RE: 10 questions TVR's new bosses must answer
Discussion
Thankyou4calling said:
I'm glad you think it an impressive list and took the time to paste it her although why I don't know.
My question about the successful Gordon Murray designs in the last 20 years though remains.
Thanks
I pasted the list of topics started by you on a car forum as an attempt to ridicule you. Apologies - childish of me. I was just so flabbergasted that you would question the credentials of a man acknowledged throughout the automative world as an engineering genius. He did the SLR as well by the way, and it was GM that laid the foundations for the carbon tub now used by McLaren. Gordon Murray Design employs around 130 people which to me reflects at least some level of success. GM is a champion of lightweight driver focussed cars, regardless of bhp. He certainly doesn't need me to defend him but I'll leave two quotes which really excite me about the new TVR.My question about the successful Gordon Murray designs in the last 20 years though remains.
Thanks
Firstly one from Goodwood Road and Racing magazine:
"What’s in your garage at home these days?
Ten cars, all of them under 900kg (light weight is a theme of this interview). Two Lotus Elans, Frogeye Sprite, Rocket, Smart Roadster, Porsche 550 Spyder Replica, Fiat 500, Renault 4 and the Ford Cortina MkI I drove today – bored and stroked to 1700cc, twin Webers, Lotus Cortina suspension. Sideways all the way to work. Brilliant."
And the one taken from an interview done back in 2011:
“I definitely have one supercar left in me, and the team wants to do it too,” he says. “It won’t be anything like the cars you see at the moment – the Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Aston Martins, Porsches, Bugattis or the McLaren MP4-12C – it will hold all the values the F1 had, but it will be in a completely different direction which ignores horsepower and top speed. As the F1 was a swansong for the 20th century, I’d like to do something for the 21st century.
Some buyers convince themselves they need the big numbers, and they won’t choose our supercar, but more people see beyond that, as they did with the F1. We didn’t sell the F1 on top speed. We didn’t even do a top speed run until we stopped selling the cars because I didn’t want to – it was never part of the agenda. I like to think most people bought the F1 because it was the pinnacle of engineering at the time, using modern materials, and was also a pure, pure drivers car and didn’t pretend to be anything else.
A lot of supercars now try to be all sorts of things. They try to be well-engineered, with all the latest trick suspension and electronics. They try to be track day cars, and they try to be status symbols and that goes with a lot of baggage – size, complexity and weight. I don’t want to do any of that rubbish, I really don’t. I just want to do a pure, pure supercar again, like the F1 was. And I think there are enough people out there to move in a different direction again. I’d like the next supercar to point the same direction change the F1 did in 1992.”
I've carried out some research into the history of TVR at motor shows. Please don't click the link if you are easily offended by blondes on bonnets 
...
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=tvr+motor+show+n...
Good luck, New TVR !
...https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=tvr+motor+show+n...
Good luck, New TVR !
thecook101 said:
I pasted the list of topics started by you on a car forum as an attempt to ridicule you. Apologies - childish of me. I was just so flabbergasted that you would question the credentials of a man acknowledged throughout the automative world as an engineering genius. He did the SLR as well by the way, and it was GM that laid the foundations for the carbon tub now used by McLaren. Gordon Murray Design employs around 130 people which to me reflects at least some level of success. GM is a champion of lightweight driver focussed cars, regardless of bhp. He certainly doesn't need me to defend him but I'll leave two quotes which really excite me about the new TVR.
Firstly one from Goodwood Road and Racing magazine:
"What’s in your garage at home these days?
Ten cars, all of them under 900kg (light weight is a theme of this interview). Two Lotus Elans, Frogeye Sprite, Rocket, Smart Roadster, Porsche 550 Spyder Replica, Fiat 500, Renault 4 and the Ford Cortina MkI I drove today – bored and stroked to 1700cc, twin Webers, Lotus Cortina suspension. Sideways all the way to work. Brilliant."
And the one taken from an interview done back in 2011:
“I definitely have one supercar left in me, and the team wants to do it too,” he says. “It won’t be anything like the cars you see at the moment – the Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Aston Martins, Porsches, Bugattis or the McLaren MP4-12C – it will hold all the values the F1 had, but it will be in a completely different direction which ignores horsepower and top speed. As the F1 was a swansong for the 20th century, I’d like to do something for the 21st century.
Some buyers convince themselves they need the big numbers, and they won’t choose our supercar, but more people see beyond that, as they did with the F1. We didn’t sell the F1 on top speed. We didn’t even do a top speed run until we stopped selling the cars because I didn’t want to – it was never part of the agenda. I like to think most people bought the F1 because it was the pinnacle of engineering at the time, using modern materials, and was also a pure, pure drivers car and didn’t pretend to be anything else.
A lot of supercars now try to be all sorts of things. They try to be well-engineered, with all the latest trick suspension and electronics. They try to be track day cars, and they try to be status symbols and that goes with a lot of baggage – size, complexity and weight. I don’t want to do any of that rubbish, I really don’t. I just want to do a pure, pure supercar again, like the F1 was. And I think there are enough people out there to move in a different direction again. I’d like the next supercar to point the same direction change the F1 did in 1992.”
I understand why you pasted the topics, they weren't largely on the car forums but on the masses of threads and forums which exist on PH, I've been on here a long time and contribute a fair bit to the variety and enjoy a lot of positive feedback from other members.Firstly one from Goodwood Road and Racing magazine:
"What’s in your garage at home these days?
Ten cars, all of them under 900kg (light weight is a theme of this interview). Two Lotus Elans, Frogeye Sprite, Rocket, Smart Roadster, Porsche 550 Spyder Replica, Fiat 500, Renault 4 and the Ford Cortina MkI I drove today – bored and stroked to 1700cc, twin Webers, Lotus Cortina suspension. Sideways all the way to work. Brilliant."
And the one taken from an interview done back in 2011:
“I definitely have one supercar left in me, and the team wants to do it too,” he says. “It won’t be anything like the cars you see at the moment – the Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Aston Martins, Porsches, Bugattis or the McLaren MP4-12C – it will hold all the values the F1 had, but it will be in a completely different direction which ignores horsepower and top speed. As the F1 was a swansong for the 20th century, I’d like to do something for the 21st century.
Some buyers convince themselves they need the big numbers, and they won’t choose our supercar, but more people see beyond that, as they did with the F1. We didn’t sell the F1 on top speed. We didn’t even do a top speed run until we stopped selling the cars because I didn’t want to – it was never part of the agenda. I like to think most people bought the F1 because it was the pinnacle of engineering at the time, using modern materials, and was also a pure, pure drivers car and didn’t pretend to be anything else.
A lot of supercars now try to be all sorts of things. They try to be well-engineered, with all the latest trick suspension and electronics. They try to be track day cars, and they try to be status symbols and that goes with a lot of baggage – size, complexity and weight. I don’t want to do any of that rubbish, I really don’t. I just want to do a pure, pure supercar again, like the F1 was. And I think there are enough people out there to move in a different direction again. I’d like the next supercar to point the same direction change the F1 did in 1992.”
If you've apologised then thanks, I'm not looking to come across as clever and in no way belittle Gordon Murrays achievements, I'm simply asking his track record, in the last 20 years of car design success and nobody has come up with much.
I know he was involved in the SLR, I love that car but it was far from a success and the T25 city car launch has been on more than a promise than me on a bad night out!
It's 2016, so where is his successor to the F! and all the other niches that have appeared that could and should have his name on.
I don't see the TVR as having legs and I think it'll be another thing on his CV that hasn't materialised.
Now I fully accept different opinions but I was looking for facts, actual cars he has designed that have hit the road and sold in good numbers.
Thankyou4calling said:
It's 2016, so where is his successor to the F! and all the other niches that have appeared that could and should have his name on.
Fair enough, although F1 level cars don't come along too often. That said - another Q&A from the Goodwood interview in 2014:"What you would most like to drive up the Hill at FoS?
I have been up in an F1 and an SLR, but now I would most like to drive the unborn sports car I am developing. It’s not far off…"
The interview makes for great reading, you can find it here https://www.goodwood.com/grrc/road/news/2014/6/qa-...
We can only hope.
thecook101 said:
We can only hope.
I think that's what Thankyou4calling is getting at, right now all you can do is hope. There has been a serious lack of anything concrete, and I think it's fairly reasonable to be very skeptical of it even if big names like Gordon Murray are involved. I'd like them to succeed, more choice in the sports car market can't be a bad thing, but doing interviews like this isn't doing much in my eyes to help their cause. Every time I read these interviews that contain no certainties I get that bit more doubtful it'll happen.
They're stuck between a rock and a hard place there.
To the British, staying silent = failure. Sadly, giving progress updates also = failure.
They're damned if they try to answer questions and they're damned if they don't. That's not because there is anything wrong with what they're doing, but more because the British just love to find fault, and introducing each prophecy of doom with "I want them to succeed but ..." doesn't change that fact.
To the British, staying silent = failure. Sadly, giving progress updates also = failure.
They're damned if they try to answer questions and they're damned if they don't. That's not because there is anything wrong with what they're doing, but more because the British just love to find fault, and introducing each prophecy of doom with "I want them to succeed but ..." doesn't change that fact.
jamieduff1981 said:
They're stuck between a rock and a hard place there.
To the British, staying silent = failure. Sadly, giving progress updates also = failure.
They're damned if they try to answer questions and they're damned if they don't. That's not because there is anything wrong with what they're doing, but more because the British just love to find fault, and introducing each prophecy of doom with "I want them to succeed but ..." doesn't change that fact.
But they haven't actually been doing much answering have they? PH asked "How much will it actually cost?" and they gave an answer that could be interpreted as being less than £100k for a standard car but possibly more for the LE car. I don't call that much of an actual answer, why not tell us straight out what price they have built the business case on? To the British, staying silent = failure. Sadly, giving progress updates also = failure.
They're damned if they try to answer questions and they're damned if they don't. That's not because there is anything wrong with what they're doing, but more because the British just love to find fault, and introducing each prophecy of doom with "I want them to succeed but ..." doesn't change that fact.
They were asked whether it will be ready; the answer to that was again very vague while admitting they don't even have a mule yet.
I don't think it's anything to do with the British loving to find fault, I think it's everything to do with the fact that if you actually dig into what they're saying, there isn't anything concrete.
leglessAlex said:
jamieduff1981 said:
They're stuck between a rock and a hard place there.
To the British, staying silent = failure. Sadly, giving progress updates also = failure.
They're damned if they try to answer questions and they're damned if they don't. That's not because there is anything wrong with what they're doing, but more because the British just love to find fault, and introducing each prophecy of doom with "I want them to succeed but ..." doesn't change that fact.
But they haven't actually been doing much answering have they? PH asked "How much will it actually cost?" and they gave an answer that could be interpreted as being less than £100k for a standard car but possibly more for the LE car. I don't call that much of an actual answer, why not tell us straight out what price they have built the business case on? To the British, staying silent = failure. Sadly, giving progress updates also = failure.
They're damned if they try to answer questions and they're damned if they don't. That's not because there is anything wrong with what they're doing, but more because the British just love to find fault, and introducing each prophecy of doom with "I want them to succeed but ..." doesn't change that fact.
They were asked whether it will be ready; the answer to that was again very vague while admitting they don't even have a mule yet.
I don't think it's anything to do with the British loving to find fault, I think it's everything to do with the fact that if you actually dig into what they're saying, there isn't anything concrete.
I acknowledge that they haven't given much away at all. I don't really see the problem with that for anyone who isn't a deposit holder, and even then they can only demand information and when it is contractually obliged to be available. For anyone else it's just curiosity.
I am speaking as an ex-Cerbera owner who still has a fondness for TVR's. I think the reasons Peter Wheeler sold out, and the reason the Russian went under still hold. Namely :
1) The competition has moved on considerably since TVR's heyday in the late 80's. They sold loads of Griffiths and Chimeara's before Boxsters, TT's, Z4's et all even existed. There really wasn't a lot of choice BUT a TVR back then if you wanted a fast convertible ( or maybe a Marcos ? ). As soon as the others piled in , TVR sales headed south and never really recovered
2) Customer expectations are now that much higher for a road car, and therefore the cost of developing them is that much higher. It is no co-incidence that the only small volume manufacturers that have succeeded in the last 15 years have been for track cars, where you don't have to go to the ( great ) expense of developing climate control, ABS, wipers, central locking, a sound system etc etc. People may say that they want a simpler car without these luxuries but when it comes to actually spending your own money, there are very few who will. Even a Lotus Elise has some luxuries these days ( and still sells in tiny volumes )
3) I'm very much with the sceptics on this one - sounds like a venture founded more on a hope and a prayer than any sensible commercial logic which ultimately prevail, no matter how romantic the idea sounds, and no matter how much we love the brand and wish them well.
Sorry.
PS Do you think they will still smell of glue ?
1) The competition has moved on considerably since TVR's heyday in the late 80's. They sold loads of Griffiths and Chimeara's before Boxsters, TT's, Z4's et all even existed. There really wasn't a lot of choice BUT a TVR back then if you wanted a fast convertible ( or maybe a Marcos ? ). As soon as the others piled in , TVR sales headed south and never really recovered
2) Customer expectations are now that much higher for a road car, and therefore the cost of developing them is that much higher. It is no co-incidence that the only small volume manufacturers that have succeeded in the last 15 years have been for track cars, where you don't have to go to the ( great ) expense of developing climate control, ABS, wipers, central locking, a sound system etc etc. People may say that they want a simpler car without these luxuries but when it comes to actually spending your own money, there are very few who will. Even a Lotus Elise has some luxuries these days ( and still sells in tiny volumes )
3) I'm very much with the sceptics on this one - sounds like a venture founded more on a hope and a prayer than any sensible commercial logic which ultimately prevail, no matter how romantic the idea sounds, and no matter how much we love the brand and wish them well.
Sorry.
PS Do you think they will still smell of glue ?
leglessAlex said:
I don't think it's anything to do with the British loving to find fault, I think it's everything to do with the fact that if you actually dig into what they're saying, there isn't anything concrete.
I think it does unfortunately. I've founded and sold two businesses here in the UK - both for 8 figure sums. Both times I was told again and again that it wouldn't work, that I couldn't compete with the established brands. Right up until the day that I did. It's a UK thing, we don't like change, cheeky buggers challenging the status quo, and up until the day the spreadsheet says so we will deny it's existence. Works for some sectors, but it certainly doesn't for entrepreneurs. Stop with the negativity, give him your backing, if not monetary than at least in spirit. If he succeeds, we were there from the start. If ultimately he fails, then get up, dust off, learn the lessons, and do it again. Show us the evidence that says the new TVR won't be everything Les Edgar says it will be and I'm sure even Les will bow out, but until then we should be cheering him on.jamieduff1981 said:
I don't blame them. My interpretation of all that is that they're still working towards an £80k car, with the L.E. costing more. My interpretation is as valid or invalid as anyone elses'. Were I in their position I would also avoid stating a price, purely because any price they give now will come back to haunt them. That's what people do - take preliminary guesstimates and treat them as though they were cast in stone.
I acknowledge that they haven't given much away at all. I don't really see the problem with that for anyone who isn't a deposit holder, and even then they can only demand information and when it is contractually obliged to be available. For anyone else it's just curiosity.
That's fair enough, I'll admit that I forget how a lot of people wouldn't be very forgiving if they then later changed the price even if they had valid reasons. I like to think that I'm reasonable, I wouldn't take issue with them changing the price later if they had valid reasons, but I see how not everyone would view it that way! I acknowledge that they haven't given much away at all. I don't really see the problem with that for anyone who isn't a deposit holder, and even then they can only demand information and when it is contractually obliged to be available. For anyone else it's just curiosity.
You're correct, I don't have a deposit down and so I can't claim to have a problem with it! But this is an open forum, maybe if the guys from TVR are reading these kind of threads they see that at least a few people are a bit frustrated at how little concrete information there is out there.
Still, all my pessimism doesn't stop me wishing TVR all the best, I hope they release an amazing car in the next year and prove all the doubters like me wrong.
Just caught up with this thread. Disappointing the interview turned out to be something and nothing, then again, no real surprises there. I just wish there was something more concrete.
I'm staggered that even with the one month or two months away claim for a proper mule they couldn't better convey it. Much better to say 2 months rather than maybe 1, it just seems a bit amateurish and dare I say desperate to please.
Be very interested to see the full transcript of the interview as promised as something may have got lost in the editing....
I'm staggered that even with the one month or two months away claim for a proper mule they couldn't better convey it. Much better to say 2 months rather than maybe 1, it just seems a bit amateurish and dare I say desperate to please.
Be very interested to see the full transcript of the interview as promised as something may have got lost in the editing....
Jimmy Recard said:
leef44 said:
You would rather have him at the helm of the engineering design of this car than the current crop of mainstream Germanic offerings.
I agree that TVR isn't mainstream, but it is Germanic really. However it is not German.
BigChiefmuffinAgain said:
2) Customer expectations are now that much higher for a road car, and therefore the cost of developing them is that much higher. It is no co-incidence that the only small volume manufacturers that have succeeded in the last 15 years have been for track cars, where you don't have to go to the ( great ) expense of developing climate control, ABS, wipers, central locking, a sound system etc etc. People may say that they want a simpler car without these luxuries but when it comes to actually spending your own money, there are very few who will. Even a Lotus Elise has some luxuries these days ( and still sells in tiny volumes )
Everything mentioned in point two is off the shelf stuff. Even the big boys just roll-up at Bosch (for example)for the complicated bits you don't see or touch.GM said:
“I definitely have one supercar left in me, and the team wants to do it too,” he says. “It won’t be anything like the cars you see at the moment – the Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Aston Martins, Porsches, Bugattis or the McLaren MP4-12C – it will hold all the values the F1 had, but it will be in a completely different direction which ignores horsepower and top speed. As the F1 was a swansong for the 20th century, I’d like to do something for the 21st century."
The problem, and it's a bit of a biggie, is that "rewriting the supercar rules" way back in the early 1990s with the F1 was actually pretty easy. Fast forwards to 2016 and i'm sorry Gordon, but it's all be done before. In 1992, when the F1 shocked people with it's 600bhp, a typical sports car, say 964 911, had just 250bhp odd, here in 2016, the cooking model has 400ish bhp for example!so, lets check some of the F1's salient points against todays supercar barometer:
Big V12 - you now get them in lots of supercars with nearly 800bhp
Carbon tub - you now get them in pretty much everything now
No driver aids: good luck with that one - unfortunately, as many F1 owners have proven in numerous ruinously expensive mishaps, lots of power in a light car can result in a loss of control very, very easily indeed, especially when having a million quid is no guarantee of having any driving talent whatsoever..... Whilst you could sell a modern supercar with no drivers aids, i think you would be extremely foolish to do so imo.
Pure drivers car: Plenty of those, from Mono, to 458 etc - The laws of physics mean you simply can't improve on those by an significant margin. Pretty much all modern cars are tyre limited, and those, for a road car, are a massive compromise
Aerodynamics: All modern supercars, and most sports cars now have a lot of clever aero stuff going on. But realistically, a heavily downforce assisted road car design is HORRIBLE to drive for normal people.
So GM builds the "rocket II" so what? that moves the game on precisely by nothing whatsoever. Sure, they'd sell a few on reputation / name alone, but it will be a mere side show in the grand scheme of all things automotive
can't remember said:
BigChiefmuffinAgain said:
2) Customer expectations are now that much higher for a road car, and therefore the cost of developing them is that much higher. It is no co-incidence that the only small volume manufacturers that have succeeded in the last 15 years have been for track cars, where you don't have to go to the ( great ) expense of developing climate control, ABS, wipers, central locking, a sound system etc etc. People may say that they want a simpler car without these luxuries but when it comes to actually spending your own money, there are very few who will. Even a Lotus Elise has some luxuries these days ( and still sells in tiny volumes )
Everything mentioned in point two is off the shelf stuff. Even the big boys just roll-up at Bosch (for example)for the complicated bits you don't see or touch.can't remember said:
BigChiefmuffinAgain said:
2) Customer expectations are now that much higher for a road car, and therefore the cost of developing them is that much higher. It is no co-incidence that the only small volume manufacturers that have succeeded in the last 15 years have been for track cars, where you don't have to go to the ( great ) expense of developing climate control, ABS, wipers, central locking, a sound system etc etc. People may say that they want a simpler car without these luxuries but when it comes to actually spending your own money, there are very few who will. Even a Lotus Elise has some luxuries these days ( and still sells in tiny volumes )
Everything mentioned in point two is off the shelf stuff. Even the big boys just roll-up at Bosch (for example)for the complicated bits you don't see or touch.(hint, how much do you think BOSCH want for an "off the shelf" ABS system for example? The reason low volume manufacture cars don't have things like ABS etc is simply because they are too expensive to amortise at low volume. Get Bosch to supply the ABS system, and on top of the $200 cost of the actual ABS unit, they will want £10M to calibrate, validate and warrant it. Not a problem if you are making 10,000 or 1000,000 or 1M cars, but a big one for <1000unitsPA
Max_Torque said:
And the "big boys" can afford to pay Bosch......
(hint, how much do you think BOSCH want for an "off the shelf" ABS system for example? The reason low volume manufacture cars don't have things like ABS etc is simply because they are too expensive to amortise at low volume. Get Bosch to supply the ABS system, and on top of the $200 cost of the actual ABS unit, they will want £10M to calibrate, validate and warrant it. Not a problem if you are making 10,000 or 1000,000 or 1M cars, but a big one for <1000unitsPA
Seeing as you're here Max, I'd like to ask something. You've mentioned before that these systems are very expensive, and I believe you, but surely they must be within reach of a company that will be offering a car for £80k? (hint, how much do you think BOSCH want for an "off the shelf" ABS system for example? The reason low volume manufacture cars don't have things like ABS etc is simply because they are too expensive to amortise at low volume. Get Bosch to supply the ABS system, and on top of the $200 cost of the actual ABS unit, they will want £10M to calibrate, validate and warrant it. Not a problem if you are making 10,000 or 1000,000 or 1M cars, but a big one for <1000unitsPA
The only thing that's making me think that is that the Lotus Exige has a BOSCH TC system doesn't it, and I didn't think Lotus had that much more buying power than TVR would have.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff