2017 TVR predicted pricing

[anonymous-user]

TVRMs said:

And that alone would be enough for me to tell TVR to go raffle themselves...

Why after supporting a start up should you need to see how you order is being progressed by reading a comic?

Hmm. Wrong side of bed this morning..? I guess it's fine to grumble and criticise, but be aware that's what it is. Unless you have information I don't I guess we'll all just have to be patient. Even the naysayers.

And for goodness sake, TVR and not trying to create a 'supercar', nor something that competes with one, just a lightweight, proper sports car that looks bonkers, sounds brilliant and goes like stonk. I'm excited, clearly you're not, that's fine.

[BJWoods]

m4tti said:

It is.. It's defined largely by speed, handling, looks and for some laptimes... The point I'm was alluding to is in even semi analogue terms you'd need to produce something like the RXC to have supercar performance at the price mentioned. Hence why I'm sceptical the tvr will generate anything like super car performance. But you can call it what you like.. If it's a super car to you then it's a supercar.

You asked why cant it compete with super cars due to its superior power to weight, and that's been answered, and now your digressing.

Edited by m4tti on Thursday 18th August 21:02

Edited by m4tti on Thursday 18th August 21:20

I'm not digressing.. Murray was talking about what a sports car should be, and I raised the question (as have other in the past) about what is a supercar, does it have to be ever more exotic, with an ever higher, BHP, complexity,max speed...

I think P1, Veyron or something really exotic beating performance is not being expected/promoted from TVR, I'm certainly not.. but vs a porsche turbo, Ferrari 488, Mclaren 570?. etc.. which are sports cars - or 'supercars' albeit it 'lesser' ones. (more road friendly, fun 'supercars'? ) and have 'supercar' performance in the 'real world' ..

(please note heavy use of quotes marks)

Edited by BJWoods on Thursday 18th August 21:40

[JapanRed]

Sorry for stirring up the pot once again :-)
I assume no one has any idea how many orders have been placed so far?
Thanks.

[m4tti]

BJWoods said:

It just won't compete against a 488 or latest 911 turbo. As previously explained it won't have the on board technology to do it.

I think real expectations should be set otherwise it leads to dissapointment.

[BJWoods]

JapanRed said:

Sorry for stirring up the pot once again :-)
I assume no one has any idea how many orders have been placed so far?
Thanks.

no 'orders' as such - just deposits.... (450+ the last I read somewhere)
Ie I've got a deposit down, but I wouldn't think of it as an order yet.

[m4tti]

thecook101 said:

TVRMs said:

And that alone would be enough for me to tell TVR to go raffle themselves...

Why after supporting a start up should you need to see how you order is being progressed by reading a comic?

Hmm. Wrong side of bed this morning..? I guess it's fine to grumble and criticise, but be aware that's what it is. Unless you have information I don't I guess we'll all just have to be patient. Even the naysayers.

And for goodness sake, TVR and not trying to create a 'supercar', nor something that competes with one, just a lightweight, proper sports car that looks bonkers, sounds brilliant and goes like stonk. I'm excited, clearly you're not, that's fine.

TVRMs makes a valid point. The depositors are essentially investors and should be given a greater level of transparency, it's simple business practice.

[m4tti]

BJWoods said:

no 'orders' as such - just deposits.... (450+ the last I read somewhere)
Ie I've got a deposit down, but I wouldn't think of it as an order yet.

Hopefully with a credit card that has no expiration of its legal cover on a transaction

Feel free to berate me

[TOV!E]

BJWoods said:

no 'orders' as such - just deposits.... (450+ the last I read somewhere)
Ie I've got a deposit down, but I wouldn't think of it as an order yet.

DITTO, wish they would hurry up though

[anonymous-user]

m4tti said:

TVRMs makes a valid point. The depositors are essentially investors and should be given a greater level of transparency, it's simple business practice.

The deposit holders are certainly not investors, unless you think they are doing this on a budget of £2.5m (500x£5k). As a deposit holder I am simply providing an expression of interest to be used by Les to validate the business model and raise the real money. It's also the only fair way to allocate the initial 500 carbonfibre launch cars. Remember, Les has always said the aim is LeMans, and he needs 500 homologated cars to do that - coincidence?

[BJWoods]

thecook101 said:

The deposit holders are certainly not investors, unless you think they are doing this on a budget of £2.5m (500x£5k). As a deposit holder I am simply providing an expression of interest to be used by Les to validate the business model and raise the real money. It's also the only fair way to allocate the initial 500 carbonfibre launch cars. Remember, Les has always said the aim is LeMans, and he needs 500 homologated cars to do that - coincidence?

Originally the pr implied was for both convertible and coupe version at similar times (at least it did to me), later it firmed up as coupe 1st, I might defer mine for a convertible if/when more information on timescales become available. or go for coupe and then go into a convertible.

But racing is what they need/want 500 coupes for.

we shall see... they need to show a car to deposit holders within the next couple of months though. imho. And I do think they will

[BJWoods]

m4tti said:

Yes I know all that. Sorry but if you think that's going to make it compete with the cars I mention then your buying into the hyperbole.

This competes and beats the current crop of super cars. Laps quicker than a p1... Has huge aero, flat bottom, and a trick gearbox.. And starts at 120k. As you can see as a road car it will only appeal to a certain few. We need an air of realism. Murray has a vested interest to make you think like this about the new car.



Another question is why Yamaha didn't continue with the istream car..

I wasn't the person that started talking about supercars! ( ie P1, etc)

[m4tti]

thecook101 said:

The deposit holders are certainly not investors, unless you think they are doing this on a budget of £2.5m (500x£5k). As a deposit holder I am simply providing an expression of interest to be used by Les to validate the business model and raise the real money. It's also the only fair way to allocate the initial 500 carbonfibre launch cars. Remember, Les has always said the aim is LeMans, and he needs 500 homologated cars to do that - coincidence?

No I don't think they have a budget of £2.5m but I vaguely know where the finance is coming from....

[m4tti]

BJWoods said:

I wasn't the person that started talking about supercars! ( ie P1, etc)

Super cars covers everything from 911 turbos upwards. I'll refresh your memory when you asked Nick why it couldn't compete with such cars

BJWoods said:

NickOrangeCars said:

This is flawed as £80k TVR is still going to be a long way from todays Supercars - back in the day a Cerbera could easily hold it's own against the Ferrari's of its day (and still very respectable) - but Supercar world has moved on big time and 400-500bhp (if they get that) is still going to be slow compared to most 200k cars. So the idea thats it's a cheap way to get that sort of performance is flawed, as its more likely to be a competitor to new Cayman's (with Turbo power now) - M3/M4 - its not going to get near a Supercar.

Why IF? as the base engine is 420 BHP! - and Cosworth are not going to lie about it. if they say 480 or 500 BHP in TVR spec.

|Also it is not going to be slower - if it is 400-500 Kgs lighter!! (don't care about Max speed)

Target TVR weight 1150kg.. a target 400BHP per tonne level of performance

ie

Porsche Turbo 'unladen' weight = 1,670 kg - with only 540BhP
http://www.porsche.com/uk/models/911/911-turbo/fea...

Jaguar F-Type R AWD - weight > 170 kg - 550 bhp (non AWD (1650kg)
http://www.jaguar.com/jaguar-range/f-type/specific...

Ferrari 488 - 1544 KG - 660 BHP

---

How does all that weight help you go around corners, or stop quickly?

In the Gordon Murray interview he bemoans the fact that cars have got to heavy.... Lets's see?

Edited by BJWoods on Thursday 18th August 19:20

Edited by BJWoods on Thursday 18th August 19:23

[BJWoods]

m4tti said:

yes - NickOrange started talking about supercars - 200k plus cars

I was referring to sports cars, quoting Murray talking about sports cars.. (see my my earlier comments)

I gave examples Porsche 911 turbo, Jaguar F-type, Ferrari488.. (not "supercars" - ie of the P1 variety, you refered to..... )
Are these super cars in your eyes, they are not in mine, and is what I was talking about - sports cars

You gave an exampe of a 120k car competing with a P1...

which is totally irrelevant to what I was talking about sportscars, and I never suggested it would be competing witha P1 -
I gave examples of 550-650 bhp sports cars, that were heavy, making a 500 BHP much lighter target weight TVR competive with them

why this attitude?

[m4tti]

BJWoods said:

yes - NickOrange started talking about supercars - 200k plus cars

I was referring to sports cars, quoting Murray talking about sports cars.. (see my my earlier comments)

I gave examples Porsche 911 turbo, Jaguar F-type, Ferrari488.. (not "supercars" - ie of the P1 variety, you refered to..... )
Are these super cars in your eyes, they are not in mine, and is what I was talking about - sports cars

You gave an exampe of a 120k car competing with a P1...

which is totally irrelevant to what I was talking about sportscars, and I never suggested it would be competing witha P1 -
I gave examples of 550-650 bhp sports cars, that were heavy, making a 500 BHP much lighter target weight TVR competive with them

why this attitude?

There's no attitude it's called realism laced with a sense of humour

Year upon year the 911 turbo is pretty much a super car. A P1 is a hyper car

Sorry if you feel offended.

Edit

Infact you started the topic based on EVO. It's weak garbage.sorry.

Edited by m4tti on Thursday 18th August 23:43

Edited by m4tti on Thursday 18th August 23:45

Edited by m4tti on Friday 19th August 00:12

[BJWoods]

m4tti said:

There's no attitude it's called realism laced with a sense of humour

Year upon year the 911 turbo is pretty much a super car. A P1 is a hyper car

Sorry if you feel offended.

Edit

Infact you started the topic based on EVO. It's weak garbage.sorry.

Edited by m4tti on Thursday 18th August 23:43

Edited by m4tti on Thursday 18th August 23:45

Edited by m4tti on Friday 19th August 00:12

No - you just want to win an argument because you define supercars a ceratin way...

I described a 911 turbo, F-type, Ferrarri 488 as sportscars. you think they are supercars.. - we disagree - then you used a P1 as an example of what TVR has to compete with!
I'm not offended, just amused. What's your beef ahgainst EVO - it's just a car mag. And the Gordon Murray interview is worth a read, wherever it is held.

Edited by BJWoods on Friday 19th August 08:32

[anonymous-user]

thecook101 said:

TVRMs said:

And that alone would be enough for me to tell TVR to go raffle themselves...

Why after supporting a start up should you need to see how you order is being progressed by reading a comic?

Hmm. Wrong side of bed this morning..? I guess it's fine to grumble and criticise, but be aware that's what it is. Unless you have information I don't I guess we'll all just have to be patient. Even the naysayers.

And for goodness sake, TVR and not trying to create a 'supercar', nor something that competes with one, just a lightweight, proper sports car that looks bonkers, sounds brilliant and goes like stonk. I'm excited, clearly you're not, that's fine.

I didn't get out of the wrong side of the bed - yesterday or today.

As someone that's had a few new TVRs in the past I would like to be excited about a new TVR but I see nothing to get excited about.

I'm a glass half - full person. When I check my post code it does not suggest I live in cloud cookoo land. I would consider myself to be a realist.

If being a realist qualified me as a naysayer, in regard to the topic being discussed, I guess I am.

I have however, several very good reasons to believe a new TVR won't be along for a long time.

None of them trivial?

No factory.
No workforce.
No car that they seem to be able to display.
Little to suggest they have a business model.
Limited access to a time warp which they are looking more and more like they will need in order to deliver on what they have previously committed to.

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 19th August 08:59

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 19th August 09:02

[m4tti]

BJWoods said:

No - you just want to win an argument because you define supercars a ceratin way...

I described a 911 turbo, F-type, Ferrarri 488 as sportscars. you think they are supercars.. - we disagree - then you used a P1 as an example of what TVR has to compete with!
I'm not offended, just amused. What's your beef ahgainst EVO - it's just a car mag. And the Gordon Murray interview is worth a read, wherever it is held.

Edited by BJWoods on Friday 19th August 08:32

I didn't.. you did.. you answered a post regrading super cars made by nick orange and asked why it couldn't compete.. Ive explained.. the quotes are there for all to see.

[chris watton]

To the people who put down a deposit last year, have you not had any extra communication from TVR about what your car will actually look like, or any other details yet?

[N7GTX]

In the interview with Sprint last year, Les himself said this car was to be an Aston, Ferrari etc beater . He has placed the car in this bracket.

And this is what he said to Top Gear magazine in June 2015. Small clues about styling and size included.

http://www.topgear.com/car-news/insider/new-tvr-wi...