RE: GBRoadster Turbo S

[sidesauce]

tomTVR said:

sidesauce said:

tomTVR said:

Shame they dont build a slower version

You mean slower than the 225bhp normally-aspirated version? To be fair though I agree about the warranty thing though.

Yes, perhaps a 4 pot with FWD gearbox in the back to save cost. If they could get it to Audi TT sort of money i think they would sell loads what with performance through low weight along with the rarity factor.

OK, I see what you're saying, to be honest the price is probably more to do with economies of scale more than anything esle.

Hmm... having said that, I'd definitely consider one of these, in spite of the "built together from other manufacturers" vibe, I really like the design overall!

[Ed.]

sidesauce said:

tomTVR said:

sidesauce said:

tomTVR said:

Shame they dont build a slower version

You mean slower than the 225bhp normally-aspirated version? To be fair though I agree about the warranty thing though.

Yes, perhaps a 4 pot with FWD gearbox in the back to save cost. If they could get it to Audi TT sort of money i think they would sell loads what with performance through low weight along with the rarity factor.

OK, I see what you're saying, to be honest the price is probably more to do with economies of scale more than anything esle.

Hmm... having said that, I'd definitely consider one of these, in spite of the "built together from other manufacturers" vibe, I really like the design overall!

I am not sure I see what he is saying?
How would re-engineering a rwd low volume car to be fwd make it cheaper?

Aside from that I think its great, like a squished Mitsubishi Eclipse but better.

[Rob_F]

That is a VERY pretty car. Really like it, only new car design i've been wowed by in a long time.

Rob.

[Old Geezer]

Oh dear!

Please don't tell Donnymac about this!!

[PurelyRetro]

Would it be possible to have that first picture in a higher resolution, or - 1024x768?

[planetdave]

tomTVR said:

sidesauce said:

tomTVR said:

Shame they dont build a slower version

You mean slower than the 225bhp normally-aspirated version? To be fair though I agree about the warranty thing though.

Yes, perhaps a 4 pot with FWD gearbox in the back to save cost. If they could get it to Audi TT sort of money i think they would sell loads what with performance through low weight along with the rarity factor.

Last time I looked at the 'upcoming Audi' website they had a mid engined four pot 'TT' stylee jobbee in the pipeline (with a tin top but shirley a convertible would be feasable).

[EDLT]

Does it have any sort of a roof?

[neema_T]

Ed. said:

sidesauce said:

tomTVR said:

sidesauce said:

tomTVR said:

Shame they dont build a slower version

You mean slower than the 225bhp normally-aspirated version? To be fair though I agree about the warranty thing though.

Yes, perhaps a 4 pot with FWD gearbox in the back to save cost. If they could get it to Audi TT sort of money i think they would sell loads what with performance through low weight along with the rarity factor.

OK, I see what you're saying, to be honest the price is probably more to do with economies of scale more than anything esle.

Hmm... having said that, I'd definitely consider one of these, in spite of the "built together from other manufacturers" vibe, I really like the design overall!

I am not sure I see what he is saying?
How would re-engineering a rwd low volume car to be fwd make it cheaper?

Aside from that I think its great, like a squished Mitsubishi Eclipse but better.

I don't think he meant converting it to FWD, at least that's what I took 'with FWD gearbox in the back' to mean. I think he means instead of having a V6 mounted longitudinally, a transverse I4 would make it cheaper because you could just drop the engine and gearbox from any FWD car straight in. At least that's what I think HE means, not what I personally think, but if it does actually work like that then I think that would be a pretty good idea as far as reducing costs go (especially as you could bin whatever they put in it and use a big VTEC, seems to work wonders on the S1 Elise!). However the competition from Lotus, being a proven lightweight-ish track day weapon (whichever one you go for, except for the Europa and Evora), would probably be something the GBRoadster wants to avoid.

Personally I can see 400+bhp in a sub-1000kg car being quite spectacular, but I didn't pay much attention to it at Goodwood, I must admit. Possibly because of the off they had last year (when it was called the Yes! Roadster), but at least I now know why! Lots of power, not much weight, pre-production prototype, no driver aids except ABS, and lots and lots of rain...

[Dagnut]

That would wipe the smile of Ferrari owners faces...and pretty much anything else..fair play to the lads for building it

[tomTVR]

neema_T said:

Ed. said:

sidesauce said:

tomTVR said:

sidesauce said:

tomTVR said:

Shame they dont build a slower version

You mean slower than the 225bhp normally-aspirated version? To be fair though I agree about the warranty thing though.

Yes, perhaps a 4 pot with FWD gearbox in the back to save cost. If they could get it to Audi TT sort of money i think they would sell loads what with performance through low weight along with the rarity factor.

OK, I see what you're saying, to be honest the price is probably more to do with economies of scale more than anything esle.

Hmm... having said that, I'd definitely consider one of these, in spite of the "built together from other manufacturers" vibe, I really like the design overall!

I am not sure I see what he is saying?
How would re-engineering a rwd low volume car to be fwd make it cheaper?

Aside from that I think its great, like a squished Mitsubishi Eclipse but better.

I don't think he meant converting it to FWD, at least that's what I took 'with FWD gearbox in the back' to mean. I think he means instead of having a V6 mounted longitudinally, a transverse I4 would make it cheaper because you could just drop the engine and gearbox from any FWD car straight in. At least that's what I think HE means, not what I personally think, but if it does actually work like that then I think that would be a pretty good idea as far as reducing costs go (especially as you could bin whatever they put in it and use a big VTEC, seems to work wonders on the S1 Elise!). However the competition from Lotus, being a proven lightweight-ish track day weapon (whichever one you go for, except for the Europa and Evora), would probably be something the GBRoadster wants to avoid.

Personally I can see 400+bhp in a sub-1000kg car being quite spectacular, but I didn't pay much attention to it at Goodwood, I must admit. Possibly because of the off they had last year (when it was called the Yes! Roadster), but at least I now know why! Lots of power, not much weight, pre-production prototype, no driver aids except ABS, and lots and lots of rain...

Yea that is what i meant. The problem is it is goiing head to head with a 911 on price and as we have seen countless times before. Seems well engineered though so may be ok. Perhaps i just want a cheapo version so i could afford one!

[Fiddlemesticks]

Audi TT for Barbers. No women allowed.

[sprinter885]

Waiting to see the first one in a hedge bottom-somewhere near you!!

Actually I'd think the normally aspirated version should be enough fun for most people & lighter too.

[sad61t]

EDLT said:

Does it have any sort of a roof?

from their website: "and even comes with an occasional Soft Top!"

[Oli S]

sad61t said:

EDLT said:

Does it have any sort of a roof?

from their website: "and even comes with an occasional Soft Top!"

It's a Murcielago Roadster type affair but apparently it will stay in place right up to the top speed

[dinkel]

I wonder how it'd compare to a hopped Exige.

What's the quickest around these days? The turboed 1.8 right?

[maybemaser]

I'm the proud owner of one of the first Yes 3.2 Roadsters in Switzerland. Even the non turbo version is big fun.
Build quality of my car is very good for a car which is build in these low numbers (better than my previous TVR's )
Ther roof takes its time to errect - it reminds me sometimes on errecting a tent ;-)
It is great to see that the car gets positive reactions in the UK

[bales]

I know its a bit sad but this sort of thing annoys me slightly on a car forum, why would the wastegate make a noise....why do so many people get this wrong.


I seriously doubt that he is talking about an external wastegate, so the noise will just be the dump valve/diverter valve, whatever you want to call it, you would think as a car journalist you would know this...

[sprinter885]

Oli- Consider yourself told off !!

[RJDM3]

bales said:

I know its a bit sad but this sort of thing annoys me slightly on a car forum, why would the wastegate make a noise....why do so many people get this wrong.


I seriously doubt that he is talking about an external wastegate, so the noise will just be the dump valve/diverter valve, whatever you want to call it, you would think as a car journalist you would know this...

The car runs an external wastegate so yes Oli is right

[RJDM3]

with the roof on



Doors open


Enginebay