RE: 'It was worse than I thought' | Moers on Aston

[hornbaek]

Enjoyed reading that and am genuinely pleased that AML has received the CEO it deserves to keep the brand alive. On another note. Just how disastrous was Andy Palmer for AML and what a terrible decision to take the company public.

[TWPC]

That's a really fascinating interview. Great job, PH!

I realise a new CEO is bound to highlight the chaos he faced on arrival but it is sad to hear about the disorganisation at Aston in the recent past. It's really interesting to read about the changes to production that have been made and about the silo-isation of the business. I'm sure many of us have experienced the communication issues at work that come from people protecting or not wishing to discuss their own patch... Hopefully Mr Moers is true to his word and is getting it fixed.

After all the press commentary over the years about how great the AMG 4.0l V8 sounds, it is hilarious to read that it has been electronically enhanced all along.

[BigChiefmuffinAgain]

He certainly is making the right noises, and it is clear that the previous management had lost the plot a bit near the end, but I still think they have a lot of struggles ahead. The DBX is doing OK but no more - they say it handles the best of all the SUVs, but this is very subjective and buyers in this sector are often more sold on bold performance numbers, for which it is currently lacking. Certainly residuals on the Urus look far stronger. He did suggest they were going to do something about this.

The worry is that there is a new Cayenne and Ferrari just round the corner, while the Urus is soon due a refresh , and you wonder how that's going to hit them....

[jwwbowe]

Good luck to him, from the little we know he sounds like a good fit for the role.

Big challenges ahead i.e. the same every ICE performance car manufacturer faces, making a EV have a sound that makes you smile. However probably most important for Aston above its rivals, if they don’t look and sound great what’s the point. Everyone was bashing BMW M yesterday for working on the sound of an EV, but at least they are giving it a go.

[thelostboy]

Interesting article.

I think Aston has been in a tricky position, much like people have exchanged saloons for SUVs, people don't a big GT cruiser anymore as modern supercars are so usable.

Saw the mid-engined concept cars at Geneva and I was blown away - they looked incredible to me. I'm also a realist and perfectly happy with the AMG engines.

[nicfaz]

sidesauce said:

chelme said:

NFC 85 Vette said:

chelme said:

"In every respect Ferrari is the market leader in mid-engined programmes; if I could achieve that level, I'm happy," he says, "I know there is a huge challenge, but for the mid-engined programme for sure it is Ferrari. They stand for that; it is their very purpose. And if you can catch up with these guys, what an unbelievable journey it would be"

Won't achieve this using crate engines from AMG. Glad the V12 will see some use though.

That point was addressed in that future V8 engines aren't crate engines from AMG. In fact, they've never been - the litmus test here is try taking a current Vantage to a Mercedes dealer for an engine related issue; there's too many changes to the engine that it's not something a Merc dealer can help you with. The use of the M177 engine is almost always over simplified and it's assumed that it just arrives in a box and gets thrown between the suspension turrets. It's never been like that, and the way the technical partnership now works, the next batch of cars will have V8 engines built how AML wants them, not a modified, tailored version. I don't doubt that this still wont be good enough for those demanding an in-house developed engine, but life isn't that simple anymore.

I appreciate your point about purity, and there's a belief that if you don't build your own engine, you're not building a 'proper thoroughbred' car, but the AE31 V12 is very much a 'proper' engine yet people moan about it being turbocharged. Aston's walking a tight rope of trying to be a low volume, independent car maker at a time where nearly everyone else in the game has a benevolent parent company to pay the bills. IMO they've produced some outstanding cars all things considered.

It's a pity the TM01 has officially been canned, but in hindsight, spending that much money on an all-new engine that would only come to market in 2023 and be retired from service 6 or 7 years later - it doesn't make good financial sense even if it was an antidote to the 'purity' issue noted above.

I like your response, though I do think differently. The AMG unit in the AM was the same bar ecu and exhausts being changed to my knowledge.

The unit will differ in the mid engines cars more as the intallation of the hybrid system will no doubt demand this, however I am not yet convinced this will be so different to what is there. Sadly however one tries to reason (using logic and financial justification) the allure (however illogical and subjective this may be) of a manufacturer successfully building its own engines will not be matched imho.

This will change with the advent of pure EV no doubt, when (hopefully) everyone will be on a more level playing field...this will no doubt be levelling down for everyone concerned bar those who started out at the EV level.

I disagree. The vast majority of the market Aston is aimed at simply do not care where the engine comes from. You're a purist and I get that, but I don't think your view reflects the market as a whole, at all.

Speaking to a few ex Aston owners, it was the interior that bothered them. If they got into an Aston in a showroom and inside it looked like a Merc, then they didn't sign on the dotted line. No mention of the engine, so I think you're right.

[hufggfg]

TWPC said:

After all the press commentary over the years about how great the AMG 4.0l V8 sounds, it is hilarious to read that it has been electronically enhanced all along.

I'm not sure that he's saying it's electronically enhanced through the speakers. I think he's saying that the sound is not "natural" ie they didn't just tune the engine for it's power characteristics and then just leave whatever sound that made.

I don't think it's a surprise at all that manufacturers actively tune the way the engine works with all their electronic trickery to make it produce the pops, bangs etc that they make this days.

That said, I do think to those of us that do enjoy the noise, there's a fundamental difference between:

a) fully natural sound - an engine tuned for power that happens to make the pops and bangs etc (almost certainly because it's inefficient in some way)
b) a "tuned natural" sound - mapping the engine (and other tuning) with specific sound characteristics in mind
c) artificial sound - just making the sound through the speakers

I really want (a). I can handle (b) at times because I realise that it allows a big step forwards in other areas (power, efficiency), but I have zero desire to have a car that does (c). I'd rather electric cars just made their natural sound that trying to fake engine noises.

[dukebox9reg]

chelme said:

"In every respect Ferrari is the market leader in mid-engined programmes; if I could achieve that level, I'm happy," he says, "I know there is a huge challenge, but for the mid-engined programme for sure it is Ferrari. They stand for that; it is their very purpose. And if you can catch up with these guys, what an unbelievable journey it would be"

Won't achieve this using crate engines from AMG. Glad the V12 will see some use though.

Pagani do alright out of it

[redroadster]

Front mid engined just like merc gtr why chase lambo and ferrari, offer amazing sumptuous interiors and classic timeless styling, James bond cool stuff, that's all that's needed roads are too busy for ultimate performance give cars presence and great noises to turn heads.

[chelme]

sidesauce said:

chelme said:

NFC 85 Vette said:

chelme said:

"In every respect Ferrari is the market leader in mid-engined programmes; if I could achieve that level, I'm happy," he says, "I know there is a huge challenge, but for the mid-engined programme for sure it is Ferrari. They stand for that; it is their very purpose. And if you can catch up with these guys, what an unbelievable journey it would be"

Won't achieve this using crate engines from AMG. Glad the V12 will see some use though.

That point was addressed in that future V8 engines aren't crate engines from AMG. In fact, they've never been - the litmus test here is try taking a current Vantage to a Mercedes dealer for an engine related issue; there's too many changes to the engine that it's not something a Merc dealer can help you with. The use of the M177 engine is almost always over simplified and it's assumed that it just arrives in a box and gets thrown between the suspension turrets. It's never been like that, and the way the technical partnership now works, the next batch of cars will have V8 engines built how AML wants them, not a modified, tailored version. I don't doubt that this still wont be good enough for those demanding an in-house developed engine, but life isn't that simple anymore.

I appreciate your point about purity, and there's a belief that if you don't build your own engine, you're not building a 'proper thoroughbred' car, but the AE31 V12 is very much a 'proper' engine yet people moan about it being turbocharged. Aston's walking a tight rope of trying to be a low volume, independent car maker at a time where nearly everyone else in the game has a benevolent parent company to pay the bills. IMO they've produced some outstanding cars all things considered.

It's a pity the TM01 has officially been canned, but in hindsight, spending that much money on an all-new engine that would only come to market in 2023 and be retired from service 6 or 7 years later - it doesn't make good financial sense even if it was an antidote to the 'purity' issue noted above.

I like your response, though I do think differently. The AMG unit in the AM was the same bar ecu and exhausts being changed to my knowledge.

The unit will differ in the mid engines cars more as the intallation of the hybrid system will no doubt demand this, however I am not yet convinced this will be so different to what is there. Sadly however one tries to reason (using logic and financial justification) the allure (however illogical and subjective this may be) of a manufacturer successfully building its own engines will not be matched imho.

This will change with the advent of pure EV no doubt, when (hopefully) everyone will be on a more level playing field...this will no doubt be levelling down for everyone concerned bar those who started out at the EV level.

I disagree. The vast majority of the market Aston is aimed at simply do not care where the engine comes from. You're a purist and I get that, but I don't think your view reflects the market as a whole, at all.

I know a few AM owners who agree with me. They form part of the market who chose not to bother getting the latest Vantage.

[chelme]

dukebox9reg said:

chelme said:

"In every respect Ferrari is the market leader in mid-engined programmes; if I could achieve that level, I'm happy," he says, "I know there is a huge challenge, but for the mid-engined programme for sure it is Ferrari. They stand for that; it is their very purpose. And if you can catch up with these guys, what an unbelievable journey it would be"

Won't achieve this using crate engines from AMG. Glad the V12 will see some use though.

Pagani do alright out of it

Pagani have exclusive use of the 6.0 litre turbo and 7.3 NA unit in the Zonda. Those engines are not exactly in a C, E and G Class are they?

If anyhting, having shelf engine dilutes the brand's usp, just like installing another brands electronic architecture lock stock.

AM just seems a mediocre coachbuilder at the moment. Not a fully fledged manufacturer, or a super sports coachbuilder like Pagani, who pride themselves with using exclusively designed and engineered high value parts for almost every part of the car.

This matters to enough people, who have chosen not to go back to the brand post Bez.

[samoht]

oilit said:

Wasn’t it once said by Ferrari that you are buying an engine and getting rest of the car/ a body for free? Folklore suggests it was in response to poor quality - but I am sure someone will be along to correct me on this !

If that rumour is true, then I wonder what the value prop is for AM?

You're buying the ability to roll up at the pub looking like James Bond, everything else is incidental?

[chelme]

sidesauce said:

chelme said:

NFC 85 Vette said:

chelme said:

"In every respect Ferrari is the market leader in mid-engined programmes; if I could achieve that level, I'm happy," he says, "I know there is a huge challenge, but for the mid-engined programme for sure it is Ferrari. They stand for that; it is their very purpose. And if you can catch up with these guys, what an unbelievable journey it would be"

Won't achieve this using crate engines from AMG. Glad the V12 will see some use though.

That point was addressed in that future V8 engines aren't crate engines from AMG. In fact, they've never been - the litmus test here is try taking a current Vantage to a Mercedes dealer for an engine related issue; there's too many changes to the engine that it's not something a Merc dealer can help you with. The use of the M177 engine is almost always over simplified and it's assumed that it just arrives in a box and gets thrown between the suspension turrets. It's never been like that, and the way the technical partnership now works, the next batch of cars will have V8 engines built how AML wants them, not a modified, tailored version. I don't doubt that this still wont be good enough for those demanding an in-house developed engine, but life isn't that simple anymore.

I appreciate your point about purity, and there's a belief that if you don't build your own engine, you're not building a 'proper thoroughbred' car, but the AE31 V12 is very much a 'proper' engine yet people moan about it being turbocharged. Aston's walking a tight rope of trying to be a low volume, independent car maker at a time where nearly everyone else in the game has a benevolent parent company to pay the bills. IMO they've produced some outstanding cars all things considered.

It's a pity the TM01 has officially been canned, but in hindsight, spending that much money on an all-new engine that would only come to market in 2023 and be retired from service 6 or 7 years later - it doesn't make good financial sense even if it was an antidote to the 'purity' issue noted above.

I like your response, though I do think differently. The AMG unit in the AM was the same bar ecu and exhausts being changed to my knowledge.

The unit will differ in the mid engines cars more as the intallation of the hybrid system will no doubt demand this, however I am not yet convinced this will be so different to what is there. Sadly however one tries to reason (using logic and financial justification) the allure (however illogical and subjective this may be) of a manufacturer successfully building its own engines will not be matched imho.

This will change with the advent of pure EV no doubt, when (hopefully) everyone will be on a more level playing field...this will no doubt be levelling down for everyone concerned bar those who started out at the EV level.

I disagree. The vast majority of the market Aston is aimed at simply do not care where the engine comes from. You're a purist and I get that, but I don't think your view reflects the market as a whole, at all.

How do you know what the "vast majority" of the market cares about? Did you carry out market research? If so, when, who did you put the research paper to, what questions were asked? Or are you just opining. Its fine if you are, just curious.

What I do know is that I can count on two hands at least, the number of "manufacturers" since the 60s who tried to compete at this level with Ferrari and Porsche, peoducing high quality coachbuit chassis albeit openly using crate engines, and they all became either bit players in the market or went bust.

Also, the CEO would not be speaking of, (as was Andy Palmer) of the AMG engine being "unique" to AM (despite the obvious inference that it is not) if they did not think/fear that having a AMG engine lock stock from Mercedes would cause a number of their customers to turn away?

This is sufficient evidence for me, not to mention the number of AM owners I have met who voiced disappointment at having Mercedes engines and hardware.

Edited by chelme on Wednesday 12th May 16:57

Edited by chelme on Wednesday 12th May 16:59

[Xfe]

Don't want to say it but sounds like Moers has a much better handle on how to turn around the company than the previous management. His straightforwardness is also refreshing in an age of buzzwords and meaningless corporate drivel.

I appreciate the point on synthetic fuels, at least Moers is open to them and I'm sure we all similarly hope we get the breakthrough/viability in time.

[Speedraser]

To all those who said I was being a pessimist, don't worry, Moers, Stroll and Daimler know how to take care of Aston, they said. Now, Moers has officially killed the new Aston Martin V6. This is just the beginning. Shared platforms are coming. Aston will be reduced to a Badge-on-a-Benz. They are in the process of murdering one of the all-time-great marques. This is not Aston surviving -- this is Aston dying. No, it's worse; being reduced ultimately to a pretty, luxurious Benz-engined and -- just wait -- Benz-platformed so-called "Aston" is worse than letting the marque call it quits with its dignity (mostly) intact.

Moers' claim that he most wants to go after Ferrari is spectacularly arrogant and absurd. Ferraris are Ferraris -- they don't use bought-in off-the-shelf engines. Nor do they use mix-and-match bits from someone else's shelf to create a "bespoke" engine. I love Astons. I'll never buy an "Aston" with a Benz engine (mix-and-match AMG bits is still an AMG engine, not an Aston engine). To compete with Ferrari while using someone else's engine is hilariously arrogant, and completely absurd. When Ferrari buys in someone else's engine, then, and only then, would this notion make any sense. Let's be clear: Moers' claim that Aston's V6 wouldn't be emissions-compliant is absolute BS, a flat-out lie. He previously admitted that he was considering dropping Aston's V6 because of his easy access to cheaper AMG parts. It's his shameful and transparent attempt to justify and excuse the end of Aston Martin engines. Benz platforms are coming next (he also previously alluded to considering that).

This is an automotive atrocity in process.

[ManyMotors]

We need AM to compete in order to make other makes better. Best of good luck, AM!

[Speedraser]

NFC 85 Vette said:

That point was addressed in that future V8 engines aren't crate engines from AMG. In fact, they've never been - the litmus test here is try taking a current Vantage to a Mercedes dealer for an engine related issue; there's too many changes to the engine that it's not something a Merc dealer can help you with. The use of the M177 engine is almost always over simplified and it's assumed that it just arrives in a box and gets thrown between the suspension turrets. It's never been like that, and the way the technical partnership now works, the next batch of cars will have V8 engines built how AML wants them, not a modified, tailored version. I don't doubt that this still wont be good enough for those demanding an in-house developed engine, but life isn't that simple anymore.

I appreciate your point about purity, and there's a belief that if you don't build your own engine, you're not building a 'proper thoroughbred' car, but the AE31 V12 is very much a 'proper' engine yet people moan about it being turbocharged. Aston's walking a tight rope of trying to be a low volume, independent car maker at a time where nearly everyone else in the game has a benevolent parent company to pay the bills. IMO they've produced some outstanding cars all things considered.

It's a pity the TM01 has officially been canned, but in hindsight, spending that much money on an all-new engine that would only come to market in 2023 and be retired from service 6 or 7 years later - it doesn't make good financial sense even if it was an antidote to the 'purity' issue noted above.

The AMG engine itself in the current Vantage and DB11 is completely unchanged in any way for Aston Martin. Few if any people here have said it could be removed as is from a C63 and simply bolted in to a Vantage. It was adapted to fit into the car, and the intake, exhaust, sump were changed. The actual engine -- block, crank, bearings, conrods, pistons, rings, cams, valves, heads -- is completely unchanged. I'd be delighted to be proven wrong, or convinced otherwise, but I don't think a "unique" combination of AMG bits will make an Aston engine. And no, if you read my previous comments, I've been very clear that I do not think that an engine must be clean-sheet to be an Aston engine. Yet we almost had exactly that with the TM01. Dumping it at this point is an absolute travesty.

[Speedraser]

chelme said:

dukebox9reg said:

chelme said:

"In every respect Ferrari is the market leader in mid-engined programmes; if I could achieve that level, I'm happy," he says, "I know there is a huge challenge, but for the mid-engined programme for sure it is Ferrari. They stand for that; it is their very purpose. And if you can catch up with these guys, what an unbelievable journey it would be"

Won't achieve this using crate engines from AMG. Glad the V12 will see some use though.

Pagani do alright out of it

Pagani have exclusive use of the 6.0 litre turbo and 7.3 NA unit in the Zonda. Those engines are not exactly in a C, E and G Class are they?

If anything, having shelf engine dilutes the brand's usp, just like installing another brands electronic architecture lock stock.

AM just seems a mediocre coachbuilder at the moment. Not a fully fledged manufacturer, or a super sports coachbuilder like Pagani, who pride themselves with using exclusively designed and engineered high value parts for almost every part of the car.

This matters to enough people, who have chosen not to go back to the brand post Bez.

As someone who has been a lifelong Aston Martin enthusiast, and who bought his first one almost 12 years ago: The AMG engine is an absolute deal-breaker for many people. It is for me, it is for many on this forum, it is for many other Aston owners and potential owners I know personally. It is a frequent discussion point. A shared platform would also be a deal-breaker (maybe even more so than the engine). This matters. As much as any other factor in the purchase decision. It goes straight to the core of desirability. It goes straight to the core of credibility. A Benz-powered (or platformed) "Aston" comprehensively defeats the point of an Aston Martin, and such a car is no more an Aston than a Benz-powered (or platformed) Ferrari would be a Ferrari. No one says this is easy or cheap -- it isn't easy or cheap to make an Aston Martin. Make Aston Martins. Or don't bother.

[sidewinder500]

Speedraser said:

To all those who said I was being a pessimist, don't worry, Moers, Stroll and Daimler know how to take care of Aston, they said. Now, Moers has officially killed the new Aston Martin V6. This is just the beginning. Shared platforms are coming. Aston will be reduced to a Badge-on-a-Benz. They are in the process of murdering one of the all-time-great marques. This is not Aston surviving -- this is Aston dying. No, it's worse; being reduced ultimately to a pretty, luxurious Benz-engined and -- just wait -- Benz-platformed so-called "Aston" is worse than letting the marque call it quits with its dignity (mostly) intact.

Moers' claim that he most wants to go after Ferrari is spectacularly arrogant and absurd. Ferraris are Ferraris -- they don't use bought-in off-the-shelf engines. Nor do they use mix-and-match bits from someone else's shelf to create a "bespoke" engine. I love Astons. I'll never buy an "Aston" with a Benz engine (mix-and-match AMG bits is still an AMG engine, not an Aston engine). To compete with Ferrari while using someone else's engine is hilariously arrogant, and completely absurd. When Ferrari buys in someone else's engine, then, and only then, would this notion make any sense. Let's be clear: Moers' claim that Aston's V6 wouldn't be emissions-compliant is absolute BS, a flat-out lie. He previously admitted that he was considering dropping Aston's V6 because of his easy access to cheaper AMG parts. It's his shameful and transparent attempt to justify and excuse the end of Aston Martin engines. Benz platforms are coming next (he also previously alluded to considering that).

This is an automotive atrocity in process.

Very much so, I think.

When Ford took over, they at least understood through Walter Hayes, that you have an identity to preserve, much more than to sharpen up the building process and to have a baby-Aston (DB7...) to get a wider customer base. OK, they used a lot of Jaguar-based mechanicals, never lied about that, but they definitely nailed the identity thing with the looks, the heritage thing etc, even if the product was mediocre at first, at least a little bit.
What you hear from Moers is the usual corporate talk, Ferrari being the leader, the target blah blah blah. They have to meet THEIR targets, return of invest, numbers built, broader acceptance etc al. Being clinical germans I suspect they planned this thoroughly and know what to do to succeed financially.
What is left from Aston's heritage is to be seen... I strongly feel with speedraiser, there will be nothing left except the name

[NGK210]

I wish they’d developed the relationship with Toyota: bespoke-ish engines designed by either Cosworth or Prodrive, but based on Lexus engine blocks; Lexus-build principles / efficiency; Lexus-type quality control; Lexus-grade under skin components / electrics.
In short, Aston’s charm and style + Lexus’s bombproof reliability = a world beater!