Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

Discussion in '2001 Bentley Arnage Red Label LWB' started by bob777, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from SoupedUpSupra</i>
    <b>Hve you ever seen a car called the "Dodge Viper"? Its got real crappy performance, for a 8.0 liter car. </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->You are an imbecile.<!-- Signature -->
     
  2. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    Hve you ever seen a car called the "Dodge Viper"? Its got real crappy performance, for a 8.0 liter car. <!-- Signature -->
     
  3. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from car-god</i>
    <b>allright you dumb #$%#s. get it through your #$%#ing stupid heads. this is a luxury cruiser. the large displacement engine is there for the loads of torque needed to move the car. plus it's easier on the engine you dumb #$%#s. it's about reliability. a large displacement high torque decent horsepower engine can run smoothly and for many years hauling that much weight and having so many accressories running off of it. stupid #%$gots quit running your mouths about such a beautiful car when you don't know shit. allright. and who the #$%# would compare this to a benz. they're in totally different classes, also comparing this to high performance cars? what a #$%#ing dumb stupid piece of mother#$%#ing loser #%$got ass. THIS IS A LUXURY CRUISER NOT A HIGH PERFORMANCE CAR. read some #$%#ing books. IDIOTS
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    well said car-god, well said! and also the guy who said my 79 vette could beat this car is the biggest moron i ahev ever seen and i'm not even gonna finish repling to that statment!<!-- Signature -->
     
  4. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    allright you dumb #$%#s. get it through your #$%#ing stupid heads. this is a luxury cruiser. the large displacement engine is there for the loads of torque needed to move the car. plus it's easier on the engine you dumb #$%#s. it's about reliability. a large displacement high torque decent horsepower engine can run smoothly and for many years hauling that much weight and having so many accressories running off of it. stupid #%$gots quit running your mouths about such a beautiful car when you don't know shit. allright. and who the #$%# would compare this to a benz. they're in totally different classes, also comparing this to high performance cars? what a #$%#ing dumb stupid piece of mother#$%#ing loser #%$got ass. THIS IS A LUXURY CRUISER NOT A HIGH PERFORMANCE CAR. read some #$%#ing books. IDIOTS
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  5. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from SoupedUpSupra</i>
    <b>Hve you ever seen a car called the "Dodge Viper"? Its got real crappy performance, for a 8.0 liter car. </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->You are an imbecile.<!-- Signature -->
     
  6. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    This car is essentially a brick, Bentley have managed to combine all the ugliness in the world with all the poor performance and weighed it down with all kinds of crap it doesn't need and it's still a desirable vehicle.
    What does the Bentley justice is its interior; personally I would rather an S-Class, 7-Series of A8 over this obese paper-weight.
    The new Maybach which will be out soon will not only out perform this piece of shit, it will be better looking, lighter and a car that has a solid market for a reason not involving patriotism.
    The only reason Bentleys sell is because of patriotism and nothing else.
    The engineering of this car is crap and just try selling it in six years time!
    What were six figures will soon diminish to five, so why would anybody in their right mind want such a poor vehicle?
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  7. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    The torque definately helps move this thing, but a Chevy Suburban only weighs like 5600 pounds. So this must be quite the sedan. Still a nice car though.

    -A.P. Etc
     
  8. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    F-U-C-K you all you people are just hating it cause you can't afford it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  9. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    What ever Rapier. The German engine sucked because it went way slower, and was less powerful
     
  10. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    The reason this car dosent go fast is because it is powered by a mixture of coal and sweet smelling oils. i have 3 of these and i fashioned them together with some rope and now they go fast. plus i added about 40 tires to each wheel and dropped and 74 big block 80000 cubic inch engine on each seat so u can feel the 4 torque it produces with 17 horse power. you all be hatin cause you all aint be ownin one of these little diddys right ova here. and i also have a billion dollars
     
  11. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    this car sucks! its ulgy, slow and ugly!
    my 79 vette with 390hp would smoke this thing!<!-- Signature -->
     
  12. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    come on this things a BENTLEY!! the interior is custom designed by you and then hand made. If you want performance buy a Ferrari. <!-- Signature -->
     
  13. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from MR2Supra</i>
    <b>F-U-C-K you all you people are just hating it cause you can't afford it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    WELL SAID!!<!-- Signature -->
     
  14. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from vetteboy79</i>
    <b>this car sucks! its ulgy, slow and ugly!
    my 79 vette with 390hp would smoke this thing!</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    You are a complete fool, who gives a shit if your sports car can beat a luxury cruiser, I think just about any vette's are about the ugliest things going on 4 wheels.
     
  15. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Irwind</i>
    <b>my goodness....such a huge displacement and yet the lousy performance....ok...so it's not suppose to go fast coz it's a rich man's wagon....but then if so....why the large displacement??
    I wonder wat gadgets do they have in there that justify the price...of else it's just for the snobs</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Um, it's 5853 #$%#ing pounds! A 6.75 L V8 is necessary to haul that much metal, and it goes pretty damn fast for a 3 ton car. <!-- Signature -->
     
  16. my goodness....such a huge displacement and yet the lousy performance....ok...so it's not suppose to go fast coz it's a rich man's wagon....but then if so....why the large displacement??
    I wonder wat gadgets do they have in there that justify the price...of else it's just for the snobs
     
  17. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    Almost 6,000 pounds, of course this is a crappy car. IT'S A BENTLEY!<!-- Signature -->
     
  18. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    Any idea how old that engine is? they have been updating it sinds the 70's, it's an old school English 16 valve V8.

    The German's(BMW) have tried to put a modern V8 into it, but the buyers do not want performance ,clean emissions or a smooth ride. They want a totally English car. No matter the cost.
     
  19. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    NOBODY WANTED THE BMW V8 BECAUSE IT WAS WEEAAAKKKKK! NO TORQUE WHATSOEVER, SO THE BUYERS SAID WE WANT THE OLD ENGINE. IF IT WERE OFFERED TEN YEAR FROM NOW, I WOULD STILL WANT THAT OLD PUSH-ROD WITH ENOUGH TORQUE TO YANK YOUR HOUSE FROM ITS FOUNDATION.

    BENETLEY RULES. DON'T HATE IT ONLY MAKES YOU LOOK SILLY!
     
  20. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    Your right, this is not a performance car. Besides, it weight 2and1/2 tons you #$%#ing morons
     
  21. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    Who said "my 79' 390hp vette would smoke this" maybe. but yours is a sports car not a luxury cruiser that costs over 200g! You are the most idiotic, limited, piece of shit I've ever heard of.
     
  22. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    Just...no.
     
  23. Re: Poor performance for a 6.75 litre car..

    You are dumb, so is your comments, so is this thread.
    The Arnage weighs almost 3 tons because it is so luxurious, but it is still pretty quick for its level of luxury.
     

Share This Page