RE: Aston Martin Valkyrie design secrets revealed
Discussion
AER said:
robinessex said:
From the Top Gear interview:-
He tells me about one customer, an American lady, who’s designing her entire house with the Valkyrie as its centrepiece.
Can't even think of a suitable response to that!
October 1929..He tells me about one customer, an American lady, who’s designing her entire house with the Valkyrie as its centrepiece.
Can't even think of a suitable response to that!
Max_Torque said:
The point i was making is that there is a lot more to a good road car than just sticking some number plates on a track car.
Lets face it, if you've got £3M in expendable cash on a toy, just get a F1 car, and get someone to SVA approve it. Really not that hard to do. What you'll have is a ballisitically quick total shed, that is impossible to drive, can't go more than a few miles without either a) running out of fuel, b) overheating, c) cooking it's driver or more likely d) ending up backwards in the scenery when the downforce disappears without warning on a road bump or pothole.
AML/RB can crow on till they are blue in the face that this is a "road car" but lets be honest, it isn't, is it. It's an ultra high performance track car that is juuuuuust road legal (and i suspect there is going to be a lot of bluring the lines in getting it through even limited volume type approval.
For example, it's possible to get two large adults in a Lotus Elise, but have you actually done that and then driven it for more than 10mins. er no. and this cockpit looks to be several sizes smaller. And what about HVAC? What is the demist performance like? (does it even have A/C?)
As i said this isn't a road car, it's a rich persons posing pouch, which like the Caparo T1 will get driven once, and then stuck on a podium in a nice warm garage to be looked at, because actually driving it will be incredibly difficult.......
(IMO.. lol)
It's amazing how much you know about the car without having seen it in the flesh, sat in it, let alone driven it. Are you Adrian Newey in disguiseLets face it, if you've got £3M in expendable cash on a toy, just get a F1 car, and get someone to SVA approve it. Really not that hard to do. What you'll have is a ballisitically quick total shed, that is impossible to drive, can't go more than a few miles without either a) running out of fuel, b) overheating, c) cooking it's driver or more likely d) ending up backwards in the scenery when the downforce disappears without warning on a road bump or pothole.
AML/RB can crow on till they are blue in the face that this is a "road car" but lets be honest, it isn't, is it. It's an ultra high performance track car that is juuuuuust road legal (and i suspect there is going to be a lot of bluring the lines in getting it through even limited volume type approval.
For example, it's possible to get two large adults in a Lotus Elise, but have you actually done that and then driven it for more than 10mins. er no. and this cockpit looks to be several sizes smaller. And what about HVAC? What is the demist performance like? (does it even have A/C?)
As i said this isn't a road car, it's a rich persons posing pouch, which like the Caparo T1 will get driven once, and then stuck on a podium in a nice warm garage to be looked at, because actually driving it will be incredibly difficult.......
(IMO.. lol)
Btw do you know what the fuel range of an F1 car is?
robinessex said:
Is it another LHD only supercar then ?
No, available in rhdAnd to answer the previous question, anyone who has driven a caterham will know that the legs forward driving position is perfectly comfortable (indeed I quite like it)
This thread is such a depressing indictment of PH. Car company tries to push some boundaries and instead of being excited about what might come of it, instead the natural reaction is to criticise and pick holes (ffs people complaining about where the licence plate goes!).
Thank goodness evolution wasn't left to PH, we'd still be arguing about whether the cave paintings should be Nero or Rosso Corsa
In defense of Max Torque's comments, as an Engineer, I have a huge amount of respect for his thoughts and having scanned though them, I must admit to agreeing with them.
In terms of the Valkyrie, I am alone in thinking it looks like a Fish?
Which is an inevitable conclusion to high speed car design - air is a fluid though which cars move after all.
Whilst the car itself has no real world relevance I am excited and disappointed at the same time. Excited, as it's clearly pushing the boundary of possibility but disappointed on the basis of my first observation;
It looks like a fish.
Fishes are sculpted to move through water efficiently, like the car but there's so much more to it at a microscopic level in terms of their scales. Yes, they're there to allow movement but, from what I understand, their scales, like the dimples on a golf ball, add to their efficient movement. Instead of wittering on about a lightweight bit of sticky backed aluminium foil, why not bring about real change in the form of paint / surface design and manipulation?
In terms of the Valkyrie, I am alone in thinking it looks like a Fish?
Which is an inevitable conclusion to high speed car design - air is a fluid though which cars move after all.
Whilst the car itself has no real world relevance I am excited and disappointed at the same time. Excited, as it's clearly pushing the boundary of possibility but disappointed on the basis of my first observation;
It looks like a fish.
Fishes are sculpted to move through water efficiently, like the car but there's so much more to it at a microscopic level in terms of their scales. Yes, they're there to allow movement but, from what I understand, their scales, like the dimples on a golf ball, add to their efficient movement. Instead of wittering on about a lightweight bit of sticky backed aluminium foil, why not bring about real change in the form of paint / surface design and manipulation?
Edited by Zombie on Friday 14th July 00:57
DonkeyApple said:
AER said:
robinessex said:
From the Top Gear interview:-
He tells me about one customer, an American lady, who’s designing her entire house with the Valkyrie as its centrepiece.
Can't even think of a suitable response to that!
October 1929..He tells me about one customer, an American lady, who’s designing her entire house with the Valkyrie as its centrepiece.
Can't even think of a suitable response to that!
NRS said:
Mike348 said:
If I was AM I'd only consider building Valkyrie if it were both eligible and competitive in endurance racing. I'm no expert but manufacturers need to build at least 100 cars, limited to 1245kg with 5.5L NA or 4.0L forced induction engines. Valkyrie doesn’t currently comply here bar build-run but it could, however, the real elephant in the room is its fuel tank size. In no CEO but I wouldn't have signed-off a project like this unless it could be proven to win endurance races, as the Ford GT was I speculate.
That's probably why you're not CEO... The main thing is to make money for the company. You've effectively got a modern day F1 in that one of the best designers in F1 is making what seems to be his dream car. Presumably it is sold out already. Yet you would not go for it because it (might) not be going for endurance racing? Also it would be a bit pointless for endurance racing as the cars are effectively equalised, so there is no point in designing a "dream car" that then is so modified to fit a series that is in theory neutralised in performance.They have all been sold so the CEO has done his job to a certain extent.
If it's been profitable, lovely. But of its being used as a sort of loss leader to promote the 'cooking' models - if Aston do such things - time will tell.
But I agree with your broad principle
A completely pointless bathtub of carbonfibre which is destined for nothing greater than storage under cover in the garages of the billionaires who are going to buy this thing.
What a fabulous waste of time and effort to produce this car is. No more than a trinket for the super wealthy to enhance thier own egos and willy sizes in front of thier mates. Too fast to remotely start exploiting on a public road, too valuable to risk exploiting fully on a race track and almost certainly beyond the skill of it's owners as well.
If ever there was a totum to the ludicrous state of some parts of the current hypercar industry this is it.
What a fabulous waste of time and effort to produce this car is. No more than a trinket for the super wealthy to enhance thier own egos and willy sizes in front of thier mates. Too fast to remotely start exploiting on a public road, too valuable to risk exploiting fully on a race track and almost certainly beyond the skill of it's owners as well.
If ever there was a totum to the ludicrous state of some parts of the current hypercar industry this is it.
Edited by corozin on Friday 14th July 06:35
JD said:
Surely this is going to be horribly uncomfortable to drive for any length of time at all? if you look at the brightened photo it looks like you face the pillar and your legs squeeze down to the right.
Yup. You're not going to drive across Siberia in it and as Max so rightly points out, it's going to be pretty useless as a shopping car with so little boot space and I suspect parking will just be plain awkward. My guess is that owners will just end up using it at circuits and private tracks where fuel is freely available etc.
You'd be a tool to buy this instead of a 120D which is better to park, has a bigger boot, better fuel economy, probably faster once you've mapped it and definitely makes you look much more of a winner to strangers.
I'm with Max on this. This is a pointless shopping car and Newey, like Murray, should have consulted with Max before starting out so as to avoid making these school boy errors.
DonkeyApple said:
I'm with Max on this. This is a pointless shopping car and Newey, like Murray, should have consulted with Max before starting out so as to avoid making these school boy errors.
I just found Max's dream car. It solves the issue of a lack of space for the driver/passenger, solves the fuel range, solves the issue with the car magically flying off the road into the scenery:
Zombie said:
It looks like a fish.
Fishes are sculpted to move through water efficiently, like the car but there's so much more to it at a microscopic level in terms of their scales. Yes, they're there to allow movement but, from what I understand, their scales, like the dimples on a golf ball, add to their efficient movement. Instead of wittering on about a lightweight bit of sticky backed aluminium foil, why not bring about real change in the form of paint / surface design and manipulation?
I think picking on the poster rather than the post is too often used as an excuse to avoid a debate, but do you really think you know more about aero than Newey? If things like dimples would help do you not think they'd already be used in F1 where anything that gives the smallest gain is done? Perhaps you could reply saying it's the cost/ difficulty in designing the bodywork like that - in which case if they can't justify it in the competitive environment of F1 why would they do it on a road car?Fishes are sculpted to move through water efficiently, like the car but there's so much more to it at a microscopic level in terms of their scales. Yes, they're there to allow movement but, from what I understand, their scales, like the dimples on a golf ball, add to their efficient movement. Instead of wittering on about a lightweight bit of sticky backed aluminium foil, why not bring about real change in the form of paint / surface design and manipulation?
Edited by Zombie on Friday 14th July 00:57
corozin said:
A completely pointless bathtub of carbonfibre which is destined for nothing greater than storage under cover in the garages of the billionaires who are going to buy this thing.
What a fabulous waste of time and effort to produce this car is. No more than a trinket for the super wealthy to enhance thier own egos and willy sizes in front of thier mates. Too fast to remotely start exploiting on a public road, too valuable to risk exploiting fully on a race track and almost certainly beyond the skill of it's owners as well.
If ever there was a totum to the ludicrous state of some parts of the current hypercar industry this is it.
Why do you have a VR6 version? Presumably it is just to show off, and most of the owners will not have the skill to get the max performance out of the car etc. A random member of the public could easily justify similar comments about you not going for the most bog standard version - this is just a much more extreme example. Just different people draw the line at different places. Seeing as it seems at least 2 PHers are on the list for one that are "proper" users of their previous hypercars then it's not just the Harrod's brigade that has one. If anything, the focus of the car being so extreme will put off most posers I'd imagine. What a fabulous waste of time and effort to produce this car is. No more than a trinket for the super wealthy to enhance thier own egos and willy sizes in front of thier mates. Too fast to remotely start exploiting on a public road, too valuable to risk exploiting fully on a race track and almost certainly beyond the skill of it's owners as well.
If ever there was a totum to the ludicrous state of some parts of the current hypercar industry this is it.
Edited by corozin on Friday 14th July 06:35
As a petrol head I think it is brilliant that somebody is producing a car like this.
But, as an engineer, it is so horribly compromised that is only ever going to bea garage ornament, and that upsets the petrol head in me.
The McLaren F1 was so popular because it was designed to be the worlds best sports cars, as a result it was compact, fast and very useable at the same time. Seated three, with luggage space.
And let's face it, it is not a looker is it? I find myself wondering two things: 1) Would people be more accepting if it was more conventionally pretty, even if that made it slightly slower. 2) Does the Red Bull connection put people off.
But, as an engineer, it is so horribly compromised that is only ever going to bea garage ornament, and that upsets the petrol head in me.
The McLaren F1 was so popular because it was designed to be the worlds best sports cars, as a result it was compact, fast and very useable at the same time. Seated three, with luggage space.
And let's face it, it is not a looker is it? I find myself wondering two things: 1) Would people be more accepting if it was more conventionally pretty, even if that made it slightly slower. 2) Does the Red Bull connection put people off.
Megaflow said:
But, as an engineer, it is so horribly compromised that is only ever going to bea garage ornament, and that upsets the petrol head in me.
How can you possibly know that unless you are involved in the production of this car and are using this forum to vent at the people who pay your wages?1) The vast majority of PH are just miserable b
ds especially when it comes to any car that's British, look at the constant whining on the new TVR thread to see that. If this car had a Ferrari badge it'd be seen as the second coming on here and the most beautiful car in the world.
2) If someone is put off by the Red Bull F1 team and Adrian Newey being connected to one of the most extreme production cars ever then they're really not the target market.
Fortunately not only are they all sold already but there's a long list in an office at Gaydon of alternative buyers who want a car if someone was to pull out of the purchase.
ds especially when it comes to any car that's British, look at the constant whining on the new TVR thread to see that. If this car had a Ferrari badge it'd be seen as the second coming on here and the most beautiful car in the world. 2) If someone is put off by the Red Bull F1 team and Adrian Newey being connected to one of the most extreme production cars ever then they're really not the target market.
Fortunately not only are they all sold already but there's a long list in an office at Gaydon of alternative buyers who want a car if someone was to pull out of the purchase.
PhantomPH said:
Megaflow said:
But, as an engineer, it is so horribly compromised that is only ever going to bea garage ornament, and that upsets the petrol head in me.
How can you possibly know that unless you are involved in the production of this car and are using this forum to vent at the people who pay your wages?All cars are "compromised". It just depends on the use you want it for. This will never be a daily driver, but then even the F1 isn't despite it being more practical. Same goes for cheap stuff like an MX-5 - that is far more practical, yet how many that are made are used as an one garage car due to the compromises of not having more seats etc? Does that make them a failure?
The classic dilemma. The engineer wants to design it according to all the rules of engineering, the stylist wants it to look fantastic, and the production engineer wants it cheap (relatively ) and easy to manufacture. Oh dear, real world car manufacturing. And, this is what happens to ALL cars designed, it’s the way the car industry works. The only difference with this project, is Mr Newey may get his way a bit more ! But I do wish it was bit better looking.
All sold, waiting list. Build slot on the market. https://www.knightinternational.net/viewid-3701 How long before the speculators, after delivery, put them on the market, and how much. I've heard there maybe a clause about selling on though. Ought to be about driving them as well !!!
robinessex said:
All sold, waiting list. Build slot on the market. https://www.knightinternational.net/viewid-3701 How long before the speculators, after delivery, put them on the market, and how much. I've heard there maybe a clause about selling on though. Ought to be about driving them as well !!!
I read for the first "x" years you can only sell it at a loss back to Aston. But not sure how it is written - is it just they won't sell you another car in future, or something more strict legally.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff