RE: 250 orders for new TVR
Discussion
Been lucky enough to have had a 991 Gt3 for a week and what a car then was reading the below post by another Tvr owner and have to agree with him, Tvr will have to offer a proper flappy paddle option and a decent working air con system and up the build quality of old if I'm to buy one.
"I was a die hard manual fan at one point, TVR's/Noble etc and analogue beasts were my choice but those days are now gone for me, I refused to do the high tech thing but last year thought I'd dip my toe and bought a Speciale, then an LP640 with an older single clutch system (which is slow but still much better and faster than using a gearstick), it adds so much excitement to a fast car with the brutal gearchange of a paddle system.
The final nail in the coffin was a 10 day euro trip in the Speciale, it was easy to drive, fast, fun and comfortable, largely down to the gearbox. All the other cars struggled with heat, gearbox's seizing up, and people crying about a sore clutch leg/foot. We covered 3000 miles and I didn't have a single thing to complain about (other than my air con being too cold), the first of about 8 trips I've done over the years where this was the case. As a consequence I'm selling the Sagaris. Appreciate a manual in the right classic but modern sports cars need to embrace the flappy paddles. "
"I was a die hard manual fan at one point, TVR's/Noble etc and analogue beasts were my choice but those days are now gone for me, I refused to do the high tech thing but last year thought I'd dip my toe and bought a Speciale, then an LP640 with an older single clutch system (which is slow but still much better and faster than using a gearstick), it adds so much excitement to a fast car with the brutal gearchange of a paddle system.
The final nail in the coffin was a 10 day euro trip in the Speciale, it was easy to drive, fast, fun and comfortable, largely down to the gearbox. All the other cars struggled with heat, gearbox's seizing up, and people crying about a sore clutch leg/foot. We covered 3000 miles and I didn't have a single thing to complain about (other than my air con being too cold), the first of about 8 trips I've done over the years where this was the case. As a consequence I'm selling the Sagaris. Appreciate a manual in the right classic but modern sports cars need to embrace the flappy paddles. "
Lotus E300S said:
Been lucky enough to have had a 991 Gt3 for a week and what a car then was reading the below post by another Tvr owner and have to agree with him, Tvr will have to offer a proper flappy paddle option and a decent working air con system and up the build quality of old if I'm to buy one.
"I was a die hard manual fan at one point, TVR's/Noble etc and analogue beasts were my choice but those days are now gone for me, I refused to do the high tech thing but last year thought I'd dip my toe and bought a Speciale, then an LP640 with an older single clutch system (which is slow but still much better and faster than using a gearstick), it adds so much excitement to a fast car with the brutal gearchange of a paddle system.
The final nail in the coffin was a 10 day euro trip in the Speciale, it was easy to drive, fast, fun and comfortable, largely down to the gearbox. All the other cars struggled with heat, gearbox's seizing up, and people crying about a sore clutch leg/foot. We covered 3000 miles and I didn't have a single thing to complain about (other than my air con being too cold), the first of about 8 trips I've done over the years where this was the case. As a consequence I'm selling the Sagaris. Appreciate a manual in the right classic but modern sports cars need to embrace the flappy paddles. "
Not a bloody chance of that."I was a die hard manual fan at one point, TVR's/Noble etc and analogue beasts were my choice but those days are now gone for me, I refused to do the high tech thing but last year thought I'd dip my toe and bought a Speciale, then an LP640 with an older single clutch system (which is slow but still much better and faster than using a gearstick), it adds so much excitement to a fast car with the brutal gearchange of a paddle system.
The final nail in the coffin was a 10 day euro trip in the Speciale, it was easy to drive, fast, fun and comfortable, largely down to the gearbox. All the other cars struggled with heat, gearbox's seizing up, and people crying about a sore clutch leg/foot. We covered 3000 miles and I didn't have a single thing to complain about (other than my air con being too cold), the first of about 8 trips I've done over the years where this was the case. As a consequence I'm selling the Sagaris. Appreciate a manual in the right classic but modern sports cars need to embrace the flappy paddles. "
TVR cannot afford a good dual clutch and an old fashioned auto must be out of the question, surely?
Max_Torque said:
And that's the other thing. The market is very much driven by "The Latest Thing". Product life cycles have come down, sometimes to less than 3 years! The big OEMS always have the "next big thing" waiting in the wings, but to try to compete with that level of development turnover is suicide for a small company. And yet, if you want to take even a handful of customers away from the establishment, then you are going to rely to some degree on having a volatile product.
Wiesmann had a good product. It looked good, went well, and got good reviews. Yes it was expensive, but that's because it was low volume (even after ripping all the powertrain from a BMW.......). And yet, sales dried up? If i were TVR, i'd want to look very closely at this ex-company and their business case / market positioning........
Yes but you are forgetting 2007/8. If TVR hadn't gone bust in 2006 it would have done in 2007/8 just like Weismann as the credit crunch was the reason for the slump in demand for sportscars. Neither firm had the foundations to get by. Wiesmann had a good product. It looked good, went well, and got good reviews. Yes it was expensive, but that's because it was low volume (even after ripping all the powertrain from a BMW.......). And yet, sales dried up? If i were TVR, i'd want to look very closely at this ex-company and their business case / market positioning........
If we look at JLR, the Jagiar side, in fact the whole business, was kept afloat by the baffling appearance of Asian demand for premium SUVs. Lotus' volumes slumped but they were bailed by their parent. It was a time when no one was buying sports cars because of both employment fears and also no capacity for additional debt.
I completely agree that today's market expects change much sooner but at least TVR can cater for that with just new body shells but as for total slumps, they will always be too small to be able to hedge out that risk and must maintain low employment costs and survive the way all small car firms get through economic downturns and that's to choose from : special commissions from Arabs, tapping up a gullible Geoff, massive money laundering, drug trafficking, tax fraud etc.
250 people place deposits on a car that they have no idea about beyond concept. The future is bright, but for what ?
All I've seen so far is the creation of a kind of hype that would take a no hope business model to venture capitalists or try to attract gullible wannabe new owners to invest in a dead marque.
Did I miss something?
All I've seen so far is the creation of a kind of hype that would take a no hope business model to venture capitalists or try to attract gullible wannabe new owners to invest in a dead marque.
Did I miss something?
Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 29th August 20:58
Jasandjules said:
Oh and I want to see a V8 in - be quite happy with a tuned rover V8 frankly to keep costs down.
Rover V8 is out of production and to be honest, quite expensive for what it is.Best value for money and most sensible would be a Chevrolet LS series motor, but would lack exclusivity since they are in every kit car/low production build under the sun.
The Mustang engine seems like a good choice and will provide an established aftermarket combined with good reliability and cheap servicing.
Assuming Q4 2017, it's still an aggressive timeframe, however people are forgetting that the development of the car is not starting from now. TVR has been owned by Les since June 2013, and starting the new car development likely 6-12 months after that. So potentially 18 months of development is already done. Q4 2017, that's around 4 years which sounds like plenty of time to me.
Also, anyone who has paid any attention will know that the dealer and parts support network is already set up. With a few notable exceptions amongst the establishment, this is already a done deal.
With regards new car sales, I think TVR would be wise to follow a Tesla type approach of direct sales with a few demonstrators available at key maintenance locations that happen to have a showroom attached. Given the approach so far, looks like it might be that way as customers are dealing with the manufacturer direct, not via a dealer.
For the hard of thinking on the engine; It's going to be a Cosworth modified NA crate V8 with manual transmission as advised by TVR themselves. The only possibilities in the whole world right now are the Chevy LS or Ford Coyote families of engines. Nothing else meets Euro 6, or develops the power (400hp+) without going FI. TVR are not going FI.
Ricardo Speed Six is a non starter as it'd have to be so heavily modified and strangled by emissions that it'd come out a completely different engine that was 100hp short of where it needed to be, and in the process would have lost all the character that makes the Speed Six what it is. The only way to get it back to where it needs to be would be to turbocharge it. And then you've basically just wound up with your own very expensive version of a BMW M3 engine whilst decimating your development budget.
I'm looking forward to the coming weeks and further announments about the specs of the T37. And for the overly vocal naysayers and trolls, no one is making you buy one. Frankly you're not ever likely to be in the market for one either, so why do you give a s
t?
Also, anyone who has paid any attention will know that the dealer and parts support network is already set up. With a few notable exceptions amongst the establishment, this is already a done deal.
With regards new car sales, I think TVR would be wise to follow a Tesla type approach of direct sales with a few demonstrators available at key maintenance locations that happen to have a showroom attached. Given the approach so far, looks like it might be that way as customers are dealing with the manufacturer direct, not via a dealer.
For the hard of thinking on the engine; It's going to be a Cosworth modified NA crate V8 with manual transmission as advised by TVR themselves. The only possibilities in the whole world right now are the Chevy LS or Ford Coyote families of engines. Nothing else meets Euro 6, or develops the power (400hp+) without going FI. TVR are not going FI.
Ricardo Speed Six is a non starter as it'd have to be so heavily modified and strangled by emissions that it'd come out a completely different engine that was 100hp short of where it needed to be, and in the process would have lost all the character that makes the Speed Six what it is. The only way to get it back to where it needs to be would be to turbocharge it. And then you've basically just wound up with your own very expensive version of a BMW M3 engine whilst decimating your development budget.
I'm looking forward to the coming weeks and further announments about the specs of the T37. And for the overly vocal naysayers and trolls, no one is making you buy one. Frankly you're not ever likely to be in the market for one either, so why do you give a s
t?Edited by dvs_dave on Sunday 30th August 04:52
chris watton said:
DonkeyApple said:
so called said:
One question that I have carried in my head since 2000 is, how fast does a sports car have to be?
I've always considered a TVR as a sports car and not a super car.
I did 155mph in my Chimaera on the Abahn in Germany.
I did similar in my first Tuscan with so much more in the peddle.
The fun is the 0 to 100 and the NOISE.
Someone earlier said the s6 wouldn't touch "what ever' but 0 to 60 sub 4 seconds?
Do we really need super car performance in a sports car?
Did I just write that?
Someone spiked my second bottle of wine :-o (I'm in India so it's late enough).
??
In a PH article the other day between the F Type and the 911 they ended with a sentence that highlighted an interesting point. And that was that other countries might make cars that handle better and are faster than the cars the British build but that the Brits haven't forgotten that it's not all about numbers and stats but about actually how a car feels and makes you feel in just normal driving conditions. I've always considered a TVR as a sports car and not a super car.
I did 155mph in my Chimaera on the Abahn in Germany.
I did similar in my first Tuscan with so much more in the peddle.
The fun is the 0 to 100 and the NOISE.
Someone earlier said the s6 wouldn't touch "what ever' but 0 to 60 sub 4 seconds?
Do we really need super car performance in a sports car?
Did I just write that?
Someone spiked my second bottle of wine :-o (I'm in India so it's late enough).
??I thought it rather poignant.
The all too clear truth is that 99% of all driving is about how a car feels from 40-80. And zipping around within that range. And well, while driving a 911 Turbo recently and also a 458 the one thing I noticed about both was that neither stirred any emotion at all while driving in that range. No drama, no thrills, nothing. Two unbelievably awesome and near faultless cars and yet utterly sterile, soulless and pointless in sensible driving conditions. In fact, the only thing I found exciting about the 458 was starting it. That sent tingles down my spine every time but once moving and driving a combination of London, motorway, countryside is was boring. It was like getting to bang the hottest girl on the planet but just sitting next to her for 5 hours, touching her knee a couple of times.
These cars are unbelievably great but monumentally f
king boring to actually use as cars within a sensible remit. Earlier, I was only meant to pop out down the road to fill the tank up in my Tamora, ready for our hols tomorrow, but ended doing 30 miles first, before returning to refuel - it is so much fun all of the time, whether going 30 or 130. Never fails to put a smile on my face.
One in particular is determined eventually to get a Morgan, at the moment making do with a Z3.
They all speak fondly of English sports cars.
Same in America where I joined the North American TVR Fan Club a couple of years back.
When I made my point about performance and the question being in my head since 2000, that was when I bought my first Chimaera.
The performance increase compared to my 2,8 Tasmin was fantastic and for me perfect.
In 2006 I bought my first Tuscan, and again realized a new level of performance but this time that I felt it was unnecessary.
I have to add that I wrote that one off.
I drove a GT3 round a track a few years back and found it totally soleless compared to my Chimaera. Amazingly fast brilliant car but so isolated from the road.
As far as a manual gear box, they are a pain when in a motorway tailback otherwise I think they are a must for the new TVR.
Have they stated a market volume target ? I don't think that they are thinking in the thousands per year.
I know a few Americans that will get in line if they can be US road legal.
A U.S. Based customer right here. Although the reality of getting US type approval is a cripplingly expensive and onerous task that not even the big boys bother to do it for all their models. So many European cars, particularly performance ones that never make it to the U.S. because of this.
All Mercedes-Benz doing in the 80's.
All Mercedes-Benz doing in the 80's.
DonkeyApple said:
so called said:
One question that I have carried in my head since 2000 is, how fast does a sports car have to be?
I've always considered a TVR as a sports car and not a super car.
I did 155mph in my Chimaera on the Abahn in Germany.
I did similar in my first Tuscan with so much more in the peddle.
The fun is the 0 to 100 and the NOISE.
Someone earlier said the s6 wouldn't touch "what ever' but 0 to 60 sub 4 seconds?
Do we really need super car performance in a sports car?
Did I just write that?
Someone spiked my second bottle of wine :-o (I'm in India so it's late enough).??
In a PH article the other day between the F Type and the 911 they ended with a sentence that highlighted an interesting point. And that was that other countries might make cars that handle better and are faster than the cars the British build but that the Brits haven't forgotten that it's not all about numbers and stats but about actually how a car feels and makes you feel in just normal driving conditions. I've always considered a TVR as a sports car and not a super car.
I did 155mph in my Chimaera on the Abahn in Germany.
I did similar in my first Tuscan with so much more in the peddle.
The fun is the 0 to 100 and the NOISE.
Someone earlier said the s6 wouldn't touch "what ever' but 0 to 60 sub 4 seconds?
Do we really need super car performance in a sports car?
Did I just write that?
Someone spiked my second bottle of wine :-o (I'm in India so it's late enough).
??I thought it rather poignant.
The all too clear truth is that 99% of all driving is about how a car feels from 40-80. And zipping around within that range. And well, while driving a 911 Turbo recently and also a 458 the one thing I noticed about both was that neither stirred any emotion at all while driving in that range. No drama, no thrills, nothing. Two unbelievably awesome and near faultless cars and yet utterly sterile, soulless and pointless in sensible driving conditions. In fact, the only thing I found exciting about the 458 was starting it. That sent tingles down my spine every time but once moving and driving a combination of London, motorway, countryside is was boring. It was like getting to bang the hottest girl on the planet but just sitting next to her for 5 hours, touching her knee a couple of times.
These cars are unbelievably great but monumentally f
king boring to actually use as cars within a sensible remit. http://youtu.be/ooBJ2Z2sZvo
Let me clarify, responding to the last few pages: I've had two very nice V8-engined cars - but neither of those engines compares to even a relatively humdrum straight six. That particular configuration, with its inherent balance, keenness to rev and characteristic howl at high revs, is infinitely more special than any V8 could ever be. Anything you can do to a V8 to make it special, you can do with greater success to a straight six simply because the latter configuration is inherently superior. I reserve particular loathing for any V8 with a 180-degree crankshaft, because they just sound like two out-of-sync inline fours, droning away... the mid-engined Ferrari sports cars should have stuck to V12s (a la 250LM) or perhaps V6s (a la 246 "Dino").
TVR has an existing engine which can only be called superb (at least now the reliability issues have been sorted). It is capable of producing vastly more power than a smallish sports car driven on British roads will ever need. It sounds godly. It could be future-proofed for a one-off investment of a few million. Instead, they're buying-in US-built power units (I hesitate to use the term 'engine') which can also be found in most F-150s. Some interesting points have been raised about how certain modern performance cars fail to thrill at legal speeds: this is precisely where TVR can come in. If they just revived the old Tuscan/Tamora/Sagaris recipe, brought up-to-date as required, it would be a fabulous and much-needed ****-you to the likes of McLaren.
My point about Gordon Murray's Rocket stands. It's an open-wheel cigar-tube with a bought-in bike engine and gearbox. It has no interior, no roof and no doors. It is not, thereby, a car in the conventional sense of the meaning.
My point about the timescales put forward by Messrs Edgar, Murray et al also stands. Customer cars two years from now, with no factory site yet chosen nor any dealer established - forget it...
TVR has an existing engine which can only be called superb (at least now the reliability issues have been sorted). It is capable of producing vastly more power than a smallish sports car driven on British roads will ever need. It sounds godly. It could be future-proofed for a one-off investment of a few million. Instead, they're buying-in US-built power units (I hesitate to use the term 'engine') which can also be found in most F-150s. Some interesting points have been raised about how certain modern performance cars fail to thrill at legal speeds: this is precisely where TVR can come in. If they just revived the old Tuscan/Tamora/Sagaris recipe, brought up-to-date as required, it would be a fabulous and much-needed ****-you to the likes of McLaren.
My point about Gordon Murray's Rocket stands. It's an open-wheel cigar-tube with a bought-in bike engine and gearbox. It has no interior, no roof and no doors. It is not, thereby, a car in the conventional sense of the meaning.
My point about the timescales put forward by Messrs Edgar, Murray et al also stands. Customer cars two years from now, with no factory site yet chosen nor any dealer established - forget it...
skyrover said:
Rover V8 is out of production
I know of at least two builders building new Rover V8s. Point taken about cost though. Chevrolet/LS motors have always been cheaper.RoverP6B said:
Let me clarify, responding to the last few pages: I've had two very nice V8-engined cars - but neither of those engines compares to even a relatively humdrum straight six. That particular configuration, with its inherent balance, keenness to rev and characteristic howl at high revs, is infinitely more special than any V8 could ever be. Anything you can do to a V8 to make it special, you can do with greater success to a straight six simply because the latter configuration is inherently superior. I reserve particular loathing for any V8 with a 180-degree crankshaft, because they just sound like two out-of-sync inline fours, droning away... the mid-engined Ferrari sports cars should have stuck to V12s (a la 250LM) or perhaps V6s (a la 246 "Dino").
TVR has an existing engine which can only be called superb (at least now the reliability issues have been sorted). It is capable of producing vastly more power than a smallish sports car driven on British roads will ever need. It sounds godly. It could be future-proofed for a one-off investment of a few million. Instead, they're buying-in US-built power units (I hesitate to use the term 'engine') which can also be found in most F-150s. Some interesting points have been raised about how certain modern performance cars fail to thrill at legal speeds: this is precisely where TVR can come in. If they just revived the old Tuscan/Tamora/Sagaris recipe, brought up-to-date as required, it would be a fabulous and much-needed ****-you to the likes of McLaren.
My point about Gordon Murray's Rocket stands. It's an open-wheel cigar-tube with a bought-in bike engine and gearbox. It has no interior, no roof and no doors. It is not, thereby, a car in the conventional sense of the meaning.
My point about the timescales put forward by Messrs Edgar, Murray et al also stands. Customer cars two years from now, with no factory site yet chosen nor any dealer established - forget it...
Sure. My S6 is delivering well over 400 BHP and is tremendous but to build it from scratch would be well over £20k. And you can't reduce that as it will always be hand built, not computer built, and you will always have to use good people as you need to ensure reliability. TVR has an existing engine which can only be called superb (at least now the reliability issues have been sorted). It is capable of producing vastly more power than a smallish sports car driven on British roads will ever need. It sounds godly. It could be future-proofed for a one-off investment of a few million. Instead, they're buying-in US-built power units (I hesitate to use the term 'engine') which can also be found in most F-150s. Some interesting points have been raised about how certain modern performance cars fail to thrill at legal speeds: this is precisely where TVR can come in. If they just revived the old Tuscan/Tamora/Sagaris recipe, brought up-to-date as required, it would be a fabulous and much-needed ****-you to the likes of McLaren.
My point about Gordon Murray's Rocket stands. It's an open-wheel cigar-tube with a bought-in bike engine and gearbox. It has no interior, no roof and no doors. It is not, thereby, a car in the conventional sense of the meaning.
My point about the timescales put forward by Messrs Edgar, Murray et al also stands. Customer cars two years from now, with no factory site yet chosen nor any dealer established - forget it...
skyrover said:
Rover V8 is out of production
I know of at least two builders building new Rover V8s. Point taken about cost though. Chevrolet/LS motors have always been cheaper.In the market that TVR sells in it is extremely obvious that people cannot afford to be paying £30k+ for the power plant.
On top of that, emmission compliance would hack a vast amount of power off.
On top of that the media would have a negative field day.
On top of that, TVR buyers expect a V8.
On top of that you are saddling a fledgling company with huge upfront investment costs for the engine line.
On top of that a hand built S6 is never going to be anywhere as reliable or strong as a crate V8.
On top of that, they are high performance, sensitive engines and the average car buyer would never, ever look after the engine they way it needs.
On top of that, you need to source different parts from different suppliers, in small numbers, and each supplier is a weak link. A duff batch or a delay and your whole line grinds to a halt.
When it comes to talking about TVR's S6 you must accept that you know absolutely nothing about it or understand anything at all about the basic economics of a start up.
And regards the RoverV8, you also seem to actually understand very little. Sure there are still people building them. A descent built for power is easily £10k and for half that you can get a 2015 US engine which is superior in every single way.
If your experience of the Rover V8 was in its 60's guise or built for a saloon then you cannot even begin to compare such a not to the modern, BV, cammy engines built for sports car use.
In short, you have a basic premis that is correct. The I6 engine is in my opinion just better than the V8. But absolutely everything you wrap around that argument to try and justify it is total and utter b
ks and verging on the insane ramblings of someone who could be 300BHP's dad, slipped off their medication. RoverP6B said:
I know of at least two builders building new Rover V8s.
And what emissions level are their builds? I suspect not EU6.............(in fact, i bet they are note even EU3, or possibly not even EU1 in all reality. Google those to see "how dirty" an EU2 engine is compared to the current std!!)
"TVR buyers expect a straight six. That is the definition of a modern TVR."
I cannot believe TVR owners could have such short memories? truth be told a lot of those that had the straight six cars wont have good memories of that engine either!
Actually the way I view it, is that TVR was a roaring success in the late Eighties and Nineties running V8 power but the straight six era was maybe a step too far and the beginning of the end.
Sure sixes are great for many reasons but V8s are easier to package and available off the shelf, to my knowledge there are no N/A straight sixes in mass production that would suit this application.
Personally I hope this new project is a success.
I cannot believe TVR owners could have such short memories? truth be told a lot of those that had the straight six cars wont have good memories of that engine either!
Actually the way I view it, is that TVR was a roaring success in the late Eighties and Nineties running V8 power but the straight six era was maybe a step too far and the beginning of the end.
Sure sixes are great for many reasons but V8s are easier to package and available off the shelf, to my knowledge there are no N/A straight sixes in mass production that would suit this application.
Personally I hope this new project is a success.
RoverP6B said:
Smolensky was the beginning of the end, not an initially somewhat troublesome engine. TVR needed an owner who knew what he was doing. Smolensky was not that man. Lawrence Tomlinson probably was...
Absolute rubbish. Engines were blowing up from 2000 and the company was massively over staffed and sales tumbling from around that time. Meanwhile, all the cash and assets were being stripped out by PW!The company was bust before NS was duped into buying it. And it is very well known the the S6 cars that went out under NS' ownership were of far higher build quality than under PW. PW ran it into the ground. And LT would have been a disaster as proven by the mess of Ginetta and the fact that the bank's wanted their money back from him.
Please stop talking total and utter s
t. and as for your earlier remark about the S6 tooling being in existence. Well there are plenty of people who would like to know where this is, least of all TVR.
Edited by DonkeyApple on Monday 31st August 15:52
RoverP6B said:
Smolensky was the beginning of the end, not an initially somewhat troublesome engine. TVR needed an owner who knew what he was doing. Smolensky was not that man. Lawrence Tomlinson probably was...
Ok we've finally got there and understand where you're coming from, however let's move forward and not look back. The V8 is the immediate future for a TVR, as publicised by the new TVR owners, let's embrace that point. I for one am very much looking forward in every sense to the new car as its unveiled. I'd imagine the tooling is in the hands of the specialists still building these engines, new blocks and all... Wheeler saved TVR from otherwise inevitable oblivion c.1990 and was continuing to bring interesting new products on the market, and that Scamander concept was/is brilliant... Smolensky was an idiot who wrecked a viable business (even if it needed some restructuring). I don't see any evidence to suggest that Edgar etc have a credible plan to revive it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff