RV8R - for all things Rover V8, the TVR Griffith and Chimaera and the TVR T-Cars
Privacy Policy Terms of Use
A common question from most potential TVR owners is: “How reliable will it be?” There is no simple answer. There are no new TVRs being built now so their condition on delivery is of no importance. It is really just a question of what can you expect if you bought one now.
Speed 6
Two mechanics in Dream Machines, then a TVR main dealer, told me they had previously worked for Porsche and Ferrari dealers. As they were working on a 4.5 AJP8-engined Cerbera at the time I expected some off the cuff, rather sarcastic, comments when I asked their comparative reliability but they actually considered their replies.
The most unreliable, and to some degree, was Ferrari, although there was an assumption that this was exacerbated by infrequent use. One chap only drove his V12 twice a year, to and from his villa in the south of France (come the revolution . . .), and experienced a considerable number of major and minor faults. So perhaps there is a god. But it would appear that those who used their cars fairly regularly suffered less problems, but even these suffered a great deal. Porsche, that epitome of Teutonic engineering excellence, actually fared worse than TVRs. The mechanics had worked at a Porsche dealer at the time of the
introduction of the Boxster and rattled off a whole litany of design and manufacturing faults. But any warm feeling of superiority was quickly washed away by the comment that an owner could have his engine blow on a Monday and by Wednesday have his car back with a brand-new, and uprated, engine.
“The owners will forgive anything with that sort of support. It could even save them money if a service was due.” One said.
They started to tell me about one chap whose Boxster blew something major in the morning en route to the Continent and was sent on his way that evening with a new booking on the following day’s ferry but I became bored very quickly.
There was talk of a conspiracy. When Fifth Gear, a magazine-styled television programme, tested a Boxster against a Speed 6 TVR, both cars were subjected to identical demands. The Porsche expired under the strain. In order not to ruin their feature, another Boxster was brought in and that too gave up the fight. For the filming of the programme, the Boxster had to be pushed into the arena while the TVR drove in. The frailty of the Boxsters was not mentioned when the presenters chose them over the TVR.
So with this sort of reliability, why did TVR have such a dreadful reputation?The mechanics came to TVR after the problems with the early Speed 6 cars but even so they spoke of an incredible three months being the norm for warranty work on a blown head.
It was their opinion that TVR moved up too far in the specialist car manufacturer pecking order. Owners were willing to put up with a certain quirkiness when the prices, and their aspirations, were not for saloon car reliability. A blown fuse or two, a flat battery, a door that wouldn’t open were all expected and a bit of fun. A bit like getting soaked in a Morgan when it rained, and sometimes even in a heavy dew. Lessor mortals just didn’t understand. But moving up into Porsche and Jaguar territory meant that expectations increased and TVR were just not able to satisfy them. Production levels increased dramatically, more than doubling in three years, and staffing levels in the chassis and body side only went up a little.
One complaint from an ex-employee of TVR was that he could not spend any time on getting the car right, the feeling being the dealer could sort the problems under warranty.
It wasn’t the case of TVR losing a good name for reliability, it was more to do with it being made worse.
An indictment of the attitude of some people is the comment of one chap who has owned a number of Speed 6-engined TVRs. Despite running up a few thousand miles in four different Speed 6 TVRs with no engine troubles at all he refused to have his name quoted in any publication as, he said, whenever he told anyone how reliable his cars had been they would tell him he was wrong. “People,” he said. “Could get quite offensive at times, telling me that I knew nothing about it, despite me owning quite a number and most of them never even having ridden in one.”
AJP8
It was considerably different for the AJP8-engined Cerberas evidently as their engines were very reliable. Indeed, I rode in an 80,000+ mile 4.5 that was used solely for track days and it had not had any work on the engine. And the owner knew of one with 110,000+ that similarly had never been touched. At least, the engine hadn’t.
The electrics were not so robust and minor, and not quite so minor, electrical glitches took the shine off ownership. They were no more unreliable than Ferraris in this respect, but many Cerbs were used as daily
transport so the faults were much more frequent. Doors not opening, windows not closing, immobilisers immobilising despite you having the proper key, and batteries going flat even immediately after a long run.
But in general, most owners forgave this sort of aggravation once they had sampled the performance. A supercar at a bargain price. There was little that could even keep with a Cerbera, let alone beat it. At any price. It humbled Porsches that cost more than twice the price.
One problem was that whilst the Cerbera cost half the price of a Porsche 911 to service, even such a bargain price caught out many owners who had moved up from Rover V8-engined TVRs. Every 12,000 miles it was gird you loins time.
A Speed 6 engine prepared by Knight Engineering for the LNT T400Rs, this time at a very wet
A very pretty T350T. These cars were fitted with the 3.6 litre engine which was, according to John Ravenscroft, and he should know, considerably more reliable than the 4.0 in the early days.
A much-modified Cerbera 4.5. And I don’t know why either.
Reliability