RE: New TVR - the car
Discussion
Tuvra said:
Name one car that offers both manual and auto (style) boxes where the 0-60 difference is over a few hundredths of a second? The M2 for example is 0.2, M4 is 0.2, Cayman S is 0-4, C4S is 0.2 seconds, V12VS is 0.2 seconds?
No being arsey, genuine question BTW.
Did they all use Clive from Accounts for the tests or people who's job it is to be able to change manual gears very efficiently? No being arsey, genuine question BTW.
I would say that a 4 speed slush pump with lowered line pressure can probably change faster than the average driver in the real world.
I really do suspect that in the real world those differences will be much larger just because with the auto it is a computer making the change efficiently every single time whereas with the manual, human error alone is going to widen out the difference before ability even comes into play.
Gorbyrev said:
But hang on - 3 pages in and no-one is making a big noise about the powerplant! My understanding is that Ford used a 458 engine to help with development for the flat plane crank V8. The development budget for this engine will be an order of magnitude more than TVR's entire pot. The GT350 is one of the best cars we can't currently buy in the UK. This is the engine that will be fettled by Cosworth. I salute you sirs for your savvy choice of engine and giving this peach of a powerplant a chance to power something exotic.
While I really wish this was the case, everything I've read suggests it is the 5.0 cross plane crank "Coyote" engine which is in the regular Mustang, rather than the 5.2 flat plane crank "Voodoo" engine found in the GT350. That said, it'll be fettled by Cosworth, and have a lighter flywheel, both of which are very good things in my book!With regards to the ABS issue, I hugely applaud them for giving you the CHOICE to turn it off. So many people on here complain about a nanny state, but now seem to be annoyed that you can be given choices!
The reason to want it switchable is exactly as one poster above said, it gives you the choice when on track to leave more of the driving to yourself. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to be able to beat ABS, but I'm going to enjoy trying to master it, and that's the only point of trackdays. For the same reason I'd rather have a car with absolutely zero driver aids on track (which incidentally, is exactly what I have), because I enjoy process of trying to drive it quickly. I would enjoy something with lots of computers which helped me to go quickly a lot less.
Tuvra said:
Byker28i said:
Tuvra said:
Byker28i said:
mikEsprit said:
I don't think Edgar is correct about paddle shifting knocking off a 1/2 second on the 0-60 time compared to a manual transmission? Isn't it more like a tenth difference?
Doesn't golf dsg against normal gearbox claim much more than 0.5 sec?http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/motoring/vw-golf...
tankplanker said:
The DSG can also be tweaked to make it more aggressive (debatable if this is a good idea when looking at long term reliability) and this will increase the gap further. I'd expect a proper sports car like a TVR to have as aggressive as possible auto when set to race mode, so I'd expect a bigger gap between the manual and the auto than a few hundredths of a second.
Name one car that offers both manual and auto (style) boxes where the 0-60 difference is over a few hundredths of a second? The M2 for example is 0.2, M4 is 0.2, Cayman S is 0-4, C4S is 0.2 seconds, V12VS is 0.2 seconds?No being arsey, genuine question BTW.
This guy is either the consummate wind up merchant who is loving all the guessing and groaning about lack of detail and simply relishing the chance of a smug "told you so moment" once the car finally breaks cover.
Or he was the chief tailor at the fashion house that designed the emperor's new clothes and is just trying to drag out his time in blighty before he runs off the the Caymen Islands with all the deposits!
Love it to be the former, but history tends to favour the latter.
On paper it is quite a car, the engineering/construction technique follows that of the F40 from over 28 years ago, so nothing new.
Or he was the chief tailor at the fashion house that designed the emperor's new clothes and is just trying to drag out his time in blighty before he runs off the the Caymen Islands with all the deposits!
Love it to be the former, but history tends to favour the latter.
On paper it is quite a car, the engineering/construction technique follows that of the F40 from over 28 years ago, so nothing new.
PAUL500 said:
This guy is either the consummate wind up merchant who is loving all the guessing and groaning about lack of detail and simply relishing the chance of a smug "told you so moment" once the car finally breaks cover.
Or he was the chief tailor at the fashion house that designed the emperor's new clothes and is just trying to drag out his time in blighty before he runs off the the Caymen Islands with all the deposits!
Love it to be the former, but history tends to favour the latter.
On paper it is quite a car, the engineering/construction technique follows that of the F40 from over 28 years ago, so nothing new.
Why would you use the example of someone completely different to attest to what you think is likely to happen to TVR? Nonsense. Or he was the chief tailor at the fashion house that designed the emperor's new clothes and is just trying to drag out his time in blighty before he runs off the the Caymen Islands with all the deposits!
Love it to be the former, but history tends to favour the latter.
On paper it is quite a car, the engineering/construction technique follows that of the F40 from over 28 years ago, so nothing new.
I do not imagine you would love it to be the former because you laboured so intensely on the latter.
If you actually read about iStream you will find out that it is in fact very new and is nothing like the F40. The fact that the process saves about 80% of the development and tooling / production start up costs means it is totally unlike the F40.
Do you own a Porschar, do you like seeing failure, like kicking people on the ground or sticks away from pensioners? Jeez, have a little faith that Gordon Murray and Cosworth can do something right if no one else.
fatbutt said:
Ayahuasca said:
Will it have cup holders?
I bloody hope not.Can we start up a list of all the things we DON'T want to see in the new TVR?
1) No cup holders
2) No sat nav
3) ....
If (old)TVR had a winning formula, surely everyone would be doing it and they would have sold every car they ever made and be a thriving company. I suggest that the reason 'sports cars' have sat nav and heated and leather and electric, is because that's what the majority of clients want and that's how you sell cars, make a profit and avoid gurgling down the drain.
All that being said, Ariel are still around making niche cars and Lotus seem to be doing ok, so perhaps TVR will hit the sweet spot. I certainly hope so, as I like choice - and a new car company adds more choice.
The new TVR needs to feel like a 'prestige' product. I'm sorry, but 'trim cannot start to rattle or fall off as long as the engine works'...I'm afraid it ALL has to work and feel well screwed together - and BE well screwed together otherwise the previous reputation will come and bite the new company on the arse, regardless of the [i]actual/i] connection between old company and new.
If the car looks good and after a year or so there are no horror stories or quality issues, this really could be a winner. I hope so as I've always liked a TVR.
Tuvra said:
Name one car that offers both manual and auto (style) boxes where the 0-60 difference is over a few hundredths of a second? The M2 for example is 0.2, M4 is 0.2, Cayman S is 0-4, C4S is 0.2 seconds, V12VS is 0.2 seconds?
No being arsey, genuine question BTW.
Being an internet pedant, have you got tenths and hundredths mixed up, as I'd say the 0.4 you quoted for the Cayman S is more than 'a few hundredths of a second', being nearly half a second...?No being arsey, genuine question BTW.
Or do I deserve a whoosh parrot?
Has it been mentioned how they are going to sell these cars? That seems to be Lotuses problem at the moment, they're making a great product that undercuts the 911 but they aren't selling them well because so many people (normal people, not PHers) barely even know they exist. They seem to be doing something about it with new dealerships, but still.
How many people outside of the UK know about the resurrection of the TVR? How will they get access to one? I can't believe there's enough of a domestic market to even support the limited numbers that they want to make.
How many people outside of the UK know about the resurrection of the TVR? How will they get access to one? I can't believe there's enough of a domestic market to even support the limited numbers that they want to make.
chrispj said:
Being an internet pedant, have you got tenths and hundredths mixed up, as I'd say the 0.4 you quoted for the Cayman S is more than 'a few hundredths of a second', being nearly half a second...?
Or do I deserve a whoosh parrot?
Or do I deserve a whoosh parrot?
Whoosh intended, my mistake, I meant tenths As for the DSG V Manual argument, the DSG would be more consistent to the factory 0-60 times than the manual, it still doesn't change the fact that the manual car COULD get reasonably close. By close I mean within half a second.
kambites said:
dvs_dave said:
And it's not illegal to not have ABS, or switchable ABS for any low volume type approval, as borne out by the many non abs equipped low volume cars available today. Therefore no issues with insurance, just as current non ABS TVRs are no issue. Mass market type approvals though are different in this respect.
I might be wrong but I think both ABS and Stability Control are required for ECSSTA these days? - ABS is only mandatory on M2 (>8 seats, <5,000kg) and above vehicles
- ESP is only mandatory on M3 (>8 seats, > 5,000kg) and above vehicles
- A car falls under the M1 category (<8 seats, <5,000kg)
Definition of Vehicle Categories
So under the ECSSTA low volume rules TVR (or any low volume manufacturer) are not obliged to install ESP or ABS. Although market forces these days dictate that they need to, however as it's not mandatory, no issues with making is fully switchable.
Ozzie Osmond said:
fatbutt said:
I bloody hope not. Can we start up a list of all the things we DON'T want to see in the new TVR?
1) No cup holders
2) No sat nav
3) [Air conditioning]
4 .....
Sounds like the owners will be hot, lost and thirsty! 1) No cup holders
2) No sat nav
3) [Air conditioning]
4 .....
But I'd say there's no real need for an additional satnav in today's world when almost everyone has a smart phone. Don't think you need a cup holder in order to be able to rehydrate.
I'd advocate that aircon is essential.
DonkeyApple said:
Ozzie Osmond said:
fatbutt said:
I bloody hope not. Can we start up a list of all the things we DON'T want to see in the new TVR?
1) No cup holders
2) No sat nav
3) [Air conditioning]
4 .....
Sounds like the owners will be hot, lost and thirsty! 1) No cup holders
2) No sat nav
3) [Air conditioning]
4 .....
But I'd say there's no real need for an additional satnav in today's world when almost everyone has a smart phone. Don't think you need a cup holder in order to be able to rehydrate.
I'd advocate that aircon is essential.
I had no aircon in my first Tuscan, huge mistake. Learnt my lesson when I built the Tuscan 2. In the Sag it would have been unbearable without it. No cup holders.
When I moved to the US and bought a 280i it had an aftermarket cup holder.
My F-Type has cup holders, satnav, climate control, safety equipment, heated seats and steering wheel, a G force meter (eh?) and a Meridian audio system that integrates with every conceivable device. It still makes a great noise and goes like stink. Personally I think that's the way of the world now and nobody bar a few enthusiasts will pay 80 grand plus for a car with no frills.
and if you read my post properly you will see that I stated the engineering and construction is the same as the F40 ie
Tubular space frame chassis using composite panels sandwiched within it to add strength.
The car industry has been full of snake oil salesmen and magic bean merchants since the days of the model T hence my reference to the past. Full of promises that never materialise, I do really hope TVR does not turn out to be the next example of the formula.
What was it PT Barnum said?
Oh never ever owned a Porsche but a Cosworth product has continuously been in my garage ever since 1990 until last year
Tubular space frame chassis using composite panels sandwiched within it to add strength.
The car industry has been full of snake oil salesmen and magic bean merchants since the days of the model T hence my reference to the past. Full of promises that never materialise, I do really hope TVR does not turn out to be the next example of the formula.
What was it PT Barnum said?
Oh never ever owned a Porsche but a Cosworth product has continuously been in my garage ever since 1990 until last year
smilo996 said:
Why would you use the example of someone completely different to attest to what you think is likely to happen to TVR? Nonsense.
I do not imagine you would love it to be the former because you laboured so intensely on the latter.
If you actually read about iStream you will find out that it is in fact very new and is nothing like the F40. The fact that the process saves about 80% of the development and tooling / production start up costs means it is totally unlike the F40.
Do you own a Porschar, do you like seeing failure, like kicking people on the ground or sticks away from pensioners? Jeez, have a little faith that Gordon Murray and Cosworth can do something right if no one else.
I do not imagine you would love it to be the former because you laboured so intensely on the latter.
If you actually read about iStream you will find out that it is in fact very new and is nothing like the F40. The fact that the process saves about 80% of the development and tooling / production start up costs means it is totally unlike the F40.
Do you own a Porschar, do you like seeing failure, like kicking people on the ground or sticks away from pensioners? Jeez, have a little faith that Gordon Murray and Cosworth can do something right if no one else.
Edited by PAUL500 on Monday 6th June 19:49
Edited by PAUL500 on Monday 6th June 19:51
Edited by PAUL500 on Monday 6th June 19:54
DonkeyApple said:
But I'd say there's no real need for an additional satnav in today's world when almost everyone has a smart phone.
I don't have a satnav or a smartphone. I've still managed to find a lot of very out-of-the-way places in a lot of very out-of-the-way countries without too much problem.Because I know how to read a map. Anybody else remember that basic essential skill?
(Anyway, your smartphone nav won't help you one tiny bit around here. No mobile signal, even for SMS, let alone fast enough data to get you the maps in any timely fashion...)
DonkeyApple said:
I'd advocate that aircon is essential.
You poor delicate little snowflake...I don't accept that's the final word in the matter at all.
There are always people who like to be contrary.
Since "sports cars" are so mainstream now with all the frills that used to be the reason to buy a large saloon cars, they have lost the sportiness.
Some people just want to be awkward. Some people like a challenge. Some people just want to see what life is like with all the bulls
t stripped back.
Why does anyone in their right mind buy a motorcycle? They aren't very comfortable and most don't have cup holders. Why do some people go out in boats with masts and sails when engines were invented long ago? Why does anyone spend £50k+ and thousands of hours building a Cobra replica kit car when you can buy a Gayman for that money?
Is a big lardy automatic with electric seats and cup holders what most people want? Yes because the fannies are all as soft as ste. Are there still some people who are a bit unorthodox who thinks something with 8 cylinders, rear wheel drive, a limited slip diff, a gearstick, 3 pedals and a steering wheel all wrapped up in a bold body is great value at the same sort of price as all the mass-market stuff aimed at the vanilla people? Apparently so.
It's a poor get-rich-quick scheme, granted, but there are still those of us who snigger at those who want AWD in their "sports car".
There are always people who like to be contrary.
Since "sports cars" are so mainstream now with all the frills that used to be the reason to buy a large saloon cars, they have lost the sportiness.
Some people just want to be awkward. Some people like a challenge. Some people just want to see what life is like with all the bulls
t stripped back.Why does anyone in their right mind buy a motorcycle? They aren't very comfortable and most don't have cup holders. Why do some people go out in boats with masts and sails when engines were invented long ago? Why does anyone spend £50k+ and thousands of hours building a Cobra replica kit car when you can buy a Gayman for that money?
Is a big lardy automatic with electric seats and cup holders what most people want? Yes because the fannies are all as soft as s
te. Are there still some people who are a bit unorthodox who thinks something with 8 cylinders, rear wheel drive, a limited slip diff, a gearstick, 3 pedals and a steering wheel all wrapped up in a bold body is great value at the same sort of price as all the mass-market stuff aimed at the vanilla people? Apparently so.It's a poor get-rich-quick scheme, granted, but there are still those of us who snigger at those who want AWD in their "sports car".
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff