New TVR still under wraps!

[CanoeSniffer]

Handbags handbags

Let's not confuse performance with driving experience here... I'm not in the market for the new TVR (yet) but a couple of years ago I was looking for a toy. If I wanted a FAST car I would've bought an AMG Merc or BMW M_ with four hundred gazillion horsepower and more computers than the Kennedy space centre.

I bought a st old Chimaera instead.. Now why would that be

Personally I don't really care about the headline figures for the new TVR, I'm just pleased that it's bringing something a bit more old school to the party

[cerb4.5lee]

CanoeSniffer said:

Handbags handbags

Let's not confuse performance with driving experience here... I'm not in the market for the new TVR (yet) but a couple of years ago I was looking for a toy. If I wanted a FAST car I would've bought an AMG Merc or BMW M_ with four hundred gazillion horsepower and more computers than the Kennedy space centre.

I bought a st old Chimaera instead.. Now why would that be

Personally I don't really care about the headline figures for the new TVR, I'm just pleased that it's bringing something a bit more old school to the party

The biggest issue for me with Audi/Bmw/Merc and the new Aston!...is weight. TVR's are refreshingly light in comparison and the new one is sticking to this philosophy thankfully.

[themee]

Anyone still up? in car live Bruno Senna stream. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kdXLrCHQyU

[anonymous-user]

Rebellion TVR 3rd and 4th behind Toyota

Those pesky Japs. Excellent result though.

[essexstu]

m4tti said:

Not really. You’re just being obtuse to the fact that weight is no longer the limiting factor of modern performance cars and super cars that it once was, as technology has balanced previous disadvantages.

Which is exemplified by many metal super cars lol.


Perhaps what would be better than Les driving this thing to various places, revving it in a cringe worthy fashion whilst parking, would be to get it on dunsfold/top gear test track for a timed lap

Edited by m4tti on Friday 15th June 15:51

"Adding power makes you faster on the straights. Subtracting weight makes you faster everywhere." Colin Chapman

[m4tti]

essexstu said:

"Adding power makes you faster on the straights. Subtracting weight makes you faster everywhere." Colin Chapman

Yep... I get that. Try a light weight car round the beaten up B roads around Kent, then try a heavier car with active suspension. I’ve done it.. I’ve lived it.. I know which ones quicker.

“The appliance of science” Zanussi

[Englishman]

The current F1 regs specify a dry weight of 734 kg, including driver, just saying

[barchetta_boy]

m4tti said:

Yep... I get that. Try a light weight car round the beaten up B roads around Kent, then try a heavier car with active suspension. I’ve done it.. I’ve lived it.. I know which ones quicker.

“The appliance of science” Zanussi

Interesting... this is the first time I've seen anyone on this site arguing for sports cars to be made heavier. How about a lightweight car with active suspension? Eg. McLaren 570S vs 991 Turbo S. The McLaren is faster in every metric other than 0-60 which as we all know is down to engine weight over the rear wheels and 4wd.

I take your point that technology can do an incredible job these days of overcoming what 20 years ago were iron laws of constraint, but that's not really the point.

The new TVR, if it delivers what they say it will, will combine cutting edge tech in terms of chassis stiffness, engine efficiency and reliability, overall reliability with an 'old school' ethos of light weight, big power and manual transmission. This is a potent formula. It doesn't really matter if the latest Panamera Turbo goes round the ring quicker (after all a Panny Turbo goes round the Ring quicker than most things including a 458 Speciale).

I'm lucky enough to be able to choose from a wide selection of cars to go for a hoon in including a 12C Spider (which is an amazing car to drive that feels like a big Elise with 4x the power) but my favourite is my 993RS clubsport, despite the fact that it would be shown a clean pair of heels by a Golf R. It's not about outright pace, it's about enough pace, sound, looks and above all how rewarding the car is to drive.

I presume you don't have a deposit down? I do, and can't wait. It will be my first new car.

Joel

[feef]

barchetta_boy said:

m4tti said:

Yep... I get that. Try a light weight car round the beaten up B roads around Kent, then try a heavier car with active suspension. I’ve done it.. I’ve lived it.. I know which ones quicker.

“The appliance of science” Zanussi

Interesting... this is the first time I've seen anyone on this site arguing for sports cars to be made heavier. How about a lightweight car with active suspension?

Context is important. A sports-car on Britain's roads as they are now benefit from slightly more supple suspension or more mass and therefore inertia to maintain a line and (fwiw) some comfort.

On a track where it's smooth, you're totally right that a lighter car will handle better, but 'better' can be subjective depending on the surface.

[900T-R]

Um...? More mass doesn't benefit the dynamics of a car in any way. Of course, the better the sprung-unsprung weight ratio the more inclined the wheels will be to follow the road, but that should be an incentive for lighter (smaller?) wheels, brakes and suspension components, not for adding more weight up top FFS,

[m4tti]

barchetta_boy said:

Interesting... this is the first time I've seen anyone on this site arguing for sports cars to be made heavier. How about a lightweight car with active suspension? Eg. McLaren 570S vs 991 Turbo S. The McLaren is faster in every metric other than 0-60 which as we all know is down to engine weight over the rear wheels and 4wd.

I take your point that technology can do an incredible job these days of overcoming what 20 years ago were iron laws of constraint, but that's not really the point.

The new TVR, if it delivers what they say it will, will combine cutting edge tech in terms of chassis stiffness, engine efficiency and reliability, overall reliability with an 'old school' ethos of light weight, big power and manual transmission. This is a potent formula. It doesn't really matter if the latest Panamera Turbo goes round the ring quicker (after all a Panny Turbo goes round the Ring quicker than most things including a 458 Speciale).

I'm lucky enough to be able to choose from a wide selection of cars to go for a hoon in including a 12C Spider (which is an amazing car to drive that feels like a big Elise with 4x the power) but my favourite is my 993RS clubsport, despite the fact that it would be shown a clean pair of heels by a Golf R. It's not about outright pace, it's about enough pace, sound, looks and above all how rewarding the car is to drive.

I presume you don't have a deposit down? I do, and can't wait. It will be my first new car.

Joel

I waited till the reveal to put a deposit down as I wanted to see what the thing would look like, but just couldn’t get pass the “face”. The rear is cracking.

Edited by m4tti on Monday 18th June 10:01

[Testarossa]

m4tti said:

The rear is cracking.

Dammit, I thought they had moved on from using fibreglass.

[RichB]

Testarossa said:

m4tti said:

The rear is cracking.

Dammit, I thought they had moved on from using fibreglass.

[bullittmcqueen]

Just seen this, not a TVR though:

https://www.carscoops.com/2010/06/mama-mia-ferrari...

I am really not a fan of Ferraris, but this is spectacular. I think this is the direction TVR should have gone with the front. The basic ideas are not that much apart, but execution matters obviously.


Edit: noticed that this is old stuff from 2010, but i've never seen it before. If you'd put a cover over it, it would look like the TVR. TVR rear does look better than this, but very coherent design. Some elements of Ford GT thrown in as well. Worldclass.

Edited by bullittmcqueen on Tuesday 19th June 08:26

[yajeed]

Much more cohesive and aggressive from the front. I’d have guessed it was a corvette concept though....

[BJWoods]

bullittmcqueen said:

Just seen this, not a TVR though:

https://www.carscoops.com/2010/06/mama-mia-ferrari...

I am really not a fan of Ferraris, but this is spectacular. I think this is the direction TVR should have gone with the front. The basic ideas are not that much apart, but execution matters obviously.


Edit: noticed that this is old stuff from 2010, but i've never seen it before. If you'd put a cover over it, it would look like the TVR. TVR rear does look better than this, but very coherent design. Some elements of Ford GT thrown in as well. Worldclass.

Edited by bullittmcqueen on Tuesday 19th June 08:26

Really, look at the front end.. some might say an open mouthed guppy.. far ‘worse’ than the new Aston or TVR

[bullittmcqueen]

BJWoods said:

bullittmcqueen said:

Just seen this, not a TVR though:

https://www.carscoops.com/2010/06/mama-mia-ferrari...

I am really not a fan of Ferraris, but this is spectacular. I think this is the direction TVR should have gone with the front. The basic ideas are not that much apart, but execution matters obviously.


Edit: noticed that this is old stuff from 2010, but i've never seen it before. If you'd put a cover over it, it would look like the TVR. TVR rear does look better than this, but very coherent design. Some elements of Ford GT thrown in as well. Worldclass.

Edited by bullittmcqueen on Tuesday 19th June 08:26

Really, look at the front end.. some might say an open mouthed guppy.. far ‘worse’ than the new Aston or TVR

I think the guy solved the guppyness-problem quite well. Although the car is very curvy, he managed to put an aggressive edginess to the front. This is imo the main problem with the TVR front which has a bit of clumsiness to it. Guess turning the mouth upside down as proposed by others and a few more details like giving hard corners to the mouth could do wonders.

The Ferrari is, as i understand, just a concept by one guy, not even sure if Ferrari's got anything to do with it. It's got some Aston, some Corvette in it, but this direction plus the TVR rear and side would be solve the main problem with the TVR.

[RichB]

BJWoods said:

Really, look at the front end.. some might say an open mouthed guppy.. far ‘worse’ than the new Aston or TVR

Really, it's not...

[anonymous-user]

RichB said:

BJWoods said:

Really, look at the front end.. some might say an open mouthed guppy.. far ‘worse’ than the new Aston or TVR

Really, it's not...

That mock up Ferrari’s front looks odd but it’s still way better than the new tvr. The Aston is much better looking than the TVR. I love TVRs but the new car just looks all wrong.

I’m amazed they haven’t changed the front. Every article I’ve read about it has people saying it’s dull and generic and already dated and criticising the looks of the front.

Even some people on here ordering one comment on it. I’m just praying that they sell enough so that their next car (which hopefully will be better looking) will actually get made.

Come on tvr it’s not too late. Sort that front out, it’s just silly. How on Earth have they made a tvr that instead of looking menacing and full of intent, just looks stupid.

[bullittmcqueen]

Been browsing a bit and came back to the Ferrari. Still vapor and most likely never to be released, but this newer pic here is a lot closer to the TVR front style idea, but "done right". Very dynamic and aggressive. This is different lights than the one from my first link. Would like to see it full frontal, but looks like they got it right from all angles and not fishy at all.

https://carreleasedate.us/2018-ferrari-612-gto-rel...

Marvelous piece of work.


Edit:

seems to be from this page (full frontal as well, awesome):

http://www.cars-concept.com/612-gto-iii-by-sasha-s...


Edit 2:

This thing is not even vapor but one very talented guys fantasy. Got nothing to do with Ferrari and has no chance of ever being realized.

Edited by bullittmcqueen on Wednesday 20th June 13:43

Edited by bullittmcqueen on Wednesday 20th June 13:56