Aston struggling
#16
10-10-2013, 09:37 PM
The sad truth seems to be that "this" is simply a dying breed. The numbers suggest that there are just not enough people like us, especially like blue skies. Porsche adds more nannies, more plastic and sells more cars.
The brand proposition for an Aston Martin is very specific. "I want a car that is fast but is also comfortable." Look at the flagship. It's not sure if it's a super car or a luxury cruiser. In truth it is great as both, but in comparisons that demand supremacy, it falls short. It is neither the super-est super car, nor the most lux cruiser. Side by sides have been done in both directions and it comes up appearing to be the lesser of the breed. Yes, WE all know that this actually means that it is the better car for actual driving and owning, but that does not appear to be the quality that actually sells cars in the world today.
Please AMG, provide Aston Martin with the leading edge technology it needs to stand out from the crowd again. Meanwhile, let's hope ownership is able to roll with the punches and ride it out.
The brand proposition for an Aston Martin is very specific. "I want a car that is fast but is also comfortable." Look at the flagship. It's not sure if it's a super car or a luxury cruiser. In truth it is great as both, but in comparisons that demand supremacy, it falls short. It is neither the super-est super car, nor the most lux cruiser. Side by sides have been done in both directions and it comes up appearing to be the lesser of the breed. Yes, WE all know that this actually means that it is the better car for actual driving and owning, but that does not appear to be the quality that actually sells cars in the world today.
Please AMG, provide Aston Martin with the leading edge technology it needs to stand out from the crowd again. Meanwhile, let's hope ownership is able to roll with the punches and ride it out.
#17
10-11-2013, 05:40 AM
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: whereabouts unknown
Posts: 2,266
Rep Power: 118 
^^^I don't buy that Aston is struggling because they want to produce cars that are both "fast and comfortable." There are lots of other cars that are equally comfortable and faster. This is another excuse. Your second point, about the old technology, is closer to the mark.
I was thinking about upgrading to the V12V-S. I was really hoping that the new gearbox would bring Aston's automated manuals up to date. Based upon the evo article I posted about, it looks like this is not the case, so, I will not be buying a V12V-S. Aston, are you listening???
I was thinking about upgrading to the V12V-S. I was really hoping that the new gearbox would bring Aston's automated manuals up to date. Based upon the evo article I posted about, it looks like this is not the case, so, I will not be buying a V12V-S. Aston, are you listening???
Last edited by Racer_X; 10-11-2013 at 05:43 AM.
#18
10-11-2013, 06:08 AM
1. I think the rollup display is cool (I'm in my mid-20s). The lower-mid 20's women I take on dates in the Aston think it's cool. And if I'm humbly honest, most exotic car drivers are not what most of the world would call "cool". So who's defining "cool" here?
I've used the systems in the competition and I don't think they're any better (I think touch screens are awful for driving).
2. I agree with this. I hated the gearbox in my old Vantage and it was the primary reason I went to a DB9.
4. The general consumer doesn't even know what an Aston Martin is. I've had my Vantage mistaken for a Lamborghini and my DB9 mistaken for a Bentley. The general consumer couldn't tell a rock from a mountain.
No one's "grasping at straws" by defending their brand. I didn't buy two brand new Aston's because I couldn't afford a "better" Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bentley, etc (my DB9 replaced my California). I've driven 12C's, 458's, Gallardos, GTC's and so forth and bought it because I thought it was a better car.
Of course Aston is struggling -- they serve a niche within a niche market, in bad economic times, in an era that is progressively moving towards hybrids/electrics and greater regulation. But they still have appeal to new buyers (like me) and my peers, and that's very promising.
I've used the systems in the competition and I don't think they're any better (I think touch screens are awful for driving).
2. I agree with this. I hated the gearbox in my old Vantage and it was the primary reason I went to a DB9.
4. The general consumer doesn't even know what an Aston Martin is. I've had my Vantage mistaken for a Lamborghini and my DB9 mistaken for a Bentley. The general consumer couldn't tell a rock from a mountain.
No one's "grasping at straws" by defending their brand. I didn't buy two brand new Aston's because I couldn't afford a "better" Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bentley, etc (my DB9 replaced my California). I've driven 12C's, 458's, Gallardos, GTC's and so forth and bought it because I thought it was a better car.
Of course Aston is struggling -- they serve a niche within a niche market, in bad economic times, in an era that is progressively moving towards hybrids/electrics and greater regulation. But they still have appeal to new buyers (like me) and my peers, and that's very promising.
My point about models looking the same is for the general buyer who is wondering why they would spend 120+ on a new car when they can get a used one for half the price that looks the same, drives the same, and performs the same. It's why I bought the 08 in 2010.
I was in the market for the V12VS Roadster as I was hoping they would be adding some new tech to the car, but it's more of the same. I would rather buy a 2011-12 V12V with a better gearbox....I hate saying that but it's true.
#19
10-11-2013, 08:39 PM
Why would anyone buy an Aston Martin for 'performance?' You can buy a 850HP Mustang from Shelby in Vegas for same money if that's your thing - I've been in one of those and nothing can stay with them. But I gave up street racing a long time ago and where I live (Wash DC 'burb) there is so much traffic, one cannot use a 380HP car to full advantage much less a 500 HP one. Go to the track? OK, I do that too - and I dare say a stock Vantage V8V early model with zero mods can't be driven 10/10ths by 80 % of the people on this forum. Put R-Compound tires on it and I'll put that number at 97%. It's a fast car, and extremely capable. But I get the HP number wars.
I know my friend that owns the 850 HP Mustang isn't ever going to drive it like it was made to go - ever - but he can brag about it, and that's OK, too. Here's his car, he's never ran it once wide open (he paid $ 93,000 for this)
The only thing I find 'dated' on my 07 Vantage is some of the electronics - like lack of a USB port and a crude TPS system. But unlike my new 'modern' BMW that is in the space next to it, my Vantage doesn't safety niggle me to no end and will let me move the car with the door open or cracked. The BMW won't and refuses to budge.
As for updating the look....how does one improve on a near-perfect design? It's not easy. I actually prefer the panels on my 07 to the new ones, the more subtle rear spoiler, the red tail lamps, the smooth rocker panels....
I bought an Aston for something I call "the art of the build". I could get a Porsche 991 easily enough (I've had four Porsches) but I know when I take it apart that its got the same plastic push pins holding cheap plastic trim as a Toyota. The Aston has metal screws and metal parts and that's very, very cool. Orange peel is rampant on most cars, but not on the wet-sanded Aston - its a factory 'World of Wheels' paint job, and only Bentley and Rolls do it like that as far as I can tell. When you take this car apart, up the jackstands, and go into places few owners do - you see the quality of the components and art of the build. That's what I get a kick out of, and why I own an Aston. And I hope they keep the production that way and not bow to mass produced methods.
My only real gripe with the car is the cheezy Ford Turn Signal am made of plastic. I mean COME ON....never use an out-of-the bin part that the owner's hand touches every day on every drive. Those should always be custom and feel special on an exotic.
I know my friend that owns the 850 HP Mustang isn't ever going to drive it like it was made to go - ever - but he can brag about it, and that's OK, too. Here's his car, he's never ran it once wide open (he paid $ 93,000 for this)
The only thing I find 'dated' on my 07 Vantage is some of the electronics - like lack of a USB port and a crude TPS system. But unlike my new 'modern' BMW that is in the space next to it, my Vantage doesn't safety niggle me to no end and will let me move the car with the door open or cracked. The BMW won't and refuses to budge.
As for updating the look....how does one improve on a near-perfect design? It's not easy. I actually prefer the panels on my 07 to the new ones, the more subtle rear spoiler, the red tail lamps, the smooth rocker panels....
I bought an Aston for something I call "the art of the build". I could get a Porsche 991 easily enough (I've had four Porsches) but I know when I take it apart that its got the same plastic push pins holding cheap plastic trim as a Toyota. The Aston has metal screws and metal parts and that's very, very cool. Orange peel is rampant on most cars, but not on the wet-sanded Aston - its a factory 'World of Wheels' paint job, and only Bentley and Rolls do it like that as far as I can tell. When you take this car apart, up the jackstands, and go into places few owners do - you see the quality of the components and art of the build. That's what I get a kick out of, and why I own an Aston. And I hope they keep the production that way and not bow to mass produced methods.
My only real gripe with the car is the cheezy Ford Turn Signal am made of plastic. I mean COME ON....never use an out-of-the bin part that the owner's hand touches every day on every drive. Those should always be custom and feel special on an exotic.
#20
10-11-2013, 09:30 PM
RossL,
You replied to my post and said "the 991S is a lot faster than the Vantage or the Vantage S, PDK or not." Magazine tests of the V8V show 1/4 mile speeds of between 111 and 115, with most at 113. Tests show 111 mph for the manual 991 through the 1/4 mile, and 114 to 115 for the manual 991S. Those figures hardly support the notion that the manual 991 is "a lot faster." That'a pretty competitive set of figures for the "old" V8V, which offers so much more than performance.
Somehow there seems to be a perception that the Vantage lacks performance, but the figures say otherwise, as does my experience. I think it's very underrated. Sure, the tech isn't bang up to date, but the qualities that Duane discussed are so much more important to me than the picture on the nav screen.
BTW, you said you bought an '08 Vantage in '10 because the '08 looked the same and performed the same as the '10. Except that it didn't perform the same given that the 4.7 arrived for '09.
You replied to my post and said "the 991S is a lot faster than the Vantage or the Vantage S, PDK or not." Magazine tests of the V8V show 1/4 mile speeds of between 111 and 115, with most at 113. Tests show 111 mph for the manual 991 through the 1/4 mile, and 114 to 115 for the manual 991S. Those figures hardly support the notion that the manual 991 is "a lot faster." That'a pretty competitive set of figures for the "old" V8V, which offers so much more than performance.
Somehow there seems to be a perception that the Vantage lacks performance, but the figures say otherwise, as does my experience. I think it's very underrated. Sure, the tech isn't bang up to date, but the qualities that Duane discussed are so much more important to me than the picture on the nav screen.
BTW, you said you bought an '08 Vantage in '10 because the '08 looked the same and performed the same as the '10. Except that it didn't perform the same given that the 4.7 arrived for '09.
#21
10-12-2013, 04:31 AM
RossL,
You replied to my post and said "the 991S is a lot faster than the Vantage or the Vantage S, PDK or not." Magazine tests of the V8V show 1/4 mile speeds of between 111 and 115, with most at 113. Tests show 111 mph for the manual 991 through the 1/4 mile, and 114 to 115 for the manual 991S. Those figures hardly support the notion that the manual 991 is "a lot faster." That'a pretty competitive set of figures for the "old" V8V, which offers so much more than performance.
Somehow there seems to be a perception that the Vantage lacks performance, but the figures say otherwise, as does my experience. I think it's very underrated. Sure, the tech isn't bang up to date, but the qualities that Duane discussed are so much more important to me than the picture on the nav screen.
BTW, you said you bought an '08 Vantage in '10 because the '08 looked the same and performed the same as the '10. Except that it didn't perform the same given that the 4.7 arrived for '09.
You replied to my post and said "the 991S is a lot faster than the Vantage or the Vantage S, PDK or not." Magazine tests of the V8V show 1/4 mile speeds of between 111 and 115, with most at 113. Tests show 111 mph for the manual 991 through the 1/4 mile, and 114 to 115 for the manual 991S. Those figures hardly support the notion that the manual 991 is "a lot faster." That'a pretty competitive set of figures for the "old" V8V, which offers so much more than performance.
Somehow there seems to be a perception that the Vantage lacks performance, but the figures say otherwise, as does my experience. I think it's very underrated. Sure, the tech isn't bang up to date, but the qualities that Duane discussed are so much more important to me than the picture on the nav screen.
BTW, you said you bought an '08 Vantage in '10 because the '08 looked the same and performed the same as the '10. Except that it didn't perform the same given that the 4.7 arrived for '09.
http://fastestlaps.com/cars/aston_ma...ge_420bhp.html
http://fastestlaps.com/cars/porsche_991_carrera_s.html
I'm pretty familiar with the 4.7L and the 4.3L
. The 4.7L is quicker but it still handles the same and looks the same and to the general buyer, is the same. Look at how many posters on here opt for the 4.3L because the price to performance ratio is so small. You can split hairs all you want for your argument to work but Aston isn't making money on people buying used and until they solve that problem, they will continue to lose money. For reference, I'm not going to buy a V12VS because it's the same car as the V12V but with an average transmission. The performance is better but it's not enough to pay the premium and get the same thing.
#22
10-12-2013, 07:36 AM
The V8V usually run about 4.3 sec for the 0-60 run, and I've seen a best of 4.1 and a worst of 4.5. Only one test I've seen shows 3.5 for a 991S, and it was PDK. I think the 1/4 mile speed is much more informative because it puts less emphasis on the launch, which will always favor a rear-engined car.
The difference in straight line performance is greater between a 4.3 and 4.7 Vantage than it is between a 4.7 Vantage and a 991S.
Regarding lap times, yes, the 991 is very fast around a track. It uses a huge amount of tech to accomplish this. IMO, that lap time is pretty meaningless for a road car used on the road. I prefer the analogue mechanical feel and experience of the Aston, even though it's not as quick around a track -- I'm driving it on the road, and I haven't yet been on a road where a 991's extra speed will get me down that road faster. Both cars are faster than any public road I've been on.
Aston does need to make real progress with tech because the market demands it, and I've never suggested otherwise. That said, I think the current cars are underrated, and I also think they remain the best-looking cars on sale today.
The difference in straight line performance is greater between a 4.3 and 4.7 Vantage than it is between a 4.7 Vantage and a 991S.
Regarding lap times, yes, the 991 is very fast around a track. It uses a huge amount of tech to accomplish this. IMO, that lap time is pretty meaningless for a road car used on the road. I prefer the analogue mechanical feel and experience of the Aston, even though it's not as quick around a track -- I'm driving it on the road, and I haven't yet been on a road where a 991's extra speed will get me down that road faster. Both cars are faster than any public road I've been on.
Aston does need to make real progress with tech because the market demands it, and I've never suggested otherwise. That said, I think the current cars are underrated, and I also think they remain the best-looking cars on sale today.
Last edited by Speedraser; 10-12-2013 at 07:41 AM.
#23
10-12-2013, 09:08 AM
Hey Speedraser,
I see you have a '95 993 in your sig line - you are so right on the Porsche handling. I had a '96 C4S and man-oh-man was that car hard to drive fast on the track in stock forum (suspension). The climbing esses at VIR in that car would give me major pucker factor at speed, and of course with All Wheel Drive and sticky tires I was the King of Hogpen, though...lol. I was exhausted driving that car fast on the track, it was flat out work.
The Vantage though, its such a lovely car on the track - probably my very favorite and my second favorite was a BMW E36 M3 outside of pure open wheel cars (which are my VERY favorite). The Aston is delightfully neutral and well-composed. More fun factor, less work. Definitely less elbows! You can do a session in a Vantage at 10/10ths and not come away a heaping sweaty mess like you do in a Porsche 993, and isn't that what the brand is all about? The Gentleman's Sports Car!
P.S. For you magazine racers out there, just give me a boosted Subie Sti and I'll put all your lap times to shame for less than $ 30K in the car...
I see you have a '95 993 in your sig line - you are so right on the Porsche handling. I had a '96 C4S and man-oh-man was that car hard to drive fast on the track in stock forum (suspension). The climbing esses at VIR in that car would give me major pucker factor at speed, and of course with All Wheel Drive and sticky tires I was the King of Hogpen, though...lol. I was exhausted driving that car fast on the track, it was flat out work.
The Vantage though, its such a lovely car on the track - probably my very favorite and my second favorite was a BMW E36 M3 outside of pure open wheel cars (which are my VERY favorite). The Aston is delightfully neutral and well-composed. More fun factor, less work. Definitely less elbows! You can do a session in a Vantage at 10/10ths and not come away a heaping sweaty mess like you do in a Porsche 993, and isn't that what the brand is all about? The Gentleman's Sports Car!
P.S. For you magazine racers out there, just give me a boosted Subie Sti and I'll put all your lap times to shame for less than $ 30K in the car...
#24
10-12-2013, 05:43 PM
There's a thread on Pistonheads at the moment, which talks about Aston's financial losses, with the predictable flurry of responses criticizing Astons for being slow. One guy talks about how Astons are poor track cars because they cannot go around corners. He then goes on to provide 'proof' by saying you never see Astons on track days, completely ignoring the concepts of production numbers and market demographics.
Speedraser and drcollie are right on the mark. Having driven 997 and earlier versions of the 911, as well as my previous V8V on track, I can tell you which I found better balanced, hands down: the Aston (can't speak for the 991, haven't tried one yet). Maybe he is referring to pre-Gaydon cars? It might just be me, but I can't get comfortable with the specific driving style required by rear-engined Porsches - I'll pass on the power understeer, the tail wagging the dog, etc. Each successive generation has filtered out a bit more of the inherent disadvantages of a rear-engined layout, but it's a bit like polishing a turd if you ask me. No offense to 911 owners; I do have immense respect for what the cars can do when driven correctly, and yes, they do accelerate and brake very well.
But finer nuances of driving dynamics are not going to be relevant to a majority of buyers of either Astons or Porsches. The latest tech and test number bragging rights are more important, it seems. You can argue all you want that Astons have underestimated performance abilities compared to Porsche, and I won't say you are wrong, but virtually any independent test report going back many years will disagree, both subjectively and objectively. People read these reports, and what they say becomes 'the truth', and these brand stereotypes are very difficult to crack.
Speedraser and drcollie are right on the mark. Having driven 997 and earlier versions of the 911, as well as my previous V8V on track, I can tell you which I found better balanced, hands down: the Aston (can't speak for the 991, haven't tried one yet). Maybe he is referring to pre-Gaydon cars? It might just be me, but I can't get comfortable with the specific driving style required by rear-engined Porsches - I'll pass on the power understeer, the tail wagging the dog, etc. Each successive generation has filtered out a bit more of the inherent disadvantages of a rear-engined layout, but it's a bit like polishing a turd if you ask me. No offense to 911 owners; I do have immense respect for what the cars can do when driven correctly, and yes, they do accelerate and brake very well.
But finer nuances of driving dynamics are not going to be relevant to a majority of buyers of either Astons or Porsches. The latest tech and test number bragging rights are more important, it seems. You can argue all you want that Astons have underestimated performance abilities compared to Porsche, and I won't say you are wrong, but virtually any independent test report going back many years will disagree, both subjectively and objectively. People read these reports, and what they say becomes 'the truth', and these brand stereotypes are very difficult to crack.
#25
10-12-2013, 05:46 PM
There's a thread on Pistonheads at the moment, which talks about Aston's financial losses, with the predictable flurry of responses criticizing Astons for being slow. One guy talks about how Astons are poor track cars because they cannot go around corners. He then goes on to provide 'proof' by saying you never see Astons on track days, completely ignoring the concepts of production numbers and market demographics.
Speedraser and drcollie are right on the mark. Having driven 997 and earlier versions of the 911, as well as my previous V8V on track, I can tell you which I found better balanced, hands down: the Aston (can't speak for the 991, haven't tried one yet). Maybe he is referring to pre-Gaydon cars? It might just be me, but I can't get comfortable with the specific driving style required by rear-engined Porsches - I'll pass on the power understeer, the tail wagging the dog, etc. Each successive generation has filtered out a bit more of the inherent disadvantages of a rear-engined layout, but it's a bit like polishing a turd if you ask me. No offense to 911 owners; I do have immense respect for what the cars can do when driven correctly, and yes, they do accelerate and brake very well.
But finer nuances of driving dynamics are not going to be relevant to a majority of buyers of either Astons or Porsches. The latest tech and test number bragging rights are more important, it seems. You can argue all you want that Astons have underestimated performance abilities compared to Porsche, and I won't say you are wrong, but virtually any independent test report going back many years will disagree, both subjectively and objectively. People read these reports, and what they say becomes 'the truth', and these brand stereotypes are very difficult to crack.
Speedraser and drcollie are right on the mark. Having driven 997 and earlier versions of the 911, as well as my previous V8V on track, I can tell you which I found better balanced, hands down: the Aston (can't speak for the 991, haven't tried one yet). Maybe he is referring to pre-Gaydon cars? It might just be me, but I can't get comfortable with the specific driving style required by rear-engined Porsches - I'll pass on the power understeer, the tail wagging the dog, etc. Each successive generation has filtered out a bit more of the inherent disadvantages of a rear-engined layout, but it's a bit like polishing a turd if you ask me. No offense to 911 owners; I do have immense respect for what the cars can do when driven correctly, and yes, they do accelerate and brake very well.
But finer nuances of driving dynamics are not going to be relevant to a majority of buyers of either Astons or Porsches. The latest tech and test number bragging rights are more important, it seems. You can argue all you want that Astons have underestimated performance abilities compared to Porsche, and I won't say you are wrong, but virtually any independent test report going back many years will disagree, both subjectively and objectively. People read these reports, and what they say becomes 'the truth', and these brand stereotypes are very difficult to crack.
Last edited by DonBond; 10-12-2013 at 05:49 PM.
#26
10-13-2013, 12:10 AM
I think part of AM's problem is that they're too much a niche car. If they were the only marque in that field, then no big deal. But they aren't, they're competing with other companies.
So let's say you're looking for a high-end coupe or convertible. You've got the Porsche 911, M-B SL and SLS, BMW 6-Series, Jaguar XK... Each of those is full of gadgets and doodads and bells and whistles. The AM option, on the other hand, has very little to offer. For example, if your "must have" list includes vented/cooled seats, you're automatically out of AM. Same with AWD. Same with a hybrid. Same with cargo space (SUV). Same with a dual-clutch transmission.
What AM offers are fantastic drivers' cars. But they're made for very specific tastes. If what they offer doesn't meet your needs, you have to look outside of AM for your next purchase. Meanwhile, if the 911 doesn't fit your needs, you've got several options to pick from and remain in Porsche's marketplace. Same with M-B and BMW, and to an extent Jaguar (which is adding an SUV soon).
Interestingly, Bentley - a company with a similarly-niche portfolio - has had steadily increasing sales (up 9% globally during the first half of 2013). I think Bentley's market is easier to sell to, though. Powerful engine, smooth transmission, luxurious interior, comfortable ride quality... All things someone dropping $200k on a car would want. Plus, again, bells and whistles courtesy of VAG. But AM's cars are more sporty - they've got a harsher ride, fewer amenities, and hit-or-miss transmissions.
And being in the "sporty" category makes things even harder for AM. The 911 is the most often-named competitor, the GT-R is a damn monster, and a Corvette is one of the best performance-for-money deals around.
Comparing cars side-by-side, AM just can't match its competition. Those of us that fit the niche end up buying and loving our cars, but we're few in number. Looking at cars side-by-side, where is AM on top? This is key. This is what makes people actually buy an AM instead of something else. Looks are the obvious one. Engine noise is glorious. Driving experience is wonderful. But those aren't enough for AM to make it. There are too many things that could potentially prevent someone from buying an AM (the "must have" list I mentioned earlier). AM needs more reasons for people to choose one of their cars over those of their competitors.
So let's say you're looking for a high-end coupe or convertible. You've got the Porsche 911, M-B SL and SLS, BMW 6-Series, Jaguar XK... Each of those is full of gadgets and doodads and bells and whistles. The AM option, on the other hand, has very little to offer. For example, if your "must have" list includes vented/cooled seats, you're automatically out of AM. Same with AWD. Same with a hybrid. Same with cargo space (SUV). Same with a dual-clutch transmission.
What AM offers are fantastic drivers' cars. But they're made for very specific tastes. If what they offer doesn't meet your needs, you have to look outside of AM for your next purchase. Meanwhile, if the 911 doesn't fit your needs, you've got several options to pick from and remain in Porsche's marketplace. Same with M-B and BMW, and to an extent Jaguar (which is adding an SUV soon).
Interestingly, Bentley - a company with a similarly-niche portfolio - has had steadily increasing sales (up 9% globally during the first half of 2013). I think Bentley's market is easier to sell to, though. Powerful engine, smooth transmission, luxurious interior, comfortable ride quality... All things someone dropping $200k on a car would want. Plus, again, bells and whistles courtesy of VAG. But AM's cars are more sporty - they've got a harsher ride, fewer amenities, and hit-or-miss transmissions.
And being in the "sporty" category makes things even harder for AM. The 911 is the most often-named competitor, the GT-R is a damn monster, and a Corvette is one of the best performance-for-money deals around.
Comparing cars side-by-side, AM just can't match its competition. Those of us that fit the niche end up buying and loving our cars, but we're few in number. Looking at cars side-by-side, where is AM on top? This is key. This is what makes people actually buy an AM instead of something else. Looks are the obvious one. Engine noise is glorious. Driving experience is wonderful. But those aren't enough for AM to make it. There are too many things that could potentially prevent someone from buying an AM (the "must have" list I mentioned earlier). AM needs more reasons for people to choose one of their cars over those of their competitors.
Last edited by telum01; 10-13-2013 at 12:18 AM.
#27
10-13-2013, 03:06 PM
Yes, it is a niche manufacturer, and that's largely why the cars are so loved by people whose preferences fit that niche. They are great driver's cars that also offer unmatched levels of sensory appeal.
As other manufacturers, such as Porsche and Bentley, and soon-to-be Maserati, broaden the appeal off their offerings, their sales increase. However, their cars also become less appealing to the people who loved them when each was more of a niche manufacturer. I used to LOVE 911s, and I still have and love my 993. The new ones are nice, but I no longer "need" to own one. The Bentley Continental R from the '90s -- that was a very special thing. The current Conti... eh. Nice, but they don't make me want one.
To each his own, but for cooled seats and the latest nav screen to be more important (to an enthusiast) than the car itself is, to me, utterly baffling.
As cars become less niche and more mainstream, sales increase. But those cars rarely if ever inspire the MUST-OWN-ONE lust that the niche offerings do to certain people.
The best business case rarely makes for the most lustworthy products.
As other manufacturers, such as Porsche and Bentley, and soon-to-be Maserati, broaden the appeal off their offerings, their sales increase. However, their cars also become less appealing to the people who loved them when each was more of a niche manufacturer. I used to LOVE 911s, and I still have and love my 993. The new ones are nice, but I no longer "need" to own one. The Bentley Continental R from the '90s -- that was a very special thing. The current Conti... eh. Nice, but they don't make me want one.
To each his own, but for cooled seats and the latest nav screen to be more important (to an enthusiast) than the car itself is, to me, utterly baffling.
As cars become less niche and more mainstream, sales increase. But those cars rarely if ever inspire the MUST-OWN-ONE lust that the niche offerings do to certain people.
The best business case rarely makes for the most lustworthy products.
Last edited by Speedraser; 10-13-2013 at 03:10 PM.
#28
10-13-2013, 04:23 PM
Yes, it is a niche manufacturer, and that's largely why the cars are so loved by people whose preferences fit that niche. They are great driver's cars that also offer unmatched levels of sensory appeal.
As other manufacturers, such as Porsche and Bentley, and soon-to-be Maserati, broaden the appeal off their offerings, their sales increase. However, their cars also become less appealing to the people who loved them when each was more of a niche manufacturer. I used to LOVE 911s, and I still have and love my 993. The new ones are nice, but I no longer "need" to own one. The Bentley Continental R from the '90s -- that was a very special thing. The current Conti... eh. Nice, but they don't make me want one.
To each his own, but for cooled seats and the latest nav screen to be more important (to an enthusiast) than the car itself is, to me, utterly baffling.
As cars become less niche and more mainstream, sales increase. But those cars rarely if ever inspire the MUST-OWN-ONE lust that the niche offerings do to certain people.
The best business case rarely makes for the most lustworthy products.
As other manufacturers, such as Porsche and Bentley, and soon-to-be Maserati, broaden the appeal off their offerings, their sales increase. However, their cars also become less appealing to the people who loved them when each was more of a niche manufacturer. I used to LOVE 911s, and I still have and love my 993. The new ones are nice, but I no longer "need" to own one. The Bentley Continental R from the '90s -- that was a very special thing. The current Conti... eh. Nice, but they don't make me want one.
To each his own, but for cooled seats and the latest nav screen to be more important (to an enthusiast) than the car itself is, to me, utterly baffling.
As cars become less niche and more mainstream, sales increase. But those cars rarely if ever inspire the MUST-OWN-ONE lust that the niche offerings do to certain people.
The best business case rarely makes for the most lustworthy products.
#29
10-13-2013, 04:37 PM
The best business case is one that keep a business in the black . Aston's target market is not to the purists. That's what Lotus, Morgan, Caterham, Ariel, Noble, etc are for. Aston's market is the refined GT car. There are levels of refinement that are expected and if you were a true purist and it was more about the "car itself", you would be complaining about ABS, traction control, LSD, CCB, cruise control, sound deadening, etc, etc. These are all considered "standard" items and take away from purity of a car.
However, for a refined GT car, most people expect iPod adapter, bluetooth, strong stereo, non-lurchy transmission, navigation, etc. The GT market is full of competition and the majority that will keep Aston in business expect standards when paying a premium. If you compare the field and look at standard equipment to standard equipment, Aston is behind.
Edit: Here's a video from Car magazine. At 2:20 what they say about the Aston Martin compared to the Ferrari F12 is IMO spot on:
. Aston's target market is not to the purists. That's what Lotus, Morgan, Caterham, Ariel, Noble, etc are for. Aston's market is the refined GT car. There are levels of refinement that are expected and if you were a true purist and it was more about the "car itself", you would be complaining about ABS, traction control, LSD, CCB, cruise control, sound deadening, etc, etc. These are all considered "standard" items and take away from purity of a car.However, for a refined GT car, most people expect iPod adapter, bluetooth, strong stereo, non-lurchy transmission, navigation, etc. The GT market is full of competition and the majority that will keep Aston in business expect standards when paying a premium. If you compare the field and look at standard equipment to standard equipment, Aston is behind.
Edit: Here's a video from Car magazine. At 2:20 what they say about the Aston Martin compared to the Ferrari F12 is IMO spot on:
Last edited by RossL; 10-13-2013 at 04:48 PM.
#30
10-13-2013, 05:04 PM
so many different tacts to take in this discussion...................I don't have the strength to engage right now but I will ponder for a while...........I think there are many right answers here..........It is getting a bit more difficult to to be a Brit car fan..........