dyno (straight 6)
Discussion
Hi
Some guys on the Cerbera forum had a dyno shoot-out with similar "dissapointing" to the Griff/Chimaera V8s*.
The straight 6 Tuscan that turned up made near as damn it exactly what it said on the tin which caused a little controversy.
Cheers
Marco
* The performance claims seem accurate however and thats what I bought my Griff for rather than the engine figures anyway so who cares - its all Pub-Talk anyway
Some guys on the Cerbera forum had a dyno shoot-out with similar "dissapointing" to the Griff/Chimaera V8s*.
The straight 6 Tuscan that turned up made near as damn it exactly what it said on the tin which caused a little
Cheers
Marco
* The performance claims seem accurate however and thats what I bought my Griff for rather than the engine figures anyway so who cares - its all Pub-Talk anyway
The Tuscan that developed 358 (belonging to Robin) was actually a Red Rose version. I know of only one other Tuscan on a rolling road, which was Jon Lewis' ex-dealer demo, which had 373. It wasn't supposed to be a Red Rose though!
Ston - I'm very interested in seeing a Red Rose 4.5 Cerbera on the dyno - I'm trying to get mine on Joolz' local road (Noble) ASAP - shall we make it a double booking? Any other Tuscan's welcome!
danny
Ston - I'm very interested in seeing a Red Rose 4.5 Cerbera on the dyno - I'm trying to get mine on Joolz' local road (Noble) ASAP - shall we make it a double booking? Any other Tuscan's welcome!
danny
oo leading questions. how far am I allowed to go before tvr drag me through the courts? best stop here then
don't know why tvr push the SP6. from what i understand (usual disclaimers apply) it was introduced for no other reason that someone high up wanted a straight six like britain used to do so well in the 50s 60s 70s etc - certainly there are no packaging benefits cos it's massive. I'm a lifelong Triumph fan so the idea of a straight 6 appeals greatly, but why did tvr have to make an engine so utterly characterless and with possibly the worst exhaust note of any 6 ever. I probably shouldn't go into all the faults I've seen on sp6 engines, but from what I've seen so far they still aren't sorted (isn't one car on it's 4th or 5th engine? .. there'll be a thread somewhere in the archive on yahoo groups). by contrast the V8 was sorted within a couple of years and became a storming engine, if a little difficult to get any extra power out of. the sp6 is also much much cleaner burning which could be a factor - but why not just do some 4 valve heads for the V8 .. crikey how great would that be??? .. a 32 valve V8 would be the engine to make tvr great again..hope someone's listening. thing is I'm the biggest tvr fan on the planet so I get genuinely upset to see so many disgruntled customers, and I'm sure tvr won't like it either - it'd be nice to see them stop producing new models all the time (who needs a tuscan R and cerbera SP12 except for PR purposes ..?) and just concentrate for a year on getting the current crop sorted - that's the time to introduce new models again surely. PW has to be applauded for what he's done in the recent past for tvr but i wonder just where he sees the company in 5 years time?.. with the receivers?
don't know why tvr push the SP6. from what i understand (usual disclaimers apply) it was introduced for no other reason that someone high up wanted a straight six like britain used to do so well in the 50s 60s 70s etc - certainly there are no packaging benefits cos it's massive. I'm a lifelong Triumph fan so the idea of a straight 6 appeals greatly, but why did tvr have to make an engine so utterly characterless and with possibly the worst exhaust note of any 6 ever. I probably shouldn't go into all the faults I've seen on sp6 engines, but from what I've seen so far they still aren't sorted (isn't one car on it's 4th or 5th engine? .. there'll be a thread somewhere in the archive on yahoo groups). by contrast the V8 was sorted within a couple of years and became a storming engine, if a little difficult to get any extra power out of. the sp6 is also much much cleaner burning which could be a factor - but why not just do some 4 valve heads for the V8 .. crikey how great would that be??? .. a 32 valve V8 would be the engine to make tvr great again..hope someone's listening. thing is I'm the biggest tvr fan on the planet so I get genuinely upset to see so many disgruntled customers, and I'm sure tvr won't like it either - it'd be nice to see them stop producing new models all the time (who needs a tuscan R and cerbera SP12 except for PR purposes ..?) and just concentrate for a year on getting the current crop sorted - that's the time to introduce new models again surely. PW has to be applauded for what he's done in the recent past for tvr but i wonder just where he sees the company in 5 years time?.. with the receivers?
Just for some context, the rolling road on Trigger the Tuscan of 358 was unadjusted for atmospheric conditions - a normalised reading would have been some 15-20 bhp higher (the 373 reading on the 'standard' Tuscan was on this normalised basis I believe).
It was also taken at 4.5k miles with valve clearances unadjusted - now it's through the 6k service and on fully synthetic oil and idling at 800rpm rather than 500, it's appreciably more perky. I'd be very surprised if it's less than 400 now - possibly rather more. Guess this will start to come back a little if/when the valves unadjust themselves though.
Had a chance to try it back-to-back against a decatted 4.5 Cerbie on the way back from Le Mans - it did feel quicker (but then I would say that anyway
), although possibly more weight in the Cerbie....and the Cerbie won hands-down for listenability through the tunnels. Not to mention the flames of course. 
It was also taken at 4.5k miles with valve clearances unadjusted - now it's through the 6k service and on fully synthetic oil and idling at 800rpm rather than 500, it's appreciably more perky. I'd be very surprised if it's less than 400 now - possibly rather more. Guess this will start to come back a little if/when the valves unadjust themselves though.
Had a chance to try it back-to-back against a decatted 4.5 Cerbie on the way back from Le Mans - it did feel quicker (but then I would say that anyway
), although possibly more weight in the Cerbie....and the Cerbie won hands-down for listenability through the tunnels. Not to mention the flames of course. 
You know you have 400bhp? Then you should tell everyone why & how, and show us the dynograph! That's more than the Tuscan S is quoted...
I saw the one in the vault, agree that it's not corrected - don't know why they didn't bother connecting the air temp/pressure up? Anyway - given it was around 20 degrees that day, corrected wouldn't have been much different - mine at 20 degrees was 398 corrected from 397 or so I think.
I saw the one in the vault, agree that it's not corrected - don't know why they didn't bother connecting the air temp/pressure up? Anyway - given it was around 20 degrees that day, corrected wouldn't have been much different - mine at 20 degrees was 398 corrected from 397 or so I think.
quote:
Be sure that the V8 will be dropped on the Motorshow.
Christof,
Do you know things that we dont? Care to elaborate? Oh, and how is the build of the Tuscan R coming along?
Cheers,
Paul
P.S. Dont suppose that you are going to Duxford in august. I know it is a little way, but us UK lot would love to see your monster in the flesh....
Paul,
just wait till the Motorshow, couldn't tell more.
And I really hope I'm wrong with the V8 ...
I'm currently thinking about the Tuscan R, but I'm worried about the wheight of the car.
Actually I'm thinking of buying a Tamora with an upgrated engine.
I also have a Ford GT40 on order (pre order list).
But I count the days to the Motorshow to see the new TVR.
I would love to come over to meet up again. I'll try to join the GT series again later in the year.
What about meeting up at the Motorshow ...???
Cheers,
Christof
just wait till the Motorshow, couldn't tell more.
And I really hope I'm wrong with the V8 ...
I'm currently thinking about the Tuscan R, but I'm worried about the wheight of the car.
Actually I'm thinking of buying a Tamora with an upgrated engine.
I also have a Ford GT40 on order (pre order list).
But I count the days to the Motorshow to see the new TVR.
I would love to come over to meet up again. I'll try to join the GT series again later in the year.
What about meeting up at the Motorshow ...???
Cheers,
Christof
Happy to explain one more time. Unadjusted dyno = 358. Correction = 15-20 (per PowerStation staff on the day and documented in subsequent emails; note that the correction for the other Tuscan dyno'd is 16.5). No reliable data exists for pre- versus post-valve clearance adjustment bhps. However, it is known to be greater than the 20-30bhp difference between RR/S and non-RR/S engines. Mine was idling at 500rpm (lowest idle experienced), but call it 30 to be conservative. Assume no benefit for 6k service engine adjustments or other general running-in. Worst-case is therefore 358 + 15 + 30 = 403 (best-case maybe 420+, but who knows). I would consider this within individual engine tolerances (my Griff 500 is around 15 bhp lower than average, for example) and I would also expect it to fall off a bit as the valve clearances unadjust themselves.
At some point I'll get to a weighbridge to calculate a true power/weight ratio. Data from magazine test-drives on other TVR models suggest that this could be optimistically stated....but as I still have 15 sprints/hillclimbs left this season, it'll have to wait until the winter.
At some point I'll get to a weighbridge to calculate a true power/weight ratio. Data from magazine test-drives on other TVR models suggest that this could be optimistically stated....but as I still have 15 sprints/hillclimbs left this season, it'll have to wait until the winter.
Gassing Station | Tuscan | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff