RE: Rolls-Royce Cullinan on the 'ring!
Discussion
Ares said:
Shhh.... You don't need a rational argument when complaining about a large SUV. They are just wrong, and owners are stupid.
(until you own one then realise they are hugely useful, close to the perfect large family car and understand why its the fastest growing automotive market
)
What makes them bigger than a big estate?(until you own one then realise they are hugely useful, close to the perfect large family car and understand why its the fastest growing automotive market
)TheDrBrian said:
Ares said:
Shhh.... You don't need a rational argument when complaining about a large SUV. They are just wrong, and owners are stupid.
(until you own one then realise they are hugely useful, close to the perfect large family car and understand why its the fastest growing automotive market )
What makes them bigger than a big estate?(until you own one then realise they are hugely useful, close to the perfect large family car and understand why its the fastest growing automotive market
)Secondly, I'm not sure you're quoting the right person, because he didn't say they were bigger than an estate....?
Others also prefer the added security of 4WD which isn't always available on saloon/estate counterparts and also prefer the higher driving position.
I'm not sure why people hate them. It's not like you're being forced to buy them....but I guess having more choice is a bad thing in the eyes of many....
E65Ross said:
It's not like you're being forced to buy them...
Whilst this is true, I think we are getting towards the point where estates are losing their viability for manufacturers in some segments. I've got nothing against this thing, mind. It seems to fit the ethos of the brand perfectly to me, which is more than could be said of things like the Cayenne when that first appeared.
Crankie Shaft said:
DonkeyApple said:
The truth is that this massive, uber luxurious car is fully in keeping with RR's true heritage. If any marque was ever going to be suitable for the luxury SUV trend it is very obviously RR who first made SUVs over 100 years ago up until they switched to saloons in the 60s.
This behemoth is finally a return to its roots for RR.
Arguably, this will be the first time since it was nationalised in 71 that Rolls Royce Motors has produced a true Rolls Royce a la Rolls Royce Ltd, the company that invented the luxury SUV over 100 years ago.
Completely agree. Good post sir.This behemoth is finally a return to its roots for RR.
Arguably, this will be the first time since it was nationalised in 71 that Rolls Royce Motors has produced a true Rolls Royce a la Rolls Royce Ltd, the company that invented the luxury SUV over 100 years ago.
E65Ross said:
TheDrBrian said:
Ares said:
Shhh.... You don't need a rational argument when complaining about a large SUV. They are just wrong, and owners are stupid.
(until you own one then realise they are hugely useful, close to the perfect large family car and understand why its the fastest growing automotive market )
What makes them bigger than a big estate?(until you own one then realise they are hugely useful, close to the perfect large family car and understand why its the fastest growing automotive market
)Secondly, I'm not sure you're quoting the right person, because he didn't say they were bigger than an estate....?
Others also prefer the added security of 4WD which isn't always available on saloon/estate counterparts and also prefer the higher driving position.
I'm not sure why people hate them. It's not like you're being forced to buy them....but I guess having more choice is a bad thing in the eyes of many....
TheDrBrian said:
E65Ross said:
TheDrBrian said:
Ares said:
Shhh.... You don't need a rational argument when complaining about a large SUV. They are just wrong, and owners are stupid.
(until you own one then realise they are hugely useful, close to the perfect large family car and understand why its the fastest growing automotive market )
What makes them bigger than a big estate?(until you own one then realise they are hugely useful, close to the perfect large family car and understand why its the fastest growing automotive market
)Secondly, I'm not sure you're quoting the right person, because he didn't say they were bigger than an estate....?
Others also prefer the added security of 4WD which isn't always available on saloon/estate counterparts and also prefer the higher driving position.
I'm not sure why people hate them. It's not like you're being forced to buy them....but I guess having more choice is a bad thing in the eyes of many....
Definitely a few reasons as to why some prefer them over estate cars. Still can't understand why people can't grasp that, but there we go!
I personally prefer estate cars, yet I can totally see why people buy them. Interesting people slate cars like the Audi Q range, BMW X range etc yet rarely slate a RR. If it's because the RR is better off road.....then that's a bit odd, considering many of the RR cars sold to the public will never go off road....
kambites said:
Whilst this is true, I think we are getting towards the point where estates are losing their viability for manufacturers in some segments.
I've got nothing against this thing, mind. It seems to fit the ethos of the brand perfectly to me, which is more than could be said of things like the Cayenne when that first appeared.
It's a slightly weird segment the 'estate' as it has been subsumed over the years by newer segments. I've got nothing against this thing, mind. It seems to fit the ethos of the brand perfectly to me, which is more than could be said of things like the Cayenne when that first appeared.
If you think back to the Ford Escort the estate version was referred to as an estate but the evolution of that model is now referred to as a hatchback. The hatchback segment has extended heavily into what we once called an estate. I think it's fair to say that if we saw a pair of 1 series cars back in the 80s we would have labelled one a saloon and the other an estate.
So what were once small estates now fall into the large hatchback class.
And then of course there's the SUV these have rapidly replaced the traditional estate car. Today the estate has pretty much been reduced down to being a car that is less practical than an SUV. The vast majority of people wanting the practicality of an estate will today opt for the even more practical SUV equivalent.
To my eyes the 'estate' is more popular than it has ever been but it has just evolved into large hatchbacks and SUVs. Two segments that might account for a very large percentage of modern sales.
The 'estate' monicker isn't seen as 'cool' any more either. Hence why manufacturers seem so desperate to call them shooting brakes or avants or anything other than using the word 'estate'.
Those questioning what these offer over an estate....One thing I haven't seen asked...
What do estates offer over these SUV types of cars? If anyone says something like "it handles better" I will laugh....Because that's clearly important for mum on the school run, or about 99% of the population...
What do estates offer over these SUV types of cars? If anyone says something like "it handles better" I will laugh....Because that's clearly important for mum on the school run, or about 99% of the population...
E65Ross said:
Those questioning what these offer over an estate....One thing I haven't seen asked...
What do estates offer over these SUV types of cars? If anyone says something like "it handles better" I will laugh....Because that's clearly important for mum on the school run, or about 99% of the population...
That's really it. For conventional road driving the estate is going to be slower simply because you're lower so have fewer over taking opportunities or less visibility on certain bends or at junctions. What do estates offer over these SUV types of cars? If anyone says something like "it handles better" I will laugh....Because that's clearly important for mum on the school run, or about 99% of the population...
In 1986 the Range Rover was offered with the new interior focussed entirely on car level comfort. In 1986 families across Britain stopped buying E Class estates and bought Range Rovers.
The modern SUV is the evolution of the estate. It does everything the estate does and more on top. With the single exception of Ring times.
And at the small end of the market the hatchback bookended the once practical estate segment.
Cheaper tyres, better On fuel,cheaper to maintain when it breaks, look better,
More aerodynamic, you won't scare the hell out of everyone and there aunty when you tailgate them to oblivion, and you will not look like a mouse in a block of flats
Oh and estate cars have more room and handle much better and you will be safe in the knowledge that you won't look a prize Pratt
If image bothers you which is ironic because that's the main reason for owning an SUV
More aerodynamic, you won't scare the hell out of everyone and there aunty when you tailgate them to oblivion, and you will not look like a mouse in a block of flats
Oh and estate cars have more room and handle much better and you will be safe in the knowledge that you won't look a prize Pratt
If image bothers you which is ironic because that's the main reason for owning an SUV
loose cannon said:
Cheaper tyres, better On fuel,cheaper to maintain when it breaks, look better,
More aerodynamic, you won't scare the hell out of everyone and there aunty when you tailgate them to oblivion, and you will not look like a mouse in a block of flats
Oh and estate cars have more room and handle much better
So better for tailgating as they don't scare the victim so much? More aerodynamic, you won't scare the hell out of everyone and there aunty when you tailgate them to oblivion, and you will not look like a mouse in a block of flats
Oh and estate cars have more room and handle much better
Tyres aren't cheaper. Take the comparable footprint and performance car and SUV tyres cannoften be cheaper as they are more common.
I'm not convinced that looking like a ' mouse in a tower block' to complete strangers would feature that strongly. It seems more like an answer someone might give on Family Fortunes.
Looks obviously are subjective so not really relevant.
Handling is irrelevant unless you need to pretend you're Nigel Mansell when you drive to Waitrose for the weekly shop.
So really that just leaves 'lower mpg' as the only credible benefit. But seeing as more people buy SUVs than estates it is incredibly clear that this is wholly and utterly irrelevant to the consumer.
Nanook said:
Debaser said:
Why are they testing at the ring, and why are they driving so quickly? It doesn't bear any relation to the real world.
You can't make a car with that much power, and that much mass high up, and not make sure it corners without tipping over or doing something else awful.The 'ring is a large track with lots of features you'll find on roads.
Where else should they test it?
TheDrBrian said:
Ares said:
Shhh.... You don't need a rational argument when complaining about a large SUV. They are just wrong, and owners are stupid.
(until you own one then realise they are hugely useful, close to the perfect large family car and understand why its the fastest growing automotive market )
What makes them bigger than a big estate?(until you own one then realise they are hugely useful, close to the perfect large family car and understand why its the fastest growing automotive market
)Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff