Discussion
Quentin1 said:
I will simply put it this way:
I think those days are over, where a small sports car company can survive because a handful of enthusiasts is willing to buy their products. And as good as all your words sound, who really would splash out 70 grand on a new TVR? Even if it WOULD sound, look, drive and smell like an old TVR?
£70K spent on a mainstream car does not equal £70K invested in a limited production, bespoke built sports car.I think those days are over, where a small sports car company can survive because a handful of enthusiasts is willing to buy their products. And as good as all your words sound, who really would splash out 70 grand on a new TVR? Even if it WOULD sound, look, drive and smell like an old TVR?
If you drove an F-type against a Morgan Plus Eight Speedster, objectively the Jaguar would probably win on all aspects. But - and it's a big 'but' - as the Jag finds itself in competition with a host of other equally impressive sports/GT cars one of which carrying a rather evocative three digit number, another being known as 007's personal transport and yet another one carrying an armour of supercar tech and raw pace and being supplied to dealerships in a continuous stream with the latter being responsible for putting bums on seats, while the the Morgan represents an experience which is fairly unique in the market and has a list of people who ordered one and hope their order gets honoured, the financial consequences of spending a similar amount of money are vastly different.
The £70K Jaguar (or Porsche, or GT-R etc) will lose £25K in the first year and likely depreciate to £10K or so in the decade after that.
The £70K Morgan will probably fetch £50K at its lowest point 10-15 years from now, and then go up again.
So while the F-Type, 991 C2 et al may be objectively better cars at £70K, when you factor in the true cost of ownership they will struggle to justify being several times as expensive to keep as a personal asset to anyone who's not so minted that they don't care.
I could see myself laying down £70K for a classic car at some point.
I could see myself spending £70K on a limited production, bespoke built car on the proviso that it provides an ownership experience that I crave and which sufficently different from what's readily available from the market.
But £70K for an off-the-shelf motor (no matter how capable)? No way Jose. I might as well set fire to a bundle of notes every frigging month...
V8 GRF said:
DonkeyApple said:
The big problem though is that TVRs are expected to be cheap which will be difficult if they want to avoid the errors of the past. But while Wheeler made some really bad decisions with the brand I think he was right in understanding who his typical customer was and that they were extremely price sensitive.
This myth of TVRs being 'cheap' really is just that. Yes you got much more performance for a lot less money than the usual suspects but in no way were they cheap. If you run the prices of the various models over the years through inflation calculators they all come out in the £60k - £75k range in present day prices. That isn't 'cheap'Peter Wheeler was lucky imo he didn't 'understand' his typical customer, he just built cars he wanted which luckily for him in the early '90s was what his customer wanted. Subtle but important. When he then went off later and built other cars he fancied he wasn't quite as lucky so that's when he saw the writing on the wall.
There is still a market, but it would be a mistake to think it's the same buyer as an XKF because if you want an XKF that's what you'll buy.
If however you want raw visceral experience in an over powered lightweight car capable of handling long as well as short journeys that handles without driver aids and flappy paddle gearboxes and are willing to put up with the foibles of a hand built, low volume sportscar that's where the market is for for a modern TVR similar in character to the cars of the '90s '00s (IMHO
)It's when you look at the way they were built that you see cheap. Money saved on components, build technology, design etc. They had to build the cars to a price point and to invest in cost saving manufacturing processes, top quality electrical components, developing solutions that worked perfectly would have led to a car that needed to cost many thousands more to turn a profit. As it was, there was little margin in the cars they were selling.
There was true genius in how TVR built the cars. Really clever little things such as hiding lower door edges to get them to fit the shell in less time, more ease etc. It was a really smart company but while the end product wasn't cheap to the consumer they had to be built cheap in order to get some price that was affordable.
'There is still a market, but it would be a mistake to think it's the same buyer as an XKF because if you want an XKF that's what you'll buy.
If however you want raw visceral experience in an over powered lightweight car capable of handling long as well as short journeys that handles without driver aids and flappy paddle gearboxes and are willing to put up with the foibles of a hand built, low volume sportscar that's where the market is for for a modern TVR similar in character to the cars of the '90s '00s (IMHO
)'Couldn't agree more. There is definitely a market but it's a small one which raises the problem of inserting enough margin into each sale to keep the lights on and what that means for the sale price?
900T-R said:
£70K spent on a mainstream car does not equal £70K invested in a limited production, bespoke built sports car.
If you drove an F-type against a Morgan Plus Eight Speedster, objectively the Jaguar would probably win on all aspects. But - and it's a big 'but' - as the Jag finds itself in competition with a host of other equally impressive sports/GT cars one of which carrying a rather evocative three digit number, another being known as 007's personal transport and yet another one carrying an armour of supercar tech and raw pace and being supplied to dealerships in a continuous stream with the latter being responsible for putting bums on seats, while the the Morgan represents an experience which is fairly unique in the market and has a list of people who ordered one and hope their order gets honoured, the financial consequences of spending a similar amount of money are vastly different.
The £70K Jaguar (or Porsche, or GT-R etc) will lose £25K in the first year and likely depreciate to £10K or so in the decade after that.
The £70K Morgan will probably fetch £50K at its lowest point 10-15 years from now, and then go up again.
So while the F-Type, 991 C2 et al may be objectively better cars at £70K, when you factor in the true cost of ownership they will struggle to justify being several times as expensive to keep as a personal asset to anyone who's not so minted that they don't care.
I could see myself laying down £70K for a classic car at some point.
I could see myself spending £70K on a limited production, bespoke built car on the proviso that it provides an ownership experience that I crave and which sufficently different from what's readily available from the market.
But £70K for an off-the-shelf motor (no matter how capable)? No way Jose. I might as well set fire to a bundle of notes every frigging month...
Fair point, especially mentioning Morgan. They do have the massive benefit of being sold world wide and having a relatively big number of followers.If you drove an F-type against a Morgan Plus Eight Speedster, objectively the Jaguar would probably win on all aspects. But - and it's a big 'but' - as the Jag finds itself in competition with a host of other equally impressive sports/GT cars one of which carrying a rather evocative three digit number, another being known as 007's personal transport and yet another one carrying an armour of supercar tech and raw pace and being supplied to dealerships in a continuous stream with the latter being responsible for putting bums on seats, while the the Morgan represents an experience which is fairly unique in the market and has a list of people who ordered one and hope their order gets honoured, the financial consequences of spending a similar amount of money are vastly different.
The £70K Jaguar (or Porsche, or GT-R etc) will lose £25K in the first year and likely depreciate to £10K or so in the decade after that.
The £70K Morgan will probably fetch £50K at its lowest point 10-15 years from now, and then go up again.
So while the F-Type, 991 C2 et al may be objectively better cars at £70K, when you factor in the true cost of ownership they will struggle to justify being several times as expensive to keep as a personal asset to anyone who's not so minted that they don't care.
I could see myself laying down £70K for a classic car at some point.
I could see myself spending £70K on a limited production, bespoke built car on the proviso that it provides an ownership experience that I crave and which sufficently different from what's readily available from the market.
But £70K for an off-the-shelf motor (no matter how capable)? No way Jose. I might as well set fire to a bundle of notes every frigging month...
I hope I am wrong, but there will be no new TVR...not as we are expecting it. If it comes as another LS kit car, I am out anyway...
So let´s enjoy what we have. A piece of British automotive history.
Björn.
Quentin1 said:
If all the above ist true, there is the slight problem, that the company has to get money out of the cars.
And to be honest, as loevely as the idea is, and I am TVR through and through, with the existence of the current cars in the targeted price bracket, there are simply too many alternatives, especially the F-Type. Bash it for weight, but drive one to get the point.
I will simply put it this way:
I think those days are over, where a small sports car company can survive because a handful of enthusiasts is willing to buy their products. And as good as all your words sound, who really would splash out 70 grand on a new TVR? Even if it WOULD sound, look, drive and smell like an old TVR?
I can see where you're coming from. I also can see the dilemma. But that is the hoop Les Edgar has to jump through: build bespoke cars and get a profit out of it.And to be honest, as loevely as the idea is, and I am TVR through and through, with the existence of the current cars in the targeted price bracket, there are simply too many alternatives, especially the F-Type. Bash it for weight, but drive one to get the point.
I will simply put it this way:
I think those days are over, where a small sports car company can survive because a handful of enthusiasts is willing to buy their products. And as good as all your words sound, who really would splash out 70 grand on a new TVR? Even if it WOULD sound, look, drive and smell like an old TVR?
I don't want to see a run-of-the mill sportscar with a TVR badge on it. Then I'd rather enjoy my "classic" car instead and pretend that the TVR company indeed is dead.
longbow said:
As soon as I saw pics of the new Supra concept I couldn't help think that it had a lot of Sagaris DNA in there....
If this thing packs GT-R tech in a body like that and is say sub £70k then the new TVRs are going to face some mighty competition.
The more I see that the more I think 'plagiarism' The designer plainly had a selection of Sagaris views on his wall, especially a rear shot.If this thing packs GT-R tech in a body like that and is say sub £70k then the new TVRs are going to face some mighty competition.
Quentin1 said:
900T-R said:
£70K spent on a mainstream car does not equal £70K invested in a limited production, bespoke built sports car.
If you drove an F-type against a Morgan Plus Eight Speedster, objectively the Jaguar would probably win on all aspects. But - and it's a big 'but' - as the Jag finds itself in competition with a host of other equally impressive sports/GT cars one of which carrying a rather evocative three digit number, another being known as 007's personal transport and yet another one carrying an armour of supercar tech and raw pace and being supplied to dealerships in a continuous stream with the latter being responsible for putting bums on seats, while the the Morgan represents an experience which is fairly unique in the market and has a list of people who ordered one and hope their order gets honoured, the financial consequences of spending a similar amount of money are vastly different.
The £70K Jaguar (or Porsche, or GT-R etc) will lose £25K in the first year and likely depreciate to £10K or so in the decade after that.
The £70K Morgan will probably fetch £50K at its lowest point 10-15 years from now, and then go up again.
So while the F-Type, 991 C2 et al may be objectively better cars at £70K, when you factor in the true cost of ownership they will struggle to justify being several times as expensive to keep as a personal asset to anyone who's not so minted that they don't care.
I could see myself laying down £70K for a classic car at some point.
I could see myself spending £70K on a limited production, bespoke built car on the proviso that it provides an ownership experience that I crave and which sufficently different from what's readily available from the market.
But £70K for an off-the-shelf motor (no matter how capable)? No way Jose. I might as well set fire to a bundle of notes every frigging month...
Fair point, especially mentioning Morgan. They do have the massive benefit of being sold world wide and having a relatively big number of followers.If you drove an F-type against a Morgan Plus Eight Speedster, objectively the Jaguar would probably win on all aspects. But - and it's a big 'but' - as the Jag finds itself in competition with a host of other equally impressive sports/GT cars one of which carrying a rather evocative three digit number, another being known as 007's personal transport and yet another one carrying an armour of supercar tech and raw pace and being supplied to dealerships in a continuous stream with the latter being responsible for putting bums on seats, while the the Morgan represents an experience which is fairly unique in the market and has a list of people who ordered one and hope their order gets honoured, the financial consequences of spending a similar amount of money are vastly different.
The £70K Jaguar (or Porsche, or GT-R etc) will lose £25K in the first year and likely depreciate to £10K or so in the decade after that.
The £70K Morgan will probably fetch £50K at its lowest point 10-15 years from now, and then go up again.
So while the F-Type, 991 C2 et al may be objectively better cars at £70K, when you factor in the true cost of ownership they will struggle to justify being several times as expensive to keep as a personal asset to anyone who's not so minted that they don't care.
I could see myself laying down £70K for a classic car at some point.
I could see myself spending £70K on a limited production, bespoke built car on the proviso that it provides an ownership experience that I crave and which sufficently different from what's readily available from the market.
But £70K for an off-the-shelf motor (no matter how capable)? No way Jose. I might as well set fire to a bundle of notes every frigging month...
I hope I am wrong, but there will be no new TVR...not as we are expecting it. If it comes as another LS kit car, I am out anyway...
So let´s enjoy what we have. A piece of British automotive history.
Björn.
New TVR will need to overcome old TVR pub-talk "knowledge" that, being British will mean that people will do anything they can to talk down a home-grown product. That TVR is a brand everyone knows is both an opportunity and a risk. Nobody knows anything about Morgans other than that men with grey beards drive them - the kind who see a Cerb at a car show and read "Ker-Beer-Ah?" from the badge. Garage mechanics never tell you they've had 6 Morgans through in the past month and they're all trouble (why do so many mechanics talk such b
ks???). Nobody talks about Morgans.DonkeyApple said:
Cheap has different interpretations. Obviously, if you look at the purchase price then they weren't.
It's when you look at the way they were built that you see cheap. Money saved on components, build technology, design etc. They had to build the cars to a price point and to invest in cost saving manufacturing processes, top quality electrical components, developing solutions that worked perfectly would have led to a car that needed to cost many thousands more to turn a profit. As it was, there was little margin in the cars they were selling.
There was true genius in how TVR built the cars. Really clever little things such as hiding lower door edges to get them to fit the shell in less time, more ease etc. It was a really smart company but while the end product wasn't cheap to the consumer they had to be built cheap in order to get some price that was affordable.
OK wrong word 'affordable' is the myth.It's when you look at the way they were built that you see cheap. Money saved on components, build technology, design etc. They had to build the cars to a price point and to invest in cost saving manufacturing processes, top quality electrical components, developing solutions that worked perfectly would have led to a car that needed to cost many thousands more to turn a profit. As it was, there was little margin in the cars they were selling.
There was true genius in how TVR built the cars. Really clever little things such as hiding lower door edges to get them to fit the shell in less time, more ease etc. It was a really smart company but while the end product wasn't cheap to the consumer they had to be built cheap in order to get some price that was affordable.
However, taking your other interpretation of the word, then yes I'd agree they were built on a shoestring or on the cheap, maybe acceptable when the company was recovering from the lean times but there was plenty of profit in the Griffith, Chimaera and Cerberas, that's why PW ended up owning large tracts of the Trough of Bowland etc
So you could argue in the mid '90s there was no excuse in not spending a little more in development of the cars that came later but they didn't and that ultimately killed his Golden Goose. So I'd question the use of the word Genius, more like 'taking the piss' and when the 'new breed' of owners arrived who'd been enticed in from other main stream marques they didn't bend over and take it like the 'enthusiasts' would.
The ingenuity, agility to respond quickly to trends and ability to innovate of a small company is one of its USP and that wasn't taken full advantage of and is one of the myriad of reasons TVR failed.
I don't think decent, thought through engineering or construction methods are all that difficult to implement cheaply but they do require an element of investment, nothing ridiculous but some cash wisely spent. Restrict your sharpest minds by starving them of cash and you're asking for trouble and that's what they got.
Use clever construction and design methods by all means but do the underlying fundamentals right and everything surely will follow. That's what the new TVR needs to do if they what to avoid the failures of the past.
jamieduff1981 said:
Whilst it's undoubtedly true that the mainstream cars will all depreciate, I think it's also fair to point out that not all TVRs have enjoyed strong residual values as Morgans have. If you bought a Sagaris new and still have it, you're laughing. If you bought a Mk1 Tuscan or a Cerbera, you're not. If you bought a Chimaera, the car gets mentioned in every "which cheap V8?" thread in the General Gassing forums.
New TVR will need to overcome old TVR pub-talk "knowledge" that, being British will mean that people will do anything they can to talk down a home-grown product. That TVR is a brand everyone knows is both an opportunity and a risk. Nobody knows anything about Morgans other than that men with grey beards drive them - the kind who see a Cerb at a car show and read "Ker-Beer-Ah?" from the badge. Garage mechanics never tell you they've had 6 Morgans through in the past month and they're all trouble (why do so many mechanics talk such bks???). Nobody talks about Morgans.
I nearly bought a 70k XKR in 2000, that same car is now worth 7k,New TVR will need to overcome old TVR pub-talk "knowledge" that, being British will mean that people will do anything they can to talk down a home-grown product. That TVR is a brand everyone knows is both an opportunity and a risk. Nobody knows anything about Morgans other than that men with grey beards drive them - the kind who see a Cerb at a car show and read "Ker-Beer-Ah?" from the badge. Garage mechanics never tell you they've had 6 Morgans through in the past month and they're all trouble (why do so many mechanics talk such b
ks???). Nobody talks about Morgans.Less than a good early Chimaera.
WolfyJones said:
jamieduff1981 said:
Whilst it's undoubtedly true that the mainstream cars will all depreciate, I think it's also fair to point out that not all TVRs have enjoyed strong residual values as Morgans have. If you bought a Sagaris new and still have it, you're laughing. If you bought a Mk1 Tuscan or a Cerbera, you're not. If you bought a Chimaera, the car gets mentioned in every "which cheap V8?" thread in the General Gassing forums.
New TVR will need to overcome old TVR pub-talk "knowledge" that, being British will mean that people will do anything they can to talk down a home-grown product. That TVR is a brand everyone knows is both an opportunity and a risk. Nobody knows anything about Morgans other than that men with grey beards drive them - the kind who see a Cerb at a car show and read "Ker-Beer-Ah?" from the badge. Garage mechanics never tell you they've had 6 Morgans through in the past month and they're all trouble (why do so many mechanics talk such bks???). Nobody talks about Morgans.
I nearly bought a 70k XKR in 2000, that same car is now worth 7k,New TVR will need to overcome old TVR pub-talk "knowledge" that, being British will mean that people will do anything they can to talk down a home-grown product. That TVR is a brand everyone knows is both an opportunity and a risk. Nobody knows anything about Morgans other than that men with grey beards drive them - the kind who see a Cerb at a car show and read "Ker-Beer-Ah?" from the badge. Garage mechanics never tell you they've had 6 Morgans through in the past month and they're all trouble (why do so many mechanics talk such b
ks???). Nobody talks about Morgans.Less than a good early Chimaera.
It's all swings and roundabouts. Anyone who buys a new TVR from the showroom needs to be in it for the long game. Nowt wrong with that, but I think it's unrealistic to expect to buy a new TVR at £80k and expect it to still be worth £80k in 3,5,7 or 10 years. It's going to dive before it flattens out.
jamieduff1981 said:
WolfyJones said:
jamieduff1981 said:
Whilst it's undoubtedly true that the mainstream cars will all depreciate, I think it's also fair to point out that not all TVRs have enjoyed strong residual values as Morgans have. If you bought a Sagaris new and still have it, you're laughing. If you bought a Mk1 Tuscan or a Cerbera, you're not. If you bought a Chimaera, the car gets mentioned in every "which cheap V8?" thread in the General Gassing forums.
New TVR will need to overcome old TVR pub-talk "knowledge" that, being British will mean that people will do anything they can to talk down a home-grown product. That TVR is a brand everyone knows is both an opportunity and a risk. Nobody knows anything about Morgans other than that men with grey beards drive them - the kind who see a Cerb at a car show and read "Ker-Beer-Ah?" from the badge. Garage mechanics never tell you they've had 6 Morgans through in the past month and they're all trouble (why do so many mechanics talk such bks???). Nobody talks about Morgans.
I nearly bought a 70k XKR in 2000, that same car is now worth 7k,New TVR will need to overcome old TVR pub-talk "knowledge" that, being British will mean that people will do anything they can to talk down a home-grown product. That TVR is a brand everyone knows is both an opportunity and a risk. Nobody knows anything about Morgans other than that men with grey beards drive them - the kind who see a Cerb at a car show and read "Ker-Beer-Ah?" from the badge. Garage mechanics never tell you they've had 6 Morgans through in the past month and they're all trouble (why do so many mechanics talk such b
ks???). Nobody talks about Morgans.Less than a good early Chimaera.
It's all swings and roundabouts. Anyone who buys a new TVR from the showroom needs to be in it for the long game. Nowt wrong with that, but I think it's unrealistic to expect to buy a new TVR at £80k and expect it to still be worth £80k in 3,5,7 or 10 years. It's going to dive before it flattens out.
jamieduff1981 said:
Whilst it's undoubtedly true that the mainstream cars will all depreciate, I think it's also fair to point out that not all TVRs have enjoyed strong residual values as Morgans have. If you bought a Sagaris new and still have it, you're laughing. If you bought a Mk1 Tuscan or a Cerbera, you're not. If you bought a Chimaera, the car gets mentioned in every "which cheap V8?" thread in the General Gassing forums.
Even Chimaeras, with about 6,000 built the most common TVR by a landslide, never dropped below roughly 1/4th of its original purchase price for a 15-20 year old car (£28K-£7K) for a very average example. Early Boxsters and SLKs are at £3-4K and £1-2K respectively. Granted, a 1995 Plus Eight has been doing a lot better still... but I don't assume Les and his team would be making the same mistake as PW did in the late 1990s when demand for TVR was booming for a very short time and the factory was bursting at the seams to knock out nearly 2,000 per annum in a place that historically had thrived on the same 6-700 that Morgan has been doing all along, with the only variable being the length of the waiting list (now 12-18 months rather than 5-7 years).
Reading this thread proves the loyalty of the authors to the TVR brand. 20 some years ago TVR produced a car that has developed a cult following with most of the 'cults' on here by the look of it. This may partly explain why the depreciation is relatively low compared to mainstream Mercs and BMs coupled with the, again, relatively low volume.
But times have moved on, we are in an age where the majority want every conceivable extra even on their exotica e.g. Lotus with aircon and electric windows for crying out loud. The 'pure' sports car is becoming a nostalgia trip in the minds of today's buyers.
I respect the views here but maybe the rose tinted glasses need putting away for a second or two. Like it or not TVRs do have a reliability issue and some excuse this with words like 'quirks' or 'peculiarities' and 'to be expected'. All well and good for those on here, but if the man has just traded his 911 (complete with big depreciation so not best pleased), is he going to spend £70-80k on a car with no proven reliability (new model), a history of unreliability (old models), poor build quality, unknown dealers, unproven warranty claims/issues etc?
Yes, the old days were good - aren't they always? - but they are for you, not the upcoming breed with a totally different outlook who demand ever more - just look at any teenager's bedroom. To believe there is going to be a successful market for a 'pure' sports car may be harking back to an era that seems to me to be ever more unlikely. Sadly.
But times have moved on, we are in an age where the majority want every conceivable extra even on their exotica e.g. Lotus with aircon and electric windows for crying out loud. The 'pure' sports car is becoming a nostalgia trip in the minds of today's buyers.
I respect the views here but maybe the rose tinted glasses need putting away for a second or two. Like it or not TVRs do have a reliability issue and some excuse this with words like 'quirks' or 'peculiarities' and 'to be expected'. All well and good for those on here, but if the man has just traded his 911 (complete with big depreciation so not best pleased), is he going to spend £70-80k on a car with no proven reliability (new model), a history of unreliability (old models), poor build quality, unknown dealers, unproven warranty claims/issues etc?
Yes, the old days were good - aren't they always? - but they are for you, not the upcoming breed with a totally different outlook who demand ever more - just look at any teenager's bedroom. To believe there is going to be a successful market for a 'pure' sports car may be harking back to an era that seems to me to be ever more unlikely. Sadly.
N7GTX said:
Yes, the old days were good - aren't they always? - but they are for you, not the upcoming breed with a totally different outlook who demand ever more - just look at any teenager's bedroom. To believe there is going to be a successful market for a 'pure' sports car may be harking back to an era that seems to me to be ever more unlikely. Sadly.
It all depends from which side you are coming from. New customer coming from known sports manufacturer, new customer first sports car, die-hard TVR customer. (just to name a few)It is true, that every company wants to make a good buck. It's also true that nowadays every car seems to need every gimmick you can think of. So maybe easy formula to build a successfull sports car, then? Maybe.
But then you wouldn't need to revive TVR anyway. Just build up a new company and give the masses, what they want. TVR comes with a heritage. You could discard that, but I don't think Les Edgar wants that.
longbow said:
As soon as I saw pics of the new Supra concept I couldn't help think that it had a lot of Sagaris DNA in there....
If this thing packs GT-R tech in a body like that and is say sub £70k then the new TVRs are going to face some mighty competition.
If they actually make something that looks like that and goes like sIf this thing packs GT-R tech in a body like that and is say sub £70k then the new TVRs are going to face some mighty competition.
t off a stick I'd buy it straight away. They won't though.V8 GRF said:
DonkeyApple said:
Cheap has different interpretations. Obviously, if you look at the purchase price then they weren't.
It's when you look at the way they were built that you see cheap. Money saved on components, build technology, design etc. They had to build the cars to a price point and to invest in cost saving manufacturing processes, top quality electrical components, developing solutions that worked perfectly would have led to a car that needed to cost many thousands more to turn a profit. As it was, there was little margin in the cars they were selling.
There was true genius in how TVR built the cars. Really clever little things such as hiding lower door edges to get them to fit the shell in less time, more ease etc. It was a really smart company but while the end product wasn't cheap to the consumer they had to be built cheap in order to get some price that was affordable.
OK wrong word 'affordable' is the myth.It's when you look at the way they were built that you see cheap. Money saved on components, build technology, design etc. They had to build the cars to a price point and to invest in cost saving manufacturing processes, top quality electrical components, developing solutions that worked perfectly would have led to a car that needed to cost many thousands more to turn a profit. As it was, there was little margin in the cars they were selling.
There was true genius in how TVR built the cars. Really clever little things such as hiding lower door edges to get them to fit the shell in less time, more ease etc. It was a really smart company but while the end product wasn't cheap to the consumer they had to be built cheap in order to get some price that was affordable.
However, taking your other interpretation of the word, then yes I'd agree they were built on a shoestring or on the cheap, maybe acceptable when the company was recovering from the lean times but there was plenty of profit in the Griffith, Chimaera and Cerberas, that's why PW ended up owning large tracts of the Trough of Bowland etc
So you could argue in the mid '90s there was no excuse in not spending a little more in development of the cars that came later but they didn't and that ultimately killed his Golden Goose. So I'd question the use of the word Genius, more like 'taking the piss' and when the 'new breed' of owners arrived who'd been enticed in from other main stream marques they didn't bend over and take it like the 'enthusiasts' would.
The ingenuity, agility to respond quickly to trends and ability to innovate of a small company is one of its USP and that wasn't taken full advantage of and is one of the myriad of reasons TVR failed.
I don't think decent, thought through engineering or construction methods are all that difficult to implement cheaply but they do require an element of investment, nothing ridiculous but some cash wisely spent. Restrict your sharpest minds by starving them of cash and you're asking for trouble and that's what they got.
Use clever construction and design methods by all means but do the underlying fundamentals right and everything surely will follow. That's what the new TVR needs to do if they what to avoid the failures of the past.
TA14 said:
DonkeyApple said:
Especially on the matter of PW stripping the firm of cash and never investing to move the firm on.
So the AJP engine range was developed for free? And the 350i, 350SE, 390SE... Sagaris as well?Taking your examples however, building bigger Rover V8s isn't exactly rocket science and I doubt the he paid Melling that much for his consultancy. taking that further why use Melling when there were more well known and genuinely successful engine designers out there?
I'm sure you know some of the myriad of stories about corner cutting and shoestring development budgets.
Even I have one to tell.
In the early '90s I had a business selling 3D CAD software and PCs and was contacted by Nick Coughlan, I think (even he wasn't sure but he remembered the incident) and they wanted a demo. I was obviously excited at thinking we could be getting a big local customer and a car manufacturer to boot only to be deflated a couple of days before the demo was scheduled when we received a call cancelling the demo because Peter Wheeler had found out about it and said he didn't want them wasting their time because he wouldn't pay for it.
V8 GRF said:
TA14 said:
DonkeyApple said:
Especially on the matter of PW stripping the firm of cash and never investing to move the firm on.
So the AJP engine range was developed for free? And the 350i, 350SE, 390SE... Sagaris as well?...
I'm sure you know some of the myriad of stories about corner cutting and shoestring development budgets.
TA14 said:
V8 GRF said:
TA14 said:
DonkeyApple said:
Especially on the matter of PW stripping the firm of cash and never investing to move the firm on.
So the AJP engine range was developed for free? And the 350i, 350SE, 390SE... Sagaris as well?...
I'm sure you know some of the myriad of stories about corner cutting and shoestring development budgets.
I can't think of an area where PW invested properly to move the business forward. Every step TVR took forward, they were proud to take with insufficient funds to do it properly and bodge the end result together with excess labour spend or leave it to their customer to resolve. From engines, to chassis, to shells, to components, even to paint and short changing bottom end engineers, they thought they were being clever by cutting corners.
Obviously, I am totally open to finding areas where they over invested to get a job done. Other than PW's pension
Gassing Station | General TVR Stuff & Gossip | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff