New TVR spec

[WolfyJones]

What would you like?

Me,


Price around 80k
Ltd edition modern hardcore track version of a Sagaris
Bespoke TVR speed six engine (420/450 Bhp) (380/400 lbft)
Better protected chassis
Lightweight, max 1100 kg
Proper welded cage
6 pot brakes
Adjustable dampers
Bigger rubber
Mech LSD

That would have me putting down a deposit

[WolfyJones]

V8 GRF said:

Move on.

Price around 80k
Ltd edition modern hardcore track version of a Sagaris New Design, leave the Sag where it is things have moved on.
Bespoke TVR speed six engine (420/450 Bhp) (380/400 lbft) Reliable, cheaper, more powerful engine
Better protected chassis
Lightweight, max 1100 kg
Proper welded cage New, modern chassis design.
6 pot brakes
Adjustable dampers
Bigger rubber Maybe, modern tyre tech has moved on
Mech LSD

What kind of chassis design?

[WolfyJones]

m4tti said:

You've just described this.

http://www.radicalsportscars.com/uk/rxc/

Tvr won't build anything that will touch it.

Apart from the fact it's got a body only it's mother would love, crate engine and I wouldn't fancy driving it on the road.

[WolfyJones]

BuzzBillsberry said:

Not this again....

Turning into another engine bashing debate unfortunately,

I was more interested in what type of new TVR other TVR owners wanted,

2/4 seats, convertible, muscle car, cruiser, hardtop, track car, race car, sturdy heavier, lightweight, tc, abs, V8, S6, V6, turbo, electric, etc

[WolfyJones]

macdeb said:

^^^^ Absolutely agree with the great work Dom and the like have done to it since, some fantastic developments that should have been done by the factory in the first instance. But it's reputation stays with it and even many existing TVR owners would still not have one.

]

Talking of engines again
I disagree, the engines being built now by the independents are unique and a definite selling point,

Nice 4 litre doing the business,

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[WolfyJones]

jamieduff1981 said:

I have that gearbox in the same setup as the F-Type in this car at home:



This car wouldn't see which way the one above went on a spirited drive:



When people bash cars like the F-Type I find myself wondering why I'm actually keeping the Cerbera. I'm seriously considering buying an F-Type. Infact I'll have to restrain myself. The XF is going back to the dealer for a little warranty thing in 2 weeks and I'm getting a V8S as my courtesy car. It's going to make me do some soul searching.

The XF above is better than the Cerbera in every measurable way. It doesn't go out of tune all the time. The heating and cooling systems actually do something useful. The handling is extremely playful yet safe and predictable - confidence inspiring actually whereas the TVR is st frankly. The XF is easily the faster car point to point. The F-Type is quicker still. The slushbox auto is a wonderful feat of engineering in that it lets the car be driven smoothly with seemless gearchanges yet offers near instantaneous up changes and rev-matched downchanges on command via the paddles letting me keep my hands on the wheel. Compare that to the crappy Borg Warner T5 that craps itself when 5th gear gets too much torque reversal, a naff clutch that lasts 30,000 miles and costs £900 for the parts and an equally crap slave cylinder, combined with one of the worst pedal boxes I've ever used with pedal spacings completely unsuitable for heel-toe gearshifts and an absurdly long pedal travel on the clutch that necessitates lifting your foot off the floor to find the pedal. It's pants. The first time you get stuck in traffic in a Cerbera you're sat in a sauna with hot carpets and an aching left knee and ankle shunting along with a handbrake that can't hold the car, hacked off and just wanting to get out and walk.

The TVR is good fun for a blast but is awful for everything else. I'd like to do some of the Alpine passes in the TVR but would be completely unwilling to put up with the car for the drive there and back - it's not even close to pleasant to be in.

The only thing it's better at than our family car above is that it looks sexier. Looks are subjective but I think the F-Type beats the Cerbera on that too. Why should I keep the Cerbera? The only reason I can think of is that I make a lot of money and the Cerbera isn't worth that much to sell so I might as well hang on to it.

I'm going to have to work very hard not to buy a slushbox F-Type in the next 12 months. It'll match or better the Cerbera for Sunday blasts and is a car that won't fill me with dread at the prospect of taking it anywhere longer distance.

To be fair to the Cerbera you are comparing a new car to one designed in the mid 90s,

[WolfyJones]

jamieduff1981 said:

Absolutely correct, but what do we define as progress and what do we not? I find pulling the choke knob out to start the engine on my Midget quite charming but few miss manual chokes nowadays.

People moan about the weight of new cars but that's bks IMHO because a) the actual weight doesn't tell you anything about how it feels to drive and b) nobody is asking you to pick the car up and carry it.

The much lamented manual gearbox and clutch pedal - where do they sit? For people who have driven an automatic Honda Jazz they are an essential part of sports cars. For people who have used the Porsche PDK or the ZF Quickshift they belong in classic cars along with manual chokes.

TVR used to be appealing because they were faster than everything else. They can't play that game now - the latest generation of cars have taken outright performance way beyond the realms of a biggish engine and a decent LSD. Frankly, a manual gearbox would hamstring any new sportscar in the performance stakes because it's the acceleration figures that get 99% of potential customers interested in the first place.

That kinda means any new sports car has to just look good, sound good and be playful - which is what the F-Type appears to do rather well for the same price point as we're talking here. For your £80k it also can be driven in a traffic jam without making its driver want to get out and punch someone and has things like cruise control that take the chore out of long drives. There is a lot of romance attached to long drives in a sports car, but I'm not very good at lying to myself. It's not romantic - it's tedious.

The trouble with a slower sports car that seems fast is that few are captured by the headlines (see Toyota GT86) and those who are realise that in real life they're being overtaken by a diesel hatchback that will pull in front and brake to an utterly uninteresting speed (forcing you to also) for each corner whilst pulling away from you on the straights. You'll be sat there stirring your manual gearbox having your fun ruined by a middle aged woman unaware you're even there.

Enjoying your posts but have to disagree,

Have driven the F type and Aston V8V and they are great everyday cars but lack that special buzz lightweight cars without toys give you, early Sunday morning I would take the lightweight every time and for everyday you can't beat a RR,

[WolfyJones]

jamieduff1981 said:

Whilst it's undoubtedly true that the mainstream cars will all depreciate, I think it's also fair to point out that not all TVRs have enjoyed strong residual values as Morgans have. If you bought a Sagaris new and still have it, you're laughing. If you bought a Mk1 Tuscan or a Cerbera, you're not. If you bought a Chimaera, the car gets mentioned in every "which cheap V8?" thread in the General Gassing forums.

New TVR will need to overcome old TVR pub-talk "knowledge" that, being British will mean that people will do anything they can to talk down a home-grown product. That TVR is a brand everyone knows is both an opportunity and a risk. Nobody knows anything about Morgans other than that men with grey beards drive them - the kind who see a Cerb at a car show and read "Ker-Beer-Ah?" from the badge. Garage mechanics never tell you they've had 6 Morgans through in the past month and they're all trouble (why do so many mechanics talk such bks???). Nobody talks about Morgans.

I nearly bought a 70k XKR in 2000, that same car is now worth 7k,

Less than a good early Chimaera.

[WolfyJones]

jamieduff1981 said:

WolfyJones said:

jamieduff1981 said:

Whilst it's undoubtedly true that the mainstream cars will all depreciate, I think it's also fair to point out that not all TVRs have enjoyed strong residual values as Morgans have. If you bought a Sagaris new and still have it, you're laughing. If you bought a Mk1 Tuscan or a Cerbera, you're not. If you bought a Chimaera, the car gets mentioned in every "which cheap V8?" thread in the General Gassing forums.

New TVR will need to overcome old TVR pub-talk "knowledge" that, being British will mean that people will do anything they can to talk down a home-grown product. That TVR is a brand everyone knows is both an opportunity and a risk. Nobody knows anything about Morgans other than that men with grey beards drive them - the kind who see a Cerb at a car show and read "Ker-Beer-Ah?" from the badge. Garage mechanics never tell you they've had 6 Morgans through in the past month and they're all trouble (why do so many mechanics talk such bks???). Nobody talks about Morgans.

I nearly bought a 70k XKR in 2000, that same car is now worth 7k,

Less than a good early Chimaera.

Much will depend on the engineering of the car. Chimaeras are pretty cheap to maintain compared to post Cerbera cars. Those make the annual ownership costs more than offset the delta in residual values.

It's all swings and roundabouts. Anyone who buys a new TVR from the showroom needs to be in it for the long game. Nowt wrong with that, but I think it's unrealistic to expect to buy a new TVR at £80k and expect it to still be worth £80k in 3,5,7 or 10 years. It's going to dive before it flattens out.

Depends if limited numbers per model, look at 997 4.0 Gt3 RS prices, just offer less cars than demand ( limited numbers of 150 ) I bet prices will rise as soon as they leave the showroom,

[WolfyJones]

Bonded alloy chassis?

[WolfyJones]

It's going to be very difficult for any new TVR no matter what engine it has,

Looks wise PW and his team built fantastic looking cars that still look great today,

And will Owners of TVR engined cars really trade down to a crate engined car especially with the great upgrades available,

Will owners of Griffs/Chims spend £50k plus on a new crate engined car or spend a lot less on keeping said cars and upgrading them,

Best chance is to build a car with a far superior chassis that won't rot out after 10 years and really improve on build quality then wrap it up in a fantastic looking body,

Performance wise it must be able to compete with the likes of Gt3s/458s and not just in a straight line and without electric toys and be far cheaper to buy,

Just like TVR once did

[WolfyJones]

AV8 said:

DonkeyApple said:

They were once able to do that because Porkers and Fez's had less power. The game has moved on considerably and you only need look at Noble to see how this effects pricing as your costs go up and potential client base dwindles dramatically.

I agree that build quality is essential but trying to match modern supercar performance is a dead end for the TVR brand. It isn't a prestige brand and could never carry the price needed to meet those criteria.

And most current older Tiv owners aren't the people who forked out new so arguably aren't as core to future sales as you might think. Especially if you want to build in credible volumes.

This is the crux of the problem they face. The game has moved on so much in the last 10 years or so. The performance of cars like the 458, GT3, GTR, etc is just staggering, and they combine it with reliability, comfort, safety etc.

To directly compete with cars like these is going to take vast amounts of money, R+D etc.

Agree with you both,

One point though is gt3/gtr etc are still heavy cars, if Tvr can keep wait down to around 1 ton, build a balanced chassis with lots of mech grip, equivalent rubber and 450 Bhp it won't be far off in dry conditions and will be a hoot to drive,

Agree on new customers also , most won't be existing owners, they need to nick cayman/gt3/gtr sales and by offering something more direct more fun and less electronic should work.

Just look on the Porsche forum they are all moaning about electronic interference whether it's steering feel, gearbox etc

[WolfyJones]

900T-R said:

The 'credible volumes' game is a bit of a red herring, I would just build the ones I can sell at a decent margin to people who understand what they are buying. The scope for losing your shirt on building new cars is a lot greater than the potential gains. Basically, you need new cars to keep the brand alive and in column inches/pixels.

The money in automotive is entirely in aftersales/aftermarket (including motorsport support activities and upgrades for the existing vehicle parc), branding/merchandising and events/incentives.

As for performance, we're at the point where one really can't hope to compete with the top dogs in terms of cold numbers with a 2WD, front engined car. On road tyres, the threshold of what you can handle on the road before electronics rein the whole lot back in again has not much progressed - if at all - beyond the low/mid 'real' 300s bhp/ton the last batch of TVRs already had (see where the top F-Type and Astons sit in this regard...). Then again, I don't think it's relavant at all unless you are hoping to sell to the great unwashed that need to validate their choice with playing the numbers game in the pub. Unlike two decades ago when 'supercars' were generally a lot slower than the outlandish claims for them indicated and something like a Lancia Integrale could easily show them a thing or two on a real road, the performance of the current lot has become a theoretical/intellectual exercise more than anything else.

The only place for TVR to go is to make an analogue/mechanical car as a counterpoint to the electronics-guided missile devices that pass for sports cars these days, and accept the performance limitations - not that you won't blow the doors off a bum-basic 911 of similar price, anyway, atleast in a straight line...

Agree though don't underestimate what a lightweight mechanical car with only 420 Bhp can do

[WolfyJones]

ChilliWhizz said:

Looks like that Sag's about to get lapped by the Cerb

If my memory is right they were both lapping much newer Porsches and Ferraris.

[WolfyJones]

V8 GRF said:

I think there's one person peddling the idea of an updated Sagaris in this thread and it won't happen. For a number of reasons, not least it's a seriously outdated car and with the amount of work required to bring it up to modern standards you may as well start from scratch. The Winstanleys had many problems with the engine in that car and that's why the deal for the Speed 6 only lasted one year. The Speed6 isn't viable or sensible for a car in the modern day.

Love the idea of a Griffith/Chimaera'esque car but at the money you're talking about it won't happen as there's no margin at that price point to sell a properly engineered car.

What problems with engine? This wasn't a engine that cruised country roads it was a engine that was ragged racing in Gt cup,

Wasn't it just a lack of track time the team had with the engine that was problem, The Winstanleys and Power did very well considering the budget they had compared to the big teams.

[WolfyJones]

DonkeyApple said:

BarnFind said:

Doesn't that Sag have an LS ?

It does now. Back then it had something else.

I would say what it was but I can't rob Wolfy of his favourite phrase.

Yes before it turned into just another kit car

[WolfyJones]

V8 GRF said:

WolfyJones said:

Wasn't it just a lack of track time the team had with the engine that was problem,

Exactly and from what I understand it was the engine that caused that lack of track time.

And the problems with engine were?

My understanding was the time it took to take out, strip and check and refit was the problem, something Power did as part of the development,

No problem with the engine just the check and turnaround took a age, understandable considering the budget

[WolfyJones]

V8 GRF said:

I think the frequency of the need to do that was the problem, I wasn't told the details only that there were 'issues'.

Hopefully someone more informed will shed some light on these issues,

With only a handful of 4.5 speed sixes built at the time it was only prudent of Power to do this, especially with the budget and build numbers the 4.5 had compared to the millions spent and high build numbers available to the competition (Porsche etc)

Still the long turnaround must have been very frustrating for Team Winstanley.

[WolfyJones]

Don1 said:

At the risk of being called negative, or having a pop at Dom (I'm really not), there is a thread on here that Dom talks about why their engine went bang, and what he did about it (clue, he is a man of his word).

To balance the perceived negativity, this modified S6 engine is the only one that has gone racing (well, that and Str8-Six one now).

Is that the failure at Spa at the end of the season, my understanding is it ran fine in the UK races with many racing miles done,

And don't forget the S6 cars that finished 24 hrs at Le Mans/Spa etc.

[WolfyJones]

V8 GRF said:

WolfyJones said:

Still the long turnaround must have been very frustrating for Team Winstanley.

That was the main part of the issue I believe allied to the fact that it needed those regular rebuilds and inspections.

So it needed rebuilds, I was under the impression it just went off for inspection as part of development and never needed any work doing after inspection.