Wow. Jack, I really thought you were better than this.
I’ll largely ignore your comments on the DBX because, as an Aston owner and enthusiast, I hate the idea of an Aston SUV in principle, though I’m aware of the business case. I’ll note that, while I have no interest whatsoever in buying one, I’ve driven it and it was excellent – for a largeish SUV. As a driver’s car, to suggest that the DBX isn’t leagues better than an Escalade is so preposterous that it makes we wonder if you actually drove either. Also, the DBX I drove was put together much better than the one you assessed, and hopefully is more representative of production cars. By the way, compared to the Cullinan, I’d say the DBX is a work of art. But this isn’t what compelled me to reply…
Your description of Aston Martins in general isn’t merely snarky -- it perpetuates untruths, which is truly disappointing. You stated that “no Aston in postwar history has ever been a particularly good car,” that they’re merely “lash-ups of shelf-stock British components” and that they display a “fundamental lack of goodness.” The italics are yours, so compelled were you to emphasize how bad they are. All of them. You’re entitled to you opinion, of course, as am I. In my opinion, yours is grossly incorrect. There have been many Astons that weren’t good cars, even if they were desirable, but there are many that are genuinely good cars.
You state that Aston’s V12 is “two Ford Taurus engines welded together; the lovely Vanquish was hobbled by a Rube Goldberg single-clutch auto-manual, the Vantage was uncomfortably similar to a Jaguar and not that much faster than a base 911.” Let’s discuss:
You say the V12 is two Taurus V6 engines “welded together.” SERIOUSLY??? Shameful, and you really should know better. I can barely believe you are perpetuating this utterly false notion. The V12 is based on the architecture of the Duratec V6, and some components are shared, but let’s tell the truth. When it was decided to build a production V12 for Aston, that engine was designed as a purposed-built V12. The block, crank, heads, cams, etc. were designed and manufactured purely as a V12. There is NO welding, gluing or joining of any kind. Please stop perpetuating such false information.
The Vanquish gearbox was an early single-clutch design, and it left a lot to be desired when it was new. However, it was continuously developed. By the time the Vanquish S was introduced for the 2005 model year, it was greatly improved. Properly set up (by someone who knows how), it works as well as most other similar-vintage single-clutch systems. I bought an ’05 Vanquish S 6 years ago. I spent some money to sort it when I got the car, including setting up the gearbox. It works quite well (again considering it’s a single-clutch system), and the car has been perfectly reliable since. It’s an absolutely superb supercar-GT.
The Vantage: To dismiss the V8 Vantage (2006-2017 VH-generation) as “uncomfortably similar to a Jaguar” is simply ridiculous. Which Jag? The contemporary XK? That’s a much larger, heavier GT car, not available with a manual gearbox, and is a 2+2. The F-type was more similar, but was introduced many years later. Are their looks somewhat similar? Yes, but not that similar, and they are all 2-door “fastback” coupes (or convertibles), so there are always going to be similarities. I love Jags, but the differences between Jags and Astons are quite clear if one actually looks at them.
I have a 2009 V8 Vantage (manual ‘box) that I bought new. It’s a genuinely excellent car. It has been completely reliable. It is great to drive, to look at and to own. It handles with that wonderfully exploitable balance that very well-balanced front-mid-engined cars with a transaxle exhibit. The build quality is superb – the materials quality, the fit and finish, and the attention to detail are exquisite. There are few parts-bin switches – most of the controls are bespoke, and beautifully done. There is very little plastic, and everything that looks like metal is metal – no fakery. There is one small section of interior stitching that is less than perfectly straight – surely because it was done by a person – and yes, I’m fine with that. The flush-fitting aluminum door handle is beautifully made and displays nothing resembling “flimsiness.” The car’s structure is immensely stiff (confirmed by the structural rigidity figures), and nothing rattles or squeaks. The engine sounds epic, and has none of the fundamental self-destructive weaknesses that too many recent Porsche and BMW engines have. My experience with my Vantage is not at all unusual – I know many owners, and most of them have also had superb service from their Vantages. It’s a real jewel of a car, special in a way that a Porsche, BMW, Mercedes, Audi or Jaguar simply isn’t (I've owned them too). Even after almost 12 years, every drive is an event.
Aston has made its share of not-very-good cars, but they’ve also made many genuinely great cars. It shouldn’t be hard to acknowledge the great, along with the good, the bad and the ugly.
