RE: 250 orders for new TVR
Discussion
RoverP6B said:
dvs_dave said:
So anyone that's near Gordon Murray's place
That'll be me then, he's in Shalford and I'm in the neighbouring village (Chilworth) several times a week, often head through Shalford and even stop there sometimes.Oh, wait.....
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I think that's the hardest bit. I reckon cabin design is the easier part but the outside is going to just be hugely difficult and the single most important thing. The Griff is the seminal TVR shape. Like it or love it, it's the shape that put TVR on the map and grabbed all those headlines. But it was the more classic looks of the Chimp that attracted greater numbers. This time around, like in the early 90s after the last recession and before the tech boom, it was the early retirees who had the money to spend and they voted for classic looks. But then they all sold up as soon as mainstream manufacturers made a car that looked sport but had neck warmers, pile warmers and park assist etc.
Of the T cars I think the T350 has by far the best rear, the Tuscan the best nose. Sorry, but as much as the Sag has grown on me and has become iconic, when it was new I thought it an embarrassment and couldn't ever see myself parking up at the places I tend to park up and not feeling a bit silly.
I wonder if they asked for deposits now so they could confirm the demographic most interested and most able? For example, when paying the deposit did they ask people's ages and even go so far as to ask what cars they have owned etc?
Personally, as a bit of a young fogey, I'd like to see a retro look. Maybe a Kamm tail even!
Stepping back to the interior aspect, plastic chrome and plastic wood in weird f
king places are things that make modern cars farcical. If you cannot use the real materials then don't make ridiculous, Chinese tat versions. Use real metal and real wood or nothing. And don't place classical materials in positions that they never would have been in. Mercs have the most gopping, tasteless interiors for punters who have absolutely no clue about any form of class or sophistication. In 2005 the Sagaris could hold its own against a 360, GT3, Gallardo.
For me this new Tvr must also do the same against the modern competition so anything under £80,000 will probably be a disappointment, I can't think of anything worse than a American type muscle car or a modern pipe and slippers type Chim.
Hopefully it will be more Sag than the older beard type Tvrs.
For me this new Tvr must also do the same against the modern competition so anything under £80,000 will probably be a disappointment, I can't think of anything worse than a American type muscle car or a modern pipe and slippers type Chim.
Hopefully it will be more Sag than the older beard type Tvrs.
Lotus E300S said:
In 2005 the Sagaris could hold its own against a 360, GT3, Gallardo.
For me this new Tvr must also do the same against the modern competition so anything under £80,000 will probably be a disappointment, I can't think of anything worse than a American type muscle car or a modern pipe and slippers type Chim.
Hopefully it will be more Sag than the older beard type Tvrs.
In performance, yes. But it was never comparable to anyone but TVR enthusiasts. The new car will not be looked at as being in anything like the same league as a GT3 or Lambo, irrespective of its performance, so it cannot be priced in even the same ballpark. For me this new Tvr must also do the same against the modern competition so anything under £80,000 will probably be a disappointment, I can't think of anything worse than a American type muscle car or a modern pipe and slippers type Chim.
Hopefully it will be more Sag than the older beard type Tvrs.
You cannot launch a new marque out of nowhere with a car with a fettled crate engine and hope that people will just pay premium money.
I really want this car to succeed, assuming it is a bit more focussed than the competition, but it has to be realistic about its pricing potential.
ORD said:
In performance, yes. But it was never comparable to anyone but TVR enthusiasts. The new car will not be looked at as being in anything like the same league as a GT3 or Lambo, irrespective of its performance, so it cannot be priced in even the same ballpark.
You cannot launch a new marque out of nowhere with a car with a fettled crate engine and hope that people will just pay premium money.
I really want this car to succeed, assuming it is a bit more focussed than the competition, but it has to be realistic about its pricing potential.
I'm not a Tvr enthusiast and I chose a Sagaris over a 996 GT3, also I don't think £80,000 is premium money.You cannot launch a new marque out of nowhere with a car with a fettled crate engine and hope that people will just pay premium money.
I really want this car to succeed, assuming it is a bit more focussed than the competition, but it has to be realistic about its pricing potential.
£80k is pretty much the same as the £75k that I think is sensible pricing 
I am more concerned about the suggestion that £100k + is sensible.
I think it will come out at £70-something thousand with options maybe tickling it over £80k.
It's notable that Jaguar cleverly dodged pricing at a level that would make the F-Typr directly comparable to any Porsche. I think TVR could aim to do pretty much the same thing to Jaguar - price under the F-Type R and above the other F-Types.
I am more concerned about the suggestion that £100k + is sensible.I think it will come out at £70-something thousand with options maybe tickling it over £80k.
It's notable that Jaguar cleverly dodged pricing at a level that would make the F-Typr directly comparable to any Porsche. I think TVR could aim to do pretty much the same thing to Jaguar - price under the F-Type R and above the other F-Types.
DonkeyApple said:
If any car is as utterly hideous as an Invecta or that absolute abomination of a Jensen then it will fail. Looks will be important and making it look like some council estate kit car for mentalists has rarely been a recipe for tremendous success.
Said this before, I don't think the looks were a big problem at all, and they drove pretty well. I even quite liked the Invicta's use of rotated VW Passat tail-lights, and it had a rather nice interior. The Jensen wasn't as good-looking, admittedly, but a car in that sector will ultimately sell on how it drives...ORD said:
(Sagaris) was never comparable to anyone but TVR enthusiasts
Top Gear were evidently TVR enthusiasts then, and the laptimes didn't lie. TVR won't sell a crate-motor special at any price, people who want a Mustang engine will buy a Mustang (remember, the 'Stang is coming to the UK officially, for the first time!)... this is why they need a bespoke engine, something more special than a V8...Edited by RoverP6B on Saturday 5th September 15:02
RoverP6B said:
... This is why they need a bespoke engine, something more special than a V8...
In an ideal world regulations and funding would allow this, a big I6 would really be nice. But in the real world I'm glad they are spending their money elsewhere. US crate engine is a perfect solution IMO, lots of NA power, reliable, excellent price/performance ratio, endless tuning options, easy to find somebody with service experience.I'm only a potential second hand buyer, ie. cost concious. Not having to worry about some exotic and unproven engine is a big plus.
DonkeyApple said:
I think that's the hardest bit. I reckon cabin design is the easier part but the outside is going to just be hugely difficult and the single most important thing.
The Griff is the seminal TVR shape. Like it or love it, it's the shape that put TVR on the map and grabbed all those headlines. But it was the more classic looks of the Chimp that attracted greater numbers. This time around, like in the early 90s after the last recession and before the tech boom, it was the early retirees who had the money to spend and they voted for classic looks. But then they all sold up as soon as mainstream manufacturers made a car that looked sport but had neck warmers, pile warmers and park assist etc.
Of the T cars I think the T350 has by far the best rear, the Tuscan the best nose. Sorry, but as much as the Sag has grown on me and has become iconic, when it was new I thought it an embarrassment and couldn't ever see myself parking up at the places I tend to park up and not feeling a bit silly.
I wonder if they asked for deposits now so they could confirm the demographic most interested and most able? For example, when paying the deposit did they ask people's ages and even go so far as to ask what cars they have owned etc?
Personally, as a bit of a young fogey, I'd like to see a retro look. Maybe a Kamm tail even!
Stepping back to the interior aspect, plastic chrome and plastic wood in weird fking places are things that make modern cars farcical. If you cannot use the real materials then don't make ridiculous, Chinese tat versions. Use real metal and real wood or nothing. And don't place classical materials in positions that they never would have been in. Mercs have the most gopping, tasteless interiors for punters who have absolutely no clue about any form of class or sophistication.
or Chimearas (4.0,4.3,4.5) sold more because Chimaeras were cheaper than Griffifth 500'sThe Griff is the seminal TVR shape. Like it or love it, it's the shape that put TVR on the map and grabbed all those headlines. But it was the more classic looks of the Chimp that attracted greater numbers. This time around, like in the early 90s after the last recession and before the tech boom, it was the early retirees who had the money to spend and they voted for classic looks. But then they all sold up as soon as mainstream manufacturers made a car that looked sport but had neck warmers, pile warmers and park assist etc.
Of the T cars I think the T350 has by far the best rear, the Tuscan the best nose. Sorry, but as much as the Sag has grown on me and has become iconic, when it was new I thought it an embarrassment and couldn't ever see myself parking up at the places I tend to park up and not feeling a bit silly.
I wonder if they asked for deposits now so they could confirm the demographic most interested and most able? For example, when paying the deposit did they ask people's ages and even go so far as to ask what cars they have owned etc?
Personally, as a bit of a young fogey, I'd like to see a retro look. Maybe a Kamm tail even!
Stepping back to the interior aspect, plastic chrome and plastic wood in weird f
king places are things that make modern cars farcical. If you cannot use the real materials then don't make ridiculous, Chinese tat versions. Use real metal and real wood or nothing. And don't place classical materials in positions that they never would have been in. Mercs have the most gopping, tasteless interiors for punters who have absolutely no clue about any form of class or sophistication. compare annual sales or Chim 500 vs Griff 500's
Actually thinking back a good friend of mine had a Griffith 500 in 1993, it was the quickest thing on the road on four wheels back then and it was as cheap as monkey nuts, the problem these days is the competition (Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche) now sell properly fast stuff as well and a cheap Tvr won't get close these days when back in the 90s/early 00s the Tvrs would blow away cars costing twice or three times as much, well in a straight line anyway and that's why people bought them.
No chance of that in today's world of 400/500bhp+ cars with fancy gearboxes and electrics, the world has moved on and for Tvr to compete it has to as well or you might as well by an old Griffith 500.
No chance of that in today's world of 400/500bhp+ cars with fancy gearboxes and electrics, the world has moved on and for Tvr to compete it has to as well or you might as well by an old Griffith 500.
RoverP6B said:
Said this before, I don't think the looks were a big problem at all, and they drove pretty well. I even quite liked the Invicta's use of rotated VW Passat tail-lights, and it had a rather nice interior. The Jensen wasn't as good-looking, admittedly, but a car in that sector will ultimately sell on how it drives.
Jesus wept man...just look at them!!!!! Driving experience and interior are completely irrelevant with those looks.
It's as though your brain has had some sort of perception modifier fitted. Like one of those Chinese ECU tuning boxes that intercepts engine sensor signals and alters them to fool the ECU into making wildly incorrect commands without realising it as all sensor inputs remain normal.
Edited by dvs_dave on Saturday 5th September 17:13
Lotus E300S said:
ORD said:
In performance, yes. But it was never comparable to anyone but TVR enthusiasts. The new car will not be looked at as being in anything like the same league as a GT3 or Lambo, irrespective of its performance, so it cannot be priced in even the same ballpark.
You cannot launch a new marque out of nowhere with a car with a fettled crate engine and hope that people will just pay premium money.
I really want this car to succeed, assuming it is a bit more focussed than the competition, but it has to be realistic about its pricing potential.
I'm not a Tvr enthusiast and I chose a Sagaris over a 996 GT3, also I don't think £80,000 is premium money.You cannot launch a new marque out of nowhere with a car with a fettled crate engine and hope that people will just pay premium money.
I really want this car to succeed, assuming it is a bit more focussed than the competition, but it has to be realistic about its pricing potential.
But I think that Ord is absolutely right also.
dvs_dave said:
Jesus wept man...just look at them!!!!! Driving experience and interior are completely irrelevant with those looks.It's as though your brain has had some sort of perception modifier fitted. Like one of those Chinese ECU tuning boxes that intercepts engine sensor signals and alters them to fool the ECU into making wildly incorrect commands without realising it as all sensor inputs remain normal.
Edited by dvs_dave on Saturday 5th September 17:13
DonkeyApple said:
RoverP6B said:
The Eva GT was stunningly pretty, it was a practical 2+2 and was building on the success of the Aero series (which are fine-handling beasts but just too cramped inside for daily use). It wasn't made because Charles Morgan was sacked in disgraceful circumstances by his sister and brother-in-law, who seem determined to drag the firm back to the dark ages (much to the chagrin of the workforce at Malvern). The N54, while turbocharged, is still a good straight-six engine and has a pretty nice linear power-band. It would have made a good partner to that chassis. The Morgan V6 roadster is a much cheaper car, which is why it uses a cheap engine.
Please stop. The 2010 Eva didn't make it into production because Morgan didn't have the money. As one of the people who placed a deposit for one I seem to recall following it rather closely. Due to the lack of funds they invested in the US license for the 3 wheeler to bring in some easy, low end revenues and they also chose to take the regional development grant for electric vehicles.
They did not and sadly still do not have the money for the Eva. CM being removed was also one of the plans for cutting costs and stopping a large amount of the crazy expenditure. The fact that CM hasn't found a normal job since 2013 does tend to suggest why the Board felt he was better as a figurehead and not actually involved in doing anything important.
I've always hankered after a Morgan since a child and hearing stories from my grandfather about how HFS would race his uncle up their driveway. My great uncle's Bugatti always won apparently. So the failure to built the Eva was a huge disappointment. But it's also why I kept with TVR.
DonkeyApple said:
dvs_dave said:
appreciate that, but aero follows the laws of diminishing returns in terms of investment dollars. So whilst ultimately Ferrari aero will be better, it's not all that expensive or difficult to get 90% of that without massive investment but a lot of know how. Something GM isn't lacking in...
I don't think it is that difficult to apply the basics of aero, it's just the cost and skill needed to go beyond. Edited by dvs_dave on Friday 4th September 03:09
Geoffrey Marsh has run ground effect Astons for a couple of decades and people like Malcolm Hamilton have applied aero to their cars on the tiniest of budgets.
You'd think that with Murray they would be able to achieve just enough to be able market that they have proper aero.
But what is also interesting is that it shows that Edgar does genuinely understand TVR as this is just another historic issue that the media can beat TVR with that he is nipping in the bud.
I suspect most of us have had the front of their TVR lift at some point. I recall climbing the hill approaching Calais in the days when speeding in France was just an economic option and suddenly having that feeling of aquaplaning! It's a very well known problem for nearly all TVRs at high speed so designing in some actual aero is required with the new design as well as being vital for helping shut up the journos that are waiting to tear TVR apart.
TVR only need 95%. I and several hundred others could do the aero for Les for a fixed fee Work Package per item, in fact that is pretty much what I suspect he will do, out-sourced fixed fee Work Package to one of the industry experts.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff