Why I drive faster in TVR than in SLK350 - discuss

Why I drive faster in TVR than in SLK350 - discuss

Author
Discussion

Slohmo

Original Poster:

17 posts

127 months

Saturday 25th October 2014
quotequote all
I'm the very recent owner of a 55 plate immaculate SLK350 with 20K on the clock.
As someone who currently owns a few older cars, it's giving me the same sort of amazement at how cars have developed in terms of technology and engineering as I felt when I drove my first 320i BMW in 1987 after previously ragging around in XR3i's and Pug 205 GTi's (no speed cameras then - oh bliss...)
However, interestingly, and it is I admit early days (I've only had it for a month), I'm finding that it doesn't give me that urge to floor it when I hit open road.
A classic example is when I drive my '97 Chimaera 4.00.
In the TVR, when I hit a nice familiar stretch of open dual carriageway, the first thing I want to do (or is it what my car wants me to do?) is to give it a good clear out. You know, drop it into 3rd and get a hit of the rolling musical throb of the ancient push rod V8 which rewards me with a relaxed but deceptively brisk surge of torque from 4000 to 5250rpm. Feeling the car squat I watch the rev counter swing round with an emotion of knowing familiarity and a thrill of intuitive pleasure, (a well-built kit car in all honesty - crude but visceral) until my next change point (you can take it to 6500rpm but there's no real point really), slick it into 4th and rip it up to 125mph in the blink of an eye before I think of cameras, the old bill, bans, points etc….. and then throttle back to a steady 80, having left the proles their tin boxes many yards behind........ lovely.
Now in the SLK, I hit the same stretch of road. Where’s that urge? None. No manual gear box, just a hyper efficient 6 gear seamless drive, and where’s the noise? No glorious V8 but, to be frank, a bit of a magnificent fart, building and building, just like the Indian had last night.
And you have to cane it. At the last 500rpm to the red line it really, really shifts, far faster on a per second, per second measurement than the TVR (come on chaps, remember your O’ level physics).
But that surge is only for a second or two whereas the TVR, which never feels really “punch-in-the-back” quick, probably just has the edge on overall pace
It’s too efficient. Too Teutonic and with no manual, somehow less involving.
Don’t get me wrong, I like this car (except for its looks) but perhaps I should hard wire the battery onto my d*ck or something because it doesn’t say to me “go for it”.
Still, that’s no bad thing I suppose.
What is has done though is give me the Merc bug. So much so that I have just treated myself to a brand spankers E250 company car (arrives next month).
As a biker, I love manual (or foot operated) gears. It makes you constantly think and plan and involves you with the machine. But for a fast 2 seater not have a manual is odd and not something I’d buy again I think. Yes, it has flappy paddle nonsense but it’s not the same.
But who knows, early days and I may change my mind.
Interestingly, the stats are
Merc – 1350kgs + driver (me) 95kgs - 269bhp = (converted to UK tons) – 188 bhp per ton
TVR – 1050 kgs + 95kgs – 190 bhp = (converted to UK tons) – 169 bhp per ton

TVR claim power output from the 4.00 L TVR is 230bhp – absolute rubbish of course.
The final question though is, which would I prefer to take on a track day?

Well, the TVR of course.


Edited by Slohmo on Saturday 25th October 21:14

tonys

1,080 posts

222 months

Saturday 25th October 2014
quotequote all
Good post. Don't know what the answer is, though.

I have kept my Chimaera for years as I just can't find another toy (new/newish) that really makes me want to change it. 190bhp? Maybe, but Rover quoted 190bhp for the 3.5 SD1 vitesse, so it would be reasonable to assume that TVR's 400, with the changes TVR made, would produce more than Rover managed out of the smaller version. And I thought TVR quoted 240bhp? Anyhow, it's the driving experience that counts, not the 'figures'. I like the manual box, which is becoming more difficult to find nowadays, naturally aspirated engine, a proper handbrake (not the silly MB foot-operated brake, hill-start assist and all the other nonsense). Oh, and the sound, of course smile

Now, if they did a manual Jaguar F-Type V8............

Slohmo

Original Poster:

17 posts

127 months

Saturday 25th October 2014
quotequote all
Hi Tonys and fellow Tivvie owner.. respec! (etc, etc)

Interesting thing about "quoted" figures.

I was seriously thinking about getting in my old beast Supercharged this year and, if business goes well, may do so next year - wacks it up to 270bhp on rear wheel....

The guy who can do this is Ipswich way and we had a few chats.

He said that on the dyno, (BACK WHEEL, not crank), he usually finds on 4.0 Tivvies between 190 and 200 bhp. - so allowing for a 75% power loss from the crank, that actually makes the TVR chuck out 253bhp (mark up/mark down scenario)

However, TVR say 240 bhp so that must be a crank measurement in ideal conditions with 17% to 20% loss of power to rear wheels.

I always go for the back wheel bhp (must be the biker in me)

That said, i don't know if the 268bhp from the SLK is crank or wheel (but bet you're bottom dollar it's crank) so it's probably more like 220 odd bhp rear wheel on same % draw down as TVR.

The 500s are only around 235bhp (rear wheel)!

What one must remember is that TVRs are very light (the 4000cc is 1050 kg) so on a power to weight ratio, it's good and also it had huge torque.

The old SDI 3.5 was probably 125 rear wheel i would say (never believe manufacturers figures.....)

As you say, manual Jag F-Type.....

eldar

21,614 posts

195 months

Saturday 25th October 2014
quotequote all
Slohmo said:
I'm the very recent owner of a 55 plate immaculate SLK350 with 20K on the clock.
As someone who currently owns a few older cars, it's giving me the same sort of amazement at how cars have developed in terms of technology and engineering as I felt when I drove my first 320i BMW in 1987 after previously ragging around in XR3i's and Pug 205 GTi's (no speed cameras then - oh bliss...)
However, interestingly, and it is I admit early days (I've only had it for a month), I'm finding that it doesn't give me that urge to floor it when I hit open road.
A classic example is when I drive my '97 Chimaera 4.00.
In the TVR, when I hit a nice familiar stretch of open dual carriageway, the first thing I want to do (or is it what my car wants me to do?) is to give it a good clear out. You know, drop it into 3rd and get a hit of the rolling musical throb of the ancient push rod V8 which rewards me with a relaxed but deceptively brisk surge of torque from 4000 to 5250rpm. Feeling the car squat I watch the rev counter swing round with an emotion of knowing familiarity and a thrill of intuitive pleasure, (a well-built kit car in all honesty - crude but visceral) until my next change point (you can take it to 6500rpm but there's no real point really), slick it into 4th and rip it up to 125mph in the blink of an eye before I think of cameras, the old bill, bans, points etc….. and then throttle back to a steady 80, having left the proles their tin boxes many yards behind........ lovely.
Now in the SLK, I hit the same stretch of road. Where’s that urge? None. No manual gear box, just a hyper efficient 6 gear seamless drive, and where’s the noise? No glorious V8 but, to be frank, a bit of a magnificent fart, building and building, just like the Indian had last night.
And you have to cane it. At the last 500rpm to the red line it really, really shifts, far faster on a per second, per second measurement than the TVR (come on chaps, remember your O’ level physics).
But that surge is only for a second or two whereas the TVR, which never feels really “punch-in-the-back” quick, probably just has the edge on overall pace
It’s too efficient. Too Teutonic and with no manual, somehow less involving.
Don’t get me wrong, I like this car (except for its looks) but perhaps I should hard wire the battery onto my d*ck or something because it doesn’t say to me “go for it”.
Still, that’s no bad thing I suppose.
What is has done though is give me the Merc bug. So much so that I have just treated myself to a brand spankers E250 company car (arrives next month).
As a biker, I love manual (or foot operated) gears. It makes you constantly think and plan and involves you with the machine. But for a fast 2 seater not have a manual is odd and not something I’d buy again I think. Yes, it has flappy paddle nonsense but it’s not the same.
But who knows, early days and I may change my mind.
Interestingly, the stats are
Merc – 1350kgs + driver (me) 95kgs - 269bhp = (converted to UK tons) – 188 bhp per ton
TVR – 1050 kgs + 95kgs – 190 bhp = (converted to UK tons) – 169 bhp per ton

TVR claim power output from the 4.00 L TVR is 230bhp – absolute rubbish of course.
The final question though is, which would I prefer to take on a track day?

Well, the TVR of course.


Edited by Slohmo on Saturday 25th October 21:14
First, your SLK has 7 gears, not 6. And, for some odd reason 2 reversesmile

It is a seriously fast non-supercar car, 5.4 to 60, and 185mph with the limiter off. Handles properly, and capable of seriously quick point to point travelling.

So it ticks the performance boxes. But. It is a bit too civilised, the sound is nice but muted, and won't offend neighbours or old ladies waiting to cross the road. Really a bit of a Q car, the 200s are popular as as second cars for the lady wife in respectable suburbia, almost a bit hairdresser. The 350 looks the same, apart from the badge.

The TVR is noisy, looks aggressively fast even when parked.

So, image and expectation, I suppose - TVRs are performance cars, mercs are civilised saloons. You don't really expect the boring car to be fast.

Once you get used to the mercs abilities, you'll start to use them. It will just seem slower than the tiv.

I bought my SLK expecting to keep it for the usual 2 years, but 7 years later I've still got it, the longest time I've owned a car. kind of addictive, once you get over the lack of noise!



Slohmo

Original Poster:

17 posts

127 months

Sunday 26th October 2014
quotequote all
Hi Eldar -yes, I think I need to give it time.

Interesting though that the TVR's top speed is 150 dead and you say an unleashed 350 can do 185.

Wow!

Must be the gearing.

I will double check, but I would put money on it that my 350 has only 6 gears.

I've played with the manual tiptronic shift option and only ever got to "6" on the read out.

I think you've got the 300 brake newer post 2005 model! A bit quicker methinks...

I'll read the manual tomorrow.


buzzsaw

698 posts

268 months

Sunday 26th October 2014
quotequote all
eldar said:
First, your SLK has 7 gears, not 6. And, for some odd reason 2 reversesmile

It is a seriously fast non-supercar car, 5.4 to 60, and 185mph with the limiter off. Handles properly, and capable of seriously quick point to point travelling.

So it ticks the performance boxes. But. It is a bit too civilised, the sound is nice but muted, and won't offend neighbours or old ladies waiting to cross the road. Really a bit of a Q car, the 200s are popular as as second cars for the lady wife in respectable suburbia, almost a bit hairdresser. The 350 looks the same, apart from the badge.

The TVR is noisy, looks aggressively fast even when parked.

So, image and expectation, I suppose - TVRs are performance cars, mercs are civilised saloons. You don't really expect the boring car to be fast.

Once you get used to the mercs abilities, you'll start to use them. It will just seem slower than the tiv.

I bought my SLK expecting to keep it for the usual 2 years, but 7 years later I've still got it, the longest time I've owned a car. kind of addictive, once you get over the lack of noise!
185 out of a 350?? Don't think my 55 would even do that!

eldar

21,614 posts

195 months

Sunday 26th October 2014
quotequote all
Slohmo said:
Hi Eldar -yes, I think I need to give it time.

Interesting though that the TVR's top speed is 150 dead and you say an unleashed 350 can do 185.

Wow!

Must be the gearing.

I will double check, but I would put money on it that my 350 has only 6 gears.

I've played with the manual tiptronic shift option and only ever got to "6" on the read out.

I think you've got the 300 brake newer post 2005 model! A bit quicker methinks...

I'll read the manual tomorrow.
The R171 had either a 6 speed manual or optional 7 speed auto. in C mode it normally uses 2nd to 7th unless you use kickdown. M and S use all 7.

http://media.daimler.com/dcmedia/0-921-658575-1-80...

The 185 top speed I've not tried, but allegedly it will do that according to a US magazine. Needs to be in rolling road mode, which turns off the limiter and all electronic aids.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/mercedes-benz-...

185 may be bullst or an inaccurate speedo....




MattyB_

2,008 posts

256 months

Sunday 26th October 2014
quotequote all

It's fairly simple (at least it my head, not sure I can get it onto print so well)!

Similar situation - I took my Exige (177bhp) into have some tyres changed. While I waited, I popped over the road to look at an SLK55 (hence the reason I'm looking for one now!) and went out for a test drive.

Basically, even on the test drive, I didn't have the urge to drive the SLK anywhere near as fast or as hard as the Exige. A bit like the TVR I expect, the Lotus is visceral, raw, intense and intoxicating on a 'racer' level where the enjoyment comes from really giving it the beans.

With the SLK, which is the polar opposite in terms of refinement, comfort and cosseting - the enjoyment factor is broader on the speed scale. Being more withdrawn from the driving experience, part of the enjoyment comes from the easily accessible performance and comfort, rather than the "Holy crap, I'm at 9/10ths in the Lotus/TVR and I could die or breakdown at any moment!!" adrenaline rush.


buzzsaw

698 posts

268 months

Sunday 26th October 2014
quotequote all
eldar said:
The R171 had either a 6 speed manual or optional 7 speed auto. in C mode it normally uses 2nd to 7th unless you use kickdown. M and S use all 7.

http://media.daimler.com/dcmedia/0-921-658575-1-80...

The 185 top speed I've not tried, but allegedly it will do that according to a US magazine. Needs to be in rolling road mode, which turns off the limiter and all electronic aids.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/mercedes-benz-...

185 may be bullst or an inaccurate speedo....

Or could be running on a rolling road with no air resistance. That would make more sense

anonymous-user

53 months

Sunday 26th October 2014
quotequote all
MattyB_ said:
It's fairly simple (at least it my head, not sure I can get it onto print so well)!

Similar situation - I took my Exige (177bhp) into have some tyres changed. While I waited, I popped over the road to look at an SLK55 (hence the reason I'm looking for one now!) and went out for a test drive.

Basically, even on the test drive, I didn't have the urge to drive the SLK anywhere near as fast or as hard as the Exige. A bit like the TVR I expect, the Lotus is visceral, raw, intense and intoxicating on a 'racer' level where the enjoyment comes from really giving it the beans.

With the SLK, which is the polar opposite in terms of refinement, comfort and cosseting - the enjoyment factor is broader on the speed scale. Being more withdrawn from the driving experience, part of the enjoyment comes from the easily accessible performance and comfort, rather than the "Holy crap, I'm at 9/10ths in the Lotus/TVR and I could die or breakdown at any moment!!" adrenaline rush.
I think that's it. Let's face it, a TVR or any other raw sports car isn't happy just wandering along, at least they're not in my experience. They're still noisy, a hard ride and not very good at low revs. The solution is to drive hard when it all makes sense.

The 350SLK is a different kettle of fish. My mrs has a month old one, not fully run in, but there are definitely two sides to it. You can wander along in DE, never over 2K revs and it behaves fine. Wind it up in S or M with the paddles and it's as good as most soft sports cars. 306hp moves it along OK, it appears, it corners prety well and the steering is OK, if a little heavy and disconnected.



DJRC

23,563 posts

235 months

Sunday 26th October 2014
quotequote all
Hmmm. One of the reasons I bought the 55 was because I felt it was like a grown up Griffith. Both are similRly over engined hotrods. Both sound rather nice smile Griff was my twenties, 55 for my 30s!

Slohmo

Original Poster:

17 posts

127 months

Sunday 26th October 2014
quotequote all
Apologies Eldar -I found the 7th gear today!

As you may have noticed, I'm making a rather dimwitted and plodding fist of adapting from 20th Century automobile technology (TVR Chimaera design in the early 90's, not great at low revs and all rather crude) to an incredibly tight and amazingly designed piece of 21st Century kit (all the gubbins, seat, wheel, mirrors, roof etc seems to have an electric motor driving it.. it must have about 15 motors in it - think of the weight!)

And I'm starting to get it - toeing it our of corners etc - my God it's planted - feels more planted than the TVR.

Actually, a rather worrying thing happened coming back form the gymn today - it got stuck in 3rd - only when I stopped at lights did it go to 2nd and then it stopped even doing that.

Tried fiddling with manual, C and S - no effect.

Limped home and when I stopped and restarted, it seems to reboot itself and returned to normal - any ideas?

eldar

21,614 posts

195 months

Sunday 26th October 2014
quotequote all
Slohmo said:
Apologies Eldar -I found the 7th gear today!

As you may have noticed, I'm making a rather dimwitted and plodding fist of adapting from 20th Century automobile technology (TVR Chimaera design in the early 90's, not great at low revs and all rather crude) to an incredibly tight and amazingly designed piece of 21st Century kit (all the gubbins, seat, wheel, mirrors, roof etc seems to have an electric motor driving it.. it must have about 15 motors in it - think of the weight!)

And I'm starting to get it - toeing it our of corners etc - my God it's planted - feels more planted than the TVR.

Actually, a rather worrying thing happened coming back form the gymn today - it got stuck in 3rd - only when I stopped at lights did it go to 2nd and then it stopped even doing that.

Tried fiddling with manual, C and S - no effect.

Limped home and when I stopped and restarted, it seems to reboot itself and returned to normal - any ideas?
Glad you found 7thsmile Next challenge is to find 2nd reverse....

Check the ecu for error codes, a bluetooth OBC connector and the Torque app sorts than for about £15. The codes are all on the net and reasonably helpful. Or find an indy with a Star machine to do it.

And check the water drain under the battery, they have a tendency to block, and knacker the heater blower...

Dodsy

7,172 posts

226 months

Monday 27th October 2014
quotequote all
I have a chim 450 and the wife has a 2009 SLK300 (couldnt get a 350 at the time just werent any around). The merc has the sports pack and flappy paddle auto box.

I agree 100% with the OP, when I am in the chim I give it the beans whenever I can , the sound the vibration, the way it just goes and goes... irresistible. The Merc on the other hand being rather quiet and very capable leads you into sticking it in full auto and just driving it. Its still a lot of fun but there just isnt that temptation to rag the tits off it. Of course the Merc handles a lot better than the TVR but its rather clinical.

I think the TVR is a hooligan and gets treated as such while the merc is a bit of a city gent .

Odd though that I also have a Jag XJR which is also very quiet and refined but it totally brings out the loony in me sometimes......

Dodsy

7,172 posts

226 months

Monday 27th October 2014
quotequote all
eldar said:
Glad you found 7thsmile Next challenge is to find 2nd reverse....
No the trick is the find first gear forward and reverse..... 'Comfort' always sets off in 2nd gear both forward and reverse...its really 'winter' mode. Select sport or (if you have the paddle shifters) Manual mode and you'll find it takes off a hell of a lot quicker from a standstill in either direction.


Slohmo

Original Poster:

17 posts

127 months

Monday 27th October 2014
quotequote all
Thanks chaps - all very useful

My understanding is the the 450 Chim is the sweetest balance between the power of the 500 and the mild mannered 400.

To be honest, the 400 just isn't really fast enough to compete with all the quick stuff that's out there at the moment.


Which is why I may supercharge it.......

P.Nott

227 posts

188 months

Tuesday 28th October 2014
quotequote all
Interesting topic this as I'm exactly the same, depending on which car I'm driving. My toys are a SL500 and a Lotus Exige S V6, which I recently bought to replace a Lotus Elise SC (SC=Supercharged) and both cars seem to bring out different sides to me. The SL is a very capable quick car, but I mostly tend to drive that like Miss Daisy, just wafting along and I actually enjoy it that way. Despite being a V8, the engine sound is very muted and although acceleration is fairly rapid, it just doesn't seem that fast and doesn't really encourage me to press on.

The Exige on the other hand is a (relatively) light car with a 3.5L 345 bhp supercharged V6 and that is just so much fun to get out on the B roads or on track. Like you in the TVR, I can't help but drop a couple of gears and give it the beans as soon as a bit of open road beckons and listen to the superb engine note from the valved exhaust. I love seeking out tunnels on drives in the Exige, just to hear the exhaust sound bouncing off the walls. I become a complete hooligan, despite my advancing years! biggrin My wife thinks it's childish to behave the way I do in the Lotus and doesn't understand why I do, but fortunately she accepts the way I am with cars. Besides, I believe it keeps me thinking young! wink

The SL is still fun to drive, just a different kind of fun I guess and it's good to be able to indulge both sides of ones driving character I think. smile

Edited by P.Nott on Tuesday 28th October 10:52

Derek Smith

45,512 posts

247 months

Tuesday 28th October 2014
quotequote all
I had to get rid of my Chim due to a back injury meaning declutching was a problem. I needed an auto and went for an SLK350.

I found the SLK a superb car in many ways and was certainly the faster point to point along fast A and B roads. Further, in wet weather, damp weather and when someone sneezed, the SLK was much faster.

I went from Brighton to Dover and back and got 36 mpg despite going across country. I did an identical journey in the Chim and a rough calculation showed a fraction over 20.

Downsides: the auto of course, but that was a requirement for me. That said, the 7-speed g'box is sublime.

The auto changing up mid-corner. It's no problem, just scary.

Not so comfortable for a 6'3" fat bloke.

And it was by no means anywhere near as reliable as my Chim. In 7 years of ownership I bought a boot strut, and a rear caliper went, so I bought two. For the SLK, the gearbox plate went, the heater motor needed replacing, as did the ridiculously located power output, there was a massive water leak from the battery bay and, finally, the balance shaft gear disintegrated dumping sintered metal bits all around the engine, giving low compression and high oil consumption. The oil pump was failing as well. Total cost ran into £thousands.



Edited by Derek Smith on Wednesday 29th October 07:50

Ari

19,328 posts

214 months

Tuesday 28th October 2014
quotequote all
It's not a sports car, it's a compact comfortable GT. If you want something to 'nail' everywhere you're probably better off with a Boxster or Elise.

Now, what's this about two reverse gears? biggrin

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 29th October 2014
quotequote all
Ari said:
It's not a sports car, it's a compact comfortable GT. If you want something to 'nail' everywhere you're probably better off with a Boxster or Elise.

Now, what's this about two reverse gears? biggrin
That's the SL. The SLK is a two seater RWD convertible and is most definitely considered a sports car. It's not a GT.