PROJECT CERBERUS

Still Searching..........

2011-07-17T13:31:00.000+01:00

..... for the ideal project car, all the ones for sale at the moment are "runners" and I don't really want to have to pull a serviceable AJP8 or Speed6 engine.

So if anyone knows of one then please use the "Contact Me" link to drop me an e-mail.

Exhausts vs. Gearbox vs. Chassis

2011-07-11T08:28:00.004+01:00

I've been trying to find a photo to illustrate the potential clash with the exhausts when fitting a gearbox larger than the T5. Here's the best one I could find:

You can clearly see the potential conflict where the exhausts sweep behind the back of the gearbox. It is clear that the extra length of a T56 is going to leave quite a tight gap. One option could be to move the engine forward a bit? This is the option that Topcats Racing use. Here's some photo's of the Topcats Conversion:

You can see where the bracing tube between the shock mounts is cut out, together with the diagonal brace that runs towards the nearside front upper wishbone mount.

On later chassis the single diagonal brace is replaced with a twin diagonal brace running from the centre of the bracing tube to both wishbone mounts.

Obviously this is a critical brace to be removing as it adds significantly to the rigidity of the suspension mounting points and is not something to be undertaken lightly.

It needs to be replaced with something that does not compromise the overall rigidity of the font part of the chassis and the suspension pick up points. The photo below shows how Topcats solve this problem:

Topcats weld in a box section brace ahead of the original brace position. Short diagonals are fitted back to the original cross brace positions and the forward side of the new brace is box section gussets fitted to stiffen up the front section of the chassis. There's not a great deal of point putting a diagonal brace back in as it would run at quite an acute angle which would reduce it's effectiveness. It also gives enough clearance to remove the crank pulley should you want to change the camshaft.

Finally here's a photo showing the AJP8 exhaust routing, you can see that the headers pass straight backwards, rather than the more conventional down and then back, and effectively "hug" the T5 gearbox. Again you can see where the extra length of a T56 is going to cause some issues. This standard routing can potentially cause some issues with the powder coating being burnt off the top chassis rail due to the proximity of the header to the chassis rail.

Nearly Bought a Cerbera.......

2011-07-08T18:23:00.004+01:00

It seemed an ideal candidate, albeit the interior was probably in too good a condition. It was a non-runner with the engine already out awaiting repair. Unfortunately my opinion of value was not commensurate with the sellers opinion of worth.

Oh well..... keep on looking. Problem is there may not be many opportunities:

Alternative Gearbox Position

2011-07-05T18:00:00.002+01:00

So, if we are struggling for room to accommodate a 6 speed box up front........ why not put it at the back?

Anyone seen a C6 corvette with the body off?

What no chassis? The gearbox (a version of the T56) is mounted direct to the diff. The diff and the engine (LS2) are connected by a torque tube which carries the prop shaft...... cool!

The shifter has a remote linkage so can easily be re-positioned plus the torque tube design would add to the torsional stiffness of the chassis.

If the engine to rear axle distance is different this would mean shortening the torque tube and prop shaft. Possibly too big a job - especially when one considers the prop shaft runs at engine rpm !! - that'll need some very special welding skills (at least)!

But would it all fit in the Cerbera Chassis?

Hmmmm...... probably not. In any case there's a horizontal strut just above the prop that braces between the two outrigger braces that would have to come out that would affect chassis stiffness.

Interestingly the Cerbera Wheelbase is 2565mm, the C6 corvette is 2685 and the C5 is 2654 - so that would be a difference of only 89mm with the C5.

Quite like the idea of a rear mounted box though...... wonder what else is out there?

On The Subject of Gearbox Size

2011-07-03T18:01:00.008+01:00

Found these images lurking on the web, they help to illustrate the problems with using anything other than the T5 gearbox.

Here's the T56 top against the T5 bottom:

And here's another view - T56 at the back, T5 at the front.

You can clearly see that the T56 is wider further back - this is where the transmission tunnel narrows down so you are quickly going to run out of room for the exhausts. This photo also shows how the two possible shifter positions on the T56 don't line up with the T5 - you need a position somewhere in between? One solution would be to use a shift kit like this (as Rich - Boosted Cerb) did:

Have a look therefore at the following photo of a T56 against a T56 Magnum (TR-6060):

The T56 Magnum is the bottom box - the red shifter plate is reversible just like the TKO500/600 so the shifter should be as near as damn it in the right place, maybe a tad close to the chassis brace?

The box may still be too big though compared to the T5!

And finally, for the sake of completeness, heres a T5 against a TKO600:

Hmmmmm...... kinda tempting innit!

An Introduction to Gearboxes

2011-07-03T15:08:00.006+01:00

As I mentioned in the previous post there are three main flavours of gearbox. However there is a little more to it than that and I've tried to list the fundamentals options below:

Retain the original T5 - generally considered weak for 400+ BHP applications - needs an adaptor plate to mount to an LSx - fits in original positions so exhaust routing and gear stick positioning OK.
CTS upgrade to the T5 - OK for 400+ BHP applications - needs an adaptor plate to mount to an LSx - fits in original positions so exhaust routing and gear stick positioning OK - choice of close of wide ratios.
TKO 500 - OK for 400+ BHP applications - mounts direct to an LSx - exhaust routing and gear stick positioning need consideration - multiple alternative gearstick positions - quite a short first gear.
TKO 600 - OK for 400+ BHP applications - mounts direct to an LSx - exhaust routing and gear stick positioning need consideration - multiple alternative gearstick positions - better first gear - tall overdriven 5th.
TKO 600RR - OK for 400+ BHP applications - mounts direct to an LSx - exhaust routing and gear stick positioning need consideration - multiple alternative gearstick positions - better first gear - short overdriven 5th.
T56 - OK for 400+ BHP applications - mounts direct to an LSx - exhaust routing and gear stick positioning need consideration - limited number of gearstick positions - confusing number of variants.
T56 Magnum (TR6060) Pro Street - OK for 400+ BHP applications - mounts direct to an LSx - exhaust routing and gear stick positioning need consideration - multiple number of gearstick positions - shorter 1st gear - taller 6th gear.
T56 Magnum (TR6060) Pro Touring - OK for 400+ BHP applications - mounts direct to an LSx - exhaust routing and gear stick positioning need consideration - multiple number of gearstick positions - taller 1st gear - shorter 6th gear.

Confused? I am. Time for a table:

We can ignore the original T5 as potentially being understrength, the TKO500 and T56GM3 for having far too low a first gear and the TKO600W for having to great a jump from 4th to 5th. So that narrows things down a bit:

For me the next consideration is fuel economy - WTF! I hear you all cry. Based on my recent experience of owning a 450HP V8 there is only so much "hooning" around you can do on the roads today. I have an aspiration to undertake some European road trips in the finished car so long distance touring mpg needs to be a consideration - the less spent on fuel the more there'll be to spend on wine! The 6 speed T56's and TR6060 have the first 5 gear ratios similar to the original T5 - so they will have the same amount of "hoonability" but with the added benefit of a double overdriven 6th for cruising. However there are the exhaust routing and gearstick positioning issues to consider.

On the face of it the 5th gear ratios of the CTS upgraded T5's and the TKO 600 are going to result in 5th gear rpms of around 2500 - ideally I would be looking for no more than 1800ish. The 0.500 ratio of the T56's and TR6060 would give around 1600rpm. Lets do some numbers, but first we need some other info:

Tyres - can be anything between 235/50/16 to 255/35/18 - lets use 255/35/18.
Diff ratios - normally 3.45:1, can be 3.73:1 on "close ratio" cars and can be re-built as 3.08:1. There's no point using the 3.73:1 option - this is only going to make things worse. Lets look at both the 3.45:1 and 3.08:1 options.

So based on this train of thought I'm being pushed down the 6 speed route with the inherent problems of exhaust routing and geasrstick positioning. Going down as far as 1400 rpm might be a bit too far?

The only 5 speed option would be to bring back the TKO600W with the 0.64 5th, this would give 2076rpm @ 70 with the 3.45 diff and 1853rpm with the 3.08 diff. 1853 might just be acceptable but I don't know if I could cope with the big gap between 4th and 5th though? - depends on the rest of the gearing:

Hmmm...... big jump 4th to 5th, but good legs in the rest. At the end of the day an LSx will have better power delivery with a broader torque spread than the AJPV8. The LSx could hardly be described as "peaky" so perhaps just having 4 gears covering 0-150mph with 5th for just cruising would be OK? On paper maybe, but I have the real world experience of having the the TKO600 in the GD..... it just felt a bit odd. I can't help but think a more natural spread of ratios across 6 gears would be better...... but I'm also left thinking why would you want so many gears with a big flexible V8?

So there you go......... a lot of post with little conclusion. Perhaps I need to see if I can get anyone else's real world experiences.

An Introduction to LS Conversions

2011-07-02T17:02:00.021+01:00

Now this is not a new idea. There are already a few examples of Cerbera's that have had LS transplants. Some of these can be regarded as pioneering work that has proved the viability of LS transplants in these cars. There's quite a bit of info that can be found on the Pistonheads forum and various other sites but there is no real definitive source of information. It has been the efforts of these pioneers that has given me the inspiration for this project.

At one end of the "cost" spectrum are the professional installations - have a look at the services offered by Topcats Racing. There was a write up Sprint Magazine some time ago regarding their Cerbera LS Conversions (click the picture on the right to read):

There is a difference to most other conversions in that Topcats elect to remove some of the chassis cross bracing to allow the LS3 to fit in as it is mounted further forward than some of the other conversions. The removed bracing is replaced with some box section bracing and stiffening further up the chassis to restore, if not increase, chassis stiffness. The conversion also utilises a TKO600 gearbox to replace the existing T5 box.

Topcats have also installed an LS7 into a TVR Sagaris - that's gotta be one hell of a car! - But bearing in mind it'll cost you £40k just to pick up a Sagaris and then the conversion is extra - it's a bit out of my price range to say the least.

One of the pioneering professional conversions is that offered by Steve Heath Engineering. Steve's concept was to offer a transplant service that would cost around the same as an AJPV8 re-build.

To achieve this he uses the Australian version of the LS2 (L98) and retains the original T5 box, MBE ECU and just about everything else! Click on the picture to download Steve's LS engine conversion brochure.

However, you don't have to go along the professional route, there are a handful of exceptional conversions carried out (or being carried out) by individuals:

Supercharged LS1 anyone? This fantastic conversion belongs to Rich (Boosted Cerb on Pistonheads).

Then there is possibly one of the best known LS conversions belonging to Paul (brummmie on Pistonheads)

6.9litre LS3 based 531 RWHP and the first proven 200+ MPH Cerbera!

Obviously there are a number of LSx Variants that could be considered: LS1 and LS6 (Generation III), LS2, LS3, LS7 and LS9 (Generation IV) - have a look at the Wiki for some explanation. However the main issue around Cerbera LS conversion is the Gearbox.

On an original Cerbera the exhausts run around the gearbox then along underneath the propshaft tucked up between the lower chassis rails - pretty much like the GD427. There are 3 potential gearbox options: The original T5, the TKO 500/600 and the T56/TR6060. The T5 and TKO600 are 5 speed affairs and the T56 is a 6 speed. Because of the extra gear the T56 is a bit bulkier leaving less room to accommodate the exhausts. There were a few that said that a T56 could not be fitted - however Rich (Boosted Cerb) managed it without having to drop the exhausts significantly and compromise ground clearance.

But what gearbox to plump for? - That'll be the subject of another post.

To finish, here's some videos I found on YouTube:

Registration and the DVLA

2011-07-02T10:12:00.005+01:00

Obviously one of the important issues to be kept at the forefront of any such contemplations is returning the car to the road. The DVLA does seem to come in for some criticism from the kit car / re-builder community. However when building the GD427 I knew I had to go through the SVA test and I made sure that I knew what the relevant rules where from the beginning of the project. Consequently I found the whole process of testing and registration to be quite simple. After all, these rules have been put in place for our own protection and safety - not to spoil antibody's fun!

The Cerbera I will hopefully be returning to the road will have a replacement chassis and a replacement engine - a quick read of the Directgov website is required:

Quote:

"To keep the original registration number of a car or light van that has been rebuilt you will need to use either of the following:
• The original unmodified chassis or unaltered bodyshell.
• A new chassis or monocoque bodyshell (body and chassis as one unit – monocoque) of the same specification as the original supported by evidence from the dealer or manufacturer (eg receipt).
You will also need to have two other major components from the original vehicle. These can be any of the following:
•Suspension (front and back)
•Steering assembly
•Axles (both)
•Transmission
•Engine
If a second-hand chassis or monocoque bodyshell is used, a car or light van must pass Individual Vehicle Approval (IVA) or Single Vehicle Approval (SVA). If your vehicle passes a 'Q' prefix registration number will be allocated. If the vehicle fails it cannot be registered."

Now at this moment it is intended that the RT Racing / TVR Power replacement chassis will be classified as an OEM component which will ensure compliance with the first point. Regarding the re-use of components I will be retaining (although refurbished) the original Suspension, Steering Assembly and Axles which is more than required two thereby ensuring compliance with the second point.

However, before I commit I intend to get written confirmation from DVLA that my intentions do meet the rules for rebuilt vehicles.

Other Aspirations: Various

2011-07-02T09:34:00.000+01:00

There are a few other things I've thought about, but I really need to get my hands on a car to be certain about the viability of them:

Replace or re-engineer the heating and air conditioning system to be more effective / simple.
Modify the dashboard to incorporate more modern instruments and audio/navigation system. whilst keeping the original overall "swooping" appearance.
Re-engineer the windscreen wiper system to replace the bundy tube and wheelbox layout with a more modern linkage type system and more powerful motor. Investigate a more effective screen wash system.
Possible re-location of the handbrake lever.
Possible replacement of the pedals with floor mounted pedals as per the T350.
Anything else I've not thought of yet!

Other Aspirations: Traction Control

2011-06-21T20:37:00.004+01:00

Hmmmmm interesting one. I have to admit to having had a few interesting moments with the GD in the wet. You could argue that the best traction control is appropriate use of the right foot - you could also argue that fitting traction control is not really in the spirit of TVR's. In fact you could argue lots of things - I'm just looking from a practical point of view, particularly if SWMBO could be driving - and also taking into account by fitting traction control you can also end up with a launch control system for those perfect traffic light get aways!

Racelogic do a very nice system - you can see the details here. The nice feature of this system (apart from getting launch control) is the optional digital adjuster. The adjuster gives access to a whole host of functions in addition to controlling slip levels it can also be used as a setup and diagnostic tool, and features many display and configuration options.

Slip levels are adjustable in 1% increments from 0% up to 25%. Cut level thresholds, rev limits, wheel sizes and RPM operating levels can all be altered in real-time. The display option will represent, in a graph or text format, wheel speeds, RPM, and cut levels. In addition an injector cut feature allows diagnostics to be carried out without the use of a laptop computer.

All very clever and a neat installation. Steve Heath Engineering sell a DIY kit with all the additional bits required to install yourself.

Other Aspirations: Headlight Conversion

2011-06-21T19:48:00.001+01:00

There are a number of flavours of Cerbera headlights:

There's the original single light:

Then there's the facelift twin light, which can be unfaired (with or without the sidelight):

Or the twin light set up faired in (with or without the sidelight):

Then the twin light set up faired in with indicator and sidelight:

Personally I prefer the last set up. I Would use HID's for the main lights with a high intensity LED for the sidelight so they could be used as DLR's (Daylight Running Lights). As the indicator has been relocated higher up - I would use the original locations to house fog / driving lamps.

Simple Job - buy the mouldings - hack away - fit and blend in - the whole car is going to need painting so no extra work required on that front.

Issue 4. Build Quality Issues

2011-06-16T22:18:00.001+01:00

Build quality is another issue that seems to constantly dog TVR. Most reasonable people appreciate that TVR's are hand built and that over the years they have suffered the quirks and reliability issues all small hand built car makers face. Like the other issues there are good cars and there are bad cars, and there are owners who accept this and deal with it and there are those who make a lot of noise about it and fuel this perception.

As you've probably figured out by know I am not on a mission to acquire a concourse example of the marque, so no doubt I will be encountering some build quality problems. However as the project will essentially be a full re-build, and having made a half decent job of the GD427 I'm not expecting any real problems.

One of the critical areas will be the interior re-trim and the required end result will be beyond my capabilities, but there are some excellent TVR trimmers out there and some spectacular results are available at some very reasonable prices.

Not a lot more to say about this one really.

So I have covered in outline the four main issues, there will of course be more detail to follow in due course. In doing so I have also kind of set a benchmark for the "project" car I'm looking for. This essentially is going to be something of a "basket case". And here-in lies perhaps Issue 5......... that kind of Cerbera doesn't seem to crop up for sale too often. Maybe if you look at the cars currently on SORN, 282 with 596 actually taxed. Perhaps there are already quite a few "restoration" projects underway where owners have taken the plunge as opposed to the easier option of disposal?

There is of course another option: Courtesy of E-Bay -

TVR CERBERA 1999 4LTR IN ATLANTIS PEARL PAINT WITH CONTRASTING LEATHER TRIM ,POWER STEERING AND 18 INCH SPIDER ALLOYS WITH DAMAGE TO THE DRIVERS SIDE EASY FIX

THE CAR STARTS AND RUNS WELL
THERE IS SOME DAMAGE TO THE FRONT SUSPENSION AND IT WILL REQUIRE TOP AND BOTTOM ARMS AND SHOCKER .
THE CAR IS A CAT C

Price: £5,999.00

Hmmmmm...... Can't help but think that 6K might be a bit much bearing in mind the extra bodywork costs..... but then if the engine is half decent then that can be moved on along with the electrical system ECU's which should help to offset the additional bodywork costs?

The place is reasonably local to me so it might be worth popping along for a look see?

Car Salvage Insurance Categories

All vehicles defined as Motor Salvage are given an insurance category, these help to define exactly what sort of damage has been inflicted on the car and also what it can be used for afterwards. The salvage categories are:

Category A - A vehicle that has been written-off and which must be completely destroyed. It cannot be used for dismantling into its parts . Notification of Destruction required. (To be crushed). Recorded at DVLA & HPI

Category B - A vehicle that has been written-off but where it's parts may be re-used. However, the body shell cannot be re-used and must be destroyed. Notification of Destruction required. (Parts can be removed and sold). Recorded at DVLA & HPI

Category C - An insurance write-off mainly due to the cost of repair would be greated than the value of the car. It is suitable to repair to make it roadworthy. Can be sold for repair but must now have VIC inspection. Recorded at DVLA & HPI.

Category D - An insurance write-off for other reasons as the repair costs may be less than the value of the vehicle. It is suitable to repair to make it roadworthy. Recorded with HPI.

Category X - A vehicle which is not listed as being damaged on the HPI register, or one which may have very little damage. Often these are vehicles that have been stolen and then recovered.

The consensus is that a CAT C/D repaired Cerbera will only be worth about half what a non-salvaged car would be worth..............Hmmmmmm.

Issue 3. Electrical Issues / Reliability

2011-06-11T00:15:00.001+01:00

Electrical issues are a perennial TVR problem to the end. The Cerbera contains numerous ECU's dotted around the car controlling most of the functions. The electrical system seems to be prone to the effects of moisture ingress made worse by the use of cheap connectors as opposed to decent waterproof ones. One of the most common problems relates to the electrickery managing the door opening / window dropping / door closing / window raising functions. There are also numerous other common problems relating to some of the other ECU's. However, everything, including the ECUs, is repairable with parts and expertise from the cottage TVR industry that has grown up since the factory’s demise. Unfortunately even repairs may not guarantee the effectiveness of what could be argued to be a poorly executed solution in the first place.

If I am going to follow the intended route of a full re-build / restoration then it will probably be a racing certainty that a significant re-wire would be on the cards. However some of the systems have complexities that cannot really be executed successfully with conventional automotive electrics.

There is of course a solution ...................... as you might have guessed by now!

I have to thank my friend Andy Roe for the solution to this problem - it was something he came across when contemplating the electrical system for his GD427 build - you can read Andy's blog post here.

The answer is the ISIS Intelligent Multiplex System. For want of a better description this is essentially a DIY CANBUS system. With a CANBUS system all your switch inputs are connected to a "Brain" which sends messages via a data cable to power modules located around the car which then control the application of power to the various items.

Kinda Like this:

For a better introduction have a watch of this video:

For all the detailed info visit the ISIS website. Well worth a read as there has been a hell of lot of development to this product which meets OEM performance and durability criteria.

In addition to the standard POWERCELL there is an INMOTION version that allows control of 5 pairs of current sensing polarity reversvible outputs - ideal for electric window and door solenoid control.

Apart from the advantages of a lot less wiring and enhanced fault diagnostic capabilities, the programmable nature of MASTERCELL will allow all the unique TVR functions to be included.

Again, there's a lot of info to follow in later posts, this is just to give you an introduction to the solution.

If you want to know more now then there's plenty of material on the ISIS Power website.

Issue 3 sorted.

Issue 2. Engine Problems / Reliability

2011-06-08T23:36:00.001+01:00

Prior to the Cerbera, TVR had purchased V8 engines from Rover and then tuned them for their own use. When Rover was purchased by BMW, TVR didn't want to risk problems should the Germans decide to stop manufacturing the engine. In response, they engaged the services of race engineer Al Melling to design a V8 engine that TVR could manufacture in-house and even potentially offer for sale to other car-makers.

The result was dubbed the "Speed Eight" - the official designation being the AJP8, a 4.2 litre 75-degree V8 with a flat-plane crank producing 360 horsepower. A larger version of the engine was later offered that displaced 4.5 litres and output rose to 420 horsepower.

The AJP8 had one of the highest specific outputs of any naturally aspirated V8 in the automotive world at 83.3 hp/litre for the 4.2 and 93.3 hp/litre for the 4.5. Later models of the 4.5 litre engine were given the option of being to the 'Red Rose' specification, which increased its output to 440 bhp (97.7 hp/litre) when fuelled with super-unleaded (high octane) and the driver pushed the unmarked button on the dashboard which altered the engine mapping to suit.

With the success of the Speed Eight program, TVR also undertook the design of a "Speed Six" engine to complement it. This engine also made its debut in the Cerbera. Unlike the Speed Eight, the new engine was a 4.0 litre inline slant six design additionally differing from the V8 in having four valves per cylinder compared to the Speed Eight's two.

As with the chassis issues, a quick google search will reveal plenty of tales of woe. Dig a little deeper and you'll find quite a few cars with high mileages and very few reported problems. So what's going on? I think it is simply a case of ownership history. A single owner car that has been meticulously maintained regardless of cost will present few problems. A mutli owner car where servicing has been skimped on (and it can be quite expensive - the V8 is a labour-intensive engine, with several hours’ work every 24,000 miles to re-shim the 16 tappets and it can get overlooked) and the engine thrashed from cold could be a big liability. Both the Speed Eight and Speed Six engines need to be warmed up carefully before giving them some beans otherwise problems could ensue. Many AJP8 Cerberas are now getting on a bit with some starting to suffer from increased oil consumption and leaks. With the passage of time there appear to be increasing incidences of:

Snapped crankshafts

Snapped camshafts

There are also a number of problems relating to tappets, cams and followers on the Speed Six engines There's nothing to stop me considering an engine re-build other than cost. However some rebuilds can turn out to be pretty expensive if you want everything bob on, as some of TVR's quality control in the engine department left a lot to be desired some times. TVR Power will rebuild and upgrade Speed Six engines and offer a full 3 year unlimited mileage warranty, it'll cost you over £5K though. A full AJP8 rebuild could cost over £6K with no warranty.

The Borg-Warner T5 transmission is geberally considered to be‘bulletproof’ apart from occasional wear on second- and fifth-gear synchromesh. The clutch tends to fracture the fingers on the pressure plate’s diaphragm spring, often well before the plates have worn out. a clutch typically lasting around 25,000 miles

Now as I am looking for a "project" car, I'm hardly going to be shelling out top dollar for a full service history, immaculately maintained, one owner car. In fact common sense budget constraints will dictate that I'll be looking at multi owner cars without a FSH. So I could be setting myself up for some problems.

There are an increasing number of owners who, having had enough of failures, rebuilds and servicing costs have opted for a different solution.................. an LS engine conversion. This is a big topic and I'll save the details for a later post. Suffice it to say that it has been done several times with more than acceptable results with regard to performance and reliability.

The whole subject of replacing Speed Eight or Speed Six engines raises strong feelings within the TVR purists, and to be honest I can see thier point. However if you are looking at a Cerbera with terminal engine issues or indeed selling the engine to someone with a blown engine(or for vital spares) - then an LS conversion keeps another Cerbera on the road. This is becoming of increasing importance when you look at the decline in the number of Cerberas on the road - 596 taxed and 282 SORN'd as of last quarter 2010.

So in a nutshell, with more detail to come later, an LS conversion is on the wish list. With proven reliability and a 100,000 mile service interval it will meet my requirements for a V8 circa 400 HP capable of 2000+ mile European jaunts without worrying about breakdowns / failures in faraway places.

So at the moment the ideal "Project" car will be one with a knackered chassis and a blown engine!

Issue 2 sorted.

Issue 1. Chassis Corrosion

2011-06-08T00:31:00.001+01:00

One of the main issues that seems to occupy prospective Cerbera (or indeed other TVR Models) purchasers is the integrity of the chassis. It would appear to be commonplace to have some degree of corrosion present with a good chance that it may be more serious than first appears.

Some folks have made some shocking discoveries:

During certain periods of production the quality of the powder coating to the chassis appears to have questionable at best. There are people who remember seeing bare metal chassis stored outside the factory covered in surface rust and have questioned the thoroughness of surface preparation before coating.

One of the more critical areas are the outriggers - these are even more vulnerable as they are exposed within the wheel arches and are subject to gravel and salt rash. The tops of the outriggers and the outer rails are covered by the body and all can appear well until the body is lifted. Historically such shockers have been dealt with my meticulously cutting out the rotted sections and welding in new tubes. If you are not a dab hand at metalworking and welding then the costs of this labour intensive process can mount up.

There is however an alternative shortly to become available. RT Racing have partnered with TVR Power to produce OEM chassis for TVR's. Production of the new chassis started in May 2011 with Chimeara and Griffith chassis both immediately being available. Cerbera Chassis are expected to follow later in the year. The new OEM chassis will be available in a choice of colours and finishes and will sell for under £3000 including VAT!

Here's a recent article in Sprint magazine (click to read):

Now in my book this really is a no-brainer - especially as it is going to be a body off project. So this being the case I needn't be put off by a car with a shot chassis - in fact this could well help the budget bring down the initial purchase price.

I've not made my mind up on powder coating just yet - there is a chance that the chassis may need some modifications post production which would ruin any powder coating. So any surface treatment will possibly need to be done after any mods. I could stick with a top notch powder coating system or consider alternatives such as polysiloxanes or moisture cured urethanes. I don't consider galvanising as an option, there is a risk (albeit minimal) from heat related distortion during dipping but the main problem is that you would need to drill all the tubes several times to galvanise the insides and to allow gases to escape during the galvanising process, you will also need to grind of the zinc and zinc/steel allot layer if you want to do any welding.

I have heard there may be a stainless option......... I dread to think of the cost though!

So if you are looking for runner to jump in and drive with a bit of maintenance then chassis corrosion could be an issue, if like me you are contemplating a full rebuild then it is not an issue, especially as a new OEM chassis for £3k would be more than worth the money. Use one of these, with the correct surface treatment and some protective panels for the susceptible exposed parts and you can forget about chassis corrosion - and any significant chassis maintenance for many years.

Issue 1 sorted.

An Introduction......

2011-06-06T22:50:00.001+01:00

Well that's probably long enough for people to be staring at an "under construction" picture. I'm a bit surprised at how time has flown by whilst I have been distracted by kitchen refurbishments and re-organisations at work amongst other things.

For those of you who don't know me, you may want to go here: http://www.str-427-cobra.blogspot.com/

it kinda explains a little of how I've got to this point in time, or maybe not?

The "Building a GD427" blog was well received by others and was a good way of imparting helpful information to others as well as providing a handy permanent record of my exploits. Unfortunately this previous Blog has raised my fiends expectations for my next project!

So here we are, I have explained on the GD427 blog why I made the decision to part company with the Cobra. Whilst it was an exceptional car, I had to admit that once I had completed the build I realised that I hadn't really put a great deal of thought into it's end use. Having let it go there was (is!) still a petrolhead void that needed filling. My thoughts concluded that what I really needed was a GT car and of course it would need to be something with a little uniqueness! I also wanted to build or re-build something as opposed to just buying something off Auto-Trader, as firstly it would make a very short blog and secondly I now have half of Machine Mart's stock in my garage desperate to be used again in anger.

After a bit of research (i.e. endless lunchtimes on t'internet) I couldn't really find anything in kit form that took my fancy. Then one day on the way home from work I passed a TVR T350C going in the opposite direction. It was then that I realised that my obsession with Cobra's meant I had forgotten about some of my previous favourite cars. In particular the Cerbera, I remember sitting in one at the Birmingham Motorshow on press day (got some passes as a freebie) - I also remember getting stuck in the back (should have never tried to sit in the back seats) - and I also remember breaking the indicator stalk when getting out (never did own up to that one...... well that's a weight off now).

Time for a bit of a history lesson: (Courtesy of Pistonheads and TVREcosse)

So where did the Cerbera appear from given TVR's history of 2 seater convertibles? It was in fact the third attempt by TVR to produce a 2+2, a family man's TVR. The Tasmin +2 was produced early in the 1980's but never sold in great numbers. Later in the 80's Peter Wheeler toyed with the concept of a 420 Wedge saloon. Despite running a prototype for some time, and showing it at the 1986 Motor Show, he was never satisfied with the design and it never made it into production.

In 1993 the Cerbera was unveiled at the London Motor Show. It was the result of experimentation with a lengthened Chimaera chassis and a styling exercise with full scale foam models. The car is a true 2+2, with typically small seats as is often the case with this genre of car. It was greeted with tremendous acclaim. Orders flooded in, a further 276 of them at the 1994 Birmingham Motor Show alone. Since then, almost every aspect of the car had been improved. Originally, the Cerbera was designed to be powered by Rover based engines but it was decided that TVR's own engine, the Speed Eight, would be a more suitable power plant.

The Cerbera was the first roadgoing TVR to feature the Speed Eight engine. This engine was quite remarkable in design in that it owed more to the then current trends in racing engines than to anything that had ever been seen before in a road car. In other words, instead of basing a race engine on an existing road engine, TVR developed an engine for the Cerbera out of a race engine. The result was that the Speed Eight had many features in it which would be more commonly found on an F1 engine. Examples of these are its extremely sophisticated water circulation system and its lubrication system which delivers oil at high pressure to the engine and at low pressure to the crankshaft.

Although sharing styling cues with the Chimaera, the Cerbera was a completely new car with new brakes, chassis, suspension and a different construction method. Introduced in response to overwhelming customer demand for a 2+2, the Cerbera saw TVR return to a market sector that it had not inhabited since 1985.

With the Cerbera's interior, TVR discarded conventional thinking and created a dashboard binnacle in which all the instruments were right in front of the driver. The clock and the fuel gauge, visible through the steering wheel, and a fresh air vent are situated under the steering column and are adjustable for reach and rake with it. Mounted on the steering wheel are controls for the main beam, windscreen washers and wipers as well as the horn.

The Cerbera is more than a normal 2+2 in that, in terms of the configuration of its seating arrangement, it would be better described as a 3+1. The front passenger seat is able to slide forward further than normal, thereby freeing a substantial amount of extra legroom for the passenger sitting directly behind. Attention has been paid to the ease of access to the rear seats which in too many 2+2s is unnecessarily difficult. Therefore, the Cerbera's doors are long enough to make getting into the back seats much easier.

Nice!......

You are probably starting to wonder why this exploit has been titled "Project Cerbarus" and not "Project Cerbera"........ well you'll have to wait a while, but I'll get there.

Now, on the face of it the Cerbera may well be what I'm after, it seems to tick all the boxes. Surely there couldn't be any problems with such a choice?........ could there?

Well another one of the reasons for the delay is the amount of Cerbera research I've been doing.

Now it would be far to say that TVR's in general have suffered from some bad press regarding build quality and reliability. Some of it is no doubt justified and some of it not, in fact there seems to be a bit of an urban myth developed that TVR = Trouble, a bit unfair but not without some foundation perhaps. Now I'm not here to upset any TVR purists, although some of my later ideas might sail a bit close to the wind, why would I want to? I like TVR's and I want to own one. But I need it to fulfill certain criteria and I want to enter this project with my eyes open to potential problems. Don't get me wrong, there are some excellent cars out there with very few, if any, problems. But there are also some that suffer the varying effects of a less than perfect maintenance and servicing regime. Like I said earlier, I'm not after something I can just jump into and drive after handing over the cash, I'm after a project car - a car needing some TLC that I can make my own to suit my particular requirements - which means I am more than likely to encounter one or more of the following issues:

Chassis Corrosion
Engine Problems / Reliability
Electrical Issues / Reliability
Build Quality Issues

I shall convey my musings on each of these issues separately in subsequent posts.

It's Good to be Back ;-)

..... I may be a while yet......

2010-07-13T16:28:00.000+01:00

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Donec porta diam et orci dictum pulvinar. Nulla quis sapien lorem, vitae consectetur mauris. Ut a odio purus, in aliquet nunc. Sed euismod dapibus enim, nec mattis mi laoreet vel. Nunc id leo lorem, ac fringilla ligula. Maecenas facilisis ipsum vel neque scelerisque eget cursus leo iaculis. Morbi tincidunt mi et dui sodales id varius justo dictum. Proin dapibus, augue quis rutrum volutpat, turpis sapien ornare odio, commodo consequat purus risus tempus quam. Vivamus in pretium lacus. Curabitur gravida est vel ante dictum auctor. Vestibulum tincidunt tortor vitae arcu tempus blandit. Nulla mattis consectetur quam, ac imperdiet lorem congue sed. Vestibulum at purus mauris. Sed non libero velit. Praesent justo lacus, suscipit sed laoreet a, tempus eget nulla.