400 and 500, how do they differ??
Discussion
Hello all,
Im relatively new to PH and am after some opinions!
I have recently sold my 4.0 Chimaera and am now in the process of looking for its replacement (TVR of course). I loved the 400 to bits and it was an awesome car, but im unsure of the next step to take?
Unfortunately i dont have the money to put aside for a possible Speed Six rebuild should the worst happen, so that rules out the Tuscan etc. The Cerbera is a beautiful car but I dont think you can beat the noise of a big V8 with the roof off! This brings me back to the Chim, apart from 100 horses how does the 500 differ from the 400? Is it a totally differen animal?
Any oppinions would be greatly appreciated!
Im relatively new to PH and am after some opinions!
I have recently sold my 4.0 Chimaera and am now in the process of looking for its replacement (TVR of course). I loved the 400 to bits and it was an awesome car, but im unsure of the next step to take?
Unfortunately i dont have the money to put aside for a possible Speed Six rebuild should the worst happen, so that rules out the Tuscan etc. The Cerbera is a beautiful car but I dont think you can beat the noise of a big V8 with the roof off! This brings me back to the Chim, apart from 100 horses how does the 500 differ from the 400? Is it a totally differen animal?
Any oppinions would be greatly appreciated!
I have just been through the exact same process as you, considered buying a Tuscan but the Semtex 6 put me off.
I had a 1995 400, great if not superb car intop condition but I had had it for two and a half years and was ready for a change. I looked into having a new engine built by TVR Power but then decided why not go for the best of the bunch to start with.
Which is where my 1998 500 came into play, apart from getting the obvious 5 litre engine I also benefited from bigger brakes, the later chassis, different suspension settings, got rid of PAS, later interior, front end and door openings.
Power wise off the mark there is not a huge difference, the difference in power really comes into play in the mid range torque which is superb where the 400 was running out of puff the 500 is still pulling Robbie Williams in a brothel.
I still like the idea of the Tuscan but running costs put me off.
Hope this helps.
I had a 1995 400, great if not superb car intop condition but I had had it for two and a half years and was ready for a change. I looked into having a new engine built by TVR Power but then decided why not go for the best of the bunch to start with.
Which is where my 1998 500 came into play, apart from getting the obvious 5 litre engine I also benefited from bigger brakes, the later chassis, different suspension settings, got rid of PAS, later interior, front end and door openings.
Power wise off the mark there is not a huge difference, the difference in power really comes into play in the mid range torque which is superb where the 400 was running out of puff the 500 is still pulling Robbie Williams in a brothel.
I still like the idea of the Tuscan but running costs put me off.
Hope this helps.
Corin Denton said:
I have just been through the exact same process as you, considered buying a Tuscan but the Semtex 6 put me off.
I had a 1995 400, great if not superb car intop condition but I had had it for two and a half years and was ready for a change. I looked into having a new engine built by TVR Power but then decided why not go for the best of the bunch to start with.
Which is where my 1998 500 came into play, apart from getting the obvious 5 litre engine I also benefited from bigger brakes, the later chassis, different suspension settings, got rid of PAS, later interior, front end and door openings.
Power wise off the mark there is not a huge difference, the difference in power really comes into play in the mid range torque which is superb where the 400 was running out of puff the 500 is still pulling Robbie Williams in a brothel.
I still like the idea of the Tuscan but running costs put me off.
Hope this helps.
The chassis/suspension,interior and brakes are the same on the post 1996 4.0 Chimaera. The only difference apart from the engine is the 5.0 litre may have a thicker front ARB.
My choice would be the 4.5 as it is a better sorted engine and cross-bolted.
Power figures are approx 220BHP for the 4.0 litre and 270BHP for the 5.0 litre HC.
Torque would be more noticeable due to the extra cc's.
ian8542 said:
,
The chassis/suspension,interior and brakes are the same on the post 1996 4.0 Chimaera. The only difference apart from the engine is the 5.0 litre may have a thicker front ARB.
My choice would be the 4.5 as it is a better sorted engine and cross-bolted.
Power figures are approx 220BHP for the 4.0 litre and 270BHP for the 5.0 litre HC.
Torque would be more noticeable due to the extra cc's.
I'm not sure the above is true. Certainly the tyres are different on the 500. I also believe some of the other oily bits are different. Anyway, the only way to gauge the difference is to try a 500 & see. I think you'll be surprised how much more poke there is in the 50-70 mph zone.
steveb* said:
,
The chassis/suspension,interior and brakes are the same on the post 1996 4.0 Chimaera. The only difference apart from the engine is the 5.0 litre may have a thicker front ARB.
My choice would be the 4.5 as it is a better sorted engine and cross-bolted.
Power figures are approx 220BHP for the 4.0 litre and 270BHP for the 5.0 litre HC.
Torque would be more noticeable due to the extra cc's.
I'm not sure the above is true. Certainly the tyres are different on the 500. I also believe some of the other oily bits are different. Anyway, the only way to gauge the difference is to try a 500 & see. I think you'll be surprised how much more poke there is in the 50-70 mph zone.
Sorry i missed the tyres, yes they are slightly wider on the 500.
I can't think what other 'oily' bits there are, whatever 'oily' bits means.
You will be telling us that the Griffith has a different chassis next.
And the extra 50BHP and slightly more in the way of torque will = more poke.
daggart said:
I've got a P reg 4 litre Chimaera as a courtesy car at the moment,it's a heck of a lot slower than my Cerb.The engine on the Chimeara seem's to run out of puff exactly at the point when the Cerb is throwing you back into the seat,the handling as well is a bit dodgey.On a good note it starts every time and the exhaust note is dead sexy.
The Cerbera is a totally different kettle of fish and cannot really be compared to an old used and abused 4.0 litre Chimaera.
It's like comparing the Chimaera with a Morris Ital.
ATG said:
(Could be wrong, but I'm not aware that there are any mechanical differences bar those relating to the engine capacity btwn the 400 and 500 Chims. Mine's a 97 and it's the kind of thing that would have stuck in the mind as obvious upgrades when I read the Griff and Chim bible.)
Nope, loads of differences - bigger valves, gas flowed heads, higher lift cam, larger plenum, different clutch etc
Corin Denton said:
(Could be wrong, but I'm not aware that there are any mechanical differences bar those relating to the engine capacity btwn the 400 and 500 Chims. Mine's a 97 and it's the kind of thing that would have stuck in the mind as obvious upgrades when I read the Griff and Chim bible.)
Nope, loads of differences - bigger valves, gas flowed heads, higher lift cam, larger plenum, different clutch etc
I don't think that you have read ATG correctly because you've gone on to mention only differences relating to the engine. ATG and Ian were talking about everything else - suspension, brakes etc.
)A good 400 and a not so good 450 are about the same performance wise.
A 500 is in another league in all areas, performance, fuel consumption, running costs. The 500 also suffers more overheating type problems and obviously will wear things out quicker due to extra power.
Sensible(?) running costs - 400/450
Not bothered about costs - 500
Something different to own - 400/450/500
Ivan
A 500 is in another league in all areas, performance, fuel consumption, running costs. The 500 also suffers more overheating type problems and obviously will wear things out quicker due to extra power.
Sensible(?) running costs - 400/450
Not bothered about costs - 500
Something different to own - 400/450/500
Ivan
Ribol said:
A good 400 and a not so good 450 are about the same performance wise.
A 500 is in another league in all areas, performance, fuel consumption, running costs. The 500 also suffers more overheating type problems and obviously will wear things out quicker due to extra power.
Sensible(?) running costs - 400/450
Not bothered about costs - 500
Something different to own - 400/450/500
Ivan
I've had one 400, one 450 & three 500s. Maybe I've been lucky with my 500s, but I didn't notice the costs to be appreciably more than its smaller sisters. You're right about the 500 being in a different league though!!! .....and they are all the dogs dangly bits
Ribol said:
A good 400 and a not so good 450 are about the same performance wise.
A 500 is in another league in all areas, performance, fuel consumption, running costs. The 500 also suffers more overheating type problems and obviously will wear things out quicker due to extra power.
Sensible(?) running costs - 400/450
Not bothered about costs - 500
Something different to own - 400/450/500
Ivan
Hmmm, have to disagree?? Having owned both the 400 and the 500, running costs are no different and the 500 runs cooler???
Corin Denton said:
A good 400 and a not so good 450 are about the same performance wise.
A 500 is in another league in all areas, performance, fuel consumption, running costs. The 500 also suffers more overheating type problems and obviously will wear things out quicker due to extra power.
Sensible(?) running costs - 400/450
Not bothered about costs - 500
Something different to own - 400/450/500
Ivan
Hmmm, have to disagree?? Having owned both the 400 and the 500, running costs are no different and the 500 runs cooler???
Corin....looks like we agree on most things here!
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff