£12,000 to spend Tvr chimera v 911
Discussion
Jasandjules said:
4.0 - 22 or so average, 25-28 on a run at times. But if you are a bit enthusiastic (putting Boxsters behind you 
) then I've got 8mpg out of a full tank before now....
Blimey never seen 8's myself but I haven't tracked mine. Hear from those that do that figure and a bit more is common. Totally agree on your other figures mine has an Av of 22.5 and the max i have had 27.5 (fuelly.com) using Shell V power ) then I've got 8mpg out of a full tank before now....Edited by TVRJAS on Tuesday 16th September 01:20
village idiot said:
I bought a chimp... it was crap... it leaked, the battery went flat, the speedo never worked properly, it handled like a ford model t, it was slow, but by God did it sound great.
I then bought a boxster 3.2s (most of the way to a 996). it was ultra-reliable, it was comfortable, it was quick, it handled well, but it was dull as dishwater and I spent my entire ownership paranoid that the engine would blow up.
Have a look at the BMW 6-series... a nice 650 would work well.
If you had a 3.2 Boxster that was 'quick' versus your 'slow' Chimaera, the latter was a real dog (which was always the case based on the threads you started back in the day, you wouldn't listen though...). Just take a look at the respective power/weight ratios for both models (even allowing for a 'real' 4 litre to have no more than 210-215 bhp for an average example). I then bought a boxster 3.2s (most of the way to a 996). it was ultra-reliable, it was comfortable, it was quick, it handled well, but it was dull as dishwater and I spent my entire ownership paranoid that the engine would blow up.
Have a look at the BMW 6-series... a nice 650 would work well.
6-series wouldn't even figure in this comparison... they weigh nearly 2 tonnes.
village idiot said:
1997 Chim 400 with ageing Buick pig-iron lump up front against 2012 Bavarian uber-wagon with 414hp of high-revving v8 and a independently road-tested 0-60 in the low 4's.......... I'm oooot! Lol
Proper sports car weighing just over 1,000 kgs versus hotted up, biggish saloon car wighing half as much again... Not as clear cut as you think, then Someone must have swapped your small all-alloy V8 for something found in an old pick-up truck, too...
village idiot said:
I'm sorry, but if you really think a TVR Chim 400 is a sub 5.0 second car you are truly deluded.
Um, back when they were new 5.0 secs 0-60 was pretty much bang on, given that the long-term, boggo four litre of Autovisie magazine consistently returned 5.2 and 5.3s for the 0-100 km (0-62 mph) dash near the beginning, and at the end of the 40,000 km test period. They also put it on the rollers at the end of the term, nothing special at something like 185 hp at the rear wheels...village idiot said:
18mpg v power for the Chim and 23 mpg for the cockstar.
That seems very low for a Chimaera. Everything you've said seems to point at yours being a bad one unfortunately.For what it's worth, I think the feel and character of the cars are all-important and absolute performance on the road a complete side issue. Corner either at 10/10ths or go racing other cars down B-roads and you're a Tier 1 idiot - these cars are about how the make you feel. Hot hatches are for driving like a complete tosser on public roads. Sports cars are for grown ups who can recognise the appropriate times and places to enjoy a squirt of power.
As DonkeyApple says on Page 2, the OP should know straight away.
OP - I understand why you went for that local test drive, but I'd suggest you make a point of visiting one of the well respected TVR specialists to see what higher quality examples look and feel like.
Of course, do the same for the 996 at a Porsche specialist. Looking at a knackered car is never the best way to make a choice.
jamieduff1981 said:
village idiot said:
18mpg v power for the Chim and 23 mpg for the cockstar.
That seems very low for a Chimaera. Everything you've said seems to point at yours being a bad one unfortunately.For what it's worth, I think the feel and character of the cars are all-important and absolute performance on the road a complete side issue. Corner either at 10/10ths or go racing other cars down B-roads and you're a Tier 1 idiot - these cars are about how the make you feel. Hot hatches are for driving like a complete tosser on public roads. Sports cars are for grown ups who can recognise the appropriate times and places to enjoy a squirt of power.
As DonkeyApple says on Page 2, the OP should know straight away.
OP - I understand why you went for that local test drive, but I'd suggest you make a point of visiting one of the well respected TVR specialists to see what higher quality examples look and feel like.
Of course, do the same for the 996 at a Porsche specialist. Looking at a knackered car is never the best way to make a choice.
jamieduff1981 said:
Of course, do the same for the 996 at a Porsche specialist. Looking at a knackered car is never the best way to make a choice.
Although in fairness, it does give a fair indication of what goes wrong...Thing is, average UK examples of either won't give you a true measure of what these cars can be like.
An example of this which I feel is fairly representative appeared at a Porsche show last week in the shape of a UK-registered, early Boxster S which was offered at a typical UK market price (the equivalent of £5K'ish).
From a distance it looked good.
Up closer, there were several areas where the clearcoat had peeled off, the flanks were a bit wavy, the leather was worn... and to top it off, the car sat on four Chinese budget tyres. All pretty typical for a UK-market Porsche at that sort of age. You'd rarely encounter a modernish Porsche (or TVR) in such a run down state on the continent, though - which is why prices tend to start at twice the asking price for this, and why either car tends to be a lot better regarded over here. They simply tend to be kept in a better state.
Do yourself a favour - try and find a proper example of each to get a feel, and disregard the notions of folks who were landed with a ropey car that is not representative for the breed.
TA14 said:
also cheap compared to a Boxster which was £40K+
Erm, no - the Top Gear comparison test between SLK 230, Boxster and Chimaera 450 back in 1997 mentions all three being a very close match on price at a bit over £30K... Of course it was probably easier to spec up a Boxster to the 40K+ level.DonkeyApple said:
900T-R said:
TA14 said:
also cheap compared to a Boxster which was £40K+
. Of course it was probably easier to spec up a Boxster to the 40K+ level.I enjoyed my 18 months or so with my Chimaera (450). Bought from a TVR specialist and it was in very good nick overall. It was good fun, sounded great, but it was laughably agricultural, and build quality and electrical systems of that generation of TVRs is shockingly bad.
Mpg - anything from single figures to 20ish on a long run. Servicing was pricey (at the Specialist), rear hood needed replacing, immobiliser was a f
ker and needed sorting out, and various other annoying things.
Not had a Boxster, but I did have a 07 plate Cayman S. Compared to the Tiv it's on a different planet altogether (and century for that matter), in terms of handling, build quality (engine issues aside), sophistication, comfort, reliability, mpg etc. Driven numerous Boxsters, and they are very similar of course.
Recently sold a Z4M Coupe (07 plate). The engine is a masterpiece, car was bullet proof, great fun, and though not quite as accomplished as the Cayman not far off either, and more enjoyable. Mpg 30 is easy on a run, average was 24 ish. Z4M much quicker than the Cayman or indeed the Tiv. Downside is that the ride is brutally harsh. Great cars.
Out of the 3 I'd recommend the Z4M - quickest, bulletproof, amazing engine, reliable, looks great, sounds great and is currently holding its value very well indeed.
Mpg - anything from single figures to 20ish on a long run. Servicing was pricey (at the Specialist), rear hood needed replacing, immobiliser was a f
ker and needed sorting out, and various other annoying things. Not had a Boxster, but I did have a 07 plate Cayman S. Compared to the Tiv it's on a different planet altogether (and century for that matter), in terms of handling, build quality (engine issues aside), sophistication, comfort, reliability, mpg etc. Driven numerous Boxsters, and they are very similar of course.
Recently sold a Z4M Coupe (07 plate). The engine is a masterpiece, car was bullet proof, great fun, and though not quite as accomplished as the Cayman not far off either, and more enjoyable. Mpg 30 is easy on a run, average was 24 ish. Z4M much quicker than the Cayman or indeed the Tiv. Downside is that the ride is brutally harsh. Great cars.
Out of the 3 I'd recommend the Z4M - quickest, bulletproof, amazing engine, reliable, looks great, sounds great and is currently holding its value very well indeed.
TA14 said:
DonkeyApple said:
900T-R said:
TA14 said:
also cheap compared to a Boxster which was £40K+
. Of course it was probably easier to spec up a Boxster to the 40K+ level.TA14 said:
DonkeyApple said:
900T-R said:
TA14 said:
also cheap compared to a Boxster which was £40K+
. Of course it was probably easier to spec up a Boxster to the 40K+ level.But if they were £40k and someone discounted them by £10k wouldn't that mean they cost £30k?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff