RE: TVR Confirms 'Vette Power For New Roadster

[Byker28i]

dvs_dave said:

You'll always get random failures...that's engines for you.

Except that the SP6 engine failures aren't random though?

I do think that a lot of the negativity still surrounding TVR, and a contributory factor in it's demise is the attitude perpetuated by owners of older V8 engined TVRs constantly banging on about how bad the Speed 6 is, when in reality it isn't. Only the cars built up until about 7 or 8 years ago had problems but by then TVR was already a sinking ship, regardless of engine choice. Time to change the record and move on methinks?

In the meantime, the LS route is about the only option if we want to see another TVR within the next 5 years. This is no bad thing, however a lot of the magic that the AJP8/Speed 6 cars had will unfortunately be lost.

I think it's still the stories of failures and the owners accepting it needs to be rebuilt after relatively low mileage that's affecting the reputation of the SP6, not necessarily anything to do with the RV8 owners. Obviously it's a lot better now with warranty from some engine builders, but you still hear of failures.

You said: Only the cars built up until about 7 or 8 years ago had problems
So that's just early Tuscans then?


Numbers built
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Cerbera 441 372 271 168 102 72 87 61 4 0 0
Sagaris 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 235 107 0
T350 0 0 0 0 0 10 403 454 140 8 0
Tamora 0 0 0 0 24 217 108 141 79 9 0
Tuscan 0 0 4 686 626 375 267 201 254 182 0
Typhon 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

[Byker28i]

Snoggledog said:

Idle curiosity but why not stick with the AJP8 rather than buying in a crate engine? If it's an emissions thing weren't TVR already talking to Ricardo(?) about getting it up to spec?

Dunno - would the AJP8 fit?

[dvs_dave]

I think the AJP8 unit cost was too high hence why the Speed 6 was developed in the first place. Also with a 2 valve head there was no way it would meet emissions, and as for Ricardo, nice idea if TVR could actually afford it!

Back to the speed 6; I'd be very surprised if those Sag failures were due to knackered finger followers like on the early engines? Of the post '04/'05 failures I've heard about, there's been a few spun big end bearings, and another recent one was a blown head gasket. All of which could easily be attributed to over revving or overheating.

The worst of the Speed 6's from what I've ascertained over the years were probably the '01-'03 engines as TVR tried to cut costs by getting Indian made followers. Unfortunately they were the wrong hardness in comparison to the camshafts, hence the premature wear rates. Lubrication was not the problem.

If the followers were ok and the engine lasted (as in my case), then the soft "race spec" valve guides fitted to earlier engines wore out (typically around the 30k mark) and would need replacing. At this point most people opted for a full rebuild to get the warranty but it's not strictly necessary. The engines didn't suddenly go pop, just drank more and more oil.

The bad image resulted from the poor way in which it was handled by TVR who wouldn't admit that there was a problem and kept saying it was user error. This was a long time ago now and the Speed 6 was definitely fixed post '04/'05, but a lot of people still aren't willing to fully acknowledge that and continue to grind what is now a stump of an axe.

[profstoff]

dvs_dave said:

You'll always get random failures...that's engines for you.

That really depends on how random your Quality Assurance is, I believe TVR's was really random.

dvs_dave also said:

The bad image resulted from the poor way in which it was handled by TVR who wouldn't admit that there was a problem and kept saying it was user error.

That is certainly true

dvs_dave also said:

This was a long time ago now and the Speed 6 was definitely fixed post '04/'05

That also is probably true but public perception (not PH, I mean general public) remains that the TVR has an unreliable engine. And now there is virtually no publicity around TVR to dispell the myth.

[JR]

profstoff said:

dvs_dave said:

You'll always get random failures...that's engines for you.

That really depends on how random your Quality Assurance is, I believe TVR's was really random.

QA would have had to exist for it to be random.

[JR]

dvs_dave said:

I do think that a lot of the negativity still surrounding TVR, and a contributory factor in it's demise is the attitude perpetuated by owners of older V8 engined TVRs constantly banging on about how bad the Speed 6 is, when in reality it isn't. Only the cars built up until about 7 or 8 years ago had problems but by then TVR was already a sinking ship, regardless of engine choice.

You provide a good counter balance to the exagerations of the V8 lot making claims the other way. No problems after 2002? Dream on.

[JR]

Byker28i said:

Numbers built
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Cerbera 441 372 271 168 102 72 87 61 4 0 0
Sagaris 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 235 107 0
T350 0 0 0 0 0 10 403 454 140 8 0
Tamora 0 0 0 0 24 217 108 141 79 9 0
Tuscan 0 0 4 686 626 375 267 201 254 182 0
Typhon 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

What on earth does all that lot mean? 1,000 T350s built? 350 Sags?

[JR]

dvs_dave said:

I think the AJP8 unit cost was too high hence why the Speed 6 was developed in the first place. Also with a 2 valve head there was no way it would meet emissions, and as for Ricardo, nice idea if TVR could actually afford it!

What makes you think that an 16v V8 is more costly than a 24v S6? The only reasonable explanation that we have heard for dropping the AJP8 is the legal one and that's dubious. S6 was developed because PRW wanted an S6. 2v head not meeting emissions? What about the LS? Mnay have commentated that the AJP8 life could have been extended. TVR did employ Ricaro. I'll let someone else go through the rest.

[Gazzab]

JR said:

dvs_dave said:

I think the AJP8 unit cost was too high hence why the Speed 6 was developed in the first place. Also with a 2 valve head there was no way it would meet emissions, and as for Ricardo, nice idea if TVR could actually afford it!

What makes you think that an 16v V8 is more costly than a 24v S6? The only reasonable explanation that we have heard for dropping the AJP8 is the legal one and that's dubious. S6 was developed because PRW wanted an S6. 2v head not meeting emissions? What about the LS? Mnay have commentated that the AJP8 life could have been extended. TVR did employ Ricaro. I'll let someone else go through the rest.

I have heard many many times that the AJP cost a fortune to build and that is one of the reasons for the S6 engine.

[TVRMARKUB]

I'm a big fan of the LS engine, though last week while parked at the Nurburgring Car Park TF entrance a poorly sounding Corvette parked up next to me after doing a lap, his engine had just let go and was pissing out oil/water and smoking like a tt.


the irony.

[JR]

Gazzab said:

I have heard many many times that the AJP cost a fortune to build and that is one of the reasons for the S6 engine.

Yes but that doesn't make it true.

[dvs_dave]

JR said:

Gazzab said:

I have heard many many times that the AJP cost a fortune to build and that is one of the reasons for the S6 engine.

Yes but that doesn't make it true.

2 heads, two lots of valvegear, 2 lots of cam drivetrain gubbins, 2 lots of throttle bodies and fuel rails, 2 lots of inlet and exhaust manifolds, more rods and pistons, and last but not least......have you seen the water/oil pumps assembly?

I don't see how it cannot be a lot more expensive to make than the Speed 6? Also trying to get it to meet emissions of the time without going to a 4v head would not have been be easy without castrating it. And before the LS is brought up, don't forget that the LS has a MUCH larger displacement.

[dinkel]

[quote=JonRB( . . . ) I rest my case
[/quote]
Without wishing to reopen THAT can of worms again, the Speed 6 engine is pretty well developed and reliable now. But I agree the damage is done now.
[/quote]

This quote could have been made 4 years ago. And as time goes on . . .

I really wonder what the target group is . . . and how many / few will really buy? My guess is as good as yours but I reckon no more than about a 100 will open their wallet for a brand new TVR product. And maybe another 100 or so in the year that follows.
Dragons Den mode: I can't see anyone making money from this one.

[s6boy]

JR said:

....TVR did employ Ricaro. I'll let someone else go through the rest

Can't add much more of substance other than that I was told by my local dealer that TVR had spent £2m with Ricardo. I believe in an effort to get the s6 US compliant but I would guess to also put the reliability issue to bed. I don't remember exactly when this was but Smolensky was at the helm, maybe '06.

[Byker28i]

JR said:

Byker28i said:

Numbers built
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Cerbera 441 372 271 168 102 72 87 61 4 0 0
Sagaris 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 235 107 0
T350 0 0 0 0 0 10 403 454 140 8 0
Tamora 0 0 0 0 24 217 108 141 79 9 0
Tuscan 0 0 4 686 626 375 267 201 254 182 0
Typhon 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

What on earth does all that lot mean? 1,000 T350s built? 350 Sags?

P*** poor formatting but basically years and numbers built.

[Derek Smith]

JR said:

TVR did employ Ricaro. I'll let someone else go through the rest.

I spoke with Ricardo press office and they stated that they had no knowlege of any contract with TVR. When I mentioned to them what I had been told by an official of TVR the chap apologised and said he would get the definitive answer for me.

A day or two later he phoned me and said that no contract had been signed with TVR.

Press officers tend not to give information they don't want to but are often ready to answer a direct question. I asked if they were doing any prepatory work for a contract with TVR and they said, and note the tense: "We were."

I asked if any contracts had been prepared and he said there was not a simple answer. Work would have been done on a contract by both parties before any prepatory work was started but this would not be what he thought I would consider to be a contract. Not that helpful I thought but the impression I got was that he was telling the truth.

I phoned back some time later and was told that there were no "ongoing contacts" between TVR and Ricardo. I was later told by and employee of Ricardo that they had lost money over the work they did for TVR and were not amused.

[V41LEY]

JR said:

Byker28i said:

Numbers built
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Cerbera 441 372 271 168 102 72 87 61 4 0 0
Sagaris 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 235 107 0
T350 0 0 0 0 0 10 403 454 140 8 0
Tamora 0 0 0 0 24 217 108 141 79 9 0
Tuscan 0 0 4 686 626 375 267 201 254 182 0
Typhon 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

What on earth does all that lot mean? 1,000 T350s built? 350 Sags?

TVR Fantasy Production League ?
Figures are way out

[JonRB]

Derek Smith said:

I phoned back some time later and was told that there were no "ongoing contacts" between TVR and Ricardo. I was later told by and employee of Ricardo that they had lost money over the work they did for TVR and were not amused.

I can independently corroborate that based on information from a source I have no reason to doubt.

Edited by JonRB on Monday 26th July 22:50

[JonRB]

V41LEY said:

JR said:

Byker28i said:

Numbers built
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Cerbera 441 372 271 168 102 72 87 61 4 0 0
Sagaris 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 235 107 0
T350 0 0 0 0 0 10 403 454 140 8 0
Tamora 0 0 0 0 24 217 108 141 79 9 0
Tuscan 0 0 4 686 626 375 267 201 254 182 0
Typhon 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

What on earth does all that lot mean? 1,000 T350s built? 350 Sags?

TVR Fantasy Production League ?
Figures are way out

I heard that the total production run of Sagaris was 126

[Vipers]

Did TVR ever fit seat belt tensioners, ABS or air bags? thought one time they said they didnt need them as they were a "Drivers car", what ever that meant?