160,000 mile Speed Six
Discussion
nrick said:
it is night and day to how it was a few years ago.
defo seems that way, a few years ago I would have fitted the GM LS if it came to rebuild time (though I would have hated taking the TVR engine out) but no chance of that now as my 4 litre S spec speed six just gets better and better (nearly 50k now)heightswitch said:
Look. The speed 6 is a fundamentally flawed engine.
Can it be made to work...yes
It's statements like that that confuse me as they don't make sense.Can it be made to work...yes
What's your definition of "fundamentally flawed"? For me it's something that nothing short of a re-design will fix.
The Speed Six in it's original factory form was a flawed product in terms of durability, however once properly re-built it actually turns out to be very durable. So if it can easily be made to perform its designed duties very well without changing the design, how can it be fundamentally flawed? What part of it's original design brief does it not now satisfy?
Seems illogical to me.
I'm still waiting for someone who says the design is flawed to tell me what these design flaws are? It's very easy to say this but back up what you say.
For me I can't see any real problems with the engine design (correct maintenance should not be ignored), and as far as I'm aware the failures were due to incorrect material grades and hardness values of components not the design of the components!. So you could say quality control was the big issue to the Speed 6 getting all the urban myths thrown at it which is quite unfair.
Racing Green seem to be playing on these myths (I hope I'm wrong with that statement) to sell the FFF what they are doing is just creating a "different" head not creating a better head design, each has its pro's and con's and too early in the FFF's design/operational life to assume one is any more reliable than the other. But I'm glad they are giving people an option to change and maybe one day I will go this route but for now I will stick to the original "flawed" design that is performing well in competitions.
I hope Racing greens FFF design takes off and TVR Power continue to push the boundaries as this is good for us who appreciate a British classic and not put off by pub speak.
For me I can't see any real problems with the engine design (correct maintenance should not be ignored), and as far as I'm aware the failures were due to incorrect material grades and hardness values of components not the design of the components!. So you could say quality control was the big issue to the Speed 6 getting all the urban myths thrown at it which is quite unfair.
Racing Green seem to be playing on these myths (I hope I'm wrong with that statement) to sell the FFF what they are doing is just creating a "different" head not creating a better head design, each has its pro's and con's and too early in the FFF's design/operational life to assume one is any more reliable than the other. But I'm glad they are giving people an option to change and maybe one day I will go this route but for now I will stick to the original "flawed" design that is performing well in competitions.
I hope Racing greens FFF design takes off and TVR Power continue to push the boundaries as this is good for us who appreciate a British classic and not put off by pub speak.
Hello.
I do not know if the Speed Six engine is fundamentally flawed or not.
But I do know this.
My Tuscan got through 3 original TVR Speed Six engines in under 14,000 miles.
All with different faults. Which at the time forced me to look for an alternative power plant. Now that was 6 years ago.
Some may say that the Speed Six engine can be made to work.
I think that is the point now. This is not a bad thing though. This is a good thing.
I can only talk about TVR Power and their amazing engines as I have no knowledge about the other suppliers.
I believe that Dom at TVR Power has shown that he has made the engine work.
Furthermore he backs up his belief with a guarantee.
So where is the problem now?
If the engines do not all prove to be as the one we are discussing then it is Dom who will have to sort them out.
Again, is this a problem? I don't think so.
TVR Power, who I have no affiliation to, are turning out the engines that Speed Six owners want. So who really cares about their history.
I just wish that Dom had sorted them out 6 years ago.
You lot don't know how lucky you are. If I could have walked up to Dom and bought one I would have.
TVR Power have turned the Speed Six into what you all want. And to be fair to the others maybe they have too.
So lets bury the past and leave it there, in the past.
What you can now buy is fantastic. Isn't it?
Regards.
Speed eight.
I do not know if the Speed Six engine is fundamentally flawed or not.
But I do know this.
My Tuscan got through 3 original TVR Speed Six engines in under 14,000 miles.
All with different faults. Which at the time forced me to look for an alternative power plant. Now that was 6 years ago.
Some may say that the Speed Six engine can be made to work.
I think that is the point now. This is not a bad thing though. This is a good thing.
I can only talk about TVR Power and their amazing engines as I have no knowledge about the other suppliers.
I believe that Dom at TVR Power has shown that he has made the engine work.
Furthermore he backs up his belief with a guarantee.
So where is the problem now?
If the engines do not all prove to be as the one we are discussing then it is Dom who will have to sort them out.
Again, is this a problem? I don't think so.
TVR Power, who I have no affiliation to, are turning out the engines that Speed Six owners want. So who really cares about their history.
I just wish that Dom had sorted them out 6 years ago.
You lot don't know how lucky you are. If I could have walked up to Dom and bought one I would have.
TVR Power have turned the Speed Six into what you all want. And to be fair to the others maybe they have too.
So lets bury the past and leave it there, in the past.
What you can now buy is fantastic. Isn't it?
Regards.
Speed eight.
Edited by Speed eight on Thursday 16th June 09:16
Getsis said:
I'm still waiting for someone who says the design is flawed to tell me what these design flaws are? It's very easy to say this but back up what you say.
For me I can't see any real problems with the engine design (correct maintenance should not be ignored), and as far as I'm aware the failures were due to incorrect material grades and hardness values of components not the design of the components!. So you could say quality control was the big issue to the Speed 6 getting all the urban myths thrown at it which is quite unfair.
Racing Green seem to be playing on these myths (I hope I'm wrong with that statement) to sell the FFF what they are doing is just creating a "different" head not creating a better head design, each has its pro's and con's and too early in the FFF's design/operational life to assume one is any more reliable than the other. But I'm glad they are giving people an option to change and maybe one day I will go this route but for now I will stick to the original "flawed" design that is performing well in competitions.
I hope Racing greens FFF design takes off and TVR Power continue to push the boundaries as this is good for us who appreciate a British classic and not put off by pub speak.
The fundamental flaw in many peoples' eyes is that it is missing 2 cylinders and that they are not all banked in groups of 4 in a kind of V shape. For me I can't see any real problems with the engine design (correct maintenance should not be ignored), and as far as I'm aware the failures were due to incorrect material grades and hardness values of components not the design of the components!. So you could say quality control was the big issue to the Speed 6 getting all the urban myths thrown at it which is quite unfair.
Racing Green seem to be playing on these myths (I hope I'm wrong with that statement) to sell the FFF what they are doing is just creating a "different" head not creating a better head design, each has its pro's and con's and too early in the FFF's design/operational life to assume one is any more reliable than the other. But I'm glad they are giving people an option to change and maybe one day I will go this route but for now I will stick to the original "flawed" design that is performing well in competitions.
I hope Racing greens FFF design takes off and TVR Power continue to push the boundaries as this is good for us who appreciate a British classic and not put off by pub speak.
While the 'reliability' issues were very significant I suspect that much of the time they were maybe used as a tool to further split two schools' of thought. There were a lot of TVR fans who were vehement that a TVR could only ever be a V8 back when this engine was l(a)unched
Re the actual S6 I was under the impression that shonky parts probably made up for the majority of problems along with dodgy rebuilds and not just from TVR but from some indies in the early days.
There were talks that Ravenscroft changed Mellings design and that it was these changes that caused the 'inherant' problems but apparently this has now been de-bunked and the engines were built to Melling's design.
I think that the main flaw that has been discussed to the sufficient point is the issue with lubrication of some parts, but there have been so many arguements on PH over the years about deeper inherant flaws but I don't recall these being much more than customers repeating verbatum the sales schpeel of re-builders.
I think the points that we probably can believe in are:
The engines were originally build with crap internals which caused the bulk of the failures.
Many of the factory rebuilds used the same crap internals thus we had lots of re-rebuilds.
These are limited resource and build run engines and also high performance so it would be unfair to compare them to those built by billion dollar multi nationals. And I think it is churlish to start talking about Porsche engines breaking etc.
Today, an engine can be rebuilt by several competant firms and perform and last as well as most performance, low volume engines on the road today.
If you respect the engine and look after it it will perform notebly better than if you treat it like s
t. Whereas you tend to be able to get away with murder with many mass produced engines and even the good old RV8.One of the big issues I see with the T cars is that because of their price quite a few are probably being bought by people who are simply not as sympathetic or understanding as maybe we are and they are trashing them. This simply perpetuates the arguement against the engine. The old 'My mate bought one of them and after driving it like an AstraMax van it broke, they're s
t mate.'But sadly, I don't think we will ever get away from the general perception that this engine will break after 5 miles just like the perception out there that these cars will kill you within 6 miles if the engine hasn't broken.
I would just like to add that most of the long term engines are treated well, very well serviced and used well. Maybe this wasn't the case with some of the early engines, coupled with the poor quality parts, and the unknown at the time rebuild secrets.
My point is that these are now very good engines and it is unfair to call them anything else. Agreed?
My point is that these are now very good engines and it is unfair to call them anything else. Agreed?
heightswitch said:
And Please to all the armchair mechanics who try to compare Porsches having similar engine issues please consider the numbers built!!
Never wanted to be an armchair mechanic but simply condensing what I've picked up from other sources of information in an effort to balance out and dispel the sense that only TVRs' have serious mechanical issues and everything else runs like clockwork. And of course there's no comparison when taking into account the numbers built.The post was also meant to highlight the fact that main stream manufacturers had and probably continue to have relatively major issues be they mechanical or electrical but that they manage this in a way TVR didn't seem able to and therefore don't alienate their cutomer base. Perhaps this wasn't clear in the few lines posted previously.
:Returns to comfortable chair by the fire and puts on slippers
:V41LEY said:
Thanks G - my only gripe with the article waqs that there was no photo of the car - just the oily bits - as cascade copper is such a great colour.
I did send them a couple of photos of the car (not just the oily bits) but I guess my snaps were not up to standard ( I don't have the computer skills to put them up here either).In answer to a couple of other queries. The original rebuild at 60k was not because I'd blown it completey but it was beginning to sound rough. Likewise the second rebuild, almost 100,000 miles later wasn't strictly necessary but I was getting concerned and Dom at TVR Power seemed keen to look at a rebuild with big miles on it. Both rebuilds were just that, not upgrades in terms of increased capacity but upgrades in terms of newer, better components. In fact, with the exception of the nitrons my car is pretty close to standard, or as standard as any Red Roses were.
Though 60% of my mileage is 'cruising' on motorways that still leaves a many tens of thousand miles of A and B road blasting and, on climbing trips, numerous narrow lanes, dirt tracks and inappropriate places to drive a TVR. Oh and a few thousand miles of track use too.
It has been out in the rain once or twice as well.
Shorts, I don't even count the latest strip down as a re-build - it was a strip down inspection that found nothing wrong, so it was put back together with just new piston rings and 12,000 mile service items...
Out of interest, did the first strip down at 60,000 miles have many components replaced ? You could, technically, be the highest mileage Speed Six with original internals of all time !!
Out of interest, did the first strip down at 60,000 miles have many components replaced ? You could, technically, be the highest mileage Speed Six with original internals of all time !!
If this has been already asked i apologise,now that Dom has sorted the Speed 6 out,what is the long term capability of this engine,500bhp,600bhp ? the reason i ask is that if TVR started manufacturing tomorrow,would the Speed 6 carry them through the foreseeable future or would it run out of grunt ?
RedSpike66 said:
Shorts, I don't even count the latest strip down as a re-build - it was a strip down inspection that found nothing wrong, so it was put back together with just new piston rings and 12,000 mile service items...
Out of interest, did the first strip down at 60,000 miles have many components replaced ? You could, technically, be the highest mileage Speed Six with original internals of all time !!
I'm sure I should know but it was 100,000 miles ago so maybe Dom at TVR Power is more likely to know that!Out of interest, did the first strip down at 60,000 miles have many components replaced ? You could, technically, be the highest mileage Speed Six with original internals of all time !!
Gassing Station | General TVR Stuff & Gossip | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff