RE: Aston Martin 'not lazy' - official

[897sma]

Pr1964 said:

What Model Aston was this one ?

It's the one that, if you work hard and save up, you might be able to afford and then pretend it's like an Aston.

[Zod]

Pr1964 said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

What Model Aston was this one ?



I know it’s A SHAG U R .

The thing that gets me is the quality on the V8's the early ones had lovely leather everywhere and quality trim the later ones went cheap.

There is little in the new Astons which really turns heads they look like generic sports cars which could be confused with some models from Maserati Jaguar and OLD Ferraris.

The V8Vantage was a missed opportunity too heavy and just not mental enough.

We are in a new era if AM don’t understand and it looks like they don’t have a clue then they will die.
AM need to get a backbone and build some exotic machinery which will turn heads aimed to sell in the growth markets of asia and south america where building the same car body over and over again with new invisible bits underneath does NOT work.

AM get a mental designer and “Go for it or die….”

Movie title “Go for it or Die”. LOL

You have no clue.

The quality is better than it has ever been.

The One-77 was mental and sold out, mostly in Asia.

What's the point of the Jag photo?

[897sma]

George H said:

My god you speak some ste. Of corse they're rivals. They're In a similar price range as I said, I never said exactly the same price

Anyway, I hardly think someone who drives a 2 generation out of date Boxster will bother Aston that he doesn't like their cars

I'm with you George

[George H]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Well explain why I'm wrong. You're hardly the target market are you? You're comments prove that with the utter ste contained within them

How the SLS at nearly twice the price is a rival is beyond me... And then you have the audacity to question the rival cars I posted. Why not go post a thread over in the Aston forum and ask the owners about the other cars they considered, then you will see that I'm right and you're wrong

897sma said:

I'm with you George

Nice to see someone else with sense in this thread Steve

[897sma]

George H said:

Nice to see someone else with sense in this thread Steve

What is it they call a group of people with exaggerated misguided beliefs with little basis on reality...... cults. Some of those on this thread are very nearly there.........only one letter out

[George H]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

That's funny, I can't believe anyone would be so fking stupid that they can't see that it's definitely one of the best, and lightest of the cars that people would actually consider buying instead. That's more relevant, why don't you compare it to a Koenigsegg and say how slow it is. Or perhaps a Range Rover and say how crap it is off road. Your points are irrelevant, I don't understand why you can't see that

I really get the impression you've never actually driven a V8V, or even any Aston. You sound like you've got your facts from Top Gear

And as I said before... If you think it's too heavy, don't go and part ex your massively out of date Boxster for one

[Talksteer]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Steel is a perfectly good material for making a body in white out of and given the complex structures in a modern car sees a very small weight penalty in comparison to aluminium. The high strength alloy steels have comparable strength to weight to aluminium and once you start running into practical constraints of cross sections for structural members, resistance to fatigue, practical joining methods and forming limitations the fact that aluminium has a superior ratio of stiffness to density squared is pretty irrelevant.

Looking at the Porsche chassis the steel is used in perimeter components and the lower density aluminium is used in web components like the roof and floor pan. An inherently sensible way of doing things and playing to both materials advantages.

There is a big assumption that the VH platform is about performance, it isn't, it's about lowering cost for a medium sized production run. If you look at the VH bodies the structure is built out of relatively simple extrusions and bent plates.



Producing a steel chassis requires expensive dies and production equipment and is not economic at the sort of production runs Aston can achieve. The VH on the other hand requires far less tooling, and ultimately far less manufacturing engineering time.

Note that Jaguar who have much larger production runs use far more hydro-formed and stamped components and utilise considerably more complex geometries.



Ultimately Porsche are in a position where they can sell a supercar at volumes where they can justify the investment in a pressed steel body and by doing that they generate revenues that allow then to optimise that body to a weight at which there is negligible weight penalty between the 911 and say a Ferrari 458 or a McLaren MP4-12-C.

The other point is the body in white is only about 200kg of the total mass of the vehicle and Porsche also have the budget to do the detail engineering to reduce weight all over the car without spending ridiculous amounts of money.

[Dblue]

George H said:

That's funny, I can't believe anyone would be so fking stupid that they can't see that it's definitely one of the best, and lightest of the cars that people would actually consider buying instead. That's more relevant, why don't you compare it to a Koenigsegg and say how slow it is. Or perhaps a Range Rover and say how crap it is off road. Your points are irrelevant, I don't understand why you can't see that

I really get the impression you've never actually driven a V8V, or even any Aston. You sound like you've got your facts from Top Gear

And as I said before... If you think it's too heavy, don't go and part ex your massively out of date Boxster for one

Blimey, not sure I've seen a series of more aggressive insulting posts for ages on here. Tell you what, I'm a potential customer for Aston Martin and up until this thread and posts from yourself and others I considered them to be classy, beautiful and pretty good sportscars owned by enthusiastic and rather classy clientele. Mmmm. So another enthusiasts opinion is not valid because he doesn't own a car you consider to be glamorous enough to trade for one of Gaydons finest?

Still FWIW I wish all the best to a great car maker from up the road that makes gorgeous cars and I hope against all hope that they can overcome a chronic lack of R&D funds. Like Lotus they have worked wonders on a shoestring but the weight issue is indicative that despite using technology that should allow them to be better than the competition they are worse.
The Vantage is lovely but it's not any more than competitive against 991s or R8s, not quite as good but close enough to sell for the time being. But every year sees the competition driven on by relentless R&D getting better and better.
honestly, I hope Ratan Tata is going to swoop soon because his Anglophile attitude and deep pockets and willingness to back these brilliant engineers as they deserve, as at Jaguar , seem to offer hope in the long term.

[George H]

Dblue said:

Blimey, not sure I've seen a series of more aggressive insulting posts for ages on here. Tell you what, I'm a potential customer for Aston Martin and up until this thread and posts from yourself and others I considered them to be classy, beautiful and pretty good sportscars owned by enthusiastic and rather classy clientele. Mmmm. So another enthusiasts opinion is not valid because he doesn't own a car you consider to be glamorous enough to trade for one of Gaydons finest?

He hardly seems like an enthusiast since all he has done is slate them, whilst giving massively irrelevant points.

I never said his opinion doesn't mater because of the car he drives, if you would care to re-read what I put, I said that perhaps he shouldn't go and part ex it against a V8V since he's so against them... Seems quite reasonable to me... if you don't like it, then don't buy it

[Kong]

Talksteer said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Steel is a perfectly good material for making a body in white out of and given the complex structures in a modern car sees a very small weight penalty in comparison to aluminium. The high strength alloy steels have comparable strength to weight to aluminium and once you start running into practical constraints of cross sections for structural members, resistance to fatigue, practical joining methods and forming limitations the fact that aluminium has a superior ratio of stiffness to density squared is pretty irrelevant.

Looking at the Porsche chassis the steel is used in perimeter components and the lower density aluminium is used in web components like the roof and floor pan. An inherently sensible way of doing things and playing to both materials advantages.

There is a big assumption that the VH platform is about performance, it isn't, it's about lowering cost for a medium sized production run. If you look at the VH bodies the structure is built out of relatively simple extrusions and bent plates.



Producing a steel chassis requires expensive dies and production equipment and is not economic at the sort of production runs Aston can achieve. The VH on the other hand requires far less tooling, and ultimately far less manufacturing engineering time.

Note that Jaguar who have much larger production runs use far more hydro-formed and stamped components and utilise considerably more complex geometries.



Ultimately Porsche are in a position where they can sell a supercar at volumes where they can justify the investment in a pressed steel body and by doing that they generate revenues that allow then to optimise that body to a weight at which there is negligible weight penalty between the 911 and say a Ferrari 458 or a McLaren MP4-12-C.

The other point is the body in white is only about 200kg of the total mass of the vehicle and Porsche also have the budget to do the detail engineering to reduce weight all over the car without spending ridiculous amounts of money.

Really interesting post, thanks for that. Really highlights the challenge faced by the medium sized manufacturers who don't have the luxury of mass economies of scale.

Edited by Kong on Wednesday 17th October 00:11

[MycroftWard]

George H said:

He hardly seems like an enthusiast since all he has done is slate them, whilst giving massively irrelevant points.

I never said his opinion doesn't mater because of the car he drives, if you would care to re-read what I put, I said that perhaps he shouldn't go and part ex it against a V8V since he's so against them... Seems quite reasonable to me... if you don't like it, then don't buy it

Cmoose and others have made some good valid points, your coming off as ever so touchy and actually quite offensive.

[Richard-G]

g3org3y said:

Far too fussy at the front. The splitter looks like such an afterthought. Very inelegant.

pistonheads is a great site, it would be boring if everyone just said "wowzers MAYTE nice aston megalolz!!!111!one111"

i guess you could say its a forum that invokes good car banter.

HOWEVER if anyone calls that car ugly i will personally come round your house while you're asleep, come into your room and fill your mouth full of crisps, so that when you wake up in the morning you will have a mouthful of soggy crisps and that will be a lesson for you, punishment for talking ste.

[e600]

There is a great deal of heart over head in car purchase, I, in my youth, aspired to buy an e type, and did. In fact several. I didn't have the same feeling with the XKR ( but did buy one) and similarly with a 911 and later version of the same. Both competent cars.

However, I lusted for a Vanquish, (mk1) and did so earlier this year. That's why people buy Astons, not because of some trump card numbers game but more to do with the emotions.

IMHO of course

[NGK210]

"Being so modular means Aston rolls out all-new systems easily, as they become available rather than at model change time - ... developed with engineering partners such as ZF..."

What a load of old bit! ZF has almost forgotten Aston exists, never mind being "partners" - it's probably the only car company still using the old 6-speed autobox, whereas all others swapped to the 8-speeder yonks ago, including grade-A penny-picher Jag.

[Digga]

e600 said:

There is a great deal of heart over head in car purchase, I, in my youth, aspired to buy an e type, and did. In fact several. I didn't have the same feeling with the XKR ( but did buy one) and similarly with a 911 and later version of the same. Both competent cars.

However, I lusted for a Vanquish, (mk1) and did so earlier this year. That's why people buy Astons, not because of some trump card numbers game but more to do with the emotions.

IMHO of course

But a car looking and even suonding good is still just, for many, only part of the whole sports car package. It is inevetable that those whish weight more tend to feel less 'alive' and exciting. TVR had it nailled, and on the volumes they operate on, Porsche seem to do an excellent job, but sadly the Astons - from what you hear on PH (a lot of disappointment with V8V)- never really quite feel sufficiently hardcore by comparisson, beautiful as they are.

[DJRC]

Richard-G said:

g3org3y said:

Far too fussy at the front. The splitter looks like such an afterthought. Very inelegant.

pistonheads is a great site, it would be boring if everyone just said "wowzers MAYTE nice aston megalolz!!!111!one111"

i guess you could say its a forum that invokes good car banter.

HOWEVER if anyone calls that car ugly i will personally come round your house while you're asleep, come into your room and fill your mouth full of crisps, so that when you wake up in the morning you will have a mouthful of soggy crisps and that will be a lesson for you, punishment for talking ste.

I like this post. This man does punishments I approve of

[Zod]

e600 said:

There is a great deal of heart over head in car purchase, I, in my youth, aspired to buy an e type, and did. In fact several. I didn't have the same feeling with the XKR ( but did buy one) and similarly with a 911 and later version of the same. Both competent cars.

However, I lusted for a Vanquish, (mk1) and did so earlier this year. That's why people buy Astons, not because of some trump card numbers game but more to do with the emotions.

IMHO of course

It's all about emotion. I just didn't get them and in the early DB9 and V8V days said they were pretty but too slow. But then I drove one and I had to have one.

[Zod]

Digga said:

e600 said:

There is a great deal of heart over head in car purchase, I, in my youth, aspired to buy an e type, and did. In fact several. I didn't have the same feeling with the XKR ( but did buy one) and similarly with a 911 and later version of the same. Both competent cars.

However, I lusted for a Vanquish, (mk1) and did so earlier this year. That's why people buy Astons, not because of some trump card numbers game but more to do with the emotions.

IMHO of course

But a car looking and even suonding good is still just, for many, only part of the whole sports car package. It is inevetable that those whish weight more tend to feel less 'alive' and exciting. TVR had it nailled, and on the volumes they operate on, Porsche seem to do an excellent job, but sadly the Astons - from what you hear on PH (a lot of disappointment with V8V)- never really quite feel sufficiently hardcore by comparisson, beautiful as they are.

You should try mine. Most people complain that it is too lively and exciting.

[George H]

Zod said:

You should try mine. Most people complain that it is too lively and exciting.

http://www.pistonheads.com/doc.asp?c=52&i=2557...

[Digga]

George H said:

Zod said:

You should try mine. Most people complain that it is too lively and exciting.

http://www.pistonheads.com/doc.asp?c=52&i=2557...

V12V is certainly the cream of the crop.

But I can remember the contrast even from a (very heavily modded) Griff 500 to a 911 GT3 - the latter was very, very impressive no doubt, very capable, especailly under braking, but never felt as alive (or was that just not so close to armageddon?) IMHO.

I'm with Colin Chapman and Gordon Murray as regards weight.