Why?

"HammerheadFistpunch" (hammerheadfistpunch) 11/24/2015 at 16:32 • Filed to: Questions

0

51

That’s the simple question.

Not - why did Bentley need an SUV? (because, duh. $$$)

Not - Why does it look the way it does?

No, why...did they go to such great lengths to:

Give it a legit off road capability?

Make every effort to tout said ability?

I can only come up with 2 logical answers

1. Because its not how deep you dive, its how deep your watch can go.

2. Because Bentley genuinely hasn’t figured out that unless a person is buying into an off road pedigree (G wagon/Ranger Rover/Land Cruiser)...no one cares that SUV’s don’t go off road anymore.

Honestly, can anyone help me understand why its important for sales or image of this thing that it can go off road?

(photo credit: car and driver)

Aaron M - MasoFiST > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:37

0

Their main competitors are the G-Wagen and Range Rover, and maybe the Cayenne. That says to me that people will cross-shop the feature sets of those vehicles, regardless of whether or not they will ever use said features.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:38

0

Because even though we know better, normal folks who buy anything from a Range Rover to an Explorer to a Chevy Traxx often do it because they want to appear adventurous.

Also, middle-eastern buyers (who will no doubt buy quite a few of these) tend to take their vehicles off-road.

Vimto > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:39

0

People buy products because they can promise a certain capability regardless of whether the person is actually going to use it or not. I think that scales up to luxury brands like Bentley.

Future next gen S2000 owner > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:39

0

*raises hand*

Number one. It’s bragging rights. Like Mr. Regular and the S2000. It’s potential. It is what sells. Potential.

TheJWT > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:40

0

To please auto journalists, the only people who would ever offroad them.

TheHondaBro > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:40

0

The Bentley looks like it’s struggling.

Ash78, voting early and often > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:40

0

When Mercedes led the way in the “luxury offroading” segment around 1997 with the M-class, the very first thing they pushed was that it had some offroad cred. The reviews actually agreed. Not too long after that, the Cayenne did the same. (Never mind that the Land Cruiser beat them all to the idea)

So in a sense, it’s a way to go back to the pure poseur origins of the segment. It was ridiculous then and it’s ridiculous now.

I prefer to look on the bright side: Bentley Wagon...with some other stuff I don’t need.

HammerheadFistpunch > Aaron M - MasoFiST 11/24/2015 at 16:41

0

But again, the Gwagon and range rover are built on an off road heritage...if anything those vehicles are hamstrung by it, forced to compromise their vehicles to continue to provide this capability because its core to their brand...is the market that insecure that its a must have feature even without that brand pedigree?

MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:42

1

that flex though

HammerheadFistpunch > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 11/24/2015 at 16:42

0

See, I can buy the middle eastern market angle...but I don’t buy the “suv image” in 2015. I think people have forgotten about surge by now.

Dusty Ventures > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:42

0

Put simply: Because Range Rover

HammerheadFistpunch > Vimto 11/24/2015 at 16:43

0

Point 1 then, it doesn’t matter that I’ll never go to space my pen still works there?

SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman > Ash78, voting early and often 11/24/2015 at 16:43

0

The Land Cruiser wasn’t about luxury back then... That didn’t really start to happen until after the Lexus LX happened and then the Land Cruiser started to get gussied up a bit also (though not close to the LX)

Snuze: Needs another Swede > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:43

1

Because it’s a Bentley. Nothing about a Bentley should be half-assed or assumed. I think they are just that type of company... doing things the right way is how you get the sort of prestige they have.

Sam > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:43

0

People in the middle east do tend to take their vehicles off road a lot. And people here follow point 1. They want something capable that makes them look super adventurous.

It's the same reason why a lot of the off road guys never wash their trucks. They took them offroading once, 6 months ago, but with mud all over it looks like they go off road every week. Super adventurous.

RallyWrench > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:44

0

Because that other British SUV manufacturer makes Bentley look stupid?Anything with a low range, ABS & a stability/traction program with descent control, and M+S tires can be made to have “off road capability”. Just wait until that breakover rips the rockers off, for a several thousand dollar bill. That’s why “off road” belongs in quotation marks.

HammerheadFistpunch > TheJWT 11/24/2015 at 16:44

1

nuts to poor journos, they aren’t buying and the smart ones aren’t impressed by this nonsense.

Stapleface-Now Hyphenated! > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:44

0

Because why take a horse to the fox hunt when you can take a Bentley?

Aaron M - MasoFiST > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:45

2

If you’re a theoretical marketing analyst and see the luxury SUVs making more margin than a, say, Lexus RX or Infiniti QX60, and doing similar volumes, will it be immediately apparent that said margin is not in fact caused by the off-road pedigree? Car guys think in terms of features and practicality, but that’s not what 95% of the car-buying public care about. And in this market, it’s “is my Bentayga cooler than Tom’s G-Wagen, and shows how much more I paid for it?”

HammerheadFistpunch > SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman 11/24/2015 at 16:45

1

quite right, about 96 is when the fancifacation of the cruiser happened, and even then it was just a dressed up utility wagon.

HammerheadFistpunch > Ash78, voting early and often 11/24/2015 at 16:45

1

1997 was ever so long ago though, which leads me to believe that Bentley really is living in the past.

HammerheadFistpunch > MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s 11/24/2015 at 16:46

1

it would be nice if there was some

Ash78, voting early and often > SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman 11/24/2015 at 16:47

1

Here’s the interior of a ‘97 model. I’d say (for Toyota...pat them on the head), this is about as luxurious as anything non-Lexus they made at the time. But yeah, the Lexus twin really upped their game here.

HammerheadFistpunch > Dusty Ventures 11/24/2015 at 16:47

0

yes...but Range Rover has an excuse. It’s the hallmark of their brand, its the REASON people put up with shoddy product. Why does this also apply to a Bentley? Unless Bentley is happy saying “me too, what they do? Yes to that, only with us instead of them.”

If I were a rich guy this would turn me off more than draw me in.

HammerheadFistpunch > Snuze: Needs another Swede 11/24/2015 at 16:48

0

is it “the right way?” Wouldn’t it be a better grand touring utility wagon without the extra weight and complexity?

HammerheadFistpunch > Sam 11/24/2015 at 16:49

0

hey now, some of us are just lazy

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:49

0

Why do you think people buy a Ford Explorer, but not a Flex or Taurus X? Why do you think people bought twice as many Pilots as Odysseys last year? It’s a factor, whether you or even the people buying them know it or not.

Also, it’s the same reason some people buy a 911 Turbo to drive to the grocery store. It’s about the fact that a) you know what the car can do, and it makes you feel good, and b) other people know what the car can do, and it makes you feel good.

HammerheadFistpunch > Stapleface-Now Hyphenated! 11/24/2015 at 16:50

0

Because you wouldn’t hear the bugle in a Bentley.

Wobbles the Mind > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 16:50

0

Simply put, there is a relatively huge market without competition above $200k. The next Cayenne will cover all the street stuff. The upcoming Lamborghini will be the fastest SUV around the Ring. That leaves the Bentley aiming for the Range Rover and G owners that want an SUV that is over $200k without being confused with variants that are half that price to enter. Remember that it actually makes more sense to spend $250,000 on a vehicle that covers your needs for speed, prestige, road presence, utility, and all season driveability than some low to ground, unusable 488 GTB. Even Land Rover had to add on an SV-Autobiography and a Holland and Holland edition to push further upmarket.

HammerheadFistpunch > Aaron M - MasoFiST 11/24/2015 at 16:52

0

So it really does boil down to the believe (not saying its true) that people still think an SUV needs to be a capable off-roader always?

HammerheadFistpunch > Wobbles the Mind 11/24/2015 at 16:53

0

Oh I agree that upmarket is Bentleys thing...but the road upmarket is paved.

HammerheadFistpunch > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 11/24/2015 at 16:58

0

Why do people buy crossovers? Because of fear. Fear of the alternative which is seen as weak and submissive (minivans and wagons). I don’t think capability or perceived ruggedness factors in to the equation anymore. in 2015 its not about where you can go its what you’ll look like. What I mean to say is that I think for all but a few, the image of the SUV as a tool for outdoor escapism is largely gone and dead, replaced with fashion based buying decisions that are less “I look rugged” but are more “I wont look like my mother.”

HammerheadFistpunch > Ash78, voting early and often 11/24/2015 at 17:01

0

My 97 looks like this minus the hilariously bad wood trim. The only difference between a Land Cruiser and the Pink Panty Cruiser (nickname for the LX) is that the LX got softer springs, different leather, a different subwoofer and horrid body cladding. The LX 450 was a seriously half-assed effort at a luxury vehicle.

SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 17:01

0

Living in the past? I hardly think that’s fair. If anything SUV sales are going up year-over-year.

Bentley is just late to the party.

HammerheadFistpunch > SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman 11/24/2015 at 17:04

1

Oh no, I have no beef with them wanting to cash in on the SUV and I don’t even think the timing is bad for hyper luxury SUV’s...but as the SUV market continues its upward arch anyone that’s been in the game for a while is learning to ditch the pretensions of off road worthiness unless its vital to the brand. Thats what I mean with stuck in the past. Bentley is building an SUV like its 1999

SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 17:08

0

So it seems they’re emulating Land Rover more than anyone else

HammerheadFistpunch > SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman 11/24/2015 at 17:14

0

yes...which is sad to be honest. If it were my money and I had to choose between a Land Rover and a more expensive car that WANTS to be a Land Rover...well that’s an easy choice.

Aaron M - MasoFiST > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 17:16

1

It is honestly my belief that in any car segment where transaction prices are above $75k it’s about having more than the other guy. In luxury SUVs, that often translates to off-road capability. Though, there’s another class of SUVs, the Cayennes and X5Ms and SQ7s which are “sporty” rather than “off-road”. Both are just different variants of “I have more than you”.

I don’t think the engineers or even the marketers actually believe this will be used. Then again, most Chrysler engineers know a Hellcat has maybe a .01% chance of ever being taken to the track, so I really don’t think off-road luxury SUV is any different than any sports car with more than 400hp. 90% of 911 turbos will not use the top 75% of their capabilities in their lifetime.

HammerheadFistpunch > Aaron M - MasoFiST 11/24/2015 at 17:19

0

I have no delusions that Bentley actually expects anyone will use their vehicle off road...which is so strange to me they are working so hard to promote it. I mean its fine to say “yeah, its all in there...all the stuff you need.” but to make a point of making sure all the press drives have off road courses? That’s new Tacoma type marketing.

Aaron M - MasoFiST > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 17:24

0

Thinking about the market, they probably looked at their competition. The SQ7s, the X5Ms, and the Cayennes of the world are fast as hell, modern, and already kind of in an arms race. The Range Rover and G-wagen are old designs trading on their legacy, with the most recent change (the Evoque) aimed downmarket, away from your product and audience. Now if you were designing a new product from the ground up, in a brand that trades on their legacy significantly, who would you try to target?

HammerheadFistpunch > Aaron M - MasoFiST 11/24/2015 at 17:26

0

As I was telling snap, I think the biggest turnoff for me is a quarter million dollar Bentley that wants to be an Audi or Range Rover. Just BE a Bentley.

PS9 > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 17:31

0

‘image’. Right there is the answer to your question. Remember what happened when people trophy truck’d their Raptors into oblivion? Even though Ford never advertised that capability? It didn’t matter. The bent-frame pictures spread like wild fire and damaged both Ford as a brand and the credibility of the Raptor as the most extreme off-road factory truck your could buy.

It would be a rather bad look for Bentley if someone took their Bentayga to a trail and it fell flat on it’s face, or worse; getting towed out of a jam it had no business getting itself into by a Range Rover. The commentary on that Jalopnik/Road and Track/Motor Trend article writes itself. ‘ LOL at $220k you’d think they wouldn’t forget to put the U in this SUV’ ‘Hmm, $220k for one Bentayga, or a 3 Range Rover Bentayga rescue fleet. $10k a pop, I’ll make my money back overnight and then some haha.’ It’s true that many Bentaygas will never see a trail, as it was true that many Raptors would never touch the sands of Baha, but in the public eye -where all of your customers are watching - that will never matter. No one wants to put their cash into a deficient product, even if they specifically won’t use the capability.

‘Image’. That word means so much here. What’s the image you get when you pit a Bentayga with no offroad capability and a $220k pricetag against the Range Rover Autobiography, that comes in at half price and gives you the same plush interior and locking differentials if you want? ‘Not good enough.’ and that is unacceptable. This is a $220k Bentley. All of the other cars are the ones that must be not good enough.

Aaron M - MasoFiST > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 17:33

0

I think that Bentley’s marketing staff have as little an idea of how to make an SUV “BE a Bentley” as we do.

HammerheadFistpunch > PS9 11/24/2015 at 17:36

0

Its just a shame that a Land Rover Autobiography is the better SUV, even at half the price. Its just my opinion that Bentley needs to be Bentley and frankly I don’t think most prospective buyers give a darn about its trail performance, even in reviews. But then again, maybe I’m giving their buyers too much credit.

HammerheadFistpunch > Aaron M - MasoFiST 11/24/2015 at 17:38

0

Well, I can tell you what Bentley is not: an adventure brand.

PS9 > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 17:54

0

I don’t know if we can render a judgement like that from here. If it were Ford or somebody and they were going to xerox a billion of them after a committee of penny pinchers and shareholders told them it was what they need to boost marketshare by 10% next quarter...sure. We can tell why they’re doing it from here.

But with someone like Bentley, where the volume of their whole brand is roughly half that of a Miata, the dynamics are different. No one who gets a Bentley new - leasing, financing, outright cash, whatever - will be hurting for money because of the purchase. Many could get a new Bentley every year on the year without feeling the pinch. Given that it’s only 3k people/year that get these things new, It’s not hard for me to imagine a client being able to talk directly with Bentley if they wanted to, and research on what your buyers want from you is much easier when there are so few (just call them up and ask).

The more I think about this, the more I realize that the Bentayga’s place in the market relative to other products is not at all like that of, say, an Expedition, or a Sequoia, or even a Land Rover. It’s not like the target market for this thing don’t know about the Land Rover AB. Many of them probably already have one. It exists, not because they really needed an SUV in their lineup, but because Bentley’s clientelle asked for it and are guaranteed to pick one up as soon as it’s ready.

HammerheadFistpunch > PS9 11/24/2015 at 17:58

0

That’s the moral of the story - Bentley buyers wanted it [off road cred]...heavens knows why...so Bentley built it. It doesn’t speak highly of Bentley buyers though that are impressed only by how many tick marks a company can squeeze onto the order sheet.

for Michigan > HammerheadFistpunch 11/24/2015 at 18:48

0

For the same reason all the luxury brands tout track performance figures for the fancy versions of their cars. How many M/AMG/RS/V owners actually track their cars? Is their performance potential relevant for daily driving? Does their capability compromise their real mission of comfortable street driving?

All of those absurd performance cars that everyone loves are the exact same thing. An irrelevant percentage of owners are ever going to use that capability, but having it strokes their egos.

LionZoo > Aaron M - MasoFiST 11/24/2015 at 22:57

1

Exactly. As someone on miata.net (who weirdly had a collection of exotics) once said, “If I date a supermodel, it’s about being seen with her. What I do or not do with her in the bedroom is my business alone.”

911e46z06 > HammerheadFistpunch 11/25/2015 at 01:06

2

I see very little ‘legit off road capability’ on display in that photo.

To me it looks a lot like a gussied up station wagon on a dirt road taking a nose-dive into a medium-sized dip that a stock Geo Tracker could handle without missing a beat.

Snuze: Needs another Swede > HammerheadFistpunch 11/25/2015 at 09:16

0

I’m not sure what the difference between a Grand Touring Utility Wagon (GTUW)and a plain old SUV is. I think to most consumers that sounds like a made up term for “I bought an SUV but I don’t want to call it an SUV.” To some people there’s probably an appeal in that. To people spending a quarter million dollars on a luxury SUV, I doubt it.

Also... extra weight in a Bentley? Really? This is a company that prides itself on building 2 ton+ cars. I don’t think thats a concern. Also, it’s not that complex, they aren’t reinventing the wheel, and there are lots of different AWD and 4WD units available off the shelf from vendors like Getrag or ZF. Packaging may be an issue, but I don’t think the Bentayga is exactly small, so they have some room to work.

I just think Bentley is a prestigious company known for making fine automobiles. They’ve been constantly held in high regard basically since the company started, and the only way that happens is if you continue to make a top notch product. On the flip side they are still a niche brand. They only recently surpassed 10,000 vehicles a year in sales. They definitely don’t have the muscle to redefine the market space and create a new class of vehicle. What they can do is do what they do best - bring their A game and make a top notch SUV.