These “beta prototypes” pack more power, more towing, but no word on range or price.
With the Tesla range and the new Porsche Taycan, there’s no shortage of high-performance electric vehicles to choose from. But while blistering sprints to 60 are common place, the move to electric performance hasn’t transitioned to dirt yet. Bollinger, though, is hoping to change that with what it’s calling the “beta prototypes” for its B1 and B2 off-road EVs.
It’s been over two years since we saw the Bollinger B1 SUV, and nearly a year since the B2 pickup arrived, but these beta prototypes reveal a good deal more than off-road aspirations and a design that relies almost exclusively on right angles. For a start, there’s an updated packet of specs.
Where the Bollinger said the B1 would have just 360 horsepower and 472 pound-feet of torque at its 2017 debut, the company is now citing a dual-motor setup with 614 horsepower and 678 pound-feet of torque. Somehow, the sprint to 60 remains unchanged at 4.5 seconds, while the top speed drops from 127 to 100 miles per hour. The towing capacity scoots up, though, to 7,500 pounds.
Unchanged, though, is the B1 and B2’s focus on off-road ability. Both the pickup truck and SUV offer a two-speed transfer case, 15 inches of ground clearance, and 10 inches of suspension travel. That should allow it to get deep into the countryside, although just how far it’ll go remains an open question.
When the B1 debuted in 2017, Bollinger listed a 60- and 100-kilowatt-hour battery, with range figures landing between 120 and 200 miles per charge. But following the B2's debut, it's 120-kWh packs across the range. There are no range estimates, though.
It’s also too early to say how much Bollinger will charge for its rugged EV. We were hoping to see prices for both models as part of today’s debut, but aside from the aforementioned details, the company is mum on prices.
Correction: A previous version of this story indicated the B1 and B2 weighed in at 10,000 pounds. That figure is the gross vehicle weight rating. This is (quite obviously) incorrect. The story has been edited accordingly. We regret the error.