Why are Aston Martins so slow?

[tonyyeb]

But a 6 litre engine is insane. I don't understand why it is such a slow car?

Simple = weight!!

Challenger 2 Tank has a 1200hp engine but weighs 63 tonnes!! Hence a top speed of 37mph! Not totally relevant I know but a good analogy.

 

[tonyyeb]

Must be me but I thought they way he phrased it made it obvious

Not to us. Depends on how you approach things i guess.

 

[Firestar_3x]

We were on a country road and two up.
But, hey ho.
There a few cars quicker than bikes across country, a lardy GT isnt one of them.
911 turbo is one of them and faster than a DB9.

I've also agreed with the opening post about the 911 being faster, in fact i did that in the opening post, but it seems that part is seemingly invisible.

Up buxton i've not met a bike that can do that road quicker than me in my car, simply cause the corners are tight and a car has more tread so grip than a bike.

 

[atpbx]

Not to us. Depends on how you approach things i guess.

Reading whats in front of you often helps.

 

[Alibaba99]

Take the Vanquish S, for example.

It's equipped with a V12 6.0 litre engine, yet it does 0-62mph in only 4.8 seconds.

Meanwhile, a 3.6 litre 6-cyl 911 turbo can do the same sprint in 3.7 seconds.

Sure, the Porsche is lighter, but when having a glimpse at the engine comparison you'd surely expect the Aston to make minced meat of the Turbo?

They are stunning cars, but they are definitely at the lower end of the super-car spectrum in terms of speed.

Porsche 911 Turbos are 4wd drive, are lighter than the Aston but have similar power and in having a massively rearwards weight balance will have superior traction.

 

[tonyyeb]

Reading whats in front of you often helps.

Funny reading your posts doesn't

 

[GFX707]

Why didn't you just say "I was on a bike"?

Why do people here act so surprised when no one can understand their cryptic smartarse answers?

 

[divine`]

If you'd just said a bike, we wouldn't have a half ruined, virtually entirely off topic thread though would we?

 

[richolmes72]

But a 6 litre engine is insane. I don't understand why it is such a slow car?

It may be 6 litre, but its naturally aspirated. The 3.6 Porsche is turbocharged. The horsepower made is similar.

The Aston makes 520bhp, the Porsche 475bhp. Not that much in it really. However, the extra 250kg of weight stunts the acceleration a fair bit.

 

[needmorespeed]

Take the Vanquish S, for example.

It's equipped with a V12 6.0 litre engine, yet it does 0-62mph in only 4.8 seconds.

Meanwhile, a 3.6 litre 6-cyl 911 turbo can do the same sprint in 3.7 seconds.

Sure, the Porsche is lighter, but when having a glimpse at the engine comparison you'd surely expect the Aston to make minced meat of the Turbo?

They are stunning cars, but they are definitely at the lower end of the super-car spectrum in terms of speed.

quite simple really the porsche is lighter and most likely has more power.

 

[Kreeeee]

Not to us. Depends on how you approach things i guess.

Fair enough, I guess I'm quite into bikes so picked up on it easier.

 

[[TW]Fox]

But a 6 litre engine is insane. I don't understand why it is such a slow car?

It does 0-60 in 4.8 seconds. In what way is it 'such a slow car'?

 

[atpbx]

If you'd just said a bike, we wouldn't have a half ruined, virtually entirely off topic thread though would we?

I did, only people who have taken it of topic are people eager to jump down someones throat.
The relevance to what i was driving riding at the time has no bearing on the conversation which is why i didnt raise it in the first place, i just merely agreed that a 911 is quicker.
That is all.
thank you.

 

[Morba]

We were on a country road and two up.
But, hey ho.
There a few cars quicker than bikes across country, a lardy GT isnt one of them.
911 turbo is one of them and faster than a DB9.

I've also agreed with the opening post about the 911 being faster, in fact i did that in my first post, but it seems that part is seemingly invisible.

your impression of him gunning it and a real attempt at gunning it can be two completely different things.

 

[rare]

Since when was 4.8 slow

Its a GT car not a 0-60 car, that said, 4.8 is NOT slow.

 

[NathanE]

I really doubt a two-up motorcycle even registered on an Aston driver's radar as someone he could attempt a ****ing contest with. It's easy to mistake an Aston as "gunning it" because even the slightest twitch of the throttle results in the sound of a few lions roaring

 

[silversurfer]

Ive seen an Aston driven in anger on the local link road and it was not slow in the slightest, everyone else went backwards as he became one with the horizon.

Truely rapid and gracefull tbh, no massive noise and it looked perfectly poised as it moved so rapidly which made it all a bit unreal. Caught up with him eventually, pushing my little car to its ends as he went into traffic (single lanes), he was just en route to the local golf club

A porsche on the other hand you can see the movement in the body at any speed, the lights look like their flashing just because of that (and no I wasnt in his lane )

 

[Tommy B]

I know weight has a huge effect, it just seems rather stupid to have the engine when a turbocharged one half the size can have better performance.

 

[Pepz]

The DB9 might be slower but I wouldn't be seen dead in a porsche, not my thing, whereas the aston is possibly the best looking new car on the market... obviously my opinion,

Mike

 

[Morba]

I know weight has a huge effect, it just seems rather stupid to have the engine when a turbocharged one half the size can have better performance.

its a Grand Tourer, as has been stated a couple of times, not a sports car.
the power delivery you want is completely different from both cars own perspective.