RE: TVR's return - new details
Discussion
otolith said:
I think if TVR is set up with realistic production volumes in mind, and given that it is using iStream which is supposed to keep production costs down, it could be able to make money producing niche vehicles. Lotus struggles to do the same thing because its cost base is too high (although recent rationalisation has apparently improved that situation). I think directly competing for the mass market is a hiding to nothing for the same reason that Lotus can't do it - you've got to play to your strengths, not to Porsche's. Do things that the volume players can't do because they have to please all of the people all of the time.
I think this is what we all hope will happen but I'm not familiar enough with the economics of making cars to know if this is truly a viable strategy, I really hope it is but deep down I suspect it might not be.Also people keep mentioning istream as if it's some magic bullet that will make the hideous development and legislative costs disappear but what exactly is it? Gordon Murray is a very clever guy but do we really think whatever this process is will enable them to make low volume cars that weight 1100kgs but cost less than a Porsche at a profit? I'm not so sure.
Guvernator said:
_Neal_ said:
Fair enough, but this is about TVRs, which have never really been like that. Cerbera top end was great, but it still had tons of torque.
So we are agreed that a TVR needs BOTH, which with a bit of tinkering, the Coyote should be able to deliver. Good I'm glad we got that sorted 
All this TVR chat certainly makes me want another for sure.
I think some of you are getting ahead of yourselves here. It's very likely to be the 5.0l Coyote from the regular Mustang GT, not the flat pane GT350. The article said that they will coax it up to 500bhp. The 5.2l GT350 already makes over that.
Also, though related the 5.2 is almost an all new engine which I don't even think is called a Coyote. I'd imagine Ford would charge a hell of a lot more for the 5.2 even if they could make enough of them for resale.
I wouldn't worry, the regular Coyote is plenty special enough for this.
Also, though related the 5.2 is almost an all new engine which I don't even think is called a Coyote. I'd imagine Ford would charge a hell of a lot more for the 5.2 even if they could make enough of them for resale.
I wouldn't worry, the regular Coyote is plenty special enough for this.
PorscheGT4 said:
GroundEffect said:
Why? With a 500PS V8 it's hardly necessary. Sub 1300kg with good quality is what it should be aiming for.
because every one can make a 1300kg car and there are loads about, inc Evora's and Caymans etc.a bespoke smaller car needs to be 1100 kg's imo to attract even a look see for me.
In fact they are nearer to (or above) 1400kg. Even the GT4 is 1340kg DIN according to the Porsche website. (Which I'm assuming is without ANY options)
pozi said:
Max_Torque said:
Does he think he (and his customers) are stuck in 1983? (about the last time that "winning a race on Sunday sold a car on monday")........
Dailywail Press Office said:
Hello Mercedes, some guy on PH thinks you don't need to go racing anymore, is this true and will you close your F1 team.
Hello, hello, I think they hung up........
Hello, hello, I think they hung up........
When you are Mercedes (or Audi as i said in my first post) then sure, go racing. You've got lots of cash and a very very good product. If the racing gives you a slight marketing edge to nick a few sales off BMW or who ever, brilliant, money well spent.
Now lets look at TVR>
1) Product. Er, what product. You can make the fastest racing car in the world and still sell precisely ZERO road cars (the list of people who have thought they could is nearly endless. eg MG-SV anyone?? ;-)
2) Are your customers "swung" by racing. If you are selling a Caterham, possibly, but anything else more road biased, er, nope. Since the internet was invented there are many much better and cheaper ways of building a brand.
3) Have you a decent product and the bottom of it all? Who knows. It's safe to say TVRs dev budget will be very very tight indeed and going racing, instead of spending the money on making the heating work properly, or some decent SatNav is suicide these days
4) Going racing sounds fun and glamorous, but it's actually difficult, expensive and seriously hard work (especially if you want to win and not just drive round at the back!) To take part at LeMans with any aspirations at all is a £2M project. That money is much better spent at this point in their product life cycle on the actual product.
Lets face it, the end product can be one of the following:
a) Not that competitive but very cheap
b) Very competitive and but expensive
Option "c) Not that competitive and very expensive" is not a long term route for a fledgling car manufacturer.............
NickGibbs said:
If they were still battling 90s Porsches, then all well and good. But the current crop are exquisite inside.
Really? With £30,000 worth of options maybe, but failing that, they're still black plastic with silver painted bits. For all its faults, the Tuscan Mk1's interior was exquisite. Ferrari's look like a Playstation-wielding 18 year old boy's wet dream inside, Astons have the feel good factor but not the minimalistic, future/retro style, Lambos are fairly undistinguished, the Germans look like the mass produced items they are. You have to get to the Pagani level to 'better' latter-day TVRs, and then - for all the fantastic workmanship and attentin to detail - things arguably get too fussy for their own good...
I'd like to see TVR back in racing, I wonder just how much the Tuscan challenge bolstered their profits & car sales?
I worked on the T400R - did Sebring with one and a few other meetings but was on another car when they went to LeMans.
Sure you need a large budget to do LeMans BUT - If the car uses proven running gear and the chassis is as capable as it should be, then there is no reason why a couple of cars entered shouldnt do well and get some decent advertising while doing so. If they dont have the budget for pro driver I bet theres a list of wealth racers that would jump at the chance.
I worked on the T400R - did Sebring with one and a few other meetings but was on another car when they went to LeMans.
Sure you need a large budget to do LeMans BUT - If the car uses proven running gear and the chassis is as capable as it should be, then there is no reason why a couple of cars entered shouldnt do well and get some decent advertising while doing so. If they dont have the budget for pro driver I bet theres a list of wealth racers that would jump at the chance.
oh and make sure it has a tvr interior We don't want bland generic interiors unpc said:
I think some of you are getting ahead of yourselves here. It's very likely to be the 5.0l Coyote from the regular Mustang GT, not the flat pane GT350. The article said that they will coax it up to 500bhp. The 5.2l GT350 already makes over that.
Also, though related the 5.2 is almost an all new engine which I don't even think is called a Coyote. I'd imagine Ford would charge a hell of a lot more for the 5.2 even if they could make enough of them for resale.
I wouldn't worry, the regular Coyote is plenty special enough for this.
+1Also, though related the 5.2 is almost an all new engine which I don't even think is called a Coyote. I'd imagine Ford would charge a hell of a lot more for the 5.2 even if they could make enough of them for resale.
I wouldn't worry, the regular Coyote is plenty special enough for this.
It will not be the flat-plane V8 of the GT350. That's a Ford corporate gem at the moment.
It will be a bog-standard crate motor offered by Ford Performance to all punters.
Some examples: it could be the V8 used in the current Mustang GT (model year 2015 onward) or that used in the previous generation of Mustang GT (concluded production in model year 2014).
For various reasons, it's likely that TVR will limit itself to externals -- enhanced breathing, a dry sump and a re-map. Rather than popping the heads, replacing the cam, etc.
Max_Torque said:
Does he think he (and his customers) are stuck in 1983? (about the last time that "winning a race on Sunday sold a car on monday")........
Indeed, the potential buyers for this car will be more interested in kerb appeal, ease of use and a plush interior. Modern sports car buyers don't seem all that bothered about the car but they're pretty picky about the badging. Look at how Lotus make incredible cars but are perpetually struggling.N
It will not be the flat-plane V8 of the GT350. That's a Ford corporate gem at the moment.
It will be a bog-standard crate motor offered by Ford Performance to all punters.
Just two examples: it could be the V8 used in the current Mustang GT (model year 2015 onward) or that used in the previous generation of Mustang GT (concluded production in model year 2014).
For various reasons, it's likely that TVR will limit itself to externals -- enhanced breathing, a dry sump and a re-map. Rather than popping the heads, replacing the cam, etc.The flat plane version is special and Fords first attempt at one, they called it the Vodoo to differentiate it from the Coyote. Mightily nice engine IMHO. I'd like to think employing the services of Cosworth will amount to more than external packaging. As you say the Coyote is available as a crate engine, it actually comes in at less than $8k direct from Ford Racing. I expect Cosworth to at least get more than 500hp out of any engine where the main stream is 435hp. If not to say I'd be disappointed would be an understatement.
I run a high spec version of the AJP8 in my Cerbera, that's a 2 valve solid lifter OHC flat plane that makes 450hp and 400lbs and the car comes in around 1200kg wet. If the new car doesn't rock those figures I for one would have to think hard about dropping £60K+ on the new car.
unsprung said:
unpc said:
I think some of you are getting ahead of yourselves here. It's very likely to be the 5.0l Coyote from the regular Mustang GT, not the flat pane GT350. The article said that they will coax it up to 500bhp. The 5.2l GT350 already makes over that.
Also, though related the 5.2 is almost an all new engine which I don't even think is called a Coyote. I'd imagine Ford would charge a hell of a lot more for the 5.2 even if they could make enough of them for resale.
I wouldn't worry, the regular Coyote is plenty special enough for this.
+1Also, though related the 5.2 is almost an all new engine which I don't even think is called a Coyote. I'd imagine Ford would charge a hell of a lot more for the 5.2 even if they could make enough of them for resale.
I wouldn't worry, the regular Coyote is plenty special enough for this.
It will not be the flat-plane V8 of the GT350. That's a Ford corporate gem at the moment.
It will be a bog-standard crate motor offered by Ford Performance to all punters.
Just two examples: it could be the V8 used in the current Mustang GT (model year 2015 onward) or that used in the previous generation of Mustang GT (concluded production in model year 2014).
For various reasons, it's likely that TVR will limit itself to externals -- enhanced breathing, a dry sump and a re-map. Rather than popping the heads, replacing the cam, etc.
I run a high spec version of the AJP8 in my Cerbera, that's a 2 valve solid lifter OHC flat plane that makes 450hp and 400lbs and the car comes in around 1200kg wet. If the new car doesn't rock those figures I for one would have to think hard about dropping £60K+ on the new car.
This is a car that the new TVR should be looking very very closely at indeed, imo:
A car that is probably more than the sum of it's parts, but that has really come of age with this latest iteration (and it's styling has finally, imo hit the spot)
Compare that to this:
As the equivalent in TVRs heyday! Quite some difference, and the mark of how far sports cars have come in the last 15 years or so (particularly in terms of Surfacing rather than just Styling)
I'd suggest that a RHD 'vette is very close to what TVR were about, and yet Chevrolet can't even make the numbers add up for the relatively cheap handwheel side to side swap.........
A car that is probably more than the sum of it's parts, but that has really come of age with this latest iteration (and it's styling has finally, imo hit the spot)
Compare that to this:
As the equivalent in TVRs heyday! Quite some difference, and the mark of how far sports cars have come in the last 15 years or so (particularly in terms of Surfacing rather than just Styling)
I'd suggest that a RHD 'vette is very close to what TVR were about, and yet Chevrolet can't even make the numbers add up for the relatively cheap handwheel side to side swap.........
Baryonyx said:
Max_Torque said:
Does he think he (and his customers) are stuck in 1983? (about the last time that "winning a race on Sunday sold a car on monday")........
Indeed, the potential buyers for this car will be more interested in kerb appeal, ease of use and a plush interior. Modern sports car buyers don't seem all that bothered about the car but they're pretty picky about the badging. Look at how Lotus make incredible cars but are perpetually struggling.There is little point in producing a car that won't be useful, as it won't sell. It's up against Porsche, BMW, etc etc...
As for weight.... you are generally on the money.
Different models will weigh less/more.
HarryW said:
The flat plane version is special and Fords first attempt at one, they called it the Vodoo to differentiate it from the Coyote. Mightily nice engine IMHO. I'd like to think employing the services of Cosworth will amount to more than external packaging. As you say the Coyote is available as a crate engine, it actually comes in at less than $8k direct from Ford Racing. I expect Cosworth to at least get more than 500hp out of any engine where the main stream is 435hp. If not to say I'd be disappointed would be an understatement.
I run a high spec version of the AJP8 in my Cerbera, that's a 2 valve solid lifter OHC flat plane that makes 450hp and 400lbs and the car comes in around 1200kg wet. If the new car doesn't rock those figures I for one would have to think hard about dropping £60K+ on the new car.
I run a high spec version of the AJP8 in my Cerbera, that's a 2 valve solid lifter OHC flat plane that makes 450hp and 400lbs and the car comes in around 1200kg wet. If the new car doesn't rock those figures I for one would have to think hard about dropping £60K+ on the new car.
If my words give the impression that I imagine an august and somewhat peerless engineering works like Cosworth sending a couple of buck-toothed lads round with a claw hammer to open crates at the assembly area, I'm sorry for that.The goals you cite are, IMHO, achievable with a "mostly externals" strategy for the engine -- a strategy which could go a long way toward protecting TVR margin and securing reliability.
Here's why:
- Ford Motor Company is a mass-market OEM which runs its engines to conservative standards; TVR are relatively free of these engine restrictions
- Ford must manage their V8 offerings with a portfolio view that fulfills CAFE requirements; again TVR are relatively free of these restrictions
- The Coyote V8 offers a sort of engineer's dream in terms of re-mapping -- don't forget the independently variable DOHC setup; this is not a push-button exercise, but the domain of serious maths / trial and error
- A modest 15 percent increase is all that's needed to get the current Coyote V8 to 500hp -- an achievement that seems workable and sustainable with a re-map, with external upgrades, and in consideration of the points above.
Would be great to have TVR back. Remember the early Noughties when the 'modern' TVR's went on weekend meets with 30 odd TVR's of various models trundling through the country roads and there was always a cerbera at least on tunnel runs. For me TVR is about the noise and outrageous Peter Wheeler era design and the crazy interiors. If the new cars are anything like the renderings that have been shown, that will be way too conservative. The Sagaris needs to be the minimum starting point.
It would also help if they occasionally broke down, have windows not wanting to wind up in pouring rain and leak like mine did! Firing hot catalysing material out of your exhaust forcing cars behind you to back off is a bonus! Still loved every minute of owning mine
It would also help if they occasionally broke down, have windows not wanting to wind up in pouring rain and leak like mine did! Firing hot catalysing material out of your exhaust forcing cars behind you to back off is a bonus! Still loved every minute of owning mine
It is astonishing how unbridled the armchair business magnates on ph have become, judging by the plain confidence with which bullet-pointed blueprints for TVR's options have been thrust forward on this thread. If only the rest of the world shared ph expertise on how much a car ought to weigh, rev to, be developed and be compared to. All with the benefit of such hard data charting the demise of any small manufacturing firm.
Did I look at Boxsters or 911s or TTs or Elise's when I got my first and subsequent TVRs? Sure. I hated them. There was simply nothing that came within a mile of the noise, occasion, and fabulously designed delight of the 90s and naughties TVRs. I remember well when I wanted to know more about the engine issues. I rang the company and someone at reception put me through directly to the factory floor, when some engineer type bloke told me what he thought the issues were amidst the clear background din of machinery and compressed air pumps.
And I loved, perversely, how there was indeed a ritualised mixture of euphoria and worry when driving it about. Whilst it totally overwhelmed me with the sensations of raw joy that transmitted with every exhaust pop, every damped road bump, which blip of the throttle would push it's lightspeed response too far? When would I hear a clunk of something deep inside the engine literally imploding?
It is disappointing that 5 pages in, nobody seems to be aware of what it properly felt like to be in a car that was made with such a different, heroic, unlikely and defiant type of philosophy that led to those glorious things being made, all in a large shed, and holding the world to ransom.
Undoubtedly, I must be in a minority. Along with the others of us who had and loved those cars.
Undoubtedly, I laughed the hearty laugh of oblivion when people who never had one volunteered their rationale for how the BoxsteraudiRSTX-5 was the proper way to go. I didn't care for any doubts that such a fragile and audacious an outfit would make money for year to year. Some great and exceptional things only succeed for limited periods- OMG who knew eh? I cared only for how ruthlessly proud the company was about going fast and looking fantastic whilst doing so. Even if I rode home on an AA truck, expecting a fat bill, I forgave the car because I just 'got' what they did. About the rest, your stats, your 5-point success plans, I and I daresay the majority of other TVR owners, never gave and never will give, a flying f**k.
Did I look at Boxsters or 911s or TTs or Elise's when I got my first and subsequent TVRs? Sure. I hated them. There was simply nothing that came within a mile of the noise, occasion, and fabulously designed delight of the 90s and naughties TVRs. I remember well when I wanted to know more about the engine issues. I rang the company and someone at reception put me through directly to the factory floor, when some engineer type bloke told me what he thought the issues were amidst the clear background din of machinery and compressed air pumps.
And I loved, perversely, how there was indeed a ritualised mixture of euphoria and worry when driving it about. Whilst it totally overwhelmed me with the sensations of raw joy that transmitted with every exhaust pop, every damped road bump, which blip of the throttle would push it's lightspeed response too far? When would I hear a clunk of something deep inside the engine literally imploding?
It is disappointing that 5 pages in, nobody seems to be aware of what it properly felt like to be in a car that was made with such a different, heroic, unlikely and defiant type of philosophy that led to those glorious things being made, all in a large shed, and holding the world to ransom.
Undoubtedly, I must be in a minority. Along with the others of us who had and loved those cars.
Undoubtedly, I laughed the hearty laugh of oblivion when people who never had one volunteered their rationale for how the BoxsteraudiRSTX-5 was the proper way to go. I didn't care for any doubts that such a fragile and audacious an outfit would make money for year to year. Some great and exceptional things only succeed for limited periods- OMG who knew eh? I cared only for how ruthlessly proud the company was about going fast and looking fantastic whilst doing so. Even if I rode home on an AA truck, expecting a fat bill, I forgave the car because I just 'got' what they did. About the rest, your stats, your 5-point success plans, I and I daresay the majority of other TVR owners, never gave and never will give, a flying f**k.
Edited by Light n Hairy on Thursday 8th October 00:05
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff