RE: 250 orders for new TVR

RE: 250 orders for new TVR

Author
Discussion

anonymous-user

53 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
ORD said:
If TVR does a good job and gets a fairly light chassis and body, crisp throttle response, good sound, decent and feelsome steering and brakes...all for £75k...it'll be onto a winner (within a fairly small market).
If......


Take Mclaren Automotive. A young, but well funded and supremely talented company. Their first car, the 12c was considered good, but perhaps not brilliant. That sold for double what TVR are so far suggesting their car will cost.

Any car that has ALL the attribute you suggest is going to be heavily compromised in other areas, both as a result of budget/time limitations but also legal ones. A lot will depend on the route to market they take with the cars homologation process. I'd imagine they will be going via some form of low volume type approval to avoid the biggest headaches!

anonymous-user

53 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
chris watton said:
It's also a huge lump, overweight, high bonnet and slab sides, like most modern cars.

And, TBH, that looks as if it's trying a little too hard, way too fussy. It probably will not age all that well.
Overweight? it's a mass produced four door hatchback with NCAP5 rating, It was never going to weigh 1000kg now was it (apparently it's 1380 odd kg, sounds bang on to me.)


But that's besides the point. The point i was trying to make is that access to CAD and the associated CAM processes has meant that mass market cars are no longer just square boxes. They are heavily styled (even if you personally don't like that particular style). Some are pretty out their too (Nissan Puke anyone?) meaning the USP of "TVR STYLING SHOCK" is just not what it once was.


Robert Elise

956 posts

144 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
If......
i think TVR need to keep it simple and honest, like it used to be. drama in the engine, noise and looks. Dump the hi tech, titanium, carbon fibre passion of Mclaren. They'll be a market for it here. But the legal issues abroad are difficult i agree.

DonkeyApple

54,918 posts

168 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
DonkeyApple said:
the simple fact that it needs to look great.
But again, even that is rather hard these days.

I mean, take a look at the average hot hatch from the late 1990s, arguably TVRs heyday:




ok, a nice enough things, but not exactly "mad" in its appearence.

Fast forward nearly 20 years and we have normal "cooking" cars looking like this:




The game has changed, and it's a LONG way away from where it used to be.
Again, I agree. What I'm thinking is that it's going to need to either go for very retro lines, which may be prudent given that it's the over 55s with the money in the UK, or be striking like the last GT40 was.

so called

9,073 posts

208 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
DonkeyApple said:
the simple fact that it needs to look great.
But again, even that is rather hard these days.

I mean, take a look at the average hot hatch from the late 1990s, arguably TVRs heyday:




ok, a nice enough things, but not exactly "mad" in its appearence.

Fast forward nearly 20 years and we have normal "cooking" cars looking like this:




The game has changed, and it's a LONG way away from where it used to be.
Of course I'm biased but I think all of the T cars still look good.


DonkeyApple

54,918 posts

168 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
[redacted]

Robert Elise

956 posts

144 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
exactly.
"cartoonish" is a little harsh, but i know what you mean. Nothing wrong with that. I love purist sports cars, but TVR is still petrolhead heaven and i want one some day. No little boy sees one in the street and says "meh, rather have a a Type R"

AER

1,142 posts

269 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
Let's see now. Even making the stunning cars of old that everyone remembers fondly and then under some pretty lax regulatory standards compared to today's requirements, the company went broke. ..

interloper

2,747 posts

254 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
But again, even that is rather hard these days.

I mean, take a look at the average hot hatch from the late 1990s, arguably TVRs heyday:




ok, a nice enough things, but not exactly "mad" in its appearence.

Fast forward nearly 20 years and we have normal "cooking" cars looking like this:




The game has changed, and it's a LONG way away from where it used to be.
Why are you comparing tall hatches to low sleak sports cars? Back in the Nineties you could have a fairly in your face hatch like an Escort Codworth or an Integrale. Both fairly Ott (but better resolved than that dogs breakfast of a Honda) yet Tvrs still stood out.

If the new Tvr is low, sleak and lacking awkward fussy detail, it will look hugely better than most of the current crop of road cars.

Robert Elise

956 posts

144 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
AER said:
Let's see now. Even making the stunning cars of old that everyone remembers fondly and then under some pretty lax regulatory standards compared to today's requirements, the company went broke. ..
some truth. However, there was some mismanagement and some stubbornness. Developing your own engine is just commercial suicide.
Also, we *hope* that they'll be a retro demand for such beasts.

anonymous-user

53 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
interloper said:
Max_Torque said:
But again, even that is rather hard these days.

I mean, take a look at the average hot hatch from the late 1990s, arguably TVRs heyday:




ok, a nice enough things, but not exactly "mad" in its appearence.

Fast forward nearly 20 years and we have normal "cooking" cars looking like this:




The game has changed, and it's a LONG way away from where it used to be.
Why are you comparing tall hatches to low sleak sports cars? Back in the Nineties you could have a fairly in your face hatch like an Escort Codworth or an Integrale. Both fairly Ott (but better resolved than that dogs breakfast of a Honda) yet Tvrs still stood out.

If the new Tvr is low, sleak and lacking awkward fussy detail, it will look hugely better than most of the current crop of road cars.
OK, i'll try again!

I'm not comparing a Type R with a TVR!

I'm simply using it as an example of "mad" or "extreme" styling, something that was the preserve of TVR when all normal mass produced cars looked very boring. Now, even mass produced cars look pretty stunning (you might not like any given cars particular styling ethos, but you can't ignore the amount of design and concept work that these days is present in dull euroboxes, let alone in todays "real" sports cars).

Perhaps this is a better example of what i mean, the benchmark "max thrills" N/A sports car (imo)




Look at it! It looks like it's driven pretty much straight off the race track!



Also, it's worth taking a moment to look at this:



As an example of what TVR could be making. And yet, even with access to the extensive BMW "back catalogue" for powertrain and chassis, they still went bust.........

DonkeyApple

54,918 posts

168 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
AER said:
Let's see now. Even making the stunning cars of old that everyone remembers fondly and then under some pretty lax regulatory standards compared to today's requirements, the company went broke. ..
This is what's interesting about the iStream concept.

In the latter years of TVR, because PW had never invested in production but just hired more and more bods from what was an extremely limited local talent pool, the company ended up with over 400 staff!!! Arguably less than 100 of those had the genuine skills to be anywhere near such a type of car and besides investing in the modern world should have meant a workforce of under 100.

Ultimately a failure to invest compensated for by hiring more and more staff of less and less ability meant making any money impossible.

And also lets be really honest, who in their right mind wanted to pay £60k+ for a car that was mostly built by semi literate spaztards who not only didn't give a fk about their craft but clearly disliked the people buying the product.

My understanding of iStream is that it requires extremely low numbers of staff so costs are much lower, the production line more flexible and you can cherry pick only competent workers who want to work.

And it goes without saying that ensuring any engine issues fall into Cosworth's brand and balance sheet makes sense.

Plus, a regional development grant or two wouldn't go amiss. biggrin

so called

9,073 posts

208 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
One question that I have carried in my head since 2000 is, how fast does a sports car have to be?
I've always considered a TVR as a sports car and not a super car.
I did 155mph in my Chimaera on the Abahn in Germany.
I did similar in my first Tuscan with so much more in the peddle.
The fun is the 0 to 100 and the NOISE.
Someone earlier said the s6 wouldn't touch "what ever' but 0 to 60 sub 4 seconds?
Do we really need super car performance in a sports car?

Did I just write that?
Someone spiked my second bottle of wine :-o (I'm in India so it's late enough). smile👳

DonkeyApple

54,918 posts

168 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
so called said:
One question that I have carried in my head since 2000 is, how fast does a sports car have to be?
I've always considered a TVR as a sports car and not a super car.
I did 155mph in my Chimaera on the Abahn in Germany.
I did similar in my first Tuscan with so much more in the peddle.
The fun is the 0 to 100 and the NOISE.
Someone earlier said the s6 wouldn't touch "what ever' but 0 to 60 sub 4 seconds?
Do we really need super car performance in a sports car?

Did I just write that?
Someone spiked my second bottle of wine :-o (I'm in India so it's late enough). smile??
In a PH article the other day between the F Type and the 911 they ended with a sentence that highlighted an interesting point. And that was that other countries might make cars that handle better and are faster than the cars the British build but that the Brits haven't forgotten that it's not all about numbers and stats but about actually how a car feels and makes you feel in just normal driving conditions.

I thought it rather poignant.

The all too clear truth is that 99% of all driving is about how a car feels from 40-80. And zipping around within that range. And well, while driving a 911 Turbo recently and also a 458 the one thing I noticed about both was that neither stirred any emotion at all while driving in that range. No drama, no thrills, nothing. Two unbelievably awesome and near faultless cars and yet utterly sterile, soulless and pointless in sensible driving conditions. In fact, the only thing I found exciting about the 458 was starting it. That sent tingles down my spine every time but once moving and driving a combination of London, motorway, countryside is was boring. It was like getting to bang the hottest girl on the planet but just sitting next to her for 5 hours, touching her knee a couple of times.

These cars are unbelievably great but monumentally fking boring to actually use as cars within a sensible remit.

ORD

18,086 posts

126 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
L
so called said:
One question that I have carried in my head since 2000 is, how fast does a sports car have to be?
I've always considered a TVR as a sports car and not a super car.
I did 155mph in my Chimaera on the Abahn in Germany.
I did similar in my first Tuscan with so much more in the peddle.
The fun is the 0 to 100 and the NOISE.
Someone earlier said the s6 wouldn't touch "what ever' but 0 to 60 sub 4 seconds?
Do we really need super car performance in a sports car?

Did I just write that?
Someone spiked my second bottle of wine :-o (I'm in India so it's late enough). smile??
Not sure. Usually I say 'No.'. Actually, I would go so far as to say that a sports car definitely can be too fast. The optimum is probably between 150 and 250 bhp per ton.

However, a massive part of TVR's brand identity was the 'white collar supercar' thing. I don't think TVR can afford to relaunch with something that isn't fairly ballistic. I don't know how easily that can be done now with the safety regulations without increasing the weight a lot.

There is probably a sweet spot, at around 1250kg, where it could be very fast compared to the market because of its weight advantage rather than silly power and torque.

How much power would it take to get a front-engine RWD car that weighs 1250kg to a 4 second 0-60? Less than 450bhp? I think that's seriously fast.

DonkeyApple

54,918 posts

168 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
OK, i'll try again!

I'm not comparing a Type R with a TVR!

I'm simply using it as an example of "mad" or "extreme" styling, something that was the preserve of TVR when all normal mass produced cars looked very boring. Now, even mass produced cars look pretty stunning (you might not like any given cars particular styling ethos, but you can't ignore the amount of design and concept work that these days is present in dull euroboxes, let alone in todays "real" sports cars).

Perhaps this is a better example of what i mean, the benchmark "max thrills" N/A sports car (imo)




Look at it! It looks like it's driven pretty much straight off the race track!



Also, it's worth taking a moment to look at this:



As an example of what TVR could be making. And yet, even with access to the extensive BMW "back catalogue" for powertrain and chassis, they still went bust.........
Although, Weismann went bust because they massively pissed away lender's money on frivolities and living well beyond their means and when rates spiked and their sales slowed they had no foundations and their lenders quite rightly pulled the pin. The two brothers killed that business and screwed their staff by pure incompetence. Same as some of the supposed British 'millionaires' when RBS started asking them why they had been holidaying, getting pissed, pretending to be rich using their loans.

chris watton

22,477 posts

259 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
DonkeyApple said:
so called said:
One question that I have carried in my head since 2000 is, how fast does a sports car have to be?
I've always considered a TVR as a sports car and not a super car.
I did 155mph in my Chimaera on the Abahn in Germany.
I did similar in my first Tuscan with so much more in the peddle.
The fun is the 0 to 100 and the NOISE.
Someone earlier said the s6 wouldn't touch "what ever' but 0 to 60 sub 4 seconds?
Do we really need super car performance in a sports car?

Did I just write that?
Someone spiked my second bottle of wine :-o (I'm in India so it's late enough). smile??
In a PH article the other day between the F Type and the 911 they ended with a sentence that highlighted an interesting point. And that was that other countries might make cars that handle better and are faster than the cars the British build but that the Brits haven't forgotten that it's not all about numbers and stats but about actually how a car feels and makes you feel in just normal driving conditions.

I thought it rather poignant.

The all too clear truth is that 99% of all driving is about how a car feels from 40-80. And zipping around within that range. And well, while driving a 911 Turbo recently and also a 458 the one thing I noticed about both was that neither stirred any emotion at all while driving in that range. No drama, no thrills, nothing. Two unbelievably awesome and near faultless cars and yet utterly sterile, soulless and pointless in sensible driving conditions. In fact, the only thing I found exciting about the 458 was starting it. That sent tingles down my spine every time but once moving and driving a combination of London, motorway, countryside is was boring. It was like getting to bang the hottest girl on the planet but just sitting next to her for 5 hours, touching her knee a couple of times.

These cars are unbelievably great but monumentally fking boring to actually use as cars within a sensible remit.
Well said!

Earlier, I was only meant to pop out down the road to fill the tank up in my Tamora, ready for our hols tomorrow, but ended doing 30 miles first, before returning to refuel - it is so much fun all of the time, whether going 30 or 130. Never fails to put a smile on my face.

Jasandjules

69,825 posts

228 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
A TVR is not just "fastest" but it is a car with a soul, a car you love and are as happy puttering along at 40mph as racing through the gears, you still just enjoy being in the driving seat. You know when you start the engine, that you will grin. You know that no matter what, you look back at her when you park up. You either get it or you don't. That to me is the difference between a TVR and a Porsche/BMW.

Oh and I want to see a V8 in - be quite happy with a tuned rover V8 frankly to keep costs down.

anonymous-user

53 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
DonkeyApple said:
and their sales slowed
And that's the other thing. The market is very much driven by "The Latest Thing". Product life cycles have come down, sometimes to less than 3 years! The big OEMS always have the "next big thing" waiting in the wings, but to try to compete with that level of development turnover is suicide for a small company. And yet, if you want to take even a handful of customers away from the establishment, then you are going to rely to some degree on having a volatile product.

Wiesmann had a good product. It looked good, went well, and got good reviews. Yes it was expensive, but that's because it was low volume (even after ripping all the powertrain from a BMW.......). And yet, sales dried up? If i were TVR, i'd want to look very closely at this ex-company and their business case / market positioning........

ORD

18,086 posts

126 months

Saturday 29th August 2015
quotequote all
DonkeyApple said:
In a PH article the other day between the F Type and the 911 they ended with a sentence that highlighted an interesting point. And that was that other countries might make cars that handle better and are faster than the cars the British build but that the Brits haven't forgotten that it's not all about numbers and stats but about actually how a car feels and makes you feel in just normal driving conditions.

I thought it rather poignant.

The all too clear truth is that 99% of all driving is about how a car feels from 40-80. And zipping around within that range. And well, while driving a 911 Turbo recently and also a 458 the one thing I noticed about both was that neither stirred any emotion at all while driving in that range. No drama, no thrills, nothing. Two unbelievably awesome and near faultless cars and yet utterly sterile, soulless and pointless in sensible driving conditions. In fact, the only thing I found exciting about the 458 was starting it. That sent tingles down my spine every time but once moving and driving a combination of London, motorway, countryside is was boring. It was like getting to bang the hottest girl on the planet but just sitting next to her for 5 hours, touching her knee a couple of times.

These cars are unbelievably great but monumentally fking boring to actually use as cars within a sensible remit.
Not sure a 1750kg 'sports car' from Jaguar is really the car to prove that point.

I'm with you in principle, but applying that to the Jag is just the usual pro-JLR nonsense that you get in this country. If anything, a bloated car with forced induction and oodles of mid-range torque is completely the other way. Only upside from the perspective of enjoyment is that the chassis is st enough that it can't corner smile