2008 Bentley Continental GT Speed

[JYODER240]

Your logic is always as bogus as your outright claims .

Show us one of the cars that you mentioned below that is a true GT coupe with back seats as roomy as Bentley GT coupe. The Ford GT, F430, Gallardo you mentioned are two seater sports cars that have no back seats genius they are not true coupes so comparing them to Bentley GT is sort of moronic. The ditto goes for DB9 or Porsche 911 Turbo the back seats are almost non existant. Atleast compare oranges to oranges and not apples to oranges.

Have you driven a Bentley GT I doubt you have to make such comments that it is not an involving car. It offers very decent performance in its class and most of the cars you mentioned below are also bought for outright prestige and maybe only 1%-2% owners of F430's, GT40, Gallardo, 911 turbo or DB9 buy them to track them. Most of them are driven arround town or back and forth to country clubs. I have always found your logic to be flawed much like your statement that lower profile tires are not good

Yes, it's the rear seat room that keeps them from being non-competitive. Show me where I said the Continental GT was not an involving car? I said it's not as good as its competition. I never said low profile tires were bad either, they have their pros and cons. I said that bigger wheels are worse for performance.

Care to make anything else up?

[oilfilter]

Hmmm. You're the first person I've heard call it ugly.

WTF! I am the original Continental GT hata'. Yet, Raza gets all the credit. WTF! WTF!?

[the Teuton]

You's all hatas, mang.  I likes me dem Bentleys wit dem dub-deuces.  You gets to roll round like it's yo' birfday.  It's da blang thang!

It be da hunchback of motor blang, fo sho.

[LonghornTX]

A lot of people want to claim to be enthusiasts today, but all I see is a bunch of close minded posts....

I like this car a lot and can appreciate it for what it is, not what some people want to try and make it.  There is no other 2+2 GT car that I would want to take cross country.  The CL65 has no where near the emotional appeal to me, the Ferrari is ugly as sin to me and is currently the worst Ferrari design on the market (IMO), and the DB9 might be a little to stiff for me long distance.

Not a car I would realistically buy, unless I had a collection of say....5 cars. I would probably have something like the GT for times when I wanted to relax.

[the Teuton]

+1

What is its range on the highway, though?

[omicron]

See, if I'm going on a long highway cruise, or wafting from one country club to the other, I'm taking this:

[TheIntrepid]

Don't hold back on our account.

I heartily disagree with your stance, however, and I wouldn't kick one out of the driveway. I'd drive the snot out of it. I absolutely love the Bentley Conti GT and have since it first came out.

+++++++

It's a beauty, and Chris put it right in saying it's just a gentleman's cruiser. Same with the MB CL.

[BimmerM3]

A lot of people want to claim to be enthusiasts today, but all I see is a bunch of close minded posts....

I like this car a lot and can appreciate it for what it is, not what some people want to try and make it.  There is no other 2+2 GT car that I would want to take cross country.  The CL65 has no where near the emotional appeal to me, the Ferrari is ugly as sin to me and is currently the worst Ferrari design on the market (IMO), and the DB9 might be a little to stiff for me long distance.

Not a car I would realistically buy, unless I had a collection of say....5 cars. I would probably have something like the GT for times when I wanted to relax.

+1, and while I personally am a fan of the 612 Scag, it's nearly 100k more expensive. It's not like just because people are buying these cars doesn't mean they wouldn't rather spend less. Many rich people got that way by investing well.

Conclusion: Conti GT FTW.

[BimmerM3]

+1

What is its range on the highway, though?

According to Edmunds, 452.2 miles from a 23.8 gallon tank.

[1 BAD 7]

Are you serious with your lame sarcasim about rear seats .

Why dont you tell us that out of the cars you mentioned F430, Lambo, 911 turbo, GT40, and DB9 which car comes even close enough to providing the pure luxury that Bentley offers compared to them. One has to be quiet ignorant to compare those cars to begin with as they are in different class and are not Bentley direct competition. The Bentley is far more luxurious then any of the above you had mentioned. So the day the above mentioned cars by you offer as much luxury as the Bentley that day you can compare them directly and see how much more involving they will be compared to it. Any one can tell that the luxury and sports dont go hand in hand. I think for the amount of luxury Bentley offers it is seriuosly fast and pretty capable and to compare far more sporty machines with half the luxury is not fair by any stretch of imagination.

As for your comment that lower profile are not bad and have positives and negatives...... good that you finally admitted that you were wrong.

But you are still being stubborn about the fact that not all bigger wheels are bad as you can have many smaller wheels that can weigh a lot more then some of the bigger wheels. So there are positives and negatives there too just like I have been trying to explain to you for last few months. Atleast you are half way there since you accepted that lower profiles have positives and negatives.

Yes, it's the rear seat room that keeps them from being non-competitive. Show me where I said the Continental GT was not an involving car? I said it's not as good as its competition. I never said low profile tires were bad either, they have their pros and cons. I said that bigger wheels are worse for performance.

Care to make anything else up?

[Eye of the Tiger]

Shut the fuck up. All other things being equal, smaller wheels will always have lower rotational inertia than your ridiculous, unnecessarily giant bling bling badonkadonk rimz. Shut the fuck up you idiot.

[565]

Yes, and I think that cars like the CL65, DB9, and 612 Scag. are better choices.

Speaking of which, check out this Edmunds comparo.?

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=121870

Conti GT vs CL600

Cl600 wins.


CL600 performance numbers.

0 - 30 (sec): 1.7
0 - 45 (sec): 2.7
0 - 60 (sec): 4.2
0 - 75 (sec): 5.9
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 12.4 @ 113.4
30 - 0 (ft): 28
60 - 0 (ft): 114
Braking Rating: (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor) Excellent
Slalom (mph): 67.8
Skid Pad (g-force): 0.85
Handling Rating: (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor) Excellent
Db @ Idle: 43
Db @ Full Throttle: 70.5
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 64

Bentley Conti GT numbers

0 - 30 (sec): 1.5
0 - 45 (sec): 2.9
0 - 60 (sec): 4.4
0 - 75 (sec): 6.7
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 12.8 @ 108.3
30 - 0 (ft): 29
60 - 0 (ft): 120
Braking Rating: (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor) Good
Slalom (mph): 64.3
Skid Pad (g-force): 0.81
Handling Rating: (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor) Very good
Db @ Idle: 50.4
Db @ Full Throttle: 72.4
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 65.5


So the CL600 manages to be faster, handle better, and also is more quiet.

And it seems more pleasurable to drive as well

"Driving the Point
When it comes to actually driving these cars, this becomes a battle fought in degrees of wonderfulness. The 12-cylinder engines in both cars deliver huge amounts of power in seamless ribbons; both cars have brakes that could stop a stock market crash and their suspensions absolutely smother broken pavement.

Although the Mercedes' oversize steering wheel takes some adjustment, the steering itself has a preferably lighter feel and offers better feedback than the Bentley's. The Mercedes Active Body Control suspension system is an incredibly complex hydraulic system with sensors that lower ride height at speed and continually adjusts for pitch, squat, dive and probably for the driver's bunions ? but it all happens without the driver feeling as if the car is doing the driving. And the Mercedes always seems to corner flat, where the Bentley has at least some body roll.

There's nothing wrong with the Bentley, but it's not as right as the Mercedes. Besides being quicker, the CL600 stops and handles better than the Bentley. Despite the Continental's massive 20-inch Pirelli tires and ceramic brakes (also part of that Diamond Series package), the CL600 takes 6 feet less (114-120 feet) to stop from 60 mph and it orbits the skid pad at 0.85g vs. 0.81g for the Bentley. With its huge 12-cylinder engine mounted essentially ahead of its front tires, the Bentley understeers more than the Mercedes, and that better balance got the big Benz through the slalom course at a quick 67.8 mph, more than 3 mph faster than the heavier Bentley could manage.

Even the CL600's crummy 15.3 mpg Inside Line-observed fuel economy is better than the Continental GT's truly awful 13.1 mpg."

[the Teuton]

20" rims on the tester and 6 ft. longer to stop?  Any correlation?

[Soup DeVille]

20" rims on the tester and 6 ft. longer to stop?? Any correlation?

Not enough to draw any real comclusions from.

[565]

Not enough to draw any real comclusions from.

Probably because the Bentley was heavy even compared to the already heavy CL600.? Not even huge ceramic brakes could save it.



Those 20 inch wheels and ceramic brakes are part of a diamond package that costs 20K!

These ceramic mofos are 16.53 inches front, 14 inches rear, with 8 pistons all around.? The standard brakes of the Conti GT were already supposedly the largest brakes on a production car.? These new ceramic brakes are even bigger.

"The Continental GT and GT Speed are both equipped with the largest brakes of any
production passenger car on sale today. The ventilated front discs have a 405mm
diameter and are 36mm thick. Ventilated discs are also used at the back, with a diameter
of 335mm and a thickness of 22mm.

For both models, the performance boundaries are further extended by Bentley?s
optional carbon/silicon carbide brake system. Boasting 420 x 40mm carbon-silicon
carbide, cross-drilled front discs and 356 x 28mm rears, with eight-piston callipers, the
new brakes are even larger than the standard system. The system provides a 20kg
reduction in rotating and unsprung mass, benefiting steering response and handling.
The lightweight, fade-resistant braking system minimises disc distortion under high
thermal conditions. Under normal driving conditions the brake discs will last the lifetime
of the car. Furthermore, brake pad life is doubled compared with the standard braking
system."

[the Teuton]

For $20k, there better be some real diamonds somewhere in there.

[JYODER240]

Speaking of which, check out this Edmunds comparo.?

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=121870

Conti GT vs CL600

Cl600 wins.

I hate do this magazine thing but here's another:

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/8303/2005-aston-martin-db9-v-2005-bentley-continental-gt-v-2005-ferrari-612-scaglietti-f1-v-2005-mercedes-benz-cl600.html

1st: Ferrari 612
2nd: MB CL
3rd: DB9
4th: Continental GT

[Eye of the Tiger]

I hate do this magazine thing but here's another:

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/8303/2005-aston-martin-db9-v-2005-bentley-continental-gt-v-2005-ferrari-612-scaglietti-f1-v-2005-mercedes-benz-cl600.html

1st: Ferrari 612
2nd: MB CL
3rd: DB9
4th: Continental GT

2005 Bentley Continental GT

Highs: Stylish inside and out, skilled-craftsman build quality, roomy trunk.

Lows: Ponderous and overweight, cramped rear headroom, pillbox visibility fore-and-aft.

The Verdict: A whale of a car, just not a whale of fun.


HA!!!! HA!!!!! HA!!!!?

[JYODER240]

Are you serious with your lame sarcasim about rear seats .

Why dont you tell us that out of the cars you mentioned F430, Lambo, 911 turbo, GT40, and DB9 which car comes even close enough to providing the pure luxury that Bentley offers compared to them. One has to be quiet ignorant to compare those cars to begin with as they are in different class and are not Bentley direct competition. The Bentley is far more luxurious then any of the above you had mentioned. So the day the above mentioned cars by you offer as much luxury as the Bentley that day you can compare them directly and see how much more involving they will be compared to it. Any one can tell that the luxury and sports dont go hand in hand. I think for the amount of luxury Bentley offers it is seriuosly fast and pretty capable and to compare far more sporty machines with half the luxury is not fair by any stretch of imagination.

As for your comment that lower profile are not bad and have positives and negatives...... good that you finally admitted that you were wrong.

But you are still being stubborn about the fact that not all bigger wheels are bad as you can have many smaller wheels that can weigh a lot more then some of the bigger wheels. So there are positives and negatives there too just like I have been trying to explain to you for last few months. Atleast you are half way there since you accepted that lower profiles have positives and negatives.

Your posts aren't even worth resonding to anymore.

[JYODER240]

2005 Bentley Continental GT

Highs: Stylish inside and out, skilled-craftsman build quality, roomy trunk.

Lows: Ponderous and overweight, cramped rear headroom, pillbox visibility fore-and-aft.

The Verdict: A whale of a car, just not a whale of fun.


HA!!!! HA!!!!! HA!!!!?

But it's better because it's more luxurious!

[Eye of the Tiger]

But it's better because it's more luxurious!

If all I cared about was luxury, I wouldn't drive myself. I'd take one of these:

[omicron]

Whatever one thinks of the Bentley Continental GT, it remains a fantastic business decision by Bentley management.

[Raza]

Whatever one thinks of the Bentley Continental GT, it remains a fantastic business decision by Bentley Volkswagen management.

I agree.

[omicron]

I agree.

Churchill is turning in his grave.

[Tave]

But it's better because it's more luxurious!

*sigh* I'd like to draw your attention to a comment in the Edmunds review:

When it comes to actually driving these cars, this becomes a battle fought in degrees of wonderfulness. The 12-cylinder engines in both cars deliver huge amounts of power in seamless ribbons; both cars have brakes that could stop a stock market crash and their suspensions absolutely smother broken pavement.

Sounds to me like they enjoyed both. I think the cars have different focuses, is all. The Bentley may be automotive perfection for the more reserved driver, while the Scag or Merc may do the same for someone who expects a little more sport in their GT. What's wrong with that?


I constantly favor Astons in comparison tests, even if they don't offer the statistical performance of the competition.


And really, some of that data is too close not to matter. 6 ft. further braking from 60? That's within 5%.

[JYODER240]

*sigh* I'd like to draw your attention to a comment in the Edmunds review:

Sounds to me like they enjoyed both. I think the cars have different focuses, is all. The Bentley may be automotive perfection for the more reserved driver, while the Scag or Merc may do the same for someone who expects a little more sport in their GT. What's wrong with that?


I constantly favor Astons in comparison tests, even if they don't offer the statistical performance of the competition.


And really, some of that data is too close not to matter. 6 ft. further braking from 60? That's within 5%.

I guess the LS460 is better than the competition too. Afterall it offers just as much luxury if not more than the competition for less money. It must be automotive perfection for the reserved driver

All I ever said is that there are better cars for the money. Sorry if you disagree with that.

[Raza]

Churchill is turning in his grave.

As long as he's not turning in mine. 

[Submariner]

fixed

[Submariner]

Very true that pure sports cars by strict definitions are two-seat open cars that can be raced. But as far as Bentley vs F430, Gallardo, GT40 goes they are in totaly different class of cars. One is a coupe that can easily seat four while others are 2 seaters. It is like comparing S2000 to G35 coupe two different class of cars.

As for DB9 it has rear seats but the Bentley is better and less cramped in rear seats the roof is only issue as it slopes down. But good luck trying to get in the back seats of DB9. Dont get me wrong I love DB9 but its rear seats are useless.

Infact here is quote from C/D regarding DB9 "The DB9 has nicely shaped rear seats, but no adult would want to go there."

I've sat in the back of one.  It wouldn't be my first choice, but I could live with it.

[AltinD]

If all I cared about was luxury, I wouldn't drive myself. I'd take one of these: