. You really have to get that thing up past 5k RPM to have any fun. I love low-end torque, makes for enjoyable city driving (playing when you can, legally) and just feels smoother somehow.
5000rpm is only just over half way through it's rev band though. High revving engines are so much fun! Especially when your 1.8ltr 'economy' car takes out a 5.0ltr V8 sedan. Heh heh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by linux_pro View Post
About the Supra engine (2JZ-GTE), you can't get close to 1000hp on stock internals. Don't get me wrong, I agree that it's one of the best engines ever produced, but stock internals only handle about 400-500hp. Then, you have to swap out everything - cams, pistons, heads, etc. If you were just talking about the block, you still have to upgrade the block to 6-bolt past 500hp, and I've heard they require some custom oil porting. And at that point, you're no longer looking at anything close to a stock 2JZ-GTE, bottom-end or otherwise.
Actually, I have heard of 1000 hp Supras on stock internals. They don't last long though. Toyota's UZ engine is awesome, but for ability to make power cheap the 2JZ-GTE is better. Although I'd rather have a 250kw 3UZ-GE Supra, than a 350kw 2JZ-GTE Supra. But I'm a sucker for N/A power.
post #158 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shraka View Post
Large displacement is fine. It's not my cup of tea, I prefer a higher revving engine (which is harder to do with larger displacement per cylinder). My point was just Inline is not bad. It's just a bit big and not popular due to this. It's still a fine layout for an engine.


With larger displacement. It's easier to make more power with more ccs and stay reliable. A truck engine can make thousands of horsepower. The Supra can make 1000hp with 3.0ltr and 1200+ with 3.2, and still be reliable. That's saying something. Not that I'd want a 1000hp Supra. The lag would be a killer.


I get annoyed at people who go nuts when they find out my car has VTEC too. They don't understand that VTEC doesn't actually help top end performance. You can make a non VTEC engine rev to 8500rpm, and make just as much power per cc. VTEC, or any variable cam technology (almost ALL car manufacturers have it now) just means the engine is still usable below 6000rpm. So I know what you mean.


Yes, I love the S2000, but I'm a bit of a Honda fanboy. I wish Honda made more RWD cars. My next car will probably either be an S2000 or Supra RZ.


5000rpm is only just over half way through it's rev band though. High revving engines are so much fun! Especially when your 1.8ltr 'economy' car takes out a 5.0ltr V8 sedan. Heh heh.


Actually, I have heard of 1000 hp Supras on stock internals. They don't last long though. Toyota's UZ engine is awesome, but for ability to make power cheap the 2JZ-GTE is better.

Although I'd rather have a 250kw 3UZ-GE Supra, than a 350kw 2JZ-GTE Supra. But I'm a sucker for N/A power.


How is pricing on a used S2000 where you're at? I know here, you can get a relatively good deal. I agree completely about Honda making more rwd cars, the only two I can think of in recent years were the S2000 and NSX (Acura). I got to give them credit for staying competitive w/o large displacement engines and using forced induction.
post #159 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by linux_pro View Post
I don't even think I'll ever buy a car with 4 seats again. Now, if Toyota would just bring back an MR2 like the SW11... I'd be set.
Now this I could definately agree on.....I felt the 1991-1997 MR2 was one of the most underrated cars at it's time. Toyota basically made an average priced midengine sportscar, capable of putting other cars in it's day to shame on the track. They really need to bring that philosophy back. That was at a time when Toyota was rather exiting, they had the TT Supra, MR2, and Celica (turbo w/awd).

The only Japanese car I would elected over the MR2, would have likely been the RX-7.
post #160 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
^^

How is pricing on a used S2000 where you're at? I know here, you can get a relatively good deal. I agree completely about Honda making more rwd cars, the only two I can think of in recent years were the S2000 and NSX (Acura). I got to give them credit for staying competitive w/o large displacement engines and using forced induction.

Not brilliant but not bad. All sports cars... no strike that all cars in Australia are a bit expensive. In America your pickup truck market is bigger than our entire car market, so we don't have much buying power, and we're kinda far away from everywhere except Japan (and obviously Malaysia and the like, but I'd rather chew off my own arm than buy a Malaysian car).

Yeah the only recent RWD cars Honda has made are the S2000 and NSX (We don't have Acura here, it's all just Honda). We do get all their top of the range cars though which is good, unlike many other car manufacturers. We got the DC2 Integra Type R, the DC5 Type S, the Prelude VTiR, the NSX for a time, and the S2000. We didn't get the Skyline R33 or R34 (let alone the GT-R of those models), or the Supra or S13 Silvia at all (they're all imports, but thankfully we drive on the same side of the road as Japan).

Luckily with our economy going as well as it is, importing is getting cheaper, but it does mean all our local manufacturing plants are closing down. Personally I don't see that as so bad. In New Zealand imports are even cheaper than they are here because the gov. doesn't have any local car manufacturers to protect.
post #161 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad View Post
Who buys a RR or Bentley with reliability in mind? In late 2007, Top Gear reviewed the RR Phantom Drop Head (if I remember correctly, James May drove it). To paraphrase, he said it was sweetest car on the planet.

Lexus and MB make very nice cars. But, to compare RR and Bentley to Lexus or MB is feeble. It's a whole different league of car.
True, most of the people who purchase those cars, seldom consider reliabilty, the same can apply to Ferrari, Aston, etc.

....their only current competition is the Maybach on the high end, and maybe Maserati Quattro on the low end (Bentley Continental).
post #162 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by linux_pro View Post
Now, if Toyota would just bring back an MR2 like the SW11... I'd be set.
Actually, it's an SW20. The AW11 (and AW10) is the 80s model Lotus that Lotus decided not to make, so Toyota picked it up. There was never an SW11. S stands for S series engine (in this case, 3S-GE and 3S-GTE). The A in AW11 is the 4A-GE and 4A-GZE. The SW20 does totally kick arse. A friend of mine is getting one. Apparently the late model SW20 was given softer suspension and a weaker rear swaybar because people complained about the tendancy to snap oversteer. This problem was because it was very well balanced, and rear wheel drive, making it take corners really well. In fact the ZZW30 was an okay car too, the problem was the engine / gearbox combination. If they'd put the 2ZZ-GE (rather than shitty 1ZZ-FE) in it, and given it a proper manual and hard top it would have been a total machine! But alas, no. Toyota decided to be lame and make a car for girls. Toyota should bring back the Supra and a proper MR2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
... and Celica (turbo w/awd).
The Celica GT-Four wasn't actually that good. It was trying to compete with the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution and Subaru WRX Sti but failed. It was really heavy compared to it's competition, and didn't make much power. The ST185 made 150kw, and was 1400+kg. The ST205 got a more impressive 180kw, but was closer to 1500kg. Meanwhile the Evo and WRX were closer to 1200kg, and making 180 to 205kw with more torque. EDIT: As a side note, the SW20 MR2 got the same engine as the GT-Four, but only had to power the back wheels (less losses in the drivetrain) and was closer to 1050kg! The GT Four was better when it was rallied, as it was stripped out, but plenty of rally drivers complained about the 'road racer' style seating position which was low, and not as good for the rough, random roads of dirt rally. Eventually Toyota got the Corolla and put the GT-Four running gear under it. Now THAT would have been good, if they'd released it for the consumer market. Sadly they didn't and we got a crappy 1.8Ltr ~120kw Turbo FWD Corolla instead, which is crap because the same year model Levin / Trueno (Based on the Corolla body) was making 130kw from a 1.6 N/A engine.
post #163 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by linux_pro View Post
The 1UZ-FE is the best engine Toyota ever made (and possibly the best made by anyone), and it's rumored that BMW stole the design for their new V8 M3.

Given the provenance of the M3's V8, I doubt this.

--Andre
post #164 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shraka View Post
The GT Four was better when it was rallied, as it was stripped out, but plenty of rally drivers complained about the 'road racer' style seating position which was low, and not as good for the rough, random roads of dirt rally. Eventually Toyota got the Corolla and put the GT-Four running gear under it. Now THAT would have been good, if they'd released it for the consumer market. Sadly they didn't and we got a crappy 1.8Ltr ~120kw Turbo FWD Corolla instead, which is crap because the same year model Levin / Trueno (Based on the Corolla body) was making 130kw from a 1.6 N/A engine.
I remember it competed in Rally's, but I wasn't aware it wasn't competitive. I guess I was comparing into such cars as the Eclipse (which the earlier generation AWD's were quite quick), Preludes, etc.
post #165 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
True, most of the people who purchase those cars, seldom consider reliabilty, the same can apply to Ferrari, Aston, etc.

....their only current competition is the Maybach on the high end, and maybe Maserati Quattro on the low end (Bentley Continental).

I agree. I'm a big MB fran, but the Maybach offerings look too much like MB for me. Have you seen the pricing for the Maybach Landaulet? It's something absurd like 1.37M. Apparently Brabus will mod these.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Bentley v Rolls Royce