AJP8... ever intended for more?
Discussion
Hi all,
I was just wondering, given there is a vast amount of discussion about the merits or otherwise of certain engines in certain cars, I was wondering a bit about TVR's own units. They had a good run with the RV8 unit, and there seem to be plenty of answers around as to why that fell by the wayside, and the Speed Six is a very known quantity now, but I wonder if anyone knows (or can guess at) the reasons that the AJP8 was so short-lived?
Okay, I know it went in the tuscan challenge, and the production run of the cerb, but unless I am mistaken the AJP8 never saw action in any other car - is there a reason why?
I guessed maybe they wanted to keep the cerb as top-dog as far as performance numbers were concerned, or was it something simpler than that? (eg. demand for multi-valve cylinder heads, parts supply issues, or the like)
I know there are a few here who used to work for the factory, wonder if we could get any interesting answers?
I know Lotus had grand plans for their V8, but that didn't turn out so well for them either...
I was just wondering, given there is a vast amount of discussion about the merits or otherwise of certain engines in certain cars, I was wondering a bit about TVR's own units. They had a good run with the RV8 unit, and there seem to be plenty of answers around as to why that fell by the wayside, and the Speed Six is a very known quantity now, but I wonder if anyone knows (or can guess at) the reasons that the AJP8 was so short-lived?
Okay, I know it went in the tuscan challenge, and the production run of the cerb, but unless I am mistaken the AJP8 never saw action in any other car - is there a reason why?
I guessed maybe they wanted to keep the cerb as top-dog as far as performance numbers were concerned, or was it something simpler than that? (eg. demand for multi-valve cylinder heads, parts supply issues, or the like)
I know there are a few here who used to work for the factory, wonder if we could get any interesting answers?
I know Lotus had grand plans for their V8, but that didn't turn out so well for them either...
I think the problem was that they did not sell enough V8 Cerbs to allow the volume to balance out the cost of the unit. I remember speaking to a guy at the last Back Home event while I was looking at the last Cerb ever made (where is thst now) he worked at the factory and said they stopped making the V8 because they were losing a fortune on each one. Now I dont think they ever made a profit on the Speed Six cerbs either but the loss per unit was far less than the AJP8 because of the volumes sold of the SP6 unit across a wider model range.
Assuming AM means Al Melling, wasn't he also involved with the Speed Six?
I have to say I'm surprised that if TVR were losing so much on the AJP8 they still made the S6, but I guess it was probably a point of pride over anything else? I don't suppose there was a british "crate" engine available at the time?
I have to say I'm surprised that if TVR were losing so much on the AJP8 they still made the S6, but I guess it was probably a point of pride over anything else? I don't suppose there was a british "crate" engine available at the time?
nemasis said:
AM was paid £3K per AJP8 engine, so 1196 cerbs + tuscan racers, work that out for youselves, yes PW and AM had a serious fall out! Speed six was AM's but there was a few flaws shall we say in the original engine design, JR then sorted it as he did with the AJP8 and after the change the speed six WAS a TVR engine and no need to line AM's pockets with a sh** load of cash.
Interesting, thanks. So AM's greed, in effect, killed off the AJP8 as a going concern.How sad and ironic that is. I'm surprised he still has a nose.
The AJP8 was designed as a stressed member for use in single seater race cars if thats what the OP was asking. HHC had one in many moons ago, driven by David Coulthard at some time.
Thread from the past here :- http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Paul
Thread from the past here :- http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Paul
nemasis said:
AM was paid £3K per AJP8 engine, so 1196 cerbs + tuscan racers, work that out for youselves, yes PW and AM had a serious fall out! Speed six was AM's but there was a few flaws shall we say in the original engine design, JR then sorted it as he did with the AJP8 and after the change the speed six WAS a TVR engine and no need to line AM's pockets with a sh** load of cash.
I was led to believe, rightly or wrongly that the original design by melling was changed by tvr in order not to pay him, and those changes resulted in the unfortunate reliability record that the engines duly suffered? nemasis said:
AM was paid £3K per AJP8 engine, so 1196 cerbs + tuscan racers, work that out for youselves, yes PW and AM had a serious fall out! Speed six was AM's but there was a few flaws shall we say in the original engine design, JR then sorted it as he did with the AJP8 and after the change the speed six WAS a TVR engine and no need to line AM's pockets with a sh** load of cash.
I was led to believe, rightly or wrongly that the original design by melling was changed by tvr in order not to pay him, and those changes resulted in the unfortunate reliability record that the engines duly suffered? rigga said:
nemasis said:
AM was paid £3K per AJP8 engine, so 1196 cerbs + tuscan racers, work that out for youselves, yes PW and AM had a serious fall out! Speed six was AM's but there was a few flaws shall we say in the original engine design, JR then sorted it as he did with the AJP8 and after the change the speed six WAS a TVR engine and no need to line AM's pockets with a sh** load of cash.
I was led to believe, rightly or wrongly that the original design by melling was changed by tvr in order not to pay him, and those changes resulted in the unfortunate reliability record that the engines duly suffered? This is what I have been told so don,t shoot me down in flames if I,am wrong but it makes sense to me
Firstly
AJP Stands for
Al Melling
John Ravenscroft
Peter Wheeler
The engine was basically designed by Al Melling and should have been a very robust engine, but the cost was very high to build to Al Mellings design so Peter Wheeler sourced cheaper parts and Al Melling was not happy, plus Al Melling never patented the design, Peter Wheeler built the engine with the cheaper parts which caused the early failures with the crank snapping etc which nearly sent TVR skint so they decided to build the speed 6 as it was cheaper to produce
As I sais that is what I have been told if its true or not I don,t know
Firstly
AJP Stands for
Al Melling
John Ravenscroft
Peter Wheeler
The engine was basically designed by Al Melling and should have been a very robust engine, but the cost was very high to build to Al Mellings design so Peter Wheeler sourced cheaper parts and Al Melling was not happy, plus Al Melling never patented the design, Peter Wheeler built the engine with the cheaper parts which caused the early failures with the crank snapping etc which nearly sent TVR skint so they decided to build the speed 6 as it was cheaper to produce
As I sais that is what I have been told if its true or not I don,t know
The above may all be true, but the AJP was and still is a very expensive engine all around. Expensive to produce, and very labour intensive to maintain. On top of that, they are extremely bad on emissions and so I think would have run into problems if they were still produced today (largely due to the massive valve overlap they run).
The AJP V8 would not meet EU emission regs and as AM said the way to go would have been 4V heads, when he designed the engine he wanted it to be a 4V engine but Wheeler said no, there was many a row over it and as for the S6 i suggest you read the Sprint artical and make your own mind up.
dpd3047 said:
The AJP V8 would not meet EU emission regs and as AM said the way to go would have been 4V heads, when he designed the engine he wanted it to be a 4V engine but Wheeler said no, there was many a row over it and as for the S6 i suggest you read the Sprint artical and make your own mind up.
This would make a lot of sense, I've never been able to get my head around why its not a 4 valve per cylinder... having a flat plane crank is absolutely aiming to be a high RPM engine as the balance of masses work better at high revs than with a cross plane.... high RPM needs high air flow.... 4 valve per cylinder gives highest air flow as it gives the largest flow area into the cylinder... yet it is a 2V?! Makes me think that its prime for a 4v per cylinder head conversion....
Gassing Station | General TVR Stuff & Gossip | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff