RE: SCOOP: TVR owner bids for MG
Thursday 2nd June 2005
A TVR badge next year?SCOOP: PistonHeads has learned from TVR's Phil James that TVR owner, Nikolai Smolensky, has put in a bid for the company to MG Rover's administrators, PricewaterhouseCoopers. It's a personal bid -- it would not be a TVR take-over.
SCOOP: TVR owner bids for MG
Smolensky throws hat in ring -- confirmed
A TVR badge next year?
We don't know much more than that, other than that the bid, if successful, would play to TVR's history of using MGB engines in the early cars.
Speculating further, if the bid succeeds, MG would seem likely to remain a separate entity, and become, among other things, a recipient of TVR's engines, although that might raise issues of competition.
Either way, the next few weeks promise interesting times...
Discussion
stubedo said:
A MGTF with a 4.2 TVR V8 anyone? LOL not sure if this would be good or bad but hay go for it
No, a mix between the Smoadster and a MR2. With about 150-200 horsies. A bit like Lotus Cortina / Sunbeam Lotus / Matra Bagheera / Murena / FIAT X19. . .
TVR should keep her name to the cars / heritage they have.
Suckmychrsitmas said:
Unsure what the article means by, ". . . although that might raise issues of competition"?
It means that TVR already has plenty of cars (some say too many) all competing for the same customers, in similar price bands and with similar performance. Adding TVR engines to MGs would put MG in at least partial competition with TVR.
I do like the idea of the MG brand staying alive, hopefully with small/funky roadsters to rival the MX5 (the MGTF doesn't quite do it for me).
However if the new "small boys toys" are branded as TVR's rather than MG's, I think it would dilute the TVR brand too much.
Personally when I drive my TVR I like it when people point and say "oooh look a TVR!". If in a few years time you can buy a brand new TVR for 20k that'll all stop.
However if the new "small boys toys" are branded as TVR's rather than MG's, I think it would dilute the TVR brand too much.
Personally when I drive my TVR I like it when people point and say "oooh look a TVR!". If in a few years time you can buy a brand new TVR for 20k that'll all stop.
Munter said:
As the article says it's not TVR but the same owner bidding. I cant see any mixing of the brands for a good long time. Use MG as his sporty hatchback type company, and TVR as his weekend blatter with mental power company.
But the TF is the only rescuable part of rover/mg, the saloon cars are dead arnt they?
TF's sell well enough for several peeps to be intrested in them.
You know you're a smuch when you start quoting yourself, but here's something I said in a previous thread: (would be nice if MG could make something along these lines)
"I was thinking the other night about what I'd ideally like from a sports car: very lightweight (around the original Lotus Elise's weight); small, peppy, fuel-efficient, front-mounted engine; boot space; basic mod-cons (radio, ABS and suchlike); and a price tag under the twenty thousand pounds mark (maybe even less). Sadly, the only car that gets close that I can think of offhand is the MX5, but it's not all that lightweight.
It sounds like the simplest, most straightforward recipe for a sportscar in the world, yet no one seems to building anything like what I describe above."
"I was thinking the other night about what I'd ideally like from a sports car: very lightweight (around the original Lotus Elise's weight); small, peppy, fuel-efficient, front-mounted engine; boot space; basic mod-cons (radio, ABS and suchlike); and a price tag under the twenty thousand pounds mark (maybe even less). Sadly, the only car that gets close that I can think of offhand is the MX5, but it's not all that lightweight.
It sounds like the simplest, most straightforward recipe for a sportscar in the world, yet no one seems to building anything like what I describe above."
robdickinson said:
Could this deal help get TVR's into the US???
With what? The K series engine isnt US approved, is the TF at all?
I think part of the reason Lotus swapped to the Toyota lump was because the K-Series was not approved for the US emmisions regulations.
Suckmychrsitmas said:
You know you're a smuch when you start quoting yourself, but here's something I said in a previous thread: (would be nice if MG could make something along these lines)
"I was thinking the other night about what I'd ideally like from a sports car: very lightweight (around the original Lotus Elise's weight); small, peppy, fuel-efficient, front-mounted engine; boot space; basic mod-cons (radio, ABS and suchlike); and a price tag under the twenty thousand pounds mark (maybe even less). Sadly, the only car that gets close that I can think of offhand is the MX5, but it's not all that lightweight.
It sounds like the simplest, most straightforward recipe for a sportscar in the world, yet no one seems to building anything like what I describe above."
If TVR could produce a lighter chassis for a less powerful car, say 2.5V6 Rover engine (superchaged?) in a Tamora-ish package? Doubt the 20k tag though, unless lots of bits made by Chinese labour.....
What you describe (apart from ABS) does seem like a Stylus (kit car),
www.specialistsportscars.com/productRT.htm
£20k ish gives 300 or 400 bhp/ton...
TVR and MG cannot co-operate with their present products. In plain English the MG can't take a big lump from a mechanic's (and a marketeer's) point of view. You can't sell a 200+ bhp car that is designed to handle 150. The MG has a sound mechanical background but its not capable to handle a 200 bhp engine. Also the interior can't compete the SLK's and Z4 that would be this car's rivals.
Concluding, it can't be done without HUGE investments. Why bother when the current MG is selling pretty well?
On the other hand TVR can't use MG engines and transmissions(correct me if I'm wrong). The K-series isn't included in the MG buyout bid. I don't know what exactly is the status quo with K-Series engines, but Ford have ceised the Freelanders production because the K-Series is out of stock. Anyway, the K was a great engine for its time, but I'm pretty sure that the new technologies can offer a better engine than the K in all areas.
Now let me dream a bit. 2000cc V6 Normally Aspirated with Hydraulic Valves Variably Managed, Direct Injection and HCCI technology. Revs soar to 9,000 producing 250 bhp+
Concluding, it can't be done without HUGE investments. Why bother when the current MG is selling pretty well?
On the other hand TVR can't use MG engines and transmissions(correct me if I'm wrong). The K-series isn't included in the MG buyout bid. I don't know what exactly is the status quo with K-Series engines, but Ford have ceised the Freelanders production because the K-Series is out of stock. Anyway, the K was a great engine for its time, but I'm pretty sure that the new technologies can offer a better engine than the K in all areas.
Now let me dream a bit. 2000cc V6 Normally Aspirated with Hydraulic Valves Variably Managed, Direct Injection and HCCI technology. Revs soar to 9,000 producing 250 bhp+
gingerprince said:
I do like the idea of the MG brand staying alive, hopefully with small/funky roadsters to rival the MX5 (the MGTF doesn't quite do it for me).
However if the new "small boys toys" are branded as TVR's rather than MG's, I think it would dilute the TVR brand too much.
This is the right idea. An established British brand building an MX5 basher. Imagine an MG developed with TVR know-how in the chassis, a 4pot version of the TVR 6pot maybe, or even a turbo'd 3pot (a bit radical I know..) and decent styling for around £18-20k. Old Nik would surely have a winner on his hands.
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff