V12 Vantage S Performance Pack - how much

[nickv8]

Such a vulgar question, but needs asking

How much is the full V12 Vantage S Performance Pack fitted from an AM dealer?

https://www2.astonmartin.com/en/accessories/v12-va...

The AM page says it includes a new CF rear diffuser. Is that necessary to fit the replacement exhaust system only? I don't presume it's an optional bit?

Thanks!

[jonby]

nickv8 said:

Such a vulgar question, but needs asking

How much is the full V12 Vantage S Performance Pack fitted from an AM dealer?

https://www2.astonmartin.com/en/accessories/v12-va...

The AM page says it includes a new CF rear diffuser. Is that necessary to fit the replacement exhaust system only? I don't presume it's an optional bit?

Thanks!

The replacement exhaust has a different shape box which the standard diffuser won't accommodate, hence the different shape new diffuser that's part of the pack

[AdamV12V]

The RRP announced at the time of launch was £12,495 + fitting + vat - but don't forget it includes the full length Titanium exhaust, which was £8,995 + fitting +vat in it's own right.

I'm not sure if it is still the same price or if inflation has been applied since.

I'm sure however that you can get some discount if you ask your dealer....

[nickv8]

Thanks Adam and Jonby! Useful info

[bananarob]

I think I paid 13 all in

[yellow_tang]

V12S Performance Pack 1 which comprises of Magnesium inlet manifolds, full length titanium exhaust (sound enhancement only), and carbon diffuser blade. GD23-08-10176 £13127.25+VAT

Performance Pack 2 has addition of titanium secondary cat delete pipes GD23-35-10177 £13652.55+VAT

Interestingly you could just buy the GT12 magnesium inlet manifolds, GD2Y-9424-AB & GD2Y-9424-BB for £13122.52+VAT.

Or buy the Aluminium versions of the same design HD33-9424-AC & HD33-9424-BC for £4276.95+VAT, then get the secondary decat pipes 2x HD33-5E211-AA for £490.26+VAT for the pair and save almost £9k for the same performance...

[nickv8]

Thanks bananarob

yellow_tang ... very interesting! IMO, the weight savings are irrelevant. If I went to Slimming World it would be more effective and healthier

So the aluminium version is interesting. I didn’t realise that option existed.

But is it just me... £13k or less is actually not too bad for what’s included. Titanium exhausts aren’t cheap normally. New CF diffuser isn’t cheap either.

I know there’s the usual AM markup, but compared to other marques, it seems relatively modest for what is close to a GT12 setup!

Hmmm...

[yellow_tang]

nickv8 said:

But is it just me... £13k or less is actually not too bad for what’s included. Titanium exhausts aren’t cheap normally. New CF diffuser isn’t cheap either.

I know there’s the usual AM markup, but compared to other marques, it seems relatively modest for what is close to a GT12 setup!

Hmmm...

Especially when the GT12 inlet manifolds in magnesium are the same cost for a pair separately as for £5 more with a titanium exhaust and carbon diffuser in the performance pack...

There is also an engine cal update that is included in the performance pack that would be necessary if fitting items separately.

Edited by yellow_tang on Wednesday 10th April 13:23

[BamfordMike]

yellow_tang said:

V12S Performance Pack 1 which comprises of Magnesium inlet manifolds, full length titanium exhaust (sound enhancement only), and carbon diffuser blade. GD23-08-10176 £13127.25+VAT

Performance Pack 2 has addition of titanium secondary cat delete pipes GD23-35-10177 £13652.55+VAT

Interestingly you could just buy the GT12 magnesium inlet manifolds, GD2Y-9424-AB & GD2Y-9424-BB for £13122.52+VAT.

Or buy the Aluminium versions of the same design HD33-9424-AC & HD33-9424-BC for £4276.95+VAT, then get the secondary decat pipes 2x HD33-5E211-AA for £490.26+VAT for the pair and save almost £9k for the same performance...

The last paragraph is a top bit of financial advice if an owner has chosen that route to increasing performance, however, I’m not sure what the “same” performance actually is in absolute numbers though? We’ve dyno tested a number of cars now, the 565 motor always dyno’s at 545, never seen one higher or lower really, they repetitively bang out 545. Secondary cat delete is, say, + 10/15BHP, so now up to 560 or so. Then add the inlet manifold and ECU tune, but we chased our tail on this one for a bit trying to measure the tangible improvement of just the inlet manifold. The data we recorded showed no airflow change, no vehicle road speed vs time change / improvement just for the inlet manifold. So I think the kit in total might add something BHP wise + noise, but breaking down each individual component to assess its performance worth is very confusing.
Ultimate conclusion to offer best bang for buck was to remove the 4 corks stuck up the ass of the motor, because for approx. 25% of your £9k cost the primary cats can go, which ultimately yields more real world power / acceleration than the total kit you list.

[nickv8]

Thanks Mike and yellow_tang again!

So, just as with the V8, the most effective (cost and performance) route is simply a secondary decat?

[BamfordMike]

nickv8 said:

Thanks Mike and yellow_tang again!

So, just as with the V8, the most effective (cost and performance) route is simply a secondary decat?

A secondary decat is indeed a simple / quick / cheap route to a little more noise and a little more performance.

Other mods depend on what’s right for individual preferences / needs I guess.

On V12 variants, getting rid of the primary cats is an insurance policy against a costly engine rebuild in the case of misfire and (on account of the whopping 35deg valve overlap on fixed cam V12 variants creating significant internal EGR), subsequent catalyst ingestion. Approx. 40BHP increase for a fraction of the price compared to the franchise power pack option which retains the primary cats and the risk of engine failure, primary decat has a glorious exhaust note too.

But, some folk will like the franchise option, because its franchise and the perceived values that brings, horses for courses but the best course is arguably the biggest bang for the least buck.

For the full monty option it’s aftermarket exhaust manifolds and high flow secondary cats, which anyone who’s listened to a V12VS at that spec on a track day will know, just how uniquely epic that sounds together with performance the franchise option cannot get close to because that option is restrained by legislation to keep the primary cat present which is a huge restrictive cork and why it’s tough to get the variable cam timing motor past 560BHP no matter what parts are bolted on in a ‘kit’. The 565 motor being a real world 545, with manifolds and cats it’ll deliver approx. 610 (we’ve driven and data logged a full spec GT12 and a raft of V12VS which all had airflow consumption equating to no more than 560).

[nickv8]

It's disappointing to read that the GT12's never did really reach 100bhp/litre.

Back in the real world, nobody driving these will notice. Just one for the theoretical + history books

Thanks Mike for your input!

[BamfordMike]

nickv8 said:

It's disappointing to read that the GT12's never did really reach 100bhp/litre.

Back in the real world, nobody driving these will notice. Just one for the theoretical + history books

Thanks Mike for your input!

I’m sure there’s at least one well prepared engine out there which when under laboratory conditions meets the standards.

Road car specific power output can be disappointing these days compared to outputs 30 years ago, not forgetting the 2 wheeled world crucifies 4!
One could quite easily blame emissions regs, but then compared to Aston’s circa 50bhp for a single 500cc pot, there’s the 458 at approx. 70bhp per 500cc. Love naturally aspirated screamers, downsize and pressure charged is a cop out for a luxury sports car manufacturer imho.

Yeah, even at 545 BHP the cars are mighty quick, but the upgrade power figure instead of being just a number at peak engine speeds, translates into much greater responsiveness / how quick the engine revs up, making short shifting (which is how most folk drive) significantly more rapid. A secondary decat won’t achieve that from lower rpm

[quench]

Very helpful info.

Mike, I am wondering if you would be able to rank on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being loudest, the following:

- stock
- secondary decat
- primary decat with secondaries in place
- both decats

Also, in your experience, is a remap/chip necessary after a primary decat, either or both for driveability and maximizing power?

Thanks in advance.

[yellow_tang]

nickv8 said:

It's disappointing to read that the GT12's never did really reach 100bhp/litre.

Back in the real world, nobody driving these will notice. Just one for the theoretical + history books

Thanks Mike for your input!

They did!! 595bhp/444kW @ 7000rpm on a 5.9l AM29 engine with the magnesium inlet manifolds and GT12 engine calibration, on a certified and calibrated engine dynamometer, independently witnessed by the Vehicle Certification Agency in 2015

Edited by yellow_tang on Thursday 11th April 08:47

[BamfordMike]

yellow_tang said:

They did!! 595bhp on a 5.9l AM28 engine with the magnesium inlet manifolds and GT12 engine calibration, on a calibrated engine dynamometer, witnessed by the Vehicle Certification Agency.

Edited by yellow_tang on Wednesday 10th April 19:29

Edited by yellow_tang on Wednesday 10th April 19:33

Yes, that’s the one I’m talking about Phil!

There’s no point in a discussion about GT12 power, the test figure or the real world. But you posted pricing details of the kit of parts, I simply questioned in isolation what power benefit those products, specifically the inlet manifold, delivers. A valid question considering the not so insignificant sale price. The power kit does not have to comply with any homolagated standards / values to sell it against, but because the kit is pulling off GT12 spec, it does bring in to question GT12 figures, an unfortunate consequence.

In the past I represented Aston on a number of occasions preparing data for the VCA homologation test across many AMxx engines. The differences between the figures on the day of the race and real World is bread and butter to me, but any performance engineer knows these differences and just because a homologated figure is achieved, thinking that figure represents real world production too, is a tad disingenuous coming from anyone inside the industry. The auto maker is in the most part totally compliant to the rules, it’s the VCA who needs to rewrite the rule book more in favour of the consumer imho.

The primary pipe and primary catalyst can design has been the same for the last 19 years! (from Classic Vanquish 2001 to outgoing V12 engines). Just looking at the primary pipe / catalyst can and when only revving to 7k on a naturally aspirated engine, any performance engineer is going to gulp (several times) if asked to deliver 100BHP per ltr with that hardware constraint, which ultimately means if ploughing ahead, other variables will have to be pushed to the max to achieve the highest power figure, which brings this discussion relevant to the power kit in question here.

When the inlet is stuffed full of nice and cool 25 deg ambient air during the homologation test, the most amount of power on the table will be achieved. On the road in the real world, in even a sub 10 degree ambient, on a GT12 and an AMR car with those inlets, we couldn’t pull the inlet manifold air temp below 35 degrees no matter how fast we drove. Compared to the previous inlet manifold design, after the air is dragged thru to eliminate the heat soak, inside the manifold equalled pretty much outside ambient - a good design. More typically, in a 25 deg ambient the air temp would be, what? +50 from the revised inlets? This is important because the higher the inlet temp, the lower the power in the real World - basic stuff. Examination of the inlet manifold reveals an internal labyrinth of channels, a quick guess is all that bulk material is heating up acting like a radiator, so whilst it might return good performance at 25 deg (the test standard), in the real world it behaves entirely differently in my experience.

The 19 year old primary pipe design, the ambient air temp conditions in real world both explains why driving any model (GT12 included) the engine is running out of breath above 6000 rpm to 7000 rpm instead of the engine punching to the redline because power is still rising with engine speed, but it’s laboured above 6000rpm to 7000 rpm. Whilst that might not matter to some, those owners after the most amount of performance and drive the cars hard, it does matter to them and the engine wheezing off is disappointing and that characteristic is not improved with the power kit, despite the power figure claimed, mainly because the engine still has that 19 year old cork stuck up its ass.

You mention the calibration. On all the cars which we’ve removed the primary cats from, the cats were looking in a real bad shape for the low mileage covered, Classic witness marks of overexposure to heat which only has one ultimate conclusion (remember that big valve overlap). This goes back to the hardware constraint and where normally a calibration would be set safe, the spark and particularly fuelling has very little caution which will be interesting to see if in market and 50k miles later, how the catalyst holds up. A 2005 DB9 cat at 80k miles, when there has been no misfire, looks almost brand new, the matrix of a latter V12 at 5k miles looks extremely errorded.

[yellow_tang]

I don’t disagree with what you have said but all manufacturers comply to the same regulations. The peak power should be treated as what the setup is capable of in lab conditions and is comparable to other manufacturers quoted figures, much in the same way fuel economy and emission values are obtained. They are obtained in a way so as to be a means of comparison as real world emissions can be quite different to values obtained over the set drive cycle on a rolling road in a laboratory set to a defined ambient.

[Phil57DBS]

Mike said :
On V12 variants, getting rid of the primary cats is an insurance policy against a costly engine rebuild in the case of misfire and (on account of the whopping 35deg valve overlap on fixed cam V12 variants creating significant internal EGR), subsequent catalyst ingestion. Approx. 40BHP increase for a fraction of the price compared to the franchise power pack option which retains the primary cats and the risk of engine failure, primary decat has a glorious exhaust note too

among other upgrades, I wanted to remove EGR to improve the engine...
I finally understand why I couldn't find any EGR valves on this motor

Edited by Phil57DBS on Tuesday 16th April 14:02

[Felonious]

This is a bad thread. It's got my thinking that I need to visit Mike and get him to uncork my Vantage. But not until the warranty's up in mid-Dec.

[yellow_tang]

Felonious said:

This is a bad thread. It's got my thinking that I need to visit Mike and get him to uncork my Vantage. But not until the warranty's up in mid-Dec.

Fortunately as your V12S has VCT and knock control, the cat ingesting is not an issue. As Mike said, the biggest issue appears to be inlet air temperatures... Would it be better to get a thermal coating on the inlet manifold to reduce heat transfer, something like zircotec??