Aston Martin DB10?!

[xRIEx]

Guycord said:

Argument across the thread is that AML have copied Jag F-Type.

My premise is the Zag was out before the Jag F.
Your premise is that you agree the Zag was out first but too near together for Jag to copy the Zag.

Ergo, AML did not copy the Jag rear.

Your earlier premise was "direct inspirational copy" - I assume you didn't check the launch dates

I don't see a direct link between the two anyway, a couple of lines are similar but that's it. However, the window shapes are almost identical between the F and the DB10, and quite different to the Zagato.

[vit4]

Am I the only one who thinks that looks simply awful? Horribly out of proportion IMHO. The front doesn't look like anything special and the back just looks sort-of awkward, although I do get the impression that I'm alone here

[P4ROT]

Front grill area reminds me of this:

[Sampaio]

Clearly a Vantage rather than a DB9 replacement. That being said, this car is proof that Aston Martin can make an icon out of the Vantage, by making a new generation look genuinely different from the previous, while retaining key design aspects that allow anyone to identify it as a Vantage.

[F1GTRUeno]

P4ROT said:

Front grill area reminds me of this:

Let's not say things we can't take back.

[DonkeyApple]

blearyeyedboy said:

Am I the only person who thinks that most manufacturers would kill to link a launch to a new James Bond film? It strikes me as a bloody awesome way to introduce a new car.

It's a great way to test a departure from one design format and check if another will surpass it. Why take the risk of production when a modest fee will see the design tested on a truly global stage which if it gets popular approval will then transpire to have been a cheap launch platform.

I do think Aston need a change but there is no denying that the age old look is still an absolute cracker so it's going to be really difficult to replace.

This dB10 looks good but as others have said it looks more vantage sized than dB9.

[killingjoker]

It's actually based on the V8 Vantage not the V12.

EON pushed for it to be badged DB10.

[AMDBSNick]

DonkeyApple said:

It's a great way to test a departure from one design format and check if another will surpass it. Why take the risk of production when a modest fee will see the design tested on a truly global stage which if it gets popular approval will then transpire to have been a cheap launch platform.

[450Nick]

Is it just me or just it look like another poorly rendered and boringly generic sports car? Come on Aston, you've been using the same style for about 20 years and when its time to change you come up with this?!

[jonby]

Sampaio said:

Clearly a Vantage rather than a DB9 replacement. That being said, this car is proof that Aston Martin can make an icon out of the Vantage, by making a new generation look genuinely different from the previous, while retaining key design aspects that allow anyone to identify it as a Vantage.

I'm not sure we should be looking in a black & white way, as many on here are most understandably doing, at this being a vantage or DB9 replacement

It's neither as I interpret the situation

It's Vantage in size and in chassis. There are clear current vantage lines in the rear 3/4 view where you can see current vantage back end/rear arches/rear glass/tailgate, etc.

But it's effectively a design study indicating where AML are going. So for instance the change to the side strakes, which was hinted at in CC100 too. The change to the front end. The rear lights. Etc. We will see hints of some of those things in both DB9 & Vantage replacement. But this car is neither - it's an old/outgoing tech chassis/engine with a design study/concept body

Alongside ONE77, CC100, DP100, etc it's an indication of direction for the next crop of cars. Nothing more, nothing less. It probably doesn't even meet forthcoming regs seeing as it's built on the current chassis, so for things like pedestrian safety, they couldn't build a production version even if they wanted to. The fact it's most closely related to current Vantage is nigh on irrelevant IMO

Oh and for me, I most closely see Ferrari 456 in the front end

[loose cannon]

MogulBoy said:

And the Oscar for Best Door Mirrors goes to..... Aston Martin for the DB10/Spectre!

Oh I don't no Monica bellluchis door mirrors look ok to me

[Zod]

My view is that the "this is just for the film" line is to cover the gap until the new AMG-derived powertrain and electronics are available. Then, I expect this car will be launched as the DB10.

Apparently the cars for the movie are all manuals, but I won't raise my hopes for a manual DB10.

[DonkeyApple]

jonby said:

I'm not sure we should be looking in a black & white way, as many on here are most understandably doing, at this being a vantage or DB9 replacement

It's neither as I interpret the situation

It's Vantage in size and in chassis. There are clear current vantage lines in the rear 3/4 view where you can see current vantage back end/rear arches/rear glass/tailgate, etc.

But it's effectively a design study indicating where AML are going. So for instance the change to the side strakes, which was hinted at in CC100 too. The change to the front end. The rear lights. Etc. We will see hints of some of those things in both DB9 & Vantage replacement. But this car is neither - it's an old/outgoing tech chassis/engine with a design study/concept body

Alongside ONE77, CC100, DP100, etc it's an indication of direction for the next crop of cars. Nothing more, nothing less. It probably doesn't even meet forthcoming regs seeing as it's built on the current chassis, so for things like pedestrian safety, they couldn't build a production version even if they wanted to. The fact it's most closely related to current Vantage is nigh on irrelevant IMO

Oh and for me, I most closely see Ferrari 456 in the front end

I would only add that it was my impression they are retaining the VH chassis?

[jonby]

DonkeyApple said:

jonby said:

I'm not sure we should be looking in a black & white way, as many on here are most understandably doing, at this being a vantage or DB9 replacement

It's neither as I interpret the situation

It's Vantage in size and in chassis. There are clear current vantage lines in the rear 3/4 view where you can see current vantage back end/rear arches/rear glass/tailgate, etc.

But it's effectively a design study indicating where AML are going. So for instance the change to the side strakes, which was hinted at in CC100 too. The change to the front end. The rear lights. Etc. We will see hints of some of those things in both DB9 & Vantage replacement. But this car is neither - it's an old/outgoing tech chassis/engine with a design study/concept body

Alongside ONE77, CC100, DP100, etc it's an indication of direction for the next crop of cars. Nothing more, nothing less. It probably doesn't even meet forthcoming regs seeing as it's built on the current chassis, so for things like pedestrian safety, they couldn't build a production version even if they wanted to. The fact it's most closely related to current Vantage is nigh on irrelevant IMO

Oh and for me, I most closely see Ferrari 456 in the front end

I would only add that it was my impression they are retaining the VH chassis?

Well yes & no

As you are aware, VH changes from year/model to year/model - I just meant that the version of VH chassis that DB10 sits on will not be the same as the one new cars sit on in 2015/16, in a variety of different ways including proportions/dimensions.

Projects like V12 Zagato and the forthcoming GT3 sit on a very similar VH chassis to the 'donor car', but with a different body. It appears this DB10 is doing the same thing, hence such similar proportions to Vantage. Whereas new Vantage & DB9 will almost certainly have different proportions (however marginal the changes) on a new size chassis, still using VH principles

[DonkeyApple]

jonby said:

DonkeyApple said:

jonby said:

I'm not sure we should be looking in a black & white way, as many on here are most understandably doing, at this being a vantage or DB9 replacement

It's neither as I interpret the situation

It's Vantage in size and in chassis. There are clear current vantage lines in the rear 3/4 view where you can see current vantage back end/rear arches/rear glass/tailgate, etc.

But it's effectively a design study indicating where AML are going. So for instance the change to the side strakes, which was hinted at in CC100 too. The change to the front end. The rear lights. Etc. We will see hints of some of those things in both DB9 & Vantage replacement. But this car is neither - it's an old/outgoing tech chassis/engine with a design study/concept body

Alongside ONE77, CC100, DP100, etc it's an indication of direction for the next crop of cars. Nothing more, nothing less. It probably doesn't even meet forthcoming regs seeing as it's built on the current chassis, so for things like pedestrian safety, they couldn't build a production version even if they wanted to. The fact it's most closely related to current Vantage is nigh on irrelevant IMO

Oh and for me, I most closely see Ferrari 456 in the front end

I would only add that it was my impression they are retaining the VH chassis?

Well yes & no

As you are aware, VH changes from year/model to year/model - I just meant that the version of VH chassis that DB10 sits on will not be the same as the one new cars sit on in 2015/16, in a variety of different ways including proportions/dimensions.

Projects like V12 Zagato and the forthcoming GT3 sit on a very similar VH chassis to the 'donor car', but with a different body. It appears this DB10 is doing the same thing, hence such similar proportions to Vantage. Whereas new Vantage & DB9 will almost certainly have different proportions (however marginal the changes) on a new size chassis, still using VH principles

Yup. That's my understanding but hadn't understood what you meant. Others in the thread seem to think AMG are to be supplying chassis as well as engines.

[BarbaricAvatar]

Meh. The DB10 isn't gorgeous enough, glad it's not a production model.