Bentley Bentayga, London. What's the point?
Discussion
I encountered something rather unexpected on my commute into London yesterday. A Bentley Bentayga.
It was enormous, and it was difficult to filter past (on the bike) and it was stuck in traffic just the same as any other car. Then, surprisingly on the way home I also encountered the same car. Also stuck in traffic, also difficult (but not impossible) to get by.
Since then, it's stuck in the back of my mind. Why? Why not buy a Range Rover? Why show off that you can afford to splurge 200 grand or whatever it is on a car that is just going to sit on the M3? I assume it's not a regular trip as I've never seen it before but if you've got a Bentayga, wouldn't you have a Fiat 500 or something just to nip into town with?
I'm not even sure why I'm puzzled. I'm not sure if I'd even be as affected if I saw someone doing the journey in a 488 or something.
I suppose it says something about me. I would like to be in a situation where I can afford a 200 grand car, but if I were would it be a Bentayga? No of course not. I thought they were produced purely for rich Chinese businessmen where being ostentatious is of the fashion, or perhaps the occasional Premiership footballer. Yeah I might expect to see one in Cheshire, but driving into London on the M3? I'd buy a Rangie and with the change I'd buy a bunch of fun cars or bikes.
Waftmobile, yes I can see the point. Range Rover? Not my thing, but I can see the point. Sports car? Definitely. Supercar? Definitely. Cars for people who need to transport people and things? I don't like them, but they are most certainly a necessity. A 200 grand supersoft leather trimmed 600hp piece of bling? Who am I? Wayne Rooney?
(I just looked up the 2020 Range Rover, and the cheapest is £89k. Sheesh! but at least they are subtle to some extent?)
I just don't get it, and it would be great if someone could explain it to me. Mind you, I don't get 'Adventure' bikes or 'SUV's or 'Crossovers' at the best of times, so maybe it's just me?
It was enormous, and it was difficult to filter past (on the bike) and it was stuck in traffic just the same as any other car. Then, surprisingly on the way home I also encountered the same car. Also stuck in traffic, also difficult (but not impossible) to get by.
Since then, it's stuck in the back of my mind. Why? Why not buy a Range Rover? Why show off that you can afford to splurge 200 grand or whatever it is on a car that is just going to sit on the M3? I assume it's not a regular trip as I've never seen it before but if you've got a Bentayga, wouldn't you have a Fiat 500 or something just to nip into town with?
I'm not even sure why I'm puzzled. I'm not sure if I'd even be as affected if I saw someone doing the journey in a 488 or something.
I suppose it says something about me. I would like to be in a situation where I can afford a 200 grand car, but if I were would it be a Bentayga? No of course not. I thought they were produced purely for rich Chinese businessmen where being ostentatious is of the fashion, or perhaps the occasional Premiership footballer. Yeah I might expect to see one in Cheshire, but driving into London on the M3? I'd buy a Rangie and with the change I'd buy a bunch of fun cars or bikes.
Waftmobile, yes I can see the point. Range Rover? Not my thing, but I can see the point. Sports car? Definitely. Supercar? Definitely. Cars for people who need to transport people and things? I don't like them, but they are most certainly a necessity. A 200 grand supersoft leather trimmed 600hp piece of bling? Who am I? Wayne Rooney?
(I just looked up the 2020 Range Rover, and the cheapest is £89k. Sheesh! but at least they are subtle to some extent?)
I just don't get it, and it would be great if someone could explain it to me. Mind you, I don't get 'Adventure' bikes or 'SUV's or 'Crossovers' at the best of times, so maybe it's just me?
With regard to my 130i that someone helpfully pointed out (A lot of effort to go to... *shrug*) I will not and never have taken it into London. It's too thirsty, and too big and has far too many wheels. The only way I want to get into London is by motorcycle. Going by bike means that I arrive, by and large, in the same season in which I set off.
In actual fact I hardly use the 1er any more, and may very well sell it soon. That is by the by though, I wouldn't take it into London.
Also addressing the point that 'people don't care either way'. Oh they do. Very much so. Ever had a car keyed? No? Then you're lucky. Ever had to try to escape from a group of shifty types on mopeds? No? You're lucky.
As I said, I'd love to be in a situation where I could afford to drop £150-200k on a car, but it would most certainly not be anything as ostentatious as a 650bhp SUV. If I did, I'd probably never drive it as I'd spend my life paranoid about scratches, dents and car jacking. As it is it's taken me almost ten years of ownership to not worry about the 1 series, just in time for me to sell it on. As far as I see it, 200k cars should be a sports car or a GT, or perhaps occasionally a waft-o-matic super saloon-cum-limo. But as mentioned, this could well be because I can't see the point of even ordinary SUV's unless you're a Crofter in Scotland or you live on the isle of Skye or something.
I have to say, poor show PH for this one. So many boring comments. I could have come up with 'because they wanted one' as a reason. Sheesh, a bit of imagination could go a long way! We don't make the effort to post on here to get that kind of reply do we?
In actual fact I hardly use the 1er any more, and may very well sell it soon. That is by the by though, I wouldn't take it into London.
Also addressing the point that 'people don't care either way'. Oh they do. Very much so. Ever had a car keyed? No? Then you're lucky. Ever had to try to escape from a group of shifty types on mopeds? No? You're lucky.
As I said, I'd love to be in a situation where I could afford to drop £150-200k on a car, but it would most certainly not be anything as ostentatious as a 650bhp SUV. If I did, I'd probably never drive it as I'd spend my life paranoid about scratches, dents and car jacking. As it is it's taken me almost ten years of ownership to not worry about the 1 series, just in time for me to sell it on. As far as I see it, 200k cars should be a sports car or a GT, or perhaps occasionally a waft-o-matic super saloon-cum-limo. But as mentioned, this could well be because I can't see the point of even ordinary SUV's unless you're a Crofter in Scotland or you live on the isle of Skye or something.
I have to say, poor show PH for this one. So many boring comments. I could have come up with 'because they wanted one' as a reason. Sheesh, a bit of imagination could go a long way! We don't make the effort to post on here to get that kind of reply do we?
DaveCWK said:
I think you're emphasising the fact it's a 200k car a bit too much OP. An IT monkey living alone on an 80k London salary can probably 'afford' to lease one.
You might be right there. I (mostly) pay for my cars and bikes.On the point that the RR costs nearly as much... yes it does. Jeez. I never realised. Some people have either got too much money, or buy literally everything on lease/credit/PCP.
A few years ago I couldn't imagine spending more than 10 grand on a car. I did do that, but it was difficult and I wasn't sure if it was the right thing to do. It was on Finance, but HP not PCP. I'm sort of glad I did, but I don't think I ever would again.
Wills2 said:
You mustn't project your own thoughts and actions on to others, most people won't care or notice the car and why would they?
I think projecting is a bit of a reach there... I don't really care if people own nice things. I own nice things. I just know (and you must know) that there are people out there prepared to take those things away, and the more expensive/valuable the thing, and the more easily you could get rid of it to Eastern Europe/Ex Soviet states/China the more likely people are to use violence to get it. The Bentley has to be a confluence of those things surely? Although admittedly with all of the cameras in London tracking LEZ, ULEZ, congestion charge maybe it's not a thing that happens there?GoodCompany said:
Your ideas about 'SUVs' are well outdated, its not a lifted Sahara spec Wrangler. In fact, most of the time when Clarkson is spotted in London, you may be entirely shocked to hear he's behind the wheel of his Range Rover.
On a seperate note, I'm surprised we haven't had the 'wealth whispers' b
ks yet, admonishing the Bentley driver for not tooling around in a broken old Saab. Can only be a matter of time here!
In my opinion, anyone who owns or covets an SUV of any sort unless they are a farmer or crofter or whatever has outdated views. Weight and complexity are the enemy of economy, and climate change is still a thing. What does having an SUV get you? Speed? No, not really unless it is a Bentley, and there are faster 600bhp cars. Handling? Ha, you must be joking. Economy? No. Comfort? Maybe, but you can get comfortable cars that aren't 4x4 and weigh 2.5 tonnes. it's all about the ride height, and probably a subconscious desire to be above everyone else. Because it's about this, then it becomes a ride height arms race so more people buy SUV's and crossovers.On a seperate note, I'm surprised we haven't had the 'wealth whispers' b
ks yet, admonishing the Bentley driver for not tooling around in a broken old Saab. Can only be a matter of time here!If I went out and bought a bottom spec Lotus Elise the car would be better for the environment than a RR or even probably my 1 series. Not as comfortable perhaps, but certainly a lot of fun. It comes to something when a sports car is more economical than a daily driver.
broombroomcar said:
I never said the Bentayga was a lifted, old school SUV. Neither am I saying the Bentayga is a serious offroader.
What I am saying is theres enough huge rolling obstacles in built up areas what we dont need more of are these fat hippos. I'm not blaming Bentely for this, I'm blaming the market. Why people have nailed their mast to these crossovers is baffling, especially when theres such scrutiny over emissions and the like and these cars offer nothing - not even space inside - over a normal car.
No doubt someone will call up some figures to refute that, as its PH and the other poster is always wrong, but no, the public strangely is always right.
Yes this.What I am saying is theres enough huge rolling obstacles in built up areas what we dont need more of are these fat hippos. I'm not blaming Bentely for this, I'm blaming the market. Why people have nailed their mast to these crossovers is baffling, especially when theres such scrutiny over emissions and the like and these cars offer nothing - not even space inside - over a normal car.
No doubt someone will call up some figures to refute that, as its PH and the other poster is always wrong, but no, the public strangely is always right.
When people use default epithets that they believe to be derogatory, such as 'power ranger' for motorcyclists, they've lost the argument IMO. I would not wear one piece leathers when commuting, so more fool you. I'd rather take the risk of getting a bit wet and save likely an hour each way on my journey.
As I said before, I ride the bike into London because I want to arrive in the same season in which I set off. A car simply would not get me to work. The train does, but it's expensive and full of people. I'd rather be in a nice comfortable box but seeing the amount of lane chopping, dithering and general not so good driving I see in London, I'd rather have something small and nippy even if I was going to take the 4 wheel option.
I can totally see why there are namby pamby soft types who think a motorcycle is dangerous and dissolve at the first sign of water, but I can't see why that in any way translates to needing a 2.5 tonne 600bhp Bentley in London? There are leaps of logic I'm capable of making, but I'm just not capable of making that one. China? Perhaps. South of France? maybe. In any big city? Nah.
bristolracer said:
OP you need to understand that in London and the surrounding areas there are many seriously and I mean seriously rich people.
I have worked in a few high end places in Holland park, Bayswater and Knightsbridge.
I have seen one of these people, have a double basement dug, a swimming pool installed and removed before he had ever used it as he had changed his mind. Another chap payed £3500 to move a lightswitch on a finished wall because he was buying a different piece of furniture and the switch would be in the wrong place. The wall paper was £1500 a roll hence the cost.
These people have more money than most of us will ever comprehend. If they started spending their money now they probably wont spend it all before they die.
Bentleys, Rolls Royces top of the range Mercs are really common in those parts. They dont care about the price of petrol, congestion charge or £20 per hour parking, its pennies to them
They have endless money, they really really are not going to slum it in a Fiat 500 because its a better city car.
I find that kind of sad. I am neither super rich, nor dirt poor, but I do spend my money in such a way that gets me what I want, and what I want is the things that matter to me. Cars and bikes matter, houses matter, and I like gaming so I have a few consoles and PCs. Anything else? I'll live with it as-is. I have a 6 year old kettle that still boils water pretty quicky. I could probably spend £80 on a new one but why? It's a waste. If everything has equal importance like that, where's the spark? Where's the excitement? Nothing matters because you just pay for it all without a care. I don't think I could live like that. There's this woman who is on TV that people constantly rip the pi$$ out of, you know her, she's always on about stuff sparking joy. If something doesn't spark joy, why would I spend more than I have to on it?I have worked in a few high end places in Holland park, Bayswater and Knightsbridge.
I have seen one of these people, have a double basement dug, a swimming pool installed and removed before he had ever used it as he had changed his mind. Another chap payed £3500 to move a lightswitch on a finished wall because he was buying a different piece of furniture and the switch would be in the wrong place. The wall paper was £1500 a roll hence the cost.
These people have more money than most of us will ever comprehend. If they started spending their money now they probably wont spend it all before they die.
Bentleys, Rolls Royces top of the range Mercs are really common in those parts. They dont care about the price of petrol, congestion charge or £20 per hour parking, its pennies to them
They have endless money, they really really are not going to slum it in a Fiat 500 because its a better city car.
swagmeister said:
so the OP says its fine to spend on things that bring him joy, Im sure being a Bentayga owner brings that guy joy - but you question his choice ?
I sort of walked into that one didn't I? I was referring to the guy who re-did his £1500 roll wallpaper to move a switch because he bought different furniture. However, if you're REALLY into cars, surely you want something that handles? Something that goes? Something that stops? Surely the same spec of drivetrain in a vehicle half the weight would be better? It just strikes me as a car people buy because they think it's the 'right' one, not because they want it, or because it meets their particular needs. I can't believe nobody has said this yet (and I've been avoiding it) But it's only a VW Tuareg underneath still, right?A Kawasaki H2 *could* spark joy with me, but would I want to pay £40k for a 215bhp supercharged motorcyle? No. I can get 99% of the experience on a bike costing less than a quarter of that, and the Bentley is exactly the same.
bristolracer said:
Its a slightly different way of getting that feeling. I worked in an art collectors house in Knightsbridge. You know looking at the paintings on the wall you are looking at the real thing. Unique and beautiful art, that when seen you appreciate its value.
Its not just art, its the furniture,the fixtures and fittings,they all are quality stylish and expensive. An indulgent purchase isn't something that comes from John Lewis in their world.
I still find it quite sad. That money could be used to do so much more than moving a lightswitch. I get the art thing to some extent, but again I can't honestly see myself investing in a really valuable painting or sculpture either. But it's not even about that, it's about the fact that I can't see a Bentayga being that special.Its not just art, its the furniture,the fixtures and fittings,they all are quality stylish and expensive. An indulgent purchase isn't something that comes from John Lewis in their world.
Maybe I should drive one?
It's the same with the Urus, and the forthcoming Ferrari SUV.
I tell you what it's like. It's like a cruiser motorcycle. Why would anyone want a cruiser with compromised geometry, comfort, handling, power when they could buy a nice naked or sportsbike which is ten times better for the same money? Because they care too much about what people think about them, that's why.
Vickers_VC10 said:
Lol. Has a Buell. Good god. Couldn't think of anything worse than a low powered low revving Harley lump in a naked chassis. I guess that's why they went bust......twice
I sold my Buell, but I'm still sad about it. In fact I've had three XBs, two Firebolts and a Lightning. Nothing handles like they do, nothing. The closest I've had is an RGV250, but that was particularly temperamental.Grunty, light, fast handling, fantastically charismatic engine, fantastic noise. Absolutely eye popping brakes. So much to like. Yeah so they weren't built that well, but I've had something like 30 bikes since passing my test, and lots of them have broken down or left me stranded. You know which ones never did? The Buells. You know what would ruin a Buell? Putting the engine in a spindly frame with raked out forks and crap brakes. Like a Harley.
Harley shut down the best division they ever had because the CEO at the time didn't understand the 'adrenaline market'. Anyway, this isn't about me or really badly formed ad hominem attacks on me. This is about the ostentatiousness of a car which serves no real function apart from being a bit more comfortable than a car that costs half as much. It isn't especially fast, it doesn't handle especially well, it doesn't stop very well from what I understand. It's not good on fuel, it's not easy to park, it doesn't fit through gaps. The only reason to own it seems to me to be an ostentatious symbol of wealth. At least with a Ferrari you have the excuse of power, handling and braking. Much like my Buells really.
Ok so yeah I must concede that I shouldn't tell people what they should and should not buy. I would not presume to do so. I am just attempting to understand the logic or lack of it in choosing a car that (at least to me) has very few arguments in it's favour as a car for a big city.
Can/Do people really ignore judgement to buy somethign like this on an entirely emotional basis? Or are there at least some major 'man maths' involved?
I think if I was in a position to buy a car worth that much, I'd just buy something else. *shrug*
Can/Do people really ignore judgement to buy somethign like this on an entirely emotional basis? Or are there at least some major 'man maths' involved?
I think if I was in a position to buy a car worth that much, I'd just buy something else. *shrug*
Vickers_VC10 said:
Buell went bust because they were st and confused. If they were so good and handled so well they wouldn't have and they'd be used on track the world over as a paragon of handling brilliance. Guess what. They don't.
Put in a different engine once Harley pulled the plug and no one bought it. Your anecdotal story don't change that. Guess what I've had ten French cars and they've never broken down. Won't convince anyone else they are good or reliable though. Don't need to either. I don't have a giant chip on my shoulder like you though.
As I said you don't understand or get it therefore it's st lol.
That wasn't down to Buell though it was down to Harley. Erik Buell wanted to make a fully faired liquid cooled bike from the off, but Harley were too scared of competing with the Japanese and wouldn't let him do it. There was some kind of blanket decree, no full fairing and no liquid cooling. The V Rod engine started as a Buell design, but Harley took it in house, and it grew and got heavier and in the end was unsuitable for the job in a Sportbike.t and confused. If they were so good and handled so well they wouldn't have and they'd be used on track the world over as a paragon of handling brilliance. Guess what. They don't. Put in a different engine once Harley pulled the plug and no one bought it. Your anecdotal story don't change that. Guess what I've had ten French cars and they've never broken down. Won't convince anyone else they are good or reliable though. Don't need to either. I don't have a giant chip on my shoulder like you though.
As I said you don't understand or get it therefore it's s
t lol. Buell did go racing in Ama superbike with the 1125R. EBR took the 1190 racing and did quite well. My original point is they have a number of redeeming features at least.
I suppose one redeeming feature of the Bentley is that Bentley and the parent company were at least aligned with what they wanted to build, and pretty much successfully built it. I assume it has a coherence of design and yes I concede that comfort is a redeeming feature. I personally just can't understand the comfort to price ratio though.
But, it's worth pointing out, this is a guy who commutes 1hr 20 minutes through winter on a £1600 motorcycle, so perhaps comfort is not my top priority!
Ok One last word on this.
There seems to be an implication of jealousy here. On my part, for what it's worth? Not at all. If I really wanted a Bentayga, I could afford it. It has been illustrated as such in this thread. I realise just how much ice my denial will cut but as I said, for what it's worth.
The issue is that this isn't just a toaster, or a house, or £1500 wallpaper. This is an enormous machine that munches tyres and petrol and oil. in a world where we need to be more and more aware of the impact we're having. You can argue all you like about China, or container ships or airliners doing more damage, but in light of this I really can't see how anyone can justify driving a large SUV or whatever you want to call it into a big city. It's not about justifying it for me or for the government or for the world, but for yourself. I'm just interested in the psychology behind that. Are all the people who do this climate change deniers? Do they justify it by saying it's cleaner than an SUV from 10-20 years ago?
you've also got people arguing it's the persons only car so maybe they had to drive it into London, then you've got people arguing that it won't be their only car because they'll have something sporty to go with it? I don't really care either way, I just acknowledge that I don't think it's the best tool for the job - and hard to justify in that context.
At some point, I intend to own a 997 Carrera 2S. Does that make me equally culpable in the eyes of the environment? I can say for absolute certain that I won't be driving it into London. It'll sit in my garage and go out on a sunny day from time to time. Am I just as wasteful by doing that?
I suppose it boils down to the fact that a lot of people justify having big combustion engined vehicles because other people do worse but it's all a sliding scale isn't it? Bentayga person is good for the environment because they didn't buy a Hummer? *shrug*
I just wonder if people ask themselves these questions, or is it just me?
Maybe I've been spending too much time with young leftists...
There seems to be an implication of jealousy here. On my part, for what it's worth? Not at all. If I really wanted a Bentayga, I could afford it. It has been illustrated as such in this thread. I realise just how much ice my denial will cut but as I said, for what it's worth.
The issue is that this isn't just a toaster, or a house, or £1500 wallpaper. This is an enormous machine that munches tyres and petrol and oil. in a world where we need to be more and more aware of the impact we're having. You can argue all you like about China, or container ships or airliners doing more damage, but in light of this I really can't see how anyone can justify driving a large SUV or whatever you want to call it into a big city. It's not about justifying it for me or for the government or for the world, but for yourself. I'm just interested in the psychology behind that. Are all the people who do this climate change deniers? Do they justify it by saying it's cleaner than an SUV from 10-20 years ago?
you've also got people arguing it's the persons only car so maybe they had to drive it into London, then you've got people arguing that it won't be their only car because they'll have something sporty to go with it? I don't really care either way, I just acknowledge that I don't think it's the best tool for the job - and hard to justify in that context.
At some point, I intend to own a 997 Carrera 2S. Does that make me equally culpable in the eyes of the environment? I can say for absolute certain that I won't be driving it into London. It'll sit in my garage and go out on a sunny day from time to time. Am I just as wasteful by doing that?
I suppose it boils down to the fact that a lot of people justify having big combustion engined vehicles because other people do worse but it's all a sliding scale isn't it? Bentayga person is good for the environment because they didn't buy a Hummer? *shrug*
I just wonder if people ask themselves these questions, or is it just me?
Maybe I've been spending too much time with young leftists...
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
Because being sat in traffic surrounded in a silent metal box with lots of leather and wood is nicer than sitting in traffic in some st-box?
Why does it have to be a Sh*tbox? Couldn't it be a comfortable turbocharged 4cyl petrol? Or even, dare I say it, an electric car?t-box?MarJay said:
Why does it have to be a Sh*tbox? Couldn't it be a comfortable turbocharged 4cyl petrol? Or even, dare I say it, an electric car?
Perhaps this gets to the nub of things. If you care so little about handling and cornering and maneuverability and response that you want comfort over all of that, why does the car need to be powered by a 6 litre turbocharged V8? Why couldn't you have a 2.5 litre ditchpump? It's hardly going to make a difference in Central London?berlintaxi said:
How much carbon offsetting have you ever funded?
What actions have you taken at your home with regard to renewables?
My pension is partially invested in renewable energy, and my electricity tariff is an entirely renewable one. I don't drive a car into London. I haven't done since about 2005 when I owned a 1.1 Metro. If I had the raw cash to invest in some kind of fund it would also be on a renewable/ethical fund, but instead I'm investing in property. I would like to continue to get the train when I commute but the price is too high. I feel guilty about riding my 800cc bike to be honest, but I'm not going to pay to get a train when I don't even get a seat, it doesn't get me home on time and it costs 4x the cost of riding the bike.What actions have you taken at your home with regard to renewables?
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
More than nice enough for you, and most likely for me too, but if I had lots more money, and I didn't think much about spending that much more on a car, then why wouldn't I get something nicer?
If someone buys a bug house, do you say it's pointless because a smaller one with only an upstairs bathroom is "nice enough"? Or what about if someone buys a king size bed when a double is "nice enough"?
As mentioned - a bed doesn't generate carbon or nitrous oxides or particulates. You can argue the case with a house, but you could also have heat pump style central heating and run the electricity off of renewables.If someone buys a bug house, do you say it's pointless because a smaller one with only an upstairs bathroom is "nice enough"? Or what about if someone buys a king size bed when a double is "nice enough"?
if you're going to drive fast I can see the point of a 6l V8. But if you're going to drive fast, why an SUV Why not something with low weight? If you're going to be stuck in traffic, why do you need a 6.0 V8? Do you need an internal combustion engine at all? Could you live with a Tesla model X? Or Perhaps Bentley will make an electric car with the luxury that people speak of with a Tesla model X style drivetrain?
An Aston Martin Cygnet is more the sort of thing. In fact. I'm surprised they didn't sell better!
If comfort is literally the only justification for having a Bentley, then I'm sure an electric, or range extending hybrid would sell like hot cakes, right?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff