RE: Mercedes-AMG GT S vs Aston Martin V12 Vantage S

RE: Mercedes-AMG GT S vs Aston Martin V12 Vantage S

Author
Discussion

diluculophile

130 posts

250 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
I haven't driven either, and probably never will, but I can comment on what they look like.
Looks will always be a matter of opinion, but to me the Merc just looks right, even with the slightly iffy front lights.
The Aston is the same car that people considered pretty 10+ years ago, with some ugly holes cut into the bonnet.
Instead of the slow evolution of a classic shape like the 911 (that some consider dull/lazy), Aston would do well to come up with a fairly different design for a new breed of cars to compete with cars such as the GT. On looks at least...

mikey k

13,011 posts

215 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
bigfatnick said:
I don't understand how Aston Martin are now fitting that 8speed zf gearbox to the rapide and vanquish, but not the other models in the range. Somewhere I heard they said it didn't suit the character of the vantage, but it works in the f type, which is similarly aggressive. Maybe it's too expensive for them?
Saving it for the new model I'd guess, plus I don't think it will fit hence the 6MT and same size ASM boxes

Happyjap

382 posts

108 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
daytona365 said:
I've always thought of Astons as very expensive, very British, and very cobbled together TVR's........Do they also smell of glue ?.......Whereas the Merc is state of the art perfection in every way. Let's not forget they actually invented 'Das auto' !
Have you ever driven an Austin Martin? it is the difference between being with a virgin and a we, both serve a purpose and are enjoyable but cobbled together? We have an old Japanese proverb "Only Death cures the fool" Hello from Japan!!

Palmball

1,267 posts

173 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
sealtt said:
Palmball said:
Also, after a good couple of hundred miles in a GT S today, I can't imagine another car getting more attention everywhere it went
I agree with you on every point except crowd pulling power. Even in my somewhat modest Ferrari - a F430 Spider - I definitely got more attention than driving in either the SLS (extensive drives in them) or in this new GTS (spent an hour or two test driving it) from AMG.
OK, I may have been a bit ambitious quoting any other car as I'm sure most Lambo's or Ferrari's would attract oodles more attention. But the AMG isn't really in the same ballpark as either of those brands in terms of type of car (i.e. it's not a bona fide supercar) or price point.

But an Aston, which has a relatively restrained and familiar design (or 911 or R8 or F-Type or pretty much any other car which is a natural competitor) then the AMG isn't hampered by its looks or its brand cachet.

I also read with amusement the comment that anyone who dares think this new engine sounds better than the 6.2 is 'lying'. Mmmm, one suspects that someone probably hasn't driven both (or more likely either) to enable them to have an informed opinion laugh

Ahh bugger it...I'm just in a bad mood today. Had to hand the GT back yesterday and I've got 3.5 more long months to wait grumpy

Happyjap

382 posts

108 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
Palmball said:
OK, I may have been a bit ambitious quoting any other car as I'm sure most Lambo's or Ferrari's would attract oodles more attention. But the AMG isn't really in the same ballpark as either of those brands in terms of type of car (i.e. it's not a bona fide supercar) or price point.

But an Aston, which has a relatively restrained and familiar design (or 911 or R8 or F-Type or pretty much any other car which is a natural competitor) then the AMG isn't hampered by its looks or its brand cachet.

I also read with amusement the comment that anyone who dares think this new engine sounds better than the 6.2 is 'lying'. Mmmm, one suspects that someone probably hasn't driven both (or more likely either) to enable them to have an informed opinion laugh

Ahh bugger it...I'm just in a bad mood today. Had to hand the GT back yesterday and I've got 3.5 more long months to wait grumpy
You are wise on this Palmball and I respect this what you say, it is also unfortunate you are in a bad mood I this improves!

RoverP6B

4,338 posts

127 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
mikey k said:
Oh God! The Austin Allegro Quartic wheel is back!

Zod said:
After the first time you drive one you never notice that the rev counter goes the "wrong way". The instruments look lovely, but the speedo is illegible. The legal bit is between 5 o'clock and about 7.30. You use the digital speedo and the rev counter.
Jaguar XK120/140/150s do the same, as does the Aston Martin DB2. It's just an interesting little quirk that one would soon get used to with time, I'm sure.

DJRC said:
If Merc gave Aston their V12 to stick in the next pukka GT is anybody really going to question its credentials?

I genuinely struggle to understand anybody who looks at the top end of Mercs engine range and sniffs at them. Merc produce work of art engines that come fully embued with as much soul history character and pedigree as anybody else and if we put our objective hat then frankly no other fker can touch them.
No, I am far from blind to the greatness of M-B - but there's a simple problem with giving AM someone else's engine - it's that AM have always had their own engines, never shared with another maker. AMs should always have bespoke engines of some kind. Now, if they end up with their own unique castings and internals while nominally sharing an architecture with another engine (be it Jaguar's Gen2 AJ-V8 or the M-B M177), that'd be one thing, but just bolting in M-B engines... that'd be wrong.

warren182 said:
Strange how Merc/Audi can make these new turbos sound great, but BMW don't seem able to.
Err... they can't. They've just programmed in some pointless noise in a futile attempt to imbue it with some character.

Palmball said:
I also read with amusement the comment that anyone who dares think this new engine sounds better than the 6.2 is 'lying'. Mmmm, one suspects that someone probably hasn't driven both (or more likely either) to enable them to have an informed opinion laugh
Heard both from the outside. M177 has less character than just one cylinder of M156/M159. That was the last great European production V8 as far as I'm concerned.

Palmball

1,267 posts

173 months

Monday 18th May 2015
quotequote all
RoverP6B said:
Heard both from the outside. M177 has less character than just one cylinder of M156/M159. That was the last great European production V8 as far as I'm concerned.
Err, no. Just not the case. Hearing one being revved at a standstill is not the same as driving them and experiencing the full aural delights. The M156/9 was outstanding, the M177 is at worst as good , at best more 'interesting'. As pretty much concurred by everyone else who has heard it (including most of the press reports). But each to their own of course, sound is another one of the damn subjective areas again tongue out

Edited by Palmball on Monday 18th May 23:11

RoverP6B

4,338 posts

127 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Not at standstill. Accelerations and flybys, properly on it, both engines. The M177 doesn't have a tenth of the M156's character.

DJRC

23,563 posts

235 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
RoverP6B said:
Not at standstill. Accelerations and flybys, properly on it, both engines. The M177 doesn't have a tenth of the M156's character.
If you insist. Given that both Palm and I play with large capacity Merc V8s (unless he has changed his bloody car/s again!) on a daily basis then I suspect we will have to disagree with you in this.

Zod

35,295 posts

257 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
It's rather slower, but Evo nearly preferred the V8V N430to the AMG in their group test. The best thing about the test is that it emphasises how enjoyable the cars are to drive on the road over track times.

I chose and continue to own my car because of the way it looks and sounds and how much I enjoy driving it on B roads. There are plenty of silly PH threads about how you don't need a car faster than say a Golf GTI, but in the case of July car it is difficult to imagine needing more speed on the road. I wouldn't say not to even faster acceleration throw the gears, but it's already amusingly silly.



Edited by Zod on Tuesday 19th May 09:22

Palmball

1,267 posts

173 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
DJRC said:
(unless he has changed his bloody car/s again!)
biggrin Nah, I'm sticking with my AMG's for now. That'll be a whole year without a brand change yikes



Zod said:
It's rather slower, but Evo nearly preferred the V8V N430to the AMG in their group test. The best thing about the test is that it emphasises how enjoyable the cars are to drive on the road over track times.
It was a fairly unanimous win for the AMG though, wouldn't you say? From all the comparisons, it seems only Evo have placed it top of it's class....Jeez, Top Gear decided the i8 was better than the AMG and 911 Turbo....good job I don't get hung up on press opinions eh laugh

DJRC

23,563 posts

235 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Did you get the S or normal GT to play with? The non S unit is replacing the 55 unit in the SLK/C next yr and I want to know if it's going to be worth changing - I love my current engine smile

Palmball

1,267 posts

173 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
It was the S, the normal GT isn't released until later this year / early next. But to be fair, I can't see how it'll differ much - same engine, different tune.

Your SLK has the same engine as our ML but without the two turbos so I promise one thing - you will LOVE the new engine. It much more aggressive in character/harder edged than the 5.5, which is a relatively relaxed unit in comparison.

DJRC

23,563 posts

235 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
I am so sold smile

Speaking of twin turbo MLs, I really do miss ours. We had the big diesel with blowers though - more torque than a torquey thing!