First Steer - Bentley Mulsanne Turbo
Discussion
Recently i've been considering a Bentley Mulsanne or Turbo R as a second car, so when one appeared for sale on a local trader's forecourt I decided to take a look.
It's this one: 1982 Bentley Mulsanne Turbo
First impressions were ok, though I was slightly concerned by the rear arch rot - offside had a small blister, but the nearside needed more urgent attention. The rest of the car seemed good, with what appeared to be fairly matching paint (admittedly the car was covered in a layer of frost). The headlamps had also been swapped for post 1988 model year twin headlamps, apparently done by one of the previous owners. The dealer stated it had been his personal car for the last 6 years (backed up in the paperwork with the car), and had been looked after regardless of cost.
The dealer started it up (I wanted to see how he started the vehicle - a piece of advice that stuck with me from buying my first GTO was to see how the owner stated the vehicle - if they revved the engine from cold before all the oil had chance to circulate it was time to stroll away), and almost immediately there was a screech from the power steering - it took a fair bit of PAS fluid to top the reservoir up. After a few seconds though the pump stopped making noise, but I was a bit concerned at this point. Whilst checking around under the bonnet, I asked about the high-pressure pump and apparently it hadn't needed any attention in the 6 years the dealer had owned the car, but the rear suspension pipes had been totally replaced.
Going through the car, the other faults I could find were the rear doors were suffering from central locking failure, and the offside rear tyre needed re-inflating a couple of times during the viewing.
I asked for a test drive, and while the dealer extracted the car from his forecourt I went through some of the service history (if i'd gone into any detail i'd have needed to have half a day there) - there was certainly a large stack of receipts. The dealer drove first during the test drive, taking things gently (I suspect partially due to conditions on the road), though he did give the throttle a squeeze once we got out of the village. It was certainly quiet and very comfortable, with the suspension absorbing all the bumps that my E36 Touring made all too obvious on the trip there.
I drove back, finding the Mulsanne to be very comfortable and smooth as a driving experience, and when I did give the throttle a good bootful (mindful of the potential to be caught out by ice on the road) speed was picked up very quickly indeed. It wasn't acceleration in the same way as the GTO manages, but it was relentless and certainly as quick as i'd imagined it to be.
Overall, I came away impressed. I certainly will own a Mulsanne or a Turbo R in the near future, but more than anything I was concerned about potential PAS system leaks on the one I viewed.
I have got a few questions though, which I hope can be answered here.
Tyres - the Mulsanne I viewed had Avon Turbospeeds fitted, which as I recall is the 'correct' tyre as specified by Rolls-Royce & Bentley. I really wasn't keen on the white bands on the tyres however, so is there a good quality alternative that I could fit?
Carb-fitted versions - I'm quite happy to own a carb-fed version, but do they suffer from any issues seperate to injection fitted models?
Range - I'm not worried about fuel economy, but I would like to know roughly how far a tankful should take me - as daft as it sounds I don't like breaking a journey just for fuel.
Thanks
It's this one: 1982 Bentley Mulsanne Turbo
First impressions were ok, though I was slightly concerned by the rear arch rot - offside had a small blister, but the nearside needed more urgent attention. The rest of the car seemed good, with what appeared to be fairly matching paint (admittedly the car was covered in a layer of frost). The headlamps had also been swapped for post 1988 model year twin headlamps, apparently done by one of the previous owners. The dealer stated it had been his personal car for the last 6 years (backed up in the paperwork with the car), and had been looked after regardless of cost.
The dealer started it up (I wanted to see how he started the vehicle - a piece of advice that stuck with me from buying my first GTO was to see how the owner stated the vehicle - if they revved the engine from cold before all the oil had chance to circulate it was time to stroll away), and almost immediately there was a screech from the power steering - it took a fair bit of PAS fluid to top the reservoir up. After a few seconds though the pump stopped making noise, but I was a bit concerned at this point. Whilst checking around under the bonnet, I asked about the high-pressure pump and apparently it hadn't needed any attention in the 6 years the dealer had owned the car, but the rear suspension pipes had been totally replaced.
Going through the car, the other faults I could find were the rear doors were suffering from central locking failure, and the offside rear tyre needed re-inflating a couple of times during the viewing.
I asked for a test drive, and while the dealer extracted the car from his forecourt I went through some of the service history (if i'd gone into any detail i'd have needed to have half a day there) - there was certainly a large stack of receipts. The dealer drove first during the test drive, taking things gently (I suspect partially due to conditions on the road), though he did give the throttle a squeeze once we got out of the village. It was certainly quiet and very comfortable, with the suspension absorbing all the bumps that my E36 Touring made all too obvious on the trip there.
I drove back, finding the Mulsanne to be very comfortable and smooth as a driving experience, and when I did give the throttle a good bootful (mindful of the potential to be caught out by ice on the road) speed was picked up very quickly indeed. It wasn't acceleration in the same way as the GTO manages, but it was relentless and certainly as quick as i'd imagined it to be.
Overall, I came away impressed. I certainly will own a Mulsanne or a Turbo R in the near future, but more than anything I was concerned about potential PAS system leaks on the one I viewed.
I have got a few questions though, which I hope can be answered here.
Tyres - the Mulsanne I viewed had Avon Turbospeeds fitted, which as I recall is the 'correct' tyre as specified by Rolls-Royce & Bentley. I really wasn't keen on the white bands on the tyres however, so is there a good quality alternative that I could fit?
Carb-fitted versions - I'm quite happy to own a carb-fed version, but do they suffer from any issues seperate to injection fitted models?
Range - I'm not worried about fuel economy, but I would like to know roughly how far a tankful should take me - as daft as it sounds I don't like breaking a journey just for fuel.
Thanks
GTO Scott said:
had been looked after regardless of cost.
I would expect to find the last six years of receipts for between £10,000 and £40,000 of work then, and no rusty arches.It's a £6K car so expectations shouldn't be high. But there is no need for the dealer to put rubbish like that in the advert.
I keep on top of my 1990 car with a very good independent, I have the correct service carried out at the correct interval/miles, and if the car needs anything in terms of repairs or preventative maintenance work doing, I will try within reason and budget to have it done.
But no way would I describe my car as having been looked after 'regardless of cost'. Typically I spend between £1700 and £4000 a year on servicing and maintenance (not including the £20K repaint on it a few years back). Yet still I wouldn't get anywhere near close to using a phrase like 'Looked after regardless of cost'. I have seen such cars, and they aren't £6K, or £12K, or even £18K.
The car isn't priced wrongly, but it sounds ripe for the sort of fettling that could cost you the same again at least. But then, that's true of most at that price. Unless you can DIY, especially the bodywork.
this is a pretty identical car to mine - even down to the colour. Mind you, I've committed to keeping the single headlamps, if only because there aren't many who have.
Pretty much everything Warren's told you is correct - a lot depends on how "handy" you are from a DIY point of view.
There are two real things to bear in mind, there's the "ownership" and the condition of the car.
First, on the "ownership" front, I always tell people about breaking the cycle. Apologies to the regulars who've heard this all before, but there's a downward spiral that you really have to break if your ownership is to be a success. Generally speaking, the cars depreciate over time. This puts them within the reach of people who want maximum flash for little cash. As is usually the case, they are willing to buy the image, but don't really have the finances to do anything other than a minimum-price bodge when something goes wrong. This inevitably results in the car being sold again for less money, into the reaches of someone else wanting flash for no cash, and thus the cycle carries on. A new owner must approach the vehicle with the attitude to break that cycle - it really boils down to the simple question " are you prepared to fix a problem properly ? " rather than having to take the cheapest option.
Looking at the actual car, then it seems that it is in average or slightly better condition for its price. Frankly, I wouldn't bother with a non-turbo car at all, and whilst a Mulsanne Turbo definitely has plenty of "go", the handling leaves plenty to be desired. This can be addressed, although in an illustration of my above comments, this involves more than just a change of anti-roll bars ( steering rack and rear suspension pipework and rear subframe location must also be changed ). Actually, if your steering rack is goosed, I happen to have a spare which I took off when I did the suspension work. ( Mind you, I'd start by looking at the supply pipe from the PAS reservoir to the pump )
I, too would strongly disagree with the "regardless of cost" statement - just the job of replacing "all of the rear suspension pipework" would take many, many hours - it is unbelievably complex. Rebuilding mine took longer than the entire engine rebuild on my XJ-S V12 (and was more expensive !)
In order to get a modicum of reliability, I would expect to have to carry out a minor hydraulics overhaul, a good service, some front suspension work, a change of hydraulic "spheres" and maybe new tyres. Maybe £3K if you have to take it to someone to do, but parts-wise just less than £1K.
On the subject of tyres, bear in mind that there are very few tyres available with the correct speed rating for the vehicle, the Avons being the most readily available ( but expensive ) They are available with the white strip or without, and I have also seen them with the white strip on one side only, thus opening up the possibility of turning the currently-fitted ones round.
from my perspective, the real problem is the sheer cost of the spare parts. Whilst, for instance, a single suspension bush for my Holden costs £12, for the Bentley, think over 90 - and there's 12 in the front suspension alone. So a front suspension rebuild cleans me out for a couple of months. BUT, the car is so excellent to drive that it's worth the hassle. I'm committed to a good result however long it takes me.
and by the way, I paid less than £4K for mine.
If you'd like a chat, just e-mail me and I'll send you my number.
Pretty much everything Warren's told you is correct - a lot depends on how "handy" you are from a DIY point of view.
There are two real things to bear in mind, there's the "ownership" and the condition of the car.
First, on the "ownership" front, I always tell people about breaking the cycle. Apologies to the regulars who've heard this all before, but there's a downward spiral that you really have to break if your ownership is to be a success. Generally speaking, the cars depreciate over time. This puts them within the reach of people who want maximum flash for little cash. As is usually the case, they are willing to buy the image, but don't really have the finances to do anything other than a minimum-price bodge when something goes wrong. This inevitably results in the car being sold again for less money, into the reaches of someone else wanting flash for no cash, and thus the cycle carries on. A new owner must approach the vehicle with the attitude to break that cycle - it really boils down to the simple question " are you prepared to fix a problem properly ? " rather than having to take the cheapest option.
Looking at the actual car, then it seems that it is in average or slightly better condition for its price. Frankly, I wouldn't bother with a non-turbo car at all, and whilst a Mulsanne Turbo definitely has plenty of "go", the handling leaves plenty to be desired. This can be addressed, although in an illustration of my above comments, this involves more than just a change of anti-roll bars ( steering rack and rear suspension pipework and rear subframe location must also be changed ). Actually, if your steering rack is goosed, I happen to have a spare which I took off when I did the suspension work. ( Mind you, I'd start by looking at the supply pipe from the PAS reservoir to the pump )
I, too would strongly disagree with the "regardless of cost" statement - just the job of replacing "all of the rear suspension pipework" would take many, many hours - it is unbelievably complex. Rebuilding mine took longer than the entire engine rebuild on my XJ-S V12 (and was more expensive !)
In order to get a modicum of reliability, I would expect to have to carry out a minor hydraulics overhaul, a good service, some front suspension work, a change of hydraulic "spheres" and maybe new tyres. Maybe £3K if you have to take it to someone to do, but parts-wise just less than £1K.
On the subject of tyres, bear in mind that there are very few tyres available with the correct speed rating for the vehicle, the Avons being the most readily available ( but expensive ) They are available with the white strip or without, and I have also seen them with the white strip on one side only, thus opening up the possibility of turning the currently-fitted ones round.
from my perspective, the real problem is the sheer cost of the spare parts. Whilst, for instance, a single suspension bush for my Holden costs £12, for the Bentley, think over 90 - and there's 12 in the front suspension alone. So a front suspension rebuild cleans me out for a couple of months. BUT, the car is so excellent to drive that it's worth the hassle. I'm committed to a good result however long it takes me.
and by the way, I paid less than £4K for mine.
If you'd like a chat, just e-mail me and I'll send you my number.
I do take any mention of 'maintained regardless of cost' with a shovelful of salt. Certainly there was plenty of receipts, but I didn't go through them all.
I have to admit I only viewed the car as it is very local to me - whilst I went with possible intentions of buying, even if the car had been perfect I wouldn't have bought it immediately - next step would be to bring an expert along.
As for bodywork, I'm not too worried as a friend does very good quality work (having seen several examples of his work up to 10 years after the work was done I'm very happy to trust him to do justice to the paint and bodywork on a Bentley), but obviously I'd like to start with the best condition car I can afford.
Thanks for the advice Warren, much appreciated
I have to admit I only viewed the car as it is very local to me - whilst I went with possible intentions of buying, even if the car had been perfect I wouldn't have bought it immediately - next step would be to bring an expert along.
As for bodywork, I'm not too worried as a friend does very good quality work (having seen several examples of his work up to 10 years after the work was done I'm very happy to trust him to do justice to the paint and bodywork on a Bentley), but obviously I'd like to start with the best condition car I can afford.
Thanks for the advice Warren, much appreciated
GTO Scott said:
I think I need to find a Turbo R to drive.
Mine? Balmoral Green said:
If you need any advice or help, or a pint and a pie, give me a shout. Shropshire isn't far from Derby.
Warren.
As long as insurance cover is adequate, I'm on a classic policy with me as the only driver. If your policy can cover it fully comp, or there's this sort of thing... Warren.
http://www.dayinsure.com/
Time for that pint and a pie I reckon
Edited by Balmoral Green on Thursday 14th January 17:20
I'm afraid my previous reply was written 'on the hoof' via my PineApple - no insults taken or inferred 
!
Thanks very much for the advice - I think my mind was pretty much made up when I heard the PAS pump screaming to say no to this particular car, but I decided to continue looking around it on the basis that the more time I spend looking around these cars the more i'll learn.
Regarding the handling, just how much of a difference is there between a Mulsanne and a Turbo R? The Mulsanne I drove felt perfectly ok at reasonable speeds around corners, though the wallowy-ness did show through. Obviously Bentley felt it necessary to introduce the 'Roadholding' upgrade for the Turbo but by just how much does it firm up the ride? I'm sure i've seen it written before that the later RT is a bit too hard-riding, so is the standard R the perfect balance? How did fitting the larger alloys affect the quality of the ride on BG?
Stuart, I know exactly what you mean about the downward spiral of spending - it's the same with the Mitsubishi GTO/3000GT's. A £46,000 car when new, and a good early car should still pull well over £5,000, but they struggle to sell when early GTO Twin Turbos are on ebay going for little over a grand. Except for the fact that the super cheap sheds on ebay almost invariably need £3-4,000 spending to being them back up to decent condition. Mine gets what it needs - as with most people i'd be lying to say it has been maintained regardless of cost, but when it needs work I get it done, as budget and time allows. I'm fairly handy when it comes to most minor servicing jobs (for the last MoT I replaced all of the suspension and half the brakes on the GTO), so minor work on a Mulsanne or Turbo R shouldn't present much of an issue.
Pie & Pint?
!Thanks very much for the advice - I think my mind was pretty much made up when I heard the PAS pump screaming to say no to this particular car, but I decided to continue looking around it on the basis that the more time I spend looking around these cars the more i'll learn.
Regarding the handling, just how much of a difference is there between a Mulsanne and a Turbo R? The Mulsanne I drove felt perfectly ok at reasonable speeds around corners, though the wallowy-ness did show through. Obviously Bentley felt it necessary to introduce the 'Roadholding' upgrade for the Turbo but by just how much does it firm up the ride? I'm sure i've seen it written before that the later RT is a bit too hard-riding, so is the standard R the perfect balance? How did fitting the larger alloys affect the quality of the ride on BG?
Stuart, I know exactly what you mean about the downward spiral of spending - it's the same with the Mitsubishi GTO/3000GT's. A £46,000 car when new, and a good early car should still pull well over £5,000, but they struggle to sell when early GTO Twin Turbos are on ebay going for little over a grand. Except for the fact that the super cheap sheds on ebay almost invariably need £3-4,000 spending to being them back up to decent condition. Mine gets what it needs - as with most people i'd be lying to say it has been maintained regardless of cost, but when it needs work I get it done, as budget and time allows. I'm fairly handy when it comes to most minor servicing jobs (for the last MoT I replaced all of the suspension and half the brakes on the GTO), so minor work on a Mulsanne or Turbo R shouldn't present much of an issue.
Pie & Pint?
Edited by GTO Scott on Monday 11th January 18:47
GTO Scott said:
Regarding the handling, just how much of a difference is there between a Mulsanne and a Turbo R?
The Mulsanne is very wafty indeed, it is basically just the same as a RR Silver Spirit. The Turbo R is less wafty, but not really a lot in it when just pootling around. But as soon as you start to press on, the Turbo R is fantastic, whilst it is no hot hatch, it is amazing how much the car shrinks around you. I have been out on PH hoons with all sorts of very chuckable cars, my biggest problem is brakes, not handling, which is quite amazing for a four bed detached in mixed company. I have had to stop several times with smoke pouring out of the front arches. GTO Scott said:
How did fitting the larger alloys affect the quality of the ride on BG?
Killed it. It bangs and crashes now, it's only a wafty on super smooth surfaces. But the crisper turn in and lack of roll or tyre wall slop is worth it.Another thing to bear in mind is that the ancient three box bodyshell is not very stiff. You have a 1966 chassis with a 1973 body on it (which is when the shell was signed off, despite not being launched until 1980) so it's bound to be a bit soggy. When the Arnage was launched in 1998, it was said to be 68% stiffer, and it really shows when you drive one. The older car is a bit like lifting a mattress at one corner in comparison.
My instinct would be to suggest you ignore this and similar cars, up your budget a bit and go for a later car ('87 onwards Turbo R - goes round corners as well as in a straight line, with fuel injection and ABS) in better condition in a more, er, conservative colour scheme.
I have stuck with the 15" wheels and Turbospeeds (no white lines) for the sake of the ride, which is one of the things that makes this car special and if you go for a '90 or later (with active ride), you can have the best of both worlds.
I have stuck with the 15" wheels and Turbospeeds (no white lines) for the sake of the ride, which is one of the things that makes this car special and if you go for a '90 or later (with active ride), you can have the best of both worlds.
with and without Turbo R suspension.....
Both have their advantages.
The standard car has lots of body roll and is very easy to lose traction, but you wouldn't really say that it is enough traction to handle properly. Mind you, it's plenty entertaining.
The early Turbo R suspension is much better, as it it rolls very much less without any ride penalty. Handling is much improved, to the extent that it is completely unexpected for the type of car.
The difference between the two is :-
a) steering rack weighting and ratio
b) front anti-roll stiffness increase provided by a thicker anti-roll bar
c) rear anti-roll stiffness provided by a thicker anti-roll bar AND combining both rear ride-height adjustments into a single hydraulic system
d) rear subframe lateral location ( "panhard rod" for want of a better name )
Active-ride Turbo R maintains the low-roll and supplants that with stiffer damper rates. Gives a much more "modern" feel as well. Personally, don't like it, but most people seem to.
on the subject of tyres....
generally speaking the manufacturers will design a suspension system to suit a particular tyre package, so if you change that tyre package to something else, you rarely improve the balance. As time has progressed, larger wheels and lower-profile tyres have become the norm, but it's generally only for styling reasons. Smaller side-walls = less flex, that's why a wider tyre will ride harder. Handling, however, is mainly about managing the tyre flex ( as opposed to the "modern-car" grip approach )
In the case of Bentley's there is another factor at play and that is simply to be able to get tyres for a reasonable cost, which is easier with larger diameter wheels.
Both have their advantages.
The standard car has lots of body roll and is very easy to lose traction, but you wouldn't really say that it is enough traction to handle properly. Mind you, it's plenty entertaining.
The early Turbo R suspension is much better, as it it rolls very much less without any ride penalty. Handling is much improved, to the extent that it is completely unexpected for the type of car.
The difference between the two is :-
a) steering rack weighting and ratio
b) front anti-roll stiffness increase provided by a thicker anti-roll bar
c) rear anti-roll stiffness provided by a thicker anti-roll bar AND combining both rear ride-height adjustments into a single hydraulic system
d) rear subframe lateral location ( "panhard rod" for want of a better name )
Active-ride Turbo R maintains the low-roll and supplants that with stiffer damper rates. Gives a much more "modern" feel as well. Personally, don't like it, but most people seem to.
on the subject of tyres....
generally speaking the manufacturers will design a suspension system to suit a particular tyre package, so if you change that tyre package to something else, you rarely improve the balance. As time has progressed, larger wheels and lower-profile tyres have become the norm, but it's generally only for styling reasons. Smaller side-walls = less flex, that's why a wider tyre will ride harder. Handling, however, is mainly about managing the tyre flex ( as opposed to the "modern-car" grip approach )
In the case of Bentley's there is another factor at play and that is simply to be able to get tyres for a reasonable cost, which is easier with larger diameter wheels.
I've wanted one of these for ages, but been put-off by hearing of 'active-ride' problems. Are they problematic and if so, expensive to fix. I've been told that 1989 cars have the electronic fuel injection but pre-date the active-ride and hence are most sought after.
Edited by ADP68 on Wednesday 13th January 10:37
ADP68 said:
I've been told that 1989 cars have the electronic fuel injection but pre-date the active-ride and hence are most sought after.
I was told by Richard Sanders, who was the club Chairman at the time (RIP Richard), that the last 70 chassis numbers of the series I car, just before the series II car with adaptive damping, were the best to get, in his opinion. They had the firmest suspension settings and the best handling of any of the Turbo R's, whilst being conventional suspension (in as far as the high pressure green stuff is concerned anyway), but the cars had all the latest goodies on them in terms of injection, ABS etc.Edited by Balmoral Green on Wednesday 13th January 12:13
Thank you
I was told that EFI was the successor to mechanical fuel injection, which in turn succeeded carbs. Is your car active ride and have you had any probs? Likewise, I was told that head gaskets could be problematical in Turbo R's but not in low pressure turbo's.
I was told that EFI was the successor to mechanical fuel injection, which in turn succeeded carbs. Is your car active ride and have you had any probs? Likewise, I was told that head gaskets could be problematical in Turbo R's but not in low pressure turbo's.
Edited by ADP68 on Wednesday 13th January 12:23
None of them are active ride, active ride is very different and they don't have it. What the Bentley has is adaptive damping, it firms up if you wiggle it, that's all. You could call it semi active, but even that is stretching it.
Trouble is, the term active ride has become common parlance across the board now, and is commonly used even when it's not active ride.
Trouble is, the term active ride has become common parlance across the board now, and is commonly used even when it's not active ride.
Edited by Balmoral Green on Wednesday 13th January 15:39
Yes, I suppose “active damping” is a more correct description for what is a fundamentally a system based around speed-sensitive dampers. I am not a technical expert, but my understanding is that the dampers have three settings. They move off on “soft” and as the speed rises they switch to “medium” and then to “firm”. This system was developed in response to complaints that the TR’s ride was too hard, compared to its predecessor and contemporary R-Rs. Customers wanted a car that had the ride of a R-R at low speeds, when handling was not important but roads might be less than smooth-surfaced; and the handling of a TR at higher speeds when it was needed and the road surface was likely to be smoother. So that’s what we were given. This is achieved by electronically / computer controlled dampers (which are hideously expensive and, of course, can only be replaced in pairs – so if one goes, you are faced with a bill for around £3K fitted).
Curiously, my ’36 Derby-built car also has speed sensitive dampers, but mechanically controlled: the pressure in the dampers is increased by an engine-driven pump, so that it increases with speed – but steplessly, unlike the crude 3-step system fitted to our more modern cars! And unlike the TR, it also has manual override, too. And before you say “that’s all very well in theory, but they don’t actually work”, usually from experience of driving one with worn-out dampers because the owner was too mean to have them overhauled, I can assure you that they do: after I had my dampers rebuilt (at considerably less cost that the replacements on my TR, I might add – all four for less than the price of one!), the difference was phenomenal. It also has anti-lock brakes of a sort, because of the way that the gearbox-driven servo is set up, but that’s another story. Progress? Ha!
Coming back to your question, Scott, or one of them, no, I have never had any head gasket problems (fingers crossed!), but I have certainly heard of it. If my memory serves me correctly, last time I took my car to PMC, they had just dealt with the consequences of head gasket failure for one of the regular posters on this site – at a cost, I think on the high side of £6K.
I have, however, had active ride problems. First time it was the gizmo that controls the dampers: it goes into a default setting (can’t remember which, but probably “medium”) and you don’t have to do anything about it until you get around to visiting your friendly local Bentley agent / specialist, when the replacement part is relatively inexpensive and costs little to fit. Second time was when one of my dampers gave up the ghost – neither inexpensive, nor cheap to fit, see above!
I suspect the immediately pre-active-ride cars are sought after by the boy racers among us who are content to ruin the ride of their cars by fitting larger wheels in the quest for better handling (no names, but you know who you are, Warren!!), or by replacing their active dampers with conventional ones (Bilsteins?), though the latter may of course be motivated by the moths in their wallets, rather than any handling improvement.
I wasn’t aware that Bentleys were ever fitted with mechanical FI, but I stand to be corrected (and probably shall be).
Curiously, my ’36 Derby-built car also has speed sensitive dampers, but mechanically controlled: the pressure in the dampers is increased by an engine-driven pump, so that it increases with speed – but steplessly, unlike the crude 3-step system fitted to our more modern cars! And unlike the TR, it also has manual override, too. And before you say “that’s all very well in theory, but they don’t actually work”, usually from experience of driving one with worn-out dampers because the owner was too mean to have them overhauled, I can assure you that they do: after I had my dampers rebuilt (at considerably less cost that the replacements on my TR, I might add – all four for less than the price of one!), the difference was phenomenal. It also has anti-lock brakes of a sort, because of the way that the gearbox-driven servo is set up, but that’s another story. Progress? Ha!
Coming back to your question, Scott, or one of them, no, I have never had any head gasket problems (fingers crossed!), but I have certainly heard of it. If my memory serves me correctly, last time I took my car to PMC, they had just dealt with the consequences of head gasket failure for one of the regular posters on this site – at a cost, I think on the high side of £6K.
I have, however, had active ride problems. First time it was the gizmo that controls the dampers: it goes into a default setting (can’t remember which, but probably “medium”) and you don’t have to do anything about it until you get around to visiting your friendly local Bentley agent / specialist, when the replacement part is relatively inexpensive and costs little to fit. Second time was when one of my dampers gave up the ghost – neither inexpensive, nor cheap to fit, see above!
I suspect the immediately pre-active-ride cars are sought after by the boy racers among us who are content to ruin the ride of their cars by fitting larger wheels in the quest for better handling (no names, but you know who you are, Warren!!), or by replacing their active dampers with conventional ones (Bilsteins?), though the latter may of course be motivated by the moths in their wallets, rather than any handling improvement.
I wasn’t aware that Bentleys were ever fitted with mechanical FI, but I stand to be corrected (and probably shall be).
Edited by Bluebottle911 on Wednesday 13th January 20:39
I have found this Post very informative. Aside from the helpful technical advice there are two observations which I thoroughly endorse. The comment made by Balmoral Green regarding what an owner should budget for in relation to annual servicing costs is spot on. Woody2's comment concerning the need to break the cycle illustrates an absolute 'must' in relation to Bentley ownership. As the years of ownership role on so the servicing element can take a downward spiral. Such was my experience when I viewed various Bentley Turbo R examples prior to my purchase.
There are only two solutions to tackling this difficulty. Either a purchaser pays a premium price for an example with the perfect service history, and maintains it to the same degree thereafter. Alternatively, a purchaser settles for an example where the service history is less than complete, but has sufficient budget remaining to 'break the cycle' so as to complete the required maintenance to the necessary level. Bentley ownership in my limited experience is about preventative maintenance rather than waiting for problems to arise. The suggestion of 'Don't try and fix what is not broken' has limited if no application in my opinion in relation to Bentley ownership. Chris
There are only two solutions to tackling this difficulty. Either a purchaser pays a premium price for an example with the perfect service history, and maintains it to the same degree thereafter. Alternatively, a purchaser settles for an example where the service history is less than complete, but has sufficient budget remaining to 'break the cycle' so as to complete the required maintenance to the necessary level. Bentley ownership in my limited experience is about preventative maintenance rather than waiting for problems to arise. The suggestion of 'Don't try and fix what is not broken' has limited if no application in my opinion in relation to Bentley ownership. Chris
Gassing Station | Bentley & Rolls Royce | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff