Which Cerbie

Which Cerbie

Author
Discussion

timmartyn

Original Poster:

1 posts

237 months

Sunday 21st April 2002
quotequote all
I've currently got a Tuscan which was my first TVR and has got me well and truly hooked to the marque - so much so I've decided to go for a Cerbera just to try something a bit different. The engine choices confuse me - which engine should I go for given where I am at the moment - I don't want poorer performance!!

ATG

18,365 posts

245 months

Sunday 21st April 2002
quotequote all
Dumb performance stats favour the 4.5, but what are the differences like back on planet Earth? Are their any drivability benefits to the Speed 6 or 4.2? Anyone out there driven all three??

christof

827 posts

257 months

Sunday 21st April 2002
quotequote all
Go for a 4.5 LW RedRose.

It's the best of all!!!

Christof

bennno

7,766 posts

242 months

Sunday 21st April 2002
quotequote all

one very well respected TVR dealership owner advised me the one to have is a 4.2. He said the engine was a bit more torquey (thats in Devon isnt it??), the best developed and as near as dammit as fast as the 4.5 for less money.

That said the 4.5 looks superb and has the ultimate power and i love the sound of the speed six - so i would have probably a 4 or 4.5???.

what ever you do it needs air con.

Bennno

Beast

368 posts

257 months

Monday 22nd April 2002
quotequote all
Get a TuscanS ? Unless you are adamant you need elements of the Cerbera - in which case drive all 3 and see what you like.

I can understand the dealer comments (MV perhaps ?) but you might get squashed on residuals - but you will lose a shed-load on any TVR so why factor this explicitly.

In my view major difference will be what kind of ride you like (Sp6 in std form will be softer/more tourer than the V8's) and what kind of throttle reaction - I had 2 sixes, because I personally didn't like the V8 "hit the right revs and bang!" activity. But having swapped out the shocks, put a bigger front-ARB, disconnected the rear-ARB and put 17" wheels on the most recent one, it was transformed as a car and as fast as any 4.5, with the appropriate pilot. The Rolling Roads would seem to vindicate that there is little real world difference in HP between 6 and 8 (of any dimension).

But then I've just sold it and picking up a new Griff this week, so perhaps you should get a Griff

ChrisLeese

54 posts

241 months

Monday 22nd April 2002
quotequote all
Beast

Please excuse my ignorance, but what does removing the rear anti role bar do to the handling? (does it stop it skipping?)

ross

219 posts

257 months

Monday 22nd April 2002
quotequote all
a griff eh mr east?

a new one?

that'll look lovely in the garage.

Beast

368 posts

257 months

Monday 22nd April 2002
quotequote all
Chris, it makes it less "snappy" or more predictable at the rear-end. Trade-off is that it understeers slightly more (like you'd notice outside of a track).

Ross - I hope so. One of the run-out's (#77 I think) However as it's black I will endeavour not to let it become "Hollyman'd" in outlook.

>> Edited by Beast on Monday 22 April 13:20

ross

219 posts

257 months

Monday 22nd April 2002
quotequote all
no danger of that on 150 miles p.a.

are you getting barnett's ohlins kit on it?

yellowcerbie

159 posts

243 months

Monday 22nd April 2002
quotequote all
I test drove all 3 versions back to back on a dry, sunny day b4 committing. See previous thread submitted albeit under a different username (b4 I lost my password).

At the end of the day, the only way of finding out the one for you is for you to test drive all 3 models.

Good luck

Beast

368 posts

257 months

Monday 22nd April 2002
quotequote all
Ross, you should have been a comic

No I'm not getting Barmnet's Ohlins....as there's a set of racing JRZ's at my favourite place in St Ives

Tarsik

33 posts

238 months

Tuesday 23rd April 2002
quotequote all
I went for a 4.2. Its already been mentioned that the 4.5 will cost another 4k for no material performance gain (under 120). The 4.2 ride is also more compliant than the 4.5 (a lot to do with the 16 inch alloys). This is good news if you're doing any milage on the motorway.

zertec

499 posts

256 months

Thursday 25th April 2002
quotequote all
Assuming that you are buying second-hand, buy a cheap 4.2 and spend the money you save on sorting the car out and getting it exactly the way you want it.

All later 4.2 engined cars are actually 4.5 litres (economy of scale) the only real difference being in the induction set up. Hence the very small difference in performance.

You will easily be able to buy a good 4.2 for under 20k and if you budget to spend 10k you can sort everything out and even change the colour inside and out. Throw in a cheap private numberplate and you have a new looking unbeatable car.

Depreciation only really has any effect if you sell the car.

bennno

7,766 posts

242 months

Thursday 25th April 2002
quotequote all
quote:

All later 4.2 engined cars are actually 4.5 litres (economy of scale) the only real difference being in the induction set up. Hence the very small difference in performance.




never, surely ????

Bennno

dannylt

1,906 posts

257 months

Thursday 25th April 2002
quotequote all
Bit of a sweeping statement methinks. Certainly a lot more of the parts are shared (bottom end?) but the pistons are different, the heads are different for the different valves, etc. I think they just share the same stroke now - no idea what capacity that makes the recent 4.2.

danny

zertec

499 posts

256 months

Thursday 25th April 2002
quotequote all
quote:

Bit of a sweeping statement methinks.


No it's true

dannylt

1,906 posts

257 months

Thursday 25th April 2002
quotequote all
Ok fine, well it's in contradiction to parts numbers for new 4.2 and 4.5s then, and John R himself.

ro_butler

795 posts

244 months

Thursday 25th April 2002
quotequote all
Hmmm, sounds like the tamora 4.0 litre thread.

The factory would never admit the fact that 4.2's
are being supplied with what is ostensibly a 4.5
engine (if indeed this is the case).

I guess it would make people less inclined to buy
4.5's.

bennno

7,766 posts

242 months

Thursday 25th April 2002
quotequote all

when you think about it the only thing you pay extra for is bigger holes anyhow...

Bennno

ATG

18,365 posts

245 months

Thursday 25th April 2002
quotequote all
Reminiscent of when Intel used to sell a "cut down" version of their 486DX processor. It was called the 486SX and was produced by manufacturing a DX chip and then knackering some of its circuits. So it was more difficult to manufacture, but was sold at a lower price. Bonkers.