"Hello, Mr. Viper? Yes, fine, thanks. Listen, I'd like to introduce you to a friend of mine. He's a large fellow. Has expensive tastes. Very soft-spoken. Dignified, even. But don't let his looks fool you. This guy packs an uppercut that would clean your clock."
Yes, the engine boldly emblazoned on the breastplate above makes a Viper's V10 seem lacking in dangly bits. It's simply the torquey-est engine in a stock production car we've ever tested, and it's across the jump.
"Production car" is an imprecise expression, as the 2011 Bentley Mulsanne is hardly a car the average Joe will see twice in a year unless said Joe works in a Bentley dealership, in which case he's no longer average and the statement holds.
Still, this is a car subject to all regulatory requirements of emissions and noise and the like, and was developed by an OEM to meet OEM levels of driveability and durability, no different from a Viper or a Honda Civic. The Mulsanne isn't some tuner special. Not that anyone would mistake it for one.
In the past, Bentley nee Rolls Royce engineers refused to quantify the output of their engines, preferring instead the understatement that the sauce they dished up was "adequate."
Nowadays the crew in Crewe (or wherever) don't shy away from hard numbers, and they peg the Mulsanne's bent-eight at 505 hp and 752 lb-ft of torque.
Here's a better visual of the Mulsanne's adequacy:
That's 676 lb-ft of torque at 2550 rpm, as measured at the wheels by a Dynojet chassis dyno. The engine effortlessly whooshed this out as if it were doing nothing more than smearing a pat of butter on a crumpet. Insanity. This is what you get when you force-feed a 6.8-liter -- beg pardon, it's a 6 3/4 litre -- pushrod V8 with twin turbochargers and two liquid-to-air intercoolers. It's also got variable cam timing.
In light of that description, its observed peak power of 474 hp at 4150 rpm at the wheels isn't much to write home about. Bentleys have never been about peak power numbers; their calling card's always been torque.
Which makes the Mulsanne's 8-speed autobox a total head-scratcher. Yeah, the gearchanges are so smooth you could wipe a sleeping baby's ass with them, but there's so much torque at play that this thing could have a 3-speed transmission and nobody would ever notice. Or care.
The transmission also made this car nearly dyno-proof. It has a manual mode, but it 'times out' if you don't command a gearchange a few seconds after selecting the mode.
Beyond that, it wanted to downshift sixteen gears (or so it seemed at the time) if the throttle was cracked open with any kind of aggression. It took a hell of a lot of aborted attempts before we were able to confuse it into giving us a clean run from low revs.
Okay, so this well-dressed fellow has the low end of a locomotive, but the Viper V10 is victorious as the revs pile on. To wit:
This is nuts. Who would ever guess there's an engine out there that makes a Viper V10 look peaky and high-strung?
-Jason Kavanagh, Engineering Editor
fordfrenzy says:
09:14 PM, 03/28/11
WHO SAYS MONEY CANT BUY YOU HAPPINESS... THE PERSON WHO MADE THAT STATMENT WAS THREATENED BY THIS ENGINE WHEN THEY SAID IT LOL
fuhteng says:
09:16 PM, 03/28/11
Now compare that to the dyno from the latest gigantic diesel pickup. I wonder who would win?
foxthewhite says:
10:12 PM, 03/28/11
at first glance the curves resemble those of a diesel engine
zoomzoom22 says:
12:26 AM, 03/29/11
Video, please!!
ed341 says:
03:53 AM, 03/29/11
New long-termer? Pleeease!!
mieden says:
04:04 AM, 03/29/11
So, you's guyz just happened to have a Mulsanne layin around?
kkear3 says:
04:12 AM, 03/29/11
What is a Ford wrench doing with a Bentley engine shroud?
lostboyz says:
04:21 AM, 03/29/11
are you sure you didn't just test a big turbo diesel?
suju89 says:
04:56 AM, 03/29/11
"Bentleys have never been about peak power numbers; their calling card's always been torque.
...Which makes the Mulsanne's 8-speed autobox a total head-scratcher."
I'm guessing that the 8 gears are there to make up for the extremely short power band. In the same fashion that large trucks have up to 18 gears despite the insane amount of torque.
bonzjr says:
05:01 AM, 03/29/11
Great dyno test. That's just an insane amount of locomotive-like power. That must have raised a few eyebrows when you pulled up with that and asked them to strap it down.
Those wheels remind me -- from a distance -- of the Ronal "Teddy Bear" rims. I would say on a $300k car that's not a good thing (actually, on a $3k car it's not a good thing either).
kevm14 says:
06:22 AM, 03/29/11
Yay pushrods. It's cool that this engine is still around.
cwalton1 says:
06:29 AM, 03/29/11
@ mieden: We did an IL Track Tested on this car a few months back... We only just got around to posting the dyno test.
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2010/10/il-track-tested-2011-bentley-mulsanne.html#more
Chris Walton
ms3omglol says:
06:53 AM, 03/29/11
Chuck Norris' roundhouse kick just called and said, "Big deal! Let me know when you make enough torque to reverse the rotation of the earth".
pei_asdf says:
07:26 AM, 03/29/11
"@ mieden: We did an IL Track Tested on this car a few months back... We only just got around to posting the dyno test.
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2010/10/il-track-tested-2011-bentley-mulsanne.html#more
Chris Walton"
So whos long term test car is this? I cannot believe someone would lent you a $300,000 car for a few months.
BTW, could you guys also do a Aventador LP 700-4 long term test car? Thanks
fantastic says:
07:31 AM, 03/29/11
gear change so smooth you could wipe a baby's ass with em!!!....lmao
a1c_scg says:
08:28 AM, 03/29/11
Well written little piece. I absolutley freaking love this car. It's so cool. A proper Bentley. None of this lame badge-engineered Rolls garbage.
Couple of things-
1. Obviously, that is an ass-load of power.
2. This thing desparately needs a good tune. Look at those spikes in the power delivery. Sheesh.
ptcdawg says:
08:38 AM, 03/29/11
I agree, with that much torque and the proper rear end gearing, 3 speeds might be too much. :)
copmotor440cid says:
09:36 AM, 03/29/11
So is this motor prevented from reving to 5k and beyond in the interest of NVH or does it run out of breath past 4500? I would imagine theres another 50 horses or more to be had with a 5500 rpm ceiling and without sacrificing low and midrange torque. Awesome torque down low, although looking at the Vipers torque curve I wouldn't exactly call it peaky even compared to this beast. As much as I hate the pointless IL burnout contests, I think in a Bentley I might make an exception.
a1c_scg says:
11:11 AM, 03/29/11
Don't hold me to it, but I think it's a little of both. The NVH, and the engine's ability to make power any further up the rev band. To have such immense torque down low, the turbos have to be fairly small, and this thing no doubt has a long stroke. Add that to the inevitable weight of the internals to be able to withstand such pressure, and you have a recipe for low revs.
I would guess for more power up top, you'd have to fit larger turbos and/or use a different cam in conjunction w/ raising the rev limiter. Free-flowing exhaust would prolly work wonder, too.
a1c_scg says:
11:11 AM, 03/29/11
Don't hold me to it, but I think it's a little of both. The NVH, and the engine's ability to make power any further up the rev band. To have such immense torque down low, the turbos have to be fairly small, and this thing no doubt has a long stroke. Add that to the inevitable weight of the internals to be able to withstand such pressure, and you have a recipe for low revs.
I would guess for more power up top, you'd have to fit larger turbos and/or use a different cam in conjunction w/ raising the rev limiter. Free-flowing exhaust would prolly work wonders, too.
norsairius says:
11:43 AM, 03/29/11
This looks nothing like the Mulsanne I saw on the latest season of Top Gear. I think you guys have the wrong car. ;)
Beastly torque numbers though, for sure. Must be good for moving that heavy car!
kevm14 says:
01:38 PM, 03/29/11
"This thing desparately needs a good tune. Look at those spikes in the power delivery"
Went back and read the performance test and noticed this:
"Noticed 'pinging' valves a couple of times-- needs 93 and not California's 91?"
That may explain the lumpy power delivery. Possibly an unsophisticated low octane detection algorithm and it just keeps trying to feed back spark, only to get knock and retard the timing until it stops. Rinse and repeat: lumpy power.
a1c_scg says:
01:55 PM, 03/29/11
Could very well be the culprit. Didn't read the test review on the car.
Either way, I still love this car. I like the droptop even more.
barmjuan says:
02:49 PM, 03/29/11
Automatic suspension? Is it just me or did the front of the Mulsanne lift slightly on acceleration?
v8vader says:
03:16 PM, 03/29/11
when you build a tank, you give it an engine that works in a tank.
compressor says:
05:19 PM, 03/29/11
IL,
Can you please be the first to refrain from stating torque numbers at low rpm and hp at high rpm. Everything should be stated in HP or torque, not both (I have no preference, the conversion is easy)
Example for this car: "Observed peak power at the wheels is 474hp at 4150 rpm. However, the engine is able to put an amazing 328hp to the wheels at its 2550rpm torque peak."
And for the record, one doesn't feel torque. You feel acceleration, which is a function of power. I can sell a car with 975 lb-ft of torque. Sounds great, but if it comes at 500rpm I'll only be left with 93 bhp. And that won't get you anywhere fast.
People that "feel" a torquey engine are feeling relatively high hp at low rpm which results in higher acceleration at said rpm.
Sorry, but this is a pet pieve of mine.
compressor says:
05:21 PM, 03/29/11
This thing also proves, once again, that there really is no replacement for displacement.
This thing must be fun to drive. I'd imagine it feels like an airplane taking off.
mind_ride says:
07:04 PM, 03/29/11
If this were a domestic car, it would be lambasted for having a primitive, unrefined push-rod truck engine.
a1c_scg says:
09:11 AM, 03/30/11
But it's not a domestic. And it's engine isn't unrefined. Nor is it found in a truck. Soooo.....
dizzi says:
12:13 PM, 03/30/11
Ha cool car for the price i guess... But you wanna take it and its "DANGLY BITS" to the track and pit it against a VIPER???? Just remember the company that makes (made) the Viper also used to make tank engines ;~) And why pick on the currently non-existant Viper when it packs more then EVERY PRODUCTION CAR ??????? I guess thats a compliment since its sounds better than "Hey Mr. Peterbuilt... " Duh?
Just kidding that would be a joke....ummm but then again doesn't IL take "EVERYTHING" to the track????? ( minivans, 200 converibles, kia four bangers )
Letz go baby put YOUR dangly bitz where your mouth is ..... Line 'em up...or SHUT up !
JMO ... I could be wrong.