RE: New TVR - the car

[swisstoni]

unrepentant said:

swisstoni said:

Any yet Morgan plonk along ...

Totally different. Morgan has been in business continuously for 107 years selling pretty much the same product and evolutions thereof to a very loyal customer base. They still make the car in the same factory in Malvern with a skilled workforce, many of whom have undoubtedly been there for decades. They have great continuity and heritage. TVR has none of that. The current owners bought a name and will put that name on a car that bears little in common with what went before, not even the location.

Morgan is a small car company that works - that's all I'm saying. It's not inevitable that this venture will fail.

[DonkeyApple]

TooMany2cvs said:

DonkeyApple said:

But I'd say there's no real need for an additional satnav in today's world when almost everyone has a smart phone.

I don't have a satnav or a smartphone. I've still managed to find a lot of very out-of-the-way places in a lot of very out-of-the-way countries without too much problem.

Because I know how to read a map. Anybody else remember that basic essential skill?

(Anyway, your smartphone nav won't help you one tiny bit around here. No mobile signal, even for SMS, let alone fast enough data to get you the maps in any timely fashion...)

DonkeyApple said:

I'd advocate that aircon is essential.

You poor delicate little snowflake...

Smartphones don't need a SIM card to run satnav.

In the 21st century it would be silly to think that the majority of people don't expect to use satnav. Even the AA has all but given up selling maps, even for £1. The world has moved on.

And aircon isn't just for delicate flowers but again something that is simply just expected at this price point. You just won't find many people happy to drop £80k+ on a road car who think arriving at your destination in a sweaty condition remotely intelligent. Big V8 right back against the bulkhead, big, hot transmission running through the heart of the car, small window apertures. Sorry but if you want people to use this car as an every day car for commutes etc then aircon is an absolute pre requisite.

[m3jappa]

I've been looking at exiges, you can get a brand new one for about 60k

I see figures of 80k plus bandied about for the new tvr, if lotus can do it for 60k. Then surely tvr can for not a lot more include a proper interior, which is about the only area the lotus is lacking on. Plus with this new I streams cheaper to build statements isn't it even more likely to be similar money?

Genuine question.

[DonkeyApple]

unrepentant said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

unrepentant said:

Yes, but are you ready to stroke a check for 80 grand for one? Because unless enough people are it's all hypothetical.

That's the bottom line. No point having a handful of people clamouring for the first few cars if that's all they ever sell....

Yep, TVR died mainly because they couldn't find enough people to pay 40 and 50k for a new car. Now that figure is likely 80-100k. Back in 05 there really wasn't much of an alternative to a Tuscan, Saggy or Tamora either for the price. In the intervening 10 years everything has changed in the market and expectations are way higher. 500HP is now commonplace and there are plenty of main stream manufacturers making fast, affordable and fun cars with 4 year warranty's and major manufacturer back up for sensible money.

Again, that isn't why it died. It died because they were employing about 300 people more than they needed to and didn't have the cash to lay them off. Bad business. Pull down the last 7 years of TVR's accounts and you see a business being rapidly asset stripped to have no foundations and then a new owner who couldn't inject enough cash to either lay off the unrequired labour or pay for it. The balance sheet for the final years is pitiful reading.

It was so badly structured and so labour intensive and so lacking in proper tangible assets that it couldn't survive the volume contraction.

So the failings of the last version of TVR are potentially wholly irrelevant to the intended new version which is seemingly highly labour unintensive.

[dvs_dave]

The Vambo said:

dvs_dave said:

Front and rear parking sensors with RVC.

On a sports car? In fact on anything short of a Discovery is crazy. Maybe TVR could do that self parking thing that gives you 30 seconds spare to straighten your seams.

Maybe so, but plenty do. Ever driven a McLaren for example? They have them. And they are pretty useful, even if you don't actually "need" them.

Anyway, point is, all the gadgetry I suggested consists of very simple plug in modules that cost next to nothing, don't weigh anything and are very easy to install. Assuming the car will be using the Mustang electronic architecture, all these options are ready made and could be very easily offered at little to no additional cost to TVR. You'd probably find a good uptake of them, which translates directly into pure profit.

Edited by dvs_dave on Monday 6th June 23:15

[DonkeyApple]

dvs_dave said:

Maybe so, but plenty do. Ever driven a McLaren for example? They have them. And they are pretty useful, even if you don't actually "need" them.

Anyway, point is, all the gadgetry I suggested consists of very simple plug in modules that cost next to nothing, don't weigh anything and are very easy to install. Assuming the car will be using the Mustang electronic architecture, all these options are ready made and could be very easily offered at little to no additional cost to TVR. You'd probably find a good uptake of them, which translates directly into pure profit.

Edited by dvs_dave on Monday 6th June 23:15

I'd definitely be a buyer of rear sensors!

Any reversing is bloody time consuming.

[Sway]

essexstu said:

There will be no fibreglass in the new TVR. Exterior body panels will be a mix of composite, steel and aluminum.

"Composite" is a broad church, with fibreglass a member of the congregation...

I think I remember then saying the LE cars will be carbon, but that the base Base version will be 'glass or a similar lower cost fibre for a few extra kilos and quite a bit less dosh.

Jamie, your posts explain my opinion better than I could. Shame at the moment it's out of reach, but after a year or two of production...

[essexstu]

Yes but I was advised that fibreglass specifically will not be used on the LE car. Bonnet and boot will be aluminium. Rest will be carbon fibre, steel and composite plastic. Fibreglass deemed too heavy and quality of finish too variable.

[Tuvra]

TooMany2cvs said:

I don't have a satnav or a smartphone. I've still managed to find a lot of very out-of-the-way places in a lot of very out-of-the-way countries without too much problem.

Because I know how to read a map. Anybody else remember that basic essential skill?

I can read a map, never, ever needed to though. I think map reading being an "essential skill" applies to about 1% of the general population in today's generation.

[TooMany2cvs]

Tuvra said:

TooMany2cvs said:

I don't have a satnav or a smartphone. I've still managed to find a lot of very out-of-the-way places in a lot of very out-of-the-way countries without too much problem.

Because I know how to read a map. Anybody else remember that basic essential skill?

I can read a map, never, ever needed to though. I think map reading being an "essential skill" applies to about 1% of the general population in today's generation.

I find that incredibly depressing.

And the really sad thing is that you will never know why, because you'll never understand how using a map can turn a journey from A-to-B into real joy of exploration.

[PAUL500]

essexstu said:

Yes but I was advised that fibreglass specifically will not be used on the LE car. Bonnet and boot will be aluminium. Rest will be carbon fibre, steel and composite plastic. Fibreglass deemed too heavy and quality of finish too variable.

Woven fibreglass is exactly the same as carbon fibre weave, laid in exactly the same manner, using the same epoxy resin, just not as strong, painted it even looks the same. Chopped strand glass as used in previous TVRs and boat hulls is the heavy old school stuff.

Carbon fibre cloth has dropped dramatically in price these days, woven glass is about £5 a square metre, carbon can now be had for £10 a square metre.

The difference in cost of materials to build two identical body skins with either glass or carbon would be under £1000 if going the hand lay up route, and the labour would actually be greater for the glass as you would need to lay more cloth to match the rigidity of the carbon.

The cost I quote is for painted panels, exposed weave is a whole different ball game, look at Mclaren for the price difference there, the reject rate is huge and very very labour intensive to get right.

Edited by PAUL500 on Tuesday 7th June 08:47

[tankplanker]

Tuvra said:

Name one car that offers both manual and auto (style) boxes where the 0-60 difference is over a few hundredths of a second? The M2 for example is 0.2, M4 is 0.2, Cayman S is 0-4, C4S is 0.2 seconds, V12VS is 0.2 seconds?

No being arsey, genuine question BTW.

You've selectively cut my post down that addresses that.

Mr Average is going to struggle to hit the advertised 0-60 in a manual particularly one that requires a gear change to hit 60. I've no doubt that given suitable conditions and enough time a good magazine reviewer or similar skilled driver will hit or even beat any realistic time advertised by the manufacturer. The big benefit of DSG is being able to add nearly automated launch control, that takes all of the skill needed to hit a 0-60 time and allows the car to preset everything optimally for launch, meaning Mr Average will have a bigger difference between DSG and Manual to 60 than Mr Reviewer. I think GTR 35s do around 3.8/3.9 without and less than 3 using launch control? I'd expect an even bigger difference manual vs. auto with launch control in this case if Nissan offered a manual GTR 35 due to the short gearing in the 35.

Having said that, I'd be more interested in the 0-100/120 and 1/4 mile times as they should allow a car to stretch its legs.

[DonkeyApple]

TooMany2cvs said:

I find that incredibly depressing.

And the really sad thing is that you will never know why, because you'll never understand how using a map can turn a journey from A-to-B into real joy of exploration.

I think you're missing the point. If you want to sell cars to people who need to use it every day then you need satnav.

Having fun finding your way from A to B is a leisure pursuit not part of the working day.

I use my satnav as my map. I think of it as a superior and safer map as it is held in line of sight and has a little blue triangle where I am. It makes life easier than referring to a big paper map book. Frankly, pulling over every hundred or so miles on a long journey to check the next stage is daft.

[TooMany2cvs]

DonkeyApple said:

TooMany2cvs said:

I find that incredibly depressing.

And the really sad thing is that you will never know why, because you'll never understand how using a map can turn a journey from A-to-B into real joy of exploration.

I think you're missing the point. If you want to sell cars to people who need to use it every day then you need satnav.

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this thread was about £80k+ new TVRs.

But if you really DO want to use a car that doesn't have a built in satnav as an "everyday" (and I seem to have always managed just fine, even doing 30k+ business use), then...
http://www.halfords.com/technology/sat-nav/car-sat...
Glad to be of help.

[DonkeyApple]

TooMany2cvs said:

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this thread was about £80k+ new TVRs.

But if you really DO want to use a car that doesn't have a built in satnav as an "everyday" (and I seem to have always managed just fine, even doing 30k+ business use), then...
http://www.halfords.com/technology/sat-nav/car-sat...
Glad to be of help.

