Hi all,

How would you classify the driving experience of a 2009-2012 DBS volante vs a 2015-2016 Vanquish volante? Love the modern styling of the Vanquish and clean lines but old school DBS from casino royale always has a classy and elegant appeal. Both are powered by large engines and make a nice sound although not a thrilling V8 tone like say a 458. DBS volantes rarely come in a manual transmission so this would be automatic on both. If anyone has driven both back to back, I’d love your take.

 

Astons, as much as they are beautiful to experience, are the kings of depreciation. Compare the price of the 2015 Vanquish Volante when it debut to the current price. $300k to $150k. You mentioned the 458 which is the best sounding vehicle in its class. The price of a 2015 458 spider when it debut was $250k and is currently the same price a decade later. Astons are great to look at, if you don't care about sinking costs.

 

Vanquish will be the best choice. Not to knock a DBS but a Vanquish is all the best of the platform and later models have the better 8-speed box.

 

One of those situations where you need to drive both. If you're purely looking online and spec sheets, the Vanquish is the clear winner. I'd go DBS over Vanquish personally.

 

Why so? Have you driven both?

 

It's off topic, but... Astons are not "the kings of depreciation." They have a lot of company. Astons depreciate, but less than, or no more than, so many other cars, including numerous Maseratis, Mercedes, BMWs, Jaguars, Bentleys, Rolls-Royces, etc. Porsches and Ferraris (many of them, anyway) and certain Corvettes have something of a cult-like following (some of which makes sense to me, some of which makes NO sense to me) -- those are the exceptions, not the norm.

 

Yes the quoted example of 50% over 10 years is pretty decent. Look where the more expensive Mercs and BMWs are in comparison.
Plus when Astons reach a certain point they don’t tend to drop any more.

 

What happened to the V12 Vantage convertible or 13+ DB9 in all of this?

 

I used to argue with Speedraser on this point but a bit less these days, considering how much some of my other non Aston toys have also depreciated. Porsches, though, are a league apart in my own personal experience in terms of robust longevity. Apart from some dramatic failures such as the early 2000’s IMS bearing issues, they’re much more hardy than other “supercars” which reflects in their premium resale values.

Sorry for the digression. On topic, I personally would favor either a DBS or a 2013+ DB9. Vanquish looks awesome but lots of internet stories about limited ground clearance, which wouldn’t work for me.

 

You see the prices on the 911s? Gt3 and turbos? Even the gts. Either I’m missing something but these vehicles tend to be very expensive. Supposedly they are hard to get brand new from the dealer unless you have history.

 

Do the DBS have higher clearance than the Vanquish? Both seem low to me.

 

About 18 months ago I was seriously looking to replace my 2006 DB9 Coupe. My wish list, in order...

1. 2016 DB9 GT Coupe. Almost impossible to find one, scarce as hen's teeth
2. 2010+ DBS Coupe. Also pretty rare, but more common with auto (which I'm okay with)
3. 2014 Vanquish Coupe (6-speed). Figured it could just squeeze in under the budget cap

2013+ DB9 is arguably as good as or better than the DBS in most respects, but there's just something special about the DBS.

I ended up getting a 2016 Vanquish Volante and couldn't be happier. One came up local to me and the deal worked. I put over 6,000 miles on it in nine months last year. Can't wait until winter is over to get it back on the road. I didn't think I wanted/needed the 8-speed, but I'm very happy with it now that I have it. Fit and finish is excellent, and I really like the new-style waterfall with the haptic controls (also in the DB9 GT).

Yes, it's low at the front. Every one I looked at had scrapes on the bottom of the front spoiler. But a DBS I looked at also had scrapes on the bottom of the carbon fiber trim pieces at the front; one side was really badly crunched. I've added Scrape Armor to my spoiler and got curb ramps for my sloped driveway.

 

Well, yes. They're expensive to start with and they stay that way. The trick, if you want one, is to get one with higher miles but good service history and/or Porsche CPO, knowing that they take their miles better than most. I have 2 911 Turbos - a 2003 (996) Turbo with 92+ k miles and a 2017 (991.2) Turbo S with 48+ k miles, which is my daily driver. Both were purchased with a lot of miles, and both are doing great. The 2017 Turbo S with 48 k miles looks and acts considerably less worn than my 2015 DB9 with 17 k miles (ok, it's 2 years younger but 3X the miles).

Not that I dislike the Aston, far from it. It's certainly the best looker of the lot and feels the most special. But if we're talking costs and depreciation, well I know why they act the way they do.

 

I can’t part with my manual V8V but lately I have been wanting a volante. Can’t get a manual DBS volante and a Vanquish Volante in manual doesn’t exist. Both are nice vehicles but most people I talk to say that the Vanquish looks nicer than the DBS. Wonder how they drive compared to my manual V8V.

 

To continue the off-topic... My two Astons have low mileage, both 17-18k miles, but they are 10 and 16 years old. Both look and feel new -- they just don't show their age at all. I agree that Porsches (I've had air-cooled 911s and loved them), in general, withstand daily use, and abuse, better than Astons, but they're also built with much less special, but generally better-wearing, materials. Aston leather, for example, generally is much softer than Porsche leather and there is usually much more of it, but it requires more care. For me, the Astons are worth the extra effort to keep them looking their best. All that said, I do think Porsche's reputation for durability is a big factor in why they hold their values generally. However, IMO, it's not nearly that simple... 1) Those 996 and 997.1 engines (not the GTs and Turbos, which use the wonderful old Mezger -- which is telling) simply don't live up to the reputation for durability. They suffer not only IMS failures, but also bore scoring (and sometimes cracking). No, they're not as bad as the internet may suggest, but the failure rates are outrageously high by industry standards. Yet even those 911s, especially the 997.1s, still bring more money than a comparable-year V8 Vantage -- and the V8 Vantage is generally very reliable and has no such mechanical weaknesses. 2) If durability and ease of routine use determined values, Ferraris would not bring the huge values that they do.