New Model - Aston Martin Valkyrie Spyder
Discussion
Limited edition, 85 cars.
All sold.
Roof panel is removable, but no mention of whether it can be stowed within the car.
Photos show the new doors, because obviously the coupe doors are not appropriate.
Deliveries due in the second half of 2022.
Edited by Jon39 on Friday 13th August 00:20
There is indeed no onboard storage for the roof panel. I'm sure that makes it a deal breaker 
- but it didn't stop all 85 of them being sold before the unveiling, and as the thread on the front page shows - the reception has thus far been as frosty as I expected. A great pity, but Aston have dug deep to get the extraordinarily difficult project across the line, and the Spyder made some financial sense as there's an argument that the Coupe was being sold too cheaply and couldn't recoup the development cost. Some will say it's just a cash grab - but when Ferrari does something like that, nobody minds...
As a general note about the Valkyrie; I had a thought earlier which may explain why the reception has been like it has. As we've all read, the die hard Aston community, while not 'set in their ways', do have a general feeling of what an Aston Martin should be, and what it shouldn't be. Mid-rear engine supercars and hypercars are not something a purist would associate with Aston Martin, hence why (relatively) little is said about them on this sub-forum. At times it seems like they're the branch of the company that are viewed as a distant relation, almost as if they're not befitting the badge. The DBX was like that initially, and while the core demographic haven't warmed to it, there's at least an acknowledgement now that it exists for a valid reason and it's doing its job (a little how the Cayenne was viewed by 911 enthusiasts until they realised it was an inspired move by the management). I don't know if the mid-rear engine cars will be granted that same courtesy - I think it might be a few years away, perhaps once Valhalla's in production and the final version of the Vanquish is unveiled. I suspect that even then though, they might be viewed as 'the other sort' of Aston, for want of a better term.
Looking wider, the general car community and enthusiasts, might appreciate an old Aston, but for many, their vision of an Aston Martin is still an i6 DB7 with old Jaguar running gear. The very idea of Aston Martin building competitive, quick cars is alien to them - some would batch Aston and Morgan together as a couple of low volume, British car makers building quaint, old, slow, quirky cars - even if it's not the case. Because of that, the whole Valkyrie / Valhalla / Vanquish Vision idea is still perceived to be pie in the sky, concept art nonsense that'll never come to fruition.
With that being the case, it might explain why nearly ever press release about the Valkyrie is received generally poorly by the majority of car enthusiasts, and sometimes completely ignored by the Aston faithful.
- but it didn't stop all 85 of them being sold before the unveiling, and as the thread on the front page shows - the reception has thus far been as frosty as I expected. A great pity, but Aston have dug deep to get the extraordinarily difficult project across the line, and the Spyder made some financial sense as there's an argument that the Coupe was being sold too cheaply and couldn't recoup the development cost. Some will say it's just a cash grab - but when Ferrari does something like that, nobody minds...As a general note about the Valkyrie; I had a thought earlier which may explain why the reception has been like it has. As we've all read, the die hard Aston community, while not 'set in their ways', do have a general feeling of what an Aston Martin should be, and what it shouldn't be. Mid-rear engine supercars and hypercars are not something a purist would associate with Aston Martin, hence why (relatively) little is said about them on this sub-forum. At times it seems like they're the branch of the company that are viewed as a distant relation, almost as if they're not befitting the badge. The DBX was like that initially, and while the core demographic haven't warmed to it, there's at least an acknowledgement now that it exists for a valid reason and it's doing its job (a little how the Cayenne was viewed by 911 enthusiasts until they realised it was an inspired move by the management). I don't know if the mid-rear engine cars will be granted that same courtesy - I think it might be a few years away, perhaps once Valhalla's in production and the final version of the Vanquish is unveiled. I suspect that even then though, they might be viewed as 'the other sort' of Aston, for want of a better term.
Looking wider, the general car community and enthusiasts, might appreciate an old Aston, but for many, their vision of an Aston Martin is still an i6 DB7 with old Jaguar running gear. The very idea of Aston Martin building competitive, quick cars is alien to them - some would batch Aston and Morgan together as a couple of low volume, British car makers building quaint, old, slow, quirky cars - even if it's not the case. Because of that, the whole Valkyrie / Valhalla / Vanquish Vision idea is still perceived to be pie in the sky, concept art nonsense that'll never come to fruition.
With that being the case, it might explain why nearly ever press release about the Valkyrie is received generally poorly by the majority of car enthusiasts, and sometimes completely ignored by the Aston faithful.
I think the Valkyrie looks absolutely sensational but as you rightly say, it is a departure from the “normal” Aston Martin line up. AML is trying to emulate Ferrari by creating some sensational almost “one off” cars alongside the “bread and butter” normal cars but unlike Ferrari there is no cash generating normal line up which at the end finances the development of these top of the range exotic products. I can see what the strategy is of L. Stroll and consorts, wanting to move Aston much more upmarket and make it much more exclusive but it will cost a huge amount of money to get there and if they only want to sell a small number of high-end cars why do they need two factories and a dealer network. AML is in a precarious spot. They have no sufficient volume to survive long term as a luxury car maker but they are too “big” to make it as a specialist engineering shop such as Rimac or Koeningsegg etc.
It would almost be a better strategy for Stroll to build on the F1 heritage of Force India and then develop the exotic top end cars based on the F1 presence instead of dragging AML into it. Or wind down the luxury car business and concentrate on super exclusive Valkyrie like projects - but then they have to be much more expensive like Pagani etc to make it worthwhile.
It would almost be a better strategy for Stroll to build on the F1 heritage of Force India and then develop the exotic top end cars based on the F1 presence instead of dragging AML into it. Or wind down the luxury car business and concentrate on super exclusive Valkyrie like projects - but then they have to be much more expensive like Pagani etc to make it worthwhile.
I like the move by Aston Martin into mid-engine cars.
It has taken a while, but it is an interesting coincidence that the only forerunner (Bulldog) is now being restored.
Dr Bez famously said, "An Aston Martin should never be mid-engine". In that specific instance, it eventually turned out to be be a masterstroke, resulting in Aston Martin's best selling car ever.
The AM mid-engine range will be additional models, so should not greatly impact upon the traditional philosophy.
How big is the mid-engine sports car market though ?
McLaren went into it seriously, but even without the pandemic, were things slowing for them? Sale and leaseback of their premises, might be an indicator of something.
Could AML expect the mid-engine range to outsell traditional, or will it be a minority category?
( What we are seeing now, is not the L. Stroll strategy, the three mid-engine models were instigated by Andy Palmer.
As for the financial viability, Aston Martin has always miraculously survived by never worrying about that. Excitement and image seem to be the key, to attracting the next wealthy saviour. )
Edited by Jon39 on Friday 13th August 08:53
Jon39 said:
I like the move by Aston Martin into mid-engine cars.
It has taken a while, but it is an interesting coincidence that the only forerunner (Bulldog) is now being restored.
Dr Bez famously said, "An Aston Martin should never be mid-engine". In that specific instance, it eventually turned out to be be a masterstroke, resulting in Aston Martin's best selling car ever.
The AM mid-engine range will be additional models, so should not greatly impact upon the traditional philosophy.
How big is the mid-engine sports car market though ?
McLaren went into it seriously, but even without the pandemic, were things slowing for them? Sale and leaseback of their premises, might be an indicator of something.
Could AML expect the mid-engine range to outsell traditional, or will it be a minority category?
( What we are seeing now, is not the L. Stroll strategy, the three mid-engine models were instigated by Andy Palmer.
As for the financial viability, Aston Martin has always miraculously survived by never worrying about that. Excitement and image seem to be the key, to attracting the next wealthy saviour. )
The exception to that rule is the smallest of niche's created by the Ferrari SF90 Stradale where it offers hypercar performance, but at a price point that's neither hypercar territory nor supercar - it sits at the £375k mark where there's little else available. The Valhalla is an alternative, but is priced a large chunk more - now whether it counts for anything these days, the SF90 AFAIK is a series production model and the Valhalla is a limited run. Much like the Pista, Ferrari seem to be now building as many as they can sell rather than limiting supply, but they can charge as much as they like so why not?
The comparison with McLaren is relevant in a few ways. They hit the ground running, but have been a victim of their own success; they started building far too many cars per year, murdering the residuals of the lineup. The actual cars are utterly sensational, but the (largely internet based) smear campaign by a few disillusioned customers or onlookers wreaked havoc when it came to the reputation for reliability and the dealer network. They appear to have come out the other end of that now, perhaps because the negativity has died down, and the communications department are more proactive than they were.
The sale and leaseback of the MTC was a smart move - in the cost cap era of F1, and with pandemics and so on, why own the building if you can rent it cheaper. I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years, and with the F1 operation now a very competitive outfit once more, they might buy it back. The financial assistance from Bahrain oil money of course helped, and it's another example of the minnow low volume UK sports car makers needing some form of investor to keep them going, as they're all fighting against the tide when their rivals are more akin to a hobby interest of a large OEM.
NFC 85 Vette said:
The sale and leaseback of the MTC was a smart move - in the cost cap era of F1, and with pandemics and so on, why own the building if you can rent it cheaper.
To me a buy and lease-back deal just smacks of financial engineering beloved of MBAs and VCs. It's never as cheap to lease as it is to own, as (in my limited experience) the lease cost is typically one tenth of the building cost and represents a cash outflow every month, whereas once you own it, you own it. You just have to maintain it. This sort of deal is usually just a way of getting a one-off cash injection traded off for the increased outgoings.If they buy it back in, say, 4 years they'll have received the value of the building, paid out 40% of the cost of the building, then have to pay dilapidations at the end of the lease, then have to pay the value of the building (less depreciation) again to buy it back. Selling the buildings also reduces the asset value of the business on the books, which can make it more difficult/more expensive to get additional finance and makes the business an easier takeover target. I understand the argument of why tie up shareholder's cash in a non-productive asset.
It looks like LS is doing a pretty good job of trying to finish the projects and recoup the cost. I find the idea of a targa Valkyrie a little bizarre considering its design brief but they are sold, so great.
I am not really a fan of the mid engine cars, mainly because they were such a huge technical undertaking with minimal experience and funds, together with the wider picture of the AP era.
I am not really a fan of the mid engine cars, mainly because they were such a huge technical undertaking with minimal experience and funds, together with the wider picture of the AP era.
I Think it is spectacular. Not being able to stow the roof wasn't a deal. breaker for the ferrari Barchetta it had a weird flimsy rag top that the owners I met couldn't be bothered with and it would blow open at 80mph..
The roof is a an engineering marvel and light enough to be manageable by one person. It would have been great if the design would allow it to be clipped somewhere but hey who's going to drive a car like this in wet weather.
The roof is a an engineering marvel and light enough to be manageable by one person. It would have been great if the design would allow it to be clipped somewhere but hey who's going to drive a car like this in wet weather.
I think some have got tired of hearing the prolonged story of this car, and for me it will be synonymous with the point am nearly went bust again and all of the F1 shenanigans with Stroll and Red Bull etc. (Not a proud 3 years for AM).
For some reason, my “enthusiasm” in AM has waned a bit as a result of all of this above, and i feel with all the F1 focus and the mid engines that the company is headed in a different direction - which is fine as long as it is successful for them and i wish them good luck - but not entirely sure I will buy another new vehicle at the moment.
For some reason, my “enthusiasm” in AM has waned a bit as a result of all of this above, and i feel with all the F1 focus and the mid engines that the company is headed in a different direction - which is fine as long as it is successful for them and i wish them good luck - but not entirely sure I will buy another new vehicle at the moment.
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff