Rolls-Royce may be working on a new, mega-powerful roadster for 2017. CAR reports the convertible would conceivably boast a V16 engine. Of course, the report gets a little muddled here, with CAR saying the engine would be very similar to that of the one that powers the Bugatti Veyron – the French machine makes use of a W16 mill. Even so, the article says the Rolls-Royce version could put down around 700 horsepower. Design wise, we're told the creation will feature a suitably long nose with the passenger compartment pushed far to the rear.

Of course, 2017 is a long way off, and the thought of a 16-cylinder, naturally aspirated engine bowing under the crush of ever more stringent government fuel efficiency and emission regulations seems unlikely. We'll just put this one in the wait-and-see file for the time being. In the interim, you can hop over to CAR for a closer look at the magazine's rendering of the would-be roadster. If a V16 convertible does happen, look for a smug look on Rowan Atkinson's face.

Oh, and about that SUV? There's not much to report, though CAR does note that officials are keeping a close eye on rival Bentley and its plans for a luxury utility vehicle. Rolls brand boss Harald Krüger has even gone so far as to admit "we're regularly debating whether to take action."


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 36 Comments
      vegasstyleguy
      • 1 Year Ago
      I highly doubt Rolls cares about govt regs when they could sell a 16 Roadster at near Bugatti prices in places where that stuff doesn't matter or could be built into the price.
      OptimusPrimeRib
      • 1 Year Ago
      The car was designed with a V-16 in mind so I'm glad RR is following through with its original plans, albeit a little late.
      jz78817
      • 1 Year Ago
      V16? Because f*** you, that's why.
      Jonathan Wayne
      • 1 Year Ago
      A 16 cylinder Rolls Royce to go with your 16 cylinder Veyron. How could you not want this? Need a sedan version also.
      Ken
      • 1 Year Ago
      I really hope they can pull it off. They would sell as many as they could make, at any price they desired.
      likeaboss1234boss
      • 1 Year Ago
      imagine the tree huggers faces when this rolls by :O
        wmichalek
        • 1 Year Ago
        @likeaboss1234boss
        I understand that stupidity hurts. So does it, like?
        Tom
        • 1 Year Ago
        @likeaboss1234boss
        I know, like, isn't it hilarious how some people care about the fate of the world and others don't? And aren't the former just so worthy of ridicule? Ha, ha, the skies above Rome are so pretty when it's burning.
          OptimusPrimeRib
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Tom
          Do you guys recycle the paper and post you use for signs after you're done with your save the trees rally?
      rmt_1
      • 1 Year Ago
      Before variable displacement technology got nearly perfected, the whole idea of a 16-cylinder engine in a production automobile, beyond something as exotic as the Veyron, would be seen as absurd. If Rolls-Royce can get their V16 to run on just 4-cylinders, then the car may be able to get its mileage into the 20's, which isn't too bad all things considered. I believe Cadillac was the first car company to sell a car with a 16-cylinder engine back in the 1920's, so maybe it's time for them to get back into the market; I wonder what would happen if GM put 2 of their new LT-1 V8 engines together to create their own variable-displacement V16? This could really be the sort of engine that could make a Cadillac flagship really stand out from the crowd.
      Legend
      • 1 Year Ago
      Threw up when I saw the Bentley SUV. Not interested in a Rolls SUV
        Teleny411
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Legend
        That Bentley SUV is so ugly that its bizarre looking. There's something about those headlight "pods"? That made me too, want to regurgitate.
      Jai302
      • 1 Year Ago
      Why only a 700hp V16 when they could put together 2 of those M5 engines making 1120+ hp... It makes more sense for the kind of price they're going to charge, and that "really long hood" might come in handy to accommodate this.
        Zach Chai
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Jai302
        It isn't that simple, the configuration would make it barely drivable and will overheat
      John
      • 1 Year Ago
      Rolls-Royce must be, without question, the ugliest car in existence. The once voluptuous and stately mark has now been reduced to a tacky symbol of ostentation and bad taste.
      adika3z
      • 1 Year Ago
      oh nooooooooo, tooo ugly RR car
        lazix888
        • 1 Year Ago
        @adika3z
        True, but it will get you " gashed up " all over the planet.
      tbird57w
      • 1 Year Ago
      looks like it is a good deal compared to what folks once paid for their maybachs.
    • Load More Comments