Rolls Royce to produce an SUV - Cullinan

I really like that. Actually looks like the fascia is proportional to the actual front clip.
 
Spy pics of the Cullinan with production body
rolls-royce-cullinan-suv-spy-photos.jpg
rolls-royce-cullinan-suv-spy-photos.jpg
rolls-royce-cullinan-suv-spy-photos.jpg
 
VXR
I've always felt the Range Rover looks like an off-road version of the contemporary Rolls Royce model. This is the logical conclusion.

The Range Royce XXL.
Click to expand...

Especially from the rear it already looked Phantom esque, especially the lights.

2016_land_rover_range_rover_rearview.jpg
 
Actually I don't understand why Rolls doesn't go entirely big with their vehicles. Cars are just not as nice a platform for what a rolls is. You want to be able to get in without having to stoop down or bend down. Your 80 year old gazillionaire wants to be able to sit in it with ease. Also, you'd like to be able to practically conduct a business meeting in the back of one. Larger is better. It's better for potholes, dirt roads, and other rough conditions as well. More is better for throwing parties in it too.

Rolls should be going for something like a low-slung suburban profile. Maybe suicide doors in the back so that you could fit 4 in the back facing each other.
 
Last edited:
Danoff
Actually I don't understand why Rolls doesn't go entirely big with their vehicles. Cars are just as nice a platform for what a rolls is. You want to be able to get in without having to stoop down or bend down. Your 80 year old gazillionaire wants to be able to sit in it with ease. Also, you'd like to be able to practically conduct a business meeting in the back of one. Larger is better. It's better for potholes, dirt roads, and other rough conditions as well. More is better for throwing parties in it too.

Rolls should be going for something like a low-slung suburban profile. Maybe suicide doors in the back so that you could fit 4 in the back facing each other.
Click to expand...

The average Rolls Royce owner is 45, apparently... so ease of access is perhaps not that much of an issue.. though I don't disagree with you, there are elements of what a Rolls Royce should be that are better served by this type of vehicle. I saw it testing in Munich last year alongside the now revealed Phantom, and I have to say, I'm surprised how big the Cullinan isn't compared to the Phantom.
 
It used to be the case that most Rolls owners were old but with wealth boom in the Middle East, Asian, Russian markets the demographic has moved to a much younger one. That's why they came up with the Wraith.
 
Cullinan.jpg


Props to Rolls-Royce, it looks distinctive and the design flows really well. I'd rather have this over a Ghost, or even Phantom.
 
It looks exactly as it's supposed to look but it looks old, in a weird way like an early 00's Rolls Royce.

I think the design is a bit too safe, a bit too literal, looks like it even predates the first BMW era Phantom.
 
Last edited:
MatskiMonk
I think unless I specifically wanted the benefits of this body style, I'd go for a Phantom first, it's on road presence is immense.
Click to expand...

What the Cullinan loses in sheer size (assuming this is shorter than the Phantom) it makes up for in a higher seating position. You can truly feel as though you are looking down at peasants sat inside one. :lol:
 
FT-1
View attachment 735003

Props to Rolls-Royce, it looks distinctive and the design flows really well. I'd rather have this over a Ghost, or even Phantom.
Click to expand...

I love it - the benchmark for this kind of car is how easily you can see it swishing along in a royal convoy. Very easily indeed, a good way to separate the proper toffs from the naff Overfinch crowd.
 
Robin
It looks exactly as it's supposed to look but it looks old, in a weird way like an early 00's Rolls Royce.

I think the design is a bit too safe, a bit too literal, looks like it even predates the first BMW era Phantom.
Click to expand...
You're totally right about this.

It looks exactly like a Rolls Royce SUV should look. From 1995.

I actually *hate* how the front wheels aren't right at the front corners as is tradition. And I hate how the rear doesn't hang far past the wheels as is tradition. And I hate how the rear doesn't taper to a boattail as is tradition. Frankly it looks like a knockoff. It doesn't have those classic Rolls proportions.

They could've done it. Hell, the Lincoln Aviator concept has those classic Rolls proportions, except silky smooth instead of square.
 
Keef
You're totally right about this.

It looks exactly like a Rolls Royce SUV should look. From 1995.

I actually *hate* how the front wheels aren't right at the front corners as is tradition. And I hate how the rear doesn't hang far past the wheels as is tradition. And I hate how the rear doesn't taper to a boattail as is tradition. Frankly it looks like a knockoff. It doesn't have those classic Rolls proportions.

They could've done it. Hell, the Lincoln Aviator concept has those classic Rolls proportions, except silky smooth instead of square.
Click to expand...

It's weird isn't it, its like it's been on the road for decades. Because it looks so much like how you would expect it to look, it doesn't even look new. Personally I wish it had looked like this, a bit more of the modern Rolls Royce.

RR_SUV.jpg


The Lincoln Aviator and Navigator concepts looked great, I just hope they don't suffer the fate the Bentley EXP 9F did (also great looking) when they got scared and reigned it in for the production model.
 
Robin
It's weird isn't it, its like it's been on the road for decades. Because it looks so much like how you would expect it to look, it doesn't even look new. Personally I wish it had looked like this, a bit more of the modern Rolls Royce.

RR_SUV.jpg


The Lincoln Aviator and Navigator concepts looked great, I just hope they don't suffer the fate the Bentley EXP 9F did (also great looking) when they got scared and reigned it in for the production model.
Click to expand...

That is so much more of what an RR SUV should look like.
 
Danoff
Actually I don't understand why Rolls doesn't go entirely big with their vehicles. Cars are just not as nice a platform for what a rolls is. You want to be able to get in without having to stoop down or bend down. Your 80 year old gazillionaire wants to be able to sit in it with ease. Also, you'd like to be able to practically conduct a business meeting in the back of one. Larger is better. It's better for potholes, dirt roads, and other rough conditions as well. More is better for throwing parties in it too.

Rolls should be going for something like a low-slung suburban profile. Maybe suicide doors in the back so that you could fit 4 in the back facing each other.
Click to expand...

Phantoms are absolutely massive, and the hip height is pretty much the same as a mid sized SUV. You don't have to bend to get in to one!!

Not a fan of the Cullinan styling, but I expect it will be a bit outside my budget, so not a problem for me :lol:
 
It's an incredibly safe and dull design isn't it. It suffers, just as the Bentayga does, with trying to be elegant on a shape that doesn't lend itself to being so. A large SUV shape is really like a scaled up hatchback. You can get away with Golf or A3 styling and detailing on a Touareg or Q7 but contemporary RR or Bentley styling just doesn't look suitably elegant when pasted onto that kind of shape.

Porsche had the same issue when they tried to stick bits of 996 onto a Touareg to make the first gen Cayenne, which was a unhappy, badly proportioned design. With the second generation model they learnt from their mistakes and made the 958 design a much more cohesive one. Range Rover manages to make the tall two-box shape pretty elegant, but they've been at it for the best part of 50 years and are not hampered by trying to force a design language onto a fresh shape.
 
I'm most curious to see where it's priced. £280,000 maybe, a small premium over the EWB Ghost? Or maybe £300,000+ to reflect the carry over chassis from the Phantom... It might make sense.. or perhaps they'll go the other way and try and start it around £200,000 to get it closer to some of its rivals?

TheCracker
It suffers, just as the Bentayga does, with trying to be elegant on a shape that doesn't lend itself to being so.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, I don't mind the principle of a Rolls-Royce high sided vehicle, but I don't think styling wise it was ever going to work that well, it's just not a good looking segment overall. I'm sure in a more fitting colour with more flattering photography it will look a bit better.

I disagree with earlier posts that it should have looked anything like any of the earlier renders though, it looks better as it does than as a badly proportion photoshop mash-up.
 
MatskiMonk
I'm most curious to see where it's priced. £280,000 maybe, a small premium over the EWB Ghost? Or maybe £300,000+ to reflect the carry over chassis from the Phantom... It might make sense.. or perhaps they'll go the other way and try and start it around £200,000 to get it closer to some of its rivals?
Click to expand...

I reckon £300k+

I think the Bentley SUV is c.£250k, and I'd expect it to be more expensive.
 
Stotty
I reckon £300k+

I think the Bentley SUV is c.£250k, and I'd expect it to be more expensive.
Click to expand...

The Bentayga is £135-165k. So i bet it will be closer to Ghost pricing as Matski stated. I guess they'll still class the Phantom as their flagship, so it will have to undercut the £300k that it starts from.
 
TheCracker
The Bentayga is £135-165k. So i bet it will be closer to Ghost pricing as Matski stated. I guess they'll still class the Phantom as their flagship, so it will have to undercut the £300k that it starts from.
Click to expand...

I looked at a Bentayga in the Bentley next to OPC Colchester last year... it was registered, and was £200k... must have had some rich options!
 

Latest Posts

Back