RE: TVR's new owner: PH Meets
Discussion
DonkeyApple said:
But, we can't ignore the expectation set by the brand that each new genre of model was a significant performance step forward as a whole. I don't think anything ever surpassed the big Cerb
I'm more than happy with the performance of my Sagaris. I honestly don't think I would ever need anything more performant for the public road. However, I'd cordially point out that the Sagaris eclipses the Cerbera in performance, which kind of weakens your statement.
TA14 said:
JonRB said:
RichB said:
cramorra said:
yes and those "heavy" cars <clip> were in fact lighter than their size might suggest...
Indeed, my Aston weighs 1,280kg which is light even by comparison to today's smaller cars, let alone a 3.0 twin OHC, 2+2 coupe! 
JonRB said:
DonkeyApple said:
But, we can't ignore the expectation set by the brand that each new genre of model was a significant performance step forward as a whole. I don't think anything ever surpassed the big Cerb
I'm more than happy with the performance of my Sagaris. I honestly don't think I would ever need anything more performant for the public road. However, I'd cordially point out that the Sagaris eclipses the Cerbera in performance, which kind of weakens your statement.
I agree that in reality you really don't need much more than 400bhp but imagine how the new owner will be considered by the media and many fans if his first car is put dragged by a near 20 year old car? I think he is under pressure in that regard.
DonkeyApple said:
JonRB said:
DonkeyApple said:
But, we can't ignore the expectation set by the brand that each new genre of model was a significant performance step forward as a whole. I don't think anything ever surpassed the big Cerb
I'm more than happy with the performance of my Sagaris. I honestly don't think I would ever need anything more performant for the public road. However, I'd cordially point out that the Sagaris eclipses the Cerbera in performance, which kind of weakens your statement.
I agree that in reality you really don't need much more than 400bhp but imagine how the new owner will be considered by the media and many fans if his first car is put dragged by a near 20 year old car? I think he is under pressure in that regard.
christof said:
leaving the customer (and me) totally frustrated about the TVR driving experience.
So reliabilty needs to sort out first with using as much OEM parts as possible, proper prototyping and testing.
I also think that TVR can benefit from cross marketing using components from one of the premier players.
But as stated before, time will tell
I agree - time will tell - it must habe been disappointing to have punters lined up, get "development cars" with littlle support from the factory and then the whole TUEV issues-So reliabilty needs to sort out first with using as much OEM parts as possible, proper prototyping and testing.
I also think that TVR can benefit from cross marketing using components from one of the premier players.
But as stated before, time will tell
I think however there is a market for cars like this - here and in Germany- a well priced individualist's car sub Hypercar with performance to match or outrun most mains stream spotrts cars - but at that type of money you want basic reliability and the ability to tailor the car to your needs - by all means switch off traction control if you don't want it, but have it...
the only downside on an Audi idea is that I thinh rwd means sports car (but a lot of potential punters will have fwd experiance mostly and ajust easier to awd), and Audi lost some of its vorsprung durch technik.... the new 2 liter and possible the coming 4 liter V8 from AMG would be machines, though- if one wants to go German - but also the Jaguar/Landrover engines would be worth looking at if it is affordable - I somehow do not so much want a yank engine (although I acknowledge history, tuneability and price....)- i still think a KERS would be great as would be a carbon tub... but that might not work sub 100k...
Cracking, great engines which might be affordable come from honda (2 litre VTEC for basic and 3.6 litre for performance model) might work, too
the future might be bright....
JonRB said:
DonkeyApple said:
But, we can't ignore the expectation set by the brand that each new genre of model was a significant performance step forward as a whole. I don't think anything ever surpassed the big Cerb
I'm more than happy with the performance of my Sagaris. I honestly don't think I would ever need anything more performant for the public road. However, I'd cordially point out that the Sagaris eclipses the Cerbera in performance, which kind of weakens your statement.
Thing is, as I mentioned earlier, latter-day TVRs were always close to if not already at the point where more power would spoil the overall experience rather than enhance it (Sag being an exception of sorts), going for significantly more in a road car on road tyres adhering to the front-mid engined, RWD concept would mean putting it on the receiving end an electronic leash most of times - you'd as well have bought an AMG Merc then.
Thing is, at some point our cars will simply become too old to be viable as 'everyday' cars, I can rebuild, refurbish, upgrade them but at some point the technocrats will forbid driving it into cities (Paris is planning to forbid the use of cars over 17 years of age starting some time next year, some Dutch councils have been making noises about banning cars over 12 years old from city centres) no matter what I do. Which would mean I end up with having underground parking but not being able to drive my car there legally...
And I really don't feel like resigning & compromising the level of involvement & purity I want from my driving experience...
christof said:
...
I think TVR should do a bespoke Chassis, but use the drivetrain, etc from the TT-RS.
As stated before the low volume manufacturer law doesn't require crash testing and pedestrian protection, so no need to use an existing (and heavy) chassis.
But, hey, time will tell :-)
Serious question, for such a theoretical car, where would the engine sit? I think TVR should do a bespoke Chassis, but use the drivetrain, etc from the TT-RS.
As stated before the low volume manufacturer law doesn't require crash testing and pedestrian protection, so no need to use an existing (and heavy) chassis.
But, hey, time will tell :-)
I'd assume that it would be in exactly the same relative position as the "donor car"? So transversely inbetween the front wheels.
On a lighter car this would mean a worse front/rear weight distribution than the original car too. Plus it would remove the purpose of a long bonnet to sit the engine further back too....
Indeed, an absolute no go as far as I am concerned. Donkervoort doesn't seem to do too badly with the TT-RS engine in the D8 GTO - but the rest they can keep. There is atill a small niche for low volume sports car manufacturers.
However,I can't think of any for a product as compromised as outlined by way of the wholesale adoption of what is basically a FWD, transverse engine drivetrain but with all the compromises in terms of slickness that come with low volume manufacturing in addition. Basically you'd be eaten alive by the big German players...
However,I can't think of any for a product as compromised as outlined by way of the wholesale adoption of what is basically a FWD, transverse engine drivetrain but with all the compromises in terms of slickness that come with low volume manufacturing in addition. Basically you'd be eaten alive by the big German players...
christof said:
Don't take this as an offend, but you are wrong.
There are new EEC laws from 2009 which don't allow the loop hole which was used from the UK and the Netherlands.
Morgan has learned what to do to stay in the market back in 2005 and spend a lot of money to get EEC approval so that they can sell their vehicles in all markets.
Even Caterham has got the low volume manufacturer type approval with massive help from Ford.
And apparently you've misunderstood me, I never was saying that TVR should bold new body parts to the VAG chassis.
I think TVR should do a bespoke Chassis, but use the drivetrain, etc from the TT-RS.
As stated before the low volume manufacturer law doesn't require crash testing and pedestrian protection, so no need to use an existing (and heavy) chassis.
But, hey, time will tell :-)
I'm not really up to date with my European Automotive Regulations so I won't even try to discuss that, but as someone who obviously knows his stuff about TVRs, can you honestly see cars being sold under the TVR banner with 5 pot Audi engines?There are new EEC laws from 2009 which don't allow the loop hole which was used from the UK and the Netherlands.
Morgan has learned what to do to stay in the market back in 2005 and spend a lot of money to get EEC approval so that they can sell their vehicles in all markets.
Even Caterham has got the low volume manufacturer type approval with massive help from Ford.
And apparently you've misunderstood me, I never was saying that TVR should bold new body parts to the VAG chassis.
I think TVR should do a bespoke Chassis, but use the drivetrain, etc from the TT-RS.
As stated before the low volume manufacturer law doesn't require crash testing and pedestrian protection, so no need to use an existing (and heavy) chassis.
But, hey, time will tell :-)
I have absolutely no doubt that they are very capable engines, but it isn't really a 'TVR' engine. If they are going down that route, I'd much rather see them using the BMW V8s or Mercedes V8s. At least they are still engines that keep to the TVR ethos and should pass the EEC laws.
In my eyes, TVRs are all about NA large capacity V8s/Straight 6s. I think TVR would lose that British muscle car image if it used anything less than 3000cc engines and started using turbos as standard.
I will say again though, who the hell knows what the new owner will do...?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff