Rolls-Royce vs. Maybach Review

[FISH]

http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/22/Auto...ybach/?cnn=yes

We test two top luxury cruisers to see which you'd want to buy. Almost as if you could afford it.

By Peter Valdes-Dapena,
March 25, 2006: 11:49 PM EST


MONTVALE, NJ (CNNMoney.com) - You may never have the opportunity to peel out and smoke the rear tires on a $350,000 Rolls Royce Phantom, but if you ever get the chance, here's how.

First, you open the center console. Inside, there are a lot of switches, one of which you can use to turn off the car's electronic traction control. Then you press a round silver button on the steering wheel, the button with the letter "L" on it. That sets the Phantom's six-speed transmission so that it will start in first gear rather than second.

Now stomp on it.

There it is! The back end drifting to the side, noise, the smell of burning rubber, the whole deal.

OK, that was fun. But it's a bit like belching in a cathedral so you can hear the echo, isn't it? Kind of funny but... please.

The Rolls-Royce Phantom does invite that sort of treatment, though, because it is an icon of tradition, wealth and prestige. And who doesn't want to mock that?

That very iconic status creates a marketing opportunity for Rolls-Royce's major competitor, DaimlerChrysler's Maybach. After all, not everyone with a morbidly large bank account wants to rub it in the faces of the plebes. The Maybach offers an understated alternative that lacks the well-known history, but also the baggage, of Rolls-Royce.

I recently had the opportunity to travel right into the middle of this polite but nasty little war. I spent several hours driving a top-notch example of each company's product. I took the wheel of a Rolls-Royce Phantom in the morning, then a Maybach 57S after lunch.

These are the sorts of difficult decisions that extremely wealthy people have to pay other people to make for them every day. I've been there and I feel for them.

Rolls-Royce Phantom

Rolls-Royce hasn't always made truly great cars. For long periods in its history, the company made merely expensive ones. Upon taking over the brand in 1998, BMW wanted to reach back -- quite far back, actually -- and make the sort of car that made Rolls-Royce famous.

It seems to me like they pretty much nailed it. The Phantom does that thing that a Rolls-Royce has to do. It's a unique skill and no other car even comes close. The term Rolls-Royce engineers have used since the 1930s is "waftability." You do not drive the Phantom. You control it and it carries you, as if gliding over the ground, around turns, in and out of traffic.

The most remarkable thing about the Phantom, in fact, is the complete lack of any excitement whatsoever in driving it. Short of the maneuver described above or, perhaps, hitting something with it, the Phantom produces no thrills.

Ordinarily, that would sound like a bad thing. But if one chooses to drive the Phantom, one is not looking for excitement. Any car, driven fast enough, can at least scare you. The Phantom soothes even at speed. The big car simply responds to your requests, entered through the appropriately wide and spindly steering wheel. Curvy roads can be taken at a chase scene pace and the big car handles it with aplomb.

Even when the gas pedal is mashed full to the floor, the Phantom never loses its cool. In fact, the Phantom hurries up rather nicely. Under its very long hood, there's a 6.75-liter V-12 engine that can provide 453 horsepower, should you ever wish it to.

In a car like this, that sort of power helps maintain the sense of calm inside the 5,500-pound vehicle's immense cabin. The engine is strong enough that it rarely needs to tax itself, thereby creating motor noises you might actually be able to hear.

There are a few features the Phantom lacks and which one might expect on a vehicle at this price. (Well, what doesn't one expect at this price?) There is no automatic climate control, for example. I had to fiddle with knobs for the fan and temperature.

Also, the car did not have dynamic cruise control, a system that uses radar to maintain an even following distance from cars ahead on the highway. Again, that feature is available on cars costing a fraction of the Phantom's price.

Gentlemen, please, what's up with that?

Maybach 57S

The last I spent any real time in a Maybach was at the 2003 New York Auto Show. The Maybach 62 was parked at the show and I borrowed its back seat to use as my office for a couple of hours. Each of that car's back seats cost $15,000 and I think I'd pay that much just to do that again. Those were some nice seats.

While the 57...

Continued:http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/22/Auto...ybach/?cnn=yes

[megeebee]

It's interesting to me that the author offered no opinion, or even mention, of the either cars' design.

[Joevette]

thats because hes reporting on the objective components and features of the car, not the styling which is subjective and different for everyone

[tgagneguam]

The exclusivity notwithstanding, it's funny how nothing about these two pricey status symbols excites me. Given the means to buy either one, I can think of a few [relatively] much less expensive cars I'd rather own; Bentley's Continental GT comes to mind.

[genjy]

Originally Posted by tgagneguam

The exclusivity notwithstanding, it's funny how nothing about these two pricey status symbols excites me. Given the means to buy either one, I can think of a few [relatively] much less expensive cars I'd rather own; Bentley's Continental GT comes to mind.

The Continental GT doesn't nearly have as much presence as the RR Phantom... not even close. The Maybach has no presence at all because it looks like a stretched S-Class. I see these cars everyday because of the area I work at. And nothing beats a RR Phantom if you want to look filthy rich and strike a awesome impression among whoever you have to impress. The closest things I can think of that can match the Phantom are the Astons.

[Quickening]

I would easily take a Maybach over a Rolls. I wouldn't even have to think about it.

[CRBoyd91]

Originally Posted by Quickening

I would easily take a Maybach over a Rolls. I wouldn't even have to think about it.

I'm with you on that!

[yassir(snowman)]

i dont think any one that will buy the rolls will be drivin it. the mayback is more of a drivers car

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by genjy

The Continental GT doesn't nearly have as much presence as the RR Phantom... not even close. The Maybach has no presence at all because it looks like a stretched S-Class. I see these cars everyday because of the area I work at. And nothing beats a RR Phantom if you want to look filthy rich and strike a awesome impression among whoever you have to impress. The closest things I can think of that can match the Phantom are the Astons.

Ya know? I used to think the way you do about teh Maybach. Very generic. Too much Mercedes.
And then I had the opportunity to drive one.

It is sooooooo not a Mercedes. And you will just gape in the presence of a Maybach. And when you get out of one, you can feel every single person's eyeballing you and the car. One of the most amazing yet disconcerting feelings you'll ever experience. Then again, I was dressed to the 9's and walking into the Bellagio Hotel.

I've never driven a Rolls. But I've ridden in a few Silver Spurs. It's the same feeling. You still have the filthy rich feeling.

Astons... you get teh same feeling to. Then again... I really enjoy driving the DB9 near its limit.

[CobaltSScrazy]

I'll take an F430, a Bently Flying Spur, a CTS-v, and a Cobalt SS-S/C for the amount of money a 370,000$ Maybach costs thank you very much. Now if cadillac offered a car such as that........it'd be a different story

[megeebee]

Originally Posted by Joevette

thats because hes reporting on the objective components and features of the car, not the styling which is subjective and different for everyone

I agree. But I made this comment only because some many jounalists make quite a deal about their opinions of the design of lower priced vehicles all the time (though I do not know if this particualr writer is guilty of this or not).