RE: Aston confirms 835hp V12 for new Vanquish
Discussion
ManyMotors said:
E90_M3Ross said:
ManyMotors said:
E90, We don't know what the price of the Vanquish will be and the article says "Though it should be noted that the engine will be ‘handcrafted, year by year, in strictly limited numbers.’"
Again, I never stated the NA displacement. But the specific power at 160 hp/ L of the new V12 isn't relatively high. The 296 comes in at over 210 hp/L as does the MB GT43. Plus, shouldn't the celebration of final V12s require natural aspiration rather than suffer from muting turbos?
My personal preference in modern power is to hybridize like an SF90, 296, Artura or E-Ray.
Would whatever vehicle be better with more power? I think there are limits because of what can be put to the ground. But in the offerings of expensive vehicles, high numbers are important.
The most important point I am making is that AM is in trouble and is putting out undefined, chest-beating news in an effort to keep their flame burning. Though somewhat difficult to see, I wish Lawrence Stroll the best of good luck and hope he does better than David Brown. Maybe a new series beginning with an Aston Martin LS1 or going directly to a LS5 is in order - but that does read like so much Chevy.
You mentioned others are doing naturally aspirated engines with the same or more bhp/L..... So far you have managed to mention three cars. Two of which don't produce 160bhp/L NA as they're turbocharged hybrids and the other is a car which costs a LOT more, and is very much a track focused car Again, I never stated the NA displacement. But the specific power at 160 hp/ L of the new V12 isn't relatively high. The 296 comes in at over 210 hp/L as does the MB GT43. Plus, shouldn't the celebration of final V12s require natural aspiration rather than suffer from muting turbos?
My personal preference in modern power is to hybridize like an SF90, 296, Artura or E-Ray.
Would whatever vehicle be better with more power? I think there are limits because of what can be put to the ground. But in the offerings of expensive vehicles, high numbers are important.
The most important point I am making is that AM is in trouble and is putting out undefined, chest-beating news in an effort to keep their flame burning. Though somewhat difficult to see, I wish Lawrence Stroll the best of good luck and hope he does better than David Brown. Maybe a new series beginning with an Aston Martin LS1 or going directly to a LS5 is in order - but that does read like so much Chevy.
no we don't know the cost of this, but if you think it'll be anywhere near the price of a Valkyrie you're way off I said somewhere around 10x the price of this, it's about $4m so I doubt I'm too far off.You didn't state the displacement, no. But you didn't need to. You said over 160bhp/L. I have merely asked which NA engines have produced 160bhp/L.
So yeah, just curious which NA engines you were referring to.
"The 835 hp from a turbocharged five-liter V12 seems a bit low when others are getting that much from NA."
Which very much suggests others are getting that from a 5 litre. But yes, I have obviously misunderstood you
Edited by E90_M3Ross on Friday 3rd May 16:31
nismo48 said:
BigChiefmuffinAgain said:
They also announced another massive loss for the quarter, and predicted another one for Q2.
Literally living on borrowed time....
So sad.. Literally living on borrowed time....
Eventually Lawrence will realise his pockets aren't deep enough, but that won't be the end of the brand.
E90_M3Ross said:
I can see where the confusion lies but you said
"The 835 hp from a turbocharged five-liter V12 seems a bit low when others are getting that much from NA."
Which very much suggests others are getting that from a 5 litre. But yes, I have obviously misunderstood you
I'd post one of those bumping mugs emojis, too, except with cups of coffee - the hype of caffeine facilitates interaction. "The 835 hp from a turbocharged five-liter V12 seems a bit low when others are getting that much from NA."
Which very much suggests others are getting that from a 5 litre. But yes, I have obviously misunderstood you
Edited by E90_M3Ross on Friday 3rd May 16:31
Having seen the fugly and bland Ferrari ‘Dodi’, with its downmarket haptic- / touchscreen-only cabin, imho the V12 GT crown is Aston’s for the taking.
Just don’t feck it up by launching a thinly-disguised DB12 with a bodykit and an extra large grille, and a half-baked chassis that can’t cope with the V12’s wallop.
And it might be worth investigating a manual gearbox option, similar to the setup in the V12 Pagani Utopia, which is presumably all off-the-shelf kit?
Just don’t feck it up by launching a thinly-disguised DB12 with a bodykit and an extra large grille, and a half-baked chassis that can’t cope with the V12’s wallop.
And it might be worth investigating a manual gearbox option, similar to the setup in the V12 Pagani Utopia, which is presumably all off-the-shelf kit?
Bradgate said:
I agree, too. My M240i was frustrating enough because I couldn’t use the performance, and that had ‘only’ 340 bhp / 500nm, albeit in a relatively small light car. It’s difficult to argue that 800 bhp in a road car, even a huge heavy SUV, is anything other than completely pointless.
My Range Rover is 650bhp, my 650s about 650, my SL was nearly 700 and I’m speaking to DMS about options for my Portofino. I think all of them were used at peak power on most drives.Ken_Code said:
Bradgate said:
I agree, too. My M240i was frustrating enough because I couldn’t use the performance, and that had ‘only’ 340 bhp / 500nm, albeit in a relatively small light car. It’s difficult to argue that 800 bhp in a road car, even a huge heavy SUV, is anything other than completely pointless.
My Range Rover is 650bhp, my 650s about 650, my SL was nearly 700 and I’m speaking to DMS about options for my Portofino. I think all of them were used at peak power on most drives.W12GT said:
Ken_Code said:
Bradgate said:
I agree, too. My M240i was frustrating enough because I couldn’t use the performance, and that had ‘only’ 340 bhp / 500nm, albeit in a relatively small light car. It’s difficult to argue that 800 bhp in a road car, even a huge heavy SUV, is anything other than completely pointless.
My Range Rover is 650bhp, my 650s about 650, my SL was nearly 700 and I’m speaking to DMS about options for my Portofino. I think all of them were used at peak power on most drives.If you don’t give your car full throttle everyday - then Mumsnet is for you , fellow ,
ds666 said:
W12GT said:
Ken_Code said:
Bradgate said:
I agree, too. My M240i was frustrating enough because I couldn’t use the performance, and that had ‘only’ 340 bhp / 500nm, albeit in a relatively small light car. It’s difficult to argue that 800 bhp in a road car, even a huge heavy SUV, is anything other than completely pointless.
My Range Rover is 650bhp, my 650s about 650, my SL was nearly 700 and I’m speaking to DMS about options for my Portofino. I think all of them were used at peak power on most drives.If you don’t give your car full throttle everyday - then Mumsnet is for you , fellow ,
In my Ferrari I could often use full throttle for brief periods, but that's not the same as using the full performance of the car. If I was the push to the point that the outright ability of the car was holding me back it would mean maintaining an average speed well into three figures. 99% of the time it wasn't the available power on offer that was the limiting factor, it was a combination of the law, other road users, and simple common sense. Had the car had an extra 100 bhp it just means those brief full throttle periods would have been a little briefer.
I guess if a couple of seconds of maximum G force is your bag then going from 750 bhp to 840 bhp might make the car marginally better, but I am not convinced that is what an Aston is for; they aren't drag racers.
When these cars can go from 60 to 120 under 5 seconds and will be traction limited below that on anything but warm perfectly flat tarmac I don't see how you can engage full power and revs other than for a few fleeting seconds, I couldn't do it very often in cars with 425-560hp so adding another 300-400hp on top just makes that harder.
But at this price level you have to have a hook, and power is one of them otherwise why would you part with the best part of £400k+, torque will be restricted in the first few gears so you won't access the full power until you're into silly speeds anyway otherwise you'd just sit there in a cloud of smoke or have the TC light making sure you went no where.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff