Educated guesses using AM SAE papers and horsesense. The V8 Dry Sump feature was judged key to the credible new entry level AM product.

To make money (achieve an acceptable profit objective) the Vantage program had to exploit the VH concept, sharing available Ford Corporate and AM powertrain, chassis and body hardware and critical AM dimensions (called hardpoints by automotive packaging engineers).

The designers (stylists) probably saw a lower than DB9 hood height necessary to sweeten the Vantage proportions resulting from reduced front and rear overhangs and shortened wheelbase dimensions (4 less cylinders, 2 less passengers).

A dry sump was chosen (vs a long, wide powerdome, unacceptable ground clearance, and others). It also offered a "race" feature to be marketed. And so a dry sumped small Corporate DOHC V8 was programmed for the entry level Aston.

The result: outstanding. A volume and profit generating beauty. Customers willing to wait 6 months or more and pay $30 to $50K over the facing competition. 2007 AM volume totaled 7000+ and AM made a profit...maybe their first ever.

Comments, critiques, anyone have first hand knowledge?

 

I can't comment on any of the design/engineering, I'm interested to see what more knowledgeable folks have to say in response.

I saw the AM volume of 7000+, is that the total # of Vantages they have sold since launch or just for that MY? Either number is somewhat surprising, I did not expect to hear that they have sold so many. Good for AM and good for the future of our brand.

 

I just answered my own question using trusty Wikipedia.

While the V8 Vantage remains a rare and special car by any standard, the success of the model is highlighted by the completion of chassis number 10,000 – a specially ordered Onyx Coupe delivered to a customer in USA – in the first half of 2008. While the production of 10,000 cars is a tiny number by the standards of typical car manufacturers, it is a significant milestone for an Aston Martin model – the DB9 being the only other Aston Martin model to have achieved that figure.

I am surprised to hear that the DB9 has also sold more than 10k units.

 

That really was my point...it was needed for packaging, but is used as a Vantage 'marketing' gimmick.

 

It is a Jaguar derived engine with a dry sump to enable it to be fitted lower and further back behind the front wheels. This helps achieve the 50/50 weight distribution.
The Gaydon plant has produced around 4000 cars across the model range after it exams fully operational.

 

mikey K, yes Jag engineered the first iteration of our V8. I had my Vantage at Ford's Product Development Car Show the last 3 summers. At one of them a Ford engine engineer (with a British accent) declared it a Jag derivative. I believe this engine is still being manufactured for Jaguar and Land Rover at Ford's Bridgend Wales Engine Plant. It started at 3.9L, now its 5.0L.

Ford also built the same basic engine in their Lima, Ohio Engine Plant, first for the Lincoln LS, then added the latest 2 passenger Thunderbird. I leased 2 LS's and then a T-bird, outstanding North American Ford products.

I believe all of the above were available with not only conventional oil pans but also only automatic transmissions.

Our V8V engine is built at Ford's Cologne, Germany Engine Plant. The Italian 6 speed is probably the first manual transmission for this engine family.

Last summer Aston and Ford contracted to continue building the V8 (and V12 as well) thru 2015.

 

Yep Bridgend still build the JLR 5.0 engine (for now)
JLR are building a new enginer plant
I'm advised AM fell out with JLR over the 5.0 so you won't see that in an Aston
The V8 box is a manual Graziano box with auctuators for Sportshift
Derivatives of it were also used in Maseratis and Ferraris. But they have now moved on to the twin clutch Graziano system. The new 7 speed box is also a derivative of the 6 speed Graziano unit but now air cooled.

 

I conclude mikey's fallout has to have occurred as a result of the loss of Ford as leader, setter of objectives and standards, and provider of investment capital.

All of a sudden Jag and Aston are competitors struggling in a market down by 40% or more.

Cooperative ventures, like the V8, became competitive. And it was expensive. Jag, I am told, offerred to split the cost of further development of the V8. Aston turned them down, probably to maintain the V12 performance and price premium vs. the V8.

Jag succeeds, the result a 5.0L supercharged HP monster equaling Aston's V12

Product overlaps had already started. Aston introduced Rapide, a 4 door. Jag territory?

And it continues as Jag intros the Collum designed 2 pass, XKE replacement, finally, later this year. Vantage territory?

Collegial Jag/Aston interchanges of support under Ford, on technology, purchasing, product development and others are suddenly history. Welcome to the world of competition.

 

Wow..topic seems to be going off-topic with comps vs. Jag..

None the less like "mikey K" stated with the dry sump this enables aston to lower and back the engine to allow 50:50 split weight ratio.

The "PRIMARY" reason aston went to a dry sump system on the V8V, dry sump has the added advantage/ability to allow the engine to produce additional power when compared to wet sump.

Aston did not need to fish for extra power by punching and stroking to the limits and then fit a hot cam..powertrain was kept to a smooth operation. With converting to dry sump, extra power and weight ratio/clearance was achieved..

 

Makes sense

 

Dry sump applications are expensive, both to engineer and develop and in the assembly and piece price incurred with every car. Look at our engine, big stainless weldment, magnificent knurled machined filler cap/dipstick, numerous oil return lines, an oil/air seperator, etc. I think it took a whole list of reasons to justify its high cost on our entry level Astons.

Irish has added another reason. I believe he is talking about elimination/minimization of windage via a dry sump. Windage is the loss of power caused by the internal pumping/flailing of the crankshaft churning through the oil in a conventional pan.

Mike, are you lurking? Can you comment? Anything we missed?

 

My understanding is the dry sump development was done on the race cars and simply transferred to a "production item"
Albiet an expensive one
Interestingly the current GT4 engine still uses it and the only really differences from the production 4.7 is the exhaust system, head porting & polishing, balancing and a change of conrods.
So the production engine is actually quite close the the race engine.

 

While "derived" from the Jag engine, my understanding is that essentially nothing is common to the Jag engine and the Aston engine. With the 4.3, the block was cast to the same spec, but once it was machined it was unique to Aston. I don't know whether the 4.7 block is cast to the same spec prior to machining -- does anybody here know? Then...

Everything else is unique to Aston, including the crank, rods, bearings, pistons, rings, valves, cams, heads, etc. And, of course, the gorgeous, race-worthy dry sump.

 

The 4.3 L started life as a 4.2 L from Jaguar. No idea as to the 4.7 L though.

 

4.7 is based on the 4.3