Early griff 500's 340 bhp?
Early griff 500's 340 bhp?
Author
Discussion

old64er

Original Poster:

1,388 posts

267 months

Sunday 20th June 2004
quotequote all
Hey there PH ers, i am buying a early Griff 500 and it seems the early ones are quoted at 340bhp but the later are 320 bhp, what average power do they actually produce and what was the difference with the engine (if any)

Thanks to everyone on the forum for all your posts cos they make good reading for any prorpective buyer

PS been looking for 4 months for a car and even longer at this site but never posted beore

beano500

20,854 posts

304 months

Sunday 20th June 2004
quotequote all
Theoretical, at the crank, and you're right that they were apparently "detuned" slightly from about 1997. It was allegedly to make them a bit easier to drive at low speed by being a bit smoother. Mine's a pussycat even if it's supposed to be 340 - but then each individual car could have been specced slightly differently anyway.

I recommend that you don't get too hung up about what they will produce in theory. They all do what they say on the tin - "0-lost licence" in not many seconds!!!!

PS - I know a particularly good value early Griff for sale - "Ooooh, Suits you, Sir!"

>> Edited by beano500 on Sunday 20th June 00:46

julianhj

8,868 posts

291 months

Sunday 20th June 2004
quotequote all
TVR BHP, certainly on the Rover-engined cars is always a bit optomistic, and quoted outputs are from bench-tested engines. Back in the real world, if your 500 is putting out 300 BHP on a RR, you've got one of the best. Having said that, 0-60 in the very low 4's is normal on most examples, as is the ability to wipe the floor with anyone you might come across (up to around 120, in my experience). The grin-inducing factor is factory-fitted, off the scale, and very reliable.

As Beano says the drop from '340' to '320' was supposed to make the car more drivable at low speeds. Having only driven the one example (one of the first serpentine-engined models) I can second that you don't have too much to worry about on that front.

>> Edited by julianhj on Sunday 20th June 08:26

old64er

Original Poster:

1,388 posts

267 months

Sunday 20th June 2004
quotequote all
[redacted]

RAW-SEWedge

970 posts

288 months

Sunday 20th June 2004
quotequote all
I've got an early 500 (pre-serpentine). Below 2000 revs it's not happy round town and you need to slip the clutch to stop the transmission shunting. Out on the open road it is ace. Don't pay too much attention to BHP it's the torque that gives the grin factor none of them are short of that !

Guillotine

5,516 posts

293 months

Sunday 20th June 2004
quotequote all
same as raw...

changed mine abit now tho

pre serps are sharper, but less ...subtle.

bit older so cheaper.

take your choice. serps are smoother and have better cooling and oil delivery. supposedly.


don't think it matter, buy the best you can and get a car thats been driven...hence sorted.

have fun




BTW if you EVER rolling road a Griff that gives over 300bhp in standrd trim...

BUY IT IMMEDIATELY! (275 is good in the real world)
0-100 and max speeds are accurate tho)

>> Edited by Guillotine on Sunday 20th June 12:47

apache

39,731 posts

313 months

Sunday 20th June 2004
quotequote all
RAW-SEWedge said:
I've got an early 500 (pre-serpentine). Below 2000 revs it's not happy round town and you need to slip the clutch to stop the transmission shunting. Out on the open road it is ace. Don't pay too much attention to BHP it's the torque that gives the grin factor none of them are short of that !



Mine started to do that, it's a very common problem with griffs. My profile has details of how I overcame it. It's now smooth and very, very interesting

beano500

20,854 posts

304 months

Sunday 20th June 2004
quotequote all
I've always been surprised taht mine doesn't exhibit these characteristics....

...which just goes to show how each individual can turn out different!!!

H & the Tsunami

3,498 posts

269 months

Sunday 20th June 2004
quotequote all
ditto to Beano500's comment, my 94 pre serp 500 is very smooth, the only time it wasn't was when i filled up at a BP station...now i only go to Esso and Shell and she is always smooth.

beano500

20,854 posts

304 months

Sunday 20th June 2004
quotequote all
H & the Tsunami said:
... when i filled up at a BP station....


Spookey! I tried Ultimate earlier this year, about three tankfulls -

DustyC

12,822 posts

283 months

Monday 21st June 2004
quotequote all
'96 500 Serp and its smoother than Barry White wearing velvet on a waterslide. (A water slide without the irritating join sections).

glena

362 posts

277 months

Monday 21st June 2004
quotequote all
Just had my standard 92 4.3 on the RR at Austec.

252.3 Bhp @ 5314 rpm
281 lb ft @ 3944 rpm

Good or bad ?

Horse_Apple

3,795 posts

271 months

Monday 21st June 2004
quotequote all
Mine was down there last week. It's a 92/3 (not sure) BV, with lightened flywheel, cross bolted, extra big valves and a very high lift cam.

240 was the opener as the engine was retarded after a rebuild and also due to pinking issues.

They replaced the original air filter!!!! changed the ducting and flow meter, added some carbon fibre trumpets and then re-mapped the ECU.

produces around 270 now. Drives much more smoothly and what was most impressive was that on the drive back the 996T which had given me a lift down wasn't dissapearing into the horizon.

It was reckoned that more could be gotten with some more chip work but I think I have enough.

greenv8s

31,014 posts

313 months

Monday 21st June 2004
quotequote all
glena said:
Just had my standard 92 4.3 on the RR at Austec.

252.3 Bhp @ 5314 rpm
281 lb ft @ 3944 rpm

Good or bad ?


Don't know how those figures stack up against other 4.3s, but in any case it's hard to compare between different roads because they vary so much. The peak power is pretty good, although the torque seems very high for that capacity and I'm surprised peak power is occuring as low as 5300 rpm. No chance any of these figures got mixed up?

glena

362 posts

277 months

Monday 21st June 2004
quotequote all
greenv8s said:

glena said:
Just had my standard 92 4.3 on the RR at Austec.

252.3 Bhp @ 5314 rpm
281 lb ft @ 3944 rpm

Good or bad ?



Don't know how those figures stack up against other 4.3s, but in any case it's hard to compare between different roads because they vary so much. The peak power is pretty good, although the torque seems very high for that capacity and I'm surprised peak power is occuring as low as 5300 rpm. No chance any of these figures got mixed up?


No, I have the "DynoPlot" report & graphs in front of me.
If you are interested I'll fax then to you?

rev-erend

21,619 posts

313 months

Monday 21st June 2004
quotequote all
glena said:
Just had my standard 92 4.3 on the RR at Austec.

252.3 Bhp @ 5314 rpm
281 lb ft @ 3944 rpm

Good or bad ?


I would say they are good .. many will be worse and some more power could be achieved .. but I guess you would have to spend much to get it !

2 sheds

2,529 posts

313 months

Monday 21st June 2004
quotequote all
glena said:
Just had my standard 92 4.3 on the RR at Austec.

252.3 Bhp @ 5314 rpm
281 lb ft @ 3944 rpm

Good or bad ?


Yes knowing Austecs normal figures that seems healthy, btw is it the car that we supplied the intake mods for last week ?
Tim

glena

362 posts

277 months

Monday 21st June 2004
quotequote all
2 sheds said:

glena said:
Just had my standard 92 4.3 on the RR at Austec.

252.3 Bhp @ 5314 rpm
281 lb ft @ 3944 rpm

Good or bad ?



Yes knowing Austecs normal figures that seems healthy, btw is it the car that we supplied the intake mods for last week ?
Tim


No, I've had no mods.........yet !!!!

rude girl

6,937 posts

288 months

Monday 21st June 2004
quotequote all
old64er said:
Hey there PH ers, i am buying a early Griff 500 and it seems the early ones are quoted at 340bhp but the later are 320 bhp, what average power do they actually produce and what was the difference with the engine (if any)


Back to the question. They don't produce either 340 or 320, but don't let that worry you. There were a few changes to the engine, and a search will yield you pages and pages of previous argument about what the changes were, but IIRC consensus is that there was a change in cams and also in tuning. Amongst the '340' Griffs some have the serpentine engine, but very early ones don't. There was also a change in gearbox from the Rover SDI box to the Borg Warner T5, and a change in diff (but don't know when that was) plus various different interior layouts and changes in alarm system as the car evolved.

Mine's one of those that is lumpy in crawling traffic and it's bloody hard work after about 10 minutes, but I found a cheaper solution than some of the chaps - don't drive it in traffic, get on the open road and go FAST!

Best advice of all - it doesn't matter if it stacks up as the best car in the world, if it doesn't make your tummy go over, don't buy it.

Horse_Apple

3,795 posts

271 months

Tuesday 22nd June 2004
quotequote all
2 sheds said:

glena said:
Just had my standard 92 4.3 on the RR at Austec.

252.3 Bhp @ 5314 rpm
281 lb ft @ 3944 rpm

Good or bad ?



Yes knowing Austecs normal figures that seems healthy, btw is it the car that we supplied the intake mods for last week ?
Tim



Morning,

If you mean the carbon fibre trumpets then that was me.

Engine runs very smooth now and appears to be making the most of the TVR Power new engine from a year or two back.