or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Rolls Royce Automobiles.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rolls Royce Automobiles. - Page 3

post #31 of 163
Damn I'm good...

I believe that BMW used GM 4-spd. transmissions in at least the '89-'95 5-series. The six cylinder models anyway, not sure about the V8's. Seems like there were some 5-spds mixed in on the 8-cylinder models which I can't see GM sourcing.
post #32 of 163
Thread Starter 
I believe Mercedes also used a Chrysler design from the '30s for their first automatic offering in the '60s. Given the American origin of many of these Rolls parts, I wonder if these supposedly high maintenance costs are a myth. Most of the costs involved in a Rolls Royce seems to be the various adornments and interior. I can't imagine sourcing the leather from the now defunct Connolly would be inexpensive; and all that wood would be a hassle as well.
post #33 of 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
I have driven the older examples and they are surprisingly agile and fast for such a large and heavy car. The power-steering is superb with the thinnest steering wheel you can imagine.

I have never driven one, but sometime either shortly before or shortly after Bush I's Gulf War a local RR dealer got it in his head that my dad should buy one and started sending him invites to polo matches with test drive events appended. (Seems to me that if they were really good, they wouldn't have to try to sell them!) I went with him to one, and sat in a few RR and Bentley saloons as Dad drove them. (A Bentley 8, a RR Silver Spur, and a Bentley Turbo R.) I remember thinking that the only thing in any of those cars better than what we pulled up in (a Series-3 XJ6) was the sheepskin carpeting. The engines, in particular, did not sound as refined as the even the smog-choked XK 4.2 inline 6.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
I find it odd that they chose to use a Mercedes as a daily driver as some of the period Mercedes models were about the same price as a new Rolls Royce; the 6.9 was even more expensive.

A Merc 600 Pullman is a far better car than a Royce, regardless of price. The Merc engines are better than Royce's tractor motors, and I believe the Pullman had a Citroen-designed suspension system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cravate_Noire View Post
Maybe it's because I'm living in Germany, but the only Mercedes I can think of that would make people turn their heads like a RR would (and the fed. office for protection of the const. as well) is that one:

What about a 300SL?

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicad2000 View Post
I can imagine the scariest maintenance/replacement expenses being related to the powertrain. Finding someone that can work on those old motors (6.75L ?) would be a hassle and imagine the cost of a replacement transmission...

I would imagine that anyone who can work on a small block Chevy or Ford, or a BOP/Rover V8, can handle the Royce motor. It is quite primitive, lacking even overhead camshafts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
Most of the costs involved in a Rolls Royce seems to be the various adornments and interior. I can't imagine sourcing the leather from the now defunct Connolly would be inexpensive; and all that wood would be a hassle as well.

The bodywork, which in the pre-VW/BMW cars was hand-beaten, is also very, very expensive to fix.

I agree that none of the mechanical bits seem special. Between Pep Boys and Moss, it should be covered.

And Connolly Bros. is dead? How sad.
post #34 of 163
For as long as I could remember my maternal grandfather drove Cadillacs exclusively. He traded in his pair of Cadillacs every year for the latest model. Typically one of the vehicles was a convertible, and he always bought them with all the decorative options, like a spare tire in a fancy box fitted to the trunk, or a large chrome angel on the hood, things like that. In a different garage he kept a pair of burgundy Cadillacs from the 1970s that were "the pair" the year his third wife died. He didn't trade that pair in. He kept that pair in that garage as a sort of shrine to the woman. In a separate garage he kept the perpetually updated pair. Then, when I was 16 or 17, he traded in his pair of Cadillacs for a pair of Rolls Royces. They were cream colored and boxier than the Cadillacs I was so accustomed to. One of them was a convertible. I drove the hardtop once. The pedals were mushy. The seats were high. I remember the smell of the leather. I was used to driving large cars, as my first car was a 1973 Chevy Impala, and when I threw a rod on the motor, I got a 1973 Chevy Monte Carlo.

My grandfather loved his Rolls Royces. He and one of his war buddies sped from St. Louis to Boca Raton in the convertible. The way he told the story, they got the car up to 110 mph, which impressed me, as when I had tried the same with my Impala, the motor threw a rod.
post #35 of 163
Thread Starter 
JohnApril, A nice anecdote. The high seats and the mushy pedals also struck me. The hauteur is unmistakable when driving. The apparent strength of these cars--despite their large sizes--is that they can be driven continuously at rather high speeds. This is also the same with Mercedes cars, however old. A lot of modern cars may be able to reach those speeds, but they can't really maintain it for any appreciable stretch.
post #36 of 163
They are as reliable as Jaguars of the same period.
post #37 of 163
This is true of any vintage car that isn't restored. You are really looking at a money pit unless it gets full attention and/or regular service.

In my experience, the "cheap" vintage cars are NOT bargains like they appear to be.

Top Gear, in a somewhat recent episode, presented a challenge to buy a '70s sports car with £10,000 (had to be Italian). Clarkson bought a Maserati Merak, Richard Hammond bought a Ferrari 308 GT4 and James May bought a Lamborghini Urraco. They then had to do various not-so-rigorous tests. In the end, none of the cars was running - they had all died.

IMO - save your money and get one that is restored and has been properly maintained.
post #38 of 163
Have you seen the Topgear episode in which Clarkson and May do tests with their own, classic, cars, in this case a huge mercedes pullman (I think)(owned by Jeremy) and a Bentley (owned by May.)
The hilarious bit is when they try to park their car in the middle of London.
Also the slalom and u turn test on the track was hilarious.
I think the mercedes came out slightly better.
post #39 of 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flieger View Post
Have you seen the Topgear episode in which Clarkson and May do tests with their own, classic, cars, in this case a huge mercedes pullman (I think)(owned by Jeremy) and a Bentley (owned by May.)
The hilarious bit is when they try to park their car in the middle of London.
Also the slalom and u turn test on the track was hilarious.
I think the mercedes came out slightly better.


Yeah, that was great
post #40 of 163
Thread Starter 
It seems to me that those '70s era Rolls Royces are simply not expensive even in top condition.
post #41 of 163
Silver Shadows are common as dirt. I'm quite surprised they would appeal to you LK.

If a 70's Rolls is on the radar, then there's really only one choice...the Camargue.

It simply has too many good things going for it.

...the most expensive production car in the world at the time.
...Pininfarina designed.
...coachwork by Mulliner Park Ward.
...large, but still a coupe, which makes driving yourself around in a rolls less silly.
...reasonably rare (only 531 ever built over an 11 year production run)
...stupidly cheap for what it is, but quickly gaining collector attention (good investment).
...sublime styling (mistaken by the common plebs as "ugly" ).
...contains things like split climate controls that took 8 years to develope (and probably longer to fix).

This vehicle is so impractical, how could you not want one?
post #42 of 163
I just looked up the Camargue - it's one of the best looking cars I've ever seen! A true classic that I'm surprised isn't worth a heck of a lot more. There's something about the big coupe layout that's always done something for me. I would love to tool around in one, people would have no idea what to think.
post #43 of 163








post #44 of 163
And no, you aren't seeing things...that grille is slanted on a seven-degree incline (just like the Fab-One Rolls).
post #45 of 163
Thread Starter 
What an exciting car. I was aware of the model, but it wasn't on my radar as it were. The styling is distinctively '70s in that wedge-like shape--not unlike the Series III Maserati Quattroportes--but rather elegant. That gold paint job is nice although I'd have to imagine it with a black top for extra flashiness. It also appears that split-level climate controls were a big thing back then. It's surprising how some things that we take for granted were only see on luxury cars only 30 or so years back.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Rolls Royce Automobiles.