|
spats
317 posts
24 months
|
Davie said: Replied at the same time... gotcha, know the car.
Liking your work sir. Thank you Sir 
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
Devil2575 said: And they would be right.
Besides, why convert a TR7 to a V8 when they did a TR8 anyway? erm because almost ALL TR8's are LHD and went to the USA. The very few factory TR7 V8's in the UK are extremely rare and sell for a huge premium over a 2.0 FHC. EDIT: Also at the time (1999) I wanted a TVR... but couldn't afford one by a long shot. So set my criteria as RWD, British, Sports car, not a convertible and with the possibility of V8'ing it. I'd already had an MGB and always liked the look of the TR7. Some 13 years on I still have a TR7... maybe that says more about the car than words ever will. 
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
Devil2575 said: 300bhp/ton said: The TR7 was a sports car That's stretching the definition somewhat. How exactly was a TR7 sporty? How is it not sporty? Do you not consider an MGB, TR6, MX-5, TVR M Series to not be sports cars either then? Devil2575 said: The point with an Astra is that it is just a run of the mill car so no one expects it to be quick. No that's not true at all. SRI turbo, GSI variants where all pretty quick and quicker than a 2.5 V6 would be.
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
spats said: Davie said: It's not a white Cavalier SRi by any chance? No, and I fully expect MR 300 per ton to jump all over me at this description  Its a Vectra B Estate...............................in tastful brown!!! No not at all. I had a look in your profile. But as said, I assume you actually had a reason for wanting to build and it being an estate? I think there is a subtle, but significant difference with what the op is after.
|
|
|
spats
317 posts
24 months
|
300bhp/ton said: No not at all. I had a look in your profile. But as said, I assume you actually had a reason for wanting to build and it being an estate? I think there is a subtle, but significant difference with what the op is after. The actual reason to put the engine in, rather than say buy a Saab for example? It was simply the knowledge the car had no hidden nasties, hadnt been written off etc. I knew it would be a good base, and I had found the engine cheap. I just put the 2 together. I could have bought a fast estate ( I do love estates!) but then I have the whole car to worry about, suspension, brakes, rust etc etc. I wanted a faster car and it made sense to keep what I knew.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Davie
844 posts
84 months
|
 Not my car nor the OP's however as an example, very tidy Mk4 Astra... Irmscher kit, nice wheels, maybe a nice audio system, sentimental value... whatever, it's irrelevant however it could eb the case the OP is in a similar situation and owns a very well looked after Astra that he's spent alot of time and effort on but it has a smaller engine. He'd now like a bit more power/speed but likes everything else about his current car. Selling it, he wouldn't get much and the budget may only allow him to buy a cheap/rougher turbo model so he'd rather keep his car but wants a bit more power. Plus, there's the argument that a majority will go "it's just an Astra" and thus the sleeper element may also appeal. You assume it's 'just a 1.6' but it's actually got a 200bhp V6 hiding under the bonnet which also gains some more man points on your chosen forum. It's not different from bolting two massive turbo's to a Noble... you could buy something faster to start with, but that's not what modifying is all about. I'm not seeing the issue to be fair. P.s... the car above has had a turbo conversion, but that's not the point!
|
|
|
Devil2575
4,450 posts
57 months
|
300bhp/ton said: Devil2575 said: 300bhp/ton said: The TR7 was a sports car That's stretching the definition somewhat. How exactly was a TR7 sporty? How is it not sporty? Do you not consider an MGB, TR6, MX-5, TVR M Series to not be sports cars either then? Devil2575 said: The point with an Astra is that it is just a run of the mill car so no one expects it to be quick. No that's not true at all. SRI turbo, GSI variants where all pretty quick and quicker than a 2.5 V6 would be. I don't consider an MGB to be a sports car. It's a truck chassis with a sports car body stuck on it A sports car is a convertible btw A TR7 is a coupe. Re SRI GSI etc, I take your point but sticking a big engine in cooking 5 door Astra would be interesting. One without lots of body kit etc.
|
|
|
aka_kerrly
4,813 posts
79 months
|
300bhp/ton said: Devil2575 said: 300bhp/ton said: The TR7 was a sports car That's stretching the definition somewhat. How exactly was a TR7 sporty? How is it not sporty? Do you not consider an MGB, TR6, MX-5, TVR M Series to not be sports cars either then? In which case we could all argue you wasted your time with a tr7 when you could have a MGB Rv8 but i guess you didn't have the money at the time but you have the skills required to make a "that will do" car which isn't really any different to what the OP is suggesting. PS: OP, I know I am not alone when I say sleepers are FANTASTIC and should be encouraged, that way you are not appealing to every muppet who thinks they know about cars but are creating something that YOU understand and perhaps a select few.
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
Devil2575 said: I don't consider an MGB to be a sports car. It's a truck chassis with a sports car body stuck on it It's a monoque same as most cars today  Devil2575 said: A sports car is a convertible btw Guess that makes an Elan or an Exige pretty useless then. Devil2575 said: A TR7 is a coupe. Also available as a DHC Devil2575 said: Re SRI GSI etc, I take your point but sticking a big engine in cooking 5 door Astra would be interesting. One without lots of body kit etc. I think the OPs does have a body kit though.
|
|
|
Dave200
2,799 posts
89 months
|
300bhp/ton said: But that's my point. The TR7 was a sports car, a RWD sports with striking looks (even if you don't like how they look, they don't look run of the mill).
It's also 30 years old or older. So it's a rare car, with right wheel drive, with proper rally and race pedigree, has age and exclusivity on it's side and genuinely is rather unique to see on the roads. Even a 100% factory stock example. We've had the "no, I absolutely know better than you - that's a stupid idea/car". And here comes the "and this is the reason my car is better than yours". A true classic in the brief history of 300bhp posting...
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
aka_kerrly said: In which case we could all argue you wasted your time with a tr7 when you could have a MGB Rv8  I paid £1200 for my 1st TR7 I think an RV8 was £18-22k. It'd have been cheaper to buy a TVR. aka_kerrly said: but i guess you didn't have the money at the time but you have the skills required to make a "that will do" car which isn't really any different to what the OP is suggesting. It wasn't by any means a 'that will do' car. It was something I wanted and had been a long term want since being a small child and owning a Matchbox TR7. It was also the want for something British, something sports car, something RWD and something 2 seat. I think what the ops wants is a million miles from this. A hatchback is 100% primarily designed for convenience, not fun or performance. If it was a Calibra I can see a point, it's a coupe, so you'd arguably own it for it's looks. I can even see the logic in a 2.0T Corsa B, as it'd be about power and performance. But the Astra is neither small and light or good looking. It's just a hatchback. aka_kerrly said: PS: OP, I know I am not alone when I say sleepers are FANTASTIC and should be encouraged, that way you are not appealing to every muppet who thinks they know about cars but are creating something that YOU understand and perhaps a select few. I agree, I love Q cars and sleepers too, but is a chavved up Astra with a luke warm motor offering up Ford Cougar performance really going to be a sleeper?
|
|
|
Max_Torque
4,826 posts
86 months
|
If the OP wants to do it, then do it! but budget for lots of extra cash for suspension, brakes and sundries. Also, check the insurance situation before you start !
|
|
|
yonex
2,875 posts
37 months
|
300bhp/ton said: rue. But nearly all the chav chariots are for sale because they are crap and haven't actually achieved what they wanted. In other words they are selling because they where deluded Very quick to criticise aren't you yet you're the one with a Thunderbird project thats never going to happen and let's be honest.... is a piece of crap then there's the TR7 you can't sell and the Camaro both mingers. Every day you try and convince everyone your some kind of maveric when in fact you're just a cock.. I think it's you that needs the reality check, if the OP wants to build something so what?
|
|
|
Crafty_
4,552 posts
69 months
|
just to echo everyone else..
If you must do it to your car forget the V6, its a big lumbering pile of cack.
Get the front struts and rear beam from a GSI to convert to bigger brakes/5 stud etc.
Z20LET (and Z20LEH) can be done with factory components, will be cheaper, better to drive.
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
Crafty_ said: just to echo everyone else..
If you must do it to your car forget the V6, its a big lumbering pile of cack.
Get the front struts and rear beam from a GSI to convert to bigger brakes/5 stud etc.
Z20LET (and Z20LEH) can be done with factory components, will be cheaper, better to drive. Wouldn't they be better off buying a GSI, even a tatty one and swapping the good bits from their current car onto it? Probably less work.
|
|
|
Crafty_
4,552 posts
69 months
|
300bhp/ton said: Wouldn't they be better off buying a GSI, even a tatty one and swapping the good bits from their current car onto it? Probably less work. Could do, added benefits of better interior/air con etc in doing that. OP could build the 1.6 engine in to a turbo, that would be a bit more interesting wouldn't it. I don't mean just slap a turbo on, but forged internals and the like, stand alone management..
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
astra gsi arden blue (2004) 98,700 miles £2,350 http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/4019813.htm No matter how good your 1.6 is, or what stereo you've put in it. I can't believe you'd be better off sticking with it when you could buy this for this money and still have better handling and more power than a 2.5 V6 one would.
|
|
|
Davie
844 posts
84 months
|
Not everybody wants something 'off the shelf' plus at £2,300... I'd stick my neck out and say that won't be a particulary good example. So, on that basis I'd rather have a mint, tastefully modified lower spec car with a conversion over a ropey GSi. Also, as tunable as the turbos are, they also have a few common (expensive) issues and thus the V6 is actually a cheap way of gaining 200bhp. And finally, perhaps the OP doesn't like turbo power... alot of people don't.
It's his choice, the only mistake he's made so far is asking on here.
|
|
|
Davie
844 posts
84 months
|
|
