So by your logic why even have 500hp, 300 or 250 will move it and it will still looks great and be comfortable and luxurious... That kind of thinking would have had Ferrari still making 300hp supercars but no, they keep becoming more powerful and faster and yes, this IS an expensive car and a supercar so it should have this performance. Aston Martin is a cruel company because they made this car to be by far not even rivaled as the best looking car in the world with a stunning interior, just epic in every way but then they make it slow. Now forget the factory power though we're talking here about tuning, performance parts and possibly forced induction which has been done more than you think and I have seen it in person but never a twin screw blower only centrifugal SCs. Now this car with ~800-900hp would be epic.

 

"Aston Martin is a cruel company" - now that's a unique troll on things, I must admit. Yes, I feel oppressed and exploited daily by those meanies every time I drive my car, LOL.

Don't presume to pervert my "logic" to support your viewpoint. I made no comments as to what I thought constitutes reasonable power in a road car. But since you seem obsessed with the subject...

Around 300 hp/ton IMO is a reasonable number for a fast road car. Any more than this I would define as a substantial surplus on today's roads, at least where I live. Does that mean I would never have a road car with a higher power to weight ratio? No, it just means that beyond that point, power would hold relatively less importance to me than other factors, in choosing a road car.

As cars become faster they become less interactive. Witness the slow and agonizing death of the manual transmission. Go ahead and have your "epic" 800-900hp monster, and enjoy using 10% of the performance 99% of time.

 

While I don't think you need 900 bhp, I think the idea that anything beyond 500 bhp is wasted is silly. Additional power would absolutely be welcome in many "normal" driving circumstances. For example, additional power would mean you may be able to get the acceleration you want without having to drop down a gear. Is it hard or unduly inconvenient to drop down a gear? No, but it's nice to not have to. Also, I think how much is "too much power for the road" is a moving target. Twenty years ago people thought 500 bhp was only for race cars, now it's common for road cars. Maybe 900 bhp is too much, but I don't see why 600 or 700 wouldn't be useful on the road and a hell of a lot of fun.

 

Let's be honest guys

A twin C30 Rotrex set up making 750whp on a dyno dynamix is a 800+ HP car in a rwd chassis that weighs less than 3900lbs. This is just about all I could ever ask for in arguably the most beautiful car on earth.

A stock DBS will run low 12's@116-119mph. A turbo set up would not only be nearly impossible to find the resources to do it right, but it wouldn't put the power down nearly as well as a 750whp s/c car.

 

My friend I never said turbocharging my original question was for the possibility of a twin screw. As for the twin SC DBS is the video I was a little disappointing by the "750whp" because the SLR was still walking it. I do suspect this has to do with the driver though who seemed to not know how to shift gears efficiently.

I think you should read the post again...where I said because they make the most beautiful car in the world and yet give it an underpowered engine. I wasn't actually suggesting Aston Martin is a company that supports oppression

Exactly, not to mention the competition which are now almost all over 700hp and look at Ferrari's differential technology which makes the car just stunning in launches and has exceptional traction. The drivetrain technology in the DBS is definitely dated. I do think though a custom twin screw would help with that

 

It's not easy to plop in a roots type or twin screw blower. I have an SL55 AMG with a factory positive displacement SC (which i have modded with LT headers, huge pulley and TB, tune, cams, etc...etc... you name it...the car makes over 600 rwhp and over 750 rwtq) and the SLR has the same thing with a top mount IC versus the SL55 that has the IC mounted under the intake manifold.

To do this on an Aston v12, you would need to redisign a completely new intake manifold, new airbox piping, surge tanks, runners, and castings.... then fabricate top mount IC (if you wanted SLR type design...) all of which is not easy at all, you have to consider how the engine is laid out, etc...then create a cooling circuit for a front mount Heat exchanger, run the circuit to a remote reservior tank...this is just the beginning! There is a lot more detailed steps that have to be dealt with. When Mercedes designed with AMG this system, they built the engine *AROUND* the charger itself....everything was made to work with that element of design, it was the centerpiece to which the rest of the engine conformed, not by any means an afterthought.

Doing this is a MASSIVE undertaking. to do it right you would need an R&D team, a design and Fabrication team, and then somehow be able to do testing and DAQ. You would essentially be using the factory engine as a premise on which to build your all new motor, keep in mid compression reduction, changes in valvetrain etc, would all have to be part of this build. You are almost better off doing an engine transplant and using a stand alone engine managment like Motec to adapt it. In the end you would need resources like a proffecional racing and development team, or manaufacturer to pull this off.

My advise...sell the DBS, pick up a 599 GTB and be done with it, much easier, no hassle, much lower cost option. You cannot just slap a positive displacement charger on this the AM 6L v12 there is a LOT more to it then just the charger.

 

There's just not room under the hood for a twin screw on the V12 engined cars. Sadly...

Unless you start relocating the engine which frankly I think is just silly.

 

This whole thread is silly...