Should I upgrade to a 500 or stick with the 400?
Discussion
Now this is one of those questiosn that really comes down to my personal taste.
Ive been offered a series 1 Chimaera 500 for £8k. Tax and tested.
The car is good condition, albeit needs some minor tidying like all 20year old cars do.
Its HPi clear, 60k mileage.
I currently own a '93 Cat history Chimaera 400 (the CAT bit doesnt bother me in the slightest - but does effect selling value I know). This car has so far given carefree excellent motoring, but as with any car does what the annual injection of new components and maintainence.
My views are, that £8k seems a good price (??), and my car is probably worth £4k at the moment (??). Im happy with the performance of the 400. Yes 500 figures would be nice, but I dont see this a real reason to spend an extra £4k on something ive already got alone.
My current car has a good chassis, reasonable paint, and if i were to keep it then its getting a full carpet set and interior overhaul (£1k as im doing the work) to bring it up to being a very nice example car. However this is money I shall never see again.
What would you do? Sell the 400 and buy the 500? Or stick with the devil you know? My mechanic (and probably the girlfriend and bank manager) all feel that the 400 is a good car and keep it.
But ultimately I like a bargin, and if your going to be throwing money at a car, its nice to know, you may seem some return on it when you come to sell. Somehthing I dont think will happen with the 400 but maybe something applicable to the 500?
Your opnions please!
Ive been offered a series 1 Chimaera 500 for £8k. Tax and tested.
The car is good condition, albeit needs some minor tidying like all 20year old cars do.
Its HPi clear, 60k mileage.
I currently own a '93 Cat history Chimaera 400 (the CAT bit doesnt bother me in the slightest - but does effect selling value I know). This car has so far given carefree excellent motoring, but as with any car does what the annual injection of new components and maintainence.
My views are, that £8k seems a good price (??), and my car is probably worth £4k at the moment (??). Im happy with the performance of the 400. Yes 500 figures would be nice, but I dont see this a real reason to spend an extra £4k on something ive already got alone.
My current car has a good chassis, reasonable paint, and if i were to keep it then its getting a full carpet set and interior overhaul (£1k as im doing the work) to bring it up to being a very nice example car. However this is money I shall never see again.
What would you do? Sell the 400 and buy the 500? Or stick with the devil you know? My mechanic (and probably the girlfriend and bank manager) all feel that the 400 is a good car and keep it.
But ultimately I like a bargin, and if your going to be throwing money at a car, its nice to know, you may seem some return on it when you come to sell. Somehthing I dont think will happen with the 400 but maybe something applicable to the 500?
Your opnions please!
Chimjunkie said:
Well my crankshaft broke!! But pretty sure that was purely due to fatigue caused by a bent main pulley. Doh.
Most Griffs are 500's are they not?
Yeah, that sux. Hearing about yours going was heartbreaking Most Griffs are 500's are they not?
It is recognised that the cranks could break, as they were cast iron rather than forged steel, but it isn't inevitable, just a higher risk. A lot of Griefs seem to survive, and yes, most of the ones on the road are 500s to the best of my knowledge. Griff 500 production began in late(?) 1993, by which time they had produced about 700 of the 4.0L and 4.3L versions. Not sure what the total number was by the end in 2001/2002.
No doubt some wheelbarrow driver can give us some numbers here?...
Of course there were only about 600 Chimaera 500s built, and it looks today like more than half of those (original) 500s have probably met their end.
I suspect most 500 based cars, Chimaera or Griffith, ended their days in a much more dramatic fashion, rather than getting to the point of snapping the crank.
Goaty Bill said:
Utter tosh 
The only people that say that don't own one.
Yeah, that's why John Eales doesn't touch them - at least not if you tell him to keep the bottom end as TVR intended. He'll either decline or provide you with a 5 litre short engine to his spec.The only people that say that don't own one.
That's why there's at least a handful of documented crankshaft breakages on 500 on here, on just over 2,000 built (1,600+ Griff, 600+ Chim).
That's why 99.9% of professional road testers has recommended the 400 or 450 over the 500 in its time.
The 500 engine is compromised in several ways (crankshafts, piston compression height, unfavourable relation between rod length and stroke). That's why none of the RV8 engine builders follow TVRs recipee to get at 5 litres capacity.
I don't think I've ever heard of crankshaft breakages on any road driven TVR RV8 but 500s.
As a driving experience the characteristics of the 500 are not quite synergetic with those of the car. It's probably singlehandedly responsible for the 'difficult in traffic & scary handling' reputation of TVRs of the era - the 4.x versions are quite easy to handle.
That said, there's not much top end to speak of - where the smaller versions still get away with using the small AFM and 3.9 plenum/throttle, the induction system seriously hobbles the 5 litre.
Time and time again, the Griffsters have proven that on the rolling road on the same day, the 430s are in the same bhp ballpark as the 500s (both unmodified), anyway. Also if you put a pair of TVR BV heads and a decent cam on a bone stock and nigh-on indestructible 4.6, it will make about the same power - strangely, mor often than not more than that (and be a bit more driveable)...
The TVR 500 engine was an evolutionary cul-de-sac; a quick and dirty (not to mention cost effective) solution to put the Griff back in production as the top sports car in the range when it turned out that the AJP would take a bit longer to develop into full production status than hoped, and when put in the Griffith/Chimaera chassis proved to be not the cleverest idea to pursue for them, anyway.
The real value of the 500 lies in the heads and the 45 mm bored intake, which is why they respond well to moderate tuning (personally I would stop at a real 300 bhp to keep things nice and reliable on the std bottom end, still some way off the 320/340 promised by TVR...).
Rather than to take a known solid car with 4K of cash and trade it for an unknown quantity 500, I'd supercharge it, not going any further than the basic kit and enjoy significantly better performance and driveability.
Edited by 900T-R on Thursday 31st January 15:11
in the last two years ive had a 400 , a cerb 4.2 and i now have a 500. i would not go back to a 400 or a cerb 4.2. i much prefer the acceleration, the torque and the way the power is delivered in my 500. mine is very slightly modified and is 290 bhp on the rolling road. i would however be very interested in trying a later model 4.5 cerbera if i ever sold my 500.
Lester
Lester
900T-R said:
Yeah, that's why John Eales doesn't touch them - at least not if you tell him to keep the bottom end as TVR intended. He'll either decline or provide you with a 5 litre short engine to his spec.
That's why there's at least a handful of documented crankshaft breakages on 500 on here, on just over 2,000 built (1,600+ Griff, 600+ Chim).
That's why 99.9% of professional road testers has recommended the 400 or 450 over the 500 in its time.
The 500 engine is compromised in several ways (crankshafts, piston compression height, unfavourable relation between rod length and stroke). That's why none of the RV8 engine builders follow TVRs recipee to get at 5 litres capacity.
I don't think I've ever heard of crankshaft breakages on any road driven TVR RV8 but 500s.
As a driving experience the characteristics of the 500 are not quite synergetic with those of the car. It's probably singlehandedly responsible for the 'difficult in traffic & scary handling' reputation of TVRs of the era - the 4.x versions are quite easy to handle.
That said, there's not much top end to speak of - where the smaller versions still get away with using the small AFM and 3.9 plenum/throttle, the induction system seriously hobbles the 5 litre.
Time and time again, the Griffsters have proven that on the rolling road on the same day, the 430s are in the same bhp ballpark as the 500s (both unmodified), anyway. Also if you put a pair of TVR BV heads and a decent cam on a bone stock and nigh-on indestructible 4.6, it will make about the same power - strangely, mor often than not more than that (and be a bit more driveable)...
The TVR 500 engine was an evolutionary cul-de-sac; a quick and dirty (not to mention cost effective) solution to put the Griff back in production as the top sports car in the range when it turned out that the AJP would take a bit longer to develop into full production status than hoped, and when put in the Griffith/Chimaera chassis proved to be not the cleverest idea to pursue for them, anyway.
The real value of the 500 lies in the heads and the 45 mm bored intake, which is why they respond well to moderate tuning (personally I would stop at a real 300 bhp to keep things nice and reliable on the std bottom end, still some way off the 320/340 promised by TVR...).
Rather than to take a known solid car with 4K of cash and trade it for an unknown quantity 500, I'd supercharge it, not going any further than the basic kit and enjoy significantly better performance and driveability.
Thanks, very insightful and proberbly just doused any flame for the 500 I was considering. That's why there's at least a handful of documented crankshaft breakages on 500 on here, on just over 2,000 built (1,600+ Griff, 600+ Chim).
That's why 99.9% of professional road testers has recommended the 400 or 450 over the 500 in its time.
The 500 engine is compromised in several ways (crankshafts, piston compression height, unfavourable relation between rod length and stroke). That's why none of the RV8 engine builders follow TVRs recipee to get at 5 litres capacity.
I don't think I've ever heard of crankshaft breakages on any road driven TVR RV8 but 500s.
As a driving experience the characteristics of the 500 are not quite synergetic with those of the car. It's probably singlehandedly responsible for the 'difficult in traffic & scary handling' reputation of TVRs of the era - the 4.x versions are quite easy to handle.
That said, there's not much top end to speak of - where the smaller versions still get away with using the small AFM and 3.9 plenum/throttle, the induction system seriously hobbles the 5 litre.
Time and time again, the Griffsters have proven that on the rolling road on the same day, the 430s are in the same bhp ballpark as the 500s (both unmodified), anyway. Also if you put a pair of TVR BV heads and a decent cam on a bone stock and nigh-on indestructible 4.6, it will make about the same power - strangely, mor often than not more than that (and be a bit more driveable)...
The TVR 500 engine was an evolutionary cul-de-sac; a quick and dirty (not to mention cost effective) solution to put the Griff back in production as the top sports car in the range when it turned out that the AJP would take a bit longer to develop into full production status than hoped, and when put in the Griffith/Chimaera chassis proved to be not the cleverest idea to pursue for them, anyway.
The real value of the 500 lies in the heads and the 45 mm bored intake, which is why they respond well to moderate tuning (personally I would stop at a real 300 bhp to keep things nice and reliable on the std bottom end, still some way off the 320/340 promised by TVR...).
Rather than to take a known solid car with 4K of cash and trade it for an unknown quantity 500, I'd supercharge it, not going any further than the basic kit and enjoy significantly better performance and driveability.
That and the fact that no one seems to have come forward saying £8k for a 500 is all that spectacular a deal... they all seem to be round the £10k - £12k mark where I look - I thought it quite a good price....
Thanks
That really would be quite a tough call to make. Oh, no wait, not tough... it's that other word... EXCITING.
It sounds as though you potentially have a couple of grand "spare" (up to £4k by your figures). That being the case, personally I'd go for a forced induction system for the current car assuming the engine is strong OR a rebuild/upgrade if it is a bit tired.
I'm chuffed to pieces with my 96 400 that I got for £6k in October with 21k miles. like you mine is on the CAT register (you can get it removed if it bothers you - it'll cost £250 but it is possible).
In May I plan on selling my TVR S and using the funds to pay for a SC or Turbo for the Chim. Mine has a good, strong reliable motor and I am sure it'll survive nicely with a little boost.
That's what I'm doing but only you can decide what's best for you.
It sounds as though you potentially have a couple of grand "spare" (up to £4k by your figures). That being the case, personally I'd go for a forced induction system for the current car assuming the engine is strong OR a rebuild/upgrade if it is a bit tired.
I'm chuffed to pieces with my 96 400 that I got for £6k in October with 21k miles. like you mine is on the CAT register (you can get it removed if it bothers you - it'll cost £250 but it is possible).
In May I plan on selling my TVR S and using the funds to pay for a SC or Turbo for the Chim. Mine has a good, strong reliable motor and I am sure it'll survive nicely with a little boost.
That's what I'm doing but only you can decide what's best for you.
Mine's a standard 400, and as I have no interest in waving my willy at Santa Plod, but do like track days, I am trying to improve the handling first.
I have changed the shocks for adjustables, have bought some decent tyres and wheels, am fitting a gurney back onto the car, and an=m looking at the suspension joints, as well as a full geo when all this lot is done.
So if anyone has some Steve Heath drop links surplus to requirements please let me know. They are getting tricky to source.
I have changed the shocks for adjustables, have bought some decent tyres and wheels, am fitting a gurney back onto the car, and an=m looking at the suspension joints, as well as a full geo when all this lot is done.
So if anyone has some Steve Heath drop links surplus to requirements please let me know. They are getting tricky to source.
Edited by Quietlybonkers on Thursday 31st January 18:57
Sorry & all that but I went to a 5L from a 4L and wouldn't change the decision. Had the 4 for 4 years and now had the 5L for coming up 7. It really is a step up and owning a 5 is special, well, it is to me anyway. But don't get carried away with figures - mine makes 290 with 300 torque yet have a stealth cam, induction improvements and a Mark Adams chip & RR setup with MA. Was happy to hear a pro driver at Anglesey describe it a bloody quick!
Enjoy
Mike
Enjoy
Mike
axnutty said:
Julesprivate said:
...like you mine is on the CAT register (you can get it removed if it bothers you - it'll cost £250 but it is possible)...
