Future AM engines and Valhalla
Discussion
hyphen said:
V8V Pete said:
My interest is with sports cars and, like Speedraser, I would never buy an Aston that had a MB engine mounted on a MB platform. I'd buy a GT3 instead.
If Aston offered two choices, a better MB engine, or an inferior Aston engine, but both engines were better than the GT3 equivalent, would you get the inferior Aston engine?And the next question is what makes an engine “better”. Most people would consider the MB 4.0 TT V8 a “better” engine than the Aston 4.7 NA V8 but, personally, I actually prefer the Aston engine in my car. Enough power for the road (in its modified form) and I prefer the sound and nature of the power delivery. Reliability of both is very good.
The current 991.2 GT3 engine is a masterpiece and the best of the lot for me but it’s all personal choice isn’t it? I could buy a new Vantage or an AMG GTR or a GT3 today but I won’t so that says it all for me.
simonrockman said:
Mercedes engines don't seem to have hurt Pagani.
1. Pagani have never had any other engine and have no tradition of building their own.2. It's a far better version of the Mercedes V12 than Mercedes use in their own products - the opposite to the Aston/AMG scenario.
3. It's only the engine, not also the platform. Nobody would buy a Pagani if it was just some panels draped over an SL55 platform.
Speedraser said:
SFO: Many of us on this forum are very well-versed and experienced in economics and economies of scale. None of us has said it’s easy or less-than-expensive for Aston to build its own engines and/or platforms. But it is doable.
Anything is doable, but is it affordable? It's not as if Aston hasn't got enough debt ...The reality is that in nine and a half years, no new Aston Martin will have any engine at all, so I think the argument is a bit of a moot point if I'm honest.
I know that hybrids have a stay of execution (at present) until 2035, however they must be able to cover a significant (not as yet decided) distance in pure electric mode, and once manufacturers can do that, then why bother with hybrid at all, the tech will be there for pure electric. Companies aren't going to wait until the day before the deadline to get these cars out there are they, they're going to start appearing in droves in showrooms very quickly I think.
I'm already resigned to the fact that I probably have one more pure ICE purchase in me, then it'll be probably time for a fully electric Range Rover (or similar) with the V12 as the indefensible summertime weekend toy.
I think the whole electrification thing is going to cause real headaches for premium sportscar brands. An electric motor and batteries are just that, there's no character to them, they are pure function. It's going to be harder to sell someone a £200k electric sportscar, when an Audi TT or BMW 3 Series will be exactly as fast and comfortable for a quarter of the price. It'll become nothing more than willy waving with the bonnet badge I think.
All just my opinion of course.
It's sad, but true
I know that hybrids have a stay of execution (at present) until 2035, however they must be able to cover a significant (not as yet decided) distance in pure electric mode, and once manufacturers can do that, then why bother with hybrid at all, the tech will be there for pure electric. Companies aren't going to wait until the day before the deadline to get these cars out there are they, they're going to start appearing in droves in showrooms very quickly I think.
I'm already resigned to the fact that I probably have one more pure ICE purchase in me, then it'll be probably time for a fully electric Range Rover (or similar) with the V12 as the indefensible summertime weekend toy.
I think the whole electrification thing is going to cause real headaches for premium sportscar brands. An electric motor and batteries are just that, there's no character to them, they are pure function. It's going to be harder to sell someone a £200k electric sportscar, when an Audi TT or BMW 3 Series will be exactly as fast and comfortable for a quarter of the price. It'll become nothing more than willy waving with the bonnet badge I think.
All just my opinion of course.
It's sad, but true
Big Ry said:
I know that hybrids have a stay of execution (at present) until 2035, however they must be able to cover a significant (not as yet decided) distance in pure electric mode, and once manufacturers can do that, then why bother with hybrid at all, the tech will be there for pure electric.
...... I think the whole electrification thing is going to cause real headaches for premium sportscar brands. An electric motor and batteries are just that, there's no character to them, they are pure function. It's going to be harder to sell someone a £200k electric sportscar, when an Audi TT or BMW 3 Series will be exactly as fast and comfortable for a quarter of the price. It'll become nothing more than willy waving with the bonnet badge I think.
...... I think the whole electrification thing is going to cause real headaches for premium sportscar brands. An electric motor and batteries are just that, there's no character to them, they are pure function. It's going to be harder to sell someone a £200k electric sportscar, when an Audi TT or BMW 3 Series will be exactly as fast and comfortable for a quarter of the price. It'll become nothing more than willy waving with the bonnet badge I think.
I agree with your point Ryan, about 'headaches for premium sportscar brands'.
However I must admit, as a fan of the excellent British made Henry vacuum cleaners, there are still many people who really enjoy spending three times the price, to suck dust with a Dyson.
I learnt about the way hybrid cars are being used to game the system, on this forum.
My understanding, is that an employee can avoid 'Benefit In Kind' tax on an employer provided car, by choosing a hybrid vehicle.
One such hybrid user told us, "The last thing I am going to do, is use my home electricity to fuel my employer's car. I just use it as a petrol car".
Have the Treasury realised they are being duped ?
Edited by Jon39 on Monday 1st March 13:35
Jon, driving a plug-hybrid with low CO2 as a company car was cheap for a few years, but there's really no advantage in it now. So, yes, they realised what corporate buyers (including myself) were doing; buying a PHEV and running it largely on fuel to pay as little tax as possible. "Duped" would be a little unkind.
No BIK on electric cars in the 2021 tax year. Were it not for COVID meaning the cars are off the road, we may well have switched to leasing the Tesla Model 3 as our corporate option.
No BIK on electric cars in the 2021 tax year. Were it not for COVID meaning the cars are off the road, we may well have switched to leasing the Tesla Model 3 as our corporate option.
Edited by Peter McKean on Monday 1st March 15:13
Jon39 said:
AP talked about seeking 'new younger wealthy customers'...Now I see Jaguar are also talking about new younger, wealthy customers.
Do they teach this stuff on, 'Luxury car business' degree courses ?
Yes, those courses are taught at the same 'institutions of higher learning' that award degrees with names ending in 'studies', and where safe spaces are more important than course content.Do they teach this stuff on, 'Luxury car business' degree courses ?
Where are all these young, wealthy customers? Virtually none of the under 35 people I know have any interest in cars, let alone luxury cars. Granted, this is my personal experience only, but I hear the same from a lot of my friends and colleagues. Contrast that with the relative interest in cars when I was that age, and it suggests a societal shift that these car companies seem unwilling or unable to acknowledge.
What a quandary the manufacturers must be in. Continue to pander to Baby Boomers and Gen-Xers, a group that will continue to shrink over the next couple of decades, or try to attract the mythical (read rare or non-existent) younger wealthy customer, all the while knowing that governments are slowly yet inexorably legislating the automobile into oblivion.
quench said:
Yes, those courses are taught at the same 'institutions of higher learning' that award degrees with names ending in 'studies', and where safe spaces are more important than course content.
Where are all these young, wealthy customers? Virtually none of the under 35 people I know have any interest in cars, let alone luxury cars. Granted, this is my personal experience only, but I hear the same from a lot of my friends and colleagues. Contrast that with the relative interest in cars when I was that age, and it suggests a societal shift that these car companies seem unwilling or unable to acknowledge.
What a quandary the manufacturers must be in. Continue to pander to Baby Boomers and Gen-Xers, a group that will continue to shrink over the next couple of decades, or try to attract the mythical (read rare or non-existent) younger wealthy customer, all the while knowing that governments are slowly yet inexorably legislating the automobile into oblivion.
I think, sadly, you're right. My close mates are all proper petrolheads, but are a dying breed. We're all late 20's, they have stuff ranging from RS Clio's and Fiesta ST's to an F80 M4 and E39 M5. All proper enthusiast cars, but all bought secondhand or fairly leggy and maintained by mates or on the driveway. I have my Vantage, but I don't personally know anyone else with anything remotely similar in my age group. Where are all these young, wealthy customers? Virtually none of the under 35 people I know have any interest in cars, let alone luxury cars. Granted, this is my personal experience only, but I hear the same from a lot of my friends and colleagues. Contrast that with the relative interest in cars when I was that age, and it suggests a societal shift that these car companies seem unwilling or unable to acknowledge.
What a quandary the manufacturers must be in. Continue to pander to Baby Boomers and Gen-Xers, a group that will continue to shrink over the next couple of decades, or try to attract the mythical (read rare or non-existent) younger wealthy customer, all the while knowing that governments are slowly yet inexorably legislating the automobile into oblivion.
I'm only able to enjoy the cars I do because of successful family businesses, the reality is that a very small minority manage to buy £150k+ cars when they're young without pre existing family wealth. Then, of this group, how many are real petrolheads vs wanting a car because it looks good on instagram with no real idea or interest in what it is? Not many, I reckon. Which is why I can't understand why manufacturers are going after this segment that seemingly doesn't exist. My mates that aren't into cars generally see them as a polluting transport appliance and don't really care what they are, some wouldn't know the difference between petrol and electric other than the latter is 'green' so 'better'. This group, if they came into wealth, might buy an expensive car because it feels like something they 'should' do, but they really wouldn't care what powered it or ever be remotely interested in the car at the level we would be.
I think the generation slightly below me, those currently learning to drive, will be the ones to really backlash against ICE altogether given their time. Maintaining cars yourself isn't a necessity anymore and the majority just aren't going to be interested so will never be bothered. The amount of greenwashing about climate change and cars = bad being drilled into kids at school will no doubt keep the future masses from ever wanting to own an ICE car, or maybe even discourage them from going near the brands that will promote ICE until the bitter end.
I honestly think that to be successful in 20 years time, car companies will need to be like Apple. Cars will be released like smartphones are today, an update every year with some must have feature or gadget, with a big fanfare streamed online like an iPhone Keynote. The purchasing decision is going to come down to how good the onboard tech is or how vegan friendly the seats are before long, the powertrain will hardly get a look in.
...And here we are discussing how awful it is that Merc engines have found their way into Aston's. How much longer are people like us going to be buying new cars? If ICE really is banned by 2030, then not very.
hyphen said:
If Aston offered two choices, a better MB engine, or an inferior Aston engine, but both engines were better than the GT3 equivalent, would you get the inferior Aston engine?
Easy -- the Aston engine. For me, it's not an Aston if it doesn't have an Aston engine. Period. How good the non-Aston engine is matters not at all (the Aston engine needs to be good, of course). If I want a Benz engine, I'll buy a Benz. If I want a Porsche engine, I'll buy a Porsche (one with a Porsche engine, anyway).Shrimpvende said:
quench said:
Yes, those courses are taught at the same 'institutions of higher learning' that award degrees with names ending in 'studies', and where safe spaces are more important than course content.
Where are all these young, wealthy customers? Virtually none of the under 35 people I know have any interest in cars, let alone luxury cars. Granted, this is my personal experience only, but I hear the same from a lot of my friends and colleagues. Contrast that with the relative interest in cars when I was that age, and it suggests a societal shift that these car companies seem unwilling or unable to acknowledge.
What a quandary the manufacturers must be in. Continue to pander to Baby Boomers and Gen-Xers, a group that will continue to shrink over the next couple of decades, or try to attract the mythical (read rare or non-existent) younger wealthy customer, all the while knowing that governments are slowly yet inexorably legislating the automobile into oblivion.
I think, sadly, you're right. My close mates are all proper petrolheads, but are a dying breed. We're all late 20's, they have stuff ranging from RS Clio's and Fiesta ST's to an F80 M4 and E39 M5. All proper enthusiast cars, but all bought secondhand or fairly leggy and maintained by mates or on the driveway. I have my Vantage, but I don't personally know anyone else with anything remotely similar in my age group. Where are all these young, wealthy customers? Virtually none of the under 35 people I know have any interest in cars, let alone luxury cars. Granted, this is my personal experience only, but I hear the same from a lot of my friends and colleagues. Contrast that with the relative interest in cars when I was that age, and it suggests a societal shift that these car companies seem unwilling or unable to acknowledge.
What a quandary the manufacturers must be in. Continue to pander to Baby Boomers and Gen-Xers, a group that will continue to shrink over the next couple of decades, or try to attract the mythical (read rare or non-existent) younger wealthy customer, all the while knowing that governments are slowly yet inexorably legislating the automobile into oblivion.
I'm only able to enjoy the cars I do because of successful family businesses, the reality is that a very small minority manage to buy £150k+ cars when they're young without pre existing family wealth. Then, of this group, how many are real petrolheads vs wanting a car because it looks good on instagram with no real idea or interest in what it is? Not many, I reckon. Which is why I can't understand why manufacturers are going after this segment that seemingly doesn't exist. My mates that aren't into cars generally see them as a polluting transport appliance and don't really care what they are, some wouldn't know the difference between petrol and electric other than the latter is 'green' so 'better'. This group, if they came into wealth, might buy an expensive car because it feels like something they 'should' do, but they really wouldn't care what powered it or ever be remotely interested in the car at the level we would be.
I think the generation slightly below me, those currently learning to drive, will be the ones to really backlash against ICE altogether given their time. Maintaining cars yourself isn't a necessity anymore and the majority just aren't going to be interested so will never be bothered. The amount of greenwashing about climate change and cars = bad being drilled into kids at school will no doubt keep the future masses from ever wanting to own an ICE car, or maybe even discourage them from going near the brands that will promote ICE until the bitter end.
I honestly think that to be successful in 20 years time, car companies will need to be like Apple. Cars will be released like smartphones are today, an update every year with some must have feature or gadget, with a big fanfare streamed online like an iPhone Keynote. The purchasing decision is going to come down to how good the onboard tech is or how vegan friendly the seats are before long, the powertrain will hardly get a look in.
...And here we are discussing how awful it is that Merc engines have found their way into Aston's. How much longer are people like us going to be buying new cars? If ICE really is banned by 2030, then not very.
Speedraser said:
Now I'm really depressed... I don't think ICE will be done in just 9 years, and not a chance here in the US. But still, I'm depressed.
Whilst I appreciate the US is unlikely to ban new ICE sales in the next 10 years, the fact will remain that every European (and probably Asian) manufacturer will have already made the switch, and they're not likely to want to support two completely different platforms in different markets.That means it'll only be US producers who will build ICE cars, and whilst not wanting to offend anyone, they don't produce much to compete with Ferrari and Porsche etc do they (lets ignore Tesla for a minute).
Ford have already committed to being 100% electric for Europe by 2030, so the fact is that the US will lag behind the rest of the "developed" planet on that front. China have already said the ban will come in 2035, however I suspect that will bring that forward.
Whilst on one hand banning new ICE cars does make me quite sad, on the other I completely understand it (although hydrogen is better than electric, but that's a different argument). Ultimately pollution from cars is real, and whilst us owners typically drive far less in our V8's and V12's than people do in a family hatchback, it's impossible to distinguish between the two. They can't say people with money who drive few miles can crack on, but everyone else must buy electric can they.
The times are changing, so we just need to hope that the manufacturers we like will continue to build something we want to buy.
For the record, I'm no eco-warrior before people start trying to stone me and call me a heretic, but I'm realistic and accepting that the change is coming.
Big Ry said:
...... Ultimately pollution from cars is real, and whilst us owners typically drive far less in our V8's and V12's than people do in a family hatchback, it's impossible to distinguish between the two. ......
There is one way to take into account annual mileage and make the amount charged for the quantity of pollution produced a little fairer.
They will never do it though, because the present 'charge twice' system produces more revenue.
If 'Road Tax' was replaced by adding that amount of money to petrol tax, it would then take useage into account.
It would also become impossible to evade.
My supposedly, hugely polluting AM, creates less pollution each year than an average 1 litre Fiesta.
Anyway on principle, they don't get the amount they hope for, because I SORN during each winter.
Have you looked at your MoT emissions test figures? The numbers on mine are far lower that those of my older cars, for which I pay considerably less road tax. A puzzle !
Edited by Jon39 on Tuesday 2nd March 10:57
We are going to move to road pricing anyway. That may be tiered to the environmental impact of the car, but ultimately the government will need to replace fuel tax as cars become more economical and go electric. This was being investigated by the last Labour government and so was kicked into touch by the coalition, but it will come back.
V8V Pete said:
No simple answer because you’ve only taken half of the scenario I gave. I said I would not buy an Aston with BOTH engine & platform from a MB. Would I buy an Aston with just the engine from MB? Not sure but I’m not really tempted by any at present.
And the next question is what makes an engine “better”. Most people would consider the MB 4.0 TT V8 a “better” engine than the Aston 4.7 NA V8 but, personally, I actually prefer the Aston engine in my car. Enough power for the road (in its modified form) and I prefer the sound and nature of the power delivery. Reliability of both is very good.
The current 991.2 GT3 engine is a masterpiece and the best of the lot for me but it’s all personal choice isn’t it? I could buy a new Vantage or an AMG GTR or a GT3 today but I won’t so that says it all for me.
Are they not different cars?And the next question is what makes an engine “better”. Most people would consider the MB 4.0 TT V8 a “better” engine than the Aston 4.7 NA V8 but, personally, I actually prefer the Aston engine in my car. Enough power for the road (in its modified form) and I prefer the sound and nature of the power delivery. Reliability of both is very good.
The current 991.2 GT3 engine is a masterpiece and the best of the lot for me but it’s all personal choice isn’t it? I could buy a new Vantage or an AMG GTR or a GT3 today but I won’t so that says it all for me.
The GT3 is for raw driving thrills and so the engine matters more.
The Vantage is a cruiser, made to look good and sound good. As long as it looks good and sounds good, the job is done I would say.
Aston though should go through the charade of saying "it has some 'simlarities' with MB, but our engineers have changed x,y,z to our spec, the power is higher, we do some additional work after delivery on it and so on. An outsourced for manufacturing aston engine rather than a MB engine.
On the platform front, they could just call it the Aston platform Mercedes is also using. As long as the Aston is more expensive and more appealing than should be OK.
I think I'm right in saying that VAG cars like the Audi R8 is the same platform as Lamborghinis? And no one cares and R8 doesn't compare.
Edited by hyphen on Tuesday 2nd March 12:33
Olivera said:
Speedraser said:
For me, it's not an Aston if it doesn't have an Aston engine.
Aren't the older Aston V8 and V12 engines derived from Ford/Jaguar designs? Weren't both built in Cologne by Ford?
Interesting debate and one we won't knows who will win for ages. For pertolheads who appear on this forum I'm sure most of us would like to see an Aston engine in an Aston but for many people out there with a spare £150k, I'm not convinced it matters too much. And it is those people AML really need to save the company from collapse so sticking an AMG engine in a DBX is the right commercial decision - I'm pretty sure most housewives taking their kids to school won't care what's beneath the bonnet. As for an AMG in the DB11 and Vantage, I reckon it will only put off a very small number of high wealth individuals and therefore if sales are low, I doubt it will be because of the engine. Indeed, when I bought my 4.3 all those years ago, would it have been a deal breaker if it had an AMG engine? With the way the car looked and provided it was a manual - probably not.
SL500UK said:
...when I bought my 4.3 all those years ago, would it have been a deal breaker if it had an AMG engine? With the way the car looked and provided it was a manual - probably not.
Interesting point! It took me all of .5 of a second to conclude, probably not also... Such a spell the VH Vantage performs, like a siren to a sailor. But then the nature of the Aston has always been accompanied by the hand-made, low volume, Savile Row appeal. If all this falls into place, one can brush aside the company`s financial struggles with a nod nod wink wink, "All part of the process to make something so special, and clearly we owners know something you do not," so yeah, maybe a Merc engine would have had me looking at a different model, that maybe had a bespoke power plant..? Who knows.I think the appeal of a mid-engined Aston will have more than a few people interested, particularly if it`s a belter out of the box, but as cylinder numbers decrease, regardless of output, less people are going to be willing to part with the funds. No one looks at an Aston and thinks, "Ohhh, a 4 cylinder, awesome!" Electricity is the future and we cannot stop it, and we can embrace that future, or otherwise buy and hang onto the kind of car that floats your boat now. New ICE car sales will stop, but the use of fossil fuels will still continue long after I`m pushing up daisies.
Having had a read through this thread, there are so many good arguements for both sides, which shows there really is no correct answer here. Survival with an AMG donk, or maybe survival but less profitable (or typically unprofitable) but predominantly resolved in-house, but with lots of hiccups along the way, or Aston Martin goes down with the ship, waving forlornly to the AMG motoring past on the horizon? Sounds rather more romamtic and tally-ho than sticking a badge on a re-engineered Merc, which I agree is a sad and unappealling option. Ultimately, I think that the majority of the people on this forum are fans of the analogue, normally aspirated cars and the new generation, regardless of performance, comfort or agilty, just do not appeal to the same degree.
Edited by Mr.Tremlini on Wednesday 3rd March 09:03
Big Ry said:
Whilst I appreciate the US is unlikely to ban new ICE sales in the next 10 years, the fact will remain that every European (and probably Asian) manufacturer will have already made the switch, and they're not likely to want to support two completely different platforms in different markets.
That means it'll only be US producers who will build ICE cars, and whilst not wanting to offend anyone, they don't produce much to compete with Ferrari and Porsche etc do they (lets ignore Tesla for a minute).
Ford have already committed to being 100% electric for Europe by 2030, so the fact is that the US will lag behind the rest of the "developed" planet on that front. China have already said the ban will come in 2035, however I suspect that will bring that forward.
Whilst on one hand banning new ICE cars does make me quite sad, on the other I completely understand it (although hydrogen is better than electric, but that's a different argument). Ultimately pollution from cars is real, and whilst us owners typically drive far less in our V8's and V12's than people do in a family hatchback, it's impossible to distinguish between the two. They can't say people with money who drive few miles can crack on, but everyone else must buy electric can they.
The times are changing, so we just need to hope that the manufacturers we like will continue to build something we want to buy.
For the record, I'm no eco-warrior before people start trying to stone me and call me a heretic, but I'm realistic and accepting that the change is coming.
I hear you, and I'm not opposed to EVs, though none has made me actually desire one (I've driven several Teslas and the Taycan -- impressive, but they leave me cold). In the States, for those of us who do some long-distance driving, range is a huge issue, and a real one. The US is a big country. Yes, you can go cross-country in an EV, and the various apps will tell you where to find a charge. But EV non-local ease of use is still very different, and vastly less convenient. Rapid progress is being made, of course (cars and infrastructure), but the infrastructure here (and in Europe) is so far away from where it needs to be to handle such a monumental increase in electricity demand/production that I don't think it can be done in fewer than 9 years. We shall see...That means it'll only be US producers who will build ICE cars, and whilst not wanting to offend anyone, they don't produce much to compete with Ferrari and Porsche etc do they (lets ignore Tesla for a minute).
Ford have already committed to being 100% electric for Europe by 2030, so the fact is that the US will lag behind the rest of the "developed" planet on that front. China have already said the ban will come in 2035, however I suspect that will bring that forward.
Whilst on one hand banning new ICE cars does make me quite sad, on the other I completely understand it (although hydrogen is better than electric, but that's a different argument). Ultimately pollution from cars is real, and whilst us owners typically drive far less in our V8's and V12's than people do in a family hatchback, it's impossible to distinguish between the two. They can't say people with money who drive few miles can crack on, but everyone else must buy electric can they.
The times are changing, so we just need to hope that the manufacturers we like will continue to build something we want to buy.
For the record, I'm no eco-warrior before people start trying to stone me and call me a heretic, but I'm realistic and accepting that the change is coming.
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff