Bentley's Slightly More Affordable SUV Is Impersonating A Porsche
In February of this year, the patent and trademark sleuths at CarMoses discovered two new Bentley filings that could be earmarked for the incoming SUV: Mayon and Barnato. The former likely references the active Mayon Volcano in the Philippines, since the Bentayga was named after Roque Bentayga, a rock formation on the Canary Islands within the volcanic caldera of Tejeda. The latter has been trademarked by Crewe before and references Woolf Barnato, a Le Mans-winning Bentley Boy and chairman who helped keep the company alive in the mid-1920s.
When Bentley first announced this new electric SUV, it said that it would arrive in 2026, saying that it expected the market's appetite for EVs to grow to a sustainable level by then. It has since delayed that introductory date by a single year, but it ought to be worth the wait, with Bentley promising the EV will be "much more agile" than a Bentayga.
Crewe did not confirm what would underpin the new SUV, but at the time of the announcement, the PPE architecture beneath the Audi Q6 e-tron and the Porsche Macan Electric seemed the most sensible. Now that our spies tell us the Porsche mule in these images is a Bentley, those suspicions are all but confirmed. Bentley says that some elements of its extraordinary EXP 15 concept will inform the styling, though exactly how can't be gleaned from the proportions of this prototype.
Expect around 350-400 miles of range, fast-charging, and something new. Bentley's head of R&D, Dr. Matthias Rabe, spoke during the EV's announcement, saying that the sound would not be purely synthetic, nor a copy of what other automakers have been doing. Details would not be divulged, but he hinted that Bentley is "developing something no one else is doing right now." Stay tuned.
Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
21 minutes ago
Ahead of Friday deadline, appeals court considering lawfulness of Trump's sweeping tariffs
As the clock ticks down to President Donald Trump's Aug. 1 deadline for the resumption of reciprocal tariffs, a federal appeals court is hearing arguments Thursday over whether Trump's sweeping tariffs are lawful. A group of small businesses and a coalition of states are asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to invalidate the bulk of Trump's tariffs, arguing that Trump overstepped his power when he used a decades-old economic emergency statute to enact a flurry of tariffs in April. "The President's chaotic assertion of that purported authority, which changed by the day and wreaked havoc on capital markets and the economy, illustrates both the breadth of powers that the President claims and the danger of unlimited authority in this domain," the coalition of states argued in their brief to the court. The hearing comes at a critical time for Trump, as he rushes to complete trade deals ahead of a self-imposed Friday deadline for dozens of reciprocal tariffs to restart. Lawyers for the Trump administration have argued that a court invalidating the tariffs would create a "foreign policy disaster scenario" as trade negotiations remain ongoing. "To all of my great lawyers who have fought so hard to save our Country, good luck in America's big case today," Trump wrote on his social media platform Thursday morning. "If our Country was not able to protect itself by using TARIFFS AGAINST TARIFFS, WE WOULD BE 'DEAD,' WITH NO CHANCE OF SURVIVAL OR SUCCESS." The legal authority for Trump's tariffs was thrown into uncertainty in May when the New York-based Court of International Trade ruled that the president did not have the power to unilaterally impose his global "Liberation Day" tariffs, as well as the tariffs on China, Mexico, and Mexico that Trump imposed to combat fentanyl trafficking. A federal appeals court quickly stayed the Court of International Trade's decision before it could take effect, while the Trump administration's appeal worked its way through the courts. At issue is whether Trump had the authority to enact tariffs without authorization from Congress through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which gives the president the power to impose tariffs under an "unusual and extraordinary threat." While the Trump administration has argued that the tariffs combat fentanyl trafficking and seek to settle the country's trade imbalances, the Court of International Trade was unconvinced that the Trump administration demonstrated an "unusual and extraordinary threat" and that those tariffs "deal with the threats." In court filings, the Trump administration has argued that court's decision is "riddled with legal errors" and "would significantly harm the United States if it were to take effect." They have justified the tariffs by citing the country's fentanyl crisis and the "grave threats to the United States' national security and economy" stemming from trade imbalances. "President Trump has found that America's exploding trade deficit, the implications of that deficit for our economy and national security, and a fentanyl importation crisis that has claimed thousands of American lives constitute national emergencies," lawyers with the Department of Justice have argued. The Trump administration has also argued that invalidating the tariffs would "deprive the United States of a powerful tool for combating systemic distortions in the global trading system, thus allowing other nations to continue to hold American exporters hostage to their unreasonable, discriminatory, and sometimes retaliatory trade policies." The group of small businesses and state attorneys general have pushed back against those claims, arguing that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not give Trump "unlimited tariff authority" and that he has failed to prove "an unusual and extraordinary threat." "The President's chaotic assertion of that purported authority, which changed by the day and wreaked havoc on capital markets and the economy, illustrates both the breadth of powers that the President claims and the danger of unlimited authority in this domain," they wrote.
Engadget
21 minutes ago
- Engadget
Lyft completes its $197 million acquisition of Europe's Freenow
Lyft has received the required regulatory clearance to finalize its acquisition of the European app-based taxi company Freenow. First announced back in April, Lyft's approximately $197 million agreement with BMW and Mercedes-Benz allows the company to expand outside of North America for the first time. Freenow's service will continue to operate as normal, but Bloomberg reports that users will be prompted to download the Lyft app when travelling in the US or Canada, and vice versa for Lyft riders in one of the nine countries or 180 European cities Freenow currently operates in. Eventually you'll be able to book a taxi on either app without having to switch. According to Bloomberg , none of the roughly 600 Freenow employees' jobs are at risk, and while 50 percent of taxi bookings in Europe apparently still happen offline, the new partners believe there is a desire for that to shift more towards an online majority. In 2024, taxis accounted for 90 percent of Freenow's income and they will remain the "backbone" of its business going forward. As well as seamless app integration in the future, Freenow said in April that riders can expect more consistent pricing, faster matching and new features as a result of the Lyft acquisition. Lyft is the second-largest ride-hailing company in the US, trailing Uber, and has been looking to introduce more autonomous vehicles into its network from 2025 onwards after partnering with Mobileye and several other companies last year. If you buy something through a link in this article, we may earn commission.
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
European Union assumes its faces 15% tariffs in the US from Friday. But a key text still isn't ready
BRUSSELS (AP) — The European Union is working on the assumption that the United States will impose a 15% tariff on most EU exports from Friday, even though the two sides have yet to complete a key document clarifying how the agreement will operate. Last weekend, U.S. President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen reached a political agreement that would see 15% duties imposed on around two-thirds of EU produce, worth around 380 billion euros ($434 billion). The tariffs are set to enter force on Friday, but as of Thursday the two sides were still working on a joint statement that would lay out the terms of their understanding, European Commission spokesman Olof Gill said. The document wouldn't be legally binding. 'It is the clear understanding of the European Union that the U.S. will implement the agreed across the board tariff ceiling of 15%,' Gill said. The commission negotiates trade terms on behalf of the the EU's 27 member countries. Carve outs were agreed for a range of 'strategic' goods like aircraft and aircraft parts, certain chemicals, some drug generics or natural resources. Gill said that 'it is also our clear understanding that the U.S. will implement the exemptions to the 15% ceiling.' 'The U.S. has made these commitments. Now it's up to the U.S. to implement them. The ball is in their court,' Gill said. European wine and spirits won't escape the 15% levy on Friday, but may do later as negotiations on additional exemptions to the new tariff regime continue, he said. Before Sunday's meeting, Trump had threatened the bloc with 30% tariffs, which the EU's top trade official said would effectively mean the end of trade between them. Over the last three months, the commission drew up retaliatory measures worth tens of billions of euros to enact should the talks fail. Those countermeasures are due to take effect on Aug. 7, but Gill said that 'if everything goes as expected,' they would be frozen. 'If we have reached a deal, we don't need the retaliatory tariffs,' he said.