So you agree. You need satnav. Not a paper map. OK.

[TooMany2cvs]

DonkeyApple said:

TooMany2cvs said:

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this thread was about £80k+ new TVRs.

But if you really DO want to use a car that doesn't have a built in satnav as an "everyday" (and I seem to have always managed just fine, even doing 30k+ business use), then...
http://www.halfords.com/technology/sat-nav/car-sat...
Glad to be of help.

So you agree. You need satnav. Not a paper map. OK.

<scratches head>
Are you reading the same post as I am?

[DonkeyApple]

TooMany2cvs said:

DonkeyApple said:

TooMany2cvs said:

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this thread was about £80k+ new TVRs.

But if you really DO want to use a car that doesn't have a built in satnav as an "everyday" (and I seem to have always managed just fine, even doing 30k+ business use), then...
http://www.halfords.com/technology/sat-nav/car-sat...
Glad to be of help.

So you agree. You need satnav. Not a paper map. OK.

<scratches head>
Are you reading the same post as I am?

Absolutely not. Just to recap to last night where you kicked off being arsey and then we can see that by this morning you've agreed with what I said about Satnav but at least managed to retain the arsiness:

TooMany2cvs said:

DonkeyApple said:

But I'd say there's no real need for an additional satnav in today's world when almost everyone has a smart phone.

I don't have a satnav or a smartphone. I've still managed to find a lot of very out-of-the-way places in a lot of very out-of-the-way countries without too much problem.

Because I know how to read a map. Anybody else remember that basic essential skill?

(Anyway, your smartphone nav won't help you one tiny bit around here. No mobile signal, even for SMS, let alone fast enough data to get you the maps in any timely fashion...)

DonkeyApple said:

I'd advocate that aircon is essential.

You poor delicate little snowflake...

[fatbutt]

No sat nav as you can buy that and stick it on your windscreen. It robs the dash of space if you want a decent sized screen and it will always be out of date (so mag reviewers will ALWAYS complain about it).

No cup holders as they rob the cabin of space. Wife's BMW 1 series has no cup holders - its not an essential item at all. If you really need some, get the ones that clip into the air vents.

No AC as it requires a relatively large compressor, tanks and an additional radiator. This robs the engine bay of space and 10% or thereabouts of engine power when active. As has been noted elsewhere, bad AC is also something that people endlessly complain about so don't add it. Open a window.

If you want a light, cheap (£60K is cheap for a small car supplier - work out the costings for yourself, its not hard), robust and compact package you need to keep non essentials out of the equation. No only does it reduce cost, etc. it also reduces risk.

[TooMany2cvs]

DonkeyApple said:

TooMany2cvs said:

DonkeyApple said:

TooMany2cvs said:

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this thread was about £80k+ new TVRs.

But if you really DO want to use a car that doesn't have a built in satnav as an "everyday" (and I seem to have always managed just fine, even doing 30k+ business use), then...
http://www.halfords.com/technology/sat-nav/car-sat...
Glad to be of help.

So you agree. You need satnav. Not a paper map. OK.

<scratches head>
Are you reading the same post as I am?

Absolutely not.

Glad we're agreed...

DonkeyApple said:

Just to recap to last night where you kicked off being arsey and then we can see that by this morning you've agreed with what I said about Satnav but at least managed to retain the arsiness:

TooMany2cvs said:

DonkeyApple said:

But I'd say there's no real need for an additional satnav in today's world when almost everyone has a smart phone.

I don't have a satnav or a smartphone. I've still managed to find a lot of very out-of-the-way places in a lot of very out-of-the-way countries without too much problem.

Because I know how to read a map. Anybody else remember that basic essential skill?

(Anyway, your smartphone nav won't help you one tiny bit around here. No mobile signal, even for SMS, let alone fast enough data to get you the maps in any timely fashion...)

DonkeyApple said:

I'd advocate that aircon is essential.

You poor delicate little snowflake...

Sarcastic, not arsey, if you don't mind.

Honestly, a satnav is NOT essential. FAR from it. We used to have one shared in the office - Garmin, IIRC - it was, frankly, st. I gave up using it after a few trips, because it was much more of a pain in the arse than a benefit. As for aircon in a TVR... (and don't even start me on the person who said electric seats were essential...)

[jamieduff1981]

m3jappa said:

I've been looking at exiges, you can get a brand new one for about 60k

I see figures of 80k plus bandied about for the new tvr, if lotus can do it for 60k. Then surely tvr can for not a lot more include a proper interior, which is about the only area the lotus is lacking on. Plus with this new I streams cheaper to build statements isn't it even more likely to be similar money?

Genuine question.

The other major thing you've missed is that the Lotus design philosophy uses very small engines. Lotus' engines aren't interesting and are purely a tool to make the chassis move.

TVR buyers want more exotic engines which make more evocative sounds.

There isn't really any alternative out there for a truely involving back-to-basics car with an upholstered interior and a big V-block engine, unless you want to build a Cobra.

A Lotus is an entirely different proposition to a TVR.