Tuesday 18th March

Gordon Murray to headline FOS; launch new T.33

Goodwood will pay homage to the genius that is Professor Gordon Murray this summer - and reveal a new supercar

---

Prominent, South African-born businessmen aren’t proving universally popular at the moment. But we’re not discussing Mr Musk's rights and wrongs today. We’re not talking DOGE; we’re talking DAWG. The top DAWG, in fact: Professor Gordon Murray CBE. The waste this South African slashes isn’t the least bit controversial. Murray slashes weight from cars, and that makes him universally a good egg as far as PH is concerned. So when it was announced that Gordon Murray Automotive will be the headline act at this year’s Goodwood Festival of Speed, celebrating 60 years of Murray’s design and engineering nous, it’s an appointment we’re very happy to endorse.

However, while it’s great news that you’ll be able to gawp at a sculpture honouring GMA along with a collection of Murray’s myriad cars at this year's FoS – including the Brabham BT46 fan car of yesteryear, the T.50 fan car of today, and everything else besides – it’s what’s new that intrigues us the most. GMA is unveiling a special version of the T.33. It’s called the T.33s. Or at least that's what we think it is...

For those who aren’t familiar with the ‘regular’ T.33, it’s basically the budget model in GMA’s range. At a mere £1.37m (pre-tax) it’s a cool £1m cheaper than the T.50. Obviously that means it’s not as extreme. For example, the T.33 does without the T.50’s fan-assisted downforce and its tub isn’t made purely of carbon fibre. Instead, the T.33’s downforce comes from what’s called the new Passive Boundary Layer Control (PBLC), which, in effect, is a passive version of the fan. And the tub is made of honeycomb carbon fibre pieces bonded to an aluminium frame. So the T.33 is heavier and has less downforce than the T.50. It’s less powerful, too, because it has a detuned version of the GMA-Cosworth 3.9-litre naturally aspirated V12.

But here’s the thing: everything is relative. The T.33 still weighs around 1,090kg, which is ridiculously light. The PBLC still produces around 30 per cent of the downforce that the fan achieves. And its V12 will still rev all the way to 11,000rpm, producing 615hp in the process. So, as you can see, technically it’s the budget GMA product but the reality is somewhat different: it’s neither cheap nor lacking performance. That’s why all 100 of them were snapped up within a week of orders opening, and why an ‘S’ version is so very appealing – especially because we’ve seen what was achieved with the T.50s.

We’ll have to wait until the FoS to get all the juicy details, but know what to expect based on the T.50s. More power for a start, and we know what the 3.9-litre V12 is capable of. Sure, the T.33s is unlikely to match the 700hp figure of its big brother, the T.50s, but somewhere well north of the standard 615hp is surely on the cards. They’ll be more aero, too, which, if the T.50s is anything to go by, is likely to come from more track-orientated splitters and diffusers rather than huge wings. And, because this is Gordon Murray, if the ‘S’ isn’t considerably lighter than the T.33 it’s based on, we’ll be self-flagellating like a naughty monk. For the T.50s, Murray managed to shave 93kg by ditching the air con and using lighter panels among other things, so a similar weight reduction programme for the T.33s seems reasonable.

As the man himself says: ‘For 60 years I have enjoyed the design and engineering challenge of pushing the boundaries of what’s possible – be that in racing or road cars. The supercars that Gordon Murray Automotive builds today are inspired by every car I’ve designed, raced, and owned. Lightweight design, innovative use of materials, the latest technologies, and even bending the laws of physics come into all we do.’ And we’re happy bending the knee to that. As we said, he’s the perennially popular South African and all-round top DAWG for good reason.

---

• Gordon Murray Special Vehicles launched
• Gordon Murray Automotive reveals 615hp T.33

[McRors]

Top man and top car designer. Though, I didn't know he designed the Rocket. How I'd love one of those but at 6'4" and 18 stone I might not fit. Oh well.

[Rocket.]

McRors said:

Top man and top car designer. Though, I didn't know he designed the Rocket. How I'd love one of those but at 6'4" and 18 stone I might not fit. Oh well.

You would fit just fine, I'm pretty sure Gordon is about 6'3" but your head might up in the wind a bit...

[Motormouth88]

Love GM but damn…his cars are duller looking than dishwater. And I know my opinion is ‘worthless’ as I’ll never be in the position to buy one nor experience driving one, but based on that, bland comes to mind.

[Krikkit]

Motormouth88 said:

Love GM but damn…his cars are duller looking than dishwater. And I know my opinion is ‘worthless’ as I’ll never be in the position to buy one nor experience driving one, but based on that, bland comes to mind.

With how over styled a lot of modern cars are it's a breath of fresh air to have a clean design.

But styling is a very subjective thing

[EV8]

Every car in my book, that costs more than 1M, is automatically a hyper car.
And dear god, that thing looks dull.
And it is actually very poor value for money. There, I said it.

[fantheman80]

Watching Chris Harris latest video driving the F1 was a reminder how I do not find the wow factor in his new models, although granted exquisite engineering

[blistacompact]

I'm no car engineer but it's a bit shocking to think that at 1.3 millions you have a sort of cheap version of the frame with aluminium instead of carbon fiber.

[je777]

I don't think much of the T50's looks - I find it bland (other than the fan, which I like) - but were I in it, revving to 12,000, changing gear manually, while being only a wee bit heavier than half a Reveulto (1,960kg when Harry Metcalfe weighed it), I imagine I'd care not a jot.

No other modern 'hypercar' comes remotely close for me.

So many claim that this is the sort of hypercar they want to see built, then they complain about how it looks. What's more important to you?

As for the T33, I think I'd always feel a bit disappointed to own a 'T50-lite', as absurd as that might seem. But I suppose if you can't stretch to a T50, it's not a bad option.

Edited by je777 on Tuesday 18th March 15:19

[CanAm]

McRors said:

Top man and top car designer. Though, I didn't know he designed the Rocket. How I'd love one of those but at 6'4" and 18 stone I might not fit. Oh well.

As it had two seats in tandem, legroom probably wouldn't be a problem and as your weight is spread over a fair height, weight might be a problem either. But finding one for sale........

[Macboy]

In pictures at least - not seen it in person - the T-33 looks like a high end Alfa or a niche range topping sports model from a mainstream brand in the £90k - £140k price bracket. It's goes beyond simple and elegant to "OK but a bit bland" to my eye. He's an engineer, as he's proven by having too much say in the styling of his own range where an actual stylist / designer may have done better without his input. Fair play they are all sold but you can't help feeling they're desirable for their engineering and not for the way they look.

[TWPC]

I thought the OX truck, which PH and all the car mags drove and promoted in 2016, had sunk without trace. But no: it has been re-engineered as an EV and has been tested extensively in Rwanda by a company called OX Delivers.

Some of the original design ideas have been changed - now LHD (because the central driving position is illegal in some countries, including Rwanda), RWD (not FWD) and EV rather than diesel - and the business model is now based on OX Delivers owning the trucks and small businessmen using an app to book deliveries of their goods, but it is working. In December they signed a £130m deal to create a franchise partner serving five east African countries for several years. Good stuff.

https://develop3d.com/cad/ox-delivers-and-its-fant...
https://evpowered.co.uk/news/ox-delivers-signs-163...
https://www.oxdelivers.com/

I think the T33 is utterly fantastic... Also Monkey Harris has finally got to drive an F1 which is a fun video on YouTube. "What a car!"

[heisthegaffer]

Would love to meet him and pick his brains. Listened to one podcast and found him fascinating.

[Wolfsbait]

The guy is undoubtedly a living legend. His single minded approach to diving Nirvana is impossible to argue against. He is the father of arguably the very best driving machine ever created by a human....

But.

I just can't get excited by this or indeed the T.50.

I'm now approaching 50, so obviously an old fart, but it makes me want an F1 even more... it really hasn't been bettered.

Cars of the future, when I was a kid, were just that... the future!

And that's core to why this latest GMA venture leaves me a bit cold. He surrounds himself with lightweight legends from previous generations and yet chooses to create an Oligarch Express squarely aimed at the 0.1%... completely his prerogative, but just feels like a waste of engineering talent.

I know about volumes and margins and the onset of an electric future apparently meaning humans are not interested in actually 'driving' anymore... but I'd argue that they just don't have anything to tempt them.

The MX-5 came out of nowhere at the time and look where that ended up.

I have the same car as Gordon in the Healey Frogeye and I can honestly say I'd choose it for a blast over the moors every time over everything else I own... weather permitting... and I'm not sure a T.50 / 33 / 45 / 60 etc etc would change that.

Like i said... old fart

[the tribester]

I've been at Millbrook when the T50 and T33 have been undergoing testing. What a sound.

[Nobody13]

blistacompact said:

I'm no car engineer but it's a bit shocking to think that at 1.3 millions you have a sort of cheap version of the frame with aluminium instead of carbon fiber.

I would agree, especially when others produce a carbon tub for significantly less (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_carbon_fiber_monocoque_cars). Obviously, there are more expensive cars with a carbon tub, however, maybe it's more to differentiate the models (i.e., price difference)?

[BeastieBoy73]

With recent news of the Longbow, a new Morgan and now this, I can't help but wonder... is TVR still a thing?

[Nobody13]

Motormouth88 said:

Love GM but damn…his cars are duller looking than dishwater. And I know my opinion is ‘worthless’ as I’ll never be in the position to buy one nor experience driving one, but based on that, bland comes to mind.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and as said above styling is very subjective, but I would call the design 'restrained' and I would prefer the design of something like the F1/T.33/T.50 over a visually loud, vivid colour , wide, huge spoilered monstrosity.

[pycraft]

Macboy said:

In pictures at least - not seen it in person - the T-33 looks like a high end Alfa or a niche range topping sports model from a mainstream brand in the £90k - £140k price bracket. It's goes beyond simple and elegant to "OK but a bit bland" to my eye. He's an engineer, as he's proven by having too much say in the styling of his own range where an actual stylist / designer may have done better without his input. Fair play they are all sold but you can't help feeling they're desirable for their engineering and not for the way they look.

As it should be. All of this "styling" is, from an engineering perspective, a way of buggering up the airflow in order to better pose around King's Road. GM's designs are 100% about form following function. To me, saying "they're brilliant to drive but they look boring" is like saying "they're brilliant to drive, but just don't yell LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! loudly enough".

[Lefty]

pycraft said:

Macboy said:

In pictures at least - not seen it in person - the T-33 looks like a high end Alfa or a niche range topping sports model from a mainstream brand in the £90k - £140k price bracket. It's goes beyond simple and elegant to "OK but a bit bland" to my eye. He's an engineer, as he's proven by having too much say in the styling of his own range where an actual stylist / designer may have done better without his input. Fair play they are all sold but you can't help feeling they're desirable for their engineering and not for the way they look.

As it should be. All of this "styling" is, from an engineering perspective, a way of buggering up the airflow in order to better pose around King's Road. GM's designs are 100% about form following function. To me, saying "they're brilliant to drive but they look boring" is like saying "they're brilliant to drive, but just don't yell LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! loudly enough".

I couldn’t agree more. Clean, functional, simple.

That’s perfect “design language” for me.

[86wasagoodyear]

For me the T.33 is perfection. There isn't a new car I'd rather have. It looks like a modern-day Porsche 904/906/910, is small & light, can be used every day, and will be beyond brilliant to drive. What more could I wish for in a car ? I suppose a glam passenger with a short skirt & a big smile would do...