http://m.carbuzz.com/Article.aspx?Id=17705

They seem pretty evenly matched. I'm surprised that neither of them mentioned the Jag's atrociously tacky wing on the back. It may have more grip but people would unfortunately see you when you exit the vehicle.

 

Setting aside the 'Aston factor' (coolness, style etc.), this highlights how much Jaguar has moved forward in the last several years with dynamics and performance. Never would I have considered acquiring a Jag ten years ago; now I am on my second XF as a daily driver and I honestly have to say I find most of the equivalent German offerings boringly perfect to the point of dullness.

Say what you will about the image, materials quality, wing etc., the lap time difference really surprised me. Apart from the mentioned aero kit and suspension setup, I suspect the longer wheelbase contributes significantly to the stability of the Jag compared to the V12VS.

Interesting how a GT3 can have a big shopping cart handle on the back and no-one gets upset. Is it because the Porker has a more stylish shopping cart handle or because people find it unexpected and undesirable to have such a thing on a Jag? Does anyone find the carbon bits on the Aston tacky in this context?

BTW never had much use for Motor Trend but this new video series of theirs is top notch.

 

Impressive! However, I think we all know that Aston's are not about 'total performance' and if that's the standard you really want to use, your best bang for the buck is a 2014 Corvette, which is a damn hard car to beat by the numbers (both performance and dollar cost).

That was a well-produced segment! I'd be most curious as to what they used as their camera 'chase' car, because Probst was wheeling 'em pretty good and the camera car was keeping up.

Randy Probst is one of the great gentleman racers, too. I wandered into his pits at Daytona 24 hours the night before the race several years ago and he was happy to talk cars with me for 40 minutes - to just some guy off the street.

 

I think the GT3 RS aesthetics are of equally poor taste and would never own one. That being said, the carbon fiber on the Aston can certainly be viewed similarly, although I find it not as egregious. The best analogy I can think of for the giant spoilers is wearing a speedo to the beach (U.S. Opinion that is). You look like a tool. On the track great (ie swim competition). Around town (at the beach) or on a road trip? Not so much.

 

The Jag is impressive but looks ridiculous with the wing and dive planes, like it's ready for its close-up in the next Fast and Furious movie. Also, I don't like the dirty exhaust note. Reminds me of how all AMGs sound, which is not a nice sound. Regardless, I'm surprised how much better they thought the Jag drives on the track. Also surprising/disappointing that they thought the Jag's automatic transmission is actually better than Aston's automated manual.

 

From the video and commentary, the v12v just needs set up for that track. I believe it to be fortuitous that the jag did well there, a different venue would perhaps yield an outcome in the Aston's favor. I would much prefer tightening up a car that is loose than dealing with a push. I would wager that a few adjustments would probably allow the Aston to equal or exceed the jag on that track.

 

Wrong comparison. The Vanquish is the competitor to the XK-RS GT, not the V12VS. It would have equalled or bettered the Jag. The V12VS is closer to the F-Type R in terms of size, wheelbase, etc. The Vanq's longer wheelbase would have calmed the oversteer behavior of the Vantage, more akin to the Jag.

 

Gearbox woes and they said the automatic was better... That brought a tear to my eye.

 

True, but the V12VS is closer in price. The Vanq costs a staggering one and a half times as much as the XK and I suspect that the Jag would have left it in the dust.

 

Regarding the looks of the Jag. I think it looks ridiculous. I can live with the wing if I had to but the hood just looks gaudy and something right out of a ricer mag. That's a lot of money for the ricer look.

 

I luv the new V12VS...but I find its to little to late, this car should of came out years ago, the other manufactures are already further advanced..whether it be interior or performance, there nice changes but all these changes should have been done years ago, not 9 years later on a car that's at the end of its run..

As for the "Aston's aren't for performance, buy a vette"...that's what this car was made for, if it doesn't perform then it's a fail

 

That's an interesting point that I didn't think of. You are right. This car is built for numbers and it's being advertised as such, "The most ferocious Aston Martin ever produced."

http://www.astonmartin.com/en-us/car.../v12-vantage-s

 

I'm somewhat ambivalent about this car. As an Aston fan, when Aston's are compared with other cars and get picked apart, I get defensive and disparage the other car. However, my initial reaction when they released the info on the new v12S was underwhelming. I wondered why I was supposed to be excited by the performance of a $200,000 car with about 560 hp and accompanying stats. Those numbers were impressive circa 2009-2010 with the 458, gallardo, SLS, and Porsche turbo. Aston was finally catching up with the last generation and I was supposed to be excited by the numbers? The marketing seemed to miss the mark. A 2015 model with state of the art 2010 numbers marketed as a performance juggernaut?? With a 750 up beast in the one-77, why didn't they make the Vanquish and v12s at least 600hp? They could at least market as performance cars with some degree of credibility. I'm not a numbers guy, but I don't like how this car is marketed as this great performance car and then is still beaten by a jag.

 

Them's the hard facts.

It's all well and good to get nostalgic about 'hand crafted' etc. etc. and all the 'good' things that were done before everything was mass produced, but that starts to wear a little thin when you realize Aston is excited that the 'new' V12 has - wait for it - those futuristic inventions called ** knock sensing ** and ** variable camshaft timing **...

 

And the Jag will be beaten by something else...

I haven't had time to watch the video yet, but... The V12VS is a seriously fast car, and it costs a LOT less than the 458 and Gallardo (soon to be Huracan) while producing similar power. It was good enough to do very well in EVO's Car of the Year testing. The XK-RS GT is an extremely limited production (75 total if memory serves, although I think they may increase that a little) ultimate version not just of the XK, but of the XK-RS, and it's similar in price to the Aston. And all of those things that make an Aston a more expensive and desirable car than a Jaguar still apply. A '62 E-type is faster than a '62 DB4...

The V12VS is marketed as the fastest Aston ever but for the 0ne-77 because that's what it is. I never read that as meaning its numbers had to beat everything else on the road. Don't get me wrong -- it would be great if Aston produced a car that dominated everything else in every way, but (and I've said this many times) the performance of today's fast cars is so extreme that I think the need to try to be the fastest is quite ridiculous.