Bentley Torcal vs Lotus Eletre
Bentley Torcal leads 6 to 3
Biggest differences: 0–100 km/h — Bentley Torcal 2.9 s, Lotus Eletre 4.5 s · Boot — Bentley Torcal 460 l, Lotus Eletre 688 l · Power — Bentley Torcal 888 PS, Lotus Eletre 612 PS.
Bentley Torcal
The Bentley Torcal is the first all-electric SUV from Bentley: it features a 108.7 kWh battery, a range of up to 603 km according to the WLTP standard, and a power output of 821 or 888 horsepower.
Lotus Eletre
An electric SUV in the F-segment, combining high power with fast DC charging and a large cargo capacity.
Profile against the market: Bentley Torcal vs Lotus Eletre
Bentley Torcal or Lotus Eletre — who wins where
Bentley Torcal leads 6 to 3
The score leaves out metrics where data is missing on one side.
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmBentley Torcal +3 km
- Battery kWhLotus Eletre +3.3 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmBentley Torcal −3.4 kWh/100 km
- Power PSBentley Torcal +276 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sBentley Torcal −1.6 s
- Top speed km/hBentley Torcal +2 km/h
- DC charging kWNo data
- AC charging kWNo data
- Charging ↓ minBentley Torcal −4 min
- Weight ↓ kgLotus Eletre −125 kg
- Boot lLotus Eletre +228 l
Technical data: Bentley Torcal vs Lotus Eletre
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Bentley Torcal S |  Lotus EletreBase | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 603 km | 600 km | Bentley +3 km |
| Battery | 108.7 kWh | 112 kWh | Lotus +3.3 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 18 kWh/100 km | 21.4 kWh/100 km | Bentley −3.4 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | — | 350 kW | — |
| AC charging | — | 22 kW | — |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 16 min | 20 min | Bentley −4 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 26.4 km/min | 21 km/min | Bentley +5.4 km/min |
| Voltage | — | 800 V | — |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 888 PS | 612 PS | Bentley +276 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 2.9 s | 4.5 s | Bentley −1.6 s |
| Top speed | 260 km/h | 258 km/h | Bentley +2 km/h |
| Drivetrain | AWD | AWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 2720 kg | 2595 kg | Lotus −125 kg |
| Boot | 460 l | 688 l | Lotus +228 l |
| Length | 5008 mm | 5103 mm | Lotus +95 mm |
| Width | 2025 mm | 2019 mm | Bentley +6 mm |
| Height | 1677 mm | 1630 mm | Bentley +47 mm |
| Wheelbase | 3023 mm | 3019 mm | Bentley +4 mm |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Bentley Torcal
Lotus Eletre
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Bentley Torcal
Lotus Eletre
Other comparisons in this class: SUV, segment F
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Why does the Lotus Eletre have a bigger battery but a shorter range than the Bentley Torcal?
The Lotus Eletre carries 112 kWh and covers 600 km, while the Bentley Torcal with its 108.7 kWh battery does 603 km. Energy use decides it: 21.4 against 18 kWh/100 km.
Which is more powerful — Bentley Torcal or Lotus Eletre?
The Bentley Torcal is stronger: 888 PS against the 612 PS of the Lotus Eletre. The gap is 276 PS.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Lotus Eletre takes more: 688 l against 460 l in the Bentley Torcal. The difference is 228 l.
Which is cheaper to run?
The Bentley Torcal uses less electricity: 18 kWh/100 km against 21.4 kWh/100 km in the Lotus Eletre. Over 15000 km a year that is a difference of 510 kWh — the calculator on this page turns it into money.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.