Discussion
Continental GT Speed
On August 1, 2007, Bentley released details of a more powerful GT. Power is increased to 603 bhp/449kW (610 PS), with a top speed of 202 mph (325 km/h) and a 0-60 mph time of 4.3 seconds. The Continental's weight is also reduced by 35 kg (77 lb). The Continental GT Speed is the first production Bentley officially capable of reaching 202 mph (320 km/h).
I wouldnt have thought there are that many made yet as they havent been out that long.
On August 1, 2007, Bentley released details of a more powerful GT. Power is increased to 603 bhp/449kW (610 PS), with a top speed of 202 mph (325 km/h) and a 0-60 mph time of 4.3 seconds. The Continental's weight is also reduced by 35 kg (77 lb). The Continental GT Speed is the first production Bentley officially capable of reaching 202 mph (320 km/h).
I wouldnt have thought there are that many made yet as they havent been out that long.
Vixpy1 said:
No matter how much power or bling they put on the GT, its always going to be a Phaeton 
Not sure I agree, really. 
I test-drove the Continental GT Speed a few days ago and it is a mindblowing car.
To begin with, the interior is absolutely fantastic - almost without par at any cost. The car looks beautiful too; though that, of course, is subjective.
What is entirely beyond reproach is the way this thing GOES! The first time I applied 3/4 pressure on the loud pedal (on the Park Lane U-turn) I uttered a loud expletive and backed off, so intensely unexpected was the thrust. This thing weighs 2.3 tons; 600 bhp / AWD chassis and not a hint of protest from the tires. Just go, go, go, faster and faster...
What is slightly tiring is the delicate accelerator pedal; you have to keep your foot very light on it because any pressure is immediately translated to exponentially more forward motion, making it slightly less friendly than the standard Conti.
All in all, I intend to put my money where my mouth is and will not feel short-changed. Unlike stepping into a DB9 and being surrounded by dismayingly Ford build-quality...
magic_marker said:
Vixpy1 said:
No matter how much power or bling they put on the GT, its always going to be a Phaeton
Not sure I agree, really. I test-drove the Continental GT Speed a few days ago and it is a mindblowing car.
To begin with, the interior is absolutely fantastic - almost without par at any cost. The car looks beautiful too; though that, of course, is subjective.
What is entirely beyond reproach is the way this thing GOES! The first time I applied 3/4 pressure on the loud pedal (on the Park Lane U-turn) I uttered a loud expletive and backed off, so intensely unexpected was the thrust. This thing weighs 2.3 tons; 600 bhp / AWD chassis and not a hint of protest from the tires. Just go, go, go, faster and faster...
What is slightly tiring is the delicate accelerator pedal; you have to keep your foot very light on it because any pressure is immediately translated to exponentially more forward motion, making it slightly less friendly than the standard Conti.
All in all, I intend to put my money where my mouth is and will not feel short-changed. Unlike stepping into a DB9 and being surrounded by dismayingly Ford build-quality...
Vixpy1 said:
Oh i don't deny the engineering, the way it drives or the interior. They are from all reports fantastic. However its based on a german car and has a german engine, therefore IMHO it is not a proper Bentley and i could never bring myself to drive something which says Bentley on the front... and yet is'nt.
You get this stuff on Aston Forums too - that the DB9 is really a Ford, that the Vanquish arrived in crates from Germany etc etc Nearly always from people who couldn't afford a new Vanquish but of course who drove 'proper' Astons which were worth about 12p. The Bentley GT is, of course, a Bentley. It's a fantastic car and has one of the best cabins in the business. I had a the convertible GT and have a deposit on a new GT Speed Convertible - it's a great car and testament to the terrific build skills at Crewe where it is made. I have pottered along in the south of France in mine and wouldn't have traded the experience for any other car.
Other Bentleys in the range are giants of the road - too big to enjoy for me. I like the Brooklands, but it's just too large - the GT is a great compromise.
NDA said:
The Bentley GT is, of course, a Bentley.
No it's not. NDA said:
Other Bentleys in the range are...
...not Bentleys either, they are Rolls Royces, just like my old Turbo R.There are currently six models in the Bentley range, three of them are Rolls Royces, and three of them are VAG's.
Why do folks have such a problem with that?
It's not a problem, more a source of amusement to observe the determination by some to say that something's not what it patently is.
Dozens of brands change ownership - they are still the brand.
I'm sure the boys and girls working at Bentley would say that their cars are Bentleys - in fact I know they do. As Lambo would say they're not Audi and so on.
We did all this a while back and it would seem there is only 'one' Bentley, it was made in 1931 and has the chassis number YR5076.
Yawn!
NDA said:
it would seem there is only 'one' Bentley, it was made in 1931 and has the chassis number YR5076.
Well, certainly one of the very last Bentleys anyway, an 8 litre, belonging to a Mr Xxxxxx, of Hong Kong, according to the latest members list.
Edited by Balmoral Green on Wednesday 21st May 20:35
Vixpy1 said:
magic_marker said:
Vixpy1 said:
No matter how much power or bling they put on the GT, its always going to be a Phaeton
Not sure I agree, really. I test-drove the Continental GT Speed a few days ago and it is a mindblowing car.
Is Ferrari still Ferrari? Is Aston still Aston since Ford sold out, or since Victor Gauntlett sold out, or since they went tits up in '74, or since David Brown sold out, or maybe since AC Bertelli sold up or maybe since Lionel Martin went his separate way? You could go down the same route with every car maker on earth. Things change but marques remain, and are sometimes better for the change.
These cars are built in Crewe by people who are more immersed in the tradition of Bentley (and Rolls Royce) production than anyone. Its Bentley enough for me boy, however many footballers buy them, my only problem is not having enough to buy one. Thank goodness the Krauts are in charge, now the company is being run professionally.
Edited by cardigankid on Thursday 22 May 18:09
cardigankid said:
Not sure how I made a cock of that, but you get the idea I am sure.
You can always go back and edit it again you know Anyway, another broadside...
If your ex-missus has kids with her new partner, and you accept them into your greater family with open arms, then fair enough, that's all well and good. But when a mate points out that they're not actually yours, to go into complete denial, and insist that they are yours, is plainly bonkers, especially if the kids are clearly of mixed race.
It is apparent that most Rolls Royce/Bentley enthusiasts, and many Continental GT owners are the former, but some are clearly the latter, and will argue against anyone who states the bleedin' obvious. It displays a level of ignorance about their own car, and the marque in general, that I find utterley bemusing! Having a discussion with one of these VAG deniers is like wrestling with fog, why can't they just accept the car for what it is?
If you think folks who say "It's not a Bentley" are tiresome, I can tell you that they aint half as tiresome as folks who say "I'm sick of people saying it's not a Bentley".
'It is built on a shared VAG W12 platform and not a Rolls Royce platform', that's a statement of pure cold hard fact, not a point of view, and nothing to do whatsoever with denigrating the car in any way or form. But whenever anyone mentions it, they get jumped on.
Why on earth can't folks just accept that simple truth and move on, it's not hard to grasp at all, so why the constant denial? The car is fantastic, and it's probably saved the company.
Your missing my point cardigan kid, I'd still have an Arnage, or any other car in the range, I have no problem with it being german owned, or even german switch gear, My problem with the GT is its essentially a german saloon car with a different body (A not spankingly beutiful one either). For 120K, i don't want a glorified Phaeton! Its badge engineering/marketing exercise at its worse.
The Aston/Ferrari point is irrelevent, they may raid the parent companies parts bins (have been for years) but each car has a bespoke chassis.
The Aston/Ferrari point is irrelevent, they may raid the parent companies parts bins (have been for years) but each car has a bespoke chassis.
Edited by Vixpy1 on Thursday 22 May 18:35
Just to clear this up, once and for all...
WO Bentleys: 1919-1931
Rolls Royce Derby Bentleys: 1933-1940
Rolls Royce Crewe Bentleys: 1946-present day
VAG Crewe Bentleys: 2003-present day
As I said earlier, the current model range comprises of six cars, three are Rolls Royces, and three are VAG's. If you don't accept that, and insist that all six are Rolls Royces, then you will probably argue that black is white and that a Matiz is a real Chevy.
WO Bentleys: 1919-1931
Rolls Royce Derby Bentleys: 1933-1940
Rolls Royce Crewe Bentleys: 1946-present day
VAG Crewe Bentleys: 2003-present day
As I said earlier, the current model range comprises of six cars, three are Rolls Royces, and three are VAG's. If you don't accept that, and insist that all six are Rolls Royces, then you will probably argue that black is white and that a Matiz is a real Chevy.
That I can accept.
I wholeheartedly accept that 'WO' Bentleys are different from Derby Bentleys which are different again from the Mark VI to the S-Type. T/Shadows are just about as different again, as are the cars produced under VW ownership. And although the Arnage is basically developed from the Silver Seraph I admire them enormously and a current Arnage T is just about as Bentley as Bentley can be. I'm not trying to deny all this, I'm just taking issue with the statement that they are not Bentleys. They are, as you say, a different kind of Bentley. The current kind of Aston is a different kind of Aston from a DB5, but if you offer me a 1964 DB5 or a 2008 DBS, financial issues aside, I'm going to take the DBS.
I genuinely didn't know that the Continental is based on a Phaeton chassis, but even then, to me that doesn't make it a Phaeton, though the cars may be closely related. Noone could see the effort that goes into the production of these cars and question that difference, I suggest. You get into it, drive it, like some of the posters have, and see what you think. I haven't had that privilege, but it sounds like a Bentley kind of experience to me. Then again, the DB7 was based on the XJS, a car I wouldn't use as landfill, but it was still an Aston, was it not? And its success led to the Astons we have today.
Where I really have to take issue with you however is the suggestion that the GT is fugly. On the contrary I think it is one of the most elegant pieces of car design I have seen, modern, yet understated and with a host of key Bentley 'cues' as they call them. They talk bulls
t, but boy they can do the job, people like Callum and Van Braekel. This does not make them 'retro', if that expression is pejorative. Attempts to be totally different and modern. for its own sake, just tend to result in plugs, like, I would suggest, the Aston Martin V8 Zagatos, which looked like something Reliant might have come up with on a bad day.
Are we in agreement then and can we just order our Bentleys now?
I wholeheartedly accept that 'WO' Bentleys are different from Derby Bentleys which are different again from the Mark VI to the S-Type. T/Shadows are just about as different again, as are the cars produced under VW ownership. And although the Arnage is basically developed from the Silver Seraph I admire them enormously and a current Arnage T is just about as Bentley as Bentley can be. I'm not trying to deny all this, I'm just taking issue with the statement that they are not Bentleys. They are, as you say, a different kind of Bentley. The current kind of Aston is a different kind of Aston from a DB5, but if you offer me a 1964 DB5 or a 2008 DBS, financial issues aside, I'm going to take the DBS.
I genuinely didn't know that the Continental is based on a Phaeton chassis, but even then, to me that doesn't make it a Phaeton, though the cars may be closely related. Noone could see the effort that goes into the production of these cars and question that difference, I suggest. You get into it, drive it, like some of the posters have, and see what you think. I haven't had that privilege, but it sounds like a Bentley kind of experience to me. Then again, the DB7 was based on the XJS, a car I wouldn't use as landfill, but it was still an Aston, was it not? And its success led to the Astons we have today.
Where I really have to take issue with you however is the suggestion that the GT is fugly. On the contrary I think it is one of the most elegant pieces of car design I have seen, modern, yet understated and with a host of key Bentley 'cues' as they call them. They talk bulls
t, but boy they can do the job, people like Callum and Van Braekel. This does not make them 'retro', if that expression is pejorative. Attempts to be totally different and modern. for its own sake, just tend to result in plugs, like, I would suggest, the Aston Martin V8 Zagatos, which looked like something Reliant might have come up with on a bad day.Are we in agreement then and can we just order our Bentleys now?
I had a Bentley MKVI, lovely car it was, but I knew full well that it was just a Rolls Royce Silver Dawn with twin carbs, and not a proper Bentley, or was the Rolls Royce Silver Dawn just a Bentley MKVI with a single carb', and not a proper Rolls Royce? 
Anyway, if anyone told me my Skoda Fabia (also designed by DVB) was a VW Polo under the skin, I wouldn't deny it, i'd just say "Yeah, I know".
Anyway, if anyone told me my Skoda Fabia (also designed by DVB) was a VW Polo under the skin, I wouldn't deny it, i'd just say "Yeah, I know".
Edited by Balmoral Green on Thursday 22 May 20:07
Based on the information here, many owners should now be armed with enough detail to sue Bentley under either the laws of 'passing off' or some of the misrepresentation laws.
The people that work at Bentley say it's a Bentley (even their pay-checks are marked Bentley Motors), the people who sell them say they're Bentleys, the owners feel sure they're Bentleys too, the engines say Bentley on them, even the paperwork from the DVLA said it was a Bentley.
But all this while they're really VW's.
I should have checked here first before buying one.
My mate with a DB7 will now be really pissed off to find he's been driving a Jaguar all this while - actually a Ford really.
Just shows you how we've all been conned.
Thank God for PH.
I won't buy that other Breguet watch now, it's actually really a Swatch.
Gassing Station | Bentley & Rolls Royce | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff