|
<< Back to
Collections |
TVR’s early history is marked by a succession of tiny cars
with tiny engines, relying on light weight and nimble
handling to make up for straight-line speed—characteristics
used to good effect on numerous traditional British sports
cars. But as the 1960’s—a decade dedicated to the
enthusiastic pursuit of excessive horsepower—unfolded,
appreciation for tiny engines grew increasingly hard to come
by. TVR through Griffith indulged in the displacement race,
first by cramming a hulking 289 Ford V8 into its tiny
Grantura chassis and creating the Griffith and subsequently
the TVR Tuscan specials. As impressive as the speed was, the
big V8s were never a practical solution—they were expensive,
and putting down all that power in such a small car made for
serious handling challenges. As a result the early V8s
remained more of a curiosity. A more viable option for the
mainstream came when TVR installed the 2.5L straight 6 from
the Triumph TR6 into the Vixen/Tuscan chassis, creating the
TVR 2500. The Triumph powerplant was a good fit physically
and for the market, and when it came time to replace the
Vixen/Tuscan chassis two years later it found a new home in
the M chassis—and in the process the 2500M became the most
popular, best-selling TVR to date.
The M chassis was developed with powertrain variety in mind.
Though it would also be home to Ford 1.6L 4-cylinder (1600M)
and 3.0L V6 engines (3000M) during its life, the Triumph
straight 6 was the motor of choice for the majority of the
M’s production run. Though it was not quite as powerful as
the Ford V6, the 2500 had several advantages. To begin with,
the inline configuration offered a smoothness and balance
that a 4 or a V6 couldn’t match. Also, the Triumph
powertrain had a proven sports car history in the TR6,
making it a reliable choice. Lastly, the TR6 was already
available in the U.S. so the engine already had full
emissions certification. This last was particularly
important, as by the 2500M’s 1972 introduction the U.S. was
arguably even more crucial to TVR’s success than its
domestic sales.
But the borrowed engine would mean little without the right
platform, which is why the true key to the 2500M’s success
was the new chassis. The tube frame had a modular layout
with a rigid backbone and side structures, and square
cross-section braces in the high-stress areas. The structure
led one TVR alumnus to compare it to “bridge girders”. As
had been the TVR tradition, the suspension was fully
independent with wishbones and coil springs front and rear.
The geometry had been optimized over preceding designs, and
the extra reinforcement added stiffness for better handling
than previous TVRs.
The 2500M shared its body panels with the other M series
cars. The styling had clearly evolved from previous TVRs,
but the overall effect was more refined and balanced—as if
the TVR had finally grown into its skin. Most notably, the
nose had been extended more than nine inches, giving the
2500M a much sportier, more modern face. The nose also
served a technical purpose—with its U.S.-spec emissions
equipment, the Triumph straight 6 was prone to overheating,
and the elongated nose greatly increased airflow to the
cooling system. Subtle re-contouring of the doors and flanks
gave M a more flowing profile, and a modestly extended and
uplifted tail balanced things out.
The overall effect was a lithe, more muscular looking TVR,
much in keeping with the increased power and more refined
handling. No wonder then that it managed to sell 947
examples from 1972 to 1977, making it the best selling TVR
to that point, and helping to elevate TVR to another level
among independent sports car manufacturers.<<
Back to
Collections |
|
