Future model plans
Discussion
Anyone know what is going on in terms of model replacements over the next few years? I quite fancy a Vantage when my Cayman is three years old this time next year but I don't really want to replace it with a car that is the same age design wise when a new Cayman will be available about that time. Any idea if there is to be a new Vantage and if so when?
Neil1300R said:
Nothing announced. Looks like a DBS replacement first in 2013. Aston only has ~ £10M to spend on R&D.
jaguar invests £1 billion pa in R&D.
Future not looking rosy for Aston's future at the moment
On the bright side ......we all get to drive the current model for that much longer jaguar invests £1 billion pa in R&D.
Future not looking rosy for Aston's future at the moment
craigjm said:
Yeah its a shame really, their size is starting to show in that respect
The Gallardo has been built forever but I don't think anyone thinks that "it's a shame" they have been building it that long and I'm sure Lamborghini's budget for new cars is much bigger than Aston's. Note that long design life-cycles are intentional in high-end marques. Manufacturers understand that their clientele prefers to have a car that does not look like "last year's model" immediately after purchase.
Edited by KarlFranz on Monday 14th November 12:46
Aston are going to struggle to replace the VH platform that was funded by Ford.
Having said that it was designed to be flexible and has proven so to date.
IMHO the current VH platform based cars have "classic" lines and the shapes will stand the test of time better than the lines of the current Ferrari's & Lambo's.
As and when they do replace VH I think they are going to need to "borrow" technology again so will probably end up allied to some one like MB or Toyota
Having said that it was designed to be flexible and has proven so to date.
IMHO the current VH platform based cars have "classic" lines and the shapes will stand the test of time better than the lines of the current Ferrari's & Lambo's.
As and when they do replace VH I think they are going to need to "borrow" technology again so will probably end up allied to some one like MB or Toyota
mikey k said:
Aston are going to struggle to replace the VH platform that was funded by Ford.
Having said that it was designed to be flexible and has proven so to date.
IMHO the current VH platform based cars have "classic" lines and the shapes will stand the test of time better than the lines of the current Ferrari's & Lambo's.
As and when they do replace VH I think they are going to need to "borrow" technology again so will probably end up allied to some one like MB or Toyota
Ok, I'll bite. I have posted a lot on here about engine development - or a lack thereof!Having said that it was designed to be flexible and has proven so to date.
IMHO the current VH platform based cars have "classic" lines and the shapes will stand the test of time better than the lines of the current Ferrari's & Lambo's.
As and when they do replace VH I think they are going to need to "borrow" technology again so will probably end up allied to some one like MB or Toyota
But what is wrong with the V/H platform - it's bonded aluminium - it's good isn't it????
Yes it's good but its not ground breaking any more
For example many super cars are now CF tubs and ALOT lighter
Don't get me wrong I like the way the Gaydon cars are designed and built.
But their weight combined with their "low" powered engines is putting them behind in the performance statistics.
I don't care about the numbers (my S is plenty fast enough
)
But it seems the head line numbers are what get the Journo's and dreamers hankering after stuff like the SLS, 458 & MP4
For example many super cars are now CF tubs and ALOT lighter
Don't get me wrong I like the way the Gaydon cars are designed and built.
But their weight combined with their "low" powered engines is putting them behind in the performance statistics.
I don't care about the numbers (my S is plenty fast enough
)But it seems the head line numbers are what get the Journo's and dreamers hankering after stuff like the SLS, 458 & MP4
mikey k said:
Yes it's good but its not ground breaking any more
For example many super cars are now CF tubs and ALOT lighter
Don't get me wrong I like the way the Gaydon cars are designed and built.
But their weight combined with their "low" powered engines is putting them behind in the performance statistics.
I don't care about the numbers (my S is plenty fast enough )
But it seems the head line numbers are what get the Journo's and dreamers hankering after stuff like the SLS, 458 & MP4
Agree versus McLaren mp4-12c and Lambo Aventador but it's no worse than SLS or 458 as a chassis design.For example many super cars are now CF tubs and ALOT lighter
Don't get me wrong I like the way the Gaydon cars are designed and built.
But their weight combined with their "low" powered engines is putting them behind in the performance statistics.
I don't care about the numbers (my S is plenty fast enough
)But it seems the head line numbers are what get the Journo's and dreamers hankering after stuff like the SLS, 458 & MP4
And as for power - Bamford Rose it!
DB7 pilot said:
How hard would it be for AM to pitch between the DBS & One-77 without diluting the cache of each of those models, say, like the recent Virage being pitched between the DB9 & DBS?
If they need to grab a headline to stay in the fray without added R&D costs, would it seem like a natural evolution or a step too far? They'd probably have to clear the order book of One-77's before they floated that little idea though.
Er, that'd be the Zagato?If they need to grab a headline to stay in the fray without added R&D costs, would it seem like a natural evolution or a step too far? They'd probably have to clear the order book of One-77's before they floated that little idea though.
mikey k said:
Yes it's good but its not ground breaking any more
For example many super cars are now CF tubs and ALOT lighter
Don't get me wrong I like the way the Gaydon cars are designed and built.
But their weight combined with their "low" powered engines is putting them behind in the performance statistics.
I don't care about the numbers (my S is plenty fast enough )
But it seems the head line numbers are what get the Journo's and dreamers hankering after stuff like the SLS, 458 & MP4
Do you believe that CF is the B all and end all?For example many super cars are now CF tubs and ALOT lighter
Don't get me wrong I like the way the Gaydon cars are designed and built.
But their weight combined with their "low" powered engines is putting them behind in the performance statistics.
I don't care about the numbers (my S is plenty fast enough
)But it seems the head line numbers are what get the Journo's and dreamers hankering after stuff like the SLS, 458 & MP4
For
It's light
It's strong when stressed in the designed direction
Against
It's brittle and prone to breakage in a way that metal is not
It's ££££
Last I saw it is not UV stable and is known to degrade over time with exposure. Do you really want that with a car?
I would also worry that insuring CF based vehicles could become prohibitive once the insurance industry associates accidents with "total losses".
In the world of "push bikes", CF frames using bonded and lugged tubes allows frames to be repairable for "reasonable money".
Monoque based CF bike frames are a total loss if damaged. They are invariably a few percent (maybe 10%) lighter, but given the likelihood of damage that looks like a poor risk to me. Added to that once you've had an accident any "life threatening" CF components (frame, forks or wheels) really need a complete strip and Xray investigation before they can be known to be free of any consequential defects.
The compromise for a pro rider is very different than for the amateur who "just likes nice stuff".
I would apply the same argument to cars.
Would you really ever believe in a CF tub integrity once it's had "a big one". F1 teams are able to spend whatever it takes to prove that a CF chassis is 100% before electing to race it again.
Would you trust your local dealer to have done the same to your P&J before putting you out in it again?
I'm unconvinced
For sure the weight can be brought down by the clever use of CF for unstressed body panels and for other parts, but for the core of the car CF might be the wrong material for road cars. IMHO
peterr96 said:
Do you believe that CF is the B all and end all?
For
It's light
It's strong when stressed in the designed direction
Against
It's brittle and prone to breakage in a way that metal is not
It's ££££
Last I saw it is not UV stable and is known to degrade over time with exposure. Do you really want that with a car?
I would also worry that insuring CF based vehicles could become prohibitive once the insurance industry associates accidents with "total losses".
In the world of "push bikes", CF frames using bonded and lugged tubes allows frames to be repairable for "reasonable money".
Monoque based CF bike frames are a total loss if damaged. They are invariably a few percent (maybe 10%) lighter, but given the likelihood of damage that looks like a poor risk to me. Added to that once you've had an accident any "life threatening" CF components (frame, forks or wheels) really need a complete strip and Xray investigation before they can be known to be free of any consequential defects.
The compromise for a pro rider is very different than for the amateur who "just likes nice stuff".
I would apply the same argument to cars.
Would you really ever believe in a CF tub integrity once it's had "a big one". F1 teams are able to spend whatever it takes to prove that a CF chassis is 100% before electing to race it again.
Would you trust your local dealer to have done the same to your P&J before putting you out in it again?
I'm unconvinced
For sure the weight can be brought down by the clever use of CF for unstressed body panels and for other parts, but for the core of the car CF might be the wrong material for road cars. IMHO
Fair points. Personally I would never drive any car after a "big one" - carbon fibre or aluminium tub. Torsional rigidity and structural integrity are key to everything and I'm too risk averse.For
It's light
It's strong when stressed in the designed direction
Against
It's brittle and prone to breakage in a way that metal is not
It's ££££
Last I saw it is not UV stable and is known to degrade over time with exposure. Do you really want that with a car?
I would also worry that insuring CF based vehicles could become prohibitive once the insurance industry associates accidents with "total losses".
In the world of "push bikes", CF frames using bonded and lugged tubes allows frames to be repairable for "reasonable money".
Monoque based CF bike frames are a total loss if damaged. They are invariably a few percent (maybe 10%) lighter, but given the likelihood of damage that looks like a poor risk to me. Added to that once you've had an accident any "life threatening" CF components (frame, forks or wheels) really need a complete strip and Xray investigation before they can be known to be free of any consequential defects.
The compromise for a pro rider is very different than for the amateur who "just likes nice stuff".
I would apply the same argument to cars.
Would you really ever believe in a CF tub integrity once it's had "a big one". F1 teams are able to spend whatever it takes to prove that a CF chassis is 100% before electing to race it again.
Would you trust your local dealer to have done the same to your P&J before putting you out in it again?
I'm unconvinced
For sure the weight can be brought down by the clever use of CF for unstressed body panels and for other parts, but for the core of the car CF might be the wrong material for road cars. IMHO
If the tub was replaced and the whole car rebuilt then maybe.
Having managed to do £20k of damage, £15k in a front ender at about 3mph and £5k in a 15mph rear ender I do agree that carbon fibre is pricey. But it's not vastly more expensive than a similar size panel for an V12V.
mikey k said:
I'm with you both I think it has a place but is over priced and probably bit of a fad.
When it is used on an application where it is of some use (i.e. significant weight saving or improving stiffness) then I think it is a good thing, when it's used on something with no need at all (i.e. interior fascias), I really despise it. I'm not really a fan of the way it looks unpainted either.I don't think it's a fad at all, if anything it's getting used in more and more applications, and will completely reform some industries. I'm working on a titanium leading edge for a carbon fibre fan blade for use in Rolls Royce engines. Some people I was talking to reckon there won't be any new engines with hollow titanium blades being produced in 10 years.
Edited by George H on Monday 14th November 17:57
George H said:
When it is used on an application where it is of some use (i.e. significant weight saving or improving stiffness) then I think it is a good thing, when it's used on something with no need at all (i.e. interior fascias), I really despise it. I'm not really a fan of the way it looks unpainted either.
I don't think it's a fad at all, if anything it's getting used in more and more applications, and will completely reform some industries. I'm working on a titanium leading edge for a carbon fibre fan blade for use in Rolls Royce engines. Some people I was talking to reckon there won't be any new engines with hollow titanium blades being produced in 10 years.
Like I say where it has a benefical purpose I'm sure it will prevail.I don't think it's a fad at all, if anything it's getting used in more and more applications, and will completely reform some industries. I'm working on a titanium leading edge for a carbon fibre fan blade for use in Rolls Royce engines. Some people I was talking to reckon there won't be any new engines with hollow titanium blades being produced in 10 years.
Edited by George H on Monday 14th November 17:57
I to dislike it's use as a cosmetic effect, I recently saw an "adding less weight" excercise that showed a standard Aluminium bonnet weighed less than a CF in gel coat "cosmetic" bonnet.
I managed to get away with only 4 bits on mine, 2 I had no choice over
Ironically I spoke to a company today that fit wraps to cars to include F1 teams and assorted other car companies including Aston Martin. Last week apparently amongst much secrecy AM arrived bringing with them a wooden mock up of their new model which they intend launching in 2012. The company were asked to fit a carbon fibre weave wrap to it.
I fired loads of questions to the poor chap who new little or nothing about it so for the moment we can only speculate. I would hazard a guess that it will be a DB9 replacement which would then lead to a new DBS.
I fired loads of questions to the poor chap who new little or nothing about it so for the moment we can only speculate. I would hazard a guess that it will be a DB9 replacement which would then lead to a new DBS.
robgt said:
Ironically I spoke to a company today that fit wraps to cars to include F1 teams and assorted other car companies including Aston Martin. Last week apparently amongst much secrecy AM arrived bringing with them a wooden mock up of their new model which they intend launching in 2012. The company were asked to fit a carbon fibre weave wrap to it.
I fired loads of questions to the poor chap who new little or nothing about it so for the moment we can only speculate. I would hazard a guess that it will be a DB9 replacement which would then lead to a new DBS.
I do hope your not about to wrap your S I fired loads of questions to the poor chap who new little or nothing about it so for the moment we can only speculate. I would hazard a guess that it will be a DB9 replacement which would then lead to a new DBS.
There must be a law of diminishing returns for road car development using petrol engines Does a new chassis really make such a massive difference for a road car ? When I saw the 458 in the flesh for the first time it struck me as disappointing - just another racing car design ok for a track but ....... the next significant step is going to be electric - and guess which Aston will get that first - the baby swan .Chasis development is not the issue - fuel consumption / green issues is the issue for Aston and every other manufacturer.
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff