This is a cross post of mine from another board, but I thought it was appropriate for discussion here.

OK I'm confused by this video. Somehow Aston Martin takes the '06-'09 Vantage which is slower than a Mustang GT, 335i, and Boxster S and makes it faster than a GT2, Lambo Gallardo SL, and GT-R in the '09 version with the additional 40 hp. Seem a little hokey?? I'd love it if it was true, and there is video to document it, but it just doesn't make sense to me.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/VideosWallp...AR=234414&CT=V

 

I don't think the result is real...

 

Maybe someone put a block of wood under the GT2 throttle

 

Nice to say I have have driven them all ... even my 2003 996tt was faster than a V8V 4.3 or 4.7 .... yeah it had some mods (550 HP) but even stock (420 HP) it was faster ... w/ mods not a race at all - we are talking car lengths. The 996 tubos kick in faster than the power curve of the V8V ... the 997 boost is even quicker. I sorta stepped down in power but am still having a great time in the AM ...

 

 

Watched it again ... still hard to believe ... but they went to a lot of trouble if not true ... I still think my 996tt is a lot quicker ... I'll have to 0-100-0 the new owner some time ... then again maybe I should race for pinks

 

I drove a DBS recently and I felt that it was a monster acceleration wise. I know it's alot faster than my 4.3V. Could these results be a matter of braking? I feel that the braking of the vantage is excellent.

 

Well it's definitely beating the DBS in both braking and acceleration. It looks like the car hits 100 in around 8 seconds on the video. It's tough to see the LCD screen and the speedometer is at an angle, but it looks to me like they hit the brakes when the car gets to about 90. The only one that I can see an actual number on is the GT2 which flashes 105 briefly before the brakes hit. Even still, I'm not sure it could beat the GT2 0-90-0 vs. 0-105-0.

Having driven the 4.7, we all know it's faster than the 4.3, but I don't think it's that much faster. I could see it hitting 100 in just under 10 seconds but not in the 8 second range and not in GT2 territory...although I wish it was. Maybe it was a ringer with the V12 or with a secret factory supercharger.

 

I still think the GT2 would outbrake the Vantage though, right? I mean I assume it accelerates faster, and it's lighter. Hmm, anyone know the true facts?

 

wtf... nothing in the video makes sense... apparently a few hundred kilos is enough to let a Vantage beat the DBS but the GTR is right behind the Caterham even though it weighs more than 3 times as much?

And thats really all the Vantage had going for it, 40hp and a little less weight. Unless that thing secretly has the new V12, there's no way that accurate.

 

I ran a V12 DB9 and although it may be a little quicker than my car, both are way out of their league against a GT2.

The Vantage is definitely quicker than a mid-13 sec car though. Point being it's nowhere close to a GT2 unless they tested the ALMS car.

 

I can't even believe this is still being discussed... This video is a joke. The results are completely ridiculous! Everyone should just pretend they never watched the video because it is inaccurate in every way. Something was obviously wrong with either the drivers or the cars; it was probably the drivers though.

Come on now guys... Let's use a little bit of rationality here.

 

Oh and for those who weren't sure and wanted to know the facts...

In a real test, the Vantage would have been by far the slowest car there and the GT2 would absolutely destroy it in any performance test. I don't even know why the Astons were in this comparison because in a real test, they wouldn't be able to keep up with the GT2, Caterham R500, or GTR.

No offense to anyone... I love Aston Martins and I am not saying they are bad cars, but when discussing performance capabilities, this is the simple and obvious truth.

 

night and day difference. My cousin has the vantage and I have a 996tt. I would agree with NAPO.

 

the 2009 is a lot more car than 2008 and back!