Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Bentley's CEO Says 6.75L Twin-Turbo V8 In Mulsanne Will Be its “Final Home”

      The 6.75L V8 found in the Bentley Mulsanne will be heading out

    Very few engines have a long history of powering various vehicles - the small-block Chevrolet V8 and the Buick 3.5L V8 that would be used in a number of British vehicles. Another one can be found under the hood of the Bentley Mulsanne, the 6.75L (6 and 3/4 in Bentley parlance) twin-turbo V8 can trace its roots back to 1959. But the final curtain call for this engine is coming.

     

    Bentley CEO Wolfgang Dürheimer told Car and Driver that the V8 has found its “final home” in the Mulsanne. The next-generation Bentley flagship would switch to a 12-Cylinder (most likely a W12 one). Keep in mind this isn't likely going to happen until the next decade as the Mulsanne recently underwent a refresh.

     

    This isn't the first time the V8 - known as the L-Series - has been shown the door. Back when BMW owned Bentley in the mid-nineties, the automaker dropped the L-Series V8 and replaced it with one of their own with the new Arnage. Volkswagen would snap Bentley up in 1998 and would bring back the L-Series for the Arnage in the Red Label. The BMW V8 would stick around in the Arnage Green Label. However due to poor sales of the Green Label, Bentley dropped it - engine and all.

     

    Source: Car and Driver

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    The end of an era, but time catches up with everyone or everything in this case.  This engine had a phenomenal run, and it makes sense to go to the W12 and newer V8s that can produce less emissions and similar power.   The six and three quarter liter V8 will always be a legend.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I question if Bentley can continue to build an auto with a V8 or even a W12 down the road in the era of strict emissions and no other options for offsetting the poor mpg.

     

    I still think we are in the final years of big turbo V8 and 12s if a car company does not have other EV or hybrids that off set the poor mpg and emissions. Plus Tesla has proven to the world you can have luxury in a pure EV package.

     

    Bentley should go pure EV or just become a page in the history books.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Bentley will not go into the history books, maybe they'll make an EV or hybrid, maybe not.  But VW has enough cars to offset Bentley's guzzlers.  And even then a Bentley Continental V8 gets 2 mpg better than a Chevy Silverado 5.3 liter V8.  Does anyone think the Silverado will go into the history books because of emissions and fuel economy standards? 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Bentley will not go into the history books, maybe they'll make an EV or hybrid, maybe not.  But VW has enough cars to offset Bentley's guzzlers.  And even then a Bentley Continental V8 gets 2 mpg better than a Chevy Silverado 5.3 liter V8.  Does anyone think the Silverado will go into the history books because of emissions and fuel economy standards? 

    The world needs work trucks, the world DOES NOT NEED Bentley.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The world may not NEED Bentley, but the world has people that will pay massive money for a Bentley, and with $25,000 per car margins, Bentley isn't going anywhere.  There will be a 4-cylinder Silverado before Bentley stops making a 12 cylinder engine.  Heck, Bugatti makes a 16-cylinder engine and might be adding a 2nd model!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Bentley will not go into the history books, maybe they'll make an EV or hybrid, maybe not. But VW has enough cars to offset Bentley's guzzlers. And even then a Bentley Continental V8 gets 2 mpg better than a Chevy Silverado 5.3 liter V8. Does anyone think the Silverado will go into the history books because of emissions and fuel economy standards?

    That's actually a very good point considering the wheelbases are probably similar with how freakin huge Bentlys are meaning a similar CAFE score. But a more modern engine will definitely produce less overall emissions and be cleaner. Edited by ccap41
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Bentley DOHC V8 even in that 5000+ lb car gets 15/25 mpg.  That isn't too bad given the power output and weight.  The W12 is like 12/20 (still better than the 6.75 liter V8), but they could add in a hybrid system to add a few mpg to either engine.  CAFE has a weird scoring system, size of the vehicle shouldn't matter, fuel economy should.   But a Mulsanne is huge, it has a 129 inch wheelbase, 220 inch overall length.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Bentley DOHC V8 even in that 5000+ lb car gets 15/25 mpg.  That isn't too bad given the power output and weight.  The W12 is like 12/20 (still better than the 6.75 liter V8), but they could add in a hybrid system to add a few mpg to either engine.  CAFE has a weird scoring system, size of the vehicle shouldn't matter, fuel economy should.   But a Mulsanne is huge, it has a 129 inch wheelbase, 220 inch overall length.

    The footprint of the vehicle does matter though. That's one reason trucks continue to get larger is because as they get bigger and fuel economy stays roughly the same(with the larger engines, not the engines made for fuel economy(2.7 and 3.0 diesel) ) they aren't an issue. It's a ratio basically. 

     

    "First, like the current 2012–16 rules, these new standards are size based. That means there’s a formula to calculate the required CAFE—within limits—for each car based on its “footprint,” which is the product of its wheelbase and track dimensions. In 2011, for example, the required CAFE mpg for the smallest car would not exceed 31.2, while even the largest car was assigned at least 24 mpg. For 2025, these car limits go up to 61.1 and 45.6. Truck mpg is calculated in similar fashion using a different formula. For 2011, the truck mpg ranged from 21.1 to 27.1. In the 2025 proposal, it spans 30.2 to 50.4 mpg. Notice that the formula has been adjusted so that the low end of the range rises less than the high end to help accommodate large trucks.

    Second, because these CAFE requirements are based on size, every car company actually ends up with a different CAFE requirement, depending on the mix and size of cars and trucks that it actually sells. For every model year, each company must calculate the CAFE requirement for all models it markets and then determine the sales-weighted average for its actual mix. Therefore, a company such as General Motors, with its heavy share of large pickups and SUVs, will have a lower CAFE requirement than Suzuki, which primarily produces smallish cars and SUVs."

    http://www.caranddriver.com/features/the-cafe-numbers-game-making-sense-of-the-new-fuel-economy-regulations-feature

     

    "Here’s how it works. A 2010 Honda Accord has a wheelbase of 110.2 inches and a track of 62.6 inches. Multiplying those two figures yields a footprint of 47.9 square feet. If you plug that figure into the government’s formula, you get a target mpg of 35.9 for 2016. The smaller its footprint, the higher the fuel economy a given vehicle has to meet. A current Ford Focus would have to achieve 40.8 by 2016, while a Mercedes S-class will have a bogey of 31.8 mpg. The aforementioned 328i will have to hit 38.2 mpg."

    http://www.caranddriver.com/features/how-automakers-will-meet-2016-cafe-standards

    Edited by ccap41
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    That is why CAFE is pointless to begin with.  It courages car companies to make bigger, thus thirstier cars.  The only way it would work is to set an MPG target, and the entire company portfolio regardless of vehicle footprint would have to average out to that number.

     

    A better option to CAFE is to do a gas guzzler tax and energy efficient credit system.  Suppose you had a number like 35 mpg combined EPA for 2016, and you could adjust it up as years go by, raise it 1 mpg every 2 years or something and get to 40 mpg EPA combined in 2025.    So from the 35 mpg baseline, for every 1 mpg worse than that a car gets, there is a $100 gas guzzler tax.  Thus if a vehicle gets 20 mpg combined EPA, that is -15 mpg times $100 dollars = a $1,500 gas guzzler tax.  A vehicle at 25 mpg would have a $1,000 gas guzzler tax, and so on.  

     

    Then on the flip side there would be a credit for being above the baseline.  So a car with 40 mpg combined EPA would have a $500 credit that the government would pay toward the buyer at time of purchase out of the gas guzzler tax pool, and there would be a maximum credit of $2,500, all pure EV cars would get the $2,500 credit.

     

    Since we know Americans will always buy crossovers, trucks, gas guzzlers, etc, you never have to worry about the gas guzzler tax pool running too low to feed the fuel efficiency credit pool.  The excess every year can be used to fix roads and bridges.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Major announcement between GM and Hyundai. General Motors and Hyundai Motor Company Announce Plans for First Five Co-developed Vehicles - Hyundai Newsroom GM and Hyundai announce plans for first five co-developed vehicles The two companies will co-develop four vehicles for the Central and South American market, including a compact SUV, car and pick-up, as well as a mid-size pick-up, all with the flexibility to use either internal combustion or hybrid propulsion systems. Hyundai and GM also will co-develop an electric commercial van for North America. Hyundai and GM expect sales of the co-developed vehicles to be more than 800,000 vehicles a year once production is fully scaled. I have to wonder if the well-received PV5 electric van that Hyundai developed and sells under both Hyundai and Kia labels in Asia and Europe could not end up being part of the electric commercial van for North America?
    • https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/lasalle-police-illegal-border-crossing-us-kayak-rcmp-windsor-1.7602298   https://www.ctvnews.ca/windsor/article/lasalle-officer-thwarts-attempted-illegal-entry-into-canada/   A routine property check turned into a surprising discovery early Wednesday morning, according to police. Shortly before 1:00 a.m., a LaSalle police officer checking a commercial property on the 1800 block of Front Road spotted a man at the water’s edge of the Detroit River with two backpacks and a kayak. Investigators say the 51-year-old U.S. citizen was attempting to illegally enter Canada. He was detained and handed over to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for further investigation. Police Chief Michael Pearce praised the officer, saying, “This is an outstanding example of how proactive policing can yield positive results. While conducting a simple property check, our officer helped prevent an illegal entry into Canada.”   A defector... Reminiscent of former Eastern block folk from  the 1980s...
    • I said the Z06, ZR1 twins will sell out.  GM will build as many as the demand needs GM to build.  And it will probably be a higher number than any Porsche 911 variant in that category.  Firstly, Porsche limits production of those track focused upper trimmed variants.  Secondly, like Ferrari, Porsche obliges the owners of would be GT3 RS owners to buy Cayennes and Macans and have a history of past 911 purchases. Only Ferrari gets shat on for that business practice... I dont think Chevrolet and Corvette as a manufacturing team and entity and GM ultimately, are ready to introduce a Corvette SUV as it once was presented a couple of years ago.  The Corvette engineering team is too focused on giving us mental performance from the C8 platform.  And more to come is rumored.  And then there is the 9nth generation.  The C8 is already on its 6th year.  Its close to the time where Chevrolet is thinking on the next gen Corvette.  Whether this next platform will come at year 8 or year 14 of C8 production, the 6th year of any Corvette generation is when Chevrolet starts thinking if another generation of Corvette is going to happen and is talking to General Motors corporate on what budgets are needed to follow. And then the engineering team starts to form to start thinking about what is the the next Corvette going to be like. And no...lifestyle vehicles have NOT replaced anything. The sportscar is still alive and well. For those that have the money to spend on secondary vehicles as toys, these people buy Hummer EVs just as much as Corvette and Porsches.  But those that do not have monies to spend, well, they cant afford groceries in this current political climate.   But sportscars are still being bought.  Lifestyle vehicles...too I guess.  I heard that Jeep is also tanking in sales.  I dunno if its only the Wagoneer or the regular Jeep, but regular Jeeps have gone insane expensive too.  And I do not see Rivians nor Broncos all that much on the roads nor do I see US peoples rave about Rivian and Broncos the way they once did 2 years ago...
    • I dont think its that.  The base Stingray is exactly that Corvette. The Z06, ZR1 and ZR1x are just engineering flexing on what Corvette engineering and racing has to offer at a price point lower than the Corvette's competition. Hence why they went to Nurburgring with their test drivers and engineers driver the cars to show case ANYBODY could drive these cars, relatively safely, relatively aggressive but not so aggressive as to lose control and crash and STILL come out with impressive times at the Nurburgring.  Its the every man's sports car persona that they hold on dearly to.  I could respect that.  And yes, the ZR1 and ZR1x are expensive. But 1969 Corvette ZL1s with aluminium block 427s were higher priced than the highest priced Cadillac of the time.  Speed and ultimate engineering comes at a cost.  Its not for the average joe.  But...American speed is the most democratized in the world.  Even at 200 000 plus dollars, The ZR1 twins  are still half as expensive as its Porsche and Ferrari competitors.     The Corvette has sold all it could. Remember, its a Corvette and not an SUV. Its a car that is 5 going on 6 years old.  The Z06, ZR1 twins remain coveted and will sell out.  The Stingray now can be bought pennies on the dollar in the used car market like all base Corvettes in the past.  That is why it was stupid for all the idiots that bought the Stingray with dealership mark-ups the first 3 years of C8 production...   The Corvette is not a dying breed. It still sells more units than its competitors.  
    • Cool car. All C8 variants are cool.  I like all variants of the C8 Corvette.  But...I am not super enthused by the C8 all that much with the latest variants.  Yeah yeah...the Z06 is a mid engine flat plane V8, Ferrari emulating experience.  Sure it is a bargain price for what it is.  And yeah, the ZR1 and ZR1x are ridiculous in their horsepower and torque numbers and the chassis handles all that power well and puts the performance numbers to prove it while all three variants offer a very luxury GT experience.  Great.  But Im tired of seeing the GT part of the Corvette always being front and center.  The E-Ray to me is where the luxury GT part of the C8 Corvette should be at.  The best of both worlds of supercar/hyper car performance and luxury. (Because of the battery weight and the battery performance part).   The C8 Stingray is the Stingray. The base Corvette. Where the midlife crisis geezers buy it and pretend that they own the most special breed of cars ever created.  And to others that want exotic speed without the exotic price tags of Porsches, Ferraris and the like.  Just as it is now.   The Z06 should exist as a GT car as it is now, but a more track focused beast that is stripped out and more hardcore version should also exist.   The ZR1 should also exist as a GT as it is now. The ZR1x should be called something else as it really is a different car than the ZR1.  BUT... I think the C8 Corvette needs ZR1 and Z06 GT luxury delete variations where SIGNIFICANT weight reduction (with or without full on carbon fibre bodies) , ACTIVE aero,  and all the GT creature comfort options are all gone from the options list.  Sound deadening included. Crappy trunks big enough for golf bags be gone.  The Corvette NEEDS to shed off some of the late C3 1970s GT persona and return to being a pure sports car again.   The C3 Vette didnt even have a trunk for phoque's sake.  Neither the C2.  The only reason why the C3 gained a GT persona was because emissions regs and the oil shortage made the Vette's engine choices anemic so it had to sell itself on luxury features.   But Im happy as a Corvette fan with the results of the C8 Corvette.  And I hear rumours there might be another mad variant of the C8 to come before the platform changes for a 9nth generation.  
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search