IS THIS THE NEXT VANTAGE ENGINE ?
Discussion
Certain aspects of that AMG engine are possible, though as a whole I would have thought No. Fitting a new model Aston Martin Vantage with an engine that is already on its last legs technology wise would not be the way forward for the company . Can you imagine the bad press? I am convinced that the first offering will be a 4 ltr V8 , twin turbo, with cylinder de activation and the very latest stop start. It will have upwards of 500 BHP , 30MPG and the car as a whole will weigh no more than 1500 KGMS. Then there will be the 5ltr version!! 
Yes, makes good sense Rob.
I winced when I read, 'the very latest stop start'.
The very latest eh. On everyday transport then OK, but for sports cars I would hate to have the feature.
I have an answer ready, when people ask me the stupid question, "Does it use much petrol?" I last filled it three months ago, so the fuel economy is quite good.
Molly's new Polo GT has stop start. Honestly you would not notice it were it not for actually hearing the car start. It also has cylinder deactivation , now this is clever and the way forward. When it chimes in or should I say down to two cylinders it is unnoticeable . 70 mph on the motorway and it is on 2 cylinders and recording 64mpg. On a recent journey of 90 miles which included cruising at 80 mph and town work it returned an average of 52 mpg. Plus road tax is Nil!
Aston Martin's new Vantage engine needs more power, torque and economy to attract a whole new audience.
Aston Martin's new Vantage engine needs more power, torque and economy to attract a whole new audience.
Wife's Boxster has it (stop start) and to be honest it's transparent in use. If she wanted to it can be turned off anyway so not a problem. Porsche also have a coast facility where the transmission disengages in certain circumstances when cruising, reducing power requirement and fuel too. Now that IS a litle strange when it kicks in!
You've all heard this from me before, but I posted this in response to that article:
It's a HORRIBLE idea!!!
This is precisely what is potentially wrong with the AMG deal -- AMG engines just dropped into an Aston. From the perspective of this long-time Aston enthusiast and owner of 4+ years, this is one of the worst things that could happen to Aston Martin. I'd take my current 4.7L Aston-engined V8V over a Benz-engined "Aston" every single time.
It's different with a car like Pagani, which doesn't have 100 years of heritage. Paganis have always used Benz engines, and they still do -- but it's not an existing AMG engine just dropped into a Pagani.
David Brown chose not to drop other companies' engines into Astons -- he said such a car "wouldn't be an Aston Martin." Victor Gauntlett chose not to drop other companies' engines into Astons. Astons are "thoroughbreds," he said, and using someone else's engine would completely undermine that. AMG-engined "Astons" would be the end of Aston Martin IMO, and would ensure that I would not buy another new one.
The AMG deal must result in bespoke Aston engines, as the press release says it will. "Bespoke" to the same degree as the current engines (to reiterate, the current V8 is "based on" the Jag V8 but has its own Aston-only block, crank, bearings, rods, pistons, rings, cams, valves, heads, etc.) would suffice for me.
For me, it’s not only about what a car does, it’s also about what it actually is. I have no desire to own a Bentley Conti GT, for example, because underneath (platform, engine, driveline, etc.) it's a Phaeton. I'd love a Mulsanne, though. Similarly, the Rolls Ghost leaves me cold, no matter how great a car it is, as there is too much 7-series in it.
Use M-B’s technology and know-how, use the electronics and emissions tech. Adapt their direct injection, stop-start, etc. Use their engines as a starting point, as was done with the current V8 and V12, and develop Aston-only engines with their own bespoke bore and stroke, crank, bearings, rods, pistons, rings, cams, heads, valves, etc. Don’t just use "retuned versions" of AMG engines, like what Bentley does with Audi engines -- that won't do it. These are expensive, iconic cars. This is Aston Martin – respect that and spend the money to do it right. Ford did with the Vanquish and the current cars, and that strategy made for the best and most successful cars in Aston Martin history. Build on that – don’t throw it away by cheaping out and dropping someone else's engines into Astons. No matter how good those engines may be, they don't belong in an Aston Martin.
BTW, the article understates the 4.7's torque as 321 lbs.ft. If you're making a comparison about torque, at least get the numbers right. It's 346 lbs.ft for the V8V and 361 for the S.
If I want an AMG engine, I'll buy an AMG. When I buy an Aston Martin, I want an Aston Martin engine.
It's a HORRIBLE idea!!!
This is precisely what is potentially wrong with the AMG deal -- AMG engines just dropped into an Aston. From the perspective of this long-time Aston enthusiast and owner of 4+ years, this is one of the worst things that could happen to Aston Martin. I'd take my current 4.7L Aston-engined V8V over a Benz-engined "Aston" every single time.
It's different with a car like Pagani, which doesn't have 100 years of heritage. Paganis have always used Benz engines, and they still do -- but it's not an existing AMG engine just dropped into a Pagani.
David Brown chose not to drop other companies' engines into Astons -- he said such a car "wouldn't be an Aston Martin." Victor Gauntlett chose not to drop other companies' engines into Astons. Astons are "thoroughbreds," he said, and using someone else's engine would completely undermine that. AMG-engined "Astons" would be the end of Aston Martin IMO, and would ensure that I would not buy another new one.
The AMG deal must result in bespoke Aston engines, as the press release says it will. "Bespoke" to the same degree as the current engines (to reiterate, the current V8 is "based on" the Jag V8 but has its own Aston-only block, crank, bearings, rods, pistons, rings, cams, valves, heads, etc.) would suffice for me.
For me, it’s not only about what a car does, it’s also about what it actually is. I have no desire to own a Bentley Conti GT, for example, because underneath (platform, engine, driveline, etc.) it's a Phaeton. I'd love a Mulsanne, though. Similarly, the Rolls Ghost leaves me cold, no matter how great a car it is, as there is too much 7-series in it.
Use M-B’s technology and know-how, use the electronics and emissions tech. Adapt their direct injection, stop-start, etc. Use their engines as a starting point, as was done with the current V8 and V12, and develop Aston-only engines with their own bespoke bore and stroke, crank, bearings, rods, pistons, rings, cams, heads, valves, etc. Don’t just use "retuned versions" of AMG engines, like what Bentley does with Audi engines -- that won't do it. These are expensive, iconic cars. This is Aston Martin – respect that and spend the money to do it right. Ford did with the Vanquish and the current cars, and that strategy made for the best and most successful cars in Aston Martin history. Build on that – don’t throw it away by cheaping out and dropping someone else's engines into Astons. No matter how good those engines may be, they don't belong in an Aston Martin.
BTW, the article understates the 4.7's torque as 321 lbs.ft. If you're making a comparison about torque, at least get the numbers right. It's 346 lbs.ft for the V8V and 361 for the S.
If I want an AMG engine, I'll buy an AMG. When I buy an Aston Martin, I want an Aston Martin engine.
Quite right Speedraser. The product planners know that AM must be different and individual. A twin turbo V8 is available everywhere, so DB have to provide an engine not seen elsewhere (though possibly having some major dimensions based on something current). This could be a development project that has not been passed for DB production - perhaps too expensive to manufacture in volume, but suitable for AM. It also has to compliment the driving characteristics of the current naturally aspirated V8. Perhaps a supercharger/turbocharger combination - though that has been done before, it could have been done better. We may not have too long to wait for more info, as sales are falling away and DB will be keen to capitalise on this collaboration.
john ryan said:
Quite right Speedraser. The product planners know that AM must be different and individual. A twin turbo V8 is available everywhere, so DB have to provide an engine not seen elsewhere (though possibly having some major dimensions based on something current). This could be a development project that has not been passed for DB production - perhaps too expensive to manufacture in volume, but suitable for AM. It also has to compliment the driving characteristics of the current naturally aspirated V8. Perhaps a supercharger/turbocharger combination - though that has been done before, it could have been done better. We may not have too long to wait for more info, as sales are falling away and DB will be keen to capitalise on this collaboration.
I can't imagine trying to be individual for the sake of it will get AM anywhere. To progress, AM will need a partner and to preserve what's left of their pedigree, they will need someone along the lines of AMG/Ricardo, who can supply them with the latest technology and the best product.robgt said:
Molly's new Polo GT has stop start. Honestly you would not notice it were it not for actually hearing the car start. It also has cylinder deactivation , now this is clever and the way forward. When it chimes in or should I say down to two cylinders it is unnoticeable . 70 mph on the motorway and it is on 2 cylinders and recording 64mpg.
On a recent journey of 90 miles which included cruising at 80 mph and town work it returned an average of 52 mpg. Plus road tax is Nil!
You sound like one of my friends. A multi-millionaire but stingy. He drives a Skoda and keeps telling me he has just got 60 mpg, then 65 mpg, or 63mpg. All very boring. On a recent journey of 90 miles which included cruising at 80 mph and town work it returned an average of 52 mpg. Plus road tax is Nil!
Engine designers have done very well regarding fuel consumption lately, and the marketing people have had a field day. Better fuel consumption now sells cars, and it distracts buyers from the main 'hidden' cost, DEPRECIATION.
For my transport cars, all this 'driver aid' stuff is fine (not the automatic handbrake though, which once left me stranded in an Audi). For my Aston Martin, I want a pure drivers car. No automatic this and that, I want to make all the decisions. After all, I can see when it is dusk, so turn on the lights. I can also see when it is foggy. Apparantly, the automatic light switch does not detect fog!
robgt said:
Molly's new Polo GT has stop start. Honestly you would not notice it were it not for actually hearing the car start. It also has cylinder deactivation , now this is clever and the way forward. When it chimes in or should I say down to two cylinders it is unnoticeable . 70 mph on the motorway and it is on 2 cylinders and recording 64mpg. On a recent journey of 90 miles which included cruising at 80 mph and town work it returned an average of 52 mpg. Plus road tax is Nil!
Aston Martin's new Vantage engine needs more power, torque and economy to attract a whole new audience.
I think with sports cats and a thinner back box, you'd really notice it start!Aston Martin's new Vantage engine needs more power, torque and economy to attract a whole new audience.
We had a diesel Golf hire car the other day which has stop/start, and I found it really irritating.
A guy from Lambo talked about it the other day, said it was really hard to engineer, and all their customers instantly turn it off because it's so annoying. It makes the emissions figures look better on paper though, so they had to do it.
Speedraser said:
...
The AMG deal must result in bespoke Aston engines, as the press release says it will. "Bespoke" to the same degree as the current engines (to reiterate, the current V8 is "based on" the Jag V8 but has its own Aston-only block, crank, bearings, rods, pistons, rings, cams, valves, heads, etc.) would suffice for me.....
Whilst I don't generally disagree with you, without the weight of Ford or another major manufacturer behind AM there is no way they'll be able to afford to "bespoke" the engines to that extent IMO. And I cannot see AMG doing it for them without significant cost.The AMG deal must result in bespoke Aston engines, as the press release says it will. "Bespoke" to the same degree as the current engines (to reiterate, the current V8 is "based on" the Jag V8 but has its own Aston-only block, crank, bearings, rods, pistons, rings, cams, valves, heads, etc.) would suffice for me.....
So the question will boil down to "do we want an Aston or not?", or perhaps "are we prepared to pay twice as much for each car?".
Personally I see little wrong with using AMG engines. If they take the electronics (cabin and chassis) and gearbox tech too, and wrap it all up in something new and exciting then fair enough. Far better that than for AM to be wiped out.
My major concern is that I doubt they have the resources to do this either, hence the constant tweaking and fiddling. A Vantage whose major change is to have an AMG engine dropped in it and perhaps some switchgear/vents from the Vanquish2 will not be even close to being good enough, but I have a horrible feeling that might be what gets released.
PiloteAM said:
I think with sports cats and a thinner back box, you'd really notice it start!
We had a diesel Golf hire car the other day which has stop/start, and I found it really irritating.
A guy from Lambo talked about it the other day, said it was really hard to engineer, and all their customers instantly turn it off because it's so annoying. It makes the emissions figures look better on paper though, so they had to do it.
We had a hired Ford Focus petrol one, which caused me to turn it off - it was just bloody annoying.We had a diesel Golf hire car the other day which has stop/start, and I found it really irritating.
A guy from Lambo talked about it the other day, said it was really hard to engineer, and all their customers instantly turn it off because it's so annoying. It makes the emissions figures look better on paper though, so they had to do it.
Speedraser said:
You've all heard this from me before, but I posted this in response to that article:
If I want an AMG engine, I'll buy an AMG. When I buy an Aston Martin, I want an Aston Martin engine.
I didn't know Aston had started to build engines......when did that happen.....I thought they bought them in from a Ford subsidiary in Cologne (V12) and the V8 was an old Jag engine If I want an AMG engine, I'll buy an AMG. When I buy an Aston Martin, I want an Aston Martin engine.
Good points Speedraser.
Whichever engine is the first non-Aston (Ford) to appear, I hope the Morgan method is not used. I know the two companies are not comparable, and maybe Morgan are under some sort of pressure from BMW.
When the engines are received from BMW, Morgan attach a pathetic looking piece of aluminium on to the cast cam cover. The small aluminium plate covers over the letters 'BMW' and carries the label M']organ
(the Delete key is not working) 'Morgan'.
Edited by Jon39 on Wednesday 18th December 17:57
michael gould said:
Speedraser said:
You've all heard this from me before, but I posted this in response to that article:
If I want an AMG engine, I'll buy an AMG. When I buy an Aston Martin, I want an Aston Martin engine.
I didn't know Aston had started to build engines......when did that happen.....I thought they bought them in from a Ford subsidiary in Cologne (V12) and the V8 was an old Jag engine If I want an AMG engine, I'll buy an AMG. When I buy an Aston Martin, I want an Aston Martin engine.
Jon39 said:
Good points Speedraser.
Whichever engine is the first non-Aston (Ford) to appear, I hope the Morgan method is not used. I know the two companies are not comparable, and maybe Morgan are under some sort of pressure from BMW.
When the engines are received from BMW, Morgan attach a pathetic looking piece of aluminium on to the cast cam cover. The small aluminium plate covers over the letters 'BMW' and carries the label M']organ
(the Delete key is not working) 'Morgan'.
I completely agree, but moreover, Morgan never built their own engines. Aston (nearly) always has.Whichever engine is the first non-Aston (Ford) to appear, I hope the Morgan method is not used. I know the two companies are not comparable, and maybe Morgan are under some sort of pressure from BMW.
When the engines are received from BMW, Morgan attach a pathetic looking piece of aluminium on to the cast cam cover. The small aluminium plate covers over the letters 'BMW' and carries the label M']organ
(the Delete key is not working) 'Morgan'.
Edited by Jon39 on Wednesday 18th December 17:57
Firstly, I saw rumours this week (on here?) that the AMG deal had fallen through however someone has written an article in today's FT that a 5% stake is about to be taken by Mercedes in AML
Secondly, stop start is inevitable - as others say it's to pass emission laws, it's not liked by owners and in my Audi, I switch it off. IIRC emission laws mean you can't have it optional to switch on and must have it 'on' upon start up, to then be manually overridden by switching it off
But getting on to the point about 'bespoke' engines, whilst I agree with the vast majority of the sentiment expressed on here, is a lot of this not marketing BS about what degree the engine is adapted by ?
Let's be realistic, AML are not about to start making their own engines in the remotely foreseeable future. Neither will a brand new, ground up, totally exclusive to AML, engine be built by a third party
So AML will have to buy in engines based to one degree on another on existing/future plants that are also used by a.n.other/s
The extent to which any of the examples given are 'bespoke' or have been based/adapted on other/older engines is so arguable, I'm not sure it's particularly relevant. Surely it's far more important to examine how good the engine is than what %age of the engine is unique to AML ?!?
Secondly, stop start is inevitable - as others say it's to pass emission laws, it's not liked by owners and in my Audi, I switch it off. IIRC emission laws mean you can't have it optional to switch on and must have it 'on' upon start up, to then be manually overridden by switching it off
But getting on to the point about 'bespoke' engines, whilst I agree with the vast majority of the sentiment expressed on here, is a lot of this not marketing BS about what degree the engine is adapted by ?
Let's be realistic, AML are not about to start making their own engines in the remotely foreseeable future. Neither will a brand new, ground up, totally exclusive to AML, engine be built by a third party
So AML will have to buy in engines based to one degree on another on existing/future plants that are also used by a.n.other/s
The extent to which any of the examples given are 'bespoke' or have been based/adapted on other/older engines is so arguable, I'm not sure it's particularly relevant. Surely it's far more important to examine how good the engine is than what %age of the engine is unique to AML ?!?
You can always be relied upon for common sense, Jonby.
Perhaps just a few changes, eg. slightly different engine capacity, and other technical 'improvements', would be enough to give the marketing department, some scope to emphasise 'Aston input and individuality'.
jonby said:
... stop start is inevitable - as others say it's to pass emission laws, it's not liked by owners and in my Audi, I switch it off. IIRC emission laws mean you can't have it optional to switch on and must have it 'on' upon start up, to then be manually overridden by switching it off.
Hopefully some electronic / computer boffins will create a little after market circuit, that operates after each engine start (and homage paid to the EU emissions laws), to automatically switch off the stop/start.After all, am doing my best for the environment. My Aston Martin creates less pollution per annum, than an average mileage Ford Fiesta. I also keep planting trees, and that must be worth a few EU brownie points.
Jon39 said:
Hopefully some electronic / computer boffins will create a little after market circuit, that operates after each engine start (and homage paid to the EU emissions laws), to automatically switch off the stop/start.
not sure about the common sense bit but I'll happily take it ! :-)I remember once enquiring about the way the sports switch on V12V works being reversed for my car, so it's in sport unless you override it. It was refused !
IIRC, emissions, fuel economy, exhaust noise levels & other related tests are based on what happens when you start the engine, without pressing any other buttons before the testing is then done. So cancelling stop start, engaging sports modes, louder exhausts, etc are all options that have to be selected by the driver (rather than being automatic) post start up
The manufacturers build the engines & their ECUs to pass and gain optimum results in the tests, which I believe can even influence the engine mapping in respect of what happens at certain rev levels. It's a sad state of affairs because it means instead of getting the most efficient car in real world conditions, you get a car geared towards the test (which is not real world conditions) and you get meaningless figures for measures like mpg
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff