Aston Design Philosophy
Discussion
Walking through Berkley Square this morning I saw two Ferrari 458's parked back to back and thought - these are just race cars with no real character or distinction from any other mid engined race car . as driving machines I am sure they are great but a road car needs to be more than just fast , it needs to have something more which is what Astons have however difficult that is to define .
Now if we could get an Aston to handle like a Ferrari without looking like a refuge from a race track we would be on to something.
Now if we could get an Aston to handle like a Ferrari without looking like a refuge from a race track we would be on to something.
im sure they can be setup to handle the same...I mean its not like they got too left behind at lemans by Ferraris 
of course Ferraris have a big electronics package these days too which Astons dont have ...also, a car setup to ride like a race car dosent make a comfy tourer ...compromises are just that, and im pretty happy with an Aston + sports pack on the road
of course Ferraris have a big electronics package these days too which Astons dont have ...also, a car setup to ride like a race car dosent make a comfy tourer ...compromises are just that, and im pretty happy with an Aston + sports pack on the road
The 458 is one of the worst pieces of car design I've seen since I first laid eyes upon a Ssyangyong. There isn't one angle I like it from (although that seems to be a common theme throughout modern Ferrari design). It might well be one of the best cars to drive ever, but I would have an inferior car that is beautiful every time - i.e. Aston. To be honest, the only modern supercar I would even consider (if I could afford one) would be the Mclaren MP4-12C. A fantastic design and great to see function over form in design for once 
hartley said:
Walking through Berkley Square this morning I saw two Ferrari 458's parked back to back and thought - these are just race cars with no real character or distinction from any other mid engined race car . as driving machines I am sure they are great but a road car needs to be more than just fast , it needs to have something more which is what Astons have however difficult that is to define .
Now if we could get an Aston to handle like a Ferrari without looking like a refuge from a race track we would be on to something.
I think it's quite ironic that the current Aston designs/stlying all look the pretty much the same and are all based on a rejected Jaguar. I very much miss the big brutish looking V8 Aston's of times past.Now if we could get an Aston to handle like a Ferrari without looking like a refuge from a race track we would be on to something.
I think they are just different cars for different purposes - I really like the 458, looks like a weapon with wheels! I'd still rather have my V8V, purely as it is for more than just driving fast (which you can't really do anyhow), I feel I can park my car anywhere, I can easily pop to the shops - it's a proper sensible daily drive, that looks, sounds and drives fantastically.
George H said:
300bhp/ton said:
I think it's quite ironic that the current Aston designs/stlying all look the pretty much the same and are all based on a rejected Jaguar.
What a load of b
ks.
Jaguar XJ41 prototype... does it look familiar?
From the web:
The DB7, known internally as the NPX project. The styling started life as the still-born Jaguar F type (XJ41 – coupe / XJ42 – convertible) designed by Keith Helfet.The styling received modest changes by Ian Callum so that it looked like an Aston Martin.
In fairness I think the DB7 looks fantastic and has aged very well. But there's no denying the Vanquish, DB9, Vanatage and all other modern Aston's are an evolution of the DB7's lines.
300bhp/ton said:
The DB7, known internally as the NPX project. The styling started life as the still-born Jaguar F type (XJ41 – coupe / XJ42 – convertible) designed by Keith Helfet.The styling received modest changes by Ian Callum so that it looked like an Aston Martin.
In fairness I think the DB7 looks fantastic and has aged very well. But there's no denying the Vanquish, DB9, Vanatage and all other modern Aston's are an evolution of the DB7's lines.
The DB9 or any other Gaydon era Aston aren't based on the DB7 though... therefore your point is irrelevant.In fairness I think the DB7 looks fantastic and has aged very well. But there's no denying the Vanquish, DB9, Vanatage and all other modern Aston's are an evolution of the DB7's lines.
300bhp/ton said:
The styling is clearly an evolution of the DB7 lines. Even a half bind, one eyed goldfish can see that. I never said anything about the oily bits.
Yes you did.300bhp/ton said:
I think it's quite ironic that the current Aston designs/stlying all look the pretty much the same and are all based on a rejected Jaguar.
George H said:
300bhp/ton said:
The styling is clearly an evolution of the DB7 lines. Even a half bind, one eyed goldfish can see that. I never said anything about the oily bits.
Yes you did.300bhp/ton said:
I think it's quite ironic that the current Aston designs/stlying all look the pretty much the same and are all based on a rejected Jaguar.
The Op while stating design philosophy clearly is referring to the visual appearance of the F458 and nothing relating to it's oily or electronic bits.
300bhp/ton said:
Lets try again!
The Op while stating design philosophy clearly is referring to the visual appearance of the F458 and nothing relating to it's oily or electronic bits.
You put BASED on a rejected Jaguar. They aren't based on it, it's a complete different chassis. The Op while stating design philosophy clearly is referring to the visual appearance of the F458 and nothing relating to it's oily or electronic bits.
I refer you to my previous statement of you talking b
ks. It's pretty well known that you seem to do it on a regular basis The point is that if you come here and say that our cars look like something picked out of the waste paper basket at Jaguar then you can expect some hostile responses.
It's a ridiculous thing to say and I showed you that hideous 4x4 that *you* posted as being attractive to show that your taste might not be that of everyone else here.
Now if you are looking for a fight, then you are going about it the right way by insulting everyone's cars. I'm sure that many people here have strong views about the looks of the Smart Roadster, but I would hope that they have more class than to go to the Smart forum and start going on about how they look like electronic frogs.
It's a ridiculous thing to say and I showed you that hideous 4x4 that *you* posted as being attractive to show that your taste might not be that of everyone else here.
Now if you are looking for a fight, then you are going about it the right way by insulting everyone's cars. I'm sure that many people here have strong views about the looks of the Smart Roadster, but I would hope that they have more class than to go to the Smart forum and start going on about how they look like electronic frogs.
George H said:
You put BASED on a rejected Jaguar. They aren't based on it, it's a complete different chassis.
George, we may have had this discussion before (not sure if it was you or not). But lets clarify...1. I've not said (or intended, even if it wasn't clear enough or you've just misunderstood it) anything about chassis, engine, drivetrain or construction. My comment was 100% based on the styling design.
2. It is fairly obvious from the OP, that the main point they are talking about is the F458's visual looks and nothing to do with how they are built or how they perform. This means my comment was in accord and on topic.
3. As you mention chassis. The DB7 WAS built on a Jaguar XJ-S platform - it was a friggin Jaguar XJ41 simply 'restyled' to look by an Aston. Yes there were many, very many many changes
but that doesn't stop it being an XJS platform. Latter examples did use the XK8 platform, however that in itself is merely an evolution of the XJS platform. This is very well documented across the internet. I'm perfectly happy to point you at some reading material if you want. However your denial of the facts, doesn't change them being facts.4. Other Aston models. I've not mentioned anything about the chassis on any other Aston.
George H said:
I refer you to my previous statement I am talking bks.
ks.Edited by 300bhp/ton on Wednesday 20th June 09:46
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff