Aston vs Ford GT???
#47
Believe they made it for 2 years, not 1. Cars like the GT generally have a strong following and specialty sites will make hard to find replacements in years to come. A good example would be Hall Pantera for the also limited DeTomaso Pantera that Ford powered.
The GT is a solid vehicle, many are twin-turbocharged and they continue to set the bar in the mile.
I would love to have a GT and the Aston in the garage
The GT is a solid vehicle, many are twin-turbocharged and they continue to set the bar in the mile.
I would love to have a GT and the Aston in the garage
(Longest run-on sentence I've typed on 6speed)
#48
I'm going to drive it again this Saturday. We will see what a second drive reveals. The Vantage has a lot of character, that always makes another car difficult. Even if they are "better" performers, I have found some lack the charm.
I'll let you know what I think.
I'll let you know what I think.
#49
Nice write up penguin. Interesting to hear about the GT as I've never driven one. The V12 is similar in terms of always having power on tap, and that is in no way a problem. In fact, it's one of the things I like most about the car. I recently drove a Ferrari 360. On paper, it's nearly as fast as the V12V but it lacked low-end grunt. While the car was fast as long as you kept it on the boil, it was disappointing after being spoiled by the torque of the V12.
Would love a link to your review of life in a V12 Vantage. Never driven one. Does it sound and drive vastly different than the V8?
Is it more on edge? Etc
#50
You really need to test drive one. Here's the link to thread I started soon after buying the car.
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...2-vantage.html
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...2-vantage.html
#51
Great Thread
You really need to test drive one. Here's the link to thread I started soon after buying the car.
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...2-vantage.html
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...2-vantage.html
#54
Drove the FGT again. Much the same story as before. The car has a fanatic presence to it. If you love the idea of a car as a machine, it ticks the boxes. Watchingbthecwide rear drivemaway is poetry. Unlike what cars are about today.
Once again I was underwhelmed by the cabin noise. It's loud, but not the good loud. The exhaust is easy enough to change, so that's not a worry. I'm more concerned about the character of the motor. It never seems to build revs, unless of corse you beat on it, though on the street that is so difficult given second gear beats all speed laws. I'm excited to see how the Aston Vantage V12 drives, because I hear it has a beautiful build and a massive sound. For the record my AMV8 is a visceral cornucopia compared to the Ford. This is giving me pause. Aston really nailed it as far as sensoral delight with this car.
Both my TTRS and the Range Rover Sport supercharged have forced induction motors (as did my S4), so I understand the charcter of a motor like that. In the TTRS it's awesome. It masks the tiny motor and you can always thrash it. Plus the five pot has a buzzy character that s a ton of fun. I really do LOVE that motor. The gearing is fun too, always just enough power, no matter where you are on the track. So on a small displacement motor it really is cool to turbo charge. On the big Rangie, it's neither here nor there. It is an excellent engine, but engine note and character is not the point of big trucks. The constant push is the real point. In this application it is more like the Ford, just a constant surge, a constant push, but no build, not crescendo. Just all orgasim, all the time.
So, i want to drive the V12 Aston and see what it gives me. The upside is I get to stay in the Aston fold. I really do think they build a hell of a car. I get a harder edge, I keep the Aston charm and attention to detail. Its a far more exclusive car. It s finished beautifully.
Downsides: it's similar to my current car and a less interesting color (black vs blue). It's slower than the TTRS. It costs twice what my 2009 Aston costs. I'm not sure how they will depreciate.
The Ford has upsides too: it's a real throwback and likely the end of a certain type of car. The car is gaining in value. It looks amazing. The whole gestalt of the car is amazing, literally every super car seems to have risen from its primordial goo (original car predates the Jalpa). It is very cheap to run and the buyers like some mods. It's fast as hell.
Downsides: lacks the badge of Aston. The engine is on display, but poorly finished relative to an F458, lambo or R8. Most of the best tires are not available. Very shouty (also a plus). Primitive (good and bad).
So, anyone drive both? Anyone own both? Anyone own a V12 with a pov?
Once again I was underwhelmed by the cabin noise. It's loud, but not the good loud. The exhaust is easy enough to change, so that's not a worry. I'm more concerned about the character of the motor. It never seems to build revs, unless of corse you beat on it, though on the street that is so difficult given second gear beats all speed laws. I'm excited to see how the Aston Vantage V12 drives, because I hear it has a beautiful build and a massive sound. For the record my AMV8 is a visceral cornucopia compared to the Ford. This is giving me pause. Aston really nailed it as far as sensoral delight with this car.
Both my TTRS and the Range Rover Sport supercharged have forced induction motors (as did my S4), so I understand the charcter of a motor like that. In the TTRS it's awesome. It masks the tiny motor and you can always thrash it. Plus the five pot has a buzzy character that s a ton of fun. I really do LOVE that motor. The gearing is fun too, always just enough power, no matter where you are on the track. So on a small displacement motor it really is cool to turbo charge. On the big Rangie, it's neither here nor there. It is an excellent engine, but engine note and character is not the point of big trucks. The constant push is the real point. In this application it is more like the Ford, just a constant surge, a constant push, but no build, not crescendo. Just all orgasim, all the time.
So, i want to drive the V12 Aston and see what it gives me. The upside is I get to stay in the Aston fold. I really do think they build a hell of a car. I get a harder edge, I keep the Aston charm and attention to detail. Its a far more exclusive car. It s finished beautifully.
Downsides: it's similar to my current car and a less interesting color (black vs blue). It's slower than the TTRS. It costs twice what my 2009 Aston costs. I'm not sure how they will depreciate.
The Ford has upsides too: it's a real throwback and likely the end of a certain type of car. The car is gaining in value. It looks amazing. The whole gestalt of the car is amazing, literally every super car seems to have risen from its primordial goo (original car predates the Jalpa). It is very cheap to run and the buyers like some mods. It's fast as hell.
Downsides: lacks the badge of Aston. The engine is on display, but poorly finished relative to an F458, lambo or R8. Most of the best tires are not available. Very shouty (also a plus). Primitive (good and bad).
So, anyone drive both? Anyone own both? Anyone own a V12 with a pov?
#55
^^^ Penguin you're all over the place bro lol Stick with your '09 Vantage she's a beauty! Save the cash on the v12v upgrade now, keep an eye out for other options as time goes by...you have a nice stable of cars, no need to really replace the v8v that I can see off hand. One of the hardest parts of being a car guy is choosing the cars you want but it's a good dilemma to have, especially in uncertain times and less than stable economy.
#56
Penguin,
Your comments about the Ford GT are interesting – it’s always been on my “list.” The V12V is an awesome thing – like a V8V but much more of a beast. It is brutal in a way that a V8V is not (like you, I have a 4.7 V8V, though mine has the Sports Pack, which I love), and it’s an absolute blast.
While I firmly believe that an Aston Martin is much more than just the “numbers,” the numbers do matter as they are a part of the overall experience, so I feel compelled to address your comparisons to the performance of the TT RS. The “accusation” that the 4.3 V8V isn’t that quick seems to be spreading to the 4.7, which is frustrating and, IMO, simply untrue. Now, it seems that even the V12V isn’t being recognized as the performer that it is.
You say the TT RS is quicker than the V12V – it’s not. In fact, independent magazine tests show that the 4.7 V8V is as quick, or quicker, as the TT RS.
In my experience, turbocharged cars feel quicker than naturally aspirated cars that offer similar performance because of the rush of boost pressure. They usually have very good mid-range torque, so in-gear acceleration is very strong. Also, the TT RS is AWD, so it can launch from a standing start extremely hard, which is obviously good for 0-60 figures.
So, let’s look at the test results from three mags…
Motor Trend
0-60: TT RS 4.2; V8V 4.1
0-100: TT RS no time; V8V 9.98
¼ mile speed: TT RS 107.6; V8V 115.0
Car&Driver
0-60: TT RS 4.0; V8V 4.3
0-100: TT RS 10.3; V8V 10.2
0-150: TT RS 26.4; V8V 26.0
¼ mile speed: TT RS 112; V8V 112
Rolling start 5-60: TT RS 5.3; V8V 4.8
Road&Track
0-60: TT RS 4.0; V8V 4.5
¼ mile speed: TT RS 109.6; V8V 113.3
This V8V was a Roadster -- almost 200 lbs heavier than the Coupe, which would be slightly quicker.
These test results show that the V8V is the quicker car in every measure except 0-60, which is obviously the test that is most influenced by the launch – at which the AWD Audi clearly has the traction advantage. And yet, the Aston claws back all of the time lost at launch, and then some more. C&D’s rolling 5-60 test is intended to negate the traction-at-launch aspect – most people wouldn’t subject their own cars to such brutality – and the Aston wins it easily. Certainly, the V8V won't match the on-boost mid-range thrust of the TT RS, but use the 'box and the performance is there. Oh, and regarding the V12V, clearly the TT RS is not the quicker car…
The TT RS is a great car, but the V8V is faster than people give it credit for. Plus, you get all that "Aston-ness." And yes, the V12V is just awesome (so is a Ford GT).
Your comments about the Ford GT are interesting – it’s always been on my “list.” The V12V is an awesome thing – like a V8V but much more of a beast. It is brutal in a way that a V8V is not (like you, I have a 4.7 V8V, though mine has the Sports Pack, which I love), and it’s an absolute blast.
While I firmly believe that an Aston Martin is much more than just the “numbers,” the numbers do matter as they are a part of the overall experience, so I feel compelled to address your comparisons to the performance of the TT RS. The “accusation” that the 4.3 V8V isn’t that quick seems to be spreading to the 4.7, which is frustrating and, IMO, simply untrue. Now, it seems that even the V12V isn’t being recognized as the performer that it is.
You say the TT RS is quicker than the V12V – it’s not. In fact, independent magazine tests show that the 4.7 V8V is as quick, or quicker, as the TT RS.
In my experience, turbocharged cars feel quicker than naturally aspirated cars that offer similar performance because of the rush of boost pressure. They usually have very good mid-range torque, so in-gear acceleration is very strong. Also, the TT RS is AWD, so it can launch from a standing start extremely hard, which is obviously good for 0-60 figures.
So, let’s look at the test results from three mags…
Motor Trend
0-60: TT RS 4.2; V8V 4.1
0-100: TT RS no time; V8V 9.98
¼ mile speed: TT RS 107.6; V8V 115.0
Car&Driver
0-60: TT RS 4.0; V8V 4.3
0-100: TT RS 10.3; V8V 10.2
0-150: TT RS 26.4; V8V 26.0
¼ mile speed: TT RS 112; V8V 112
Rolling start 5-60: TT RS 5.3; V8V 4.8
Road&Track
0-60: TT RS 4.0; V8V 4.5
¼ mile speed: TT RS 109.6; V8V 113.3
This V8V was a Roadster -- almost 200 lbs heavier than the Coupe, which would be slightly quicker.
These test results show that the V8V is the quicker car in every measure except 0-60, which is obviously the test that is most influenced by the launch – at which the AWD Audi clearly has the traction advantage. And yet, the Aston claws back all of the time lost at launch, and then some more. C&D’s rolling 5-60 test is intended to negate the traction-at-launch aspect – most people wouldn’t subject their own cars to such brutality – and the Aston wins it easily. Certainly, the V8V won't match the on-boost mid-range thrust of the TT RS, but use the 'box and the performance is there. Oh, and regarding the V12V, clearly the TT RS is not the quicker car…
The TT RS is a great car, but the V8V is faster than people give it credit for. Plus, you get all that "Aston-ness." And yes, the V12V is just awesome (so is a Ford GT).
#57
@Sunir, I'm not all over the place
First off I'm really happy with my 09 Aston. It's a really fantastic car, very daily drive able, though I don't need it to be. But, I love cars and at the moment, I endulge. The economy is not the best, so at the moment there are some buys out there.
The Ford GT and the Aston V12, are a strange pair. They are very similar and at the same time polar opposites. The Ford wears the crown of working class hero that taught the giants a lesson. The Aston is a mix of British aristocracy and muscle car. Privilege and hoonery.
But they also have a lot in common. They are both underdogs at this game relative to the Italians and the Germans. They aren't supposed to be as good as they are. Both are throw backs, big motors, big tourque, manual transmission, lots of cubes. They are manly cars that feel organic, the final evolution of their kind before they get outlawed. Even though they arent really rivals, they do check a lot of the same boxes. They are both an alternative to status quo.
Drove the V12 for the first time tonight. It really is that much better than my 09. It's like the V12 is the supermodel and my car is her really hot sister; same DNA, same bits, but a little less awesome (not that I'm complaining).
The Aston is a sensoral delight. They build cars that are like giant watches, everything is about the details that combined add up to more. That engine is glorious sounding and it has the charcter the Ford lacks. It wants you to push it and it rewards you for doing it. Addictive. Stunning. Seductive.
So that leaves me in a strange place. The V12 is a driving delight, awesome, but it is familiar. So much of the experience can be had with my current car. Is it worth the extra for the engine?? How will it depreciate? The reviews are killer!!
The Ford GT is a totally different experience. Engine in the middle, functional vs luxurious. Even though it lacks finess and finishing you find in European cars (the engine compartment for starters), it's honest and exotic. It's a safe bet depreciation wise as well, but the Aston was the more eager car. The Aston drives the way the Ford looks.
No rush and it's fun. I think I like these two brands because of what they share and how they differ.
One looks like a race car and drives like a GT.
The other looks like a GT and drives like a race car.
First off I'm really happy with my 09 Aston. It's a really fantastic car, very daily drive able, though I don't need it to be. But, I love cars and at the moment, I endulge. The economy is not the best, so at the moment there are some buys out there.
The Ford GT and the Aston V12, are a strange pair. They are very similar and at the same time polar opposites. The Ford wears the crown of working class hero that taught the giants a lesson. The Aston is a mix of British aristocracy and muscle car. Privilege and hoonery.
But they also have a lot in common. They are both underdogs at this game relative to the Italians and the Germans. They aren't supposed to be as good as they are. Both are throw backs, big motors, big tourque, manual transmission, lots of cubes. They are manly cars that feel organic, the final evolution of their kind before they get outlawed. Even though they arent really rivals, they do check a lot of the same boxes. They are both an alternative to status quo.
Drove the V12 for the first time tonight. It really is that much better than my 09. It's like the V12 is the supermodel and my car is her really hot sister; same DNA, same bits, but a little less awesome (not that I'm complaining).
The Aston is a sensoral delight. They build cars that are like giant watches, everything is about the details that combined add up to more. That engine is glorious sounding and it has the charcter the Ford lacks. It wants you to push it and it rewards you for doing it. Addictive. Stunning. Seductive.
So that leaves me in a strange place. The V12 is a driving delight, awesome, but it is familiar. So much of the experience can be had with my current car. Is it worth the extra for the engine?? How will it depreciate? The reviews are killer!!
The Ford GT is a totally different experience. Engine in the middle, functional vs luxurious. Even though it lacks finess and finishing you find in European cars (the engine compartment for starters), it's honest and exotic. It's a safe bet depreciation wise as well, but the Aston was the more eager car. The Aston drives the way the Ford looks.
No rush and it's fun. I think I like these two brands because of what they share and how they differ.
One looks like a race car and drives like a GT.
The other looks like a GT and drives like a race car.
Last edited by black penguin; 05-22-2012 at 10:00 PM.
#58
Thanks
Penguin,
Your comments about the Ford GT are interesting – it’s always been on my “list.” The V12V is an awesome thing – like a V8V but much more of a beast. It is brutal in a way that a V8V is not (like you, I have a 4.7 V8V, though mine has the Sports Pack, which I love), and it’s an absolute blast.
While I firmly believe that an Aston Martin is much more than just the “numbers,” the numbers do matter as they are a part of the overall experience, so I feel compelled to address your comparisons to the performance of the TT RS. The “accusation” that the 4.3 V8V isn’t that quick seems to be spreading to the 4.7, which is frustrating and, IMO, simply untrue. Now, it seems that even the V12V isn’t being recognized as the performer that it is.
You say the TT RS is quicker than the V12V – it’s not. In fact, independent magazine tests show that the 4.7 V8V is as quick, or quicker, as the TT RS.
In my experience, turbocharged cars feel quicker than naturally aspirated cars that offer similar performance because of the rush of boost pressure. They usually have very good mid-range torque, so in-gear acceleration is very strong. Also, the TT RS is AWD, so it can launch from a standing start extremely hard, which is obviously good for 0-60 figures.
So, let’s look at the test results from three mags…
Motor Trend
0-60: TT RS 4.2; V8V 4.1
0-100: TT RS no time; V8V 9.98
¼ mile speed: TT RS 107.6; V8V 115.0
Car&Driver
0-60: TT RS 4.0; V8V 4.3
0-100: TT RS 10.3; V8V 10.2
0-150: TT RS 26.4; V8V 26.0
¼ mile speed: TT RS 112; V8V 112
Rolling start 5-60: TT RS 5.3; V8V 4.8
Road&Track
0-60: TT RS 4.0; V8V 4.5
¼ mile speed: TT RS 109.6; V8V 113.3
This V8V was a Roadster -- almost 200 lbs heavier than the Coupe, which would be slightly quicker.
These test results show that the V8V is the quicker car in every measure except 0-60, which is obviously the test that is most influenced by the launch – at which the AWD Audi clearly has the traction advantage. And yet, the Aston claws back all of the time lost at launch, and then some more. C&D’s rolling 5-60 test is intended to negate the traction-at-launch aspect – most people wouldn’t subject their own cars to such brutality – and the Aston wins it easily. Certainly, the V8V won't match the on-boost mid-range thrust of the TT RS, but use the 'box and the performance is there. Oh, and regarding the V12V, clearly the TT RS is not the quicker car…
The TT RS is a great car, but the V8V is faster than people give it credit for. Plus, you get all that "Aston-ness." And yes, the V12V is just awesome (so is a Ford GT).
Your comments about the Ford GT are interesting – it’s always been on my “list.” The V12V is an awesome thing – like a V8V but much more of a beast. It is brutal in a way that a V8V is not (like you, I have a 4.7 V8V, though mine has the Sports Pack, which I love), and it’s an absolute blast.
While I firmly believe that an Aston Martin is much more than just the “numbers,” the numbers do matter as they are a part of the overall experience, so I feel compelled to address your comparisons to the performance of the TT RS. The “accusation” that the 4.3 V8V isn’t that quick seems to be spreading to the 4.7, which is frustrating and, IMO, simply untrue. Now, it seems that even the V12V isn’t being recognized as the performer that it is.
You say the TT RS is quicker than the V12V – it’s not. In fact, independent magazine tests show that the 4.7 V8V is as quick, or quicker, as the TT RS.
In my experience, turbocharged cars feel quicker than naturally aspirated cars that offer similar performance because of the rush of boost pressure. They usually have very good mid-range torque, so in-gear acceleration is very strong. Also, the TT RS is AWD, so it can launch from a standing start extremely hard, which is obviously good for 0-60 figures.
So, let’s look at the test results from three mags…
Motor Trend
0-60: TT RS 4.2; V8V 4.1
0-100: TT RS no time; V8V 9.98
¼ mile speed: TT RS 107.6; V8V 115.0
Car&Driver
0-60: TT RS 4.0; V8V 4.3
0-100: TT RS 10.3; V8V 10.2
0-150: TT RS 26.4; V8V 26.0
¼ mile speed: TT RS 112; V8V 112
Rolling start 5-60: TT RS 5.3; V8V 4.8
Road&Track
0-60: TT RS 4.0; V8V 4.5
¼ mile speed: TT RS 109.6; V8V 113.3
This V8V was a Roadster -- almost 200 lbs heavier than the Coupe, which would be slightly quicker.
These test results show that the V8V is the quicker car in every measure except 0-60, which is obviously the test that is most influenced by the launch – at which the AWD Audi clearly has the traction advantage. And yet, the Aston claws back all of the time lost at launch, and then some more. C&D’s rolling 5-60 test is intended to negate the traction-at-launch aspect – most people wouldn’t subject their own cars to such brutality – and the Aston wins it easily. Certainly, the V8V won't match the on-boost mid-range thrust of the TT RS, but use the 'box and the performance is there. Oh, and regarding the V12V, clearly the TT RS is not the quicker car…
The TT RS is a great car, but the V8V is faster than people give it credit for. Plus, you get all that "Aston-ness." And yes, the V12V is just awesome (so is a Ford GT).
Never meant to imply the Astons are not fast, in fact I tell people at the track that fact all the time. My Aston is slower than my TTRS on the track. But it is way more fun. I drive the Audi there because it's cheaper to repair, though the Aston is not as hard on the brakes etc. plus the TTRS can be chipped to 400 + hp without any reliability issues. It's proper quick at that point.
Aston-ness is amazing. It is the thing that I keep coming back to.
#59
Just had to stand up for Aston's performance honor
Just a thought -- would you have any interest in adding the Sports Pack to your V8V? It changes the character of the car considerably (for better or for worse, depending on one's preferences).
Just a thought -- would you have any interest in adding the Sports Pack to your V8V? It changes the character of the car considerably (for better or for worse, depending on one's preferences).