Bentley teases its first EV, the Torcal 54%

By Jonathan M. Gitlin67%

7/6/2026, 11:30:38 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Anchoring Bias, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 26.9% saturation with 105 hits. Analysis detected 1,385 faulty-reasoning hits from 390 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 52% and a BS Rank of 54% (10,262 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 53.10% of the article peer group.

Bentley is preparing to add a fourth model to its rarified lineup, and today we know what it will be called: the Torcal. 
The carmaker has been working on its first electric vehicle for a while now; it was seen testing in the Arctic Circle late last year, giving us a sneak peek at the interior. 
A few weeks ago, another example was spotted at the Nürburgring. 
Speculation had been mounting over what Bently would call its first battery EV—although sleuths spotted a European and UK trademark filing for Torcal earlier this year, the absence of a related US trademark filing led Car and Driver to suggest the car might be badged the Bentley Barnato instead. 
This referenced Woolf Barnato, who raced Bentleys with great success in the pre-war period with much success, including three wins at the 24 Hours of Le Mans (1928, 1929, and 1930). 
El Torcal de Antequera Nature Park in Andalusia, Spain. 
Instead, Bentley continues a convention it has used for the Bentayga, Bacalar, and Batur, taking a name from a natural landmark—in this case, El Torcal de Antequera, a spectacular collection of limestone rock formations in Spain. 
When the automaker noted that the name is also derived from the Latin “torquere”—the root from which the modern word torque also traces back to—that seems to be a clue that the Torcal will use an electrified powertrain, as these provide immense amounts of effortless torque. 
“For 107 years, Bentleys have been the most incredibly complete cars—effortless performance, outstanding comfort, exquisite British handcraftsmanship using the best natural materials, and a soundtrack with soul,” said Bentley chairman and CEO Frank-Steffen Walliser. 
“Our new Torcal sets extraordinary benchmarks in every area that matters and may just be the most considered car in our history.” 
This is the EXP 15 concept. 
Although Bentley will surely build the Torcal at its factory in Crewe, England, as part of the larger Volkswagen Group, it will use the same PPE architecture we’ve seen in other EVs, such as the Porsche Cayenne. 
And unlike its British rival (and former sibling) Rolls-Royce, which opted for a two-door coupe for its first EV, the Torcal should bear some resemblance to the EXP 15 concept we looked at in some detail last year. 
The Torcal will be unveiled on September 23. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.6%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 4.1%Ars Technica: 2.8%Confirmation Bias12.6%This article: 22.1%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 1.8%Ars Technica: 1.2%Anchoring Bias22.1%This article: 8.5%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 3.2%Ars Technica: 2.4%Availability Heuristic8.5%This article: 11.8%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 1.5%Ars Technica: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic11.8%This article: 9.7%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.8%Ars Technica: 0.6%Hindsight Bias9.7%This article: 21.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 4.9%Ars Technica: 2.1%Overconfidence Bias21.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 8.6%Ars Technica: 3.4%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 9.2%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.8%Ars Technica: 0.5%Status Quo Bias9.2%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 8.7%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 2.5%Ars Technica: 4.2%Optimism Bias8.7%This article: 11.8%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 5.5%Ars Technica: 1.7%Pessimism Bias11.8%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 11.1%Ars Technica: 6.2%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 1.2%Ars Technica: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 3.0%Ars Technica: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 2.4%Ars Technica: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 1.3%Ars Technica: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 22.3%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 4.4%Ars Technica: 2.0%Halo Effect22.3%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.8%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 1.0%Ars Technica: 1.0%Recency Bias2.8%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 5.7%Ars Technica: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 22.3%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 2.8%Ars Technica: 4.1%Appeal to Authority22.3%This article: 12.6%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 2.3%Ars Technica: 1.1%False Dilemma12.6%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.5%Ars Technica: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.5%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 4.4%Ars Technica: 3.8%Hasty Generalization9.5%This article: 12.6%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 1.9%Ars Technica: 0.2%Red Herring12.6%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 8.7%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 8.1%Ars Technica: 2.7%Appeal to Emotion8.7%This article: 17.4%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 2.6%Ars Technica: 0.6%Begging the Question17.4%This article: 11.8%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 5.5%Ars Technica: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)11.8%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 12.6%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 1.0%Ars Technica: 0.5%Burden of Proof12.6%This article: 9.2%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.8%Ars Technica: 0.2%Appeal to Nature9.2%This article: 9.2%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.8%Ars Technica: 0.2%Composition/Division9.2%This article: 20.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 3.5%Ars Technica: 1.5%Anecdotal20.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 21.5%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 3.0%Ars Technica: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)21.5%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 0.0%Ars Technica: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 1.3%Ars Technica: 1.5%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 14.4%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 1.7%Ars Technica: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection14.4%This article: 5.9%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 15.0%Ars Technica: 4.5%Biased Writer Voice5.9%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 4.5%Ars Technica: 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 7.3%Ars Technica: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 1.8%Ars Technica: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 26.9%Jonathan M. Gitlin: 5.0%Ars Technica: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…26.9%

390 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker14%attributed speech334writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 49 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 0.0% coverageFrank-Steffen Walliser • 34 words • 100.0% coverageFrank-Steffen Walliser • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
56 attributed words100% of attributed speech91% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Frank-Steffen Walliser: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +85.3 ptsWriter: 14.7%Frank-Steffen Walliser: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-6.9 ptsWriter: 6.9%Frank-Steffen Walliser: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.