RE: Aston Martin 'not lazy' - official
Discussion
The Pits said:
Drives me mad the hypocrisy and double standards of the motoring press when it comes to Aston Martin.
Porsche churn out the same old recipe and styling since the '60's and they can do no wrong. Suddenly the new 991 is 'mostly' aluminium and is pronounced the second coming of the messiah. By 'mostly aluminium' you can read, not yet up to where Aston Martin were ten years ago. Or the Lotus Elise from 16 years ago.
Not even the pig ugly Panamerde or deeply cynical Cayenne receive much in the way of criticism to my continued astonishment.
What do Aston have to do to get a break? All this groundless scoffing and mis-information for the sake of a story is under mining confidence in one of the truly wonderful and life-affirming car makers. To what end?
If there's one thing that's lazy it's automotive journalism when it comes to Aston Martin. Please will somebody change the record?
As an Aston owner I am heartened by your comments. I believe however that at the heart of the issue is that 911 is an iconic, off-beat - and theoretically anachronistic car due to it's rear engine - and however improbably does seem to improve over each iteration and the rear-engine formula keeps it unique. Porsche churn out the same old recipe and styling since the '60's and they can do no wrong. Suddenly the new 991 is 'mostly' aluminium and is pronounced the second coming of the messiah. By 'mostly aluminium' you can read, not yet up to where Aston Martin were ten years ago. Or the Lotus Elise from 16 years ago.
Not even the pig ugly Panamerde or deeply cynical Cayenne receive much in the way of criticism to my continued astonishment.
What do Aston have to do to get a break? All this groundless scoffing and mis-information for the sake of a story is under mining confidence in one of the truly wonderful and life-affirming car makers. To what end?
If there's one thing that's lazy it's automotive journalism when it comes to Aston Martin. Please will somebody change the record?
The Aston shape of the last decade however, achingly beautiful as it is, does not have a similar unique twists and the shape has certain generic elements to it which have been cloned by others and in the overall create an overexposure, threatening potential iconic status. Note that curiously it is not strictly related to volume - there are plenty Range Rovers, G-Wagens, 911s etc. out there but their shapes do not get tired.
From my perspective there does seem to be an excessive "conservatism" at Aston with regard to the styling across the range of cars, by sticking to its winning formula too closely. Gone, for example, is the daring and brutality of the original V8 (one of the most lasting car shapes I believe), or the 90's Vantage, or the (at the time) jaw-dropping Lagonda - and crucially the differentiation between them.
Lastly British press does tend to be more favourably disposed towards "British" manufacturers, even though the point that Aston, a small, low volume manufacturer, is surviving very well in a very big-boy yard and should be cut a bit more slack.
sege said:
But guys, this article wasn't about the styling of Aston Martins. It was about how VH isn't a platform it's a concept/marketing nonsense.
The majority of posters must be getting confused with some other thread about how Astons are styled.
So the only thing I don't get is what is the name of the unnamed 'core' of the cars that all the other bits bolt onto then? Because that's the bit that according to that log of changes they haven't actually changed except to make it out of carbon fibre. So that's the bit people are talking about when the claim the same 'platform' is just getting re-used constantly. Presumably it doesn't have a name so perhaps we should just call it 'VH' anyway?
Was also left with this question, after two read throughs. The article states what can change, but not what remains. The majority of posters must be getting confused with some other thread about how Astons are styled.
So the only thing I don't get is what is the name of the unnamed 'core' of the cars that all the other bits bolt onto then? Because that's the bit that according to that log of changes they haven't actually changed except to make it out of carbon fibre. So that's the bit people are talking about when the claim the same 'platform' is just getting re-used constantly. Presumably it doesn't have a name so perhaps we should just call it 'VH' anyway?
Did a bit of digging and found this page http://www.astonmartins.com/gaydon_vh/index.html - which reads a little bit like the PH article. It indicates that VH is a concept for system sharing (vertical) and platform sharing (horizontal) AND a physical bonded/riveted aluminium platform which can be made into different lengths.
Think the press event is AM trying to spin the story toward differentiation and away from sameness; don't have a problem with that, seems like a fair story to tell.
IMHO Aston's are great, and they're doing a great job with what they have. I'd love one (dreams of a pre-owned DB9 one day); but to keep up with the competition (in performance/handling) Aston needs to take leap forward, and I don't think VH can't provide it.
P4ROT, thanks for posting some wonderfully beautiful cars, that clearly show the evolution in Aston design over 50+ years.
If you think of modern supercar design, not one is a streamlined, 'pure', simple shape - for example like the DB9. Look at the new Pagani Huayra, the new McLaren P12, new Lexus supercar concept etc etc - they are all heading in the same direction.
I'm not sure whether is because they can - body pressings (for metal) and composites (non-metal) bodies have moved on massively in 60 years - or whether it's because it's what the market expects.
Granted the Vanquish design is a little more 'fussy' - aka detailed - than the DB9, but I see this as an evolution on design language and personally I think Aston have done a great job in making it look more taught and muscular, whilst at the same time still recognisably an Aston and still using the design clues for which they are famous.
If you think of modern supercar design, not one is a streamlined, 'pure', simple shape - for example like the DB9. Look at the new Pagani Huayra, the new McLaren P12, new Lexus supercar concept etc etc - they are all heading in the same direction.
I'm not sure whether is because they can - body pressings (for metal) and composites (non-metal) bodies have moved on massively in 60 years - or whether it's because it's what the market expects.
Granted the Vanquish design is a little more 'fussy' - aka detailed - than the DB9, but I see this as an evolution on design language and personally I think Aston have done a great job in making it look more taught and muscular, whilst at the same time still recognisably an Aston and still using the design clues for which they are famous.
Pentoman said:
...the cayman/boxster look appreciably different despite being the same basic car. This shows it can be done..
What? Humm... rather like the V8 Vantage Roadster and the V8 Vantage Coupe look appreciably different despite being... oh hang on, you're being ironic aren't you? I get it! 
anonymous said:
[redacted]
No it's not all that matters. When it comes to questions about chassis, porsche's is done as cheaply as possible (it's the most profitable car on sale, so the margins are higher than you'll find in an Aston Martin) hence the continued use of cheaper, heavier steel which also rusts, it's a sub optimal material from an engineering point of view but one which allows you to keep production costs down while, if you're porsche, you put the retail price up.There's also the question of rigidity to consider. I don't have the figures but I know the Aston's VH system offers immense rigidity and they also use it as the basis for their race cars. By the amount of roll cages put into road going GT3's and the like it's reasonable to believe that porsche left room for improvement on this front.
This topic is about chassis. The system Aston use is outstanding and has nothing to do with why the cars look similar. The VH system could underpin virtually any type of car imaginable.
As for the weight argument the weight difference could be accounted for by the difference in engine size alone (3.6 six vs 4.7 V8). Without some figures for naked chassis weights this is a meaningless defence of porsche's use of steel.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
another reason porsche's kerb weight is relatively low is because they are so poorly equipped as standard, whereas Aston's come generously equipped.
go and find some numbers for torsional rigidity and bare chassis weight before I do otherwise because everything else is just biased speculation.
until then go with a steel chassis if you want to. you'll be the first to praise the new all aluminium 992 no doubt when porsche finally get round to it.
Until then I just think it's disingenuous of porsche and motor journos to claim the 991 is 'mostly aluminium'. I think it's clear to see that it is not.
te. Of corse they're rivals. They're In a similar price range as I said, I never said exactly the same price The Pits said:
you're just revealing that you're at least as biased as I am only with you it's towards a german car maker for whatever set of peculiar personal reasons.
another reason porsche's kerb weight is relatively low is because they are so poorly equipped as standard, whereas Aston's come generously equipped.
go and find some numbers for torsional rigidity and bare chassis weight before I do otherwise because everything else is just biased speculation.
until then go with a steel chassis if you want to. you'll be the first to praise the new all aluminium 992 no doubt when porsche finally get round to it.
Until then I just think it's disingenuous of porsche and motor journos to claim the 991 is 'mostly aluminium'. I think it's clear to see that it is not.
The new 991 is on another planet compared to the V8V in terms of weight and efficiency and no amount of bias can dispute that, whatever aluminium AM are using it appears to be a lot heavier than the steel Porsche are using. another reason porsche's kerb weight is relatively low is because they are so poorly equipped as standard, whereas Aston's come generously equipped.
go and find some numbers for torsional rigidity and bare chassis weight before I do otherwise because everything else is just biased speculation.
until then go with a steel chassis if you want to. you'll be the first to praise the new all aluminium 992 no doubt when porsche finally get round to it.
Until then I just think it's disingenuous of porsche and motor journos to claim the 991 is 'mostly aluminium'. I think it's clear to see that it is not.
It's quicker in straight line or round a track much lighter and more efficient, the fact is AM need to answer the question Porsche are posing.
I love the way Astons look but that's were it ends, I'd want them to bring out a sub 1500kg 30mpg+ new generation V8V and take the fight to the Germans, but sadly they do not have the resources in their current form.
HTH 
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff