Any questions for Les Edgar?

[swisstoni]

Ozzie Osmond said:

ORD said:

But doesn't it amount to 'We'll make a cheap as chips chassis and body, drop in a crate engine and charge you 100k for it'?

I think that's the real issue. To my mind that's what's made the mid-engine Ginetta G60 such a rare sight on the roads. It's not a bad car but it's simply not good enough to meet and beat Lotus, Porsche etc in the same price bracket.

If it looks gorgeous and embarrasses certain Famous Names at a lower price point then it will sell IMHO. That was always the USP of TVRs of old.

[DonkeyApple]

ORD said:

DonkeyApple said:

I'm not really worried about that. If there is a car then it will come along. If there isn't a car then it won't. I'm happy to see it when they are happy to show it. For price, I don't really care. If it's too expensive they won't sell any and it won't ever be cheap so it's really a matter of how far they can get it under £100k.

What I'm interested in understanding is GM's iStream. It's all be wrapped up in fancy words but in reality it looks like a series of D&T work stations designed to allow cheap, unskilled labour to not balls up production speed and quality through their own inability and lack of care. But it would be very interesting to have a proper understanding put forward by someone capable of speaking sensible English and not speaking pure ponce.

It's pure Emperor's New Clothes stuff. The premise is that the multi-billion dollar car companies have somehow missed a trick. It's the kind of thing only a beta male could come up with and only an idiot would find convincing.

Multi nationals don't need it as they build in big enough numbers to invest in robots etc.

This is for small production runs that typically are too labour intensive to be commercially competitive. It slashes the standing labour required while increasing quality over what a base manual labour force can achieve without beating them with sticks. On the surface it seems very logical but to date the explanation has been laid out in very silly English.

[DonkeyApple]

Equus said:

DonkeyApple said:

What I'm interested in understanding is GM's iStream. ... it would be very interesting to have a proper understanding put forward by someone capable of speaking sensible English and not speaking pure ponce.

These three links, together, should give you the basic information you require, but as I said earlier, it's basically a simple, untriangulated spaceframe that is panelised using cheap, composite sandwich panels to give it the stiffness that it would otherwise lack from not having any triangulation:

iFrame

iPanels

iStream

Thanks. Yes. It'll build something that is basically the same as my car, something TVR did back in 1999, but without the enormous labour cost which made my car too expensive to be commercially viable.

[Ozzie Osmond]

swisstoni said:

If it looks gorgeous and embarrasses certain Famous Names at a lower price point then it will sell IMHO. That was always the USP of TVRs of old.

Yes, that's the bottom line.

What IMO has changed is that in the 1990s there weren't many other sportscars around. Tougher now.

[DonkeyApple]

Ozzie Osmond said:

ORD said:

But doesn't it amount to 'We'll make a cheap as chips chassis and body, drop in a crate engine and charge you 100k for it'?

I think that's the real issue. To my mind that's what's made the mid-engine Ginetta G60 such a rare sight on the roads. It's not a bad car but it's simply not good enough to meet and beat Lotus, Porsche etc in the same price bracket.

To be honest, what made that car rare was that the new owner never built any as they didn't have any money. As far as I am aware they've only ever had the two or three that were already built by Farbio. Ginetta also doesn't have the brand to sell at anything other than a base level let alone the money to make a credible road car.

[Guvernator]

Can you ask Les what he sees as the essential ingredients for a TVR?

A TVR's DNA to me is

1) Fast
2) Loud
3) Gorgeous
4) Lightweight
5) Few driver aids
6) Cheap enough for normal people to afford

They may get 3 or 4 of those spot on but the last one is what made TVR so popular and the everymans champion as it was a sports car affordable to normal folk which could take on the big players. With the prices that are being bandied about, this new car is being aimed at the 911 crowd which is a totally different segment to the one they were operating in before. Sorry but a TVR which costs a similar amount of money to a 911 is not a TVR in my book.

[rejn]

• Who is his target market? Is it those who bought Griffiths/Tuscans back in the day (bearing in mind we're all older now)?
• Once first model is on sale, what next? When do they expect the first open top model?
• Any plans for a modern day Tuscan Challenge race series (and will Les be driving himself?!)
• What are his main immediate challenges?
• Are timelines really realistic? When will first 100 customers take delivery?
• Why Wales?
• Any plans to support older cars? (could they re-issue "missing" chassis numbers a la Aston Martin/Jaguar so we can order a new Sagaris)
• What does success look like?

[HarryW]

Did you have your interview yesterday as planned then?
When will you post up the article, this is the tinternet, or are you waiting on the printers to come back from the pub

[ChilliWhizz]

I have no doubt new TVR will have spectacular looks (with styling cues reminiscent of earlier models maybe), monstrously quick (in a straight line), and sound (maybe with the usual aftermarket mods) like the apocalypse horse blokes...

However, a couple of years back I spent a few bob on the suspension on my Chimaera (along with the usual geo stuff), and was over the moon with it... What a difference.. (And used on track so properly tested ) Then I made the mistake of test driving a Noble GTO 3R...

Now I know the T cars made big leaps in handling and grip over the earlier cars, but when I eventually get to test drive a new TVR I really really hope it meets my expectations in the handling and grip departments... and having owned/driven numerous Loti I do have reasonable expectations..

[swisstoni]

I wouldn't think Gordon Murray would allow himself to be associated with a bad handling car.

[HarryW]

swisstoni said:

I wouldn't think Gordon Murray would allow himself to be associated with a bad handling car.

That's what I'm hoping

[leef44]

Fetchez la vache said:

450Nick said:

Will there be an option to remove any electronic aids at point of sale to make a "real" TVR (delete ABS, TC etc)?

Unless they make less than 500 cars I don't believe selling without ABS is a legal option, since 2004.
I imagine their plans hope for > 500 a year...

This can be done. This is no different to Subaru adding the PPP upgrade after registration. So the official spec is sold at registration then after say a 1000 miles you have to come in for an "inspection" offered as a courtesy when you opt for the "delete" package. Then all the non-required gubbins are removed.

[leef44]

ORD said:

DonkeyApple said:

I'm not really worried about that. If there is a car then it will come along. If there isn't a car then it won't. I'm happy to see it when they are happy to show it. For price, I don't really care. If it's too expensive they won't sell any and it won't ever be cheap so it's really a matter of how far they can get it under £100k.

What I'm interested in understanding is GM's iStream. It's all be wrapped up in fancy words but in reality it looks like a series of D&T work stations designed to allow cheap, unskilled labour to not balls up production speed and quality through their own inability and lack of care. But it would be very interesting to have a proper understanding put forward by someone capable of speaking sensible English and not speaking pure ponce.

It's pure Emperor's New Clothes stuff. The premise is that the multi-billion dollar car companies have somehow missed a trick. It's the kind of thing only a beta male could come up with and only an idiot would find convincing.

It can be done. Multi-billion dollar vacuum cleaner companies missed a trick when some bloke came along with an idea for a bagless vacuum cleaner using cyclone technology. Then all the big guns had to follow suit because the technology took off.

[tenfour]

leef44 said:

This can be done. This is no different to Subaru adding the PPP upgrade after registration. So the official spec is sold at registration then after say a 1000 miles you have to come in for an "inspection" offered as a courtesy when you opt for the "delete" package. Then all the non-required gubbins are removed.

I think you'll find that will never happen in a trillion years. No manufacturer in 2016 (or 2030 if/when this car ever sees the light of day...) would ever be willingly associated with the deletion of an EU-mandated safety system.

Therefore, assuming the projected production runs, the removal of such would be illegal and hence not akin to fitting a 'PPP' upgrade in any way whatsoever.

There is no such thing as a 'real' TVR any more. That ship sailed with Oasis and ripped jeans. The new TVR (if it ever happens) will be a very different beast, built to do battle in a globalized market; the buyers from which will have certain expectations as to safety and technology.

Don't believe me? Expect to see a self-shifting version of this car along side the manual in due coarse.

[HarryW]

tenfour said:

leef44 said:

This can be done. This is no different to Subaru adding the PPP upgrade after registration. So the official spec is sold at registration then after say a 1000 miles you have to come in for an "inspection" offered as a courtesy when you opt for the "delete" package. Then all the non-required gubbins are removed.

I think you'll find that will never happen in a trillion years. No manufacturer in 2016 (or 2030 if/when this car ever sees the light of day...) would ever be willingly associated with the deletion of an EU-mandated safety system.

Therefore, assuming the projected production runs, the removal of such would be illegal and hence not akin to fitting a 'PPP' upgrade in any way whatsoever.

There is no such thing as a 'real' TVR any more. That ship sailed with Oasis and ripped jeans. The new TVR (if it ever happens) will be a very different beast, built to do battle in a globalized market; the buyers from which will have certain expectations as to safety and technology.

Don't believe me? Expect to see a self-shifting version of this car along side the manual in due coarse.

Don't know why you can't have variable TC from full on to off on n settings and a ABS binary switch for road and track use, allowing you to switch it off for track use....

[tenfour]

HarryW said:

Don't know why you can't have variable TC from full on to off on n settings and a ABS binary switch for road and track use, allowing you to switch it off for track use....

I think that's naive. The Griffith won't be a 'track car' - that market is already full to bursting.

Apart from which, someone appears not to have told Lotus et al that they can/should fit a switch to disable the ABS...

It's a litigation st-storm apart from anything else.

[HarryW]

tenfour said:

HarryW said:

Don't know why you can't have variable TC from full on to off on n settings and a ABS binary switch for road and track use, allowing you to switch it off for track use....

I think that's naive. The Griffith won't be a 'track car' - that market is already full to bursting.

Apart from which, someone appears not to have told Lotus et al that they can/should fit a switch to disable the ABS...

It's a litigation st-storm apart from anything else.

I like to think of myself as an eternal optimist, naive is bit harsh didn't some of the Scandinavian cars offer ABS that could be switched off, or is my memory jaded.

[Troubleatmill]

leef44 said:

It can be done. Multi-billion dollar vacuum cleaner companies missed a trick when some bloke came along with an idea for a bagless vacuum cleaner using cyclone technology. Then all the big guns had to follow suit because the technology took off.

All the big ones... were thousands of times bigger than Dyson, and despite his patents - they made knock off's and tried to bankrupt him in the courts..

Every penny you are spending on fighting law suits to protect your IP - means you are not spending it on adverting, R&D, manufacturing, employing more people etc etc

Their strategy was quite simply - bankrupt the bd.

There is a special place in hell for the big names involved.

[DonkeyApple]

Troubleatmill said:

All the big ones... were thousands of times bigger than Dyson, and despite his patents - they made knock off's and tried to bankrupt him in the courts..

Every penny you are spending on fighting law suits to protect your IP - means you are not spending it on adverting, R&D, manufacturing, employing more people etc etc

Their strategy was quite simply - bankrupt the bd.

There is a special place in hell for the big names involved.

A bit like the manufacturer teams of touring cars who used to smash up any privateer car that threatened them so as to use up their budget quicker.

Although the one I really hated was VW taking massive hoardings next to indy garages in London saying they would undercut the family firms. Really crossed a line there.

[HarryW]

So when are PH going to publish the responses to the questions asked if your interview was last week? or is there an embargo on it, linked to an official announcement perhaps?