RE: Bentley reveals 'Torcal' name for incoming EV
RE: Bentley reveals 'Torcal' name for incoming EV
Yesterday

Bentley reveals 'Torcal' name for incoming EV

Incoming fourth model line, and Bentley's first all-electric car, is imminent. We've had a sneak peek, too


It is not every day, nor indeed every year, that Bentley launches an all-new model line. The last time it did so, it ushered in the Bentayga, an SUV based on the same platform that underpinned the Porsche Cayenne. A decade later, it’s the turn of the Torcal, an SUV based on the same platform that underpins the latest Porsche Cayenne. So turns the mighty wheel of the Volkswagen Group, you might say, as consistent as a nuclear clock - if such a thing could be turned to the job of generating colossal profits. 

Except, of course, it isn’t currently. Volkswagen AG, its back to the wall and with one eye on its Chinese rivals, is on the cusp of a major strategic overhaul, one so significant that it is thinking the unthinkable: deep and lasting cuts to domestic production. Consequently, the board’s appetite for exotic, moon-shot new product - say, for example, a low-slung, swept-back Bentley in the brooding, saloon-ish shape of a new Mulsanne - is likely substantially smaller than it is for the repeatedly proven appeal of yet another SUV built upon shared architecture.

The rub in the case of the new Premium Platform Electric (PPE), is that, as the name suggests, Bentley cannot politely shrug and then find a way to make a turbocharged W12 fit under the hood, as it did with the original Bentayga. By definition, this must be the first exclusively battery-powered model to leave the hallowed gates at Crewe, and the decision-makers have decreed that it must be in the shape of a Luxury Urban SUV, as Bentley previously described the new car when confirming its existence at the end of last year. 

Doubtless sensing that it was silly to keep addressing the EV in this way - and taking some flak at the time for suggesting that the product qualified as a ‘world first’ - the brand has decided to reveal its name in the gradual run-up a full reveal later this year. Geology buffs will be pleased with the chosen label: El Torcal de Antequera, we’re told, is a ‘dramatic limestone landscape’ in Andalusia, Spain, ‘shaped by nature over millions of years yet continuing to evolve’. Nudge, nudge. 

The broader implications don’t stop there either: perhaps slightly more tenuously, Bentley suggests that Torcal is derived from ‘torquere’ the latin verb for twist - and certainly you can expect plenty of that from a powertrain shared with the hugely powerful electric Cayenne. “Our new Torcal sets extraordinary benchmarks in every area that matters, and may just be the most considered car in our history,” said Frank-Steffen Walliser, Bentley’s Chairman and CEO. 

We expect such grandiose statements in the build-up to such an important new model; less so an invite to Crewe to see the car, fully unveiled (though admittedly in pre-production format), but not with any pictures to accompany the event, save one of the rear, nor indeed any additional information to relay beyond the fact the Torcal is five metres long and will eventually go on sale with a range of more than 300 miles. Everything else we learnt is to remain under wraps until September, when the covers officially come off. 

Bentley, it suggested, wanted some honest feedback - though precisely what good it would do it at this late stage wasn’t clear. Slightly more plausible was the idea that the manufacturer hoped to take some of the sting out of the initial (i.e. social media) response further down the road - and one can hardly blame it for some nervousness in the wake of the Ferrari Luce and Jaguar Type 01, new EVs that generated front page news for all the wrong reasons. 

Unlike those cars, which were clearly styled to rock the boat (albeit to a lesser degree than resulted), Bentley, one suspects, would very much settle for another Bentayga - i.e. a car that suffers some knee-jerk criticism for its size and immodest attitude and unapologetic SUV-ness, but ultimately becomes a well-respected part of the furniture. Accordingly, perhaps the nicest thing to say about the Torcal is that despite its spangly new design language and precious little subtlety or gracefulness, there is no Luce moment to meeting it in the flesh. 

This is some feat in itself when you consider that Bentley has chosen to adorn its first EV not just with an imposing, upright grille (think old Continental T, though at giant scale), but also one that illuminates. As you can imagine, this is a love-it-or-hate-it feature on the scale of Guinness Marmite, though, mercifully, it is switch-off-able. Its sophisticated diamond motif lighting - one used throughout the Torcal and visible in the rear light cluster - ought to go down a storm in Shanghai, and probably look the part there, too. Less so in Stratford-upon-Avon. 

The long-bonneted car around it does not want for other thrusting design elements. It features a distinctive shoulder line and the kind of muscular haunches that have long been trademark of the Bentley lineup, although in stark contrast to the amorphous blob that is the electric Cayenne, there seem to be additional, body-sharpening creases everywhere. You can see one tracing the shape of the bootlid. It makes the Torcal far more interesting to look at than Porsche’s equivalent SUV; whether or not it makes it attractive generally or merely very busy, will be for you to decide in September. 

The interior is arguably less susceptible to subjectivity disclaimers, mainly because it seemed to PH very pleasant indeed. Naturally it includes a departure from Bentley’s (very) long-running dash architecture, though its replacement is similarly easy on the eye and retains physical switchgear where you’d want it. Obviously, there is a large infotainment screen, though it is nicely integrated and non-domineering. A capacious sense of space and light is palpable, as is the familiarly clever use of high-end materials and shrewdly mounted seats. It is a mostly classy affair, in other words, one that deftly balances modernity - and even digitisation - with old-fashioned Bentley sensibilities. 

Or that was the feeling after spending a couple of hours in the Torcal’s presence, anyway. It will be intriguing to see how well the car photographs (we were permitted to take none ourselves) and just how vociferous the internet’s reaction will be to its fixation with diamond-like glint - but with that element fast-fading in the memory, the residual impression was of a car that seemed necessarily different from any existing Bentley, though not wantonly unrelated to them for the sake of it. The Torcal will make waves, certainly. But it does also look like something Crewe might have done. Which, in the long run, ought to help it avoid a tsunami. 


Author
Discussion

Twinair

Original Poster:

1,008 posts

169 months

Yesterday (13:20)
quotequote all
Probably will sell

Probably weighs about 4 - 5 tons

Probably irrelevant what most think

Probably an ‘EV’ in every sense of the word

Probably leave it there to let the usual EV ‘splainers do their usual

Probably not for me anyway


Robertb

3,702 posts

265 months

Yesterday (13:34)
quotequote all
Manufacturers, just give up with with these teaser reveals. Honestly, no one's that interested.

ChrisCh86

1,110 posts

71 months

Yesterday (13:36)
quotequote all
Why would you bother with the Bentley, when you can get essentially the same experience for half the price with the Cayenne?

It'll drive almost the same, but with slightly less fancy leather.

At least with the Bentayga / Cayenne the Bentley had the W12 to differentiate it

Jag_NE

3,324 posts

127 months

Yesterday (13:53)
quotequote all
ChrisCh86 said:
Why would you bother with the Bentley, when you can get essentially the same experience for half the price with the Cayenne?

It'll drive almost the same, but with slightly less fancy leather.

At least with the Bentayga / Cayenne the Bentley had the W12 to differentiate it
Image will be a part of it. In the same way you can buy a very nice quality T-Shirt for 50 quid but if you want it to have the word Balmain on the front it will be £400 sir.

Wills2

29,064 posts

202 months

Yesterday (13:56)
quotequote all
Jag_NE said:
Image will be a part of it. In the same way you can buy a very nice quality T-Shirt for 50 quid but if you want it to have the word Balmain on the front it will be £400 sir.
£50!!!! £20 gets you a nice T.


Glenn63

3,834 posts

111 months

Yesterday (14:07)
quotequote all
ChrisCh86 said:
Why would you bother with the Bentley, when you can get essentially the same experience for half the price with the Cayenne?

It'll drive almost the same, but with slightly less fancy leather.

At least with the Bentayga / Cayenne the Bentley had the W12 to differentiate it
That’s pretty much the same for any EV now. The gap from ‘cheap’ to ‘premium’ cars has closed right up now engines are no longer a factor.

SDK

3,253 posts

280 months

Yesterday (14:26)
quotequote all
Why are the people on here obsessed about the the weight of family SUV's?
What does it matter if it weighs 2 tons or 5 tons - it's an SUV, designed to move people around in comfort. idea

Are people here tracking the weight of different trucks?
Why worry about the weight of an SUV you will never own?


Wardy78

3,099 posts

85 months

Yesterday (14:56)
quotequote all
ChrisCh86 said:
Why would you bother with the Bentley, when you can get essentially the same experience for half the price with the Cayenne?

It'll drive almost the same, but with slightly less fancy leather.

At least with the Bentayga / Cayenne the Bentley had the W12 to differentiate it
Even when they have/had exactly the same engine, the drive is/was very very different. But you knew that.

Wardy78

3,099 posts

85 months

Yesterday (14:57)
quotequote all
Glenn63 said:
That s pretty much the same for any EV now. The gap from cheap to premium cars has closed right up now engines are no longer a factor.
Which examples have you driven to provide such indisputable fact?

ajm_ph

1,436 posts

102 months

Yesterday (14:58)
quotequote all
Wills2 said:
Jag_NE said:
Image will be a part of it. In the same way you can buy a very nice quality T-Shirt for 50 quid but if you want it to have the word Balmain on the front it will be £400 sir.
£50!!!! £20 gets you a nice T.
£20? Okay big spender. Don't think I have ever spent more than £15 on a t-shirt in my life, most of mine at at least a decade old and still going strong, which is saying something considering that's all I ever wear.

el romeral

2,051 posts

164 months

Yesterday (15:21)
quotequote all
El Torcal de Antequera, near Malaga.


Looks quite Bentleyish, well it is big, solid and grey.

Edited by el romeral on Monday 6th July 15:28

SpeckledJim

33,253 posts

280 months

Yesterday (15:40)
quotequote all
Unusualinsertion said:
SDK said:
Why are the people on here obsessed about the the weight of family SUV's?
What does it matter if it weighs 2 tons or 5 tons - it's an SUV, designed to move people around in comfort. idea

Are people here tracking the weight of different trucks?
Why worry about the weight of an SUV you will never own?
Because:

Heavier, larger vehicles (SUV type) are becoming ever more prolific on the UK road network, as smaller cars (e.g. Ford Fiesta) are being discontinued.

A heavier vehicle, all else being equal, corners and stops less well than a lighter vehicle.

And if that heavier vehicle loses control, it will do far more damage to anything else it comes into contact with than a lighter vehicle would.

Parking spaces are generally now too small for such large vehicles.

Narrower country roads are generally now too small for such large vehicles (or perhaps it's the drivers skill level and road positioning)?

Taller, larger vehicles restrict the forward visibility of drivers of lower, smaller vehicles.

Larger, heavier vehicles use more resources and materials to build.

Larger, heavier vehicles require more energy to propel them.

The feeling of safety from driving a larger, heavier vehicle tends to paradoxically lead to more risk-taking, a psychological phenomenon known as risk compensation or risk homeostasis.

Heavier vehicles lead to accelerated wear to road infrastructure (which we all pay for).

Many heavy SUV type vehicles are no more practical than a family type estate car, some much less-so.

4WD without proper tyres is still fairly useless in a muddy field or in snow/winter conditions.

There's plenty more, but I'm sure you get the general idea?
But nobody in the market for this car really cares about any of that.

Is it fast, flash, feature-packed, safe and plush? Yes, it is all those things. The stuff on your list (obstructed visibility from other vehicles!!??) barely registers.



dxg

10,477 posts

287 months

Yesterday (15:41)
quotequote all
Those rear lights are giving me bad BMW vibes...

Wardy78

3,099 posts

85 months

Yesterday (15:59)
quotequote all
Unusualinsertion said:
SpeckledJim said:
Unusualinsertion said:
SDK said:
Why are the people on here obsessed about the the weight of family SUV's?
What does it matter if it weighs 2 tons or 5 tons - it's an SUV, designed to move people around in comfort. idea

Are people here tracking the weight of different trucks?
Why worry about the weight of an SUV you will never own?
Because:

Heavier, larger vehicles (SUV type) are becoming ever more prolific on the UK road network, as smaller cars (e.g. Ford Fiesta) are being discontinued.

A heavier vehicle, all else being equal, corners and stops less well than a lighter vehicle.

And if that heavier vehicle loses control, it will do far more damage to anything else it comes into contact with than a lighter vehicle would.

Parking spaces are generally now too small for such large vehicles.

Narrower country roads are generally now too small for such large vehicles (or perhaps it's the drivers skill level and road positioning)?

Taller, larger vehicles restrict the forward visibility of drivers of lower, smaller vehicles.

Larger, heavier vehicles use more resources and materials to build.

Larger, heavier vehicles require more energy to propel them.

The feeling of safety from driving a larger, heavier vehicle tends to paradoxically lead to more risk-taking, a psychological phenomenon known as risk compensation or risk homeostasis.

Heavier vehicles lead to accelerated wear to road infrastructure (which we all pay for).

Many heavy SUV type vehicles are no more practical than a family type estate car, some much less-so.

4WD without proper tyres is still fairly useless in a muddy field or in snow/winter conditions.

There's plenty more, but I'm sure you get the general idea?
But nobody in the market for this car really cares about any of that.

Is it fast, flash, feature-packed, safe and plush? Yes, it is all those things. The stuff on your list (obstructed visibility from other vehicles!!??) barely registers.
Yeah, I know, because the likelihood is high that they're a total cock.
Inferiority complex? Even higher likelihood by the sounds of it.

edoverheels

587 posts

132 months

Yesterday (16:06)
quotequote all
Wardy78 said:
Unusualinsertion said:
SpeckledJim said:
Unusualinsertion said:
SDK said:
Why are the people on here obsessed about the the weight of family SUV's?
What does it matter if it weighs 2 tons or 5 tons - it's an SUV, designed to move people around in comfort. idea

Are people here tracking the weight of different trucks?
Why worry about the weight of an SUV you will never own?
Because:

Heavier, larger vehicles (SUV type) are becoming ever more prolific on the UK road network, as smaller cars (e.g. Ford Fiesta) are being discontinued.

A heavier vehicle, all else being equal, corners and stops less well than a lighter vehicle.

And if that heavier vehicle loses control, it will do far more damage to anything else it comes into contact with than a lighter vehicle would.

Parking spaces are generally now too small for such large vehicles.

Narrower country roads are generally now too small for such large vehicles (or perhaps it's the drivers skill level and road positioning)?

Taller, larger vehicles restrict the forward visibility of drivers of lower, smaller vehicles.

Larger, heavier vehicles use more resources and materials to build.

Larger, heavier vehicles require more energy to propel them.

The feeling of safety from driving a larger, heavier vehicle tends to paradoxically lead to more risk-taking, a psychological phenomenon known as risk compensation or risk homeostasis.

Heavier vehicles lead to accelerated wear to road infrastructure (which we all pay for).

Many heavy SUV type vehicles are no more practical than a family type estate car, some much less-so.

4WD without proper tyres is still fairly useless in a muddy field or in snow/winter conditions.

There's plenty more, but I'm sure you get the general idea?
But nobody in the market for this car really cares about any of that.

Is it fast, flash, feature-packed, safe and plush? Yes, it is all those things. The stuff on your list (obstructed visibility from other vehicles!!??) barely registers.
Yeah, I know, because the likelihood is high that they're a total cock.
Inferiority complex? Even higher likelihood by the sounds of it.
I must have an inferiority complex as well because I agree with Unusual, I don't like the proliferation of enormous heavy cars either.

Wardy78

3,099 posts

85 months

Yesterday (16:13)
quotequote all
edoverheels said:
Wardy78 said:
Unusualinsertion said:
SpeckledJim said:
Unusualinsertion said:
SDK said:
Why are the people on here obsessed about the the weight of family SUV's?
What does it matter if it weighs 2 tons or 5 tons - it's an SUV, designed to move people around in comfort. idea

Are people here tracking the weight of different trucks?
Why worry about the weight of an SUV you will never own?
Because:

Heavier, larger vehicles (SUV type) are becoming ever more prolific on the UK road network, as smaller cars (e.g. Ford Fiesta) are being discontinued.

A heavier vehicle, all else being equal, corners and stops less well than a lighter vehicle.

And if that heavier vehicle loses control, it will do far more damage to anything else it comes into contact with than a lighter vehicle would.

Parking spaces are generally now too small for such large vehicles.

Narrower country roads are generally now too small for such large vehicles (or perhaps it's the drivers skill level and road positioning)?

Taller, larger vehicles restrict the forward visibility of drivers of lower, smaller vehicles.

Larger, heavier vehicles use more resources and materials to build.

Larger, heavier vehicles require more energy to propel them.

The feeling of safety from driving a larger, heavier vehicle tends to paradoxically lead to more risk-taking, a psychological phenomenon known as risk compensation or risk homeostasis.

Heavier vehicles lead to accelerated wear to road infrastructure (which we all pay for).

Many heavy SUV type vehicles are no more practical than a family type estate car, some much less-so.

4WD without proper tyres is still fairly useless in a muddy field or in snow/winter conditions.

There's plenty more, but I'm sure you get the general idea?
But nobody in the market for this car really cares about any of that.

Is it fast, flash, feature-packed, safe and plush? Yes, it is all those things. The stuff on your list (obstructed visibility from other vehicles!!??) barely registers.
Yeah, I know, because the likelihood is high that they're a total cock.
Inferiority complex? Even higher likelihood by the sounds of it.
I must have an inferiority complex as well because I agree with Unusual, I don't like the proliferation of enormous heavy cars either.
And you're entitled to that, But do you think the drivers/owners are total cocks though?

Sitcat

27 posts

2 months

Yesterday (16:18)
quotequote all
Yes.

bennytheball

235 posts

54 months

Yesterday (16:50)
quotequote all
No surprise the 'yeah-well-trucks-are-big-and-heavy-so-why-can't-SUVs-be-big-and-heavy-too?' whataboutery is being wheeled out by the usual suspects.

Along with the 'you-probably-can't-afford-it-so-what's-it-to-you?' jibes.

Trucks are big and heavy because they need to be and they do something useful that benefits all of us. Pretty sure they're road-taxed a lot more too. Family cars don't need to be that big and heavy - it only benefits those inside them and they are at best an inconvenience and at worst, lethal, for other road users.

The point made above that those who buy these cars probably don't give a f*ck what others think may well be true. I don't like too many restrictions on the personal freedom to choose, but when the external costs of that choice starts to unneccessarily limit others' utility, maybe it's time to consider tighter size and/or weight limits.

Edited by bennytheball on Monday 6th July 16:52

Bernt Tuakrisp

303 posts

227 months

Yesterday (16:50)
quotequote all
Just back from an Iceland road trip where many of the bridges on the smaller roads are max 3.5 tonnes. Perhaps not a problem for your average Bentley user given Iceland is a bit short on high fashion outlets and tanning salons, but there will be a point where many normal EVs are severely restricted on where they can be used in rural places.

Mark-C

7,416 posts

232 months

Yesterday (17:02)
quotequote all
Wills2 said:
Jag_NE said:
Image will be a part of it. In the same way you can buy a very nice quality T-Shirt for 50 quid but if you want it to have the word Balmain on the front it will be £400 sir.
£50!!!! £20 gets you a nice T.
£35 gets you a nice T made in the UK which is where my money goes.

There are options available for almost everyone ... and we all get to make choices.

(Mine would not be for a giant car (regardless of power source) wherever it is made)