Can you!?A full HPI check will still flag it BUT it will just say that the car is Condition Inspected (meaning repaired to "as new" standard. Some of the cheaper (text based) HPI checks ONLY check the ALERT register so the car will come back as completely fine through them (one reason not to use them).
In principal once this is done there is no need to declare it as CAT B, C, D, F, X etc as it no longer is..
900T-R said:
Yeah, that's why John Eales doesn't touch them - at least not if you tell him to keep the bottom end as TVR intended. He'll either decline or provide you with a 5 litre short engine to his spec.
That's why there's at least a handful of documented crankshaft breakages on 500 on here, on just over 2,000 built (1,600+ Griff, 600+ Chim).
That's why 99.9% of professional road testers has recommended the 400 or 450 over the 500 in its time.
The 500 engine is compromised in several ways (crankshafts, piston compression height, unfavourable relation between rod length and stroke). That's why none of the RV8 engine builders follow TVRs recipee to get at 5 litres capacity.
I don't think I've ever heard of crankshaft breakages on any road driven TVR RV8 but 500s.
As a driving experience the characteristics of the 500 are not quite synergetic with those of the car. It's probably singlehandedly responsible for the 'difficult in traffic & scary handling' reputation of TVRs of the era - the 4.x versions are quite easy to handle.
That said, there's not much top end to speak of - where the smaller versions still get away with using the small AFM and 3.9 plenum/throttle, the induction system seriously hobbles the 5 litre.
Time and time again, the Griffsters have proven that on the rolling road on the same day, the 430s are in the same bhp ballpark as the 500s (both unmodified), anyway. Also if you put a pair of TVR BV heads and a decent cam on a bone stock and nigh-on indestructible 4.6, it will make about the same power - strangely, mor often than not more than that (and be a bit more driveable)...
The TVR 500 engine was an evolutionary cul-de-sac; a quick and dirty (not to mention cost effective) solution to put the Griff back in production as the top sports car in the range when it turned out that the AJP would take a bit longer to develop into full production status than hoped, and when put in the Griffith/Chimaera chassis proved to be not the cleverest idea to pursue for them, anyway.
The real value of the 500 lies in the heads and the 45 mm bored intake, which is why they respond well to moderate tuning (personally I would stop at a real 300 bhp to keep things nice and reliable on the std bottom end, still some way off the 320/340 promised by TVR...).
Rather than to take a known solid car with 4K of cash and trade it for an unknown quantity 500, I'd supercharge it, not going any further than the basic kit and enjoy significantly better performance and driveability.
A very good post Eric. That's why there's at least a handful of documented crankshaft breakages on 500 on here, on just over 2,000 built (1,600+ Griff, 600+ Chim).
That's why 99.9% of professional road testers has recommended the 400 or 450 over the 500 in its time.
The 500 engine is compromised in several ways (crankshafts, piston compression height, unfavourable relation between rod length and stroke). That's why none of the RV8 engine builders follow TVRs recipee to get at 5 litres capacity.
I don't think I've ever heard of crankshaft breakages on any road driven TVR RV8 but 500s.
As a driving experience the characteristics of the 500 are not quite synergetic with those of the car. It's probably singlehandedly responsible for the 'difficult in traffic & scary handling' reputation of TVRs of the era - the 4.x versions are quite easy to handle.
That said, there's not much top end to speak of - where the smaller versions still get away with using the small AFM and 3.9 plenum/throttle, the induction system seriously hobbles the 5 litre.
Time and time again, the Griffsters have proven that on the rolling road on the same day, the 430s are in the same bhp ballpark as the 500s (both unmodified), anyway. Also if you put a pair of TVR BV heads and a decent cam on a bone stock and nigh-on indestructible 4.6, it will make about the same power - strangely, mor often than not more than that (and be a bit more driveable)...
The TVR 500 engine was an evolutionary cul-de-sac; a quick and dirty (not to mention cost effective) solution to put the Griff back in production as the top sports car in the range when it turned out that the AJP would take a bit longer to develop into full production status than hoped, and when put in the Griffith/Chimaera chassis proved to be not the cleverest idea to pursue for them, anyway.
The real value of the 500 lies in the heads and the 45 mm bored intake, which is why they respond well to moderate tuning (personally I would stop at a real 300 bhp to keep things nice and reliable on the std bottom end, still some way off the 320/340 promised by TVR...).
Rather than to take a known solid car with 4K of cash and trade it for an unknown quantity 500, I'd supercharge it, not going any further than the basic kit and enjoy significantly better performance and driveability.
My choice would be the cross-bolted 4.6 as found in the Chimp 450.
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff