4.3 BV vs modern 500
Discussion
I have a budget of £30k but do not think I'll need to spend that to get something I'm happy with. I'm seriously considering a nice black 92 4.3, mostly because of the things I've heard about the wonderful noise it makes without the cats.
I'd be interested in any owner's comments on the merits of a recent griff 500 in comparison to a 10yr old one - I can't see there's that much in it other than obvious age related issues as the car is fundamentally the same looks and handling wise (?). I think reliability may be an issue too?
Thanks
I'd be interested in any owner's comments on the merits of a recent griff 500 in comparison to a 10yr old one - I can't see there's that much in it other than obvious age related issues as the car is fundamentally the same looks and handling wise (?). I think reliability may be an issue too?
Thanks
500 has better brakes, suspension and is generally better built. Also PAS and aircon options are available. Usually has the better T5 box as well.
It all depends on what you want from the car. The 4.3BV have a bit of an exaggerated myth about them in my experience. Still a mighty fine car though.
Steve
www.tvrbooks.co.uk
It all depends on what you want from the car. The 4.3BV have a bit of an exaggerated myth about them in my experience. Still a mighty fine car though.
Steve
www.tvrbooks.co.uk
drive a 500 and you'll never want an earlier car, like chalk and cheese on the driving experience .. 500s have more torque, better suspension, better brakes, don't make your eyes water with the exhaust fumes in the cabin (potentially very dangerous), you can have the T5 gearbox, unburstable BTR diff .. the list goes on. If you buy an early non 500 budget around 5K to get it up to 500 standards..
IMO of course.
IMO of course.
'drive a 500 and you'll never want an earlier car, like chalk and cheese on the driving experience .. 500s have more torque, better suspension, better brakes, don't make your eyes water with the exhaust fumes in the cabin (potentially very dangerous), you can have the T5 gearbox, unburstable BTR diff .. the list goes on.'
Value for money-wise (and noise-wise) I'm inclined to vote the other way. I've had a 1992 4.0 and currently have a 1997 500. I got the 500 for the condition, colour and interior, not the power. IMHO the 4.0 was ideal for thrashing around country roads with a good balance of power, grip and suspension; the 500 is better for a track. Rover box was slick, fast and a delight to use; the T5 is a notchy bitch that likes to baulk between 2nd and 3rd at high revs. Add to that the 500's rock-hard suspension that has you skittering over the cats eyes, and I think the 4.0 is a better package for normal driving.
I did get exhaust fumes after a while in the cabin, but my local tyre & exhaust centre tightened up the joints and it stopped.
On paper there's only 0.8 secs in the 0-60 time, and top speed is hardly relevant. The seat in my 4.0 was different - I sat lower and felt more a part of the car. The 500's seat is firmer and I sit higher, not so snug. But then the 500 does look nicer, I think... doh...
>> Edited by simpo one on Tuesday 25th June 20:57
Value for money-wise (and noise-wise) I'm inclined to vote the other way. I've had a 1992 4.0 and currently have a 1997 500. I got the 500 for the condition, colour and interior, not the power. IMHO the 4.0 was ideal for thrashing around country roads with a good balance of power, grip and suspension; the 500 is better for a track. Rover box was slick, fast and a delight to use; the T5 is a notchy bitch that likes to baulk between 2nd and 3rd at high revs. Add to that the 500's rock-hard suspension that has you skittering over the cats eyes, and I think the 4.0 is a better package for normal driving.
I did get exhaust fumes after a while in the cabin, but my local tyre & exhaust centre tightened up the joints and it stopped.
On paper there's only 0.8 secs in the 0-60 time, and top speed is hardly relevant. The seat in my 4.0 was different - I sat lower and felt more a part of the car. The 500's seat is firmer and I sit higher, not so snug. But then the 500 does look nicer, I think... doh...
>> Edited by simpo one on Tuesday 25th June 20:57
Drive both. I did, and initially I thought I was going to end up with a 500. But I found a mint 430, and the sound you get from a 430 can never be replicated by a 500. Simply because its law that the 500's have to have cats.
But 500's do have more torque than 430's. Depends what means more to you. I'd love to try a genuine 4.3BV....
Tiv
But 500's do have more torque than 430's. Depends what means more to you. I'd love to try a genuine 4.3BV....
Tiv
Agree with Simpo. We've had a late 4.0 for 5 years and tried several 500's with a view to "upgrading". The cars are a bit different but its impossible and wrong to tag either as "best". It’s a bit like trying to say which malt whisky is best!. For us, we don't need the small extra performance as we don't compete seriously and are rarely embarrassed on the road. We also don't find the torque difference to be a problem (certainly when compared with modern peaky cars). In fact, the slightly lower power of the 4.0 can make it that bit less marginal when it comes to the occasional touch of the over-heavy boot.
We love the 4.0 for the very things that make it different to the 500 - noise, feel (no PAS), noise, position, noise, rarity, and of course it’s the original. For others it will be the opposite. Unfortunately we’ve never had the chance to drive a 4.3!
I certainly don’t think it is a reliability issue. There are good and bad ones of all ages. In fact I seem to note far more problems reported on these pages with the 500 - starter motors, cooling etc - possibly related to the extra power generated. Of course, it could also be that there are far more 500's on the road (surprisingly few 4.0/4.3’s were made).
As everyone says, drive a few of each and you will just know which is for you.
Laurie - Monaco
(By the way - saw a new Chimera out here yesterday with Monaco plates and special dark alloy wheels - if the driver reads this then please make contact)
We love the 4.0 for the very things that make it different to the 500 - noise, feel (no PAS), noise, position, noise, rarity, and of course it’s the original. For others it will be the opposite. Unfortunately we’ve never had the chance to drive a 4.3!
I certainly don’t think it is a reliability issue. There are good and bad ones of all ages. In fact I seem to note far more problems reported on these pages with the 500 - starter motors, cooling etc - possibly related to the extra power generated. Of course, it could also be that there are far more 500's on the road (surprisingly few 4.0/4.3’s were made).
As everyone says, drive a few of each and you will just know which is for you.
Laurie - Monaco
(By the way - saw a new Chimera out here yesterday with Monaco plates and special dark alloy wheels - if the driver reads this then please make contact)
No. The BV was a varient but many 4.3 cars have been sold as BV by chnaging the engine plate and claiming it was so that they could get extra money. Before buying a BV car, check its provenance very very carefully otherwise you could end up paying extra dosh for nothing special.
All the Griffi 4.x models are catless. Chassis production miraculously stopped on 31st Dec 1992 and so the '93 cars didn't need cats. All detailed in the Griff bible.
Steve
www.tvrbooks.co.uk
All the Griffi 4.x models are catless. Chassis production miraculously stopped on 31st Dec 1992 and so the '93 cars didn't need cats. All detailed in the Griff bible.
Steve
www.tvrbooks.co.uk
I've owned a BV for a few years now and prior to that a 5ltr so I can say from a point of experience that the two cars are pretty evenly matched in all aspects of handling and performance.Apart from a few dash/switches/cat exhaust/grill changes their virtually identicle even down to the chassis which has pretty much stayed the same design right through to the latest Chimearas.
I've stuck with a 4.3 BV because its my favourite of the Griffs, its cheaper to run than the 5ltr and easier to service and naturally because they are pre-cat the noise is quite unique.
All this waffle about which car is best gets a bit irritating after a while as most of the time its down to who's behind the wheel that makes the real performance difference, make the best of what you have and enjoy!
I've stuck with a 4.3 BV because its my favourite of the Griffs, its cheaper to run than the 5ltr and easier to service and naturally because they are pre-cat the noise is quite unique.
All this waffle about which car is best gets a bit irritating after a while as most of the time its down to who's behind the wheel that makes the real performance difference, make the best of what you have and enjoy!
I drove 4ltr, 4.3, 4.3bv and a couple of 500's. Ended up going with a 4.3 because it was plenty fast enough to scare the shit out of me and better in a load of other (non mechanical !) respects ( ie full leather, really nice colour comb, spottles history, immaculate chassis etc...).
4.3 and 4.3bv blew the socks off 500 for sheer driving pleasure because of the sound ! That's the real seller. 500's quicker, but you'd have to be a talanted driver to exploit it !
Go for any of the above, except the 4lt, which was noticeably slower after the others.
Enjoy.
4.3 and 4.3bv blew the socks off 500 for sheer driving pleasure because of the sound ! That's the real seller. 500's quicker, but you'd have to be a talanted driver to exploit it !
Go for any of the above, except the 4lt, which was noticeably slower after the others.
Enjoy.
quote:
I've owned a BV for a few years now and prior to that a 5ltr so I can say from a point of experience that the two cars are pretty evenly matched in all aspects of handling and performance.Apart from a few dash/switches/cat exhaust/grill changes their virtually identicle even down to the chassis which has pretty much stayed the same design right through to the latest Chimearas.
I've stuck with a 4.3 BV because its my favourite of the Griffs, its cheaper to run than the 5ltr and easier to service and naturally because they are pre-cat the noise is quite unique.
All this waffle about which car is best gets a bit irritating after a while as most of the time its down to who's behind the wheel that makes the real performance difference, make the best of what you have and enjoy!
quote:
I can't tell just by looking, but they definitely aren't all equal. There was a very nice 4.3BV at Zolder, which had a definite edge over the V8S in a straight line. And I can usually show a 500 a clean pair of heels.
I think Matt got it right Peter, it is mostly down to driver skills at this level.
He had a very noticeable straight line advantage. I was lapping about six seconds quicker and had about 10 mph on this guy out of every corner, but even with that run up the best I could do was pull level on the straights. No way I was going to get past unless he cooperated - which he clearly had no intention of doing. But I suspect you're right, and the car was far from standard. Either that, or he'd found an *extremely* nice example. Nice car, either way.
The 4.3BV at Zolder was a dutch car which was essentially standard with a few tweeks to the induction (it featured ramair). He was claiming approx 300bhp at the flywheel. I was was there too, but not spending a lot of time on the cicuit (Mine was the 4.5BV on axle stands with gearbox trouble pictured in the Zolder report). Incidentally my 4.5 BV was bench dyno'ed at V8 developments at 280 BHP on a weber 500, With the hotwire injection, together with ECU and induction mods, its estimated at 300+ bhp which is more than enough to despatch a Griff 500 (280 bhp on the same dyno).
Since I am the driver/owner of the car mentioned by you all, let me give you a littkle insight. As Mickey already suggested there are merely a few tweeks to my car: for one it is a genuine factory 1992 build 4.3 BV, shipped to Saudi Arabia in 1993, hence NO cat. I did fit ram air and insulate the hose and air flow meter, and yes there is more fuel injected [there is another little change I made to have the engine suck up more Co2, on which I cannot elaborate just now]. I did use carbon as an air box [ custom made]. As Steve mentioned I wasn't very cooperative to let you pass since I was enjoying myself to much leaving you with a question mark [you have won enough awards] on your face wondering who was that Griff blunt enough NOT to let you pass [there was even an orange modern Tuscan not capable [or didn't dare] passing me on the straight]. Needless to say I had a wonderful day at Zolder especially since you all were such good sports...
As far as the claimed power on the flywheel, I had my car dyno benched at 265 Bhp at the rear wheels [it’s up to you what the loss would be, between rear wheels and fly wheel].
As far as the claimed power on the flywheel, I had my car dyno benched at 265 Bhp at the rear wheels [it’s up to you what the loss would be, between rear wheels and fly wheel].
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff