BMW E46 M3 Engine Failure Archive
Discussion
bjwoods said:
BUT, self acknowledged design flaw,
TVR have admitted to a design flaw? That's news to me. (And to them I expect).
Well tvr1 said as much
And speak to any dealer, and they say they are better now, 2002 was the worst year,etc,etc,etc.
So yes, it is acknowledged.
B
TVR have never come out and said anything though. There were strong rumours that major changes had been made around mid-2002 but no official confirmation.
bjwoods said:
if they did say something publically it would of course admit the previous failure, so of course they have not said anything. But if you ask the dealers, when buying they will/have to me said, 2002 was the worst year since then much better..
B
Do you mean the worst year for early SP6 engines going bang? This is certainly my experience, and whilst i know some out there have been unlucky (ie. repeat faliures) it seems to me that post 2002 rebuilds by TVR power are much more robust than the original unit.
Not perfect, but better.
I wish we could get this message accross to Joe Public and get some more stability and confidence into the used Tuscan sales market.
yes, ithink;;;;
ie in 2002 they started seeing more 2000, 2001 cars as they started to put on a few k miles, and had problems... ie lot of 2nd third cra toys out there not doing many miiles...
Obviuolsy if the 1st hundred owners had all done 10k miles in the first year, this problem would probably have been found/sorted/forgotten about by now...
but there are still a few 2000-2001 cars on silly low mileages, not had a rebuild.. do some people just polish cars?
B
ie in 2002 they started seeing more 2000, 2001 cars as they started to put on a few k miles, and had problems... ie lot of 2nd third cra toys out there not doing many miiles...
Obviuolsy if the 1st hundred owners had all done 10k miles in the first year, this problem would probably have been found/sorted/forgotten about by now...
but there are still a few 2000-2001 cars on silly low mileages, not had a rebuild.. do some people just polish cars?
B
sideways mostly said:
They tried to release the news-it was embedded the indepth testing news release just before they released the Sagaris( remember the 6 month delay) No one got it or believed it.
I may be missing your context here, and sorry if that is the case, but no company 'tries' to release a clearly defined chronology and resolution statement. You either do it right, or play it low key for a questionable (and even more damaging I would suggest) reason, its that simple.
You have a website with a news section, you print a statement there.
You have a press department who should release a clear statement to the appropriatr sources.
You give your dealers a clear statement to address prospective owners questions.
None of these seem to have happend, though I will stand corrected, and leave the Speed 6 with the current perception, and I emphasise perception, it has in the marketplace of an engine with problems which no one seems to have an answer for.
This whole forum is the best possible example of this if one were needed, being full of conjecture and opinion without any clearly documented, in the catagoic sense, resons for the problem, together with a manufacturers approved view of the current status and evolution summary of the current and future engine development.
Its there somewhere, the fact its not published is why we are where we are I believe.
>> Edited by housemaster on Monday 23 January 16:13
housemaster said:
They tried to release the news-it was embedded the indepth testing news release just before they released the Sagaris( remember the 6 month delay) No one got it or believed it.
I may be missing your context here, and sorry if that is the case, but no company 'tries' to release a clearly defined chronology and resolution statement. You either do it right, or play it low key for a questionable (and even more damaging I would suggest) reason, its that simple.
You have a website with a news section, you print a statement there.
You have a press department who should release a clear statement to the appropriatr sources.
You give your dealers a clear statement to address prospective owners questions.
None of these seem to have happend, though I will stand corrected, and leave the Speed 6 with the current perception, and I emphasise perception, it has in the marketplace of an engine with problems which no one seems to have an answer for.
This whole forum is the best possible example of this if one were needed, being full of conjecture and opinion without any clearly documented, in the catagoic sense, resons for the problem, together with a manufacturers approved view of the current status and evolution summary of the current and future engine development.
Its there somewhere, the fact its not published is why we are where we are I believe.
>> Edited by housemaster on Monday 23 January 16:13
Don't disagree with the sentiment behind your post-but I do think it was there for people to read if they wanted to.
I don't beleive its possible in the current climate for TVR to say "Yes we had a problem and its now fixed." What would happen if they did-queues forming in Blackpool for people to get their money back,court cases galore? Would that really help everyone with a problem?
From what I have read its clear to me that TVR had an emerging problem which they dealt with on a case by case basis. It was never clear from day one they had a major problem-just as it has not been clear to BMW or Porche that they have problems. You can argue TVR should have made a clean breast of it-Porche and BMW did-eventually- but you have to factor in the change of ownership as well.Nick took on the company as the problem was emerging -what did he do? He shut down all new launches and undertook an extensive testing programme that included the drive train.The result of this was component changes but the press release made it clear that the basic design of the cars was sound.
This was the content of the press release-the cars-including the drive train-were basically sound and survived the testing well-some component changes and upgrades had to be made.
Now you either beleive TVR had a problem ,just like the majors have had - and dealt with it as best they could-or you think TVR are a bunch of prats.
If you think the latter you may as well not buy another one ,and if you own a TIV sell it now.
I subscribe to the former view.
I feel very sorry for owners who are out of pocket but only if they bought with their eyes open and took sensible precautions buying good warranty's or putting aside some cash. If they still lost money after all that then they were really hard done by and I would support any action they wanted to take.
But- buying 25k's worth of high performance and keeping your fingers crossed as a warranty method is just plain flat dumb.
I am sure a ton of hindsight and second geussing would have improved TVR's response to the problems-it always does in post event reviews - but then such advise is as much use as a prophylactic in an abortion clinic
Agree with most of the previous post,,, But I hardly think nik bought the company, as the problem was emerging, ie most of the grief, including threads on ph, were AT LEAST couple of YEARS old buy then...
As he bought the company, it meant takeing on its, assets, AND liabilities, can't just walk away from liabilities... That's what due diligence is for, not buying a sports car company on a whim...
Basically though, any body buying a new car 'shouldn't' have a problem, ie warranty should see to that.
Just need to be cautios buying 'PRIVATELY' any low mileage unrebuilt, 2000, 2001 models.
B
>> Edited by bjwoods on Monday 23 January 20:13
As he bought the company, it meant takeing on its, assets, AND liabilities, can't just walk away from liabilities... That's what due diligence is for, not buying a sports car company on a whim...
Basically though, any body buying a new car 'shouldn't' have a problem, ie warranty should see to that.
Just need to be cautios buying 'PRIVATELY' any low mileage unrebuilt, 2000, 2001 models.
B
>> Edited by bjwoods on Monday 23 January 20:13
sideways mostly said:
Don't disagree with the sentiment behind your post-but I do think it was there for people to read if they wanted to.
I don't beleive its possible in the current climate for TVR to say "Yes we had a problem and its now fixed." What would happen if they did-queues forming in Blackpool for people to get their money back,court cases galore? Would that really help everyone with a problem?
From what I have read its clear to me that TVR had an emerging problem which they dealt with on a case by case basis. It was never clear from day one they had a major problem-just as it has not been clear to BMW or Porche that they have problems. You can argue TVR should have made a clean breast of it-Porche and BMW did-eventually- but you have to factor in the change of ownership as well.Nick took on the company as the problem was emerging -what did he do? He shut down all new launches and undertook an extensive testing programme that included the drive train.The result of this was component changes but the press release made it clear that the basic design of the cars was sound.
This was the content of the press release-the cars-including the drive train-were basically sound and survived the testing well-some component changes and upgrades had to be made.
Now you either beleive TVR had a problem ,just like the majors have had - and dealt with it as best they could-or you think TVR are a bunch of prats.
If you think the latter you may as well not buy another one ,and if you own a TIV sell it now.
I subscribe to the former view.
I feel very sorry for owners who are out of pocket but only if they bought with their eyes open and took sensible precautions buying good warranty's or putting aside some cash. If they still lost money after all that then they were really hard done by and I would support any action they wanted to take.
But- buying 25k's worth of high performance and keeping your fingers crossed as a warranty method is just plain flat dumb.
I am sure a ton of hindsight and second geussing would have improved TVR's response to the problems-it always does in post event reviews - but then such advise is as much use as a prophylactic in an abortion clinic
I tend to think much of the damage caused to new sales of Speed 6 cars is perhaps a legacy of the lack or clarity from TVR. If the problems are resolved, and the confidence is there now, as demonstrated by the new warranty, they should admit to their previous mistakes, if there are mistakes to admit to of course, and come clean. The nature of many TVR owners is such that pragmatism would probably outway the odd few who felt the need to go legal. Personally I would have far more respect for a company who said "we goofed, we fixed it" than a company who new they goofed but felt the problem would just go away over time or one who felt their liability would be to great, which I don't think it would. I feel they are loosing more in new sales and bad press than they ever would from admiting a problem in the past and having to address it. Other manufacturers, though with deeper pockets for sure, admit to such issues and address them while supporting owners with cars with the 'bad bits'. The 'perception' that TVR has not done the same, or that they know their was an issue and though its fixed now don't want to acknowledge it, is something I personaly feel leaves a bad taste, if that is the situation we are in of course.
Marketing and brand identity is the issue here. The new guy taking over was the perfect time to admit to previous mistakes, clearly and with a detailed chronology rather than a document or statement all but invisible to the main element of prospective TVR owners. The circumstances or liabilities of the business or the provonance of the problems should not change the way they are dealt with in my view, though that is one of the heart and not one of the commercial realities of business.
TVR has an image problem when it comes to reliability. They need to work harder than most to address it and to see them lack definatives formally only perpetuates the problem.
Good discussion mind!
>> Edited by housemaster on Monday 23 January 21:48
housemaster said:
....... TVR has an image problem when it comes to reliability. They need to work harder than most to address it and to see them lack definatives formally only perpetuates the problem.
Good discussion mind!
>> Edited by housemaster on Monday 23 January 21:48
I agree with you on this. To be honest I think a PR oppertunity was lost when Nick took over and its going to be difficult to regain ground-however I think when you consider what has been deliverred so far- better build and reliability, upgrades to handling and engine, a more realistic specification on power outputs and top speeds, the 36 month warranty,the extended warranty,the wear and tear warranty extension and future promises of a new factory then we are ahead of where we were 12 month ago.
What I would love to see is a formal recovery offer for pre 2004 cars with an a top end inspection-perhaps as part of a service interval to reduce cost-and then a refreshment at cost if its wear and tear and you want it and for free if their is a problem.
This would cover off the abuse issue-and there really are cases of abuse out there including repeated thrashing from cold- and would limit TVR's responsibility to genuine cases.
It would cost TVR-but nothing like as much as the reliability worry over the Speed Six has cost sales and it would limit their exposure to genuine cases.
I agree its refreshing to have a debate about the Speed six without serious toy loss for once!
Cheers!
Steve
>> Edited by sideways mostly on Monday 23 January 22:01
>> Edited by sideways mostly on Monday 23 January 22:06
>> Edited by sideways mostly on Monday 23 January 22:08
sideways mostly said:
....... TVR has an image problem when it comes to reliability. They need to work harder than most to address it and to see them lack definatives formally only perpetuates the problem.
Good discussion mind!
>> Edited by housemaster on Monday 23 January 21:48
I agree with you on this. To be honest I think a PR oppertunity was lost when Nick took over and its going to be difficult to regain ground-however I think when you consider what has been deliverred so far- better build and reliability, upgrades to handling and engine, a more realistic specification on power outputs and top speeds, the 36 month warranty,the extended warranty,the wear and tear warranty extension and future promises of a new factory then we are ahead of where we were 12 month ago.
What I would love to see is a formal recovery offer for pre 2004 cars with an a top end inspection-perhaps as part of a service interval to reduce cost-and then a refreshment at cost if its wear and tear and you want it and for free if their is a problem.
This would cover off the abuse issue-and there really are cases of abuse out there including repeated thrashing from cold- and would limit TVR's responsibility to genuine cases.
It would cost TVR-but nothing like as much as the reliability worry over the Speed Six has cost sales and it would limit their exposure to genuine cases.
I agree its refreshing to have a debate about the Speed six without serious toy loss for once!
Cheers!
Steve
>> Edited by sideways mostly on Monday 23 January 22:01
>> Edited by sideways mostly on Monday 23 January 22:06
>> Edited by sideways mostly on Monday 23 January 22:08
I agree with both of you. Excelent posts. I know if such an offer to update/upgrade my 2000 Tuscan to a 2006 spec engine was available (maybe even with a 36 month warranty too!), I would have jumped at it, and would still have my Tuscan now. Secondly, now I have some more cash, I would have sold my upgraded Tuscan for good money, not 'scared money' to people who dont want to touch it, and have enough to get a Tusc II or Sagaris.
I wonder how many people like myself who ended up selling as a 'going concern' got burned never to return? Also how many of those would have reinvested in a new model if they had the support as described...
JR said:
Just need to be cautios buying 'PRIVATELY' any low mileage unrebuilt, 2000, 2001 models.
So 2002 on is OK?
?
That's the problem,, as said above - rumoured to be major changes in 2002, BUT noknows for sure,
WHEN in 2002?
Also, if you have ead the threads, on PH, owners of 2003,2004 and2005 cars have reported taking their cars back for engine work.
Best BET is DEALER, with the new, NEW/USED TVR backed warranty.
ie i wouldn't be inclined personally to buy a ferrari, maserati, lambo privately, would you?
B
bjwoods said:
Also, if you have ead the threads, on PH, owners of 2003,2004 and2005 cars have reported taking their cars back for engine work.
I wouldn't mind betting Woodsy that some owners of 2003,4 and 5 BMW's, Mercs, Porkers, Skodas, Kias etc etc.. have also had work done to the engines of their cars. Unless the perfect car has been invented............
bjwoods said:
Just need to be cautios buying 'PRIVATELY' any low mileage unrebuilt, 2000, 2001 models.
So 2002 on is OK?
?
That's the problem,, as said above - rumoured to be major changes in 2002, BUT noknows for sure.
OK, I was just having a little fun because for once you've let rumours influence you. What we do know is that there haven't been major changes at any date. Compare a 2005 engine with a 2000 engine. The same problems are there. What there has been is a steady flow of minor changes to try to cope with the problems - good engineering development. It's a boring answer for the people who want to say it's not OK in such a year or it's perfect now but engineering just doesn't work like that.
My point is that there is no arbitary date and I think you need to be cautious buying any car.
JR said:
Compare a 2005 engine with a 2000 engine. The same problems are there. What there has been is a steady flow of minor changes to try to cope with the problems - good engineering development. It's a boring answer for the people who want to say it's not OK in such a year or it's perfect now but engineering just doesn't work like that.
Err. No. The main problem, the reason for much of the early grief (as I have always understood it) is that early engines were fitted with finger followers from a batch that were later shown to be faulty. IIRC this involved cars from 2000 and 2001.
JR said:
OK, I was just having a little fun because for once you've let rumours influence you. What we do know is that there haven't been major changes at any date. Compare a 2005 engine with a 2000 engine. The same problems are there. What there has been is a steady flow of minor changes to try to cope with the problems - good engineering development. It's a boring answer for the people who want to say it's not OK in such a year or it's perfect now but engineering just doesn't work like that.
My point is that there is no arbitary date and I think you need to be cautious buying any car.
I agree, BUT my experience of owning a Tuscan and being with other Tuscan owners is that post 2002 rebuilds (by TVR Power) are better and more reliable than the earlier unit. If it isn't a major design change then it is major development.
justinp1 said:
I agree with both of you. Excelent posts. I know if such an offer to update/upgrade my 2000 Tuscan to a 2006 spec engine was available (maybe even with a 36 month warranty too!), I would have jumped at it,
I would also jump at the chance. If this were available it would also bring some much needed stability to the used Tuscan market.
unrepentant said:
Err. No. The main problem, the reason for much of the early grief (as I have always understood it) is that early engines were fitted with finger followers from a batch that were later shown to be faulty. IIRC this involved cars from 2000 and 2001.
This is a commonly held fallacy. There may or may not have been a faulty batch early on but there have been both problems with later cars and problems with other aspects. Note the many detail design changes to the engine by TVR and TVR Craft. It would be very neat to say that a single thing is responsible but that would be very unusual in the world of engineering and does not appear to be the case here.
Tuska said:
I agree, BUT my experience of owning a Tuscan and being with other Tuscan owners is that post 2002 rebuilds (by TVR Power) are better and more reliable than the earlier unit. If it isn't a major design change then it is major development.
So how do you define major? Simple adjectives struggle with a topic like this don't they. I would certainly sat that the more recent engine or rebuild the better it will be; afterall it would be very odd if years of experience in building the engines and engineering development made them worse.
Gassing Station | Speed Six Engine | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff