RE: 250 orders for new TVR
Discussion
joncon said:
ok...1180kgs....
wasn't far off
367 bhp.
similar to what tvr will be looking to achieve.
the new one due next year will cost 80k plus extras
I think that is the realistic area tvr will be aiming for.
if it comes in below that then awesome..... cant wait.
311 bhp/tonne is not similar to 400 bhp/tonne mentioned above. It's good but it's not great.wasn't far off
367 bhp.
similar to what tvr will be looking to achieve.
the new one due next year will cost 80k plus extras
I think that is the realistic area tvr will be aiming for.
if it comes in below that then awesome..... cant wait.
fatjon said:
I don't think the Cerb crossplane would be much of a starting point for Cosworths breath. Nice solid engine but it's very marginal on emissions.
I wasn't suggesting continuing to use the Rover V8. Everyone seems to be under the impression it's a Ford Coyote.Digger said:
Is this what's commonally referred to as irony?
No. While they're far from sporty, I do like crossplane V8s, can't stand flatplanes though. If you're referring to my opinions, I could equally fire that back in the face of those who insist the V8 is a better choice than an I6.Some Gump said:
Yeah, but that's not a sports car. Sportscars come with inline 6's. Rverp6 said so.
The Morgan Aero series, while using German rather than American power, are still muscle cars in the Cobra mould.joncon said:
morgan have also just announced a cosworth 2 litre in line 4 ....
The Ford Duratec unit (which is what I assume you're referring to) is cheap and plentiful. It is still, however, inherently compromised by being an I4. As for I6 Morgans, the sadly-cancelled Eva GT had (or was to have had, I don't know if the concept had an engine in it) a BMW N54B30. It was quoted as weighing 1250kg.RoverP6B said:
fatjon said:
I don't think the Cerb crossplane would be much of a starting point for Cosworths breath. Nice solid engine but it's very marginal on emissions.
I wasn't suggesting continuing to use the Rover V8. Everyone seems to be under the impression it's a Ford Coyote.I actually laughed when I read the latest RoverPost. I'd love to do a venn diagram to try to work out which cars (if any) fit into the P6B definition of "british sports car". You'd have guessed that between Morgan, Lotus, Westfield, Caterham, DAX, Sylva, Fisher, MEV, Bentley and Jaguar that at least one would make a sports car - seems not.
Some Gump said:
I actually laughed when I read the latest RoverPost. I'd love to do a venn diagram to try to work out which cars (if any) fit into the P6B definition of "british sports car". You'd have guessed that between Morgan, Lotus, Westfield, Caterham, DAX, Sylva, Fisher, MEV, Bentley and Jaguar that at least one would make a sports car - seems not.
Exactly, waste of time replying directly to anything posted. You can add to the list; GM is a unsuccesful designer and Cosworth have done nothing of note too.Barking.....
RoverP6B said:
braddo said:
It clearly fking isn't, because the majority of racing engines appear to be V8s and inline 4s!
You won't find many I4s in racing. BTCC is the only major series I can think of using them, and that's a far shadow of what it once was.Seems you're talking yet more st, with plenty of other people proving you wrong on other points; I wonder if you believe your own st or you're just having fun trolling?
RoverP6B said:
dvs_dave said:
That doesn't answer the question. Again the question is; how do you propose a competitive and compliant I6 NA engine be delivered at a price point workable for TVR as a startup aiming to release a sub 75 grand car?
This whole idea that a Ford Modular V8-engined British-built GT can be sold profitably for £75k is nonsense. The Jensen S-V8 and the Invicta both proved that point.....Ricardo had stated that the Speed Six could be made emissions-compliant.....questionable "facts" about the Speed Six......To help you more, all the Jensen and Invicta proved was that crap, ugly cars don't sell. You really think a more exotic/bespoke engine would have saved them??? Do you need reminding of Koenigssegg? I suppose you're a self proclaimed authority on those as well?
And the Ricardo stuff, you need putting straight on that too. In 2006, TVR under Smollensky approached Ricardo to develop the Speed Six to Euro 5 emissions. Rumor on the TVR forum at the time was that the quote was around 5M quid. The deal was never closed and no work ever done. In the decade since, Euro 6 is the minimum standard that must now be complied with. The Speed Six cannot be re-engineered to meet Euro 6 and beyond (2020 CO2 targets are the next big challenge), confirmed by Cosworth backed LE making statements on the topic such as, "it wouldn’t last long in terms of emissions demands" and "an insurmountable challenge".
Of course you think you know better from the perspective of your mum's garden shed filled with rusty old Rover parts, but you've yet to suggest anything remotely sensible or viable. So please answer my original question specifically. If you can't (and we all know you can't), then please have some dignity, accept that you're out of your depth and move on.
Apologies other readers, but I'm having too much fun here. It's like shooting fish in a barrel
KTF said:
fatjon said:
What's so unbelievable about 1100Kg. The Cerbera is a 4 seater (ish) steel backbone chassis with GRP body and a V8 and it comes in around 1040 to 1140 depending on which figures you believe and what day the car was made on.
The 2015 2.0 MX5 is just over 1000kg. The new TVR will be bigger, larger engine, more 'luxurious', etc. which means heavier so 1100kg looks a but unrealistic.So 1100-1200kg is entirely feasible, just as it was with the last generation of TVR's.
Much more interesting though is the 400hp/ton metric LE has given. If that's what they're aiming for, absolute weight isn't all that important if power is dialled to suit.
So given these numbers we can expect the engine to have between 440-480hp which is mildly tuned Coyote, or LS3 territory. If they use the Voodoo with 525hp, then up to 1300kg is doable.
ORD said:
400bhp/ton in a car that is 'tuned for torque' is insane. I had hoped that the car might focus more on lightness and involvement than huge speed. It'll be utterly impossible to rev whilst staying at sensible speeds. Not really a car for our roads!
Mine has 400/ton bit a nice gentle torque curve that makes it really easy to drive. Give it another 100 FT/lbs which this V8 will almost certainly have and you have something really rather mental. Re the weight, being discussed earlier, by the time you've increased the size of the car to a more modern template, fitted some safety kit and carpets and a drivetrain capable of taking the power being mooted then I'd be surprised if it came in significantly lighter than an Evora or Cayman.
DonkeyApple said:
ORD said:
400bhp/ton in a car that is 'tuned for torque' is insane. I had hoped that the car might focus more on lightness and involvement than huge speed. It'll be utterly impossible to rev whilst staying at sensible speeds. Not really a car for our roads!
Mine has 400/ton bit a nice gentle torque curve that makes it really easy to drive. Give it another 100 FT/lbs which this V8 will almost certainly have and you have something really rather mental. The fact that TVR is coming back excites me to bits, DA I bet your motor is awesome to open up!
cerb4.5lee said:
TVR`s should be mental I think and I like the fact that they are going for a strong power to weight figure, my Cerbera was quite tricky to put all its power down in certain road conditions but it was epic fun trying!
The fact that TVR is coming back excites me to bits, DA I bet your motor is awesome to open up!
Yes but a superior chassis makes it easier to put that power down. My Griff and also the T350 were more exciting than the Typhon for the same reason as your Cerb, they were nearing their limits for the power they had. The same power in a superior chassis just wouldn't be as exhilarating. The fact that TVR is coming back excites me to bits, DA I bet your motor is awesome to open up!
I agree that Tivs should be mental and the old ones were but they were and are mental at speeds which are fun, not lethal.
The Typhon is a huge hoot but by the time you are changing up from 2nd you are illegal. Add to that that to have the same thrill I used to get from the Griff at 50 I have to be traveling at almost double that and that's why I think even bigger power with an even better chassis might be a bit dull on the road.
DonkeyApple said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
This is my only reservation about this project. All the names and brands involved are very exciting but no one in the industry is gossiping about where this car is being put together. It does lead you to believe that the site isn't set up yet and as such two years to market seems very bullish. However, I do wonder if the iStream process is such that test cars can be build on GM's existing set up meaning that the factory and production line is not as initially critical for building the first cars as it would be under traditional/conventional manufacturing methods?
andy43 said:
Car said:
a composite ground-effect aero chassis.'
(Hint: think what happens when you hit a bump, and how bad it is having a road car that is pulling 2g and then suddenly without waring, only being able to only pull 1g.........)
Max_Torque said:
What on earth are they taking about? A "ground effect" aero chassis on a road car? Dream on!
(Hint: think what happens when you hit a bump, and how bad it is having a road car that is pulling 2g and then suddenly without waring, only being able to only pull 1g.........)
It's marketing bumf. If they can acheive a barely measurable ground effect that makes no difference at all to dynamics, they can still make that claim...so the ground effect will technically be present but will be meaningless.(Hint: think what happens when you hit a bump, and how bad it is having a road car that is pulling 2g and then suddenly without waring, only being able to only pull 1g.........)
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff