1934 Rolls Royce Phantom II

Post by **TyreFryer** » Wed Nov 19, 08 12:43 pm

This morning I had my first ride in a Rolls Royce...

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Wed Nov 19, 08 12:49 pm

Lucky devil. Not often you get to have a bit of slap n tickle in a roller.

Ivor · Post by **Ivor** » Wed Nov 19, 08 1:04 pm

Not many people know that the Phantom 2 came with a 440 as standard...

Post by **TyreFryer** » Wed Nov 19, 08 1:11 pm

Yeh, but it had two cylinders missing.

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Wed Nov 19, 08 1:21 pm

It certainly is a lovely piece of automobile but I have to say, that colour scheme is ghastly.

latil · Post by **latil** » Wed Nov 19, 08 1:27 pm

So outdated,in it's day that Rolls were importing cars like Packard,Buick,Cord etc just to see where their designs were going wrong.
It's also the design that finished Rolls in the US (Springfield) as the home market buyers could buy a better,faster more reliable home produced vehicle.

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Wed Nov 19, 08 1:32 pm

So how come Rolls is still here and Armstrong Siddley never made it? Their cars were better, more reliable, more modern in design and more luxurious.

I always wonder what happened to alot of the British car brands that used to exist, the good ones seemed to have died out and all that was left was the tat, i.e Austin.

Take Alvis for example, made cars of almost unparalleled quality only to shut up shop for good in the early 60's, surely one of the larger brands would have been better off buying them up than Morris or other brands of equal crapness?

latil · Post by **latil** » Wed Nov 19, 08 1:37 pm

Alvis went all military orientated and sold the car side to Rover,and we all know how that story goes.
Armstrong Siddeley were part of the BSA group wern't they?

Pete · Post by **Pete** » Wed Nov 19, 08 1:41 pm

It's still happening - people buy Kia's, etc, cos they look at the window sticker first, not the NCAP ratings, etc.

Having a technically great product is not always a precursor to success in business.

If the whole package is not there: price, perceived value/kudos, reliability, etc then it may not work.

In short, crap sells if it is well-priced and well-marketed crap.....

Ivor · Post by **Ivor** » Wed Nov 19, 08 2:32 pm

Dead right Pete, it's a marketing thing and together with that, perceived value or kudos, that's why the German's paid huge amounts for the Rolls Royce and Bentley brands.

I refute Jame's quote that Austin's were "tat" far from it my boy, the quality of Birmal castings and the steels used in Austin construction was the finest available and that quality lives on today.

It was also a fact that Austin workers at the same time as that Rolls Royce was made, were skilled craftsmen too...there are unrestored Austins of all sizes, sevens to twenties still around today that are running regularly and reliably without even having been subject to more than regular servicing.

Tat James? I think not.

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Wed Nov 19, 08 2:38 pm

They don't teach that on any course Ivor.

Reading before leading?

Only Joking

Pete · Post by **Pete** » Wed Nov 19, 08 2:39 pm

Oh, I forgot the Crewe posse drive kraut-mobiles

Post by **TyreFryer** » Wed Nov 19, 08 2:52 pm

My Dad's Dad was a Chauffer pre-war, my Dad has told me how when he was 7 he used to be sent under the Rolls on a Sunday to spray it with oil. They switched from Rolls Royce to Packard and my Grandad preffered them, he said they needed less maintenance and were more reliable.

When Packard started manufacturing the Merlin during the war they asked Rolls for manufacturing tolerances. They were told by Rolls that there weren't any as everything was hand finished. Packard changed this to achieve production numbers and also reduced the number of parts required in the engine.

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Wed Nov 19, 08 4:22 pm

Ivor wrote:Tat James? I think not.

Ok Ivor I'll give you the 7's, 8's and 10's, but by the time we see the Nuffield merger, it is pretty much tat. A30, how can that possibly be described as a quality, precision engineered vehicle? Not even in the same continent as something like an Alvis or a Facel, let alone the same region. Alvis made military vehicles right through the war period (just like Humber) but the Hollyhead road factory was completely destroyed by bombing, I guess that sort of damage was always going to be difficult to fully recover from.

Little known fact: Singer was the 3rd largest manufacturer of cars in 1928 (after Austin and Morris). Seems almost impossible when we look back at the waning years of the brand.

I guess all those early manufacturers chased the dream of quality and thus when the car became popular only those who could adapt to volume were going to survive. It is a shame though that the prestigious brands of the early days were lost. Much like Duesenberg over here.

Stu · Post by **Stu** » Wed Nov 19, 08 4:28 pm

So did you enjoy your ride then, Martin?