RE: Driven: BMW 760Li

[Trommel]

So do some Nissan Pulsars:

[Chris-R]

Trommel said:

So do some Nissan Pulsars:

OK, OK, but the Phantom comes with a bloke to hold the brolly for you!

[derestrictor]

Chris-R said:

derestrictor said:

Is the Phantom more comfortable? Yes, much.
Does it ride better? Yes, noticeably.
Is is quicker? Who cares!
Does it handle? Differently.
Is the material quality any better? Yes.
Is the assembly quality better? Yes.
Has it more gadgets? It has umbrellas in the door shuts - game over!

Much more comfortable? Noticeably better ride? Material quality? Assembly quality? Emphatically, worm hole inducingly wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong.

It is a lovely, lovely trinket but a stupendous slice of badge engineering cum uber hoodwinkology which is in no way superior to the 760 or for that matter, Merc's S65 AMG (the new one.)

Who cares about the handling? Well if you can have your cake and eat it, why on earth not?

[Plotloss]

Was Phantom'ed on the M4 this evening, one wafted past in the outside lane.

Probably for the rest of this week at least, nothing else will do.

[ClintonB]

okgo said:

All of those engines bar the lambo v12 are about the same power. If not less. Plus not many of them will do a combined 21 mpg.

To be fair, there's no hope & Bob that this will get anywhere near to 21 mpg in the real world either. In the real world it's a bit like comparing George Best & Richard Harris to Ollie Reid.

[okgo]

ClintonB said:

okgo said:

All of those engines bar the lambo v12 are about the same power. If not less. Plus not many of them will do a combined 21 mpg.

To be fair, there's no hope & Bob that this will get anywhere near to 21 mpg in the real world either. In the real world it's a bit like comparing George Best & Richard Harris to Ollie Reid.

All cars are tested the same way, so I don't see a problem.

[ClintonB]

okgo said:

ClintonB said:

okgo said:

All of those engines bar the lambo v12 are about the same power. If not less. Plus not many of them will do a combined 21 mpg.

To be fair, there's no hope & Bob that this will get anywhere near to 21 mpg in the real world either. In the real world it's a bit like comparing George Best & Richard Harris to Ollie Reid.

All cars are tested the same way, so I don't see a problem.

Would sir like a bottle of Black Sambucca, Absynth or Polish Spirit?

If anyone makes any attempt whatsoever to use the performance that is over & above a 730/740d then consumption is going to make Mark Viduka look a bit skinny

[BigBen]

ClintonB said:

okgo said:

ClintonB said:

okgo said:

All of those engines bar the lambo v12 are about the same power. If not less. Plus not many of them will do a combined 21 mpg.

To be fair, there's no hope & Bob that this will get anywhere near to 21 mpg in the real world either. In the real world it's a bit like comparing George Best & Richard Harris to Ollie Reid.

All cars are tested the same way, so I don't see a problem.

Would sir like a bottle of Black Sambucca, Absynth or Polish Spirit?

If anyone makes any attempt whatsoever to use the performance that is over & above a 730/740d then consumption is going to make Mark Viduka look a bit skinny

But isn't the point that MPG tests are all done in a consistent manner, so that whilst the 760 might not return 21mpg in the real world the 730 will similarly not manage its figures either so the comparison is valid.

Ben

[okgo]

BigBen said:

ClintonB said:

okgo said:

ClintonB said:

okgo said:

All of those engines bar the lambo v12 are about the same power. If not less. Plus not many of them will do a combined 21 mpg.

To be fair, there's no hope & Bob that this will get anywhere near to 21 mpg in the real world either. In the real world it's a bit like comparing George Best & Richard Harris to Ollie Reid.

All cars are tested the same way, so I don't see a problem.

Would sir like a bottle of Black Sambucca, Absynth or Polish Spirit?

If anyone makes any attempt whatsoever to use the performance that is over & above a 730/740d then consumption is going to make Mark Viduka look a bit skinny

But isn't the point that MPG tests are all done in a consistent manner, so that whilst the 760 might not return 21mpg in the real world the 730 will similarly not manage its figures either so the comparison is valid.

Ben

Exactly.

[SleeperCell]

mainaman said:

What's so special aboit this engine?

Torque and economy aside there are lots of smaller and similarly,if not more poweful engines around:Ferrari V8,Lambo V10,GM V8 Supercharged,Nissan V6 TT,etc.

The ancient Lambo V12 in SV spec does 100hp more without turbos.

Just a lazy V12 for an uber-rep car

It's the torque and it's delivery. 553 lb ft of it from 1500rpm to 5000rpm. The flat curve is pretty impressive, better than the Mercedes S600, which only manages to hold peak torque from 1800rpm to 3500rpm, still the S600 does have a fair bit more of it, peaking at 612 lb ft. Then you have the AMG S65 which has so much toque they have to artificially limit it to prevent the world (or gearbox) exploding.

[mainaman]

SleeperCell said:

mainaman said:

What's so special aboit this engine?

Torque and economy aside there are lots of smaller and similarly,if not more poweful engines around:Ferrari V8,Lambo V10,GM V8 Supercharged,Nissan V6 TT,etc.

The ancient Lambo V12 in SV spec does 100hp more without turbos.

Just a lazy V12 for an uber-rep car

It's the torque and it's delivery. 553 lb ft of it from 1500rpm to 5000rpm. The flat curve is pretty impressive, better than the Mercedes S600, which only manages to hold peak torque from 1800rpm to 3500rpm, still the S600 does have a fair bit more of it, peaking at 612 lb ft. Then you have the AMG S65 which has so much toque they have to artificially limit it to prevent the world (or gearbox) exploding.

I already said that i was not questioning its torque delivery or economy.But if you are willing to rev your mega saloon or supercar there are smaller engines with similar or even better performance.Hell,even the early 90's BMW V12 for the F1 was giving more power than this one.

It doesn't hold up even in comparison to other contemporary V12s from other similarly priced mega saloons,the admittedly more expensive AMG S65(2006!) you mentioned being a notable example.

So in absolute terms or even in its price range it doesn't appear to be a performance leader,but let's not forget that the 7 series have never been showcase for BMW's best performance engines and it's new 4.4 V8 TT that will power the next M5 will be a strong competitor for Mercedes' all-conquering 6.3 V8.

Edited by mainaman on Tuesday 25th August 19:07

[dudleybloke]

i think it looks realy good in white.
im not a fan of current bmw styling but this ones not too bad.
hopefully they will depreciate as quick as usual and be sort of affordable.
would definatly be one to get a gas conversion on though.

[zakelwe]

I fear for the person who buys a 8-10 year old one at an auction with all that eltrickergagetry it has. I bet replacement parts cost for all of it would add up to a brand new city car .

Regards
Andy

[gumsie]

collateral said:

gumsie said:

Vixpy1 said:

At least African Dictators can give up their S-class Mercs.

Nah, I don't think so. The big Benzes are seen as the pinnacle of the german auto industry over there, (and in many more places). In addition, and as accomplished as it'll no doubt be it's not exactly good looking. The interior isn't even 40K special let alone 100K special.
Something about BM interiors doesn't lend themselves to feeling luxurious. Functional yes, and well built too, but classy? No.

Then again, I saw a new E class coming the other way about an hour ago and it looks like sick on wheels

I gotta admit. It's not pretty.

[ZesPak]

gumsie said:

collateral said:

gumsie said:

Vixpy1 said:

At least African Dictators can give up their S-class Mercs.

Nah, I don't think so. The big Benzes are seen as the pinnacle of the german auto industry over there, (and in many more places). In addition, and as accomplished as it'll no doubt be it's not exactly good looking. The interior isn't even 40K special let alone 100K special.
Something about BM interiors doesn't lend themselves to feeling luxurious. Functional yes, and well built too, but classy? No.

Then again, I saw a new E class coming the other way about an hour ago and it looks like sick on wheels

I gotta admit. It's not pretty.

I think that's all down to taste, I think it's a very good evolution of a very handsome car.
Stepping away from the round headlights, going more towards the classic square ones while keeping a very nice link to the last model.




Not as good looking as the XF, but by no means an ugly car imo.

[octagon8]

Nice but I would rather have a panamera turbo

[derestrictor]

The interior of that Panemera certainly appears to be something exceptional: my concern would be over it's actual - as opposed to apparent - quality, again, ito surface/switch quality/component solidity, etc.

A bit like an X6M, it offends Middle Earth's sensibilities to the core but if you actually drive the bugger, it'll blow your automotive cherry right into the centre of next week.

[VladD]

ClintonB said:

okgo said:

All of those engines bar the lambo v12 are about the same power. If not less. Plus not many of them will do a combined 21 mpg.

To be fair, there's no hope & Bob that this will get anywhere near to 21 mpg in the real world either. In the real world it's a bit like comparing George Best & Richard Harris to Ollie Reid.

I did 168 miles in 2 hours 15 minutes last night and returned 25.2 mpg in my E38 750i. I can't see, seeing as technology has moved on, why this new car couldn't do the same. It depends on how it's driven. You wouldn't buy one of these for round town and shopping use. Cruising on the motorway is it's forte.

[TWIN TUBI]

dudleybloke said:

i think it looks realy good in white.
im not a fan of current bmw styling but this ones not too bad.
hopefully they will depreciate as quick as usual and be sort of affordable.
would definatly be one to get a gas conversion on though.

[derestrictor]

Original thinking, you can't beat it.