Bentley Turbo R - length / weight ?

[roygarth]

What is length and weight of short and long wheelbase models?

Thanks in advance!

[neilsfishing]

1985-1992 Turbo RL: 5,379 mm (211.8 in)
1993-94 Turbo R: 5,369 mm (211.4 in)

Kerb weight 2,390 kg (5,300 lb)

Wheelbase 1985-1994 R: 3,061 mm (120.5 in)
1985-1994 RL & 1995-97 R: 3,161 mm (124.4 in)

[roygarth]

neilsfishing said:

1985-1992 Turbo RL: 5,379 mm (211.8 in)
1993-94 Turbo R: 5,369 mm (211.4 in)

Kerb weight 2,390 kg (5,300 lb)

Wheelbase 1985-1994 R: 3,061 mm (120.5 in)
1985-1994 RL & 1995-97 R: 3,161 mm (124.4 in)

Thanks but i'm confused!

The 1996 Turbo R I've looked at had much less rear leg room than the Turbo RT I looked at...and pictures of cars in calssified seem to show differing length rear doors on 95-97 Turbo R's...so is it the case that 95-97 there was short and long wheelbase?

[Scotty2]

Yup,

There's the R and RL (L for long wheelbase).

[CONTI T]

well you confused me
how can turbo rl.s be different lengths in the same yrs and a turbo r longer than an rl in some yrs....

[Balmoral Green]

There's the actual body shell, in regular or long, which was the same for all years, but then you have different bumpers front & rear depending upon the year, which made a difference to overall length.

I think?

[buyer&seller]

CONTI T said:

well you confused me
how can turbo rl.s be different lengths in the same yrs and a turbo r longer than an rl in some yrs....

The 1997 model year car, introduced in late 1996 are, in comparison to previous years, long wheel base. That's an extra four inches in the length of the rear door, and so was the 1998 model car the RT. Previous to this the car was offered in the standard wheel base or as a cost option of a long wheel base. The reason the 1997 cars became LWB was to use up the bodyshells in stock in the lead up to the introduction of the Arnage, it is a similar story with Rolls-Royce with the replacement of the Spirit with the Dawn.

I hope that's clear.........

[Balmoral Green]

[quote=buyer&seller]I hope that's clear.
[/quote]

Thanks.

IIRC, the Rolls Royces are shorter o/a than the Bentleys, regular or long, because their front bumpers are straight, to go parallel across the RR radiator grille, whereas the Bentley grille is rounded and protrudes out further in the nose, so the front bumpers are curved making the Bentley variants a few inches longer than the RR.

Edited by Balmoral Green on Tuesday 27th September 20:18

[buyer&seller]

Balmoral Green said:

Thanks.

IIRC, the Rolls Royces are shorter o/a than the Bentleys, regular or long, because their front bumpers are straight, to go parallel across the RR radiator grille, whereas the Bentley grille is rounded and protrudes out further in the nose, so the front bumpers are curved making the Bentley variants a few inches longer than the RR.

Edited by Balmoral Green on Tuesday 27th September 20:18

Mmmmmm I've never heard that before, you've got me thinking, I'll have a look tomorrow.