TVR S-Series

TVR S-Series: which version to buy

The TVR S-Series ran as 1 generation from 1986 to 1996 in one body, Roadster, with three factory versions: 2.8 MT, 2.9 MT, and 4.0 MT. There is no second generation to “step up” into, so the buying choice is entirely among these three manuals. All three are Gasoline, No boost, 5-speed Manual, RWD, ground clearance 140 mm, and 92 fuel.

The TVR S-Series ran as 1 generation from 1986 to 1996 in one body, Roadster, with three factory versions: 2.8 MT, 2.9 MT, and 4.0 MT. There is no second generation to “step up” into, so the buying choice is entirely among these three manuals. All three are Gasoline, No boost, 5-speed Manual, RWD, ground clearance 140 mm, and 92 fuel. What changes is engine size, cylinder count, injection, measured performance, and how complete the spec sheet is.

Specs that actually separate the three versions

Valves per cylinder are 2 on every version. 2.8 MT and 2.9 MT use Central injection (single-point or single- point); 4.0 MT is the only one with Distributed injection (multi-point). Engine location is not measured on 2.8 MT; on 2.9 MT and 4.0 MT it is Front, longitudinal.

Which generation changed what

There is only 1 generation (keys in the catalogue: generation 5888, model 2837). Years 1986-01-01 to 1996-12-31 apply to the generation and to all three versions. Body stays Roadster. Nothing in the data describes a restyle as a separate generation, so do not treat a facelift year as a fourth choice.

That means “which generation” is not a buying filter. The filter is engine family: two 6-cylinder V-shaped cars (2.8 MT, 2.9 MT) versus one 8-cylinder V-shaped car (4.0 MT).

Engine: litres, power, and what the extra displacement buys

2.8 MT is 2792 cc and 150 hp. 2.9 MT is 2933 cc and 168 hp. Displacement rises by 141 cc (5.1%); power rises by 18 hp (12%); torque rises by 13 Nm (221 to 234). Specific output: 150 / 2.792 ≈ 53.7 hp per litre on 2.8 MT versus 168 / 2.933 ≈ 57.3 hp per litre on 2.9 MT. The 2.9 MT is not a larger engine doing the same work — it makes more power per litre as well as more litres.

Bore × stroke explains part of that. 2.8 MT is 93 × 68.8; 2.9 MT is 93 × 72. Same 93 mm bore, stroke longer by 3.2 mm. Compression is 9.2 on 2.8 MT and 9 on 2.9 MT. Peak power sits at 5700 rpm on 2.8 MT and 5400 on 2.9 MT. Peak torque sits at 4300 rpm on 2.8 MT and 3000 on 2.9 MT — 1300 rpm earlier. If the question is “which six-cylinder pulls lower,” the numbers pick 2.9 MT.

4.0 MT is a different scale: 3947 cc, 8 cylinders V-shaped, 240 hp, 366 Nm. Versus 2.9 MT that is +1014 cc, +72 hp (43%), +132 Nm (56%). Versus 2.8 MT: +1155 cc, +90 hp (60%), +145 Nm (66%). Specific output 240 / 3.947 ≈ 60.8 hp per litre — higher than both sixes. Compression 10.5 is the highest of the three (+1.5 versus 2.9 MT, +1.3 versus 2.8 MT). Bore × stroke 94 × 71.1. Peak power 5250 rpm (lowest of the three); peak torque 3500 rpm (between the two sixes). Injection is Distributed injection (multi-point) only here.

Boost is No on all three. Fuel is 92 on all three. Buying a larger version is not buying forced induction or a different fuel grade; it is buying more cylinders and more displacement at the same Gasoline / No / 92 combination.

Performance and economy: 0–100, top speed, mpg

2.8 MT: 0–100 not measured; top speed not measured; city / highway / combined consumption not measured; CO2 not measured; eco class not measured.

2.9 MT: 0–100 6.9 s; top speed 226; consumption not measured in city, highway, and mixed; CO2 not measured; eco class not measured.

4.0 MT: 0–100 5.2 s; top speed 235; consumption not measured in city, highway, and mixed; CO2 not measured; eco class not measured.

The only timed pair is 2.9 MT versus 4.0 MT. The 4.0 MT is 1.7 s quicker to 100 and 9 units faster at the top (235 vs 226). There is no 0–100 or top-speed figure for 2.8 MT, so a ranking that puts 2.8 MT “slowest” would be invented. Economy cannot decide the purchase: mpg is not measured on every version. If fuel use is the main criterion, the catalogue does not supply a number to prefer one over another.

Dimensions, weight, and what the chassis actually lists

Ground clearance is 140 mm on 2.8 MT, 2.9 MT, and 4.0 MT. Tank size is not measured on all three. Wheel sizes are not measured on all three. Kerb and gross weight are not measured on 2.8 MT.

2.9 MT: kerb 1060, gross 1200. Payload from those two figures: 1200 − 1060 = 140.

4.0 MT: kerb 1060, gross not measured. Same kerb as 2.9 MT, 72 hp more, so mass per horsepower is 1060 / 168 ≈ 6.31 kg/hp on 2.9 MT versus 1060 / 240 ≈ 4.42 kg/hp on 4.0 MT. The 4.0 MT carries about 1.89 kg less per horsepower at the same 1060 kerb.

Front suspension is Independent, spring on all three. Rear suspension is not measured on 2.8 MT; Independent, spring on 2.9 MT and 4.0 MT. Front brakes are Disc on all three. Rear brakes: not measured on 2.8 MT; Drum on 2.9 MT; Disc on 4.0 MT. The 4.0 MT is the only version with Disc at both ends in the data.

Reliability and problems: what this catalogue can and cannot say

This dataset has no failure rates, no recall list, and no owner-survey scores. Reliability and “common problems” cannot be ranked from these rows. What can be compared is how complete the measured chassis is, because missing fields mean you cannot verify a spec before you buy:

• 2.8 MT leaves not measured: 0–100, top speed, consumption, tank, CO2, eco class, kerb, gross, wheels, engine location, rear suspension, rear brakes.
• 2.9 MT still has consumption, tank, CO2, eco class, and wheels not measured, but it does list kerb 1060, gross 1200, 0–100 6.9, top speed 226, Front, longitudinal, rear Independent, spring, rear Drum.
• 4.0 MT still has consumption, tank, CO2, eco class, wheels, and gross not measured, but lists kerb 1060, 0–100 5.2, top speed 235, rear Independent, spring, rear Disc.

If you need a version whose performance and weight are written down, 2.8 MT is the weakest paper trail. That is a documentation gap in the data, not a reliability verdict.

Which version to choose

Choose 2.8 MT if the brief is the smallest Gasoline 6-cylinder V-shaped engine in this generation: 2792 cc, 150 hp, 221 Nm, Central injection (single-point or single- point), compression 9.2, 93 × 68.8, power peak 5700 rpm, torque peak 4300 rpm. You accept that 0–100, top speed, kerb, gross, rear suspension, and rear brakes are not measured. Versus 2.9 MT you give up 18 hp and 13 Nm and a 141 cc longer-stroke engine; versus 4.0 MT you give up 90 hp, 145 Nm, two extra cylinders, and multi-point injection.

Choose 2.9 MT if you want the stronger six without jumping to eight cylinders. 168 hp and 234 Nm from 2933 cc, same 6 / V-shaped / No / Central injection (single-point or single- point) pattern as 2.8 MT, but torque peaks 1300 rpm earlier (3000 vs 4300). It is the only version with both kerb 1060 and gross 1200. Timed performance is 6.9 s and 226 top speed. Rear brakes are Drum, not Disc. Versus 4.0 MT you trail by 72 hp, 132 Nm, 1.7 s to 100, and 9 on top speed, and you carry ≈6.31 kg/hp instead of ≈4.42.

Choose 4.0 MT if the numbers that matter are peak output and the only 8-cylinder row. 240 hp, 366 Nm, 3947 cc, Distributed injection (multi-point), compression 10.5, 0–100 5.2, top speed 235, kerb still 1060, rear brakes Disc. Same 5-speed Manual, same RWD, same 140 mm clearance, same 92 fuel, same No boost as the sixes — the extra displacement is what the catalogue actually gives you. Gross weight remains not measured, as do tank, wheels, and all consumption figures.

Arithmetic summary for a shortlist

• Smallest engine: 2.8 MT (2792 cc, 150 hp).
• Best-documented six: 2.9 MT (weight pair 1060 / 1200, 0–100 6.9, top 226).
• Highest power, torque, specific output, and lowest kg/hp among versions with kerb listed: 4.0 MT (240 hp, 366 Nm, ≈60.8 hp/L, ≈4.42 kg/hp at 1060 kg).
• Only Disc rear brakes in the data: 4.0 MT.
• Only version with rear brakes Drum: 2.9 MT.
• mpg: not measured on 2.8 MT, 2.9 MT, and 4.0 MT — do not pick on fuel use from this sheet.

There is no price in the data, so “what the extra money buys” can only be stated as what the extra displacement and cylinder count buy: from 2.8 MT to 2.9 MT, +18 hp and +13 Nm on +141 cc; from 2.9 MT to 4.0 MT, +72 hp and +132 Nm on +1014 cc, plus 8 cylinders and multi-point injection, at the same 1060 kg kerb where kerb is listed.