2023 Aston Martins will be different
#16
02-15-2022, 06:49 AM
Last edited by brightoncorgi; 02-15-2022 at 06:54 AM.
#17
02-15-2022, 10:03 AM
Perfurbia,
Great post! Thank you...
My .02 cents:
The reason I purchased my Aston Martin:
#1 Gorgeous
#2 Powerful
#3 Elegant
#4 Fun to drive
The newer Aston Martins are nice, but they don't quite meet my four requirements.
Gorgeous: The Vantage and DBS are nice, but as everyone here has agreed, a new nose, front headlights and a cleaner rear exhaust area would be better.
Powerful: I had to modify my crank, rods, bearings, headers, cats, intake and clutch to compete with "the big boys". So the Mercedes Turbo fits my requirements.
( It's a shame that Aston Martin couldn't make their own engine, but they have served their customer base by outsourcing.)
Elegant: The seats and all the leather/aluminum are great, old or new.
Fun to drive: The 6 speed manual is "the bomb", nothing else comes close. I believe Aston Martin is near ready to lose this singular advantage over it's competitors.
So if Aston Martin is listening, just fix the front and rear and keep the manual.
Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezy.
Great post! Thank you...
My .02 cents:
The reason I purchased my Aston Martin:
#1 Gorgeous
#2 Powerful
#3 Elegant
#4 Fun to drive
The newer Aston Martins are nice, but they don't quite meet my four requirements.
Gorgeous: The Vantage and DBS are nice, but as everyone here has agreed, a new nose, front headlights and a cleaner rear exhaust area would be better.
Powerful: I had to modify my crank, rods, bearings, headers, cats, intake and clutch to compete with "the big boys". So the Mercedes Turbo fits my requirements.
( It's a shame that Aston Martin couldn't make their own engine, but they have served their customer base by outsourcing.)
Elegant: The seats and all the leather/aluminum are great, old or new.
Fun to drive: The 6 speed manual is "the bomb", nothing else comes close. I believe Aston Martin is near ready to lose this singular advantage over it's competitors.
So if Aston Martin is listening, just fix the front and rear and keep the manual.
Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezy.
#18
02-15-2022, 09:13 PM
Its not like they conform to US GAAP anyway.https://beloved-brands.com/ferrari/
Most fans of Ferrari will never own a car. It will be a lifelong dream. Instead, these brand fans will buy tee shirts, hats, sunglasses, key chains and anything that projects their association with the brand. The branded merchandise accounts for $2.5 billion in sales each year, slightly more than the revenue from selling cars.
#19
02-15-2022, 11:31 PM
It’s late, and this is a bit disjointed, but here goes…
I wanted an Aston Martin since I was 5 years old. My dream was realized when I bought my 2009 V8 Vantage new. In 2015, a 2005 Vanquish S joined the V8V in my garage. I’d love to want to buy a new Aston again. Sadly, I think that’s very unlikely. The 2023 revisions may well make for more desirable cars -- a good thing, of course -- but I’m not hearing anything that makes me think I’ll want to own one.
Several weeks ago, it was rumored that Tobias Moers might be on his way out. That was the best Aston-related news I’d heard in a long time. It may have been false hope. Everything I feared about him is proving true, sadly. Why do I think he’s the wrong person to lead Aston? Above several other reasons, because he said that the "key" to making an Aston distinct from everything else will be having a unique infotainment system. Because that's what will truly matter. Not the engine. Not the chassis/structure. Not the actual car. No, the infotainment is the most important thing. It is every bit as ludicrous -- and atrocious -- as it seems. How can someone who said something that outrageous be at the helm of Aston Martin???
He also should be gone because he killed Aston’s new V6 engine. IMO, he has zero concept or appreciation for what makes an Aston an Aston. He said he sees “no reason” to use an Aston engine – he killed Aston’s new V6 since he can simply use an AMG engine. He lied about that V6 in interviews, saying the TM01 engine “was just a concept” and it “didn’t exist.” Remarkable, given that we’ve seen videos of it running published by Aston itself… Now we’re hearing rumors of Aston sharing platforms with Mercedes. No, Mr. Moers, one cannot make an Aston out of a Benz.
To be clear, Stroll is just as guilty. He’s enabling Moers. He is 100% a brand guy – that’s all that matters to him. That made him a fortune, but it’s the wrong philosophy to apply to a small and special marque that has invoked great passion in people. Brand is all – and only -- about the message, what they tell/persuade you about a product. What it actually is doesn’t really matter as long as people will buy.
For me, an Aston Martin MUST have an Aston Martin engine and an Aston Martin platform/structure. No sharing. The AMG V8 is a great engine. And it has no business being in an “Aston.” None. It’s an absolute, non-negotiable deal-breaker for me. Would a Ferrari be a Ferrari if it had an AMG engine? Of course not. The very thought of such a thing is utterly preposterous. Same thing for Aston Martin.
About the current cars and what I think Aston Martin should do going forward, I wrote this on another forum:
I don’t think the problem with the current range is that the cars themselves aren’t good enough. The new Vantage is a truly excellent modern sports car. It’s fast, it handles, it’s not boring to drive at less than super-high speeds. Will a fast 911 be even faster around a track? Yes, but not by that much, and how much does that really matter in a road car? The DB11 is a genuinely superb modern GT. It’s much more of a driver’s car than a Conti GT, and is every bit as potent. Now there’s the Roma, but that’s still more money, and there’s no V12. The DBS is an extraordinary supercar-GT, outrageously fast and suitably dramatic. 715hp and 664 ib-ft. Yet some complain that it isn’t as fast as an 812! Nope, it isn’t, in an all-out run through the gears. But the DBS is much torquier, so it’s easily as bonkers-fast almost all the time. It’s a whole lot of money, but it’s still considerably less than an 812, so it really shouldn’t have to be quite as fast. And seriously, if the current DBS isn’t fast enough the world has clearly gone mad. BTW, I find my "old" Vantage and Vanquish more fun to drive than any of the new cars -- there is so much more feel and tactility. But I accept that things move on and that people want things in their cars that don't matter to me.
So the cars are good, imo. But… I think the designs are not good enough (especially the Vantage), and the interiors are considerably worse. For many, the outsourced Benz V8 is a dealbreaker, but that’s not an issue for the V12. A big part of the problem, imo, is the lack of the latest technology (rather ironic, since Mercedes was supposed to fix that (and which, to me, further shows that they just don’t appreciate Aston)). While I don’t personally care much about that, very many buyers do, and I think that’s hurt sales badly. 2023 will apparently address some of this.
IMO, the VH cars show what Aston should do: Build cars that are genuinely competitive in their classes, even without the aesthetics. Then make them gorgeous too. The VH cars are breathtakingly beautiful, and imo the interiors are gorgeous too. The materials and build quality were well above those of Porsche and, often. Ferrari. These cars were certainly not perfect, but those gorgeous looks did not have to make up for a litany of shortcomings.
As we all know, the VH cars stayed in production much longer than had been intended so their competitors had moved to the next level, but they were genuinely competitive in their classes for many years. They were beautifully made, with very high-quality materials, and almost no plastic. They looked and felt special, expensive, understated, elegant and classy. Don’t chase the Lambo and Ferrari buyers – build great Aston Martins. Repeating that philosophy, suitably updated, seems to me a good way to make worthy, desirable Aston Martins. Not easy or cheap, but this is Aston Martin – do it right!
A few more thoughts:
One of the things I don’t like about the New Vantage (this generally applies to the other models too), and imo a major reason it hasn’t sold well, is that it looks and feels like a significantly less-expensive car inside and out (and must cost much less to build) than the previous V8 Vantage did (and still does). The interior is full of plastic, in stark contrast to the VH cars’ interiors. The instrument screens don’t look special in any way, whereas the old car had stunningly beautiful machined-from-aluminum gauges. Don’t get me started on the appalling oops-we-forgot-the-nav screen stuck on top of the dash, rather than the previous integrated rotating screen. The new car has so many more shut lines, and the exterior has a lot of plastic. It has a nose cone, rather than the VH cars’ beautifully done bonnet and wings extending all the way forward. The windshield posts don’t expensively meet the wings, but drop inside of the bonnet instead – no need to make the effort to make those panels fit tightly.
The new Roadster provides more evidence of this. The old V8V Roadster completely hides its folded hood under a beautifully done hard tonneau cover, with lovely leather-covered fairings and hidden, pop-up rollover bars. How does the new car do this? The folded hood is exposed and “doubles” as the tonneau, and the rollover bars are fixed in place behind the seats. Exactly like a Boxster or F-type. Which looks better? Which costs more to engineer and manufacture? Which looks more expensive? Which reflects the kind of attention to detail and craftsmanship that distinguishes an Aston Martin? There is no comparison.
Aston should do what Aston does best: classy, elegant, sporty, understated. No one does that as well as Aston Martin. Sadly, Aston Martin doesn’t either at the moment. None of this is easy or cheap, and I do think Aston needs a parent. That parent, however, must be a beneficent parent, one that understands, appreciates, and values what makes Aston so special and so unique. Ford was such a parent. Mercedes clearly would not be.
Oh, and about the interview with BMW’s designer. He is simply trying to explain why current BMWs are so ugly.
I wanted an Aston Martin since I was 5 years old. My dream was realized when I bought my 2009 V8 Vantage new. In 2015, a 2005 Vanquish S joined the V8V in my garage. I’d love to want to buy a new Aston again. Sadly, I think that’s very unlikely. The 2023 revisions may well make for more desirable cars -- a good thing, of course -- but I’m not hearing anything that makes me think I’ll want to own one.
Several weeks ago, it was rumored that Tobias Moers might be on his way out. That was the best Aston-related news I’d heard in a long time. It may have been false hope. Everything I feared about him is proving true, sadly. Why do I think he’s the wrong person to lead Aston? Above several other reasons, because he said that the "key" to making an Aston distinct from everything else will be having a unique infotainment system. Because that's what will truly matter. Not the engine. Not the chassis/structure. Not the actual car. No, the infotainment is the most important thing. It is every bit as ludicrous -- and atrocious -- as it seems. How can someone who said something that outrageous be at the helm of Aston Martin???
He also should be gone because he killed Aston’s new V6 engine. IMO, he has zero concept or appreciation for what makes an Aston an Aston. He said he sees “no reason” to use an Aston engine – he killed Aston’s new V6 since he can simply use an AMG engine. He lied about that V6 in interviews, saying the TM01 engine “was just a concept” and it “didn’t exist.” Remarkable, given that we’ve seen videos of it running published by Aston itself… Now we’re hearing rumors of Aston sharing platforms with Mercedes. No, Mr. Moers, one cannot make an Aston out of a Benz.
To be clear, Stroll is just as guilty. He’s enabling Moers. He is 100% a brand guy – that’s all that matters to him. That made him a fortune, but it’s the wrong philosophy to apply to a small and special marque that has invoked great passion in people. Brand is all – and only -- about the message, what they tell/persuade you about a product. What it actually is doesn’t really matter as long as people will buy.
For me, an Aston Martin MUST have an Aston Martin engine and an Aston Martin platform/structure. No sharing. The AMG V8 is a great engine. And it has no business being in an “Aston.” None. It’s an absolute, non-negotiable deal-breaker for me. Would a Ferrari be a Ferrari if it had an AMG engine? Of course not. The very thought of such a thing is utterly preposterous. Same thing for Aston Martin.
About the current cars and what I think Aston Martin should do going forward, I wrote this on another forum:
I don’t think the problem with the current range is that the cars themselves aren’t good enough. The new Vantage is a truly excellent modern sports car. It’s fast, it handles, it’s not boring to drive at less than super-high speeds. Will a fast 911 be even faster around a track? Yes, but not by that much, and how much does that really matter in a road car? The DB11 is a genuinely superb modern GT. It’s much more of a driver’s car than a Conti GT, and is every bit as potent. Now there’s the Roma, but that’s still more money, and there’s no V12. The DBS is an extraordinary supercar-GT, outrageously fast and suitably dramatic. 715hp and 664 ib-ft. Yet some complain that it isn’t as fast as an 812! Nope, it isn’t, in an all-out run through the gears. But the DBS is much torquier, so it’s easily as bonkers-fast almost all the time. It’s a whole lot of money, but it’s still considerably less than an 812, so it really shouldn’t have to be quite as fast. And seriously, if the current DBS isn’t fast enough the world has clearly gone mad. BTW, I find my "old" Vantage and Vanquish more fun to drive than any of the new cars -- there is so much more feel and tactility. But I accept that things move on and that people want things in their cars that don't matter to me.
So the cars are good, imo. But… I think the designs are not good enough (especially the Vantage), and the interiors are considerably worse. For many, the outsourced Benz V8 is a dealbreaker, but that’s not an issue for the V12. A big part of the problem, imo, is the lack of the latest technology (rather ironic, since Mercedes was supposed to fix that (and which, to me, further shows that they just don’t appreciate Aston)). While I don’t personally care much about that, very many buyers do, and I think that’s hurt sales badly. 2023 will apparently address some of this.
IMO, the VH cars show what Aston should do: Build cars that are genuinely competitive in their classes, even without the aesthetics. Then make them gorgeous too. The VH cars are breathtakingly beautiful, and imo the interiors are gorgeous too. The materials and build quality were well above those of Porsche and, often. Ferrari. These cars were certainly not perfect, but those gorgeous looks did not have to make up for a litany of shortcomings.
As we all know, the VH cars stayed in production much longer than had been intended so their competitors had moved to the next level, but they were genuinely competitive in their classes for many years. They were beautifully made, with very high-quality materials, and almost no plastic. They looked and felt special, expensive, understated, elegant and classy. Don’t chase the Lambo and Ferrari buyers – build great Aston Martins. Repeating that philosophy, suitably updated, seems to me a good way to make worthy, desirable Aston Martins. Not easy or cheap, but this is Aston Martin – do it right!
A few more thoughts:
One of the things I don’t like about the New Vantage (this generally applies to the other models too), and imo a major reason it hasn’t sold well, is that it looks and feels like a significantly less-expensive car inside and out (and must cost much less to build) than the previous V8 Vantage did (and still does). The interior is full of plastic, in stark contrast to the VH cars’ interiors. The instrument screens don’t look special in any way, whereas the old car had stunningly beautiful machined-from-aluminum gauges. Don’t get me started on the appalling oops-we-forgot-the-nav screen stuck on top of the dash, rather than the previous integrated rotating screen. The new car has so many more shut lines, and the exterior has a lot of plastic. It has a nose cone, rather than the VH cars’ beautifully done bonnet and wings extending all the way forward. The windshield posts don’t expensively meet the wings, but drop inside of the bonnet instead – no need to make the effort to make those panels fit tightly.
The new Roadster provides more evidence of this. The old V8V Roadster completely hides its folded hood under a beautifully done hard tonneau cover, with lovely leather-covered fairings and hidden, pop-up rollover bars. How does the new car do this? The folded hood is exposed and “doubles” as the tonneau, and the rollover bars are fixed in place behind the seats. Exactly like a Boxster or F-type. Which looks better? Which costs more to engineer and manufacture? Which looks more expensive? Which reflects the kind of attention to detail and craftsmanship that distinguishes an Aston Martin? There is no comparison.
Aston should do what Aston does best: classy, elegant, sporty, understated. No one does that as well as Aston Martin. Sadly, Aston Martin doesn’t either at the moment. None of this is easy or cheap, and I do think Aston needs a parent. That parent, however, must be a beneficent parent, one that understands, appreciates, and values what makes Aston so special and so unique. Ford was such a parent. Mercedes clearly would not be.
Oh, and about the interview with BMW’s designer. He is simply trying to explain why current BMWs are so ugly.
#21
02-16-2022, 07:35 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Central Time Zone, US
Posts: 130
Rep Power: 28 
1) Revenue is not profit. Gross margins on branding products tend to be extremely high - ever bought a Ferrari t-shirt or ballcap at a Formula One race? It is still very possible that a very large share of earnings come from those branding efforts vs. the cars themselves. Imagine for a moment that the gross margin on cars is 8%, while the gross margin on branding in 95% (which is very possible if most of it is licensing).
2) This is not a "balance sheet". This is a 3-year comparative revenue sheet. A balance sheet lists the assets and liabilities held by the firm, and does not show revenue, margin, or profit. If you wanted to actually know about the earnings by a specific product group, you would need a detailed P&L statement (Profit & Loss).
#22
02-16-2022, 07:47 AM
Sorry, but this post is so bad that it needs to be addressed.
1) Revenue is not profit. Gross margins on branding products tend to be extremely high - ever bought a Ferrari t-shirt or ballcap at a Formula One race? It is still very possible that a very large share of earnings come from those branding efforts vs. the cars themselves. Imagine for a moment that the gross margin on cars is 8%, while the gross margin on branding in 95% (which is very possible if most of it is licensing).
2) This is not a "balance sheet". This is a 3-year comparative revenue sheet. A balance sheet lists the assets and liabilities held by the firm, and does not show revenue, margin, or profit. If you wanted to actually know about the earnings by a specific product group, you would need a detailed P&L statement (Profit & Loss).
1) Revenue is not profit. Gross margins on branding products tend to be extremely high - ever bought a Ferrari t-shirt or ballcap at a Formula One race? It is still very possible that a very large share of earnings come from those branding efforts vs. the cars themselves. Imagine for a moment that the gross margin on cars is 8%, while the gross margin on branding in 95% (which is very possible if most of it is licensing).
2) This is not a "balance sheet". This is a 3-year comparative revenue sheet. A balance sheet lists the assets and liabilities held by the firm, and does not show revenue, margin, or profit. If you wanted to actually know about the earnings by a specific product group, you would need a detailed P&L statement (Profit & Loss).
#23
02-16-2022, 08:03 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Central Time Zone, US
Posts: 130
Rep Power: 28
For 2020, Ferrari's net profit was 534M on revenues of $3,460M. That's a rate of 15.4%. If the branding is license income and nearly pure margin, then yes, that's what one would expect to see.
This is all pretty clear from their annual statement.
Here's the next piece - The actual sales of Ferrari branded merchandise globally are about $2.5B - about as much as they generate from car sales. Ferrari doesn't sell the merch themselves, though, so the top line number doesn't show as revenue on their books. They do it through licensees and collect a share of that revenue - and that revenue on Ferrari's books has almost no cost associated with it.
This is all pretty clear from their annual statement.
Here's the next piece - The actual sales of Ferrari branded merchandise globally are about $2.5B - about as much as they generate from car sales. Ferrari doesn't sell the merch themselves, though, so the top line number doesn't show as revenue on their books. They do it through licensees and collect a share of that revenue - and that revenue on Ferrari's books has almost no cost associated with it.
#24
02-16-2022, 08:51 AM
It’s late, and this is a bit disjointed, but here goes…
I wanted an Aston Martin since I was 5 years old. My dream was realized when I bought my 2009 V8 Vantage new. In 2015, a 2005 Vanquish S joined the V8V in my garage. I’d love to want to buy a new Aston again. Sadly, I think that’s very unlikely. The 2023 revisions may well make for more desirable cars -- a good thing, of course -- but I’m not hearing anything that makes me think I’ll want to own one.
Several weeks ago, it was rumored that Tobias Moers might be on his way out. That was the best Aston-related news I’d heard in a long time. It may have been false hope. Everything I feared about him is proving true, sadly. Why do I think he’s the wrong person to lead Aston? Above several other reasons, because he said that the "key" to making an Aston distinct from everything else will be having a unique infotainment system. Because that's what will truly matter. Not the engine. Not the chassis/structure. Not the actual car. No, the infotainment is the most important thing. It is every bit as ludicrous -- and atrocious -- as it seems. How can someone who said something that outrageous be at the helm of Aston Martin???
He also should be gone because he killed Aston’s new V6 engine. IMO, he has zero concept or appreciation for what makes an Aston an Aston. He said he sees “no reason” to use an Aston engine – he killed Aston’s new V6 since he can simply use an AMG engine. He lied about that V6 in interviews, saying the TM01 engine “was just a concept” and it “didn’t exist.” Remarkable, given that we’ve seen videos of it running published by Aston itself… Now we’re hearing rumors of Aston sharing platforms with Mercedes. No, Mr. Moers, one cannot make an Aston out of a Benz.
To be clear, Stroll is just as guilty. He’s enabling Moers. He is 100% a brand guy – that’s all that matters to him. That made him a fortune, but it’s the wrong philosophy to apply to a small and special marque that has invoked great passion in people. Brand is all – and only -- about the message, what they tell/persuade you about a product. What it actually is doesn’t really matter as long as people will buy.
For me, an Aston Martin MUST have an Aston Martin engine and an Aston Martin platform/structure. No sharing. The AMG V8 is a great engine. And it has no business being in an “Aston.” None. It’s an absolute, non-negotiable deal-breaker for me. Would a Ferrari be a Ferrari if it had an AMG engine? Of course not. The very thought of such a thing is utterly preposterous. Same thing for Aston Martin.
About the current cars and what I think Aston Martin should do going forward, I wrote this on another forum:
I don’t think the problem with the current range is that the cars themselves aren’t good enough. The new Vantage is a truly excellent modern sports car. It’s fast, it handles, it’s not boring to drive at less than super-high speeds. Will a fast 911 be even faster around a track? Yes, but not by that much, and how much does that really matter in a road car? The DB11 is a genuinely superb modern GT. It’s much more of a driver’s car than a Conti GT, and is every bit as potent. Now there’s the Roma, but that’s still more money, and there’s no V12. The DBS is an extraordinary supercar-GT, outrageously fast and suitably dramatic. 715hp and 664 ib-ft. Yet some complain that it isn’t as fast as an 812! Nope, it isn’t, in an all-out run through the gears. But the DBS is much torquier, so it’s easily as bonkers-fast almost all the time. It’s a whole lot of money, but it’s still considerably less than an 812, so it really shouldn’t have to be quite as fast. And seriously, if the current DBS isn’t fast enough the world has clearly gone mad. BTW, I find my "old" Vantage and Vanquish more fun to drive than any of the new cars -- there is so much more feel and tactility. But I accept that things move on and that people want things in their cars that don't matter to me.
So the cars are good, imo. But… I think the designs are not good enough (especially the Vantage), and the interiors are considerably worse. For many, the outsourced Benz V8 is a dealbreaker, but that’s not an issue for the V12. A big part of the problem, imo, is the lack of the latest technology (rather ironic, since Mercedes was supposed to fix that (and which, to me, further shows that they just don’t appreciate Aston)). While I don’t personally care much about that, very many buyers do, and I think that’s hurt sales badly. 2023 will apparently address some of this.
IMO, the VH cars show what Aston should do: Build cars that are genuinely competitive in their classes, even without the aesthetics. Then make them gorgeous too. The VH cars are breathtakingly beautiful, and imo the interiors are gorgeous too. The materials and build quality were well above those of Porsche and, often. Ferrari. These cars were certainly not perfect, but those gorgeous looks did not have to make up for a litany of shortcomings.
As we all know, the VH cars stayed in production much longer than had been intended so their competitors had moved to the next level, but they were genuinely competitive in their classes for many years. They were beautifully made, with very high-quality materials, and almost no plastic. They looked and felt special, expensive, understated, elegant and classy. Don’t chase the Lambo and Ferrari buyers – build great Aston Martins. Repeating that philosophy, suitably updated, seems to me a good way to make worthy, desirable Aston Martins. Not easy or cheap, but this is Aston Martin – do it right!
A few more thoughts:
One of the things I don’t like about the New Vantage (this generally applies to the other models too), and imo a major reason it hasn’t sold well, is that it looks and feels like a significantly less-expensive car inside and out (and must cost much less to build) than the previous V8 Vantage did (and still does). The interior is full of plastic, in stark contrast to the VH cars’ interiors. The instrument screens don’t look special in any way, whereas the old car had stunningly beautiful machined-from-aluminum gauges. Don’t get me started on the appalling oops-we-forgot-the-nav screen stuck on top of the dash, rather than the previous integrated rotating screen. The new car has so many more shut lines, and the exterior has a lot of plastic. It has a nose cone, rather than the VH cars’ beautifully done bonnet and wings extending all the way forward. The windshield posts don’t expensively meet the wings, but drop inside of the bonnet instead – no need to make the effort to make those panels fit tightly.
The new Roadster provides more evidence of this. The old V8V Roadster completely hides its folded hood under a beautifully done hard tonneau cover, with lovely leather-covered fairings and hidden, pop-up rollover bars. How does the new car do this? The folded hood is exposed and “doubles” as the tonneau, and the rollover bars are fixed in place behind the seats. Exactly like a Boxster or F-type. Which looks better? Which costs more to engineer and manufacture? Which looks more expensive? Which reflects the kind of attention to detail and craftsmanship that distinguishes an Aston Martin? There is no comparison.
Aston should do what Aston does best: classy, elegant, sporty, understated. No one does that as well as Aston Martin. Sadly, Aston Martin doesn’t either at the moment. None of this is easy or cheap, and I do think Aston needs a parent. That parent, however, must be a beneficent parent, one that understands, appreciates, and values what makes Aston so special and so unique. Ford was such a parent. Mercedes clearly would not be.
Oh, and about the interview with BMW’s designer. He is simply trying to explain why current BMWs are so ugly.
I wanted an Aston Martin since I was 5 years old. My dream was realized when I bought my 2009 V8 Vantage new. In 2015, a 2005 Vanquish S joined the V8V in my garage. I’d love to want to buy a new Aston again. Sadly, I think that’s very unlikely. The 2023 revisions may well make for more desirable cars -- a good thing, of course -- but I’m not hearing anything that makes me think I’ll want to own one.
Several weeks ago, it was rumored that Tobias Moers might be on his way out. That was the best Aston-related news I’d heard in a long time. It may have been false hope. Everything I feared about him is proving true, sadly. Why do I think he’s the wrong person to lead Aston? Above several other reasons, because he said that the "key" to making an Aston distinct from everything else will be having a unique infotainment system. Because that's what will truly matter. Not the engine. Not the chassis/structure. Not the actual car. No, the infotainment is the most important thing. It is every bit as ludicrous -- and atrocious -- as it seems. How can someone who said something that outrageous be at the helm of Aston Martin???
He also should be gone because he killed Aston’s new V6 engine. IMO, he has zero concept or appreciation for what makes an Aston an Aston. He said he sees “no reason” to use an Aston engine – he killed Aston’s new V6 since he can simply use an AMG engine. He lied about that V6 in interviews, saying the TM01 engine “was just a concept” and it “didn’t exist.” Remarkable, given that we’ve seen videos of it running published by Aston itself… Now we’re hearing rumors of Aston sharing platforms with Mercedes. No, Mr. Moers, one cannot make an Aston out of a Benz.
To be clear, Stroll is just as guilty. He’s enabling Moers. He is 100% a brand guy – that’s all that matters to him. That made him a fortune, but it’s the wrong philosophy to apply to a small and special marque that has invoked great passion in people. Brand is all – and only -- about the message, what they tell/persuade you about a product. What it actually is doesn’t really matter as long as people will buy.
For me, an Aston Martin MUST have an Aston Martin engine and an Aston Martin platform/structure. No sharing. The AMG V8 is a great engine. And it has no business being in an “Aston.” None. It’s an absolute, non-negotiable deal-breaker for me. Would a Ferrari be a Ferrari if it had an AMG engine? Of course not. The very thought of such a thing is utterly preposterous. Same thing for Aston Martin.
About the current cars and what I think Aston Martin should do going forward, I wrote this on another forum:
I don’t think the problem with the current range is that the cars themselves aren’t good enough. The new Vantage is a truly excellent modern sports car. It’s fast, it handles, it’s not boring to drive at less than super-high speeds. Will a fast 911 be even faster around a track? Yes, but not by that much, and how much does that really matter in a road car? The DB11 is a genuinely superb modern GT. It’s much more of a driver’s car than a Conti GT, and is every bit as potent. Now there’s the Roma, but that’s still more money, and there’s no V12. The DBS is an extraordinary supercar-GT, outrageously fast and suitably dramatic. 715hp and 664 ib-ft. Yet some complain that it isn’t as fast as an 812! Nope, it isn’t, in an all-out run through the gears. But the DBS is much torquier, so it’s easily as bonkers-fast almost all the time. It’s a whole lot of money, but it’s still considerably less than an 812, so it really shouldn’t have to be quite as fast. And seriously, if the current DBS isn’t fast enough the world has clearly gone mad. BTW, I find my "old" Vantage and Vanquish more fun to drive than any of the new cars -- there is so much more feel and tactility. But I accept that things move on and that people want things in their cars that don't matter to me.
So the cars are good, imo. But… I think the designs are not good enough (especially the Vantage), and the interiors are considerably worse. For many, the outsourced Benz V8 is a dealbreaker, but that’s not an issue for the V12. A big part of the problem, imo, is the lack of the latest technology (rather ironic, since Mercedes was supposed to fix that (and which, to me, further shows that they just don’t appreciate Aston)). While I don’t personally care much about that, very many buyers do, and I think that’s hurt sales badly. 2023 will apparently address some of this.
IMO, the VH cars show what Aston should do: Build cars that are genuinely competitive in their classes, even without the aesthetics. Then make them gorgeous too. The VH cars are breathtakingly beautiful, and imo the interiors are gorgeous too. The materials and build quality were well above those of Porsche and, often. Ferrari. These cars were certainly not perfect, but those gorgeous looks did not have to make up for a litany of shortcomings.
As we all know, the VH cars stayed in production much longer than had been intended so their competitors had moved to the next level, but they were genuinely competitive in their classes for many years. They were beautifully made, with very high-quality materials, and almost no plastic. They looked and felt special, expensive, understated, elegant and classy. Don’t chase the Lambo and Ferrari buyers – build great Aston Martins. Repeating that philosophy, suitably updated, seems to me a good way to make worthy, desirable Aston Martins. Not easy or cheap, but this is Aston Martin – do it right!
A few more thoughts:
One of the things I don’t like about the New Vantage (this generally applies to the other models too), and imo a major reason it hasn’t sold well, is that it looks and feels like a significantly less-expensive car inside and out (and must cost much less to build) than the previous V8 Vantage did (and still does). The interior is full of plastic, in stark contrast to the VH cars’ interiors. The instrument screens don’t look special in any way, whereas the old car had stunningly beautiful machined-from-aluminum gauges. Don’t get me started on the appalling oops-we-forgot-the-nav screen stuck on top of the dash, rather than the previous integrated rotating screen. The new car has so many more shut lines, and the exterior has a lot of plastic. It has a nose cone, rather than the VH cars’ beautifully done bonnet and wings extending all the way forward. The windshield posts don’t expensively meet the wings, but drop inside of the bonnet instead – no need to make the effort to make those panels fit tightly.
The new Roadster provides more evidence of this. The old V8V Roadster completely hides its folded hood under a beautifully done hard tonneau cover, with lovely leather-covered fairings and hidden, pop-up rollover bars. How does the new car do this? The folded hood is exposed and “doubles” as the tonneau, and the rollover bars are fixed in place behind the seats. Exactly like a Boxster or F-type. Which looks better? Which costs more to engineer and manufacture? Which looks more expensive? Which reflects the kind of attention to detail and craftsmanship that distinguishes an Aston Martin? There is no comparison.
Aston should do what Aston does best: classy, elegant, sporty, understated. No one does that as well as Aston Martin. Sadly, Aston Martin doesn’t either at the moment. None of this is easy or cheap, and I do think Aston needs a parent. That parent, however, must be a beneficent parent, one that understands, appreciates, and values what makes Aston so special and so unique. Ford was such a parent. Mercedes clearly would not be.
Oh, and about the interview with BMW’s designer. He is simply trying to explain why current BMWs are so ugly.
Sadly, I think my 2010 Vantage will be my first and last Aston unless the company does a substantial 180 and given how little future the ICE engine has in general (a whole other depressing can of worms) - I just don't see it happening in time for me to want another. On the other hand, I'm happy hanging on to my 12 year old AM for many decades to come as long as I can still maintain it. There isn't much I'd want to change about it - other than maybe swapping the V8 for a V12. But I prefer the hood and shifter on the V8 to the V12 personally.
If I want to drive something up to date and fast by modern standards, I have cars like but more often than not, I actually grab the keys for my 25+ year old cars anyway so Im sure I will continue to enjoy the Vantage for quite some time.
#25
02-16-2022, 09:57 AM
AML needs to fast track the electric Lagonda models. That SUV was one of most stunning designs they've come out. The next AM Vanquish will be a big hit too. I think Stroll knows what he is doing, but fixing everything is not an overnight task.
#26
02-16-2022, 09:15 PM
It’s late, and this is a bit disjointed, but here goes…
I wanted an Aston Martin since I was 5 years old. My dream was realized when I bought my 2009 V8 Vantage new. In 2015, a 2005 Vanquish S joined the V8V in my garage. I’d love to want to buy a new Aston again. Sadly, I think that’s very unlikely. The 2023 revisions may well make for more desirable cars -- a good thing, of course -- but I’m not hearing anything that makes me think I’ll want to own one.
Several weeks ago, it was rumored that Tobias Moers might be on his way out. That was the best Aston-related news I’d heard in a long time. It may have been false hope. Everything I feared about him is proving true, sadly. Why do I think he’s the wrong person to lead Aston? Above several other reasons, because he said that the "key" to making an Aston distinct from everything else will be having a unique infotainment system. Because that's what will truly matter. Not the engine. Not the chassis/structure. Not the actual car. No, the infotainment is the most important thing. It is every bit as ludicrous -- and atrocious -- as it seems. How can someone who said something that outrageous be at the helm of Aston Martin???
He also should be gone because he killed Aston’s new V6 engine. IMO, he has zero concept or appreciation for what makes an Aston an Aston. He said he sees “no reason” to use an Aston engine – he killed Aston’s new V6 since he can simply use an AMG engine. He lied about that V6 in interviews, saying the TM01 engine “was just a concept” and it “didn’t exist.” Remarkable, given that we’ve seen videos of it running published by Aston itself… Now we’re hearing rumors of Aston sharing platforms with Mercedes. No, Mr. Moers, one cannot make an Aston out of a Benz.
To be clear, Stroll is just as guilty. He’s enabling Moers. He is 100% a brand guy – that’s all that matters to him. That made him a fortune, but it’s the wrong philosophy to apply to a small and special marque that has invoked great passion in people. Brand is all – and only -- about the message, what they tell/persuade you about a product. What it actually is doesn’t really matter as long as people will buy.
For me, an Aston Martin MUST have an Aston Martin engine and an Aston Martin platform/structure. No sharing. The AMG V8 is a great engine. And it has no business being in an “Aston.” None. It’s an absolute, non-negotiable deal-breaker for me. Would a Ferrari be a Ferrari if it had an AMG engine? Of course not. The very thought of such a thing is utterly preposterous. Same thing for Aston Martin.
About the current cars and what I think Aston Martin should do going forward, I wrote this on another forum:
I don’t think the problem with the current range is that the cars themselves aren’t good enough. The new Vantage is a truly excellent modern sports car. It’s fast, it handles, it’s not boring to drive at less than super-high speeds. Will a fast 911 be even faster around a track? Yes, but not by that much, and how much does that really matter in a road car? The DB11 is a genuinely superb modern GT. It’s much more of a driver’s car than a Conti GT, and is every bit as potent. Now there’s the Roma, but that’s still more money, and there’s no V12. The DBS is an extraordinary supercar-GT, outrageously fast and suitably dramatic. 715hp and 664 ib-ft. Yet some complain that it isn’t as fast as an 812! Nope, it isn’t, in an all-out run through the gears. But the DBS is much torquier, so it’s easily as bonkers-fast almost all the time. It’s a whole lot of money, but it’s still considerably less than an 812, so it really shouldn’t have to be quite as fast. And seriously, if the current DBS isn’t fast enough the world has clearly gone mad. BTW, I find my "old" Vantage and Vanquish more fun to drive than any of the new cars -- there is so much more feel and tactility. But I accept that things move on and that people want things in their cars that don't matter to me.
So the cars are good, imo. But… I think the designs are not good enough (especially the Vantage), and the interiors are considerably worse. For many, the outsourced Benz V8 is a dealbreaker, but that’s not an issue for the V12. A big part of the problem, imo, is the lack of the latest technology (rather ironic, since Mercedes was supposed to fix that (and which, to me, further shows that they just don’t appreciate Aston)). While I don’t personally care much about that, very many buyers do, and I think that’s hurt sales badly. 2023 will apparently address some of this.
IMO, the VH cars show what Aston should do: Build cars that are genuinely competitive in their classes, even without the aesthetics. Then make them gorgeous too. The VH cars are breathtakingly beautiful, and imo the interiors are gorgeous too. The materials and build quality were well above those of Porsche and, often. Ferrari. These cars were certainly not perfect, but those gorgeous looks did not have to make up for a litany of shortcomings.
As we all know, the VH cars stayed in production much longer than had been intended so their competitors had moved to the next level, but they were genuinely competitive in their classes for many years. They were beautifully made, with very high-quality materials, and almost no plastic. They looked and felt special, expensive, understated, elegant and classy. Don’t chase the Lambo and Ferrari buyers – build great Aston Martins. Repeating that philosophy, suitably updated, seems to me a good way to make worthy, desirable Aston Martins. Not easy or cheap, but this is Aston Martin – do it right!
A few more thoughts:
One of the things I don’t like about the New Vantage (this generally applies to the other models too), and imo a major reason it hasn’t sold well, is that it looks and feels like a significantly less-expensive car inside and out (and must cost much less to build) than the previous V8 Vantage did (and still does). The interior is full of plastic, in stark contrast to the VH cars’ interiors. The instrument screens don’t look special in any way, whereas the old car had stunningly beautiful machined-from-aluminum gauges. Don’t get me started on the appalling oops-we-forgot-the-nav screen stuck on top of the dash, rather than the previous integrated rotating screen. The new car has so many more shut lines, and the exterior has a lot of plastic. It has a nose cone, rather than the VH cars’ beautifully done bonnet and wings extending all the way forward. The windshield posts don’t expensively meet the wings, but drop inside of the bonnet instead – no need to make the effort to make those panels fit tightly.
The new Roadster provides more evidence of this. The old V8V Roadster completely hides its folded hood under a beautifully done hard tonneau cover, with lovely leather-covered fairings and hidden, pop-up rollover bars. How does the new car do this? The folded hood is exposed and “doubles” as the tonneau, and the rollover bars are fixed in place behind the seats. Exactly like a Boxster or F-type. Which looks better? Which costs more to engineer and manufacture? Which looks more expensive? Which reflects the kind of attention to detail and craftsmanship that distinguishes an Aston Martin? There is no comparison.
Aston should do what Aston does best: classy, elegant, sporty, understated. No one does that as well as Aston Martin. Sadly, Aston Martin doesn’t either at the moment. None of this is easy or cheap, and I do think Aston needs a parent. That parent, however, must be a beneficent parent, one that understands, appreciates, and values what makes Aston so special and so unique. Ford was such a parent. Mercedes clearly would not be.
Oh, and about the interview with BMW’s designer. He is simply trying to explain why current BMWs are so ugly.
I wanted an Aston Martin since I was 5 years old. My dream was realized when I bought my 2009 V8 Vantage new. In 2015, a 2005 Vanquish S joined the V8V in my garage. I’d love to want to buy a new Aston again. Sadly, I think that’s very unlikely. The 2023 revisions may well make for more desirable cars -- a good thing, of course -- but I’m not hearing anything that makes me think I’ll want to own one.
Several weeks ago, it was rumored that Tobias Moers might be on his way out. That was the best Aston-related news I’d heard in a long time. It may have been false hope. Everything I feared about him is proving true, sadly. Why do I think he’s the wrong person to lead Aston? Above several other reasons, because he said that the "key" to making an Aston distinct from everything else will be having a unique infotainment system. Because that's what will truly matter. Not the engine. Not the chassis/structure. Not the actual car. No, the infotainment is the most important thing. It is every bit as ludicrous -- and atrocious -- as it seems. How can someone who said something that outrageous be at the helm of Aston Martin???
He also should be gone because he killed Aston’s new V6 engine. IMO, he has zero concept or appreciation for what makes an Aston an Aston. He said he sees “no reason” to use an Aston engine – he killed Aston’s new V6 since he can simply use an AMG engine. He lied about that V6 in interviews, saying the TM01 engine “was just a concept” and it “didn’t exist.” Remarkable, given that we’ve seen videos of it running published by Aston itself… Now we’re hearing rumors of Aston sharing platforms with Mercedes. No, Mr. Moers, one cannot make an Aston out of a Benz.
To be clear, Stroll is just as guilty. He’s enabling Moers. He is 100% a brand guy – that’s all that matters to him. That made him a fortune, but it’s the wrong philosophy to apply to a small and special marque that has invoked great passion in people. Brand is all – and only -- about the message, what they tell/persuade you about a product. What it actually is doesn’t really matter as long as people will buy.
For me, an Aston Martin MUST have an Aston Martin engine and an Aston Martin platform/structure. No sharing. The AMG V8 is a great engine. And it has no business being in an “Aston.” None. It’s an absolute, non-negotiable deal-breaker for me. Would a Ferrari be a Ferrari if it had an AMG engine? Of course not. The very thought of such a thing is utterly preposterous. Same thing for Aston Martin.
About the current cars and what I think Aston Martin should do going forward, I wrote this on another forum:
I don’t think the problem with the current range is that the cars themselves aren’t good enough. The new Vantage is a truly excellent modern sports car. It’s fast, it handles, it’s not boring to drive at less than super-high speeds. Will a fast 911 be even faster around a track? Yes, but not by that much, and how much does that really matter in a road car? The DB11 is a genuinely superb modern GT. It’s much more of a driver’s car than a Conti GT, and is every bit as potent. Now there’s the Roma, but that’s still more money, and there’s no V12. The DBS is an extraordinary supercar-GT, outrageously fast and suitably dramatic. 715hp and 664 ib-ft. Yet some complain that it isn’t as fast as an 812! Nope, it isn’t, in an all-out run through the gears. But the DBS is much torquier, so it’s easily as bonkers-fast almost all the time. It’s a whole lot of money, but it’s still considerably less than an 812, so it really shouldn’t have to be quite as fast. And seriously, if the current DBS isn’t fast enough the world has clearly gone mad. BTW, I find my "old" Vantage and Vanquish more fun to drive than any of the new cars -- there is so much more feel and tactility. But I accept that things move on and that people want things in their cars that don't matter to me.
So the cars are good, imo. But… I think the designs are not good enough (especially the Vantage), and the interiors are considerably worse. For many, the outsourced Benz V8 is a dealbreaker, but that’s not an issue for the V12. A big part of the problem, imo, is the lack of the latest technology (rather ironic, since Mercedes was supposed to fix that (and which, to me, further shows that they just don’t appreciate Aston)). While I don’t personally care much about that, very many buyers do, and I think that’s hurt sales badly. 2023 will apparently address some of this.
IMO, the VH cars show what Aston should do: Build cars that are genuinely competitive in their classes, even without the aesthetics. Then make them gorgeous too. The VH cars are breathtakingly beautiful, and imo the interiors are gorgeous too. The materials and build quality were well above those of Porsche and, often. Ferrari. These cars were certainly not perfect, but those gorgeous looks did not have to make up for a litany of shortcomings.
As we all know, the VH cars stayed in production much longer than had been intended so their competitors had moved to the next level, but they were genuinely competitive in their classes for many years. They were beautifully made, with very high-quality materials, and almost no plastic. They looked and felt special, expensive, understated, elegant and classy. Don’t chase the Lambo and Ferrari buyers – build great Aston Martins. Repeating that philosophy, suitably updated, seems to me a good way to make worthy, desirable Aston Martins. Not easy or cheap, but this is Aston Martin – do it right!
A few more thoughts:
One of the things I don’t like about the New Vantage (this generally applies to the other models too), and imo a major reason it hasn’t sold well, is that it looks and feels like a significantly less-expensive car inside and out (and must cost much less to build) than the previous V8 Vantage did (and still does). The interior is full of plastic, in stark contrast to the VH cars’ interiors. The instrument screens don’t look special in any way, whereas the old car had stunningly beautiful machined-from-aluminum gauges. Don’t get me started on the appalling oops-we-forgot-the-nav screen stuck on top of the dash, rather than the previous integrated rotating screen. The new car has so many more shut lines, and the exterior has a lot of plastic. It has a nose cone, rather than the VH cars’ beautifully done bonnet and wings extending all the way forward. The windshield posts don’t expensively meet the wings, but drop inside of the bonnet instead – no need to make the effort to make those panels fit tightly.
The new Roadster provides more evidence of this. The old V8V Roadster completely hides its folded hood under a beautifully done hard tonneau cover, with lovely leather-covered fairings and hidden, pop-up rollover bars. How does the new car do this? The folded hood is exposed and “doubles” as the tonneau, and the rollover bars are fixed in place behind the seats. Exactly like a Boxster or F-type. Which looks better? Which costs more to engineer and manufacture? Which looks more expensive? Which reflects the kind of attention to detail and craftsmanship that distinguishes an Aston Martin? There is no comparison.
Aston should do what Aston does best: classy, elegant, sporty, understated. No one does that as well as Aston Martin. Sadly, Aston Martin doesn’t either at the moment. None of this is easy or cheap, and I do think Aston needs a parent. That parent, however, must be a beneficent parent, one that understands, appreciates, and values what makes Aston so special and so unique. Ford was such a parent. Mercedes clearly would not be.
Oh, and about the interview with BMW’s designer. He is simply trying to explain why current BMWs are so ugly.
Let's nominate Speedraser to be Aston's next CEO.
#27
02-16-2022, 09:30 PM
#28
02-17-2022, 05:43 AM
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 1,830
Rep Power: 100
Speaking of branding - Aston Martin's name seems to be on everything, Condo's Copters, Boats, and I know they probably (mostly) just make or build the things then license the name (Aston makes the income with little effort or outlay), but have you noticed that the clothing went from top quality and something you'd wear to sometimes K-Mart crap quality and not so impressive design? When I'd travel, I always bought something (hat, shirts, etc.) from the local dealers - but many have nothing or if they do their selection is terrible (except Aston in Paris which was pretty cool). They need to up their game there also. My decade old Aston clothes are wearing out and I'm starting to look like a homeless guy at car events.
#29
02-17-2022, 05:47 AM
Would you have said that Peter Sprague had no idea what makes an Aston Martin an Aston Martin? Similar story to Stroll's.
#30
02-17-2022, 05:53 AM
Speaking of branding - Aston Martin's name seems to be on everything, Condo's Copters, Boats, and I know they probably (mostly) just make or build the things then license the name (Aston makes the income with little effort or outlay), but have you noticed that the clothing went from top quality and something you'd wear to sometimes K-Mart crap quality and not so impressive design? When I'd travel, I always bought something (hat, shirts, etc.) from the local dealers - but many have nothing or if they do their selection is terrible (except Aston in Paris which was pretty cool). They need to up their game there also. My decade old Aston clothes are wearing out and I'm starting to look like a homeless guy at car events.
Which particular AM licensed clothing did you see that was so poorly constructed?