VH500-X1 (Is this the DB11?)

VH500-X1 (Is this the DB11?)

Author
Discussion

Jon39

Original Poster:

12,782 posts

142 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all

Search autoevolution DB11, and you will see some photographs of a car being tested.

Interestingly, it is thought that the engine may be a Mercedes-Benz V12 twin turbo.

A printed notice stuck on the dashboard includes the comment,
'Not to be accompanied by other AM cars on roads'.

They seemed to forget any advice about, not sticking the notice on the dashboard to be photographed.
Or, could it be a double bluff?





Edited by Jon39 on Tuesday 28th April 09:03

Neil1300r

5,487 posts

177 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
IIRC Mercedes don't make V12's anymore. Andy Palmer has stated AM will continue with its V12. Has a contract to manufacture until 2017.

George29

14,706 posts

163 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
Neil1300r said:
IIRC Mercedes don't make V12's anymore. Andy Palmer has stated AM will continue with its V12. Has a contract to manufacture until 2017.
They still make the V12 bi turbo. Used in the new S65 coupe.

Neil1300r

5,487 posts

177 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
George29 said:
They still make the V12 bi turbo. Used in the new S65 coupe.
Had to Google that - its cheap! wink
The deal with MB is only for V8 engines and electronics. Unless they've changed it and not announed it.

jonby

5,357 posts

156 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
there have been a few articles on this car

common consensus seems to be that AM will use an AMG twin turbo V8 and a development of their existing V12 going forward, in the latter instance probably turbocharged (be difficult to out perform the V8 otherwise) and possibly downsized if it is turbocharged

If they don't turbocharge the V12, I suspect in those models where there is a choice between the two, you'll end up with a situation like the Bentley Continental where it seems to be accepted (I've never driven one btw) that the V8 is the better car, with those buying the V12 doing so through either ignorance or simply for the 'prestige' of the V12 - even if the V12 is marginally quicker in straight line, I understand the V8 is the better drivers car

I do hope that Aston don't end up in a similar situation and that if there is an engine choice, the V12 is a definitively better/quicker car on all counts. Or even better, that they don't offer a choice within any given model and it's simply that some models have the V8, others the V12.

The mags seem to be guessing at the moment and it's surely possible that AM are testing two different engines before deciding which route to go down. Or that the DB9 replacement will only have a V12 and the AMG V8 will only be used in Vantage replacement. Time will tell - it really is idle speculation right now

However as others have said, there is no suggestion that AM will be using a Merc V12 engine. Incidentally, in terms of what Merc V12 engines are available theoretically, the Pagani Huayra uses a turbocharged AMG V12 does;t it ?

Edited by jonby on Tuesday 28th April 09:54

JohnG1

3,462 posts

204 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
The 65 AMG engine is a three-valve per cylinder, twin spark plug per cylinder design with two overhead cams isn't it? That's an evolutionary dead end in engine design which is why when they needed performance they took the base engine and bored/stroked to 7.3 litres and fitted 48 valve, four over head cam, 1 spark plug per cylinder heads to it for Pagani. They did use the 7.3 size in some Mercedes Benz badged cars but a tiny number.

So - why take an evolutionary dead end engine and use that to replace the technically more advanced AML block?

Someone posted on here a while back about a 6.2 V12 twin turbo AML engine. And don't forget the hydrogen Rapide was twin turbocharged.

Hopefully AML will use V8 non-turbo in a base car, V8 turbo in sportier version and V12 turbo in various states of tune for Rapide, Taraf, Vanquish, DB9 replacement. Maybe even a 1-77 replacement with 1000bhp which is pretty manageable from a 6.2 V12 twin turbo.

Or even get some one upmanship and go quad-turbo. I can only think of Bugatti and CiZeta that used four turbos in a road car.

In Spinal Tap terms - four is the new eleven...


And this use of the AML assembly area in the Ford plant will keep the deal with Ford going.

Hopefully if Ford keeps progressing at some point the PE guys who own AML will sell it back to Ford and then AML will return to the best owners it has had in a long time (possibly ever)..



jonby

5,357 posts

156 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
JohnG1 said:
Hopefully AML will use V8 non-turbo in a base car, V8 turbo in sportier version and V12 turbo in various states of tune for Rapide, Taraf, Vanquish, DB9 replacement. Maybe even a 1-77 replacement with 1000bhp which is pretty manageable from a 6.2 V12 twin turbo.
never say never but I'd be amazed if they offer a naturally aspirated V8 - the AMG twin turbo V8 they have signed up to use has a really wide range of tune levels but I don't think it's available in a naturally aspirated form and I can't see AM using two completely different V8s - the AMG twin turbo engine is likely to power all the 'sportier' cars including, I imagine, the most powerful Vantage replacement. The top end GT, assuming they have both a DB9 and Vanquish replacement, one imagines would use the V12. The real question is whether the DB9 replacement will offer a choice or just go down one route

George29

14,706 posts

163 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
JohnG1 said:
Or even get some one upmanship and go quad-turbo. I can only think of Bugatti and CiZeta that used four turbos in a road car.

In Spinal Tap terms - four is the new eleven...
How about twin superchargers instead? Can't think of many other than Aston who used twin superchargers. Nice little homage to the 90s Vantage too.

JohnG1

3,462 posts

204 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
George29 said:
JohnG1 said:
Or even get some one upmanship and go quad-turbo. I can only think of Bugatti and CiZeta that used four turbos in a road car.

In Spinal Tap terms - four is the new eleven...
How about twin superchargers instead? Can't think of many other than Aston who used twin superchargers. Nice little homage to the 90s Vantage too.
I am not qualified to give an answer from a mechanical engineering perspective but I do note that at the moment most of the big engine manufacturing car firms are clearly shifting or shifted to turbochargers rather than superchargers. Look at Mercedes - they used superchargers pretty recently in the SLR but now the AMG high specific output powerplants are all turbocharged.

I quite like the whirring/whining noise from a supercharger but I suspect there is a reason for this shift - so I doubt that AML would buck the trend. I can see the logic of multiple small turbochargers from a lower inertia, faster spin up, less lag perspective and unless you have a "hot-v" where the exhaust ports are inside the V it makes sense from a plumbing/packaging perspective. But I cannot see the point of multiple superchargers - AML put two on the Tadek Marek 5.3 V8 whereas for example the modern JLR 5.0 V8 has only got one supercharger and it's quite a nice package - when you nail it the supercharger brings a little mechanical sound and fury to the passenger cabin. Perhaps AML did it for packaging reasons - they maybe could not fit one big one under the bonnet?

Jon39

Original Poster:

12,782 posts

142 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all

Volkswagen introduced a 1.4 litre engine with both a supercharger and a turbocharger.
It seemed a great idea, with the supercharger at work before the turbo became fully effective at higher revs.

Power output from just 1400cc was quite amazing.
Owners were thrilled (for a while), but then some became very annoyed.
Volkswagen very quietly discontinued that engine from their range.

I don't know what the engineering problem was, but with forced induction, too much heat is often the culprit.


toohuge

3,430 posts

215 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
The main issue with belt driven superchargers is they consume engine power to operate - quite a significant amount. Exhaust driven turbochargers convert the otherwise 'wasted' kinetic energy from the exhaust gases. So therefore using a turbocharger doesn't affect engine load or fuel efficiency - hence their popularity in eco driven applications.

Further more, unless you are in exceptional circumstances, there will be the requirement to bleed off excess boost to save the engine from damage, do this with a turbocharger and no one loses out, do this with a supercharger and you are still pulling power from the engine to turn the charger but for nothing. There are some cars with clutch driven chargers to alleviate this problem.

8Tech

2,136 posts

197 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
toohuge said:
The main issue with belt driven superchargers is they consume engine power to operate - quite a significant amount. Exhaust driven turbochargers convert the otherwise 'wasted' kinetic energy from the exhaust gases. So therefore using a turbocharger doesn't affect engine load or fuel efficiency - hence their popularity in eco driven applications.

Further more, unless you are in exceptional circumstances, there will be the requirement to bleed off excess boost to save the engine from damage, do this with a turbocharger and no one loses out, do this with a supercharger and you are still pulling power from the engine to turn the charger but for nothing. There are some cars with clutch driven chargers to alleviate this problem.
Not so!

The most recent superchargers are of a centrifugal design and therefore take almost no power to drive them until they produce boost which can be designed-in by careful selection of the supercharger size. Using twin superchargers of this type, usually made by Rotrex, have most of the benefits of a supercharger, with most of the benefits of a turbocharger but with none of the temperature issues associated with the turbo. Just like multiple turbos, multiple centrifugal superchargers reduce lag and increase boost capability.

The centrifugal supercharger also has the benefit of almost silent operation and producing little or no boost at low rpm, improves fuel economy.

roughrider

975 posts

185 months

Tuesday 28th April 2015
quotequote all
8Tech said:
Not so!

The most recent superchargers are of a centrifugal design and therefore take almost no power to drive them until they produce boost which can be designed-in by careful selection of the supercharger size. Using twin superchargers of this type, usually made by Rotrex, have most of the benefits of a supercharger, with most of the benefits of a turbocharger but with none of the temperature issues associated with the turbo. Just like multiple turbos, multiple centrifugal superchargers reduce lag and increase boost capability.

The centrifugal supercharger also has the benefit of almost silent operation and producing little or no boost at low rpm, improves fuel economy.
Ultimately, using waste energy [exhaust gas], to create energy [turbocharger], is the way to reduce emissions. Superchargers use valuable engine energy to create more energy, increasing emissions.