4.7 Vantage vs Audi R8
Discussion
Just having a quick look at PH during a TV advert break.
Had a quiet chuckle at your question, because I was reminded of the time I bought my 4.7 manual.
For some reason, I completely forgot to consider an Audi.
No regrets though. One of the last naturally aspirated V8 manuals. Wonderful, if you are happy with a sports car, without all the latest screens and 'assist' stuff. You are even alllowed to operate the wipers, lights and hand brake.
I have driven both back to back on a race track. All I can tell you, looks aside which is personal, is that the R8 is the much faster and more efficient vehicle at dispatching a track, than the 4.7, and does it in a clinical way that lacks anywhere as much character or involvement as the Aston.
I have a manual 4.7, my mate has a rather lovely soft top V10 R8.
We're parked up at his place, his wife and daughter come home from shopping and say of the Aston 'Wow, that is such a beautiful car!'
My head thoroughly admires the Audi's power, tech, 4WD and the odd Lambourghini label on the components - a fantastic car. My heart's joy is for the old school Aston and the sheer pleasure of driving it. The Audi is, admittedly, significantly faster on the track....
We're parked up at his place, his wife and daughter come home from shopping and say of the Aston 'Wow, that is such a beautiful car!'
My head thoroughly admires the Audi's power, tech, 4WD and the odd Lambourghini label on the components - a fantastic car. My heart's joy is for the old school Aston and the sheer pleasure of driving it. The Audi is, admittedly, significantly faster on the track....
Not an R8, but have experience with RS4 & RS5
the V8V is cheaper to mainatin and service at dealer prices here in Australia
V8V rotors are cheaper, last longer
V8V sounds better, goes slower, but is WAY more engaging a drive
and you have room for luggage for a week or two away (and that includes sufficient luggage for my significant other)
ok I admit we overpacked!
the V8V is cheaper to mainatin and service at dealer prices here in Australia
V8V rotors are cheaper, last longer
V8V sounds better, goes slower, but is WAY more engaging a drive
and you have room for luggage for a week or two away (and that includes sufficient luggage for my significant other)
ok I admit we overpacked!
Graze01 said:
Not an R8, but have experience with RS4 & RS5
the V8V is cheaper to mainatin and service at dealer prices here in Australia
V8V rotors are cheaper, last longer
V8V sounds better, goes slower, but is WAY more engaging a drive
and you have room for luggage for a week or two away (and that includes sufficient luggage for my significant other)
ok I admit we overpacked!
My first thought when I read of European tours was that an R8 is pretty limited boot space wise. In convertible form I also assume you lose that space behind the front seats? the V8V is cheaper to mainatin and service at dealer prices here in Australia
V8V rotors are cheaper, last longer
V8V sounds better, goes slower, but is WAY more engaging a drive
and you have room for luggage for a week or two away (and that includes sufficient luggage for my significant other)
ok I admit we overpacked!
Wow thanks guys for the replies and thoughts.
I am surprised the audi doesnt stand up so well in your experiences...top gear raved about the 4wd being heavily rear balanced giving plenty of scope for driver engagement?
Im not worried about outright speed, but i want it to handle really well, and sound epic with a switchable exhaust. Brakes hold up in the alps!
Be comfortable on a long tour....
I presumed the audi would be less expensive to maintain......
I am surprised the audi doesnt stand up so well in your experiences...top gear raved about the 4wd being heavily rear balanced giving plenty of scope for driver engagement?
Im not worried about outright speed, but i want it to handle really well, and sound epic with a switchable exhaust. Brakes hold up in the alps!
Be comfortable on a long tour....
I presumed the audi would be less expensive to maintain......
DarkHorseTerence said:
Wow thanks guys for the replies and thoughts.
I am surprised the Audi doesnt stand up so well in your experiences...top gear raved about the 4wd being heavily rear balanced giving plenty of scope for driver engagement. ......
I am surprised the Audi doesnt stand up so well in your experiences...top gear raved about the 4wd being heavily rear balanced giving plenty of scope for driver engagement. ......
Of course, you are asking your questions on an Aston Martin forum, so we might be biased.
Perhaps unusual, but for many Aston Martin owners, one of the top priorities is that the cars must look beautiful, and that can sometimes be an even more important aspect than top speed, or 0 to 100 mph times.
Oh, and just switch off the traction control and you will have plenty of scope for driver engagement.
I bought an RS4 when I had my DB9 (different models completely I know - but bear with me here...)
The RS was extremely quick - moreso than the DB9, it was better handling, it was more configurable, it was more practical. In fact it was so good as a daily that for the year I had it I couldn't be bothered to take the AM out of the garage.
But, there were a few things that happened:-
1) The Audi dealers were nowhere as pleasant at the AM dealers for servicing (or buying), and they certainly weren't any cheaper
2) The Audi was lacking in something - it was safe, predicable, yet somehow didn't have any stirring effect on my undercarriage after the first few weeks.
3) It was uncomfortable, and I got fed up with everyone trying to cut you up, not letting you out of junctions etc etc (which is the polar opposite to the DB9)
I sold it within 12 months - but I still have the DB9 - and it is still a sense of occasion for me when i do drive it. For reliability I would say my experience was that they are on a par - but you do see the low volume production versus the high production volume fit and finish if you look closely (that didn't stop the RS drivers door having to be adjusted at every service as it kept dropping)
The RS was extremely quick - moreso than the DB9, it was better handling, it was more configurable, it was more practical. In fact it was so good as a daily that for the year I had it I couldn't be bothered to take the AM out of the garage.
But, there were a few things that happened:-
1) The Audi dealers were nowhere as pleasant at the AM dealers for servicing (or buying), and they certainly weren't any cheaper
2) The Audi was lacking in something - it was safe, predicable, yet somehow didn't have any stirring effect on my undercarriage after the first few weeks.
3) It was uncomfortable, and I got fed up with everyone trying to cut you up, not letting you out of junctions etc etc (which is the polar opposite to the DB9)
I sold it within 12 months - but I still have the DB9 - and it is still a sense of occasion for me when i do drive it. For reliability I would say my experience was that they are on a par - but you do see the low volume production versus the high production volume fit and finish if you look closely (that didn't stop the RS drivers door having to be adjusted at every service as it kept dropping)
Dewi 2 said:
Perhaps unusual, but for many Aston Martin owners, one of the top priorities is that the cars must look beautiful, and that can sometimes be an even more important aspect than top speed, or 0 to 100 mph times.
For sure.....its a given....the V8v is stunning vs the Audi. !!oilit said:
I bought an RS4 when I had my DB9 (different models completely I know - but bear with me here...)
The RS was extremely quick - moreso than the DB9, it was better handling, it was more configurable, it was more practical. In fact it was so good as a daily that for the year I had it I couldn't be bothered to take the AM out of the garage.
But, there were a few things that happened:-
1) The Audi dealers were nowhere as pleasant at the AM dealers for servicing (or buying), and they certainly weren't any cheaper
2) The Audi was lacking in something - it was safe, predicable, yet somehow didn't have any stirring effect on my undercarriage after the first few weeks.
3) It was uncomfortable, and I got fed up with everyone trying to cut you up, not letting you out of junctions etc etc (which is the polar opposite to the DB9)
I sold it within 12 months - but I still have the DB9 - and it is still a sense of occasion for me when i do drive it. For reliability I would say my experience was that they are on a par - but you do see the low volume production versus the high production volume fit and finish if you look closely (that didn't stop the RS drivers door having to be adjusted at every service as it kept dropping)
Thanks Ollit.The RS was extremely quick - moreso than the DB9, it was better handling, it was more configurable, it was more practical. In fact it was so good as a daily that for the year I had it I couldn't be bothered to take the AM out of the garage.
But, there were a few things that happened:-
1) The Audi dealers were nowhere as pleasant at the AM dealers for servicing (or buying), and they certainly weren't any cheaper
2) The Audi was lacking in something - it was safe, predicable, yet somehow didn't have any stirring effect on my undercarriage after the first few weeks.
3) It was uncomfortable, and I got fed up with everyone trying to cut you up, not letting you out of junctions etc etc (which is the polar opposite to the DB9)
I sold it within 12 months - but I still have the DB9 - and it is still a sense of occasion for me when i do drive it. For reliability I would say my experience was that they are on a par - but you do see the low volume production versus the high production volume fit and finish if you look closely (that didn't stop the RS drivers door having to be adjusted at every service as it kept dropping)
So im picking up
a) as far as costs go they are probably on a par
b) the audi is germanicly efficient but lacks soul
So....can a 4.7 V8v live with a proper weeks hard driving up and down mountains?
DarkHorseTerence said:
oilit said:
I bought an RS4 when I had my DB9 (different models completely I know - but bear with me here...)
The RS was extremely quick - moreso than the DB9, it was better handling, it was more configurable, it was more practical. In fact it was so good as a daily that for the year I had it I couldn't be bothered to take the AM out of the garage.
But, there were a few things that happened:-
1) The Audi dealers were nowhere as pleasant at the AM dealers for servicing (or buying), and they certainly weren't any cheaper
2) The Audi was lacking in something - it was safe, predicable, yet somehow didn't have any stirring effect on my undercarriage after the first few weeks.
3) It was uncomfortable, and I got fed up with everyone trying to cut you up, not letting you out of junctions etc etc (which is the polar opposite to the DB9)
I sold it within 12 months - but I still have the DB9 - and it is still a sense of occasion for me when i do drive it. For reliability I would say my experience was that they are on a par - but you do see the low volume production versus the high production volume fit and finish if you look closely (that didn't stop the RS drivers door having to be adjusted at every service as it kept dropping)
Thanks Ollit.The RS was extremely quick - moreso than the DB9, it was better handling, it was more configurable, it was more practical. In fact it was so good as a daily that for the year I had it I couldn't be bothered to take the AM out of the garage.
But, there were a few things that happened:-
1) The Audi dealers were nowhere as pleasant at the AM dealers for servicing (or buying), and they certainly weren't any cheaper
2) The Audi was lacking in something - it was safe, predicable, yet somehow didn't have any stirring effect on my undercarriage after the first few weeks.
3) It was uncomfortable, and I got fed up with everyone trying to cut you up, not letting you out of junctions etc etc (which is the polar opposite to the DB9)
I sold it within 12 months - but I still have the DB9 - and it is still a sense of occasion for me when i do drive it. For reliability I would say my experience was that they are on a par - but you do see the low volume production versus the high production volume fit and finish if you look closely (that didn't stop the RS drivers door having to be adjusted at every service as it kept dropping)
So im picking up
a) as far as costs go they are probably on a par
b) the audi is germanicly efficient but lacks soul
So....can a 4.7 V8v live with a proper weeks hard driving up and down mountains?
I wouldn't have any hesitation jumping in my 9 and going up and down mountain roads, and suspect a 4.7 Vantage if well maintained (like any car) would cope as well - but never owned a Vantage so somebody who has will for sure be along soon.
DarkHorseTerence said:
So....can a 4.7 V8v live with a proper weeks hard driving up and down mountains?
I have a 4.3 and have been up, down and around the alps often, and I would categorically say yes, the car can handle the hard driving, with the possible exception of brakes. After a good stint you certainly notice some fade when pushing especially downhill into the tight switchbacks where you need to repeatedly jump on the peddle quite hard. A set of Pagid RS29 or similar front pads should fix this easily and relatively cheaply. If you end up with a 4.7S I think the brakes are up to the task without upgrading.Mr.Tremlini said:
DarkHorseTerence said:
So....can a 4.7 V8v live with a proper weeks hard driving up and down mountains?
I have a 4.3 and have been up, down and around the alps often, and I would categorically say yes, the car can handle the hard driving, with the possible exception of brakes. After a good stint you certainly notice some fade when pushing especially downhill into the tight switchbacks where you need to repeatedly jump on the peddle quite hard. A set of Pagid RS29 or similar front pads should fix this easily and relatively cheaply. If you end up with a 4.7S I think the brakes are up to the task without upgrading.
Up and down the Alps?
Look, I do that in fact every second week or when the weather is fine. So I can judge on the roads. With the heavily controlled speedlimit of 80 km/h in the Alps, lesser frequently in France and chaotic in Italy... Speed is not your goal. Its grip!!!
I do my turns with different vehicles. So I can give you real details form the roads, not from a Laptop or prospectus.
The Vantage is a stylisch emotional car, which is not built for mountain roads with a lot of curves. It is simply too heavy. It is well balanced, but for me (my opinion) the Vantage is a pleasant, enjoiable car, its is powerfull cruising and relish, great feeling and an unbeatable kind of understatement. My wife likes to come with me only in the Vantage.
acually I drive also: The Abarth 595; uptuned to 205 hp with all kind of racetech till the wheels. Its a total Funcar, noisy, shaky.. but it is also not built for mountainroads. Despite the lightweight, it pushes enormously over the frontwheels, so it is not possible to drive the ideal line and go to max.
I also drive an Alfa Romeo Giulia, a looot of power but not so ballanced to enjoy rude curves; also too heavy car in weight; nice feelings and fully dayli, but it is a limousine.
Audi S1: this car goes really good on mountain roads, I like it, manual gearbox, quattro; its fun. But it derives from a Normal car (A1), so the good gens are from an ordinary street car concept as base.
For me unbeatable: The Lotus; still topping all I have driven in all the past 32 years, because it is a symbiosis of weight, power and grip. The steering is unbeatable in combination with the balance of the car, agile and always predictable. Its a real Drivers Car, and I have driven more than 165'000 KM in a Lotus till now. So I know what I am talking about.
I also drive with different Motorbikes (Triumph Daytona 675, Triumph Thruxton TFC, Triumph Thunderbird, Kawaski Z1000) same roads, same times, same traffic (mostly)... I know where to shift, I also know small passages or locally bad roads. So I am prepared for the trip. (as Walter Röhrl said long time ago). Every vehicle is in a certain way different, but also the Driver aims are different things. So it is really not easy to say: this is good and this is not.
Make your experiences yourself and judge; rent a car for testing. It makes no sense, to buy a car and then not to be honest enough to say: ahh... its the wrong one.
regs from Switzerland
Look, I do that in fact every second week or when the weather is fine. So I can judge on the roads. With the heavily controlled speedlimit of 80 km/h in the Alps, lesser frequently in France and chaotic in Italy... Speed is not your goal. Its grip!!!
I do my turns with different vehicles. So I can give you real details form the roads, not from a Laptop or prospectus.
The Vantage is a stylisch emotional car, which is not built for mountain roads with a lot of curves. It is simply too heavy. It is well balanced, but for me (my opinion) the Vantage is a pleasant, enjoiable car, its is powerfull cruising and relish, great feeling and an unbeatable kind of understatement. My wife likes to come with me only in the Vantage.
acually I drive also: The Abarth 595; uptuned to 205 hp with all kind of racetech till the wheels. Its a total Funcar, noisy, shaky.. but it is also not built for mountainroads. Despite the lightweight, it pushes enormously over the frontwheels, so it is not possible to drive the ideal line and go to max.
I also drive an Alfa Romeo Giulia, a looot of power but not so ballanced to enjoy rude curves; also too heavy car in weight; nice feelings and fully dayli, but it is a limousine.
Audi S1: this car goes really good on mountain roads, I like it, manual gearbox, quattro; its fun. But it derives from a Normal car (A1), so the good gens are from an ordinary street car concept as base.
For me unbeatable: The Lotus; still topping all I have driven in all the past 32 years, because it is a symbiosis of weight, power and grip. The steering is unbeatable in combination with the balance of the car, agile and always predictable. Its a real Drivers Car, and I have driven more than 165'000 KM in a Lotus till now. So I know what I am talking about.
I also drive with different Motorbikes (Triumph Daytona 675, Triumph Thruxton TFC, Triumph Thunderbird, Kawaski Z1000) same roads, same times, same traffic (mostly)... I know where to shift, I also know small passages or locally bad roads. So I am prepared for the trip. (as Walter Röhrl said long time ago). Every vehicle is in a certain way different, but also the Driver aims are different things. So it is really not easy to say: this is good and this is not.
Make your experiences yourself and judge; rent a car for testing. It makes no sense, to buy a car and then not to be honest enough to say: ahh... its the wrong one.
regs from Switzerland
Few comments - some relevant.
I have a 2007 RS4 with the 4.2L N/A engine as per the early R8, only mildly mapped up to 436bhp as per the dyno. Amazing car.
I used to have a V8VS, claimed 430bhp. (Now have a V12VS).
Of the V8 engines I much prefer the Audi......
However, as an overall package I would 100% have the Aston over the R8.
It will be more than capable for what you’re looking for and you will love it.
Audi’s are expensive to maintain. Aston may be no more expensive?
I have a 2007 RS4 with the 4.2L N/A engine as per the early R8, only mildly mapped up to 436bhp as per the dyno. Amazing car.
I used to have a V8VS, claimed 430bhp. (Now have a V12VS).
Of the V8 engines I much prefer the Audi......
However, as an overall package I would 100% have the Aston over the R8.
It will be more than capable for what you’re looking for and you will love it.
Audi’s are expensive to maintain. Aston may be no more expensive?
Edited by Phil74891 on Sunday 15th November 16:56
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff