Best engine 4.0, 4.3, 4.5 or 5.0

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Brithunter said:

latham91 said:

I have a 4 but is a 5 really 'much' faster? I'll have to try one sometime.... Looking at the stats table in the Steve Heath book there doesn't appear to be much in it although the 5 is 'slightly' faster - tests done when these cars were all brand new. With the age of these cars it's more down to how sorted a car is I would have thought... People who own a 5 probably have the extra budget to keep them professionally serviced and near to tip top performance whereas I suspect a lot of 4's have been neglected to some extent and lost some performance - Mine only had 170bhp when I bought it but after a year of fettling and servicing (by myself) I got it back to 231bhp and it's all totally standard...

Hmmm this is one of my concerns .............................. how well the car has been maintained. Hence my searchng and checking prices of stuff likes cams and valve train. With the engine running as well as it can then fuel consumption should also be the best.

There's naff all to choose between the fuel consumption. (and tbh if that's a concern you are buying the wrong car! )

As said earlier...engine is a consideration, but chassis/overall condition is the most important thing. Go test & few is the answer.

[QBee]

Not that it matters, but a 4.0 will return you 26-30 mpg, a 5.0 nearer 20 mpg.
If you aren't wanting to drive it 10/10ths, then you will get a better car for your money if you go for a 4 litre.

[glow worm]

Every TVR mechanic I've spoken to has expressed a preference for a 4.6 .

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

QBee said:

Not that it matters, but a 4.0 will return you 26-30 mpg, a 5.0 nearer 20 mpg.
If you aren't wanting to drive it 10/10ths, then you will get a better car for your money if you go for a 4 litre.

Over 300,000+ miles mine have all averaged pretty much 24 mpg. (4.0 a tad more at times, 5.0 a tad less)

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

QBee said:

Not that it matters, but a 4.0 will return you 26-30 mpg, a 5.0 nearer 20 mpg.
If you aren't wanting to drive it 10/10ths, then you will get a better car for your money if you go for a 4 litre.

Over 300,000+ miles mine have all averaged pretty much 24 mpg. (4.0 a tad more at times, 5.0 a tad less)

but allowing for odometer optimism, yes, near 20 mpg

[N7GTX]

Once you have had a good look and decided the 4 litre is the one to have you can enjoy it for a while. Then like many on here, you will become used to its performance and then the dreaded disease takes hold.
"Wouldn't mind a quicker car, can I fit a chip?" "Think I'll fit bigger brakes" "Whats the best way to get more power?" "That silly old git in a Peugeot 308 beat me at the lights yesterday" "How do I make the exhaust louder?" "The original wheels look far too small, what is the biggest I can fit?"

Then it gets really serious: "How much is a turbo?". Then you will have the last laugh with the 5 litre tormentors

[ClassicChimaera]

N7GTX said:

Once you have had a good look and decided the 4 litre is the one to have you can enjoy it for a while. Then like many on here, you will become used to its performance and then the dreaded disease takes hold.
"Wouldn't mind a quicker car, can I fit a chip?" "Think I'll fit bigger brakes" "Whats the best way to get more power?" "That silly old git in a Peugeot 308 beat me at the lights yesterday" "How do I make the exhaust louder?" "The original wheels look far too small, what is the biggest I can fit?"

Then it gets really serious: "How much is a turbo?". Then you will have the last laugh with the 5 litre tormentors

It will break the bank but you'll have a hell of a lot of fun along the way

[tonys]

latham91 said:

I have a 4 but is a 5 really 'much' faster? I'll have to try one sometime.... Looking at the stats table in the Steve Heath book there doesn't appear to be much in it although the 5 is 'slightly' faster - tests done when these cars were all brand new. With the age of these cars it's more down to how sorted a car is I would have thought... People who own a 5 probably have the extra budget to keep them professionally serviced and near to tip top performance whereas I suspect a lot of 4's have been neglected to some extent and lost some performance - Mine only had 170bhp when I bought it but after a year of fettling and servicing (by myself) I got it back to 231bhp and it's all totally standard...

A few generalisations? As there aren't very many 'owned from new' examples about, even amongst those who've had one for 15 years, a lot of owners would have bought any engine as long as the car was 'right'. The reality is that there are more 400s than 500s, so more chance of finding a decent 400 than 500.

Unless you must have a 500, and bearing in mind that the newest Chimaera will be 15 years or so old, I would look for the best car you can find, based on condition and the way it's been looked after.

[OleVix]

Ive spent a ton of money on my 400 to make it faster.... which it now is, but I did have a lot of fun in it before the big HP numbers though. It can be driven to the max without being caught off guard. I think therefore the 4.3 is the best compromise engine you will stay happy with. 4.3 came in the early models from 93 to 94 if I'm not mistaken. Its basicly a RR 4.2 with ported heads, pocketed pistons, higher CR and a 500 cam. The BigValves have 5 HP more and theres not much init, the std 4.3 is fine.

The torque of the 500 is addictive.

A lightened flywheel will serve all the cars well (the 500 already has a 9kg fly) and improve acceleration

97-99 models will have rustholes in the riggers, most of them will need a full body lift if its not already done. My 93 Griffith had only surface rust and no holes when I did the full body lift

[Brithunter]

Cheers for the comments.......................................... better explain about my experience with "fuel Consumption" ........ the fuel consumption your all talking about well ....................... hate to tell you this but the TVR sounds quite economical really after all one cannot drive foot hard down .................................. well not around here that is if you wish to stay on the road and not in the dyke or drain and under water!!!

We are out on the fens and the roads are quite dreadful really.................. badly pot holed and really ................................... and I mean REALLY uneven. Hit some of the dips and lumps and you either crash down and ground out or your airborne if at anything more than 30-40 mph. The bank road is so bad they reduced the speed limit rather than repair the road. Now it's more pot hole than road surface and it was never in that condition when the parents moved here in the mid 80's.

After running these:-

Jeep Cherokee 4.0L Hi Output ........ 20-26mpg
Rover 75 2.5L Auto ..........................18-29mpg
Rover 623 Gsi Auto ..........................12-22 mpg

A TVR seems fairly reason would you not say? OK the current run around and tow car is far more economical as it's a Rover 75 CDT with the 2.0L BMW M47 oil burning lump and we are getting somewhere around 40-46mpg even with the auto box. So we have a "normal" car.

About the engines well have taken what has been mentioned here on board and I can say now that there is no intention to go for a turbo and will try to get the best engine that I can for the money considering also the overall condition of the car especially the chassis. Things like rockers wearing and valve train wear is just wear and tear that good maintenance should reduce the amount of but these thngs do wear out and they wear they work less well of course.

Now as to chassis well as it keeps coming up and am aware of the potential pit falls unless there is proven proof that the rails have been replaced "properly" then perhaps we should consider that a haggling point when considering a car to purchase. having looked at the costs of replacing these out riggers properly and watch videos of other rust that may be found in the space frame chassis allowing money aside from the purchase price would seem to be a sensible and sound move ................................ woud it not?

Of course that does reduce the purchase budget some what!

The brakes well the small size of those on the front of the Chimaera have come as somewhat of a surprise to me. The MGF weighs about the same and mine as AP alloy racing calipers and 24mm vented 304mm dia discs up front!!!!!!!!! and 10mm solid 240mm dia discs on the rear. So fronts are way larger and rears are smaller and the MGF is of course a mid engined car. So brakes well they will be looked at and consideration given to them especially when time for new discs and pads comes around.

As I am wanting to do some touring in the Chimaera then an exhaust with a nice tone and one that does not drone will be the aim. My MGF has a S/S rear sports box and K&N 57I induction. With engine just behind you you get the full benefit of the induction roar but the exhaust is not too loud so as to make long drives annoying and tiring. The Standard MGF exhaust is far to boring and quiet for me.

This will be a similar aim for the Chimaera. It will have to sound like a sports car without being over the top.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Brithunter said:

This will be a similar aim for the Chimaera. It will have to sound like a sports car without being over the top.

Should be no problem with that!

Good luck on your search

[mk1fan]

Couple of nice 4.0 long term owned Chims advertised on Faceache 'Buy and sell anything TVR' this evening. One daily driver, one turbo.

[wuckfitracing]

Just to add to this post with the usual PH humour.
Blue is the best one to buy.

[Brithunter]

wuckfitracing said:

Just to add to this post with the usual PH humour.
Blue is the best one to buy.

Blues is good especially the darker ones. Rover's Tahiti Blue is a fine example .......................... unlike grey silver (which is really just a shade of grey) and black is rather boring. Ultimately the budget will determine colour I suppose as I am not going to turn down a really great car at a good price because it's silver, grey, or black. Condition..................................... condition .................................. condition. Now while I would love something bright yellow or a rich blue and even red. Dark green as in British Racing Green is good too.

[davetripletvr]

Yellow is the best colour

[ChilliWhizz]

I heard the 4 litre cars came with some factory standard extras, like heated rollers and stuff

[caduceus]

ChilliWhizz said:

I heard the 4 litre cars came with some factory standard extras, like heated rollers and stuff

[Brithunter]

davetripletvr said:

Yellow is the best colour

Now I do ot know what it is about yellow but I do love the colour. My Street Fighter/low rider that I build was painted bright yellow and a lot of the MGF 75th Anniversary that i have worked on and refurbished/updated is painted bright yellow:-








Refurbished front sub frame and front hubs.



Rear lower radius arms.



As the new AP calipers were red made the new 304mm dia discs match.



Refurbed rear brake caliper carrier



Steel engine coolant pipes



refurbed rear hubs.







Refurbed rear suspension





TV5 (52mm) throttle body and TF 135 alloy inlet plenum.

As you can see am rather fond of bright yelow and yes all the work was done outside spring 2015.

Meanwhile just got an insurance quote for a 99 Chim 450 and it's come out only £57 dearer that am paying for the MGF.

[OleVix]

caduceus said:

ChilliWhizz said:

I heard the 4 litre cars came with some factory standard extras, like heated rollers and stuff

Mine has the not so rare heated gearknob

[fullpull]

OleVix said:

Mine has the not so rare heated gearknob

And one's got to love the anti theft equipment that reliably protects the car from firing up the engine at the petrol station on a hot summer day.