FROM A 4.2 TO A 4.5
Discussion
As promised I have written some words on my switch
from a 4.2 to a newer spec 4.5.
There are plenty here who can describe in detail the
technical performance specs better than I, so I'll
concentrate on an overall model comparison.
So if you wish, sit back with a drink of your choice
and read on....
I owned a late 1996 4.2 and to me, having tried a few
Cerberas, this felt like the racing version.
Sparse in refinement with brutal power giving enough
speed and noise to create what felt like Mach 2 and
a sonic boom. (Mine was decatted & fitted with a
sports exhaust)
The engine only required a new cam at 42000 and
was on the original clutch at 45000 miles
It was also a pre recall upright version.
The car simply took off from a standing start
and you could still obtain wheel spin in third in the dry.
The clutch was very heavy and required exact placing
for a smooth gear change whilst in contrast, the accelerator
was feather light and could be controlled with a toe action.
It's handling was a weak point.
On a standard set up, in the country lanes it skipped
about alarmingly and every bump felt like hitting a rock.
The power meant you could put the tail out with ease
but the car seemed to right this and snap it back into line.
As always, I am sure it had a cut off point...thankfully
I never found that.
On a runway and prior to having the engine smoothed
out, I hit 165mph and post work, it would have gone further.
The car's interior was nice but the later upgrades showed
up the flaws. Trim and carpets could have been better and
when it decided to leak, the flood gates opened.
Like all hand built cars it had it's quirks, but
I used it every day and after over coming appalling
work by the non TVR dealer who had sold it to me,
it never let me down.
I thought I'd never part with it - but then along came my
current 4.5....
In contrast to the 1996 4.2, my current 1998 4.5 has
seen a lot of refinement in two years from TVR.
The standard set up sees the car with a much softer ride
which is all the more surprising as it is fitted with
18" spiders.
It takes the bumps with a bounce and remains firmly
on the road. The same country lanes can already be
taken at a good 20 - 30mph more and I am still finding
my way with the car.
Inside it has a full hide Magnolia and Prussian upgraded
interior, with additional upgraded perforated door inserts.
One or two minor adjustments have been made to the
controls (horn / main beam switched, sound on the
indicators etc) but the main internal improvements are
to the air vents.
This model has separate hot and cold vents with two
for the drivers feet (one hot one cold) the steering wheel
cold air vent and the window holes as before.
This means far better climate control.
The clutch is very light and the biting point is less
precise, while in contrast, the accelerator is much
heavier than before.
The initial 4.2 power is not there and it seems to
want to come to life at around 60 when it suddenly
takes off and jumps to 130 very quickly.
I've yet to give it a full runway test so can't
comment on top out speeds, but certainly at the
2/3's mark, it feels much firmer on the road.
While it is again fitted with a sports exhaust, it
is not decatted, so the noise level is much reduced,
but I think this is also aided by improved interior
sound proofing.
The car is more prone to 'spitting' venom at other
cars, especially when she has to throttle back and
this is a source of great amusement.
Cosmetically, my 4.5 has the lightweight headlamp
conversion and 18" spiders, but remains standard
in set up.
Loving the Cerbera as I do, I had James Agger
source me an excellent low mileage 4.5 and if all
goes to plan, the car will take me all over Europe
and will be with me for many years.
To close, I'll miss the face distorting power
low down on the 4.2 and the twitchy tail action
but the newer 4.5 is the winner and not just
by around 30mph.
Go create some weather...
Graham
TCR The Cerbera Register
www.TVR-Cerbera.com
from a 4.2 to a newer spec 4.5.
There are plenty here who can describe in detail the
technical performance specs better than I, so I'll
concentrate on an overall model comparison.
So if you wish, sit back with a drink of your choice
and read on....
I owned a late 1996 4.2 and to me, having tried a few
Cerberas, this felt like the racing version.
Sparse in refinement with brutal power giving enough
speed and noise to create what felt like Mach 2 and
a sonic boom. (Mine was decatted & fitted with a
sports exhaust)
The engine only required a new cam at 42000 and
was on the original clutch at 45000 miles
It was also a pre recall upright version.
The car simply took off from a standing start
and you could still obtain wheel spin in third in the dry.
The clutch was very heavy and required exact placing
for a smooth gear change whilst in contrast, the accelerator
was feather light and could be controlled with a toe action.
It's handling was a weak point.
On a standard set up, in the country lanes it skipped
about alarmingly and every bump felt like hitting a rock.
The power meant you could put the tail out with ease
but the car seemed to right this and snap it back into line.
As always, I am sure it had a cut off point...thankfully
I never found that.
On a runway and prior to having the engine smoothed
out, I hit 165mph and post work, it would have gone further.
The car's interior was nice but the later upgrades showed
up the flaws. Trim and carpets could have been better and
when it decided to leak, the flood gates opened.
Like all hand built cars it had it's quirks, but
I used it every day and after over coming appalling
work by the non TVR dealer who had sold it to me,
it never let me down.
I thought I'd never part with it - but then along came my
current 4.5....
In contrast to the 1996 4.2, my current 1998 4.5 has
seen a lot of refinement in two years from TVR.
The standard set up sees the car with a much softer ride
which is all the more surprising as it is fitted with
18" spiders.
It takes the bumps with a bounce and remains firmly
on the road. The same country lanes can already be
taken at a good 20 - 30mph more and I am still finding
my way with the car.
Inside it has a full hide Magnolia and Prussian upgraded
interior, with additional upgraded perforated door inserts.
One or two minor adjustments have been made to the
controls (horn / main beam switched, sound on the
indicators etc) but the main internal improvements are
to the air vents.
This model has separate hot and cold vents with two
for the drivers feet (one hot one cold) the steering wheel
cold air vent and the window holes as before.
This means far better climate control.
The clutch is very light and the biting point is less
precise, while in contrast, the accelerator is much
heavier than before.
The initial 4.2 power is not there and it seems to
want to come to life at around 60 when it suddenly
takes off and jumps to 130 very quickly.
I've yet to give it a full runway test so can't
comment on top out speeds, but certainly at the
2/3's mark, it feels much firmer on the road.
While it is again fitted with a sports exhaust, it
is not decatted, so the noise level is much reduced,
but I think this is also aided by improved interior
sound proofing.
The car is more prone to 'spitting' venom at other
cars, especially when she has to throttle back and
this is a source of great amusement.
Cosmetically, my 4.5 has the lightweight headlamp
conversion and 18" spiders, but remains standard
in set up.
Loving the Cerbera as I do, I had James Agger
source me an excellent low mileage 4.5 and if all
goes to plan, the car will take me all over Europe
and will be with me for many years.
To close, I'll miss the face distorting power
low down on the 4.2 and the twitchy tail action
but the newer 4.5 is the winner and not just
by around 30mph.
Go create some weather...
Graham
TCR The Cerbera Register
www.TVR-Cerbera.com
Interesting to hear your comments - I went completely the opposite way.
Originally had a '98 4.5 with standard exhaust, brakes and suspension and on the whole, it was a fantastic car. It had the full leather trim and normal 17" alloys. I had it on an airstrip run and managed 170 indicated, 156 actual.
Regrettably, I had to sell the car due to my wifes working situation, but put the money I sold it for straight into my own bank, so it wouldn't get used for kitchens, or double glazed windows or some sh1t.
When she realised she wasn't getting her hands on the money, oh and her job situation stabilised, I bought an older '97 4.2, but with the change I had left over, we went to Lapland with my parents, (babysiters so we could ski)and the kids for a week and bought ourselves a 8ft motorised screen and a new projector - home cinema in the sitting room - whoo hoo! The boy did good with the old selling and buying.
So, three weeks into 4.2 ownership and my observations have been that the 4.2 is so much quicker to respond on the throttle, is easier to drive with a nice light clutch but the brakes are prone to fade if pushed to the limit. The car doesn't have the same leather smell when you get in it as it's only half hide, but the air vents I find are so much better.
It really bugged me only having cold air from the center face vent in the '98, but the older one has warm air as well as cold. Other than that, the car steams up just as frequent as the '98 one did.
The ride does feel a little more sorted, probably as a result of this one having 18" spiders fitted, so maybe that's where the difference lies eh GCerbera? However, the turning circle is that of the Queen Mary and I'm always misjudging the car park spaces.
I can't wait to get this one on the airstrip to see how it preforms and will also be enquiring about Joolz's induction mods, make it even faster
>> Edited by Byff on Monday 16th February 00:07
Originally had a '98 4.5 with standard exhaust, brakes and suspension and on the whole, it was a fantastic car. It had the full leather trim and normal 17" alloys. I had it on an airstrip run and managed 170 indicated, 156 actual.
Regrettably, I had to sell the car due to my wifes working situation, but put the money I sold it for straight into my own bank, so it wouldn't get used for kitchens, or double glazed windows or some sh1t.
When she realised she wasn't getting her hands on the money, oh and her job situation stabilised, I bought an older '97 4.2, but with the change I had left over, we went to Lapland with my parents, (babysiters so we could ski)and the kids for a week and bought ourselves a 8ft motorised screen and a new projector - home cinema in the sitting room - whoo hoo! The boy did good with the old selling and buying.
So, three weeks into 4.2 ownership and my observations have been that the 4.2 is so much quicker to respond on the throttle, is easier to drive with a nice light clutch but the brakes are prone to fade if pushed to the limit. The car doesn't have the same leather smell when you get in it as it's only half hide, but the air vents I find are so much better.
It really bugged me only having cold air from the center face vent in the '98, but the older one has warm air as well as cold. Other than that, the car steams up just as frequent as the '98 one did.
The ride does feel a little more sorted, probably as a result of this one having 18" spiders fitted, so maybe that's where the difference lies eh GCerbera? However, the turning circle is that of the Queen Mary and I'm always misjudging the car park spaces.
I can't wait to get this one on the airstrip to see how it preforms and will also be enquiring about Joolz's induction mods, make it even faster
>> Edited by Byff on Monday 16th February 00:07
Byff said:Hi Byff
Interesting to hear your comments - I went completely the opposite way.
..but the brakes are prone to fade if pushed to the limit.
..The ride does feel a little more sorted, probably as a result of this one having 18" spiders fitted, so maybe that's where the difference lies eh GCerbera? However, the turning circle is that of the Queen Mary and I'm always misjudging the car park spaces.
I can't wait to get this one on the airstrip to see how it performs and will also be enquiring about Joolz's induction mods, make it even faster
Seems you have picked up on many of the things I also
found, but one important note, check the brakes before
you do the airstrip run.
With it's 'stops like a tanker' ability, the 4.2 only
just got round the bottom bend at the end of the two
mile runway.
My passenger broke all his nails, his hair turned white
and he now has a bad stutter.. "Fffffffeck mmmmme,
that was cl cl close"
Interesting point about the Spiders - doesn't add up
though, wonder why it is?
Certainly the turning circle is poor now, but hey, it
gives everyone a chance to admire the car as you
6 point turn.
Have fun with the car and here's a tip, never make
the mistake of not securing the drivers seat properly.
With a rocket throttle on the 4.2, you could easily
end up in the back seat - couldn't you James?
There is so much scope for setting these cars up that I'm sure you could have two cars that were built on the same day that are completely different. I know that my old 4.2, has a very light clutch and it is the one that came with the car, I also know that the handling was ok to begin with and is not brilliant with Notrons, I wonder what difference a switch to toyos and 17" alloys will make this week?
D.
D.
davidd said:Quite right Davidd.
There is so much scope for setting these cars up that I'm sure you could have two cars that were built on the same day that are completely different. D.
I know in all probability, a 1998 4.2 may feature
many or all of the changes I note, but strangely it
seems it would also lack the punch out of the box
that the early cars had / have?
Obviously I'm still in the learning curve with the
4.5 (500 miles down the road) and have yet to put
it on the 2mile strip, so I am sure more 4.2 / 4.5
comparisons will appear.
It would be good to hear how the to Toyos and 17"
alloys go (although don't the Toyos have a 200 mile
run in period?)
Great post Gary! 
Completely echoes my experience with my early 4.2. It has been a fantastic car, stuppendous acceleration, makes it a road going rocket. The original shocks and setup made the handing extremely lively in the dry, it would tramline like a bu99er on braking. Wet weather driving was , to the point where I was scared of driving it in the wet. Thankfully AVOs and proper geometry setup has transformed the car, and its now light years better.
It seems that the latter cars were better refined and as daily driver possibly a better option, better save up..... watch this space
Chris
Completely echoes my experience with my early 4.2. It has been a fantastic car, stuppendous acceleration, makes it a road going rocket. The original shocks and setup made the handing extremely lively in the dry, it would tramline like a bu99er on braking. Wet weather driving was
, to the point where I was scared of driving it in the wet. Thankfully AVOs and proper geometry setup has transformed the car, and its now light years better. It seems that the latter cars were better refined and as daily driver possibly a better option, better save up..... watch this space
Chris
Dean J said:
Excellent posts guys, but you have made it EVEN HARDER for me to choose between a 4.2 and 4.5!
Deano
Hi Deano, try both and see how you get on. Both have plenty of power and torque. I think there is quite considerable difference between each car built0. From the ones I've driven the post 98 cars were probably better screwed together and the handling more sorted. The 4.5 had better brakes as i recall. For me my budget would not stretch to a later car at the time so I jumped for an early one, it was cheaper but felt a lot more responsive throttle wise. Good suspension is probably the single most important upgrade so if you are looking for an early one check this has been sorted. A sports exhaust is highly recommended, but not for the shy
. Condition is most important, along with bills, recent clutch +/- starter. Just make sure you bank on 2-3k running costs a year, depending on mileages. Chris
Chris. My budget can JUST stretch to a post 98 4.5 which was what I always reckoned on getting in the first place. Others sound tempting (i love the sound of the S6 and the explosiveness of an early 4.2 - mmm) but for me I think I should stick to my original plan. Mind you whatever I buy I know I will be happy even if my wife and bank manager arent - tough!!!
Deano
Deano
If your budget will just stretch to a '98 4.5, then IMHO you should save a few K and get a 4.2. Then put the few K aside for the inevitable repairs/maintenance.
I was in a similar position -- ended up with a '98 4.2. Could have stretched to a '98 4.5, but wouldn't have had anything left over.
I was in a similar position -- ended up with a '98 4.2. Could have stretched to a '98 4.5, but wouldn't have had anything left over.
Dean J said:
Excellent posts guys, but you have made it EVEN HARDER for me to choose between a 4.2 and 4.5!
Deano
It doesn't matter what year or size it is, look at them all and make a decision based on how well it's been looked after and the condition of the car.
My first buy was down to colour/interior combo and I got lucky, it just happened to be a 98 4.5
Dean J said:
Excellent posts guys, but you have made it EVEN HARDER for me to choose between a 4.2 and 4.5!
Deano
4.5 = 4.2 plus £3000-£5000. The difference can be used for insurance, servicing, clutch, wheel & tyre upgrades, airconditioning /stereo, carpets, gold badges, mishaps etc.
>£3000/yr cost - almost unavoidable.
4.2 ('96) is more rough, wild & raw, is more explosive and has more overtaking pleasure. It is the loudest Cerbera. The 4.5 is superior at high speeds, seldom needed.
The 4.2-4.5 difference in reality varies from zero to mildly perceptible if the bias was excluded.
Gassing Station | Cerbera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff