The GT8! Carbon fibre bodied £200K 440BHP 7 Speed V8.
Discussion
JohnG1 said:
Why do you think carbon fibre bodywork is expensive?
Because google said so 
Automotive manufacturing costs can be cut by 80% with carbon fiber-based autos vs. steel-based ones due to greatly reduced tooling and simpler assembly and joining. However, such cost savings are currently overshadowed with carbon fiber material prices upwards of $10/lb.
If carbon fiber costs can be driven down to $5/lb (for large-tow, standard-modulus, automotive-grade creel fiber), a carbon-fiber-based auto would become cost-competitive with a steel-based auto. RMI's analysis of composites aligns with studies by MIT and ORNL showing that manufacturing fixed costs can be reduced by 80% from a steel-automotive baseline with composite manufacturing methods. This translates to a 35% overall savings since costs are spread over 250,000 units of annual production. Unfortunately, the same analyses show that all cost reductions associated with body-in-white and/or composite manufacturing techniques are currently overshadowed by higher material cost. For carbon-fiber-based autos to compete with steel ones at the same production volume, carbon fiber costs would need to decrease from their current $10+ per pound price by about 60%—yet ORNL thinks this is plausible.
Flugplatz said:
JohnG1 said:
Why do you think carbon fibre bodywork is expensive?
Because google said so Automotive manufacturing costs can be cut by 80% with carbon fiber-based autos vs. steel-based ones due to greatly reduced tooling and simpler assembly and joining. However, such cost savings are currently overshadowed with carbon fiber material prices upwards of $10/lb.
If carbon fiber costs can be driven down to $5/lb (for large-tow, standard-modulus, automotive-grade creel fiber), a carbon-fiber-based auto would become cost-competitive with a steel-based auto. RMI's analysis of composites aligns with studies by MIT and ORNL showing that manufacturing fixed costs can be reduced by 80% from a steel-automotive baseline with composite manufacturing methods. This translates to a 35% overall savings since costs are spread over 250,000 units of annual production. Unfortunately, the same analyses show that all cost reductions associated with body-in-white and/or composite manufacturing techniques are currently overshadowed by higher material cost. For carbon-fiber-based autos to compete with steel ones at the same production volume, carbon fiber costs would need to decrease from their current $10+ per pound price by about 60%—yet ORNL thinks this is plausible.
Do, please, remind me how much of the cost of a standard V8 Vantage is represented by steel parts? There are a small number of steel parts in the chassis and the rest is aluminium, magnesium, composites and other non-steel materials.
So, back in the real world of AML, what makes the poster think carbon fibre bodywork is expensive?
julian64 said:
I don't think I understand Astons philosophy here.
Increase cars performance by spending bucket loads of money of carbon fibre bodywork but stick with a fairly low powered engine in todays sports car world.
Wouldn't it have been better to spend half the money they have spent on the bodywork to get the engine to a more respectable figure.
The only excuse for what they've done is if the car is now the king of the corners because of how light it is. A track focussed version. However its too heavy for that compared to normal track cars.
Where are they aiming for with this car?
As has already been mentioned on this thread, the point is 150 units @ £165k - period, no free thinking beyond this point is needed because it's job done!Increase cars performance by spending bucket loads of money of carbon fibre bodywork but stick with a fairly low powered engine in todays sports car world.
Wouldn't it have been better to spend half the money they have spent on the bodywork to get the engine to a more respectable figure.
The only excuse for what they've done is if the car is now the king of the corners because of how light it is. A track focussed version. However its too heavy for that compared to normal track cars.
Where are they aiming for with this car?
But yes, the point doesn't seem to have been to create a sports car with demon dynamics to rival the fine cut of many other sports cars, which means attributes like weight below 1350, power circa 500BHP, CCM brakes, twin clutch box, electronic adaptive suspension and Nav / infotainment/ connectivity of this century - all perfectly reasonable deliverables on a run out model >10yrs old?? But hey, Just give it special edition paint / panels / stitching, roaring exhaust note, say it's a limited run (meaning it's bought to go in a collection) and that guarantees sell out regardless of dynamic capability before the first car even rolls off the production line. So it really is mission accomplished!
I get it, the factory need to have lots of specials because they don't have a cashcow money maker (Cayenne / Panemera / Bentayga) but put the specials in context... in 2007 the V12Vantage RS prototype was announced at 600BHP, at less than 1500kg that meant circa 400BHP per tonne. Nearly 10 years on GT12 is "Quoted" kerb weight 1565kg / 592 BHP = 384 BHP per tonne, GT8 is 440BHP / 1510 kerb weight = 296BHP per tonne, a stock Rapide S is 294 BHP per tonne and with its CCM's and electronic adaptive suspension is a banging capable ride around a track!! But you will never see that back-to-back review Vs GT8 on film!
But are we wrong to question? the media (pro or amateur) in all the reviews I have read / watched they rave about GT8 dynamic capability. So either a)the media continues its a long term love affair with this brand and reviews products better than relative position in marketplace (fears for their next chance at a scoop review too) because b)for the loyal mainstream buyers of the car the handling / braking / power dynamics the journos know rocks their readers world anyway, because finally c)anyone wanting more dynamic performance from an Aston is just a freak??!!
An Aston for a long time has been bought more off attributes like; Brand values / aspirational purchase / Specialness / Rarity / Sound / but not for its demon dynamics. A stock Rapide S @ 294BHP per tonne with CCM's and adaptive suspension Vs GT8's stats sums up the model strategy, so you are right in the philosophy of the question you raise. But you are airing it to the brand new car buyers (not older car owners or buyers) of this forum who mostly buy the cars for the other attributes I mention except for wanting demon dynamics. Yet what the factory needs for volume sales and to survive is to appeal to an army of folk who do buy their new cars for demon dynamics and the latest and greatest tech (getting Sports cars designed right) because the cashcow it seeks with DBX (7000 units per annum) plain and simple just ain't gonna happen. But we all want them to pull that off and prove the early 2000's success was not a one off blip due to the battering ram (Ford) used to get those models into production, and they can indeed sell 7k DB11's and new V8's with additional 7k per annum DBX sales - making 14k cars per year total - which is as difficult for me to fathom as you wishing to but not seeing GT8 have demon dynamics!
Shmee said:
rkwm1 said:
So got to drive a GT8 for the first time today but noticed car makes horrible sound when pulling away in first. The sound is like something grinding in the rear. Is this normal?
Definitely not normal, it should be making the most glorious noise imaginable!
rkwm1 said:
So got to drive a GT8 for the first time today but noticed car makes horrible sound when pulling away in first. The sound is like something grinding in the rear. Is this normal?
Just at very low speed in first? Mine does the same. Have been told it's the diff and is completely normal.
difontaine42 said:
Just at very low speed in first?
Mine does the same. Have been told it's the diff and is completely normal.
The sound that many of us hear, is thought to be a torque tube vibration.Mine does the same. Have been told it's the diff and is completely normal.
Just accelerate or change in to 2nd gear and if the grinding sound stops, then you have been hearing the normal sound.
I try to avoid the circumstances when this noise occurs, but have not read that it causes damage.
Jon39 said:
difontaine42 said:
Just at very low speed in first?
Mine does the same. Have been told it's the diff and is completely normal.
The sound that many of us hear, is thought to be a torque tube vibration.Mine does the same. Have been told it's the diff and is completely normal.
Just accelerate or change in to 2nd gear and if the grinding sound stops, then you have been hearing the normal sound.
I try to avoid the circumstances when this noise occurs, but have not read that it causes damage.
rkwm1 said:
how do you avoid it?
My Vantage is rarely driven in congested crawling traffic conditions, unless it cannot be avoided, but I just try to minimise driving in 1st gear at very low revs.
I have not looked to see what revs need to be reached for that noise to stop, but would guess possibly between 1000 and 1500.
( Edit ) I seem to remember that the noise is most pronounced, in 1st gear, at low revs, with a steady throttle. If the road conditions allow an increase in engine speed, the noise then stops.
I thought the GT8 cars have really loud exhausts. If so, I am surprised that you can still hear the torque tube vibration sound.
Edited by Jon39 on Monday 5th December 13:44
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff