RE: Rolls-Royce Cullinan: Driven

[J4CKO]

DonkeyApple said:

David87 said:

Why would you buy this over the Phantom? Other than being too poor, obviously.

To get back to RR roots.

To go where a Phantom cant, I am guessing here but as this wont be the best off roader in terms of ability, it will be a lot better than a Phantom or Ghost.

The Middle Eastern Sheikh chaps will go mad for it, get your hawks and stuff in the back and can drive through sand, those with a stately pile off the beaten track, that's if they can bear to trade in the 1989 Merc 300 CE all the rich folk currently drive. Its perhaps a bit less formal than a Phantom as well, maybe more a weekend/family car.

I dont think we will see them go rapidly downmarket, too expensive, supply is limited and RR are a bit fussier than Bentley, I expect most of early production is already booked up and will be going abroad.

[LewG]

https://youtu.be/sTWNQ5dh4-Q

Canyoneroooo

[J4CKO]

Crazy Don said:

After WW2 a relative of mine bought pre-war Rolls Royces which nobody wanted because of fuel rationing and chopped the back part of the body off and turned them into pickup trucks for his farm. I think this monstrosity costing more than a small farm would have him turning in his grave,

I am sure you can still do this now with a ropey old Shadow ?

They were very expensive then as well when new you realise.

[dimots]

Makes me want to move to a different planet.

[Paddy78]

If I was a multi-millionaire and wanted a 4x4, this would be it. Setting aside the talk about whom the target audience is, looks and taste, which are all subjective, this has to be one of the most amazing vehicles ever made in terms of pure luxury.

Not sure Rolls needed to include folding back seats for more storage though... I can't see it being used to take things to the tip very often.

I get why people don't like it... but I suggest you would if you could!

[MCBrowncoat]

DonkeyApple said:

MCBrowncoat said:

I quite like it. More pleasing than a Bentayga. Looking forward to seeing one on the road.

Genuine question though: with all that weight, and no locking diffs (bingo...) is it quite likely that one could get unwittingly plugged where say another one's 4X4 might not? And wouldn't the embarrassment rather ruin it, what?

(cue: "not likely around around Knightsbridge...")

Nice place to sit and have a drink while a beater nips off to get a tractor.

Well yeah I guess that's true

[otolith]

DonkeyApple said:

otolith said:

I didn't think there were any rich Northern mill owners left.

Mills have gone but they’ve got pound shops, IVA consultancies, no win no fee law firms and retirement homes instead.

And chains of tanning salons and nail bars I suppose. Yeah, you're right, there's still a market.

[Mackofthejungle]

Take the family on a 300 mile drive, if you're family is no more than 4 people.

It baffles me how car manufacturers haven't sussed out the middle seat idea yet. It's always an afterthought. If a Berlingo can manage it (and to be honest, a Berlingo probably rides better than this too) then why can't posh family cars like this? Because that's what one has to assume it is? It's a car for a wealthy family...right?

And if you're single, or perhaps have a partner and a kid, or you're retired and your kids have left, but you want luxury with the ability to carry some people or "things" from time to time....where's the 4.2m Rolls hatchback? At £100k? Why can't manufacturers fill this gaping hole in the market?! Why is bigger always better in the world of cars?! It's fking stupid.

Saloons? Oh yes, they start at 15 grand and go to Rolls Royce. 4x4s? Oh yes, 15 grand to Rolls again. Sports cars? MX5s to the moon. Estate cars? Again, cheap as you like, or 100 grand plus (granted, for some reason this barrier hasn't truly been broken...) But hatchbacks? (and I mean proper 5 door hatches, not a Ferrari you can technically class as one) No no no, they're cheap. They have to be cheap. Despite being utter practical, well sized for 1 or for 5 people and having big boots...they have to be cheap. Cheapest. Small is cheap for some reason. Utterly baffling. It's an Americanism the world can't get over. Look what happened when Land Rover brought out the Evoque - a total success. Same size as a golf. The only exception, and nobody else has followed it up. Lunacy. There's huge money waiting to be made.

Anyway, what was this article about again?

[ElectricPics]

The Cullinan's stamping ground will be the Gulf states so any questions of taste are relative to the target market where outrageous bling is the norm. Expect a gold-plated one soon, if there isn't already one.

[CharlieAlphaMike]

My local dealer (Stockholm, Sweden) had a launch event a couple of weeks ago. I arrived a little early and couldn't stay so they very kindly lifted the cover to give me a private viewing. In it's Magma Red 'launch colour' with tan hide interior, it certainly looked 'imposing'. The dealer were keen to point out that it's not that much bigger than a Range Rover. They were also keen to point out the 'umbrella in the door' as being typical of Rolls Royce (I'm sure they could have found something more worthy to talk about).

I completely get it. It's clearly a Rolls Royce. The quality and technology was quite evident even from this brief preview. I'm sure Rolls Royce will sell a few without too much difficulty. The question is, how many will be taken anywhere near a muddy field?

And whilst it's no 'looker'; what SUV is? It actually looks better in the metal and from the rear, it's no worse than any other luxury SUV.

Edited by CharlieAlphaMike on Tuesday 16th October 13:04

[dzernski]

I have been rude about this in the past but recant. I think it looks better than the original pictures suggested. Not sold on the dash, but love that it has suicide doors for the rear. Shame I'll never have the cash to own one (or, to be fair, would spend it on a fleet rather than a single SUV)

[bristolracer]

It's vulgar.
A Rolls should not be vulgar.

[anonymous-user]

A brilliant way to flaunt wealth. Looks absolutely hideous.

[DonkeyApple]

J4CKO said:

DonkeyApple said:

David87 said:

Why would you buy this over the Phantom? Other than being too poor, obviously.

To get back to RR roots.

To go where a Phantom cant, I am guessing here but as this wont be the best off roader in terms of ability, it will be a lot better than a Phantom or Ghost.

The Middle Eastern Sheikh chaps will go mad for it, get your hawks and stuff in the back and can drive through sand, those with a stately pile off the beaten track, that's if they can bear to trade in the 1989 Merc 300 CE all the rich folk currently drive. Its perhaps a bit less formal than a Phantom as well, maybe more a weekend/family car.

I dont think we will see them go rapidly downmarket, too expensive, supply is limited and RR are a bit fussier than Bentley, I expect most of early production is already booked up and will be going abroad.

It’s an SUV rather than a 4x4. As RR and their coach builders really created the SUV concept over 100 years ago then think this van has more RR DNA than the saloons.

What’s really nice is that it is their own chassis and has a V12. Makes it infinitely more special than the array of Audi Qs with different badges.

It also recognises that these days even those with 400 notes to spaff on a wagon haven’t the means to retain and home a driver so will be having to resort to manual labour much of the time.

[Cambs_Stuart]

juice said:

This would look ace with a snorkle

Only a matter of time until you see one with a YOLO sticker.

[otolith]

bristolracer said:

It's vulgar.
A Rolls should not be vulgar.

They always have been.

[Twoshoe]

Tom_Spotley_When said:

Reading the replies to this is my afternoon's entertainment sorted.

I'm tempted to start a game of PH Bingo:

One argument about how a lack of live axles and low range gearbox means it isn't a Proper Off-Roader.

One argument about why anyone needs an SUV and shouldn't RR make an estate instead

One argument about the four wheel drive system and how Winter Tyres on a BMW 535d are all you ever really need, you know.

One argument about how "the locals" in the alps all drive round in Fiat Panda 4x4's and how all the crashes occur when british drivers in German cars don't understand mass transfer so there is no reason what-so-ever to buy a big 4x4 for your one week skiing a year

One argument about how it isn't a "Proper" Rolls Royce

One argument about how it's the New BMW x7 underneath, you know

One argument about how all drivers of this ever do is drop their kids (or brats) off at the local private school, parking inconsiderately and how it's only been bought on finance to impress other school run mums

And one argument about how anyone who spends £300k on this should buy a fleet of caterhams (for the handling balance) and a Honda Jazz (It's the most practical and reliable car ever and no-one needs anything else, unless you're a show-off or don't properly understand rural living)

Any others to add?

Yes, surely 'coming to a premiership player's car park soon'?

[Puddenchucker]

I can't wait for the Kahn Design version.........

[SpeckledJim]

bristolracer said:

It's vulgar.
A Rolls should not be vulgar.

Struggling to remember the last one that wasn't, tbh.

Once it's got a Rolls Royce grille, it's almost inevitably vulgar. And I like Rolls-Royces.

[DonkeyApple]

Cambs_Stuart said:

juice said:

This would look ace with a snorkle

Only a matter of time until you see one with a YOLO sticker.

One Wife. LividHappy.