Why can't AM design a rear defuser?

[//j17]

The old Vantage had a rear defuser that looked like an after-thought that was bodged together in 5 minutes by someone called Dave, using just a hammer and a few bits of spare 3x2. That's fine though, it was built for one set of regulations and had to be modified as those regulations changed so was never going to look as harmonious as the new 911RSR or Ford GT that were designed to those regulations. What exactly is the excuse for the rear defuser on the NEW Vantage looking just as bodged though?!?!

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2017/11/21/aston-mar... - pic. #3

[//j17]

GrahamG said:

I guess the question should really be - If you are more of an expert than they are - why can't you spell diffuser? ;-)

1. I've never claimed to be more of an expert than those at AM, just pointed out that the experts at Ford and Porsche seem to be able to integrate the design (or perhaps more correctly styling) of their rear diffusers in to the over-all design of their cars in a way AM can't. I don't doubt the efficiency of the AM diffuser - but nor do I think either Ford or Porsche would have compromised their designs in order to make them look integrated in to the general car design.

2. An over dependence on auto-correct due to dyslexia.

[//j17]

Reno said:

Also architecture is totally different ... the Astons not got an engine hanging out back!

Neither do the Ford or Porsche? OK, mid-mounted is further rearward than front-mounted but neither's rear-mounted.