RE: New TVR - the update
Discussion
Cold said:
I had no idea he was an electronics expert. I thought he just designed cars that were well regarded - but no one bought.
However, amusing fanboism aside, I stand by my statement that "No driver aids" = industry speak for "No money". It's being true to TVR if nothing else.
It's not about being an electronics expert tbh! (unless you're going to write your own stability control code from scratch!)However, amusing fanboism aside, I stand by my statement that "No driver aids" = industry speak for "No money". It's being true to TVR if nothing else.
No, it's expensive because you have to do the following:
1) Buy an suitable ABS unit with stability control included (easy, but expensive from numerous ABS suppliers)
2) Precisely calibrate your powertrain (accurate torque control is critical to stability management, and you need a fully torque based ems system, ie one that uses engine torque as it's primary arbitor)
3) Spend hundreds of hours calibrating the stability control system, using initially simulation and then lots of hours at test tracks
4) Validate, in conjunction with your system supplier, the operation of the system under ever possible driving condition. hot, cold, high, low, slippy, grippy, and any combination of road surface, elevation etc. A massive, expensive and time consuming exercise. The System supplier will have to be part of this process in order from them to sign the system and it's safety case off for production.
Like other posters mentioned comparing the TVR to a 911 or Evora is pointless. Its like comparing a Audi S8, end terrace in Barnsley, boat or a league 2 left back just because they cost £90K
Its not the same thing!!!!
Different market and buyer.
It will be more like a 458 Special with a manual gear box, a Le Mans race car you can register and tax.
Bits will fall off, it will be difficult to park, Bluetooth will not connect but the owner will not care because it will be loud, fast, raw and just a wonderful thing!
Its not the same thing!!!!
Different market and buyer.
It will be more like a 458 Special with a manual gear box, a Le Mans race car you can register and tax.
Bits will fall off, it will be difficult to park, Bluetooth will not connect but the owner will not care because it will be loud, fast, raw and just a wonderful thing!
thecook101 said:
To each their own but this is not a car knocked together in a shed by a couple a dreamers, this is a manual V8 drivers cars conceived by the man who took Aston Martin to Le Mans and engineered by the genius that created the McLaren F1. And don't forget the torque of the Cosworth fettled engine shut down their dyno on its first run and in Les' own words, "it's very very loud". I'd say these two petrolheads spent a long time debating all the issues mentioned in this thread and countless more, and after seeing the car and speaking to both of them, my deposit is in because I believe they got it right.
EDIT: I'm fortunate enough to have a 911 and an F430 and I have never for a moment considered the new TVR to be up against them. I'm hoping it will laugh out loud then try to tear my arm off and slap me with the soggy end.
EDIT: I'm fortunate enough to have a 911 and an F430 and I have never for a moment considered the new TVR to be up against them. I'm hoping it will laugh out loud then try to tear my arm off and slap me with the soggy end.
Edited by thecook101 on Saturday 12th August 19:09
Nothing to add.SidewaysSi said:
My point was not all 911s are the same and some are special, exciting and bloody good fun. Saying the 911 is an all rounder and presumably somewhat boring as a result is not really the case in all cases. You need to consider specific models when talking Porsches, something you failed to acknowledge.
No, i answered an original post comparing this to a 911, something it is not and will not be. You raised the point around models when comparing it to a GT3 or whatnot, which is not in the same price category, otherwise why not bring in the Bentley SS or a Ferrari Speciale, so your point is not relevant here, ciao.
Im not sure why people get so caught up with traction control. Abs is a fair one but tc is not essential imo. It might be if your a f
king idiot but then if your a fking idiot you shouldn't be pushing on in a powerful car.
If the car is set up well it will be predictable and balanced. I've got a tuscan and i simply respect the fact its dangerous when the roads are cold or wet. otherwise its extremely predictable, same as my old 420bhp evo9 gt, same as my old e36 track car. All very very easy to drive when set up well.
An example is a mercedes clk350 we used to have. it could be abused with tc on, no oversteer at all, almost no chance of losing it. turn off tc and it was awful, it was like a boat when it oversteered, in fact if you did get any oversteer it was verging on being out of control and was dangerous. i can only assume the chassis set up wasn't as good as the other non tc cars was.
Tbh as well I've never had a problem with no abs in my tuscan.
so id rather not have a tc system which simply masks a st chassis. Id rather have a properly sorted and well set up car which i have a feeling this is going to be!
king idiot but then if your a fking idiot you shouldn't be pushing on in a powerful car. If the car is set up well it will be predictable and balanced. I've got a tuscan and i simply respect the fact its dangerous when the roads are cold or wet. otherwise its extremely predictable, same as my old 420bhp evo9 gt, same as my old e36 track car. All very very easy to drive when set up well.
An example is a mercedes clk350 we used to have. it could be abused with tc on, no oversteer at all, almost no chance of losing it. turn off tc and it was awful, it was like a boat when it oversteered, in fact if you did get any oversteer it was verging on being out of control and was dangerous. i can only assume the chassis set up wasn't as good as the other non tc cars was.
Tbh as well I've never had a problem with no abs in my tuscan.
so id rather not have a tc system which simply masks a s
t chassis. Id rather have a properly sorted and well set up car which i have a feeling this is going to be!It's fair game to compare a 90k to competition such as 911, lotus etc and while the TVR won't be the best, it needs to be a credible alternative.
It doesn't need driver aids - my Ultima and Atom don't have them and I never though 'that hoon across the countryside would have been so much better with power steering, abs, Esp and tsc' - it actually makes the sensory overload more rewarding when you get it right and risk is slightly higher
What it does need is looks, the right noise, performance and handling .. and above all, for £90k, reliability and excellent quality - and please no marina door handles and a decent looking engine (not some plastic covered inspection hole such as that found on the 991 911)
It doesn't need driver aids - my Ultima and Atom don't have them and I never though 'that hoon across the countryside would have been so much better with power steering, abs, Esp and tsc' - it actually makes the sensory overload more rewarding when you get it right and risk is slightly higher
What it does need is looks, the right noise, performance and handling .. and above all, for £90k, reliability and excellent quality - and please no marina door handles and a decent looking engine (not some plastic covered inspection hole such as that found on the 991 911)
Trexthedinosaur said:
SidewaysSi said:
My point was not all 911s are the same and some are special, exciting and bloody good fun. Saying the 911 is an all rounder and presumably somewhat boring as a result is not really the case in all cases. You need to consider specific models when talking Porsches, something you failed to acknowledge.
No, i answered an original post comparing this to a 911, something it is not and will not be. You raised the point around models when comparing it to a GT3 or whatnot, which is not in the same price category, otherwise why not bring in the Bentley SS or a Ferrari Speciale, so your point is not relevant here, ciao.
Trexthedinosaur said:
Thankyou4calling said:
I'm sorry but this is not going to go well.
After an initial flurry of cars the reality will hit home that it isn't very good at all.
I'm afraid the world of the £70,000 car buyer has moved on hugely in the last 10 years and a company the size of TVR just won't have the resources to be anything more than an absolute niche player at best and a dinosaur at worst.
If total sales are less than 5000 a year (which they will be) it's simply not a sustainable business.
Feel free to cal? me a cynic but I've seen it far too many times.
Based on what? Have you driven one? Where do you get the figures that show 5000 to be the break even or profit point? After an initial flurry of cars the reality will hit home that it isn't very good at all.
I'm afraid the world of the £70,000 car buyer has moved on hugely in the last 10 years and a company the size of TVR just won't have the resources to be anything more than an absolute niche player at best and a dinosaur at worst.
If total sales are less than 5000 a year (which they will be) it's simply not a sustainable business.
Feel free to cal? me a cynic but I've seen it far too many times.
£70,000 for a manual, 2 seater; base 911, V8V, Corvette and A few others, not that great of a choice and £70k isn't a great deal these days for a premium car.
It needs drama, reliability and a brutal nature, like the old TVR's.
That's why the reincarnation of TVR should be a more spartan performance car with an inclusive approach to export markets. Conversely, the proposed car sounds overspec'd: carbon chassis, "full luxury leather interior," special paint, special wheels. This is a strategy that puts the accent on exquisite and posh -- as well as the cost of goods that go with that.
And, no, the car will not meet US safety and operating requirements (IMHO).
The article quotes a price of £90,000. What would the TVR market look like at half that figure coupled with export certification?
We'll never know. And, regrettably, I'm forced to join Thankyou4calling and others here who are concerned.
unsprung said:
"It needs drama, reliability and a brutal nature, like the old TVR's."
That's why the reincarnation of TVR should be a more spartan performance car with an inclusive approach to export markets.
No, that's Lotus.That's why the reincarnation of TVR should be a more spartan performance car with an inclusive approach to export markets.
unsprung said:
"It needs drama, reliability and a brutal nature, like the old TVR's."
the proposed car sounds overspec'd: carbon chassis, "full luxury leather interior," special paint, special wheels. This is a strategy that puts the accent on exquisite and posh -- as well as the cost of goods that go with that.
which all sounds just like the old philosophy and carsthe proposed car sounds overspec'd: carbon chassis, "full luxury leather interior," special paint, special wheels. This is a strategy that puts the accent on exquisite and posh -- as well as the cost of goods that go with that.
m3jappa said:
Im not sure why people get so caught up with traction control. Abs is a fair one but tc is not essential imo. It might be if your a fking idiot but then if your a fking idiot you shouldn't be pushing on in a powerful car.
If the car is set up well it will be predictable and balanced. I've got a tuscan and i simply respect the fact its dangerous when the roads are cold or wet. otherwise its extremely predictable, same as my old 420bhp evo9 gt, same as my old e36 track car. All very very easy to drive when set up well.
An example is a mercedes clk350 we used to have. it could be abused with tc on, no oversteer at all, almost no chance of losing it. turn off tc and it was awful, it was like a boat when it oversteered, in fact if you did get any oversteer it was verging on being out of control and was dangerous. i can only assume the chassis set up wasn't as good as the other non tc cars was.
Tbh as well I've never had a problem with no abs in my tuscan.
so id rather not have a tc system which simply masks a st chassis. Id rather have a properly sorted and well set up car which i have a feeling this is going to be!
You're.king idiot but then if your a fking idiot you shouldn't be pushing on in a powerful car. If the car is set up well it will be predictable and balanced. I've got a tuscan and i simply respect the fact its dangerous when the roads are cold or wet. otherwise its extremely predictable, same as my old 420bhp evo9 gt, same as my old e36 track car. All very very easy to drive when set up well.
An example is a mercedes clk350 we used to have. it could be abused with tc on, no oversteer at all, almost no chance of losing it. turn off tc and it was awful, it was like a boat when it oversteered, in fact if you did get any oversteer it was verging on being out of control and was dangerous. i can only assume the chassis set up wasn't as good as the other non tc cars was.
Tbh as well I've never had a problem with no abs in my tuscan.
so id rather not have a tc system which simply masks a s
t chassis. Id rather have a properly sorted and well set up car which i have a feeling this is going to be!suffolk009 said:
I had a couple of TVRs many years ago. They had some issues.
It'll take a long time to convince my wife that we should get another one. I'm sure the new firm will have everything sorted.
Hopefully they'll become more affordable on the secondhand market.
I am with you on this, had a few myself. It'll take a long time to convince my wife that we should get another one. I'm sure the new firm will have everything sorted.
Hopefully they'll become more affordable on the secondhand market.
But, when you hear one go by and feel the presence, you truly appreciate the difference between that rare sound and any old Porsche Clitoris blatting its tinny farty way by. Having said that after many years of TVR ownership, you are just glad that you are not paying for the maintenance on the TVR versus the Clit.
SeeFive said:
I am with you on this, had a few myself.
But, when you hear one go by and feel the presence, you truly appreciate the difference between that rare sound and any old Porsche Clitoris blatting its tinny farty way by. Having said that after many years of TVR ownership, you are just glad that you are not paying for the maintenance on the TVR versus the Clit.
This post is tragic.But, when you hear one go by and feel the presence, you truly appreciate the difference between that rare sound and any old Porsche Clitoris blatting its tinny farty way by. Having said that after many years of TVR ownership, you are just glad that you are not paying for the maintenance on the TVR versus the Clit.
I'm not even a fanboy, I love both, but wow, that's tragic.
Porsche Clitoris. Ha ha. Laughed my socks off.
m3jappa said:
so id rather not have a tc system which simply masks a st chassis. Id rather have a properly sorted and well set up car which i have a feeling this is going to be!
Agreed. I've driven a very well sorted (as mine, eventually, was) Griffith 500 around a very wet Spa circuit.mit was exciting, hair raising at times, but doable and enjoyably rewarding.t chassis. Id rather have a properly sorted and well set up car which i have a feeling this is going to be!I've also driven my 996tt around a wet Nordschelife, that was fun too. Even when, on odd laps, the wheels in the air out of Karussell caused ominous error lights on the dash; "ABS FAILURE" "PSM OFF" (s
t!) the basic handling of the chassis was still good. Given the choice, I'd leave the PSM on (there's plenty of evidence that it does not slow the car down if you check on YouTube, but were I buying the sort of car the new TVR is hopefully going to be, a lack of systems would not put me off. A TVR is 'that' sort of car.Cold said:
I stand by my statement that "No driver aids" = industry speak for "No money". It's being true to TVR if nothing else.
I think you're right. It logically just isn't cost effective to invest in the most complex of systems for what will be such small annual production numbers. And the fact that Wheeler trotted out repeatedly that all such things including ABS and TC were for girls so as to mask the fact they couldn't afford them, or in PW's case wasn't willing to divert revenues away from his pension. 
But how much of an issue is that? For a mainstream manufacturer I think it's fair to argue that it's a significant issue. For someone producing 500 cars a year that are designed to be more traditional drivers cars and under a brand that used to shout that this stuff was for girls, I don't see it as being an issue and there's even an argument that to bring out a relaunch that had stability co trim and lots of fancy electronics would damage the historical brand link.
Maybe further down the line once the new firm is successful the electric cars will have full stability control and all the modern gizmos.
m3jappa said:
Im not sure why people get so caught up with traction control. Abs is a fair one but tc is not essential imo. It might be if your a fking idiot but then if your a fking idiot you shouldn't be pushing on in a powerful car.
If the car is set up well it will be predictable and balanced. I've got a tuscan and i simply respect the fact its dangerous when the roads are cold or wet. otherwise its extremely predictable, same as my old 420bhp evo9 gt, same as my old e36 track car. All very very easy to drive when set up well.
An example is a mercedes clk350 we used to have. it could be abused with tc on, no oversteer at all, almost no chance of losing it. turn off tc and it was awful, it was like a boat when it oversteered, in fact if you did get any oversteer it was verging on being out of control and was dangerous. i can only assume the chassis set up wasn't as good as the other non tc cars was.
Tbh as well I've never had a problem with no abs in my tuscan.
so id rather not have a tc system which simply masks a st chassis. Id rather have a properly sorted and well set up car which i have a feeling this is going to be!
TC is essential. It was essential back in the 90s. king idiot but then if your a fking idiot you shouldn't be pushing on in a powerful car. If the car is set up well it will be predictable and balanced. I've got a tuscan and i simply respect the fact its dangerous when the roads are cold or wet. otherwise its extremely predictable, same as my old 420bhp evo9 gt, same as my old e36 track car. All very very easy to drive when set up well.
An example is a mercedes clk350 we used to have. it could be abused with tc on, no oversteer at all, almost no chance of losing it. turn off tc and it was awful, it was like a boat when it oversteered, in fact if you did get any oversteer it was verging on being out of control and was dangerous. i can only assume the chassis set up wasn't as good as the other non tc cars was.
Tbh as well I've never had a problem with no abs in my tuscan.
so id rather not have a tc system which simply masks a s
t chassis. Id rather have a properly sorted and well set up car which i have a feeling this is going to be!Just think back to the number of people who jumped into TVRs from a lifetime of front wheel drive cars or cars with traction control and who then spun off into a hedge because they put their foot down while pulling out to overtake or put their foot down joining from a slip road.
Even Wheeler recognised the issues which is why later cars like mine have TC.
You and I along with lots of others may be used to pokey RWD cars and understand they aren't the same as an M3 loaded with aids or a Clio Cup but all the evidence points to a vast number of owners never making that leap of understanding until they dropped the clutch in third, engine braked to a roundabout, accelerated over white lines or floored it while pulling out to over take and ended up kaput.
In 2017 there are going to be even fewer people aware of how to drive pokey RWD without TC than there were in the mid 90s.
Tools to help tools, along with helping the misfortunate are vital I think.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff