just dynoed the cerb
Discussion
So why don't you ever drive it? It's done 47 miles in nearly 5 years, so it doesn't really matter what power it is producing. At less than 10 miles a year, you could push it without worrying.
A good example of how TVR used to exaggerate power figures and used to give the press one engine and the customers a totally different one.
A good example of how TVR used to exaggerate power figures and used to give the press one engine and the customers a totally different one.
It's none of your business really but 4 other sports cars means the cerb never gets used plus mrs spitfire doesn't like the closed in cabin, she prefers the more open nature of the Tuscan cabin so that's what we've used more recently though even that hasn't moved for 2 years I think... time to let someone else have the use of the cerb now, i've got my eye on another.
spitfire4v8 said:
It's none of your business really but 4 other sports cars means the cerb never gets used plus mrs spitfire doesn't like the closed in cabin, she prefers the more open nature of the Tuscan cabin so that's what we've used more recently though even that hasn't moved for 2 years I think... time to let someone else have the use of the cerb now, i've got my eye on another.
Very impressive and looks like a smooth power delivery, why do the torque and Bhp lines always seem to cross at 5250rpm ? 
Gladers01 said:
spitfire4v8 said:
It's none of your business really but 4 other sports cars means the cerb never gets used plus mrs spitfire doesn't like the closed in cabin, she prefers the more open nature of the Tuscan cabin so that's what we've used more recently though even that hasn't moved for 2 years I think... time to let someone else have the use of the cerb now, i've got my eye on another.
Very impressive and looks like a smooth power delivery, why do the torque and Bhp lines always seem to cross at 5250rpm ? 
ETA I may be due a parrot?
spitfire4v8 said:
It's none of your business really but 4 other sports cars means the cerb never gets used plus mrs spitfire doesn't like the closed in cabin, she prefers the more open nature of the Tuscan cabin so that's what we've used more recently though even that hasn't moved for 2 years I think... time to let someone else have the use of the cerb now, i've got my eye on another.
I would have been approximately 400 times ruder in my reply to that sort of post. Some very strange people about.
LucyP said:
A good example of how TVR used to exaggerate power figures and used to give the press one engine and the customers a totally different one.
Is it? How?It has a virtually standard 4.5 bottom end, with some light porting (which achieves what, 5-10bhp at most?), producing factory 4.5 stated outputs a quarter of a century later. Am I missing something?
robsco said:
LucyP said:
A good example of how TVR used to exaggerate power figures and used to give the press one engine and the customers a totally different one.
Is it? How?It has a virtually standard 4.5 bottom end, with some light porting (which achieves what, 5-10bhp at most?), producing factory 4.5 stated outputs a quarter of a century later. Am I missing something?
I always thought the 4.2s were around 380 in real world figures?
What’s the difference between the 4.2 and the 4.5 heads?
105.4 said:
robsco said:
LucyP said:
A good example of how TVR used to exaggerate power figures and used to give the press one engine and the customers a totally different one.
Is it? How?It has a virtually standard 4.5 bottom end, with some light porting (which achieves what, 5-10bhp at most?), producing factory 4.5 stated outputs a quarter of a century later. Am I missing something?
I always thought the 4.2s were around 380 in real world figures?
What’s the difference between the 4.2 and the 4.5 heads?
Its a 4.5 bottom end (diamond pistons) . Heads have had the rough edges and machining steps removed and skimmed, 4.2 intakes have had their machining steps removed, spindles thinned .. X pipe exhaust and remap. All that work gains you about 60-80hp over a std 4.2 as it was (std 4.2 would be around 340-360hp on my dyno)
power and torque only crosses there if the power is bhp and torque is lb.ft and yes they are linked by maths. If you have Nm or PS or KW they cross at different revs, but still linked by maths so as long as you use the same units the graphs will always cross at a fixed rev point, IYSWIM
power and torque only crosses there if the power is bhp and torque is lb.ft and yes they are linked by maths. If you have Nm or PS or KW they cross at different revs, but still linked by maths so as long as you use the same units the graphs will always cross at a fixed rev point, IYSWIM
spitfire4v8 said:
Its a 4.5 bottom end (diamond pistons) . Heads have had the rough edges and machining steps removed and skimmed, 4.2 intakes have had their machining steps removed, spindles thinned .. X pipe exhaust and remap. All that work gains you about 60-80hp over a std 4.2 as it was (std 4.2 would be around 340-360hp on my dyno)
power and torque only crosses there if the power is bhp and torque is lb.ft and yes they are linked by maths. If you have Nm or PS or KW they cross at different revs, but still linked by maths so as long as you use the same units the graphs will always cross at a fixed rev point, IYSWIM
Not far off mine! Very similar spec! I've added my x-pipe now too.. Maybe one day if I get round to saving up for Emerald I'll see what it makes now. power and torque only crosses there if the power is bhp and torque is lb.ft and yes they are linked by maths. If you have Nm or PS or KW they cross at different revs, but still linked by maths so as long as you use the same units the graphs will always cross at a fixed rev point, IYSWIM
spitfire4v8 said:
Its a 4.5 bottom end (diamond pistons) . Heads have had the rough edges and machining steps removed and skimmed, 4.2 intakes have had their machining steps removed, spindles thinned .. X pipe exhaust and remap. All that work gains you about 60-80hp over a std 4.2 as it was (std 4.2 would be around 340-360hp on my dyno)
power and torque only crosses there if the power is bhp and torque is lb.ft and yes they are linked by maths. If you have Nm or PS or KW they cross at different revs, but still linked by maths so as long as you use the same units the graphs will always cross at a fixed rev point, IYSWIM
Thanks for clarifying, learn something new everyday! How would the graph compare to a similarly fettled Cerbera speed 6? Back in the day the Tvr sales brochure was quoting 400 Bhp, which sounds a tad optimistic power and torque only crosses there if the power is bhp and torque is lb.ft and yes they are linked by maths. If you have Nm or PS or KW they cross at different revs, but still linked by maths so as long as you use the same units the graphs will always cross at a fixed rev point, IYSWIM
SteveStrange said:
105.4 said:
robsco said:
LucyP said:
A good example of how TVR used to exaggerate power figures and used to give the press one engine and the customers a totally different one.
Is it? How?It has a virtually standard 4.5 bottom end, with some light porting (which achieves what, 5-10bhp at most?), producing factory 4.5 stated outputs a quarter of a century later. Am I missing something?
I always thought the 4.2s were around 380 in real world figures?
What’s the difference between the 4.2 and the 4.5 heads?
That’s bloody brilliant, even by todays standards.
Now I’m even more sad that my car didn’t spend time at K&C’s before leaving the UK.
If it wasn’t for the sheer hassle of shipping, I would seriously consider sending it back for a visit.
On another note, I continue to marvel at how sensible/restrained the community on this forum are ;-)
Now I’m even more sad that my car didn’t spend time at K&C’s before leaving the UK.
If it wasn’t for the sheer hassle of shipping, I would seriously consider sending it back for a visit.
On another note, I continue to marvel at how sensible/restrained the community on this forum are ;-)
Gassing Station | Cerbera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff