Discussion
Speedraser said:
If it's the same engine as in the GT with merely electronic and exhaust tweaks, it has no business being in an Aston Martin.
Hopefully there will be a plastic cover on the top of the engine, with the words 'Aston Martin'.
At least that will hide the name cast into the cam covers.
You think I am joking.
Edited by Jon39 on Wednesday 12th November 18:50
It will also need more power to go in the Aston Martin otherwise performance will go backwards with the V12 now making 565bhp.
That should not be a problem with a small boost increase. The turbos nestling in the V of the engine is how BMW designed the new V8 turbos and the performance in those is good at 555bhp from the 4.4 litre in the X5 and X6.
That should not be a problem with a small boost increase. The turbos nestling in the V of the engine is how BMW designed the new V8 turbos and the performance in those is good at 555bhp from the 4.4 litre in the X5 and X6.
8Tech said:
It will also need more power to go in the Aston Martin otherwise performance will go backwards with the V12 now making 565bhp.
That should not be a problem with a small boost increase. The turbos nestling in the V of the engine is how BMW designed the new V8 turbos and the performance in those is good at 555bhp from the 4.4 litre in the X5 and X6.
Well it could work one of two ways. AML are publically claiming that the V12 will remain, so if the AMG V8 is to replace the existing V8, as opposed to replacing the V12, it's a big increase in power, not a backwards stepThat should not be a problem with a small boost increase. The turbos nestling in the V of the engine is how BMW designed the new V8 turbos and the performance in those is good at 555bhp from the 4.4 litre in the X5 and X6.
Barnezy said:
A turbo charged Aston...... No thanks.
That was the opinion of almost every BMW "M" powered car owner, and the factory, until getting the power just made the car bad to drive, with high fuel consumption and emissions on the normally aspirated engine. (5.0 V10 NA engine....504 bhp, 13 mpg!!)Finally, the Motorsport division succumbed and the M cars are all now turbocharged. With engines getting smaller capacity, it is the only way to go, like it or not.
I prefer supercharging but again, fuel economy would suffer. The turbo engines can be set up to give excellent fuel economy at the prescribed tested speeds, and those speeds only, as at cruising, they are off boost. This is why we are seeing completely unrealistic or unrepeatable figures between the specs and the owners experience. Audi have even been fined for this "scam" through the courts.
Marketing pushes the need for the appearance of good fuel economy to sell the cars and keep the tax down. Similar to the electronic exhaust valves to keep the noise down under test conditions, to hell with the rest of the time!
8Tech said:
That was the opinion of almost every BMW "M" powered car owner, and the factory, until getting the power just made the car bad to drive, with high fuel consumption and emissions on the normally aspirated engine. (5.0 V10 NA engine....504 bhp, 13 mpg!!)
Finally, the Motorsport division succumbed and the M cars are all now turbocharged. With engines getting smaller capacity, it is the only way to go, like it or not.
I prefer supercharging but again, fuel economy would suffer. The turbo engines can be set up to give excellent fuel economy at the prescribed tested speeds, and those speeds only, as at cruising, they are off boost. This is why we are seeing completely unrealistic or unrepeatable figures between the specs and the owners experience. Audi have even been fined for this "scam" through the courts.
Marketing pushes the need for the appearance of good fuel economy to sell the cars and keep the tax down. Similar to the electronic exhaust valves to keep the noise down under test conditions, to hell with the rest of the time!
I still don't get what's wrong with 15-20mgp on a car that is essentially a sports car that will only do on average 5-8k miles per year. An M5/3 is a different use case entirely and from speaking to a few M3 fans, they won't be moving to the M4 anytime soon. It seems the naturally aspirated engine has reached its pinnacle, so what a great time to own one of the best!Finally, the Motorsport division succumbed and the M cars are all now turbocharged. With engines getting smaller capacity, it is the only way to go, like it or not.
I prefer supercharging but again, fuel economy would suffer. The turbo engines can be set up to give excellent fuel economy at the prescribed tested speeds, and those speeds only, as at cruising, they are off boost. This is why we are seeing completely unrealistic or unrepeatable figures between the specs and the owners experience. Audi have even been fined for this "scam" through the courts.
Marketing pushes the need for the appearance of good fuel economy to sell the cars and keep the tax down. Similar to the electronic exhaust valves to keep the noise down under test conditions, to hell with the rest of the time!
8Tech said:
That was the opinion of almost every BMW "M" powered car owner, and the factory, until getting the power just made the car bad to drive, with high fuel consumption and emissions on the normally aspirated engine. (5.0 V10 NA engine....504 bhp, 13 mpg!!)
Finally, the Motorsport division succumbed and the M cars are all now turbocharged. With engines getting smaller capacity, it is the only way to go, like it or not.
M cars that fake their engine sound through the audio speakers Finally, the Motorsport division succumbed and the M cars are all now turbocharged. With engines getting smaller capacity, it is the only way to go, like it or not.
I no longer have any interest in them whatsoever.Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff