Awesome Tuscan R - OH YES!
Discussion
Mate of colleague was in that Ferrari coming back from Le Mans. He normally takes the P out of the TVR fraternity here. This time whilst telling the tale, he was still unbelievably-gob-smacked. 2 people have since rushed and put their deposits down.
£75k new, means a very tasty 2nd hand car is potentially very affordable within a couple of years.
Chris Runciman got some first-class tutorage from Martin Short and the Rollcentre guys about how to put together an exquisite chassis and, has a great CV now on the back of it. Shame the article did not heap any praise on the development cycle of the car over the past year - from Barn-door Rolex Blue original example to "oh-my-gawd" current Rosso version.
The car isn't comparable with a 996TT or anything else this side of a "specialist" manufacturer. For Murcialago beating dynamics, performance and soundtrack (if they sort out the exhausts - get the '02 racing side-exits please) even £75-80k doesn't sound too bad (relatively of course).
£75k new, means a very tasty 2nd hand car is potentially very affordable within a couple of years.
Chris Runciman got some first-class tutorage from Martin Short and the Rollcentre guys about how to put together an exquisite chassis and, has a great CV now on the back of it. Shame the article did not heap any praise on the development cycle of the car over the past year - from Barn-door Rolex Blue original example to "oh-my-gawd" current Rosso version.
The car isn't comparable with a 996TT or anything else this side of a "specialist" manufacturer. For Murcialago beating dynamics, performance and soundtrack (if they sort out the exhausts - get the '02 racing side-exits please) even £75-80k doesn't sound too bad (relatively of course).
Totally agree with most everything that's been said (DeR - an EVO 7 ??? WTH ??? Presumably you got fed up with refilling the bugger every 200 yards).
I've read the article and followed the car's progress. Big up to TVR for this one folks....as my dear friend and colleague said previous, in a couple of years time, the second hand market will offer us mere mortals who shudder at the D word cars like this. Okay, so they've probably taken a bit of a Franz Klammering from the previous owner, but hey.
Back end is a concern for me, never mind gearbox. They obviously didn't want the embarrassment of EVO or some other big player taking it for a jolly and have the cogbox go FTOOM! on them, so safe option - bung in the 'Borg. Tough as old boots. But I digress.
The rear of this car is somehow unfinished, incomplete. Okay, so the front end didn't exactly take a lot of homework as that had already been done, but it just doesn't finish the car off too well, and considering most of us will see the ass of it a fair bit, it's got to be good. I hope and pray the TVR Scribes get this sorted PDQ. Otherwise, I'd have one. No, I would. Really.
DeR, you've had some super cars sir, looking at your profile. Shame about your Elise. My missus nearly had one instead of the Porker (a 135), but decided she didn't want half of her office gawping at her skuddies every time she got out of the damn thing. Shame, nice bit of kit. The car that is.
I've read the article and followed the car's progress. Big up to TVR for this one folks....as my dear friend and colleague said previous, in a couple of years time, the second hand market will offer us mere mortals who shudder at the D word cars like this. Okay, so they've probably taken a bit of a Franz Klammering from the previous owner, but hey.
Back end is a concern for me, never mind gearbox. They obviously didn't want the embarrassment of EVO or some other big player taking it for a jolly and have the cogbox go FTOOM! on them, so safe option - bung in the 'Borg. Tough as old boots. But I digress.
The rear of this car is somehow unfinished, incomplete. Okay, so the front end didn't exactly take a lot of homework as that had already been done, but it just doesn't finish the car off too well, and considering most of us will see the ass of it a fair bit, it's got to be good. I hope and pray the TVR Scribes get this sorted PDQ. Otherwise, I'd have one. No, I would. Really.
DeR, you've had some super cars sir, looking at your profile. Shame about your Elise. My missus nearly had one instead of the Porker (a 135), but decided she didn't want half of her office gawping at her skuddies every time she got out of the damn thing. Shame, nice bit of kit. The car that is.
Easy there chaps. I didn't say it was ugly. I just don't think that visually it moves TVR very much further on than the current range of cars.
Undoubtedly its performance is awesome, but on looks alone, for me, it doesn't have the wow factor of a Cerbera, DB7 or F355 (or the Griff, when it was first introduced). In fact, when I think about it, a standard Tuscan is visually more dramatic.
But again, I stress that it may be totally different when I see one in the flesh/carbon fibre.
Undoubtedly its performance is awesome, but on looks alone, for me, it doesn't have the wow factor of a Cerbera, DB7 or F355 (or the Griff, when it was first introduced). In fact, when I think about it, a standard Tuscan is visually more dramatic.
But again, I stress that it may be totally different when I see one in the flesh/carbon fibre.
Oh bloody hell Roadsweeper! I've just looked at that bloody car again. PLEASE somebody de-invent it: I just can't stand the fact that it won't be in the garage back home tonight. This is TORTURE!
National speed limit? TVR Tuscan R? And your right foot...how long would your licence stay sub-50 points do you think?
National speed limit? TVR Tuscan R? And your right foot...how long would your licence stay sub-50 points do you think?
Deristictor,comments were aimed very much at the ownership level not the perfomance.
Single ultimate car - yep 996TT
I think if you approach the R expecting Germanic-type ownership/service interval type behaviour, then you are on planet zogg. But, if you want a fun-packed-rocks-off-rocket-sled etc etc that can outhandle a 911 (irrespective of engine) then you'd have to go a long way to beat this.
Single ultimate car - yep 996TT
I think if you approach the R expecting Germanic-type ownership/service interval type behaviour, then you are on planet zogg. But, if you want a fun-packed-rocks-off-rocket-sled etc etc that can outhandle a 911 (irrespective of engine) then you'd have to go a long way to beat this.
Beast - see what you mean, Guv.
Obviously you're talking about power to weight ratios here, amongst other variables, right?
I'm currently pondering the CarGraphic Stage V (final mod) to my trusty 993TT. This will hike the thing 50bhp
to 540. Although this works out at a reasonable 600ft/lb-ish of torque the bhp/tonne quotient will be just over 372 - which ain't quite Brut 33 enough, here in Asgard.
Now if the new TVR really will deliver 422bhp/tonne then questions concerning one's sexual proclivity just might be raised.
OK, so I admit to being mesmerized by Harry M's scribings in that there EVO article (the bit about the Tuscan R getting into the premium 400bhp/tonne+ division, along with F40s and Zondas) but unless there's an alternative it seems to me that given a 540bhp max the only way to hit the magic 400 is to loose at least 100kg, which will save those blushes at the weekly "How many false prophets and deceivers did you smite this week?" shindig.
What the f***k am I on about; you tell me? Power tripping, for sure, but I MUST achieve at least 400bhp/tonne in the beetle. End of story. (I do like air con so can that stay? And the car already has the optional sports seats so I dunno about them either.)
Please help me, before the Euro fags decide that idiots like me need neutering, lest we launch a pre-emptive strike against Lichenstein.
Obviously you're talking about power to weight ratios here, amongst other variables, right?
I'm currently pondering the CarGraphic Stage V (final mod) to my trusty 993TT. This will hike the thing 50bhp
to 540. Although this works out at a reasonable 600ft/lb-ish of torque the bhp/tonne quotient will be just over 372 - which ain't quite Brut 33 enough, here in Asgard.
Now if the new TVR really will deliver 422bhp/tonne then questions concerning one's sexual proclivity just might be raised.
OK, so I admit to being mesmerized by Harry M's scribings in that there EVO article (the bit about the Tuscan R getting into the premium 400bhp/tonne+ division, along with F40s and Zondas) but unless there's an alternative it seems to me that given a 540bhp max the only way to hit the magic 400 is to loose at least 100kg, which will save those blushes at the weekly "How many false prophets and deceivers did you smite this week?" shindig.
What the f***k am I on about; you tell me? Power tripping, for sure, but I MUST achieve at least 400bhp/tonne in the beetle. End of story. (I do like air con so can that stay? And the car already has the optional sports seats so I dunno about them either.)
Please help me, before the Euro fags decide that idiots like me need neutering, lest we launch a pre-emptive strike against Lichenstein.
I know what you mean derestrictor!
Did anybody notice the editor's comments at the start of Evo? He actually says that Meaden (who is the boss at Evo and seems to really know his stuff) told him he would rather have the Tuscan R than an F40 and keep the extra £75k. WTF?!!?!?!?!?! The F40 was a dream for me as a young lad and I've lost count of the number of times I've heard it described as 'the most exciting car ever', or 'a legend', etc. etc. etc. This is really what worries me I suppose - it just sounds too good to be true! But lets hope it is, because if it is I'm going to be trying to buy one in about two years time!
Being a member of the 'I've got 400bhp/tonne' club would be damn good. But being a member of the 'I've got 400bhp/tonne club and I can use it all and my car cost less than yours' would be even better!
I say again, if anyone considers themselves to be a TVR fan then buy this months Evo - the pics alone are worth it. If you can't stretch to that then read it in WHSmiths or something!
roadsweeper.
Did anybody notice the editor's comments at the start of Evo? He actually says that Meaden (who is the boss at Evo and seems to really know his stuff) told him he would rather have the Tuscan R than an F40 and keep the extra £75k. WTF?!!?!?!?!?! The F40 was a dream for me as a young lad and I've lost count of the number of times I've heard it described as 'the most exciting car ever', or 'a legend', etc. etc. etc. This is really what worries me I suppose - it just sounds too good to be true! But lets hope it is, because if it is I'm going to be trying to buy one in about two years time!
Being a member of the 'I've got 400bhp/tonne' club would be damn good. But being a member of the 'I've got 400bhp/tonne club and I can use it all and my car cost less than yours' would be even better!
I say again, if anyone considers themselves to be a TVR fan then buy this months Evo - the pics alone are worth it. If you can't stretch to that then read it in WHSmiths or something!
roadsweeper.
The car is clearly the muts nuts but I've got zero confidence in it's engine. I know the thing will be a major pain in the arse. It's a real shame they won't bung in an AMG / Brabus 550bhp unit - I'd buy one if they did but would never consider it without. Don't tell me it wouldn't be as good. (The zonda is unbelievably impressive off the line, plus it sounds amazing).
Would love to see TVR reintroduce the back lights from the previous Tuscan R or the current Tuscan S and maybe look at the difuser from the very first show car (Think it was very light sage green)...
From some angles the back windows look like they extend too far behind the back wheels but from a low shot it looks great.
Not sure about the gold badges on Rosso Red
From some angles the back windows look like they extend too far behind the back wheels but from a low shot it looks great.
Not sure about the gold badges on Rosso Red
I wondered why they didn't use the 4.5 litre AJP8 from the Cerbie myself since they have made so many modificatons. That could produce 450-500bhp with more torque. Still lets give the car a chance eh!?
I still want to see a Cerbie R with 600bhp and a Tamora R with 450bhp though!
On the wider engine issue, I would like to see if they are improving reliability and if so by how much. If it looks like they can get things sorted as their experience increases then fair play to them. Otherwise it might be wiser to either buy in engines from a UK-based 3rd party modifier (e.g. Lotus, etc.) or, if it's worth it, have the AJP engines worked over by an outside party, again a good example would be Lotus, to improve their reliability. They would learn a lot more from this as well as retaining their bespoke engines. Any opinions?
roadsweeper.
I still want to see a Cerbie R with 600bhp and a Tamora R with 450bhp though!
On the wider engine issue, I would like to see if they are improving reliability and if so by how much. If it looks like they can get things sorted as their experience increases then fair play to them. Otherwise it might be wiser to either buy in engines from a UK-based 3rd party modifier (e.g. Lotus, etc.) or, if it's worth it, have the AJP engines worked over by an outside party, again a good example would be Lotus, to improve their reliability. They would learn a lot more from this as well as retaining their bespoke engines. Any opinions?
roadsweeper.
What do you mean by 'engine misuse' exactly?
My first thoughts would be that you mean not correctly running the engine in, failings in maintenance (e.g. not following the service schedule, not checking the oil, etc.) or 'abuse in use' such as high revs when cold or using cr@p fuel.
If the above are correct then I am confident that the majority of Cerbera owners haven't mis-treated their vehicle in this kind of way, and yet I have heard a number of bad stories about the engine. However, these seem to have died down as the AJP8 engine has been developed. What we don't have access to is any real indication of what reliability increases have been achieved by TVR.
As far as the AJP6 engine goes, that was a nightmare in its infancy. I don't know what the situation is now, but it certainly has a bad reputation.
I suppose it all comes down to the fact that we just don't have the information we need. There are probably enough TVR owners on this forum alone to give us a good indication if a proper poll were carried out, as I can't see TVR ever releasing that kind of information!
roadsweeper.
My first thoughts would be that you mean not correctly running the engine in, failings in maintenance (e.g. not following the service schedule, not checking the oil, etc.) or 'abuse in use' such as high revs when cold or using cr@p fuel.
If the above are correct then I am confident that the majority of Cerbera owners haven't mis-treated their vehicle in this kind of way, and yet I have heard a number of bad stories about the engine. However, these seem to have died down as the AJP8 engine has been developed. What we don't have access to is any real indication of what reliability increases have been achieved by TVR.
As far as the AJP6 engine goes, that was a nightmare in its infancy. I don't know what the situation is now, but it certainly has a bad reputation.
I suppose it all comes down to the fact that we just don't have the information we need. There are probably enough TVR owners on this forum alone to give us a good indication if a proper poll were carried out, as I can't see TVR ever releasing that kind of information!
roadsweeper.
I don't see any reason why provided :
a)the engine they use has exactly the same rod's and pistons as the 4.0 race engine (forget all that 4.2 crap)
b)runs without the restrictors (which makes any engine much harder to run efficiently)
c) is slightly de-tuned
you shouldn't reliably get 420hp easy (Christ the race engine puts out virtually 500hp without the restrictor trumpet).
wonder what oil system cooler they're running.
....and you're not generally going to be revving it to 8,300......are you ??
a)the engine they use has exactly the same rod's and pistons as the 4.0 race engine (forget all that 4.2 crap)
b)runs without the restrictors (which makes any engine much harder to run efficiently)
c) is slightly de-tuned
you shouldn't reliably get 420hp easy (Christ the race engine puts out virtually 500hp without the restrictor trumpet).
wonder what oil system cooler they're running.
....and you're not generally going to be revving it to 8,300......are you ??
quote:
RR - I hate to bring this subject up but I still maintain the most ridiculously adhesive thing I've ever sampled was that mad, bad, crazy tumble dryer, the EVO VII
Steady there cowboy...
The problem that I've found with the 4wd sensation is that it gives you too much confidence, and you begin to believe anything is possible. A TVR will always remind you of the potential disaster if you stop respecting the car, whereas the 4wd cars just scream "faster, faster" until it's too late!
With my Griff I was always aware I had a car that weighed the same as a J cloth, rear wheel drive, and cost upwards of 30k. With the Impreza I regarded it as an expendable toy... which it proved to be.
This is the voice of recent experience, and I'll post the pictures of my (ex)Impreza over the weekend as I'm off to inspect the remains tonight hopefully
>> Edited by ap_smith on Friday 12th July 12:20
I agree about the rear lights comment - the old rear lights (taken from the original Speed 12?
) look much better... In fact, I think the back end of the original show car looked much better full stop !
See http://web.ukonline.co.uk/tvr-cerbera/motorshow/Dscf0024.jpg for a large version of the pic
) look much better... In fact, I think the back end of the original show car looked much better full stop ! See http://web.ukonline.co.uk/tvr-cerbera/motorshow/Dscf0024.jpg for a large version of the pic
Gassing Station | General TVR Stuff & Gossip | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff