Performance figures for a Tusc Mk1?

[leemarkadams]

Hello all, just wondering what the performance figures are for a Mk1 Tuscan?

Also, would I notice a vast difference over a 5.0 Chim, which I have at the moment?

Thanks

Lee

[nelly1]

0-60........4ish seconds
0-100.......9ish seconds
1/4 mile....12ish seconds

The above is dependant on variant of car, gearing and axle ratio, health of engine, state of tyres and road surface, launch technique and a myriad of other factors.

I can vouch for:-

1/4 mile in 12.4 secs @ 119mph &
3/4 mile in 25.79 secs @ 155.07mph

Outright quicker than a 5.0 Chim? After about 40mph - oh

In gear times would not be as clear cut, as the Chim has more grunt at lower revs, but if you're in the right gear in a Tuscan.....

[shadey]

I like the way you put that.

[mcspreader]

Over the standing 1/4 the Tuscan will hammer a Griff or a Chim all things being equal (i.e. the Tuscan isn't broken). Mine even beat a 4.5 Cerbera a couple of years back. And no, its not an S, just a standard 4.0 if there is such a thing.

[bigblockmark]

Hi Lee,i had a 500 chim for 2 years,which was a very quick car.Now have a Tuscan S which would hammer my old chim in both acceleration and top end.Have never looked back.Accept at whatever i have been racing .Hee Hee.
Mark

[R TOY]

From 20mph to 120mph my tuscan 3.6 is marginally slower than a 996 turbo. The Porker gained about 11/2 car lengths in the sprint on to peage from a rest area. The 996 does have a +40bhp chip tho and was bounced off the rev limiter in 2nd and 3rd but then so was my tuscan .

[leemarkadams]

Thanks everyone.....I must say a Tuscan is looking quite good at present (once money sorted and Chim sold.).

Lee

[The Pits]

In a 2003 Autocar, a mk 1 tuscan S did 0-100mph in 8.08 seconds. There's very little out there for under £100k that can get near that. And quite a lot over £100k that's can't either.

There's a lot of talk about 'press' engines etc but it was achieved with a normally aspirated 4.0 speed six of some sort. I've also been told that 2003 cars were particularly quick and it's my view that the wick has been turned down a little since, in the quest for reliability. For all the skepticism about TVR's power figures, that 0-100 time would seem to suggest that, in 2003 at least, they weren't that far off. You'd need all of 390bhp to repeat that performance. Then again, a Sagaris was timed to 100 in 8.5 which is still outrageously rapid, but hardly represents four years of progress.

That's the beauty of having a car weighing only 1100kg (ferrari and porsche will catch up one day...) is that it doesn't really matter if you've got 350 bhp or 390, your car is going to fly either way.