RE: Aston Martin and AMG: PH Blog

[anonymous-user]

chelme said:

It goes without saying that there is nothing wrong with the engines they have place.

If you wish to stick your head in the sand, and ignore the current world we live in then, yes, there is nothing "wrong" with the current AML engine line up. Unfortunately, whilst you have your head stuck in that sandy hole, the world will continue without you, and whichever way you look at it, the current engines are simply not competitive.


Let me give you an example:

4.7 V8 Vantage: 4.9s 0->62mph from 420 bhp (328g/km Co2) = 1.2bhp/gram

4.0 V8 BMW M5: 4.3s 0->62mpg from 560bhp (232g/km Co2) = 2.41bhp/gram


The dinosaurs died out because they didn't evolve quickly enough, now hopefully AML won't go the same way.

[MiseryStreak]

TNH said:

Andy ap said:

Would it be good to see a Cosworth powered AM? I cant imagine the links between Ford AM and Cosworth being too 'out there'?

I think Cosworth would have been a good option, but whether they could have made an engine as good (efficient) as AMG can for the same price would be questionable due to the economies of scale that AMG will enjoy in comparison to Cosworth.

Just look how much the Cosworth scooby cost when they did the special edition a few years ago...

Er...Cosworth helped design the current Aston V12. So you can go and buy a Cosworth powered AM now. They haven't been owned by Ford for six years now either, despite Ford still producing their V8 and V12 engines in Cologne, but the agreement ends this year hence the AMG partnership.

Do you guys really want AM to develop their own engine (which would probably be a bit rubbish) rather than use one of the finest engine manufacturers out there? Bizarre.

[DiscoColin]

Sharing the core of its engine with a VW Phaeton doesn't appear to have harmed Bentley, BMW power hasn't killed Morgan or indeed Rolls Royce...

I really don't see the problem here, particularly with the current engines already being sourced from Germany anyway.

[NGK210]

With all due respect to the self-appointed brand custodians who are pontificating about what is a real Aston Martin, perhaps it's worth considering a few inconvenient truths:

Setting aside the cobblers regarding 'is it a 911 or is it a Boxster rival?', the F-type has quietly given the dear old Vantage a bloody nose. Next, Jag will launch a new XK, which, in terms of cost/performance/dynamics/handling, etc, is probably going to deliver a similar thumping to the lovely old DB9. And because the XK will be styled by Ian Callum, there's a good chance it'll also look a bit crispy.

In short, if Aston doesn't respond pronto, Jag will soon become the thinking person's Aston, with obvious consequences for the latter's sales/turnover.

Also, Aston can't justify its premium pricing if the Vantage and DB9 can barely muster sufficient poke to out-drag a £30k BMW hatchback (ie, the 135i M thing) or its current flagship, Vanquish, is still outgunned by a previous-gen' rival (ie, the Ferrari 599).

And let's not forget: Aston isn't selling many cars at present.

And to those who wistfully, and conveniently, opine that "Aston has never been about performance", sorry but you're forgetting this little chap (which, heaven forfend, had a forced induction engine):



IMVHO, an Aston-AMG range of c. 3.6secs 0-60/c. 7.0secs 0-100 iron-fists-in-velvet-gloves is just what real world customers want, turbos 'n' all

Edited by NGK210 on Friday 26th July 16:15

[405dogvan]

Turbos and inevitable and unavoidable - fortunately they're not the 'all or nothing' hooting and swooshing things they used-to-be...

[chelme]

Max_Torque said:

If you wish to stick your head in the sand, and ignore the current world we live in then, yes, there is nothing "wrong" with the current AML engine line up. Unfortunately, whilst you have your head stuck in that sandy hole, the world will continue without you, and whichever way you look at it, the current engines are simply not competitive.


Let me give you an example:

4.7 V8 Vantage: 4.9s 0->62mph from 420 bhp (328g/km Co2) = 1.2bhp/gram

4.0 V8 BMW M5: 4.3s 0->62mpg from 560bhp (232g/km Co2) = 2.41bhp/gram


The dinosaurs died out because they didn't evolve quickly enough, now hopefully AML won't go the same way.

Er..Max_Torque, (or shall I refer to you as 'Max Power'?) no one is actually saying that the engines will not require overhauling in the future, perhaps you failed to read the entire post before stamping some statistics on you keyboard.

Having said that AM is not primarily about meaningless 0-60 times. Its about the driving experience.

No doubt they will need to overhaul the engines to meet new regulations. Was it wise to team up with a company that is known to be difficult to work with and seek domination?

I wouldn't be surprised if Mercedes swallowed up the whole brand in 5-10 years time, and as someone who likes AM, I would rather this was not the case and AM teamed up with other consultancies which remained in the background. There must have been other options, but I suspect Investindustrial used its clout to push it this direction, having already had ties with AMG.

I just hope the 'collaboration' is not simply buying an off the peg engine and AM continues to utilize its own engineering skills base to make the engines their own.

[g3org3y]

Don't worry chaps, the Germans sorted out Bentley and Rolls Royce into genuinely good cars.

Am sure they'll do the same for Aston in time.

[chelme]

DiscoColin said:

Sharing the core of its engine with a VW Phaeton doesn't appear to have harmed Bentley, BMW power hasn't killed Morgan or indeed Rolls Royce...

I really don't see the problem here, particularly with the current engines already being sourced from Germany anyway.

Seriously, would you have bought that lovely 997 GT3 of yours had it had a more powerful forced induction VW V6 power plant in it, albeit because Porsche needed to team up with someone and chose to do it with VW? Would you have thought of Porsche the same, having previously owned the 996 with the metzger 6?

I'd be genuinely surprised if you said yes.

Hypothetically if you owned the 991 which has the updated 6 (not metzger I assume) but then decided to put a more powerful forced induction Ford V6 in it. Would you not think less of Porsche for it?

I'd be genuinely surprised if you said no

[kambites]

If the Ford engine was good enough, why not? It's not as if they're going to be picking up a turbocharged four-pot to shove in the DB9 replacement.

[NGK210]

Well, if in ten or so years M-B does end up buying a majority share of Aston, then bring it on.

Hopefully, M-B will then give its full support to Aston's endurance racing programme, with a pair of retired F1 champs entering Le Mans - Lewis Hamilton and Michael Schumacher

[krisdelta]

I don't see this collaboration as a problem, you've got a company which is not cash rich enough to develop it's own competitive engine, nor deal effectively with the increasing emmissions challenges which will limit the market reach of the cars it produces.

Aston Martin has huge presence as a brand, I would have no problem purchasing an AM with an AMG engine so long as the brand integrity (e.g. beautifully styled, well built, comfortable, fast cars) continues. Without evolving, AM will be where Lotus is in a few years, which is clinging on with finger tips to a very narrow ledge.

[NGK210]

chelme said:

DiscoColin said:

Sharing the core of its engine with a VW Phaeton doesn't appear to have harmed Bentley, BMW power hasn't killed Morgan or indeed Rolls Royce...

I really don't see the problem here, particularly with the current engines already being sourced from Germany anyway.

Seriously, would you have bought that lovely 997 GT3 of yours had it had a more powerful forced induction VW V6 power plant in it, albeit because Porsche needed to team up with someone and chose to do it with VW? Would you have thought of Porsche the same, having previously owned the 996 with the metzger 6?

I'd be genuinely surprised if you said yes.

Hypothetically if you owned the 991 which has the updated 6 (not metzger I assume) but then decided to put a more powerful forced induction Ford V6 in it. Would you not think less of Porsche for it?

I'd be genuinely surprised if you said no

Take your point, but off-the-shelf Ford or VW engines are a wee bit different to deliciously rip-snortingly powerful, hand-built AMGs, surely?

[anonymous-user]

chelme said:

Max_Torque said:

If you wish to stick your head in the sand, and ignore the current world we live in then, yes, there is nothing "wrong" with the current AML engine line up. Unfortunately, whilst you have your head stuck in that sandy hole, the world will continue without you, and whichever way you look at it, the current engines are simply not competitive.


Let me give you an example:

4.7 V8 Vantage: 4.9s 0->62mph from 420 bhp (328g/km Co2) = 1.2bhp/gram

4.0 V8 BMW M5: 4.3s 0->62mpg from 560bhp (232g/km Co2) = 2.41bhp/gram


The dinosaurs died out because they didn't evolve quickly enough, now hopefully AML won't go the same way.

Er..Max_Torque, (or shall I refer to you as 'Max Power'?) no one is actually saying that the engines will not require overhauling in the future, perhaps you failed to read the entire post before stamping some statistics on you keyboard.

Having said that AM is not primarily about meaningless 0-60 times. Its about the driving experience.

No doubt they will need to overhaul the engines to meet new regulations. Was it wise to team up with a company that is known to be difficult to work with and seek domination?

And AML simply cannot afford to do that "overhaul" on their own. The (now quite sizable) engineering team at Gaydon, with whom i have personally worked on many occasions , will not simply disappear because the basic engine architecture is now sourced from AMG. They will still have a huge job on packaging, integration, power/emissions/type approval, calibration and homologation, on the intake / exhaust optimisation and platform attribute setting / tuning.

The way the world is going (whether you like it / agree with it or not) is that efficiency is now driving everything. Old tech, in-efficient sub-optimised powertrains are simply no longer viable going forwards.

AML knows this better than anyone, hence this tie up to AMG.........

And, no, an Aston has never been about raw numbers in any one area, but for how much longer do we have to stomach reviews which conclude: "Fantastic looking, characterful cars, but lacking class leading performance / ride & handling".

Personally, i'd like those reviews to end with "Fantastic looking, characterful cars with class leading performance / ride & handling".

Surely you don't need to be a Ultracrepidarian to agree with that?

[chelme]

NGK210 said:

Take your point, but off-the-shelf Ford or VW engines are a wee bit different to deliciously rip-snortingly powerful, hand-built AMGs, surely?

But are they? There are quite a few here that seem to emphasize how all engines are bits and pieces welded and glued together having been sourced from all over the world and it doesn't matter etc.

But it does matter, and an AMG V8 that cuts out at 6,500rpm (and incidentally sounds like a fart) is arguably not that special, when compared to a meztger unit, even thought the latter has only 6 cylinders, nor is it as special as the 4.7 L V8 from the AML IMO.

Anyway glad to see from Max_Touque that AML will most probably be proactive in the proposed collaboration.

[VR6 Eug]

if TVR had gone the German engine route, things would have turned out so much better for TVR, in hind sight of course...

[chelme]

Max_Torque said:

And AML simply cannot afford to do that "overhaul" on their own. The (now quite sizable) engineering team at Gaydon, with whom i have personally worked on many occasions , will not simply disappear because the basic engine architecture is now sourced from AMG. They will still have a huge job on packaging, integration, power/emissions/type approval, calibration and homologation, on the intake / exhaust optimisation and platform attribute setting / tuning.

The way the world is going (whether you like it / agree with it or not) is that efficiency is now driving everything. Old tech, in-efficient sub-optimised powertrains are simply no longer viable going forwards.

AML knows this better than anyone, hence this tie up to AMG.........

And, no, an Aston has never been about raw numbers in any one area, but for how much longer do we have to stomach reviews which conclude: "Fantastic looking, characterful cars, but lacking class leading performance / ride & handling".

Personally, i'd like those reviews to end with "Fantastic looking, characterful cars with class leading performance / ride & handling".

Surely you don't need to be a Ultracrepidarian to agree with that?

Its worth pointing out too, that the Press (which I'd like to think represent to a degree what the public want) is generally in favour of a correction in power + torque outputs.

AML models do combine ride and handling most successfully for what they are; GT front engined rear drive vehicles.

Improved performance figures can be obtained no less from using lighter structures. AML could have, if it chose to, refrain from all the marketing bulls**t it misspent its money on (including no less, helicopter rides for its top brass) and focused on reinvesting the money in its products, just like the Germans do.

That's all water under the bridge now. Looking forward, hope you are correct that they play a significant role in working on/customizing these units.

[JMC1]

Why can someone (as posed in my previous post) please explain why new engines are supposed to cost £100's of millions of pounds to produce when lots of smaller manufacturers are able to achieve this.

Lotus engineering would have been surely a better a tie up. I know they use Toyota power in some of their cars but a cost effective deal was done by GM between Lotus and Mercury Marine to produce the engine that went into the Vauxhall Carlton. Also I believe Williams GP produced the power plant for the 6R4. Nissan went to Ricardo which McLaren has inherited. From memory Chrysler got Lambo to vamp up their V10 truck engine to go in the Viper.

When big manufacturers want something special they turn to the smaller specialist organisations to develop and produce them.

Why are AML not thinking down this route rather than one of the biggest and German vehicle manufacturers.

I agree with chelme that this short term may be an answer but long term this is going to ruin the pedigree.

The reason it has worked for Bentley is because it gave them a brand new model that was launched at 60% of the price of the bigger Bentley cars and broadened their market base. When BMW stuck their V8 in the Bentley Arnage it was not well excepted and in no time at all they re-engineered the old 6750cc lump and offered it as the Red Label option which most customers then went for.

[heavyearly76]

JMC1 said:

When BMW stuck their V8 in the Bentley Arnage it was not well excepted and in no time at all they re-engineered the old 6750cc lump and offered it as the Red Label option which most customers then went for.

Excellent point! I forgot about that argument .

[DiscoColin]

chelme said:

Seriously, would you have bought that lovely 997 GT3 of yours had it had a more powerful forced induction VW V6 power plant in it, albeit because Porsche needed to team up with someone and chose to do it with VW? Would you have thought of Porsche the same, having previously owned the 996 with the metzger 6?

I'd be genuinely surprised if you said yes.

Hypothetically if you owned the 991 which has the updated 6 (not metzger I assume) but then decided to put a more powerful forced induction Ford V6 in it. Would you not think less of Porsche for it?

I'd be genuinely surprised if you said no

I don't do forced induction (thus far at least), so no.

That argument is undermined somewhat by the fact that using AMG power doesn't mean that Aston will necessarily opt for a blown 'plant. Pagani use a conventional air breather and there are a number of AMG options that AM could use which aren't turboed so your analogy may actually be a dead end.

If I hadn't bought a 997 I would actually have opted for a 996RS by the way. If you don't like the new - you can always get what you do like. Conforming to progress is optional for the buyer, but progress is mandatory for the manufacturer - otherwise they go out of business. And I want AM to stay in business, because one day in the future there may a day when I no longer either want to or indeed can drive my toy around racing tracks. At that time - all things being equal - I see a very real likelihood of an Aston in my garage. If they cock up the formula with the AMG thing it will be older, if they get it right perhaps not, but that is a long way away at the moment...

Seriously though - anyone who has ever seen or heard an AMG SLS GT3 go down the main straight of the Nordschleife would not be concerned. AMG are capable of producing an engine that would not in any way tarnish motoring's strongest brand. It is like a second world war fighter with the taps wide open. Even though that one does have forced induction - it would do.

[anonymous-user]

JMC1 said:

Why can someone (as posed in my previous post) please explain why new engines are supposed to cost £100's of millions of pounds to produce when lots of smaller manufacturers are able to achieve this.

The "Rules" as they are currently set out by the worldwide agencies responsible for passenger car homologation (the act of demonstrating that your particular product meets of exceeds the mandated limits set by those agencies for all sorts of stuff (crash worthiness, emissions, noise, recyclability, etc etc etc)) are not linear with production volume. Low volume manufacturers (< approx 1000 unit PA) are given a lot of extra leeway, and simply don't have to meet such difficult and onerous targets as the higher volume manufacturers.

AML unfortunately are at that difficult size, big enough to need to do everything properly, but small enough to have trouble making the business case stack up at those volumes. They also have a global product, which needs to meet differing (sometimes wildly differing) standards, rules and limits in markets such as the US, Japan, or China etc. This adds yet more cost per unit sold.

JMC1 said:

The reason it has worked for Bentley is because it gave them a brand new model that was launched at 60% of the price of the bigger Bentley cars and broadened their market base. When BMW stuck their V8 in the Bentley Arnage it was not well excepted and in no time at all they re-engineered the old 6750cc lump and offered it as the Red Label option which most customers then went for.

As one of the people who was responsible for the re-engineering of the new twin turbo 6.75's, i can tell you that the issue with the green label Arnarge was really just one of the shape of the torque curve, rather than the engine persay that produced that torque. Customers had become very used to the massively lazy, huge torque output of the 6.75 at low rpm. The 4.4 BMW engine simply couldn't replicate that output at low crankspeeds. Hence, it got the HeaveHo.

However, wrt: AML / AMG we are not talking about replacing the 6l V12 with a 3l V6 or similar, in fact, the engines ranges are really very similar in terms of capacity and output, and as such, with a suitable attribute optimisation will, i think, sit very happily in their new all aluminium homes ;-)