New TVR still under wraps!

[julian64]

Slow M said:

ou seem to be thinking of a dry sump system as an oil pump. Instead, think of it as being more of a supercharger, that happens to pull in a lot of oil entrained air. The oil and air are separated after the lines enter the tank, and oil is drawn from the bottom, after the maximum separation has taken place. The tanks have convoluted paths designed into them, via baffles, to promote air/oil separation.

Best regards,
Bernard.

Confused. Superchargers feed compressed air into the cylinders at the top of the engine. 'Your' dry sump supercharger, and I can't think how a dry sump pump would be compressing air would be pressurising the crankcase. How does this compressed air make it into the cylinder charge?

[rev-erend]

griffdude said:

I'm a big fan of the Ford Ecoboost-
https://www.fordgt.com/en_gb/performance/gt/?searc...

Will it ever be a customer engine though..

I know Ford did it previously with the Noble but whether they will do this again remains to be seen.

[anonymous-user]

rev-erend said:

griffdude said:

I'm a big fan of the Ford Ecoboost-
https://www.fordgt.com/en_gb/performance/gt/?searc...

Will it ever be a customer engine though..

I know Ford did it previously with the Noble but whether they will do this again remains to be seen.

The Ford GT is £325K so would they put the similar engine in a sub £80k car?

[DonkeyApple]

I assumed that rather than go V6 with all the weight of FI and being remarkably similar in cost as well as result to the V8 the ecoboost being being discussed here was a lighter weight and much cheaper standard 4 pot? As per the boggo Mustang?

[anonymous-user]

DonkeyApple said:

I assumed that rather than go V6 with all the weight of FI and being remarkably similar in cost as well as result to the V8 the ecoboost being being discussed here was a lighter weight and much cheaper standard 4 pot? As per the boggo Mustang?

OK. I've read it 4 times. Still nothing - help me out

[plfrench]

thecook101 said:

DonkeyApple said:

I assumed that rather than go V6 with all the weight of FI and being remarkably similar in cost as well as result to the V8 the ecoboost being being discussed here was a lighter weight and much cheaper standard 4 pot? As per the boggo Mustang?

OK. I've read it 4 times. Still nothing - help me out

He's just saying that he thinks the 2.3l 4 cyl Ecoboost as used in the entry level Mustang would make sense to use in an entry level TVR. The 3.5 6 cyl Ecoboost as used in the GT he feels is too close to the V8 iin terms of cost to make sense.

[anonymous-user]

dvs_dave said:

It'd be a good move to introduce an entry level Boxter Basher.

Sorry to disagree, but i think it would be a terrible idea! ;-)

Run in a "4cyl" motor doesn't save you any money (At low production volumes), and neither do TVR care about fuel economy / CO2 (which is why Ford have the ecoboost in the first place). Added to which, the cost of the New TVR is going to be building it, so a cheaper model simply means less profit. Then you get to the issue of the fact there is no why TVR can make as "good" a car (for real world, practical useage) as Porsche can, so there entry level model will simply not be competitive in that market. Add all those facts up and it's a massive own goal for TVR to do this, hence they are not doing it!!

[griffdude]

V6Pushfit said:

rev-erend said:

griffdude said:

I'm a big fan of the Ford Ecoboost-
https://www.fordgt.com/en_gb/performance/gt/?searc...

Will it ever be a customer engine though..

I know Ford did it previously with the Noble but whether they will do this again remains to be seen.

The Ford GT is £325K so would they put the similar engine in a sub £80k car?

Morgan Roadster has a Ford V6?

https://www.morgan-motor.co.uk/roadster/

[Slow M]

julian64 said:

Slow M said:

ou seem to be thinking of a dry sump system as an oil pump. Instead, think of it as being more of a supercharger, that happens to pull in a lot of oil entrained air. The oil and air are separated after the lines enter the tank, and oil is drawn from the bottom, after the maximum separation has taken place. The tanks have convoluted paths designed into them, via baffles, to promote air/oil separation.

Best regards,
Bernard.

Confused. Superchargers feed compressed air into the cylinders at the top of the engine. 'Your' dry sump supercharger, and I can't think how a dry sump pump would be compressing air would be pressurising the crankcase. How does this compressed air make it into the cylinder charge?

I meant the way it behaves, not the function it serves. It moves a large volume of oil entrained air out of the crankcase, the lifter valley, and the valve covers. Lower crankcase air density equals less resistance.

Best regards,
Bernard.

[dvs_dave]

Max_Torque said:

dvs_dave said:

It'd be a good move to introduce an entry level Boxter Basher.

Sorry to disagree, but i think it would be a terrible idea! ;-)

Run in a "4cyl" motor doesn't save you any money (At low production volumes), and neither do TVR care about fuel economy / CO2 (which is why Ford have the ecoboost in the first place). Added to which, the cost of the New TVR is going to be building it, so a cheaper model simply means less profit. Then you get to the issue of the fact there is no why TVR can make as "good" a car (for real world, practical useage) as Porsche can, so there entry level model will simply not be competitive in that market. Add all those facts up and it's a massive own goal for TVR to do this, hence they are not doing it!!

I'm not talking about straight out the gate with it. Rather if they do well with the V8's then a downspecced 4cyl ecoboost volume seller (e.g. Tamora successor) would keep the factory busy, get platform economies of scale and increase the margin on the full fat V8's. There's only so many people you can sell a 75+ grand car to. There's a hell of a lot more you can sell a 40-50 grand car to who still want something different from the mainstream. After all this is the whole reason the Boxter came about in the first place.

Either way, we're getting well ahead of ourselves here.

[anonymous-user]

griffdude said:

Morgan Roadster has a Ford V6?

https://www.morgan-motor.co.uk/roadster/

A V8 Eco job is a different animal though

[dvs_dave]

V6Pushfit said:

A V8 Eco job is a different animal though

There is no V8 ecoboost. That's the whole point of it. V8 power, V6 economy.

[julian64]

Slow M said:

julian64 said:

Slow M said:

ou seem to be thinking of a dry sump system as an oil pump. Instead, think of it as being more of a supercharger, that happens to pull in a lot of oil entrained air. The oil and air are separated after the lines enter the tank, and oil is drawn from the bottom, after the maximum separation has taken place. The tanks have convoluted paths designed into them, via baffles, to promote air/oil separation.

Best regards,
Bernard.

Confused. Superchargers feed compressed air into the cylinders at the top of the engine. 'Your' dry sump supercharger, and I can't think how a dry sump pump would be compressing air would be pressurising the crankcase. How does this compressed air make it into the cylinder charge?

I meant the way it behaves, not the function it serves. It moves a large volume of oil entrained air out of the crankcase, the lifter valley, and the valve covers. Lower crankcase air density equals less resistance.

Best regards,
Bernard.

So, if I understand you, its creating a relative vacuum for the lower bits of the engine to turn more freely in , and the output of the pump.....is being fed back into the vacuum?

I'm sorry but I just don't believe any of that. Possibly if there isn't a giant pool of oil that the crankshaft isn't dipping into and out of on every cycle, but the vacuum theory sounds implausible. Do you have any links?

[phillpot]

julian64 said:

I'm sorry but I just don't believe any of that. Possibly if there isn't a giant pool of oil that the crankshaft isn't dipping into and out of on every cycle.

Have to say I'm still a little sceptical....

No way should any of the reciprocating parts actually be hitting the oil in the sump!


Many years ago I cocked up and overfilled my Escort ("home made" Mexico, loved that car) and it sounded horrendous when I started it.

[anonymous-user]

plfrench said:

He's just saying that he thinks the 2.3l 4 cyl Ecoboost as used in the entry level Mustang would make sense to use in an entry level TVR. The 3.5 6 cyl Ecoboost as used in the GT he feels is too close to the V8 iin terms of cost to make sense.

Ah - thanks. Running out of steam on the first day back at the office.

Do people think that the LE car is going to be a track focussed no-compromise car while later cars will have a more refined interior and better NVH resolution? Is the 400 bhp-per-ton figure for the 500 LE cars or will that be for all of the 'first edition' cars? I'm starting to think that the LE cars will not only have the carbon iStream chassis but will also have a far sparser interior than the later cars. This will not only make them lighter but also shorten the development time. That should enable them to get the LE out the door quicker, re-establish TVR as the hardcore performance option, and give more time to refine the non-LE version.

[m4tti]

thecook101 said:

Ah - thanks. Running out of steam on the first day back at the office.

Do people think that the LE car is going to be a track focussed no-compromise car while later cars will have a more refined interior and better NVH resolution? Is the 400 bhp-per-ton figure for the 500 LE cars or will that be for all of the 'first edition' cars? I'm starting to think that the LE cars will not only have the carbon iStream chassis but will also have a far sparser interior than the later cars. This will not only make them lighter but also shorten the development time. That should enable them to get the LE out the door quicker, re-establish TVR as the hardcore performance option, and give more time to refine the non-LE version.

I saw your earlier post hypothesising it will be on par with a BAC mono... which i can almost guarantee it won't be if they are to survive for any length of time.

[anonymous-user]

m4tti said:

thecook101 said:

Ah - thanks. Running out of steam on the first day back at the office.

Do people think that the LE car is going to be a track focussed no-compromise car while later cars will have a more refined interior and better NVH resolution? Is the 400 bhp-per-ton figure for the 500 LE cars or will that be for all of the 'first edition' cars? I'm starting to think that the LE cars will not only have the carbon iStream chassis but will also have a far sparser interior than the later cars. This will not only make them lighter but also shorten the development time. That should enable them to get the LE out the door quicker, re-establish TVR as the hardcore performance option, and give more time to refine the non-LE version.

I saw your earlier post hypothesising it will be on par with a BAC mono... which i can almost guarantee it won't be if they are to survive for any length of time.

No I certainly don't think it will be on par with a BAC Mono - I meant the concept of the LE car will be more track performance than daily usability. This will most likely be fulfilled by the later cars.

[DonkeyApple]

thecook101 said:

No I certainly don't think it will be on par with a BAC Mono - I meant the concept of the LE car will be more track performance than daily usability. This will most likely be fulfilled by the later cars.

All impressions so far are that it will be a road car of comparable size to the 911/ftype arena. I'd be surprised if there wasn't a car dressed up for LE Mans to make the most of photo and marketing opportunities around the time of launch but there is nothing to suggest the road car is aiming remotely at the track day market as anything other than an aside. Fast road car for drivers, with a few essential electronics and mod cons and as comfortable as they can make it given the budget and weight restrictions.

[TwinKam]

phillpot said:

julian64 said:

I'm sorry but I just don't believe any of that. Possibly if there isn't a giant pool of oil that the crankshaft isn't dipping into and out of on every cycle.

Have to say I'm still a little sceptical....

No way should any of the reciprocating parts actually be hitting the oil in the sump!


Many years ago I cocked up and overfilled my Escort ("home made" Mexico, loved that car) and it sounded horrendous when I started it.

Interesting article, in particular the part about ring drag >>> http://www.hotrod.com/articles/ctrp-0608-power-in-...

[anonymous-user]

DonkeyApple said:

All impressions so far are that it will be a road car of comparable size to the 911/ftype arena. I'd be surprised if there wasn't a car dressed up for LE Mans to make the most of photo and marketing opportunities around the time of launch but there is nothing to suggest the road car is aiming remotely at the track day market as anything other than an aside. Fast road car for drivers, with a few essential electronics and mod cons and as comfortable as they can make it given the budget and weight restrictions.

So why is there the option to select the LE version or the regular version? What is the difference going to be - besides the carbon iStream chassis? Bear in mind I'm not suggesting anything and I have no further information - just seeing what people think as I love the story and I'm keen to participate. I have a couple other cars that cover off fast road and GT driving so I'm really hoping that the LE car is going to be properly hardcore - something special.