REFRESHED: 2013 Rolls Royce Phantom

[Wimbledon]

I prefer the refreshed front end.

The Bentley Mulsanne is much more appealing to me though.

[Impeccable]

I drove the Ghost a couple weeks ago and it was nice but nothing mind-blowing

The ghosts rear end just seems underwhelming

[jrmcm]

Well you must be totally narcoleptic in your cx-9, I seriously doubt you have seen a phantom on the road rolling in real life, nothing about the car is sleepy, it exudes style and presence like no other car in recent memory and it looks much better than any of the RR's since the silver cloud of the 50s and 60s.

It's a grocery getter and people hauler (the CX-9). I can't even begin to fathom why you'd bring it up in relation to my opinion about the Rolls.
And truly, I'm not too interested in what you doubt.

[jrmcm]

Really? I think the Phantom was the model that returned Rolls Royce to its roots. In the 60s they made great cars, but the 80s models were getting pretty lackluster and the 90s were just painfully dull retirement-mobiles. The Phantom was a breath of fresh air and made ultra luxury cool again.

I mean, look at this thing. White wall tires, really? It's like a really expensive Buick Century.

The key word in my post was "vintage". 1992 is not "vintage" (mainly because the assertion makes me feel old).

[jrmcm]

This isn't graceful, it's a vulgar block of granite.

Dead on

[r_fostoria]

The key word in my post was "vintage". 1992 is not "vintage" (mainly because the assertion makes me feel old).

Yeah, I know what you meant. The 50s-60s models were very glamorous. My point was that the 80's and 90's models were alot more boring than the Phantom is.

[TangoRed]

I drove the Ghost a couple weeks ago and it was nice but nothing mind-blowing

Really? I only drove one for about 5mi worth of fairly twisty roads, but it kinda just drive like a torquey, very softly sprung luxury car. It's ride quality was amazing- but that's why I truly enjoyed it more from the back seat. You can control everything from back there anyways.

[TOMPASS]

Almost nothing about that car appeals to me. I don't quite know how to describe it. Just seems... contrived.

Agreed. Fortunately, I can't afford one, so I'm not disappointed.

[MrRoboto]

I saw the series II drophead coupe at the Paris show the other day. Losing the round headlights with the redesigned front end does take away from the car somewhat. In fact, parked beside the Ghost, it definitely looked a lot more pedestrian.

[AKADriver]

The Bentley Mulsanne is a little better, but instead of being vulgar, it's a bit... twee.

It's the same problem Jaguar had for a long time, basically between the '80s and their most recent models. It's trying so hard to be a "proper British motor-car" that it comes off looking like a caricature of Englishness. It's Austin Powers wrapped in Connolly leather.

Don't get me wrong, I can recognize that they're far better as cars, in terms of their function as transportation machines, than the stuff they were making in the '80s and '90s. But there's just no elegance, no grace. They're just trinkets for sheikhs.

[roccostud]

As long as the back seat is comfy i'm in.

[DesiDub]

Phantom Series 2 Promo ft Rihanna's new song

http://vimeo.com/50370478

Kev

[ZackaryMac]

It'd make an "OK" winter-beater.

[Frosty_spl]

Sharp elbows!

[Impeccable]

I saw the series II drophead coupe at the Paris show the other day. Losing the round headlights with the redesigned front end does take away from the car somewhat. In fact, parked beside the Ghost, it definitely looked a lot more pedestrian.

Definitely agree, And the front of the drophead still made go ohhh especially in this video

[20thAna3282]

As long as the back seat is comfy i'm in.

Exactly, a RR is to be the one driven not to be the driver. Any shots of the back seat?

[Chris_V]

"exudes style and presence"... such meaningless words.

It only does that because you know it costs a lot of money. If someone built a $25k car with the exact same body shape, it'd be the dullest, most unimaginative faux-luxury bauble on the planet.

Yes, they're still built well and much by hand and all that's fine. I'm just not impressed with anything beyond that. It looks boring. Not sophisticated; sophistication implies an appreciation for design, a ceertain artfulness and grace. This isn't graceful, it's a vulgar block of granite.

I'm gonna completely disagree with everything you just said. The problem is you come at it from a perpective of a lover of little, light cars. The Rolls is coming at it from a perspective of a lover of classic architecture.

This argument has been comoing from teh sports car crowd against Rolls Royce since at least the '50s when the brits were turning out MG TCs and Jaguar XK 120s, too. And the sport car guys were missing the car's point as much then as you do now. Vulgar? Not a chance. Not every car needs to be a lithe sports car to be a valid automobile, and the Roller is no more vulgar than the Parthenon.

Now, certain owners may indeed BE vulgar, but if we aren't smart enough to separate the car from the occasional owner, then...

[71DubBugBug]

I've seen them before. It puts me to sleep. Exquisite materials packed in a completely unimaginative box which excels at impressing people you don't know.

I know, I know... Here come all of the completely subjective buzzwords that drive people batsh!t crazy, but for me it's true. Vintage Rolls exude style, sophistication, imagination, grace. To me, this is a better equipped and more expensive Camry. An appliance the same, just for the wealthy.

gonna have to agree


they did to the rolls royce what land rover did to the newest range rovers
clarkson mentioned how much bling the threw at it, and with the rolls, they tossed everything they could think of into a box and slapped 4 wheels on to it

am i the only one that thinks the controls for the heat just dont fit in a car that costs as much as a rolls does?

[TangoRed]

am i the only one that thinks the controls for the heat just dont fit in a car that costs as much as a rolls does?

It works when you're actually sitting in the interior. It fits the old school ambiance, even though in a vacuum they may remind you of an 80s Chevy econobox.

[jrmcm]

I'm gonna completely disagree with everything you just said. The problem is you come at it from a perpective of a lover of little, light cars. The Rolls is coming at it from a perspective of a lover of classic architecture.

This argument has been comoing from teh sports car crowd against Rolls Royce since at least the '50s when the brits were turning out MG TCs and Jaguar XK 120s, too. And the sport car guys were missing the car's point as much then as you do now. Vulgar? Not a chance. Not every car needs to be a lithe sports car to be a valid automobile, and the Roller is no more vulgar than the Parthenon.

Now, certain owners may indeed BE vulgar, but if we aren't smart enough to separate the car from the occasional owner, then...

I'm not a lover of little, light cars, and I think the Phantom is vulgar.
So, what's your next argument?

[ValveCoverGasket]

Is this not common? My VW does this. I would think many modern cars do.




- Josh

even the silver shadow seems to do that, though im not so sure that that was on purpose.


id like to drive/ride in one of these some day... they have incredible road presence and im sure the interior is beyond rediculous. though i dont find the exterior styling to be all that interesting, especially the front end...

[Impeccable]

The front looks considerably better. I know not to question the quality of materials in the interior (they're nothing short of exceptional,) but the design still looks like it would be more at home in a truck than the world's foremost luxury car. I suppose the Phantom is as tall as a truck...

This car is meant to be old school traditional in how it goes about luxury its not trying to be latest and greatest tech machine

[Son]

I, too, liked the round lights better. The Phantom looks awesome when going by in London, but the interior just looks cheap to me when compared to a Bentley's.