[10x07] November 25th, 2007

[Austere]

Holy arrogance batman...

Sorry about that - I got carried away. I can't guarantee it won't happen agian.

Just cobbled together...? Rubbish interor...? :lol:

Firstly it's not exactly cobbled together, Aston Martin are using some of the most sophisticated production techniques there is making this car. As for the rubbish interor, after having spent some time inside one I think it makes ANYTHING else look and feel rubbish in comparison, and yes' I've been inside several 911s including the 997.

I disagree. I think the interior is gaudy and showy. I sat in one (admittedly it was only for a few moments) and it didn't strike me as being of a very high quality but I suppose opinions will vary on that. I just thought that some of the stitching didn't look very nice and a few of the details weren't becoming of a hand made car. And the little light on the dash that reads "Power, Soul, Passion" is just the height of vulgarity in my opinion. I've heard it said that when the sun is shining you can't even see the switches and gauges etc. I'm sure a lot of people think the gauges and switches look very nice but if they can't be read in direct light then what good are they? Except for looking good in the brochure and in the showroom?

And no car that costs a quarter of a million dollars should have bits of Ford Mondeo and Volvo in it. That's what I was getting at when I said 'cobbled together from bits of...' It's just cheap and shows a lack of respect. At least Porsche have the decency to make the whole car themselves. Even if they chose plastic over leather and brushed aluminium - It's functional! You can read the dials! And they don't have a Volvo part number on them!

Secondly the fact that it sells for quite a bit over it's price isn't really proving your point.

Well, it is actually because my point is that it's a posers car and only a poser would pay that much for a flashy, gaudy, classless, tasteless piece of shit that's half Volvo and half erectile dysfunction fake exhaust. It looks like it is worth that much and it sounds like it's worth that much... and that's what makes it a posers car. It has all the look - more than all the look - but underneath it's all just bits of Volvo and smoke & mirrors trickery.

Clarkson should know, doesn't he? Considering his wife has one, and according to him it's been a model of reliability.

You and I both know he said that while he was sitting in one that had just broken down so let's not even go there. I won't even go near his bias towards Aston's... or his bias towards his wife for that matter.

Perhaps 'unreliable' is too strong a word but it's not a paradigm of reliability by any means.

Finally, when i said it's the cheapest way of getting into an Aston I said it in a way that implies that the badge is all this car has going for it and that separates it from the Gallardo and the 430 because those cars are actually good in their own right. Whereas the Vantage is just a way for rich wanker types who have a lot of money to show that they have "fine taste" to everyone who will look. And if people don't look? Just open up the butterfly valves in the exhaust and make them look.

it's a posers car! It just is! It's basically just a very stylish, flashy and loud piece of overpriced tat for people with no class.

I know it's full of leather and metal and it's light and agile and it can lap a track very quickly... But the people who buy these things - people like Jeremy Clarkson's wife - Don't care that it's 1 second faster around the 'ring than a 911. All they care about is those looks, that exhaust and that badge.

That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

And just once more: Volvo.

 

[marcos_eirik]

I think compared with its competitors it's:

1. Better looking; Makes a 911 and most of it's competitors look boring.
2. Perfoms better; Look at the 'ring times
3. Sunds better; I find the amazing V8 scream from this much more exciting than the admittedly muted 997 Carrera S or the bland sounding R8. The reason it has active exhausts is so that it's quiet when you want to go slowly and makes a lot of noise when you want to drive it as a sportscar should be driven. It's a cruiser when you want it to be, and a real sportscar when you want it to be that.
4. More exclusive; Porsche makes 30000 911s a year, AM makes just 3000 V8 Vantages a year.
5. I had no problems reading the dials or finding the buttons in the sunshine.

So, the Vantage too is undeniably a good car in it's own right, just like the Gallardo and the F430.

Whereas the Vantage is just a way for rich wanker types who have a lot of money to show that they have "fine taste" to everyone who will look. And if people don't look? Just open up the butterfly valves in the exhaust and make them look.

... Which can be said about any sports/supercar, active exhaust or not... If people don't look, just floor it a bit.

Actually of all the sports/supercars out there, the Aston Martins are the understated ones.

 

[Austere]

I think compared with its competitors it's:

1. Better looking; Makes a 911 and most of it's competitors look boring.
2. Perfoms better; Look at the 'ring times
3. Sunds better; I find the amazing V8 scream from this much more exciting than the admittedly muted 997 Carrera S or the bland sounding R8. The reason it has active exhausts is so that it's quiet when you want to go slowly and makes a lot of noise when you want to drive it as a sportscar should be driven. It's a cruiser when you want it to be, and a real sportscar when you want it to be that.
4. More exclusive; Porsche makes 30000 911s a year, AM makes just 3000 V8 Vantages a year.
5. I had no problems reading the dials or finding the buttons in the sunshine.

I tend to get carried away when I'm talking about cars and things I don't like. If I'm talking about a car I don't like? Ooh, Fah! Fuggetaboutit!


So let me just say this with the promise that I'm not exaggerating or hamming it up for the cameras:

In my opinion the V8 Vantage is the second most bland car on the market today with the most bland being the convertible version.

Granted, this is rated on a sliding scale or whatever because a $4000 car like a Dacia Logan can never compete with a $230,000 sports coupe... But with all things relative the Vantage looks just as nice as, say, a Fiat Punto grande. In all seriousness I believe the Vantage is the most dreary piece of styling I have ever seen on a sports car. Run your eye down the side and it's just a flat, vertical wall with two little bumps where the wheels go. And the rear overhang is so small there's just no rear on it at all - and no front overhang for that matter. It's just so... smooth. Not just smooth but flat. It's like a month old bar of soap. At least the 911 has hips and fat arse.

I will give it one thing tho; the front grill looks nice and so do the lights... But they put those on all their cars.


Woah, looks took too long so I better do these last ones quick!

It's only one second quicker around the world longest racetrack for gods sake.

Sounds better because of a cheap trick. Granted, it does sound better tho.

Only wankers and posers are concerned with exclusivity. If the best car in the world was common as dirt I'd still want one.

Really? I think it might only apply to the convertibles when the roof is down now that I think of it...

So, the Vantage too is undeniably a good car in it's own right, just like the Gallardo and the F430.

No it's not because it's all Volvoey...

 

[marcos_eirik]

In my opinion the V8 Vantage is the second most bland car on the market today with the most bland being the convertible version.

Granted, this is rated on a sliding scale or whatever because a $4000 car like a Dacia Logan can never compete with a $230,000 sports coupe... But with all things relative the Vantage looks just as nice as, say, a Fiat Punto grande. In all seriousness I believe the Vantage is the most dreary piece of styling I have ever seen on a sports car. Run your eye down the side and it's just a flat, vertical wall with two little bumps where the wheels go. And the rear overhang is so small there's just no rear on it at all - and no front overhang for that matter. It's just so... smooth. Not just smooth but flat. It's like a month old bar of soap. At least the 911 has hips and fat arse.

I will give it one thing tho; the front grill looks nice and so do the lights... But they put those on all their cars.

Really? I think that it has refreshingly sharp, understated and elegant lines. Not something too overly curvy, bolbous and saggy like the 90s was littered with. It's also got that airvent in front of the doors and a profile going all the way from the front wheel arches to the rears (both of which are flared). So, I would hardly call it featureless. Anyway, that's a fine balance and I think that the V8 Vantage is spot on, the DBS is a little bit too much, allthough they didn't get too carried away. The 911 has no features apart from the skirts and to quote you "with two little bumps where the wheels go"

Make no mistake, I love both of them, but having seen both for real, I do find the Aston more appealing.

And also, as much as I love the 911, and always has, it really pains me to say this, but honestly; The 911 simply does not work as a convertible, the rear is too fat which makes it look too akward. So, in convertible giuses the Aston is lightyears ahead.

It's only one second quicker around the world longest racetrack for gods sake.

Sounds better because of a cheap trick. Granted, it does sound better tho.

Only wankers and posers are concerned with exclusivity. If the best car in the world was common as dirt I'd still want one.

Really? I think it might only apply to the convertibles when the roof is down now that I think of it...

No it's not because it's all Volvoey...

1. Yes, it's only a fraction faster, but that just disproves all of those who neglect it for a lack of perfomance relative to it's competitors.

2. That cheap trick is very smart, because you have a loud car when you want to go bonkers on a B-road, and a quiet car when you just want to cruise. They've done the same on the Corvette Z06.

3. The day you are going to sell the car, you care about exclusivity. The more exclusive it is, then the better the chances are that you get your money back. To me that's a good thing, but if it makes me a wanker or a poseur, then yes...

4. Yes, that only applies only to the convertibles, with the roof down.

5. I couldn't find anything wrong with having sat-nav and mirror controls from a Volvo, they felt in no way of a worse quality than the controls in a 997. Yes, I have been in both

All in all the V8 Vantage has been summed up by most road testers as both a comfortable GT when you want it to and a harcore sportscar when you're on a B-road. The latter bit, to me at least, automatically disqualifies it as a posemobile...

 

[LoneWolf]

Well, his wife has one so he should know if it's reliable or not. He said it in his latest DVD and has written it in a couple of columns. This isn't an opinion, it's a fact that it has been reliable, but of course all Clarkson does is lying, right?

No really, the one who calls an Aston Martin a "Ford Mondeo in pimp juice" is the one who needs to get his head out of his ass... That's like saying that an Audi R8 is a "VW Passat dipped in pimp juice" Either way, it's silly...

The DB7 was a excellent GT car, and it was at the same time way more sporty than it's closest competitor, the Mercedes SL.

Anyway the fact that they sell so well, really proves that they certainly aren't overpriced... Which is my point.

I'm enjoying this, absolutely hilarious this discussion. :lol:

Firstly, it appears you have watched very little and read very few of Clarkson's work over the years to be taking his opinion as 'fact'.

Secondly, Aston's have (and to this day still do) a pretty awful reputation when it comes to reliability.

Thirdly, I don't care how beautiful the DB7 (and granted it was good looking) was, it was over priced, not very sporty, and should've been scrapped yaers before it went out of production.

And lastly, on the issue of price, you say Aston's sales prove they aren't over priced. OK, so according to your theory, a half million pound Enzo isn't over priced because it sold out. Same for the million pound Mclaren F1. And heck, BMW 1 series are selling pretty nicely too, they can't be over priced, despite costing more then all other competitors in the market segment.

 

[LoneWolf]

I disagree. I think the interior is gaudy and showy. I sat in one (admittedly it was only for a few moments) and it didn't strike me as being of a very high quality but I suppose opinions will vary on that. I just thought that some of the stitching didn't look very nice and a few of the details weren't becoming of a hand made car. And the little light on the dash that reads "Power, Soul, Passion" is just the height of vulgarity in my opinion. I've heard it said that when the sun is shining you can't even see the switches and gauges etc. I'm sure a lot of people think the gauges and switches look very nice but if they can't be read in direct light then what good are they? Except for looking good in the brochure and in the showroom?

Remember Aston's are almost solely targetted at people where 'vulgarity' is a part of their lifestyle and anything shiny is capable of catching their (usually very short) attention spans. You know the sort, footballers, rappers etc.

That alone IMO puts me off the Aston badge, and that's before we get to their woeful track performance and interiors designed by Ford accountants.

 

[marcos_eirik]

I'm enjoying this, absolutely hilarious this discussion. :lol:

Firstly, it appears you have watched very little and read very few of Clarkson's work over the years to be taking his opinion as 'fact'.

Secondly, Aston's have (and to this day still do) a pretty awful reputation when it comes to reliability.

Thirdly, I don't care how beautiful the DB7 (and granted it was good looking) was, it was over priced, not very sporty, and should've been scrapped yaers before it went out of production.

And lastly, on the issue of price, you say Aston's sales prove they aren't over priced. OK, so according to your theory, a half million pound Enzo isn't over priced because it sold out. Same for the million pound Mclaren F1. And heck, BMW 1 series are selling pretty nicely too, they can't be over priced, despite costing more then all other competitors in the market segment.

1. The reliability of his wifes V8 Vantage is not an opinion, it's a fact. Which he has written about several times. Why should he lie about it? Usually he likes to poke fun at british cars, like Jags, Rovers, LRs and such... This also coincides with what EVO has said about it, the V8 Vantage they had as a long thermer was no worse than other sports/supercars, except it was all down to small niggeling faults nothing severe.

2. I have seen all episodes of post 2002 Top Gear, all of his DVDs and read most of Clarksons works, at least all of what's posted online and I know when distinguish a fact from an opinion.

2. If you say that they have such terrible reliability today, prove it.

3. The DB7 was always a good GT car, and the DB7 GT was at the same time more sporty than it's closest competitor, the Mercedes SL.

4. No, as long as people que up to buy them, they can never be considered overpriced. If they had been struggeling with the sales, it would have been overpriced. As we all know, price follows demand.

 

[LoneWolf]

You're whole argument seems to revolve around one car, the V8 Vantage.

It went round the 'ring a few seconds faster then some of it's rivals. Conclusion? Astons are good at performance.

JC says his wifes Aston has good reliability. Conclusion, Aston's are reliable cars.

The Vantage sells well. Conclusion? Aston's are reasonably priced

And you can't seem to mention the DB7 without mentioning 'it's closest rival, the Mercedes SL'. Is that because the other competitors all left the DB7 behind choking on dust?

Tell me, are all people from Norway this naive or is it just you?

I was discussing this not in terms of specific cars or even AM's in production now, but rather Aston's overall history. And to me, the history shows that they are overpriced, unreliable, showy, purchased by show offs, and severaly lacking in performance next to more serious rivals. End.

 

[marcos_eirik]

Remember Aston's are almost solely targetted at people where 'vulgarity' is a part of their lifestyle and anything shiny is capable of catching their (usually very short) attention spans. You know the sort, footballers, rappers etc.

And that doesn't apply to Ferrari's and Lamborghinis wich are loud and shouty italian cars? :lol: You have got to be kidding...

That alone IMO puts me off the Aston badge, and that's before we get to their woeful track performance and interiors designed by Ford accountants.

Corvette C6 8:15
997 Carrera S 8:05
Audi R8 8:04
V8 Vantage 8:03

If that's woeful track performance what does that make the tree others? :lol:

And I would dearly like too meet the Ford accountant that signed off the Aston's interior with all of it's expensive materials and techno marine watch dials. :lol:

 

[LoneWolf]

And that doesn't apply to Ferrari's and Lamborghinis wich are loud and shouty italian cars?

No but a Ferrari can sell through appeal based on performance merit, an Aston can't (and never really has).

Corvette C6 8:15
997 Carrera S 8:05
Audi R8 8:04
V8 Vantage 8:03

If that's woeful track performance what does that make the tree others? :lol:

See my above post, as I don't want to be repeating myself as you have several times already

 

[marcos_eirik]

Tell me, are all people from Norway this naive or is it just you?

Personal insults FTL... You are really getting out of arguments now aren't you... :lol:

I was discussing this not in terms of specific cars or even AM's in production now, but rather Aston's overall history. And to me, the history shows that they are overpriced, unreliable, showy, purchased by show offs, and severaly lacking in performance next to more serious rivals. End.

No, they're not. They are actually good cars. Aston Martins have always been good GT cars. I don't know where you got the "showy and purchased by show offs" from. Firstly it's commonly understood that Aston Martin's are rather understated, hardly "showy" And the above mentioned has never been an Aston Martin buyer group. Those people tend to buy more loud and shouty cars like Ferraris and Lambos in stead.

As for performance, Well the first V8 Vantage was in it's days actually the fastest production car that money could buy for a while beating the Ferrari Daytona, the second V8 Vantage out acellerated a Lamborghini Diablo, so I would hardly consider that as lacking in performance.

 

[LoneWolf]

Personal insults FTL... You are really getting out of arguments now aren't you... :lol:

It wasn't an insult, as denoted by the smiley.

Firstly it's commonly understood that Aston Martin's are rather understated, hardly "showy" And the above mentioned has never been an Aston Martin buyer group. Those people tend to buy more loud and shouty cars like Ferraris and Lambos in stead.

As for performance, Well the first V8 Vantage was in it's days actually the fastest production car that money could buy for a while beating the Ferrari Daytona, the second V8 Vantage out acellerated a Lamborghini Diablo, so I would hardly consider that as lacking in performance

Oh god, this discussion is obviously not going anywhere.

Aston Martin's understated? Are you serious?

And if you believe that acceleration alone means a certain car has better track performance then another car, then clearly we need not go any further then this.

Good day to you my Norweigan friend.

 

[marcos_eirik]

Oh god, this discussion is obviously not going anywhere.

Aston Martin's understated? Are you serious?

Yes, they are. Park one next to a Ferrari or a Lamborghini and you'll get my point.

And if you believe that acceleration alone means a certain car has better track performance then another car, then clearly we need not go any further then this.

Good day to you my Norweigan friend.

No, I don't believe that. But you said that older Astons had no performance merits worth talking about, well, there you go. They have. As for track performance, it's not easy to say, as I haven't seen tests with older Astons and/or older Ferraris and old Lamborghinis on a track, but I don't think they would perform much worse. Basically The Ferrari Daytona and the Testarossa was a good engine in an awful chassis, to quote Gordon Murray. The same has been said about the Lamborghini Coutach.

And good evening to you my British friend...

 

[LoneWolf]

Let me just end the debate over Aston's and performance by using the Power Lap board for a quick comparison.

If we take the Ferrari 575 Maranello and Aston Martin V12 Vanquish out of the equation because of the very wet weather conditions (where the Ferrari still beat the Aston), there is only one Aston that has managed to beat a Ferrari, and that was the DBS, which managed to beat the 575M Maranello GTC. There are no less then five Ferrari's ahead of the DBS on the board. There are two Lambo's ahead of the DBS, and equally two Porsche's ahead of the DBS.

Basically that DBS represents the peak of what Aston have produced in terms of performance, and I don't care which way you look at it, it get's owned by all it's rivals, especially Ferrari.

 

[British_Rover]

I have been in both a DB9 and V8 Vantage recently. A client of mine has one of the few DB9 Coupes with a real manual imported into the us each year and it is so perfect inside. I couldn't fault one bit of its interior and I had it outside in the sunlight so I got a chance to check out how reflections and such worked on everything.

It was about as close to perfect as you can get for that kind of car. A friend of mine sells Astons and so I have been in several vantages as well. The interior is pretty close to a DB9 but of course the DB9 is slightly better.

Finally I have driven a F430 and a 575M and the interior in those is good as well. Different then the Astons of course but still very good. The Ferrari is must more show me then the Aston. The Aston is more of a gentleman's race car then the Ferrari.

 

[Roberto]

Let me just end the debate over Aston's and performance by using the Power Lap board for a quick comparison.

If we take the Ferrari 575 Maranello and Aston Martin V12 Vanquish out of the equation because of the very wet weather conditions (where the Ferrari still beat the Aston), there is only one Aston that has managed to beat a Ferrari, and that was the DBS, which managed to beat the 575M Maranello GTC. There are no less then five Ferrari's ahead of the DBS on the board. There are two Lambo's ahead of the DBS, and equally two Porsche's ahead of the DBS.

Basically that DBS represents the peak of what Aston have produced in terms of performance, and I don't care which way you look at it, it get's owned by all it's rivals, especially Ferrari.

Just to bring back an old fight (and considering the M3 is in the next episode) I would like to add what I have realised this week. There is a Porsche that drives around Melbourne quite blatantly looking for attention (the number plate is "Huss"). It is driven by an Italian-Greek bloke with over-gelled hair and ego. Across the road from me there is a fat Italian bald bloke who drives his automatic 911 convertible on a sunday to show off. It is hideous ( particularly because he doesn't wear a t-shirt).
On may way to work I pass a gorgeous, brown/ green DB9 that is parked on Swanston Street with the numberplate "MI6". People stare and drool at it. THAT is classy, that is what Astons are all about. People want that car and they don't go round the place saying "look at me everyone....please.... I bought an `expensive` car so people would look at me" and ignore it because they are common, boring, over-hyped cars.

 

[Ironlord]

And now, to completely change the subject away from Astons, here is your number one anorakish fact for the day!

While Captain Slow's insistence that his Princess was the first car to have its wiper spindles hidden away might have been correct (and I'm buggered if I'm going to check), it certainly wasn't the first of all vehicles. Because the Commer Spacevan beat it by a massive margin. It was launched in 1960; and although this 1963 camper has the spindles exposed, they're concealed on this other 1963 camper. Whether that was part of the design or not at the time is debatable, but by the time the first facelift (of about a thousand) came round, the roof had been extended on the basic van to hide the spindles on all models - such as on this 1965 van. Thus beating the Princess, launched in 1975, by at least a decade. And, if you look here, the Spacevan outlived the Princess, which by 1983 had already been replaced by the Ambassador. Which had its wiper spindles right out in the open.

Now, aren't you all glad I bored you with that?

 

[Momo63]

Wow! Thanks for that I've been having trouble sleeping lately

 

[blazer]

did anyone else notcie during Richards egg challenge, there was a shot with some of the safety crew in the back, anyone notice the 2 astons? i think one was a white DB9 Volante...

 

[Eye-Q]

Yes...

Here it has been discussed first and here respectively here are follow-ups.