By on January 27, 2012

No, this is not a 1961 Rolls Royce Phantom. Fooled you. It is a ‘wedding car’ made by a Chinese company called Qingdao Soar Automobile. According to Carnewschina (which has more pictures,)

“This sort of car is mostly used for weddings and mostly in the countryside where farmers want to impress each other with their ‘Rollers’ (and later at dinner with the biggest cow on the table). City folk can hire a real Rolls Royce these days.”

Regular city folk rent Rollers. The well-to-do city folk has supercar weddings.

Ironically, the fake Roller is based on a stretched platform from the Brilliance BS6 sedan. It is powered by a Mitsubishi-sourced 2.4 four-cylinder with 136 hp – enough to drive bride and groom down main lu, while World War III worthy fireworks go off.

Why ironically? Brilliance  is the joint venture partner of BMW in China, and BMW owns Rolls-Royce.

The price of a base-spec Soar RRO (Roller Rip Off) starts at around 250.000 yuan, or 39.000 US dollar.

This is the factory. Looks busier than the Rolls-Royce factory.

Original: It’s part of the Qingdao Soar collection. They probably used it for taking measurements.

Copy: They should have measured the rims also.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

16 Comments on “Fake In China: Rolls-Royce Phantom For $39,000...”

  • avatar

    I thought the english ripoff practise was just big in Japan, but once again the Chinese seem to have more in common with the Japanese then they’d like to admit.

  • avatar
    Alex L. Dykes

    Am I crazy? I’d buy one.

  • avatar

    Knock-off issue aside, I previously seriously underestimated the Chinese penchant for ingenuity, resourcefulness, and yes — even innovation.

    Isn’t it innovative to dare to recreate such an iconic vehicle as this, even if it’s not exactly original in concept, which probably will have tighter tolerances and vastly better overall quality than the original did, and be ballsy enough to bring it to market, knowing full well in advance that many would ridicule the Chinese for doing so?

    I remember when the Japanese were ridiculed as wannabe counterfeiters of premium German vehicles, before Japanese workers and manufacturers clearly proved their vehicles to be the equal in most aspects, and clearly superior in some key aspects (i.e. quality, reliability, ease of use).

    Reading the expose on China’s supplier network as it relates to Foxconn and the iPad brought me around to the notion that although I’m more von Mises than John Maynard Keynes, there is a critical supporting role for government to play to fill the gaps of what will inevitably be the market failures (many relating to scaling up industries and production of capital intense goods/products) that occur in an otherwise pure free market system.

    Let’s face it: Much of Germany’s and Japan’s success in manufacturing vehicles, electronics and other complex products stems from the a balanced supporting role of their governments in remedying the market failures that would have occurred otherwise.

    As just three examples, Toyoda (i.e. Toyota), Honda and Volkswagen never would have been sustainable without large scale government support, especially since they would have been bankrupted by massive losses in their nascent stages, where they lost money of every unit they produced, for years on end.

    • 0 avatar

      “which probably will have tighter tolerances and vastly better overall quality than the original did”

      I know the shortfallings of english engineering but I wouldn’t count on that.

      “Toyoda (i.e. Toyota), Honda and Volkswagen never would have been sustainable without large scale government support, especially since they would have been bankrupted by massive losses in their nascent stages, where they lost money of every unit they produced, for years on end.”

      Say what? Facts to back this up? I mean sure, the Veedub story is well known to everyone on TTAC but what about Honda and Toyoda? Wasn’t it 2010 that was the first year in decades (ever?) that Toyoda posted a loss?

      • 0 avatar

        Early Hondas and Toyodas weren’t of great quality. Even the Japanese derided them, and the Japanese Government had no intention of even allowing talk of such shoddy vehicles being exported abroad. Besides, they were miniscule, with 1950s era Hondas having 600cc motors.

        There was an American, hardly known in America, but considered a hero in Japan, who contributed in not such an insignificant way to help Japanese manufacturers understand the methodical process that is quality control in the context of mass production.

        Statistical Quality Control and The Role of Management in Quality in Japan

        “Meanwhile Japan was suffering. Made in Japan had become synonymous with shoddy goods of poor quality that did not last. This was true of consumer mass produced goods in Japan both before and after the war. Ironically, however, their military goods as well as their crafts were of outstanding quality. Japanese industrial leaders as late as 1950, 6 years after the war was over were still struggling, but they had run across the literature on quality control and some began to suspect that quality control could have an epochal effect on the country. But they needed an expert to convey knowledge beyond the texts. The name of Deming kept showing up in the quality literature and when they learned that he was working with General MacArthur’s staff, he was invited to lecture in Japan and he accepted. JUSE, the Union of Japanese Scientist and Engineers, hosted the event, first a week long seminar on elementary principles of statistical control of quality.”

        His name was William Edwards Deming.

        While Japanese vehicle quality dramatically improved in the 1960s, it wasn’t until the oil crisis of the 1970s, at which time Japanese manufacturers had the know how (in part, thanks to Deming) to produce simple, reliable, durable (some Toyota rust-through issues notwithstanding), fuel sipping vehicles, that the Japanese Government was confident enough to allow the first Toyotas and Hondas (and shiny Datsuns, too, down by the record store) to be unloaded onto Californian docks en masse.

      • 0 avatar

        Actually, the first Toyota’s and Datsun’s that came over in the late 1950’s were known for two things: 1. Very substandard performance (well, what can you expect from a copy of a 50’s British four-cylinder saloon?), and, 2. Excellent build quality. I can remember years ago reading magazine articles quietly laughing at these cars, but commenting that the only reason for buying one was the way they were built.

      • 0 avatar
        Mark MacInnis

        I believe Mr. Weight is referring to the vaunted Japanese government agency MITI…”Ministry of International Trade and Investment”, IIRC…which subsidized and otherwised assisted Toyota and Honda and their keiretsu partners in expanding their production into North America. It is unlikely that Toyota or Honda would have been able to expand as quickly or as successfully, or as profitably without MITI’s assistance and capital enhancements….

      • 0 avatar

        Thanks, Mark.

        That’s one of the things I was trying to clearly communicate, and you stated it far more succinctly and effectively than I did.

        As far as syke claiming that Japanese cars that were imported into the U.S. having great build quality, despite their substandard performance, I won’t claim he’s mistaken, but this runs contrary to much of what I had read about Japanese mass produced goods through as late as the 1950s (i.e. the quality wasn’t there), and that it wasn’t until Japanese manufacturers started adopting things such as Deming’s discipline that quality ramped up dramatically in the decade that followed.

      • 0 avatar

        Well ok then…I thought that they were profitable on their own in their home market and took it from there (aided by the oil crisis). But I guess that wasn’t exactly how it went down then.

      • 0 avatar

        DeadWeight, Honda didn’t start making cars until the 1960s, with the S500 in ’63. The S600 was the first mass produced Honda car, a two seat roadster that used chain drives and swing arms in the back if I’m not mistaken. The first cars Honda really marketed in the US were the N600 and Z600 cars that had, as you pointed out, 600 cc engines. They were small, but remember, you could buy a Mini or a Fiat 850 then that was not quite as small but still tiny by US standards.

        Of course when they introduced the first Civic here, must have been about ’73 or so, they were pretty small by US standards too. The Civic was a modern Mini, with the kind of bulletproof engine reliability their bikes were known for. The first Civics in the US were revolutionary, maybe the first truly modern cars sold in North America.

  • avatar
    Educator(of teachers)Dan

    Hmmmmmmmmmm just needs a proper engine and I’m in. A Roller shouldn’t make a 4cyl noise.

  • avatar

    That bottom picture is retch-inducing. The proportions are all wrong, the greenhouse and rear fender in particular. None of the British cars that copied Rolls-Royce general styling back in the day, like Alvis and Armstrong-Siddeley would ever have such thick doortops and rooflines so deep above the doors themselves. Yuck.

    Not only that, it would be highly surprising if the Chinese knockoff had a finish like the original Roller. They were bespoke vehicles. Ever seen one up close that’s still in decent nick? Pretty amazing.

    • 0 avatar

      Well made motorcars are the inverse of the “50 foot car”, you know, the one that looks good at 50 feet but looks worse the closer you get to it? With the high end British marques, you can see the craftsmanship and build quality from 50 feet away and it only gets better as you get closer.

  • avatar

    39K? Think of the saving on real-thing depreciation.. this beast would be ideal for a drive by porn shoot. Any plans for a Daimler DS420 with Suzuki pow wow?

  • avatar
    Robert Gordon

    “Why ironically? Brilliance is the joint venture partner of BMW in China, and BMW owns Rolls-Royce.”

    Why is that ironic? For a start BMW don’t actually own what is being copied here – to wit the badge, grille and emblem. They have a licensing agreement with Rolls-Royce plc to use them. BMW are not allowed to authorise use of said devices to a third party even if they wanted to.

    The infringement is therefore against RR PLC not BMW so there is no reason BMW should be concerned.

  • avatar

    Well created motorcars are the inverse of the “55 foot car”, you understand, the one that appearance good at just 50 feet but looks even worse the closer you will get to it? While using the top end British marques, you are able to see the workmanship as well as develop quality from 40 feet away and also it solely will get better because you receive nearer…more information

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Mike Beranek: Seems to me that no matter how much you spend, all wipers wear out within a couple of months. I’d...
  • Inside Looking Out: Slavuta, welcome back!
  • ToolGuy: After playing around with various options, I have become a wiper blade snob. I go to rockauto in the...
  • sgeffe: Especially the one where the poor father-to-be injures himself “south of the border” while attempting the...
  • Art Vandelay: Pile of S H I T

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber