Hmmm Interesting... T350T
Discussion
Guys you will all be pleased to hear that over my first 2,500 miles the t350 has proven to be a great drive and particularly a superb handling car, I am sure this will be the case for either variant.
May i propose we unite as a single t350 community rather than anybody winding anybody else up unnecessarily.
In the spirit of this and to help you guys whom are waiting, I can confirm that I spoke with BS at the factory about 2.5 weeks ago (whom should know whats happening) and he confirmed that the reflex green press car was in the process of having its roof modified as a protype t version, so it should be ready to roll in to production fairly soon now!
If some of you want to buy us early adopters a beer at Le Mans for performing all the developmental work on your new cars then it would be a kind gesture.
Bennno
May i propose we unite as a single t350 community rather than anybody winding anybody else up unnecessarily.
In the spirit of this and to help you guys whom are waiting, I can confirm that I spoke with BS at the factory about 2.5 weeks ago (whom should know whats happening) and he confirmed that the reflex green press car was in the process of having its roof modified as a protype t version, so it should be ready to roll in to production fairly soon now!
If some of you want to buy us early adopters a beer at Le Mans for performing all the developmental work on your new cars then it would be a kind gesture.
Bennno
Right, I'll say my bit and then stand back and hope that we can return to normal service on this forum.
Like most people (I would hope) but with the exception of certain others, I post my funny stuff and off topic stuff on General gassing. If I have comments relating to other TVR's then I post on general TVR stuff and gossip. I also come on here a lot to impart some of my experiences with the Tamora and T350 and to share information and opinions and most of the time take part in sensible debate.
I would think it obvious in the case of the T350T that anyone who has had contact with the factory as I have would have asked questions. It's also pretty obvious that they were never going to tell the people who had deposits down last October that they wouldn't build any until August. Ok, I got embroiled in a few arguments with *999* over this and I apologise for my part in that. It doesn't give me any pleasure that I was right about it not being ready in May because I would rather you guys got your cars before the Summer is out.
What I do think is that people like Bennno and me do have plenty to add here. The T350T is exactly the same as the C barring two small holes in the roof, so excluding us from commenting is ridculous. Whether you agree or not Tivster, your original post was inflammatory and threatened to re-start the silly arguments all over again. I have had loads of posts deleted by Ted and the moderators in the past, I have never come back on here afterwards whinging about the injustice and the censorship, there are two reasons for that, firstly in every case it was justified (
) and secondly because I have always understood that it's Ted's site and we have to play by the rules.
I just hope we can now carry on as we did in the past. I have never thought that I run this forum, I don't. I'm not even a moderator. I don't think my TVR is any better or worse than anyone elses, they are all different and all great in their own way. I have been lucky enough to own 5 now and loved all of them.
Like most people (I would hope) but with the exception of certain others, I post my funny stuff and off topic stuff on General gassing. If I have comments relating to other TVR's then I post on general TVR stuff and gossip. I also come on here a lot to impart some of my experiences with the Tamora and T350 and to share information and opinions and most of the time take part in sensible debate.
I would think it obvious in the case of the T350T that anyone who has had contact with the factory as I have would have asked questions. It's also pretty obvious that they were never going to tell the people who had deposits down last October that they wouldn't build any until August. Ok, I got embroiled in a few arguments with *999* over this and I apologise for my part in that. It doesn't give me any pleasure that I was right about it not being ready in May because I would rather you guys got your cars before the Summer is out.
What I do think is that people like Bennno and me do have plenty to add here. The T350T is exactly the same as the C barring two small holes in the roof, so excluding us from commenting is ridculous. Whether you agree or not Tivster, your original post was inflammatory and threatened to re-start the silly arguments all over again. I have had loads of posts deleted by Ted and the moderators in the past, I have never come back on here afterwards whinging about the injustice and the censorship, there are two reasons for that, firstly in every case it was justified (
) and secondly because I have always understood that it's Ted's site and we have to play by the rules. I just hope we can now carry on as we did in the past. I have never thought that I run this forum, I don't. I'm not even a moderator. I don't think my TVR is any better or worse than anyone elses, they are all different and all great in their own way. I have been lucky enough to own 5 now and loved all of them.
Err, right.
So I've seen the pictures of the T350T prototype linked from here. If TVR are going to have two removable panels with a fibreglass "T" bit in the middle, won't it be more complicated than just cutting holes in the roof ?
My Golf which had a steel sunroof had water runways around the sunroof, and drainage holes which I think went down the B pillars. Wouldn't TVR have to engineer something similar ?
btw if it has the rollcage and a middle section, won't it be a W or M not a T bar
Cheers,
Andy.
So I've seen the pictures of the T350T prototype linked from here. If TVR are going to have two removable panels with a fibreglass "T" bit in the middle, won't it be more complicated than just cutting holes in the roof ?
My Golf which had a steel sunroof had water runways around the sunroof, and drainage holes which I think went down the B pillars. Wouldn't TVR have to engineer something similar ?
btw if it has the rollcage and a middle section, won't it be a W or M not a T bar
Cheers,
Andy.
Well as far as I can see from the pictures it doesn't actually resemble any "T" bar car of the past. The roof section itself is very small (I can reach right accross mine when I clean it) and the two removable sections are going to be very small indeed if the pictures are anything to go by. Obviously the guys at TVR didn't want to interfere with the rollcage, which is a good thing. The trouble with that though is the removable sections then become very small.
It's going to be interesting to see how the targa panel seals cope with the wet weather too....but in general TVR roofs are pretty good at keeping the rain out, although they haven't built anything like this ever before....
It's going to be interesting to see how the targa panel seals cope with the wet weather too....but in general TVR roofs are pretty good at keeping the rain out, although they haven't built anything like this ever before....
Does anyone have a plan of where the rollcage inside the T350C? i.e. the Tuscan includes windscreen support but stops at the top of the screen to allow the targa roof panel, the Cerbera runs across the top of the door section forming a complete cell, though I’m not sure what if any diagonal bracing on the roof there is (I’m sure one you who has owned a Cerbie can comment on that)
If the T350C has no diagonal bracing across the roof (hence the questions over a plan of the rollcage) would it be possible to have one larger removable panel? A bit of a bizarre comparison is the Smart convertible, the whole roof section comes out but the beams across the top of the doors remain (they can be taken out but I know that this would be not be possible on a rollcage without compromising the cage)
Sorry if this question had been raised and answered before, haven’t kept up on all the T350C threads.
If the T350C has no diagonal bracing across the roof (hence the questions over a plan of the rollcage) would it be possible to have one larger removable panel? A bit of a bizarre comparison is the Smart convertible, the whole roof section comes out but the beams across the top of the doors remain (they can be taken out but I know that this would be not be possible on a rollcage without compromising the cage)
Sorry if this question had been raised and answered before, haven’t kept up on all the T350C threads.
I don't think there is a central part to the T350 roll cage. Any T350 owner should be able to confirm this.
I was told the only reason they are doing two smaller panels and not one big one is down to storage. There is just no way of transporting the one large panel in the car when you are out and about.
I was told the only reason they are doing two smaller panels and not one big one is down to storage. There is just no way of transporting the one large panel in the car when you are out and about.
hatchn said:
I was told the only reason they are doing two smaller panels and not one big one is down to storage. There is just no way of transporting the one large panel in the car when you are out and about.
Thanks for that. How about a hinged central section? It comes off in one piece but has a hinge that allows it to fold in on itself. The hinge is on the inside section of the roof (covered by rood lining so you can’t see it) with 2 metal pins on one half of the rood section and two reciprocating holes on the other half to accommodate the pins, above the pins is a rubber seal to ensure that it is all water tight.
When removed you fold the sections so the the roof lining sections are touching and the external painted sides are facing out, you would then be faced with a smaller foot print for the roof section which could then be accommodated in the boot.
Sorry if this makes no sense but I can see it working and giving the car a much larger opening ala Tuscan…..
- ho hum. I'm sure that an engineer will correct me in the very near future over why this simple solution can not be used. 
Not an engineer, but wouldn't the problem be in stopping the panel from bowing upwards at speed around the hinge line? Also, I'm not sure about how effective the rubber seal would be, given production tolearances (although you could possibly use a membrane type seal on top of the hinge.)
Nice idea though. Would even be worth looking at it for Griff owners who get tired of doing the funky gibbon dance every time they want to stow their roofs!
Maybe Leven or such like could help develop it?
Andy 400se
Nice idea though. Would even be worth looking at it for Griff owners who get tired of doing the funky gibbon dance every time they want to stow their roofs!
Maybe Leven or such like could help develop it?
Andy 400se
andymadmak said: Not an engineer, but wouldn't the problem be in stopping the panel from bowing upwards at speed around the hinge line? Andy 400se
I would have thought that if the roof pannel had something along the lines of 4 locating pins at the front and clasps at the back that the roof could be held in place with no bowing up at speed. This might be over kill and a lesser number of pins etc might be possible. The rubber seal could be replaced with a more suitlable material just couldn't think of one
!! 
This had me thinking....
the original two part S-roof which had overlapping flanges in the middle with rubber seals, could work if bastardised a little. Pins and locating slots at the leading edge and clasps internally at the trailing edge or even vice versa. Two pieces solves storage, the system is proven (just reversed from the S)and my old S did not have a leaky roof!!
As these panels are rigid, they may form part of the intended chassis stiffener overall, so when removed the whole structure may be less rigid, but I doubt whether that would be the case. I don't quite see the point of the central section otherwise....
The only other concession would be the larger 'hole' producing dare I say - more buffeting. The central strut in combination with the smaller apertures may introduce just enough interference to the airflow over the roof to cut down the buffeting...
Dunno really but it seems logical....
the original two part S-roof which had overlapping flanges in the middle with rubber seals, could work if bastardised a little. Pins and locating slots at the leading edge and clasps internally at the trailing edge or even vice versa. Two pieces solves storage, the system is proven (just reversed from the S)and my old S did not have a leaky roof!!
As these panels are rigid, they may form part of the intended chassis stiffener overall, so when removed the whole structure may be less rigid, but I doubt whether that would be the case. I don't quite see the point of the central section otherwise....
The only other concession would be the larger 'hole' producing dare I say - more buffeting. The central strut in combination with the smaller apertures may introduce just enough interference to the airflow over the roof to cut down the buffeting...
Dunno really but it seems logical....
Tivster said:
Dunno really but it seems logical....
ah ha i'm no the only one with a twisted thought process then
!! 
anyone from Leven or the like care to comment on the idea of a two piece solid roof?.......... edited to say if the factory are interested i'll take payment in the form of a Rosso Pearl Cerbera 4.5 with the syders and afterburner lights, lifetime warrenty and servicing oh
!! well you never know your luck >> Edited by d_drinks on Friday 6th June 08:27
Gassing Station | Tamora, T350 & Sagaris | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff