The Aston Martin turbo V12
Discussion
Happy New Year to everyone !
Well, we have a thread about the fantastic AMG V8 variants as used by AML. Some on here will know that I’m both an owner and a fan of the other recent Aston engine offering, the turbo V12.
For anyone else who may be interested in the blown V12, the AE31 (Aston Martin Engine # 31) as fitted to DB11, DBSS, V12 Vantage 2016-2023 and a handful of more limited and expensive, still continuing bespoke stuff (Speedster, Valour), some info as to why it never set the high performance world, even the Aston world on fire…
As well as being immensely strong and smooth, fact is the AE31 is an extremely well engineered and robust engine, and does not get the respect it deserves, even in the petrolhead places like PH.
This is partly because of timing, partly bad luck, but mainly bad decisions/poor management. Such decisions hurt sales, damaged reputation and of course ultimately contributed to the ousting of the previous management.
Some reasons IMHO the fabulous AE31 was almost DOA..
1. It was launched in the DB11, which while beautiful, many considered it not such an instant design classic as the DB9.
2. It was downsized (5935cc to 5204cc) redesign of the long serving, well developed and much loved Ford bankrolled n/a V12 and it was turbocharged. Being turbo put a lot of puristy Aston folk off, even though 5 litre plus blown engines were nothing new for AM.
3. A huge heavy V12 launched when the world was already downsizing to smaller lighter configurations and just beginning the move away from the IC engine altogether.
4. The V12 should not have been launched first. The AMG V8 powered version of the DB11, launched just over a year later had an extra years worth of chassis development (stiffer bushings, retuned dampers) and was 100kg lighter in the nose, was over $20k cheaper and had almost the same torque as the very heavily sandbagged V12. So of course the V8 car felt just as fast, and way sharper. After driving the V8 and talking to AM engineers at its launch who freely admitted a bit of tweaking and chassis development (because that’s what happens…) all the fickle journos who had so loved the V12 a year earlier then slagged it off. They should have launched the AMG V8 first as the ‘cooking’ version, then the higher end own-engine V12 later.
5. AM made the very stupid mistake of panicking when V12 sales fell as a result of the success of the V8, they said they were ‘withdrawing’ the V12 and ‘replacing’ it with the ‘new’ DB11 AMR. This was both stupid and cynical, the AMR was 99.99% exactly the same car as the DB11. All AM did was copy the hardware chassis tweaks made for the V8, these being slightly harder subframe bushes. AM also claimed a very slightly (0.5mm or 40thou) thicker front ARB, even though this difference would likely be within manufacturing tolerance for such a component, and part numbers appeared to remain the same. Apart from forged wheels, smoked rear lamps, dark headlamp internals, and some garish AMR logos, it’s the exact same suite of hardware, the same car. The differences for AMR were essentially thus just new firmware maps for the sportier driveline and suspension modes, ie recalibrated engine, transmission and dampers. The 30hp higher peak on the AMR came from holding onto that heavily limited 700Nm of torque for another 500rpm at the top end.
AM effectively disowning their own product so soon really damaged the original DB11 V12 with it being essentially disregarded as a failure within 2 years of its own launch. Watch any moronic youtuber video or later review. Such stuff does nothing for the reputation of the company, the product or its engine.
6. Perhaps the biggest mistake - the specification of the ZF8HP70 in all versions of DB11. This version of the ZF8 was rated at 700Nm maximum (hence the name) This was fine for the AMG 4.0 V8, which at that time was maxing out at around 685Nm, but meant that the V12, even in AMR tune, had to be heavily torque limited, to just 700Nm. Using a low spec and presumably lower cost transmission (ZF8HP75 was available in 2016) meant that AML could never, during its entire run in the DB11, really differentiate their mighty, in house, 5.2 V12 from the much cheaper AMG 4.0 V8.
Only when the far more expensive DBS Suoerleggerra was launched in 2018 did we get to see what the V12 was really made of. It had the ZF8HP95 and the otherwise exact same AE31’s twin, twin scroll turbos could finally be allowed some boost. In DBSS, the AE31’s Torque went from 700 to 900Nm. Power went to 726hp and the last versions (DBS ultimate) left the factory (again, exact same AE31 engine assembly part number) with 770hp. I’d lay odds that the aftermarket, esp in USA could easily take this motor to 1000hp with minimal changes, perhaps just new fuel pumps and turbos.
7. Traction. The front engined rear drive DB11 and DBS always struggled to get their power down. They were both traction limited. It meant fairly ordinary numbers for those who cared. This was partly due to the continued used of those awful hard Bridgestone tyres, a hangover from the Ford days. Modern sticky tyres improve things greatly.
Fact is, the AE31 was and is a beast, an absolute mother of a motor. It was designed from the outset with a very high quality forged crank, forged rods and forged pistons. It is immensely strong and immensely smooth, even in low boost excellent throttle response DB11 form, and with most of the exhaust gases bypassing the turbos to limit the power it makes a fabulous exhaust noise, despite being turbocharged, as well as an intoxicating intake roar under heavy acceleration and high rpm. It is a true Aston Martin Engine.
https://youtu.be/0IREtCujKJk?si=CPV4-mams6usnhqh
Well, we have a thread about the fantastic AMG V8 variants as used by AML. Some on here will know that I’m both an owner and a fan of the other recent Aston engine offering, the turbo V12.
For anyone else who may be interested in the blown V12, the AE31 (Aston Martin Engine # 31) as fitted to DB11, DBSS, V12 Vantage 2016-2023 and a handful of more limited and expensive, still continuing bespoke stuff (Speedster, Valour), some info as to why it never set the high performance world, even the Aston world on fire…
As well as being immensely strong and smooth, fact is the AE31 is an extremely well engineered and robust engine, and does not get the respect it deserves, even in the petrolhead places like PH.
This is partly because of timing, partly bad luck, but mainly bad decisions/poor management. Such decisions hurt sales, damaged reputation and of course ultimately contributed to the ousting of the previous management.
Some reasons IMHO the fabulous AE31 was almost DOA..
1. It was launched in the DB11, which while beautiful, many considered it not such an instant design classic as the DB9.
2. It was downsized (5935cc to 5204cc) redesign of the long serving, well developed and much loved Ford bankrolled n/a V12 and it was turbocharged. Being turbo put a lot of puristy Aston folk off, even though 5 litre plus blown engines were nothing new for AM.
3. A huge heavy V12 launched when the world was already downsizing to smaller lighter configurations and just beginning the move away from the IC engine altogether.
4. The V12 should not have been launched first. The AMG V8 powered version of the DB11, launched just over a year later had an extra years worth of chassis development (stiffer bushings, retuned dampers) and was 100kg lighter in the nose, was over $20k cheaper and had almost the same torque as the very heavily sandbagged V12. So of course the V8 car felt just as fast, and way sharper. After driving the V8 and talking to AM engineers at its launch who freely admitted a bit of tweaking and chassis development (because that’s what happens…) all the fickle journos who had so loved the V12 a year earlier then slagged it off. They should have launched the AMG V8 first as the ‘cooking’ version, then the higher end own-engine V12 later.
5. AM made the very stupid mistake of panicking when V12 sales fell as a result of the success of the V8, they said they were ‘withdrawing’ the V12 and ‘replacing’ it with the ‘new’ DB11 AMR. This was both stupid and cynical, the AMR was 99.99% exactly the same car as the DB11. All AM did was copy the hardware chassis tweaks made for the V8, these being slightly harder subframe bushes. AM also claimed a very slightly (0.5mm or 40thou) thicker front ARB, even though this difference would likely be within manufacturing tolerance for such a component, and part numbers appeared to remain the same. Apart from forged wheels, smoked rear lamps, dark headlamp internals, and some garish AMR logos, it’s the exact same suite of hardware, the same car. The differences for AMR were essentially thus just new firmware maps for the sportier driveline and suspension modes, ie recalibrated engine, transmission and dampers. The 30hp higher peak on the AMR came from holding onto that heavily limited 700Nm of torque for another 500rpm at the top end.
AM effectively disowning their own product so soon really damaged the original DB11 V12 with it being essentially disregarded as a failure within 2 years of its own launch. Watch any moronic youtuber video or later review. Such stuff does nothing for the reputation of the company, the product or its engine.
6. Perhaps the biggest mistake - the specification of the ZF8HP70 in all versions of DB11. This version of the ZF8 was rated at 700Nm maximum (hence the name) This was fine for the AMG 4.0 V8, which at that time was maxing out at around 685Nm, but meant that the V12, even in AMR tune, had to be heavily torque limited, to just 700Nm. Using a low spec and presumably lower cost transmission (ZF8HP75 was available in 2016) meant that AML could never, during its entire run in the DB11, really differentiate their mighty, in house, 5.2 V12 from the much cheaper AMG 4.0 V8.
Only when the far more expensive DBS Suoerleggerra was launched in 2018 did we get to see what the V12 was really made of. It had the ZF8HP95 and the otherwise exact same AE31’s twin, twin scroll turbos could finally be allowed some boost. In DBSS, the AE31’s Torque went from 700 to 900Nm. Power went to 726hp and the last versions (DBS ultimate) left the factory (again, exact same AE31 engine assembly part number) with 770hp. I’d lay odds that the aftermarket, esp in USA could easily take this motor to 1000hp with minimal changes, perhaps just new fuel pumps and turbos.
7. Traction. The front engined rear drive DB11 and DBS always struggled to get their power down. They were both traction limited. It meant fairly ordinary numbers for those who cared. This was partly due to the continued used of those awful hard Bridgestone tyres, a hangover from the Ford days. Modern sticky tyres improve things greatly.
Fact is, the AE31 was and is a beast, an absolute mother of a motor. It was designed from the outset with a very high quality forged crank, forged rods and forged pistons. It is immensely strong and immensely smooth, even in low boost excellent throttle response DB11 form, and with most of the exhaust gases bypassing the turbos to limit the power it makes a fabulous exhaust noise, despite being turbocharged, as well as an intoxicating intake roar under heavy acceleration and high rpm. It is a true Aston Martin Engine.
https://youtu.be/0IREtCujKJk?si=CPV4-mams6usnhqh
Edited by Calinours on Monday 1st January 12:54
DB11 only came on the Bridgestone S007, DBS was on the Pirelli Pzero AM7. I know within Gaydon don't like the Bridgestone, so I can only imagine a significant deal was struck. You can update them luckily as the sizes are common to Pilot Sports, I have never had an issue with the Pirellis mind on my Vantage.
The other issue regarding traction that was improved more so on DBS with time was the mapping, later cars being better to drive, but really it was not fully solved until the 770 Ultimate, which is far more linear in delivery.
Finally on that gearbox front the Vantage V12 (AM6)/Speedster has the same problem as the DB11 V12 where the torque is reduced owing to the gearbox. Valour is using the Graziano box we have seen previously, from understanding again the limiting issue being the box does not allow torque high enough.
Really brutally if you want the AE31 in full potential you need a DBS or to somehow retrofit or upgrade the lower gearbox.
I know some will say that the differences are minor and a number of remapped cars are above the safe limits of x version, but really if you want to use it as intended having the right hardware beneath you to transmit it to the road is something personally I would want on my side.
The other issue regarding traction that was improved more so on DBS with time was the mapping, later cars being better to drive, but really it was not fully solved until the 770 Ultimate, which is far more linear in delivery.
Finally on that gearbox front the Vantage V12 (AM6)/Speedster has the same problem as the DB11 V12 where the torque is reduced owing to the gearbox. Valour is using the Graziano box we have seen previously, from understanding again the limiting issue being the box does not allow torque high enough.
Really brutally if you want the AE31 in full potential you need a DBS or to somehow retrofit or upgrade the lower gearbox.
I know some will say that the differences are minor and a number of remapped cars are above the safe limits of x version, but really if you want to use it as intended having the right hardware beneath you to transmit it to the road is something personally I would want on my side.
Yeah, it seems the only way is DBS (ideally later) if the real factory torque and thus power of the AE31 is desired. I keep thinking of Clarkson’s comical runs in Baku. I wouldn’t regularly put 900Nm through a 700Nm rated transmission and not expect it to not only wear out much quicker but likely prematurely and catastrophically fail.
I also put PS4S on my car and the difference in traction, braking and lateral grip from the crappy OEM Bridgestones was night and day. Recommended to all.
Another point I omitted to mention in the list of the issues for the AE31 was legislation. Key markets around the world taxing anything more than four litres much more heavily making the bigger engine option seriously cost prohibitive (ie China). Also the decision to retain port injection making the development needed to meet what would and will likely be the last round of emissions standards (EU7) that bit more expensive.
I also put PS4S on my car and the difference in traction, braking and lateral grip from the crappy OEM Bridgestones was night and day. Recommended to all.
Another point I omitted to mention in the list of the issues for the AE31 was legislation. Key markets around the world taxing anything more than four litres much more heavily making the bigger engine option seriously cost prohibitive (ie China). Also the decision to retain port injection making the development needed to meet what would and will likely be the last round of emissions standards (EU7) that bit more expensive.
Edited by Calinours on Monday 1st January 21:16
Great discussion starter Calinours - thanks & HNY to you too
I'm always (crazy I know but some of you will understand) thinking of the next Aston - and it has to be either a V550 or a DBS
this thinking is somewhat constrained by the limits of my man maths and may well be only theoretical (as Mrs Graze has a list of house and holiday items which occupy her mind just as Astons occupy mine)
that being said the DBS are relatively available down under and prices are creeping down so by the time I've paid off the F1 I might be able to add a DBS or trade one for the other (the lesser option I must say). A V550 on the other hand is almost unheard of in Australia - I believe there are a couple and a works replica recently sold quite quickly so I think my chances on that front are limited
good to understand a bit more about the difference between the AMR & the standard DB11 - I have had an AMR for a week (while Aston was mucking around with my V12V) and really loved it - its owned by an acquaintance and currently for sale but the timing is all wrong
https://www.carsales.com.au/cars/details/2018-asto...
nice car though
Graze
I'm always (crazy I know but some of you will understand) thinking of the next Aston - and it has to be either a V550 or a DBS
this thinking is somewhat constrained by the limits of my man maths and may well be only theoretical (as Mrs Graze has a list of house and holiday items which occupy her mind just as Astons occupy mine)
that being said the DBS are relatively available down under and prices are creeping down so by the time I've paid off the F1 I might be able to add a DBS or trade one for the other (the lesser option I must say). A V550 on the other hand is almost unheard of in Australia - I believe there are a couple and a works replica recently sold quite quickly so I think my chances on that front are limited
good to understand a bit more about the difference between the AMR & the standard DB11 - I have had an AMR for a week (while Aston was mucking around with my V12V) and really loved it - its owned by an acquaintance and currently for sale but the timing is all wrong
https://www.carsales.com.au/cars/details/2018-asto...
nice car though
Graze
This might be somewhat of a tangent, but I have always been confused as to why this engine wasn't used for the last halo car and instead the decision was made for the Valkyrie which was always going to be an exceptionally difficult project for AM to get right.
Something like a baby Bugatti instead of the razor blade Valkyrie which is more in keeping with the brand and likely more appealing to a wider crowd.
Something like a baby Bugatti instead of the razor blade Valkyrie which is more in keeping with the brand and likely more appealing to a wider crowd.
WantSagaris said:
This might be somewhat of a tangent, but I have always been confused as to why this engine wasn't used for the last halo car and instead the decision was made for the Valkyrie which was always going to be an exceptionally difficult project for AM to get right.
Something like a baby Bugatti instead of the razor blade Valkyrie which is more in keeping with the brand and likely more appealing to a wider crowd.
RB actually commissioned Cosworth to create and build the RA engine not AM, I also suspect the same is true of the hybrid system which is actually from Rimac.Something like a baby Bugatti instead of the razor blade Valkyrie which is more in keeping with the brand and likely more appealing to a wider crowd.
Just to go back to the original post and discuss about 1000hp out of an AE31, the weak point is the turbos.
During testing of the 770 Ultimate AM had a map running 812bhp from an AE31, the turbos were really at the absolute limit though.
Good to see Harry also had the 770 Ultimate in his top 5 of 2023!
During testing of the 770 Ultimate AM had a map running 812bhp from an AE31, the turbos were really at the absolute limit though.
Good to see Harry also had the 770 Ultimate in his top 5 of 2023!
Ninja59 said:
Just to go back to the original post and discuss about 1000hp out of an AE31, the weak point is the turbos.
During testing of the 770 Ultimate AM had a map running 812bhp from an AE31, the turbos were really at the absolute limit though.
Good to see Harry also had the 770 Ultimate in his top 5 of 2023!
Absolutely. Also that old Vantage with the upgraded RSW 7.0, what utterly glorious noises those old things can make. During testing of the 770 Ultimate AM had a map running 812bhp from an AE31, the turbos were really at the absolute limit though.
Good to see Harry also had the 770 Ultimate in his top 5 of 2023!
btw I did mention in the OP it would likely need bigger turbos for that sort of power
- interesting that around 800 is actually the limit with the current turbo hardware. Many power junkies would be happy with that, still an enormous number, and still likely beyond what’s realistically usable with that RWD chassis, even with the later more sensitive DBS torque management, and if the updated DB12 dampers, wheels and tyres are fitted.Edited by Calinours on Monday 8th January 18:08
Calinours said:
Ninja59 said:
Just to go back to the original post and discuss about 1000hp out of an AE31, the weak point is the turbos.
During testing of the 770 Ultimate AM had a map running 812bhp from an AE31, the turbos were really at the absolute limit though.
Good to see Harry also had the 770 Ultimate in his top 5 of 2023!
Absolutely. Also that old Vantage with the upgraded RSW 7.0, what utterly glorious noises those old things can make. During testing of the 770 Ultimate AM had a map running 812bhp from an AE31, the turbos were really at the absolute limit though.
Good to see Harry also had the 770 Ultimate in his top 5 of 2023!
btw I did mention in the OP it would likely need bigger turbos for that sort of power
- interesting that around 800 is actually the limit with the current turbo hardware. Many power junkies would be happy with that, still an enormous number, and still likely beyond what’s realistically usable with that RWD chassis, even with the later more sensitive DBS torque management, and if the updated DB12 dampers, wheels and tyres are fitted.Edited by Calinours on Monday 8th January 18:08
BenAstonV12 said:
Thanks for the original post Calinours. Really interesting. Obviously 100% biased here, but can certainly agree, especially after a recent blast up the Pacific Coast Highway with hardly any other traffic, that once up and going the Vantage V12 has an incredible engine, and with how they tuned the engine, you don't feel much if any "turbo lag", plus 690 BHP in that car is more than plenty
Nice. The engine is also heavily torque limited in that application, pegged to ~750Nm maximum, I’m not sure what transmission was fitted in the ‘new’ V12 Vantage but that specified torque would suggest it’s the lighter 8HP75 as in the DB12. Restricting peak torque especially at lower rpm means lower boost and would some way to explaining why throttle response is so good. It was clearly tuned to build power more progressively than the earlier applications (DB11, DBSS that developed peak torque as low as 1500rpm) thus still becoming explosive at the top end without overwhelming the tyres on the way as the earlier DBSS became known for. Calinours said:
Nice. The engine is also heavily torque limited in that application, pegged to ~750Nm maximum, I’m not sure what transmission was fitted in the ‘new’ V12 Vantage but that specified torque would suggest it’s the lighter 8HP75 as in the DB12. Restricting peak torque especially at lower rpm means lower boost and would some way to explaining why throttle response is so good. It was clearly tuned to build power more progressively than the earlier applications (DB11, DBSS that developed peak torque as low as 1500rpm) thus still becoming explosive at the top end without overwhelming the tyres on the way as the earlier DBSS became known for.
Still the 75 version Yeah, thought so. Still better than the 8HP70 as fitted to the DB11 (V12 and V8). Perhaps never was an engine/car more limited by its transmission as the DB11 V12 and yes the DB11 AMR, being the same car. If AML had at least fitted the 75 in the ‘AMR’ they’d have easily been able to run the V12 engine at 670bhp (as of course they are doing with the 75 equipped but AMG V8 engined DB12, and of course the smoother, higher revving and even higher peak power V12 Vantage).
The DBS should have had the chassis and torque management development sooner and then quickly been taken to 790-800 (the MHI twin scroll turbo limit as indicated above) enabling it to more readily take on the Ferrari 812 superfast on more even terms.
Ahh, the monday morning quarterback, as our US cousins would say.
Fact is, if not limited by its transmission, that V12 (in DB11 application) would have naturally focussed resources more on chassis development and thus have been offered the opportunity to shine far more brightly than it did.
The DBS should have had the chassis and torque management development sooner and then quickly been taken to 790-800 (the MHI twin scroll turbo limit as indicated above) enabling it to more readily take on the Ferrari 812 superfast on more even terms.
Ahh, the monday morning quarterback, as our US cousins would say.
Fact is, if not limited by its transmission, that V12 (in DB11 application) would have naturally focussed resources more on chassis development and thus have been offered the opportunity to shine far more brightly than it did.
Edited by Calinours on Monday 22 January 21:02
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff