AML - NEW UK SALES

[nickv12]

Thanks, Jon, for the profit and loss table. Or nigh-on “loss and loss” table!

I recall Mr Palmer saying that he didn’t like seeing the VH platform Vantages going down the production line as each represented a loss (to paraphrase). I think they were over-engineered, which is obviously good for long-term owners.

I suspect that modern Astons remain relatively over-engineered for their volume. And therefore less profitable. Again, good for owners, less good for the company.

To me, this is reflected in the lack of persisting and significant stories of woe by owners. A little paint bubbling can be a tad annoying, but nothing compared to repeating engine issues (erm… Porsche).

[Djit]

Totally agree Nick. I recall my first VH V12, the sales person commenting the engine was relatively unstressed compared to its potential output, as seen in the race cars with the same block. Further confirmation came from the recent article posted here from the engine creator - building longevity into the design. I think this bodes well longterm for the last of the V12 n/a’s.

[nickv12]

Djit said:

Totally agree Nick. I recall my first VH V12, the sales person commenting the engine was relatively unstressed compared to its potential output, as seen in the race cars with the same block. Further confirmation came from the recent article posted here from the engine creator - building longevity into the design. I think this bodes well longterm for the last of the V12 n/a’s.

Yep! That article was really good and ensured a feel-good factor

Normally, motor racing never makes any sense to me in terms of relating to car sales. But to see that the Vantage could consistently ensure 24hr sessions and often come out the winner made me realise what robust machines they really are.

(Side comment of not getting the F1 relationship to sales apart from a badge being flashed by occasionally…)

[LTP]

Djit said:

Totally agree Nick. I recall my first VH V12, the sales person commenting the engine was relatively unstressed compared to its potential output, as seen in the race cars with the same block. Further confirmation came from the recent article posted here from the engine creator - building longevity into the design. I think this bodes well longterm for the last of the V12 n/a’s.

I think the only real Achilles' heel of the V12 is the infamous catalyst ingestion from prolonged and severe misfire. Were I ever in a position to move to a V12 VH Aston, the very first job would be off to Bamford Rose to have the primary cats removed and the ECU tweaked to avoid the ensuing "check engine" lights.

[AdamV12V]

LTP said:

I think the only real Achilles' heel of the V12 is the infamous catalyst ingestion from prolonged and severe misfire. Were I ever in a position to move to a V12 VH Aston, the very first job would be off to Bamford Rose to have the primary cats removed and the ECU tweaked to avoid the ensuing "check engine" lights.

You need to do more research, it's only ever happened a couple of times, it's just it is endlessly pedalled by BR to drum up business. Total overkill of cost to mitigate vs risk vs repair cost should it actually happen.

[LTP]

AdamV12V said:

You need to do more research, it's only ever happened a couple of times, it's just it is endlessly pedalled by BR to drum up business. Total overkill of cost to mitigate vs risk vs repair cost should it actually happen.

I think you should research. There's a vanquish being discussed over on the AMOC forum that has experienced this. One of the more technical members over there wrote about a DB7 that had it. There's a video on YouTube about an American car that has had it happen, so there's three. McGurks mention it as a possibility. There's a car over on Aston Martin Life with it.

Am I saying it's common? No. Does it happen? Yes. I also think Mike has more than enough work without having to drum up new business. As I said, if I ever got a V12 then for peace of mind I'd have the primary cats out. However, you do you.

[nickv12]

AdamV12V said:

You need to do more research, it's only ever happened a couple of times, it's just it is endlessly pedalled by BR to drum up business. Total overkill of cost to mitigate vs risk vs repair cost should it actually happen.

I’m with Adam on this. No hard data on figures.

To add complete guesstimates into the mix, it’s probably 1% chance compared to Porsche’s very well documented IMS bearing issue…

That’s the trouble with grapevine info; anybody can plant a new story

[M1AGM]

LTP said:

I think you should research. There's a vanquish being discussed over on the AMOC forum that has experienced this. One of the more technical members over there wrote about a DB7 that had it. There's a video on YouTube about an American car that has had it happen, so there's three. McGurks mention it as a possibility. There's a car over on Aston Martin Life with it.

Am I saying it's common? No. Does it happen? Yes. I also think Mike has more than enough work without having to drum up new business. As I said, if I ever got a V12 then for peace of mind I'd have the primary cats out. However, you do you.

Interesting you mention McGurk. I spoke to them last year about my car (which has had the BR primary cat delete) and the guy I spoke to there didnt even bother to call me back with a valuation after I told him about the decat - he was sucking his gums ‘needs to be completely standard for us to sell it’ was the vibe I got. Shame really as the car is fantastic with it done.

I agree it’s a rare problem, as has been discussed before, but as these cars age and get more miles with more heat cycles, you’d expect it to become less rare in time.

[Jon39]

AdamV12V said:

You need to do more research, it's only ever happened a couple of times, it's just it is endlessly pedalled by BR to drum up business. Total overkill of cost to mitigate vs risk vs repair cost should it actually happen.

Has the V12 engine always had cats in the manifolds, from DB7 onwards?

With the V8, cats were only in the manifolds from about 2011 onwards.
I believe that date was stipulated by one of those Euro 5/6/7 type changes. Only hot cats do their job, so the requirement to fit in manifolds, obviously means they heat up faster to begin working sooner.

[AdamV12V]

LTP said:

Am I saying it's common? No. Does it happen? Yes. I also think Mike has more than enough work without having to drum up new business. As I said, if I ever got a V12 then for peace of mind I'd have the primary cats out. However, you do you.

Let's do some quick maths on risk vs cost.

Mitigation costs £4k, yet a new engine fitted is likely less that £20k but lets call it £20k for the sake of easy maths.

So the basically the chance has to be 1 in 5 of the engine ingesting its cats during the period of time you own the car to break even on that level of spend.

I can tell you now that the odd are most definitely less than 1 in 5. Not even 1 in 500 in all liklihood, so even spending £40 to mitigate the issue wouldn't make financial sense.

[LTP]

AdamV12V said:

<snip>
so even spending £40 to mitigate the issue wouldn't make financial sense.

And this is the problem with probabilities. I'd be willing to bet that, if you could come up with a guaranteed mitigation against possible cat ingestion for £40, you'd have to beat potential takers off with a stick.

But, as I said, you do you

[AdamV12V]

LTP said:

And this is the problem with probabilities. I'd be willing to bet that, if you could come up with a guaranteed mitigation against possible cat ingestion for £40, you'd have to beat potential takers off with a stick.

But, as I said, you do you

And I would probably consider paying it myself for £40, but at £4k it makes no sense whatsoever.

[DB9VolanteDriver]

AdamV12V said:

I can tell you now that the odd are most definitely less than 1 in 5. Not even 1 in 500 in all liklihood, so even spending £40 to mitigate the issue wouldn't make financial sense.

Guess you don’t buy fire insurance, based on that logic.

[Jon39]

A very unlikely occurrence, so would extended warranty cover any engine damage, if ingestion did occur?
Perhaps no need to even worry about it.

No one answered my question, about whether manifold cats have been present on the V12 since the DB7 days.
I just wondered, because they might have only been present since an exhaust regulation change.

[LTP]

Jon39 said:

A very unlikely occurrence, so would extended warranty cover any engine damage, if ingestion did occur?
Perhaps no need to even worry about it.

No one answered my question, about whether manifold cats have been present on the V12 since the DB7 days.
I just wondered, because they might have only been present since an exhaust regulation change.

As far as I'm aware the primary cats have been tucked up under the runners since the NP V12 Vanquish. Don't know about in the DB7 Vantage

[LTP]

Just indulged in a little light googling and found the image below. So, assuming the listing is accurate, it would appear the early V12's did not have a primary catalyst and it must have been introduced some time during the NP DB7/Vanquish models

[AstonZagato]

DB9VolanteDriver said:

AdamV12V said:

I can tell you now that the odd are most definitely less than 1 in 5. Not even 1 in 500 in all liklihood, so even spending £40 to mitigate the issue wouldn't make financial sense.

Guess you don’t buy fire insurance, based on that logic.

Well, to be fair, I doubt he pays 1/5th of his house rebuild costs as insurance on his house over his ownership period. I don't think he's arguing that one shouldn't pay insurance but that, probability weighted, it doesn't make sense in this case.

Perhaps a warranty company might like to create a product on cat ingestion - I'd pay £40.

[DB9VolanteDriver]

AstonZagato said:

DB9VolanteDriver said:

AdamV12V said:

I can tell you now that the odd are most definitely less than 1 in 5. Not even 1 in 500 in all liklihood, so even spending £40 to mitigate the issue wouldn't make financial sense.

Guess you don’t buy fire insurance, based on that logic.

Well, to be fair, I doubt he pays 1/5th of his house rebuild costs as insurance on his house over his ownership period. I don't think he's arguing that one shouldn't pay insurance but that, probability weighted, it doesn't make sense in this case.

Perhaps a warranty company might like to create a product on cat ingestion - I'd pay £40.

But he stated he wouldn’t spend £40 because it doesn’t make sense. That 500:1 ratio he posits is not very different than a house, and you would never think that was an unwise purchase. £40 for cat protection? Sign me up! I’d go as much as 5 times that for peace of mind.

[David W.]

Just a point for clarity, is the engine now an obsolete item or still in production? Can it actually be replaced for £20k ?

[AdamV12V]

David W. said:

Just a point for clarity, is the engine now an obsolete item or still in production? Can it actually be replaced for £20k ?

You can get fully refurbished engines for £15k, but you have to give back you old one to be repaired/refurbed for the next customer. I had allowed £5k for fitting.