Aston Martin advice from Bamford Rose independent specialist
Discussion
BamfordMike said:
2nd everything you say here....
Sorry if you have done this elsewhere, can you give an outline of your pre / post experience.
What were your reasons for change? did the kit fulfill your demands? is there anything beyond sports pack you still wish for?
ta...
I test drove 12 roadsters to compare manual vs ASM and std vs Sports Pack.Sorry if you have done this elsewhere, can you give an outline of your pre / post experience.
What were your reasons for change? did the kit fulfill your demands? is there anything beyond sports pack you still wish for?
ta...
I came from a very agile 420 BHP S2000. The standard V8 (especially the 4.3) was a let down, slow turn in, no feel from steering or rear under power. Unsettled on B roads. The revised suspension on the Sports Pack (AFAIK N400 set up) just gives so much more feedback, turn in is still a little slow (retro fit Vantage S rack?) but hte car is far more composed on all surface and just wants to be driven.
I do wonder how much is down to a decent geometry (too often over looked), only things I'd like to change is 15-20 mm drop and a quicker turn in.
Mike, thanks for your counsel.
Let me supplement mikey k's answer to your "anything more" question.
My wants must be typical of many Vantage owners. We already have the best looking car, the shortfall is performance! There's lots of routes, how about a mix?
1. More torque, you explained, is a function on displacement. You offer 4.7L. I am at 4.3L and just 10,000 miles, and unwilling to dismantle my fine running machine (plus I am an ocean away}.
2. Less mass, my favorite because I can implement most changes with my own hands. I am down about 60# now, via a Quicksilver and removing little needed bits. How about lighter rotors and lugnuts at a reasonable cost. I will do your light weight flywheel when my clutch needs replacing, will use your twin plate clutch as well.
3. Less friction. Is there improvement available through a relaxed allignment? I am no racer. I don't need chassis settings that minimize tire life scrubbing off rubber.
4. Electronic trickery. A Canadian company, Sprint Booster, offers removal of tip in delay. Most carlines are listed, AM not available. How about a little more boost from the power steering pump to relieve the slugish front end feel?
Best regards, Rick (flinder}
Let me supplement mikey k's answer to your "anything more" question.
My wants must be typical of many Vantage owners. We already have the best looking car, the shortfall is performance! There's lots of routes, how about a mix?
1. More torque, you explained, is a function on displacement. You offer 4.7L. I am at 4.3L and just 10,000 miles, and unwilling to dismantle my fine running machine (plus I am an ocean away}.
2. Less mass, my favorite because I can implement most changes with my own hands. I am down about 60# now, via a Quicksilver and removing little needed bits. How about lighter rotors and lugnuts at a reasonable cost. I will do your light weight flywheel when my clutch needs replacing, will use your twin plate clutch as well.
3. Less friction. Is there improvement available through a relaxed allignment? I am no racer. I don't need chassis settings that minimize tire life scrubbing off rubber.
4. Electronic trickery. A Canadian company, Sprint Booster, offers removal of tip in delay. Most carlines are listed, AM not available. How about a little more boost from the power steering pump to relieve the slugish front end feel?
Best regards, Rick (flinder}
stanwan said:
Hi mike,
Some of your thoughts echo my own... I ordered my 2007 v8 before any performance stats were released. I was hoping for a 100 bhp/litre engine and sub 1500kg weight all-in. I didn't feel overly shortchanged by the official stats, it does make me wonder, if given free-reign and more funds, what your team could have accomplished...
I was a driving a humble, but modified, civic type-r at the time so I would have forgiven any flaws!! What did surprise me is how the v8 felt a little leaden and unresponsive compared to my little 2 litre K20 engine: After modifying intakes, plenums, cams, valves, manifolds, exhausts it buzzed and fizzed like an angry hornet!!
Which leads me to my final question. Given a cost no object approach, how would you have liked to design the vantages 4.3/4.7 v8 engine. We're talking esoteric stuff here like unobtanium con-rods, ITBs, variable valve lift, more agressive cams etc...
I look forward to your response.
Hi.Some of your thoughts echo my own... I ordered my 2007 v8 before any performance stats were released. I was hoping for a 100 bhp/litre engine and sub 1500kg weight all-in. I didn't feel overly shortchanged by the official stats, it does make me wonder, if given free-reign and more funds, what your team could have accomplished...
I was a driving a humble, but modified, civic type-r at the time so I would have forgiven any flaws!! What did surprise me is how the v8 felt a little leaden and unresponsive compared to my little 2 litre K20 engine: After modifying intakes, plenums, cams, valves, manifolds, exhausts it buzzed and fizzed like an angry hornet!!
Which leads me to my final question. Given a cost no object approach, how would you have liked to design the vantages 4.3/4.7 v8 engine. We're talking esoteric stuff here like unobtanium con-rods, ITBs, variable valve lift, more agressive cams etc...
I look forward to your response.
Just my type of discussion, engineer’s wish-list applied to an Aston Martin…! You strike a chord close to my heart and your question is the reason why Bamford Rose was born! So I will try hardest to avoid a rant, but here goes…!
Yes, and minus the cygnet clearly, although the current crop of Astons are amongst the finest sports cars in the world. Model after model it became a little disheartening to have ideas / components deleted from the wish-list at the start of development phase due to cost. But bean counters are not always the culprits, to achieve something magical it often takes an element of risk, risk means an element of potential failure, overspend or time delays. These undesirable outcomes could blot an engineer’s career forever and runs the risk of being fired. And seeing as nobody wants to get fired risk is seldom taken – but in my opinion no risk taking = the potential stunting of a truly magical outcome.
Taking risks never bothered me as if required I committed my soul to achieving the target, even if that meant life being dedicated to work for that period of time. The last time I did that was for N400 project. I had an idea how an algorithm inside the ECU would return more power, something the rest of the industry wasn’t doing to that extent at that time, the idea was even worthy of Patent in the factory’s eyes. But it was a slog to get to the position of receiving development funds and on receipt I didn’t fully know if the innovative idea could be implemented into production. But that was the risk I took to achieve something magical and the risk was worth it; N400 and the official AM power upgrade kit is the legacy I leave as a result, filtered down and now used in Vantage ‘S’.
Other examples, Rapide – in my opinion the engine should not just have been simply transplanted from DB9, the engine should have been redesigned to produce significantly more low speed torque (as both the car and pay-load would most likely be higher than standard wheel base). The engine in an application like the Rapide should deliver effortless torque 'Bentley style', but should 'rip the arms off the driver' from low speed delivery if required, the Rapide doesn’t necessarily require ultimate top-end power (save bragging rights at the bar). Additionally, technology should have been introduced to return greater fuel efficiency under cruise speeds, as after all, touring across continents is what the Rapide was meant for. But no, wish-list dashed and the car produced in a foreign country to a budget. DBS; DBS should have been 550BHP, minimum, seeing as the flagship model (Vanquish) from 5 years previous was 520BHP…
The list is long… But let’s not get too bogged down and forget that the things mentioned here put the icing on top of an already very nice cake. Perhaps the clinical financial decision was correct and necessary to ensure the future of the business. But what we are all passionate about here is making a supercar the best it can be in all respects, not just in terms of looks and emotions the brand creates…
Onto the V8 and your question. Bamford Rose is privileged to prepare the engine for Euro GT4 team Mathol Racing, one of the most successful GT4 teams currently competing. This is important for this discussion because this privateer V8 engine’d car consistently beats the factory’s own V12 engine’d car (Nurburgring 24hours last year, and also beat the factory at this season’s opening VLN1/2 races). A little known fact which isn’t hyped-up on various ‘trumpeting’ facebook sites for obvious reasons, just the factory’s performance in class is mentioned without actually saying a privateer V8 car beat the factory’s own V12 in absolute grid position.
What’s relevant here is that although the V12 lump in the front of the Vantage does create an absolute ore inspiring formidable beast of a car, the Vantage has lost some of its finesse due to the 130 or so extra kilos of mass, zapping power to weight ratio and disturbing weight distribution / handling characteristics. Unfortunately this is another example of dashing inspiration from the engineer’s wish-list. Much easier to shove a current V12 motor in the Vantage chassis than to expertly engineer the V8 to achieve the stats you desired in the question you posed to deliver the ultimate / benchmark sports car.
Evidence - all the team was allowed to muster for the Vantage ‘S’ was a BHP per litre ratio not too dissimilar to when the factory first aired the Vantage back in 2005 (89BHP per litre). So, not being contented with this for a career and ‘neck on the block’ type time, I can now ‘simply’ deliver this slight ‘short-changing’ via Bamford Rose. I can now research and develop my own game-changing modifications which would make the stats on paper equal the looks and emotions the rest of the car exudes / creates. However, not just from an engine perspective, Bamford Rose will soon include upgrades from partners such as the original interior designer, her wings unclipped of course, and similar for external body, suspension, steering and braking systems - as collectively we know there are game-changing upgrades which we can offer with robustness that will transform ownership. I will discuss each subsystem in separate posts in the near future when we are at the point of releasing products, and below is just the engine detail.
As you are probably aware, Bamford Rose is about to release the first customer car at the end of this path;
- 4.3L to 4.7L conversion (380 to 420BHP + the best increase of all, that of useable low speed torque output).
- 4.7L + sports induction and exhaust pack (420 + 39 = 459BHP)
- Light weight flywheel and twinplate clutch
Comments, thoughts and questions placed here from discerning owners suggesting areas of improvements helps us focus this kit to make sure it ‘hits the spot’ when we release it..!
On this note, interiors will be my next instalment…
Mike.
flinder said:
Mike, thanks for your counsel.
Let me supplement mikey k's answer to your "anything more" question.
My wants must be typical of many Vantage owners. We already have the best looking car, the shortfall is performance! There's lots of routes, how about a mix?
1. More torque, you explained, is a function on displacement. You offer 4.7L. I am at 4.3L and just 10,000 miles, and unwilling to dismantle my fine running machine (plus I am an ocean away}.
2. Less mass, my favorite because I can implement most changes with my own hands. I am down about 60# now, via a Quicksilver and removing little needed bits. How about lighter rotors and lugnuts at a reasonable cost. I will do your light weight flywheel when my clutch needs replacing, will use your twin plate clutch as well.
3. Less friction. Is there improvement available through a relaxed allignment? I am no racer. I don't need chassis settings that minimize tire life scrubbing off rubber.
4. Electronic trickery. A Canadian company, Sprint Booster, offers removal of tip in delay. Most carlines are listed, AM not available. How about a little more boost from the power steering pump to relieve the slugish front end feel?
Best regards, Rick (flinder}
Hi. Great comments.Let me supplement mikey k's answer to your "anything more" question.
My wants must be typical of many Vantage owners. We already have the best looking car, the shortfall is performance! There's lots of routes, how about a mix?
1. More torque, you explained, is a function on displacement. You offer 4.7L. I am at 4.3L and just 10,000 miles, and unwilling to dismantle my fine running machine (plus I am an ocean away}.
2. Less mass, my favorite because I can implement most changes with my own hands. I am down about 60# now, via a Quicksilver and removing little needed bits. How about lighter rotors and lugnuts at a reasonable cost. I will do your light weight flywheel when my clutch needs replacing, will use your twin plate clutch as well.
3. Less friction. Is there improvement available through a relaxed allignment? I am no racer. I don't need chassis settings that minimize tire life scrubbing off rubber.
4. Electronic trickery. A Canadian company, Sprint Booster, offers removal of tip in delay. Most carlines are listed, AM not available. How about a little more boost from the power steering pump to relieve the slugish front end feel?
Best regards, Rick (flinder}
Yes, oceans apart and not wanting to rip into a fine running machine I can fully understand, and the rest of your thought process is logical too.
However, this topic is an echo of my previous post, as to transform the car into the acceleration / performance you desire, means an investment the factory was not prepared to undertake themselves whilst developing future models, even though the media was critical about current products.
So, what i'm trying to say here is that there is no easy route, and whilst even a mix of things you suggest is possible, the end result will most likely not achieve the same result as the dramatic displacement change will. But as you identify - a good cost effective alternative that will start the ball-rolling.
I know the 4.3L conversion into 4.7L is not practical for you, and that is a shame, but it is a fairly uneventful modification for us. Engine out and after a machining process the engine is rebuilt with new crank and pistons, re-install, turn the key and drive off into the sunset..!
Less mass - for racing cars we do fettle the rear structures somewhat to shed weight, but I would never suggest doing that for a road car. What this leaves is a never ending revision of components to save every last ounce. I notice that the latest Porsche offering even removes the instrument pack binnacle as part of its weight saving measures. This process, to me, makes the engine displacement change the easiest option (save being oceans apart..!) and ensures the correct end result is achieved without detracting from the cars refinement and other attributes. And yes, the brakes and other measures you state are good starting points.
As part of a package, one of the best measures to aide the overall performance gain would be to change the Limited Slip Differential lock angle / ratio. This loosens up the rear end, reduces under-steer and together with the N400 / sports handing pack puts the icing on the cake in terms of handling to match the engine performance upgrade. And as both you and MikeyK comment, the retro fit of Vantage S steering rack would make the turn-in much sharper.
Tip-in delay is often programmed by auto makers to eliminate 'shunt' on throttle application. Owing to the fact the powertrain is mounted to the Aston chassis superbly, there is little to no tip-in delay programmed, so there is little room for improvement there.
Your comment "We already have the best looking car, the shortfall is performance!" is one that i knew was looming but was not allowed to do anything to overcome. I will always remember a sign-off trip in 2005 where a group of us took several Vantages across the States. We collected the cars from New York, drove much of the old Route 66 and ended up in Vegas for sign-off event in Death Valley, the trip concluded in Denver for altitude emissions testing. On this trip I took a number of dealers out in the car for a sneak preview, I could tell the 'wow factor' re performance did not come from the passenger seat, this is such a shame because as you quite correctly say, its the best looking car in the world - just needs a little extra grunt.
Good luck with your journey..!
Mike.
Edited by BamfordMike on Monday 2nd May 14:45
JohnG1 said:
Most of the posts here have been about V8s. What can you do to liberate the V12 engine in a V12 Vantage? Just curious - I've only just got one and am nowhere near understanding the performance capabilities of the car.
Hi.We can lend our hand to both platforms.
In fact, because of the factory's preoccupation with V12 over the last few years (V12 racing - the car known as 'Kermit', or V12 for the road; V12V, DBS or Virage), means the V12 engine and each model line it is fitted to is as well known to us as the V8 / Vantage. Inside the factory there was no V8 / V12 design team separation, one team did each derivative.
If you are new to the V12V then enjoy it without modification, it is a formidable beast and will take time to learn and extract the best from in standard format. The only modifications I would undertake if I were you / if it was an area of interest to you would be the interior, to create a bespoke piece of art with exotic materials and finishes the factory could never afford to implement. And it goes without saying - an aftermarket exhaust system to let those 12 cylinders sing..!
For me and many others, there is a clear distinction between the values and merits of what a V12 engine'd Aston is / does compared with a V8 powered car. Whilst a DBS Volante with B&O sound system is about as good as it gets in some peoples eyes
this might not appeal to the driver who prefers the values of a V8 N420. The Rapide clearly has a set of distinct values of its own - I cant make comment on the Cygnet 
. In the absence of a current flagship / 'Halo' model (Vanquish S being the last), the factory produced / needed to produce the V12V. Quite easy it was too - existing chassis meet existing engine and hey presto. But the mating of the V12 engine into what was the domain of the V8 chassis meant crossing that line of distinction I just mentioned. Every time I drive a V12V it puts the biggest grin factor on my face together with the biggest adrenaline rush possible from a tank of fuel, a totally awesome car. But here is the inconsistency of that formula - it is possible to set faster lap-times around a track with a finely tuned V8 than V12 vantage. Lines of distinction - for me the Vantage (codename VH2) platform was always the agile sprinter and the DB9 or DBS (codename VH1/3) platforms were the grown-up GT / cruiser. What i'm trying to say, in a very long winded way, is that it would be wrong to modify the V12V in the same way as V8 engine Vantage to chase the agile sprinter values - The car is just too much of a formidable beast for that.Bamford Rose will modify the V12 in the future - I want to concentrate on robust delivery of V8 kits (3 tiers of performance) firstly, culminating in the 500BHP V8 option.
For V12 it is quite possible, any easy for me, for the V12 to drive in at 450BHP (original DB9) and drive out 550BHP - Then the driver can go search out that Ferrari 458 on a nice country road..!
Enjoy the great weather (hopefully) in your great car..!
Mike.
BamfordMike said:
Hi.
We can lend our hand to both platforms.
In fact, because of the factory's preoccupation with V12 over the last few years (V12 racing - the car known as 'Kermit', or V12 for the road; V12V, DBS or Virage), means the V12 engine and each model line it is fitted to is as well known to us as the V8 / Vantage. Inside the factory there was no V8 / V12 design team separation, one team did each derivative.
If you are new to the V12V then enjoy it without modification, it is a formidable beast and will take time to learn and extract the best from in standard format. The only modifications I would undertake if I were you / if it was an area of interest to you would be the interior, to create a bespoke piece of art with exotic materials and finishes the factory could never afford to implement. And it goes without saying - an aftermarket exhaust system to let those 12 cylinders sing..!
For me and many others, there is a clear distinction between the values and merits of what a V12 engine'd Aston is / does compared with a V8 powered car. Whilst a DBS Volante with B&O sound system is about as good as it gets in some peoples eyes this might not appeal to the driver who prefers the values of a V8 N420. The Rapide clearly has a set of distinct values of its own - I cant make comment on the Cygnet . In the absence of a current flagship / 'Halo' model (Vanquish S being the last), the factory produced / needed to produce the V12V. Quite easy it was too - existing chassis meet existing engine and hey presto. But the mating of the V12 engine into what was the domain of the V8 chassis meant crossing that line of distinction I just mentioned. Every time I drive a V12V it puts the biggest grin factor on my face together with the biggest adrenaline rush possible from a tank of fuel, a totally awesome car. But here is the inconsistency of that formula - it is possible to set faster lap-times around a track with a finely tuned V8 than V12 vantage. Lines of distinction - for me the Vantage (codename VH2) platform was always the agile sprinter and the DB9 or DBS (codename VH1/3) platforms were the grown-up GT / cruiser. What i'm trying to say, in a very long winded way, is that it would be wrong to modify the V12V in the same way as V8 engine Vantage to chase the agile sprinter values - The car is just too much of a formidable beast for that.
Bamford Rose will modify the V12 in the future - I want to concentrate on robust delivery of V8 kits (3 tiers of performance) firstly, culminating in the 500BHP V8 option.
For V12 it is quite possible, any easy for me, for the V12 to drive in at 450BHP (original DB9) and drive out 550BHP - Then the driver can go search out that Ferrari 458 on a nice country road..!
Enjoy the great weather (hopefully) in your great car..!
Mike.
Thanks for the in depth reply Mike. Like yourself, the engineering side still gets my juices flowing. So how's about a V8 vantage with all your bespoke bits, coupled with the weight savings achieved by the V12 chassis from CFRP and CCM brakes and improved aero. 500 bhp and hopefully a sub 1500kg weight. In theory it should beast the V12 and be more efficient to boot....We can lend our hand to both platforms.
In fact, because of the factory's preoccupation with V12 over the last few years (V12 racing - the car known as 'Kermit', or V12 for the road; V12V, DBS or Virage), means the V12 engine and each model line it is fitted to is as well known to us as the V8 / Vantage. Inside the factory there was no V8 / V12 design team separation, one team did each derivative.
If you are new to the V12V then enjoy it without modification, it is a formidable beast and will take time to learn and extract the best from in standard format. The only modifications I would undertake if I were you / if it was an area of interest to you would be the interior, to create a bespoke piece of art with exotic materials and finishes the factory could never afford to implement. And it goes without saying - an aftermarket exhaust system to let those 12 cylinders sing..!
For me and many others, there is a clear distinction between the values and merits of what a V12 engine'd Aston is / does compared with a V8 powered car. Whilst a DBS Volante with B&O sound system is about as good as it gets in some peoples eyes
this might not appeal to the driver who prefers the values of a V8 N420. The Rapide clearly has a set of distinct values of its own - I cant make comment on the Cygnet . In the absence of a current flagship / 'Halo' model (Vanquish S being the last), the factory produced / needed to produce the V12V. Quite easy it was too - existing chassis meet existing engine and hey presto. But the mating of the V12 engine into what was the domain of the V8 chassis meant crossing that line of distinction I just mentioned. Every time I drive a V12V it puts the biggest grin factor on my face together with the biggest adrenaline rush possible from a tank of fuel, a totally awesome car. But here is the inconsistency of that formula - it is possible to set faster lap-times around a track with a finely tuned V8 than V12 vantage. Lines of distinction - for me the Vantage (codename VH2) platform was always the agile sprinter and the DB9 or DBS (codename VH1/3) platforms were the grown-up GT / cruiser. What i'm trying to say, in a very long winded way, is that it would be wrong to modify the V12V in the same way as V8 engine Vantage to chase the agile sprinter values - The car is just too much of a formidable beast for that.Bamford Rose will modify the V12 in the future - I want to concentrate on robust delivery of V8 kits (3 tiers of performance) firstly, culminating in the 500BHP V8 option.
For V12 it is quite possible, any easy for me, for the V12 to drive in at 450BHP (original DB9) and drive out 550BHP - Then the driver can go search out that Ferrari 458 on a nice country road..!
Enjoy the great weather (hopefully) in your great car..!
Mike.
I can't wait to see if someone will do it.
BamfordMike said:
Your comment "We already have the best looking car, the shortfall is performance!" is one that i knew was looming but was not allowed to do anything to overcome. I will always remember a sign-off trip in 2005 where a group of us took several Vantages across the States. We collected the cars from New York, drove much of the old Route 66 and ended up in Vegas for sign-off event in Death Valley, the trip concluded in Denver for altitude emissions testing. On this trip I took a number of dealers out in the car for a sneak preview, I could tell the 'wow factor' re performance did not come from the passenger seat, this is such a shame because as you quite correctly say, its the best looking car in the world - just needs a little extra grunt.
Good luck with your journey..!
Mike.
Mike.......
If you have to do another "sign off" trip across the States via route 66 you will be very thankful no doubt that if you require a driver for the trip I would kindly volunteer.
All I would require for my very generous offer is all my expenses paid.
Good luck with your journey..!
Mike.
Mike.......
If you have to do another "sign off" trip across the States via route 66 you will be very thankful no doubt that if you require a driver for the trip I would kindly volunteer.
All I would require for my very generous offer is all my expenses paid.
Edited by BamfordMike on Monday 2nd May 14:45
Hi Mike,
I have just found this forum and interesting reading it makes too.
I am fairly new to Aston ownership having bought my V8V MY06 last year with only 16,000km. My real wish is to improve the drivability of the car, 380PS is already nice, more is always better, but I want to exploit what I have and the main thing getting in the way is poor throttle response. Initially 1st to 2nd gear was a b*s***d as well but drove over to Newport Pagnell from Geneva before xmas (through the snow) to get the gearbox mod done (and USB kit fitted). There is still an issue with gearchanging but I think it is more to do with engine characteristics than the box.
As an aside, I fitted a Quicksilver Supersport back box last weekend - did it myself with just a bit of cursing - the biggest difference though is just psychological, maybe it spins up a bit quicker, but probably just seems like it. I like the noise though...
So, to return to throttle response, in my opinion what kills it and makes gearchanging much less enjoyable is a large flywheel effect - this may just be a perceived effect, it is there nonetheless. I think reducing this would make all the difference. Probably not a very good parallel, but reducing the flywheel mass on my Ducati 999s transformed not only the feel but performance as well. The engine was much more accelerative (does that exist?) and clutchless nearly instantaneous gearchanges are so easy now.
How much can the rotating mass be reduced in the V8? I suppose an engine speed clutch puts limits on this but one thought is that the flywheel effect can be reduced without reducing mass by reducing the effective diameter of the mass. Another thought, does the ECU completely cut the fuel when overrunning?
I think that is enough for an initial post...
1/2p
I have just found this forum and interesting reading it makes too.
I am fairly new to Aston ownership having bought my V8V MY06 last year with only 16,000km. My real wish is to improve the drivability of the car, 380PS is already nice, more is always better, but I want to exploit what I have and the main thing getting in the way is poor throttle response. Initially 1st to 2nd gear was a b*s***d as well but drove over to Newport Pagnell from Geneva before xmas (through the snow) to get the gearbox mod done (and USB kit fitted). There is still an issue with gearchanging but I think it is more to do with engine characteristics than the box.
As an aside, I fitted a Quicksilver Supersport back box last weekend - did it myself with just a bit of cursing - the biggest difference though is just psychological, maybe it spins up a bit quicker, but probably just seems like it. I like the noise though...
So, to return to throttle response, in my opinion what kills it and makes gearchanging much less enjoyable is a large flywheel effect - this may just be a perceived effect, it is there nonetheless. I think reducing this would make all the difference. Probably not a very good parallel, but reducing the flywheel mass on my Ducati 999s transformed not only the feel but performance as well. The engine was much more accelerative (does that exist?) and clutchless nearly instantaneous gearchanges are so easy now.
How much can the rotating mass be reduced in the V8? I suppose an engine speed clutch puts limits on this but one thought is that the flywheel effect can be reduced without reducing mass by reducing the effective diameter of the mass. Another thought, does the ECU completely cut the fuel when overrunning?
I think that is enough for an initial post...
1/2p
alpinepass said:
Hi Mike,
I have just found this forum and interesting reading it makes too.
I am fairly new to Aston ownership having bought my V8V MY06 last year with only 16,000km. My real wish is to improve the drivability of the car, 380PS is already nice, more is always better, but I want to exploit what I have and the main thing getting in the way is poor throttle response. Initially 1st to 2nd gear was a b*s***d as well but drove over to Newport Pagnell from Geneva before xmas (through the snow) to get the gearbox mod done (and USB kit fitted). There is still an issue with gearchanging but I think it is more to do with engine characteristics than the box.
As an aside, I fitted a Quicksilver Supersport back box last weekend - did it myself with just a bit of cursing - the biggest difference though is just psychological, maybe it spins up a bit quicker, but probably just seems like it. I like the noise though...
So, to return to throttle response, in my opinion what kills it and makes gearchanging much less enjoyable is a large flywheel effect - this may just be a perceived effect, it is there nonetheless. I think reducing this would make all the difference. Probably not a very good parallel, but reducing the flywheel mass on my Ducati 999s transformed not only the feel but performance as well. The engine was much more accelerative (does that exist?) and clutchless nearly instantaneous gearchanges are so easy now.
How much can the rotating mass be reduced in the V8? I suppose an engine speed clutch puts limits on this but one thought is that the flywheel effect can be reduced without reducing mass by reducing the effective diameter of the mass. Another thought, does the ECU completely cut the fuel when overrunning?
I think that is enough for an initial post...
1/2p
Hi 1/2p - Welcome on in...I have just found this forum and interesting reading it makes too.
I am fairly new to Aston ownership having bought my V8V MY06 last year with only 16,000km. My real wish is to improve the drivability of the car, 380PS is already nice, more is always better, but I want to exploit what I have and the main thing getting in the way is poor throttle response. Initially 1st to 2nd gear was a b*s***d as well but drove over to Newport Pagnell from Geneva before xmas (through the snow) to get the gearbox mod done (and USB kit fitted). There is still an issue with gearchanging but I think it is more to do with engine characteristics than the box.
As an aside, I fitted a Quicksilver Supersport back box last weekend - did it myself with just a bit of cursing - the biggest difference though is just psychological, maybe it spins up a bit quicker, but probably just seems like it. I like the noise though...
So, to return to throttle response, in my opinion what kills it and makes gearchanging much less enjoyable is a large flywheel effect - this may just be a perceived effect, it is there nonetheless. I think reducing this would make all the difference. Probably not a very good parallel, but reducing the flywheel mass on my Ducati 999s transformed not only the feel but performance as well. The engine was much more accelerative (does that exist?) and clutchless nearly instantaneous gearchanges are so easy now.
How much can the rotating mass be reduced in the V8? I suppose an engine speed clutch puts limits on this but one thought is that the flywheel effect can be reduced without reducing mass by reducing the effective diameter of the mass. Another thought, does the ECU completely cut the fuel when overrunning?
I think that is enough for an initial post...
1/2p
I hope the gearbox problem is not detracting from the joy of ownership for you.
If the factory modification has been done, this is where a modification of mine should cure any final issues. I change the cabling and fulcrum point of the lever to return a much sharper - shorter shift. I combine this with a machined from billet gear lever which is anodised in either black or clear. The lever is from the original designer, together we are embarking on a collaboration, Bamford Rose will supply her bespoke exclusive range.
You are totally correct, the standard flywheel mass carries so much inertia that it is the route cause of poor throttle response. Something when designing the engine I called 'wappability'. The only way to overcome sluggish response is to fit a lightweight flywheel, and since 2005 the N24 / GT4 Aston Martin Racing cars fitted exactly that component. I have just been discussing in the main forum (upgrades thread) how driver perceived performance and real vehicle acceleration time performance differs. By fitting this flywheel it does nothing for vehicle acceleration times, but the perceived performance increase is mega. Combine this perception with a real world performance gain, such as an exhaust system, and what is delivered is that comprehensive approach to vehicle dynamics that BMW are kings of - And I really do owe my gratitude to them for teaching me that, my formative years learning 'the trade' as part of their design and development team has paid off in my own venture now. Yep, the Ducati example is exactly the same thing.
Why do you ask the question about fuel cut-off?? Yes, in gears 2-6 when the throttle is closed, the engine goes into deceleration fuel cut-off, this saves fuel and gives a sports car feel deceleration, unlike some cars which keep fuelling on so that the car 'sails on'. Different approaches; one set of values for sports car, one set for luxury cars. However, in first gear and below about 3000 rpm, the ECU goes from fuel-off to fuel-on. There are driveability issues if the fuel was not reinstated at this speed.
Exploit what you have and enjoy your car is a good approach.. enjoy..!
Mike.
BamfordMike said:
Hi 1/2p - Welcome on in...
1) I hope the gearbox problem is not detracting from the joy of ownership for you...........
2)......comprehensive approach to vehicle dynamics that BMW are kings of - And I really do owe my gratitude to them for teaching me that, my formative years learning 'the trade' as part of their design and development team has paid off in my own venture now.............
3).........Why do you ask the question about fuel cut-off?? ...........
4)............Exploit what you have and enjoy your car is a good approach.. enjoy..!
Mike.
1) The modification at the factory has improved things and being patient and waiting for the 'box to warm up is also important. The real issue is the change in the lower three gears with a larger relative ratio change, the flywheel effect has to be allowed for. In the upper gears the ratios are close enough to permit really crisp changes - I just need to drive faster 1) I hope the gearbox problem is not detracting from the joy of ownership for you...........
2)......comprehensive approach to vehicle dynamics that BMW are kings of - And I really do owe my gratitude to them for teaching me that, my formative years learning 'the trade' as part of their design and development team has paid off in my own venture now.............
3).........Why do you ask the question about fuel cut-off?? ...........
4)............Exploit what you have and enjoy your car is a good approach.. enjoy..!
Mike.
2) My last cars were BMWs, a 335i being the last - a magnificent engine. Did you work in Munich? I worked in Werk 1.1 from May to October 1999 on Z8 production.
3) I was just wondering if some fuel flow remained on overrun to keeps the cats going or make pops and bangs, the fuel maybe being responsible for the engine not slowing down.
4) Difficult not to enjoy such a beautiful object really.
1/2p
alpinepass said:
2) My last cars were BMWs, a 335i being the last - a magnificent engine. Did you work in Munich? I worked in Werk 1.1 from May to October 1999 on Z8 production.
3) I was just wondering if some fuel flow remained on overrun to keeps the cats going or make pops and bangs, the fuel maybe being responsible for the engine not slowing down.
1/2p
Hi, yes.. I was there too at that time. I flitted to and from UK and Munich on the company jet between 1999 / 2000. I ran an engine dyno developing the performance output and ECU mapping of the Mini One, Cooper and Cooper 'S'. What was your department - I was in EA3...3) I was just wondering if some fuel flow remained on overrun to keeps the cats going or make pops and bangs, the fuel maybe being responsible for the engine not slowing down.
1/2p
Once the cats are 'lit-off' and converting (>330 deg) they stay hot for a very long time, so even when the deceleration is for a very long time, like when going down a mountain, the cats stay hot (well above the point at which conversion occurs). And yes you are correct, if the fuel stayed on the coast down would be never ending.
BamfordMike said:
Hi, yes.. I was there too at that time. I flitted to and from UK and Munich on the company jet between 1999 / 2000. I ran an engine dyno developing the performance output and ECU mapping of the Mini One, Cooper and Cooper 'S'. What was your department - I was in EA3...
Once the cats are 'lit-off' and converting (>330 deg) they stay hot for a very long time, so even when the deceleration is for a very long time, like when going down a mountain, the cats stay hot (well above the point at which conversion occurs). And yes you are correct, if the fuel stayed on the coast down would be never ending.
I remember there was the eclipse that year which passed directly over Munich, it just happened to be cloudy that day.. Cant remember the exact code for the department - TA45 I think...We were over the factory fire station by the mickey mouse test track (300m around) and opposite the on-site beer and sausages shop. The department rather bizarrely was responsible for a) screwing the Z8 together and b) unscrewing competitor's cars to see what was in them. After spending a few hours under my V8V last weekend fitting the exhaust, the chassis construction reminded me a lot of the Z8..Once the cats are 'lit-off' and converting (>330 deg) they stay hot for a very long time, so even when the deceleration is for a very long time, like when going down a mountain, the cats stay hot (well above the point at which conversion occurs). And yes you are correct, if the fuel stayed on the coast down would be never ending.
CurveEater said:
"I worked in Werk 1.1 from May to October 1999 on Z8 production."
You are a lucky man. The Z8 is a beautiful car, and the only one I considered other than a Vantage.
As I just indicated to Mike, this hadn't struck me until I got under my V8V, but the construction of the two cars is very similar, as is the layout of course. The Z8 was also hand-assembled as well. You are a lucky man. The Z8 is a beautiful car, and the only one I considered other than a Vantage.
BamfordMike said:
If you are new to the V12V then enjoy it without modification, it is a formidable beast and will take time to learn and extract the best from in standard format. The only modifications I would undertake if I were you / if it was an area of interest to you would be the interior, to create a bespoke piece of art with exotic materials and finishes the factory could never afford to implement. And it goes without saying - an aftermarket exhaust system to let those 12 cylinders sing..!
For V12 it is quite possible, any easy for me, for the V12 to drive in at 450BHP (original DB9) and drive out 550BHP - Then the driver can go search out that Ferrari 458 on a nice country road..!
Enjoy the great weather (hopefully) in your great car..!
Mike.
Hi Mike,For V12 it is quite possible, any easy for me, for the V12 to drive in at 450BHP (original DB9) and drive out 550BHP - Then the driver can go search out that Ferrari 458 on a nice country road..!
Enjoy the great weather (hopefully) in your great car..!
Mike.
Ok, I'm going to ask - how hard/easy is 550bhp from the V12V or do you mean this is something on the Bamford Rose to-do list for 2011/2012?
With regard to finishes - only thing I'm looking at for the time being is a different gear stick knob - it's too bloody cold to the touch. Was thinking carbon fibre or Alcantara. Other one is to retrofit the carbon fibre strakes from the carbon edition.
With regard to a lightweight exhaust - what's the cost/time to fit - you're in bed with quicksilver?
John
JohnG1 said:
Hi Mike,
Ok, I'm going to ask - how hard/easy is 550bhp from the V12V or do you mean this is something on the Bamford Rose to-do list for 2011/2012?
With regard to finishes - only thing I'm looking at for the time being is a different gear stick knob - it's too bloody cold to the touch. Was thinking carbon fibre or Alcantara. Other one is to retrofit the carbon fibre strakes from the carbon edition.
With regard to a lightweight exhaust - what's the cost/time to fit - you're in bed with quicksilver?
John
Hi. That performance level is a 'trodden path' for us. Ok, I'm going to ask - how hard/easy is 550bhp from the V12V or do you mean this is something on the Bamford Rose to-do list for 2011/2012?
With regard to finishes - only thing I'm looking at for the time being is a different gear stick knob - it's too bloody cold to the touch. Was thinking carbon fibre or Alcantara. Other one is to retrofit the carbon fibre strakes from the carbon edition.
With regard to a lightweight exhaust - what's the cost/time to fit - you're in bed with quicksilver?
John
But to offer V12 upgrades in repeatable kit form to that performance level, where the cost of the component is production (palatable to customer), instead of prototype (cost prohibitive to normal customer) is on the 'doing' list, but we have looked at it already for a one-off upgrade for a client.
We need to nail the Vantage options list first, including interior, braking, steering and suspension improvements. We will then concentrate on V12, where similar to V8 a 'tier' of upgrades will be available.
Working with the original interior designer, Sarah Maynard, we supply her redesigned machined from billet gear lever. It is much more ergonomic than the power rangers leg, it comes with an alcantara cover for those cold days and is finished either clear or black anodised.
Yes - we have a special relationship with Quicksilver... We can offer a range of weight reducting systems including Titanium.
Please PM for prices of gear lever and exhaust system...
Mike
BamfordMike said:
Working with the original interior designer, Sarah Maynard, we supply her redesigned machined from billet gear lever. It is much more ergonomic than the power rangers leg, it comes with an alcantara cover for those cold days and is finished either clear or black anodised.
Mike
Annoyingly Mike I have just paid big money for a power rangers leg for my DB9! What other interior upgrades do you offer, I am always looking to personalise my car further...Mike
Also, the extra weight of the gearknow over a standrd DB9 unit seems to improve the positivity of the shift - or is it my imagination? Any chance of a pic of the newly designed knob? If you could send to lewisj_evans @ hotmail.com that would be great if you don't want to clutter your thread up.
WRT the much reported difficult 1st and 2nd gear selection of the AMV8 when cold,
I am surprised that, given AM must have been aware of it, it was not addressed.
Do you know what the root cause is, and is it fixable?
PS I drove a few before I bought mine which did not exhibit the problem.
I assumed this was because they were 2007 or later, and I’d read on Pistonheads this was when the issue was fixed by AM. However, given my 2008 has this issue, they must have been warmed-up!
I am surprised that, given AM must have been aware of it, it was not addressed.
Do you know what the root cause is, and is it fixable?
PS I drove a few before I bought mine which did not exhibit the problem.
I assumed this was because they were 2007 or later, and I’d read on Pistonheads this was when the issue was fixed by AM. However, given my 2008 has this issue, they must have been warmed-up!
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff