After launching the company’s first ever pre-owned car program, it appears as though Rolls-Royce is once again trying to make the marque more accessible to potential buyers. Rolls-Royce, which is now owned by BMW, will introduce a new model in 2010 that will be smaller and cheaper than the Phantom, hoping to double world-wide output to 1,600 cars.
According to Automotive News, Rolls-Royce’s new model will be positioned between the BMW 7-series and the Rolls-Royce Phantom. While the platform and engine will be unique to Rolls-Royce, the new car is expect to be around the size of the long-wheelbase 7-series. Rolls-Royce is still deciding on what engine the new car will use but the 6.75 liter V12 seems likely. Prices for the “baby” Phantom are expected to start north of $260,000.
Rolls-Royce is also planning to bow the Phantom coupe in late 2008 or early 2009. The concept version, called the 101EX, made its debut at the 2006 Geneva auto show.
The first 30 Phantom Drophead Coupes are set to be delivered this month, with Rolls-Royce hoping to sell 150-200 of the $412,000 convertibles in the U.S.
Zero obligation price quote from a trusted local dealer.
09/04, 11:10 AM
posted by:
55amg
anything for a rolls
09/04, 11:10 AM
posted by:
Deanster
Oh yes, only $260,000? That’s a LOT more accessible! Thanks RR! Pillowbiting ass-speilunkers.
09/04, 11:31 AM
posted by:
Tree
I’m sorry Rolls-Royce has offended you, Deanster. I’m sure they’ll try to avoid that next time. Idiot.
09/04, 11:44 AM
posted by:
CTS DRIVER
Eat bark tree, $260,000 is by no means a baby anything.
09/04, 11:48 AM
posted by:
RicardoHead
Until RR comes out with a minivan, they will always be a crappy brand.
09/04, 12:49 PM
posted by:
jJayC08
You guys don’t understand, CTS Driver and Deanster. I wouldn’t be suprised if you guys had your heads stuck up your arses, please, what does Rolls Royce come to mind as? They…
Aren’t supposed to be accessable to the general public, it’s not supposed to be a statement of the super rich- it’s supposed to be a statement of the priveledged. Yes, of course it’s a statement of the super rich, don’t get that wrong, but they’re trying to make it a priveledge to own a Rolls Royce, much like Ferrari.
09/04, 12:57 PM
posted by:
AMGoff
sorry… but I don’t think a RR needs to be more accessible to anyone. It’s pointless… anyone who can comfortably afford any car that’s $100,000+ is not the type of buyer looking for the best deal.
09/04, 1:00 PM
posted by:
imageWIS
RR is not an accessible brand, and 1600 cars a year is an utter joke in terms of production when compared to some other brands which make that many cars an hour.
Jon.
09/04, 1:03 PM
posted by:
Italiafan
They’re just trying to make more money, pure and simple. They are trying to snag the high net worth professionals and business owners…rather than just the mega-trust-fund-wealthy.
If you make $500-750K/year and have no other debt then you can now comfortably buy a RR, whereas up in the $mid-300’sK it gets a little dicey.
Just my .02
09/04, 1:05 PM
posted by:
CTS DRIVER
jay it was a problem with the name you wierdo, there is and never will be a baby rr, unless they want to cheapen the brand that is.
09/04, 1:36 PM
posted by:
imageWIS
Um, how can RR cheapen the brand with a $260,000 car if they use to sell the Silver Seraph for $220,000?
Jon.
09/04, 1:57 PM
posted by:
Aston Martin
Anyone can get a Roller. My one, for instance, is worth around 24000 dollars. But even 30 years after it was built, the sense of ultimate quality is still strong. I love my Roller. Everything is hand made, and the beige leather is of absolute premium quality. For travelling in pure peace and class, nothing, NOTHING beats it.
RR ISN’T GOING TO MAKE A CHEAP CAR. THEY JUST WANT MORE PEOPLE TO HAVE ONE. THE PRICE IS STILL BEYOND F43O’S AND DB9′S, BUT THE AMOUNT OF EXECS WHO CAN BUY INTO THIS PRICE BRACKET IS FAR GREATER THAN THE PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD A PHANTOM.
09/04, 2:14 PM
posted by:
LP640
what a load of idiots on this forum
09/04, 2:47 PM
posted by:
jackjimturkey
I rode in a rolls once. It did have the feeling of quality. There were 10 of us packed in there
09/04, 3:13 PM
posted by:
CTS DRIVER
Same was said about the exclusivity of mercedes 20 years ago, dont get me wrong here, RR is as good as anything could ever get by a longshot.
john used to was a long time ago, a testerosa was under a hundred grand 20 years ago also remember
.
.
you guys are too literal sometimes, mine and deans comment was for the lln editors you stupid friggin morons not RR you twatwads, the term baby will never apply to a 2 hundred grand. jeebus f`n christ none of us will ever buy one with so many cars out there that acrually perform.
09/04, 3:55 PM
posted by:
jackjimturkey
someone took off my post praising deantj for his creativity in coming up with new homosexual insults. Are LLn mods “shaftnibblers?”
We’ll see.
Not me, not litearally, but we’ll se
09/04, 5:47 PM
posted by:
Commodore
Just don’t get into the whole SUV bull**** and just trying to expand your lineup with cars that you really shouldn’t be having in your lineup
09/04, 6:13 PM
posted by:
jackjimturkey
Commodore: imagine Rolls’ take on a hummer. 4wd, but your Grey Poupon won’t spill as you travers the wilds of Knightsbridge.
09/04, 7:01 PM
posted by:
CTS DRIVER
hahahahahah lp640 calling anyone an idiot
09/05, 10:01 AM
posted by:
55amg
damn it does aston martin have every damn car in the market?
09/05, 6:37 PM
posted by:
Deanster
Anyone against me is a ****ing knobgobbling ringpiece raider.
I simply thought that 260k for “baby” ROlls sounded like too much. Most personal financial guys will tell you that, if you’re putting 30% of your gross income into housing, you can afford 50k of car for every 100k of income you make annually. So to buy an S600, you should make around 250k. But to afford DOUBLE that, 500k a year.
Lots of restaurant owners and doctors make 250k a year. But 500k? Few and far between