# New Aston Martin DBS



## SmoothCruise (Jul 23, 2005)

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/secret_new_car.php?sid=110&page=1

Question for the Aston Martin connoisseurs, I've noticed that Aston's have V12 motors with anemic horsepower. I mean anemic when you consider it's a V12 motor. Why is that?


----------



## 99flhr (Apr 12, 2005)

SmoothCruise said:


> http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/secret_new_car.php?sid=110&page=1
> 
> Question for the Aston Martin connoisseurs, I've noticed that Aston's have V12 motors with anemic horsepower. I mean anemic when you consider it's a V12 motor. Why is that?


 Are the performance stats anemic for a luxury car of that weight?


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Best looking Coupe ever, IMO. Actually, it's how the 6er Coupe should've looked like.

Don't care about the 'measly' figure of 530hp. I bet with 6.0 Liter it'll have enough torque to move a car with that weight swiftly on the Autobahn.


----------



## Penforhire (Dec 17, 2005)

That side view makes it look almost too long. But another enthusiast choice to place against, say, the 575 M.


----------



## HW (Dec 24, 2001)

SmoothCruise said:


> http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/secret_new_car.php?sid=110&page=1
> 
> Question for the Aston Martin connoisseurs, I've noticed that Aston's have *V12 motors with anemic horsepower*. I mean anemic when you consider it's a V12 motor. Why is that?


:rofl: good one!

lets see 
*Aston V12 6.0L 530HP - 88.3HP/L*
650i V8 5.0L 367HP - 73.4HP/L
E46 M3 I6 3.2L 333HP - 104HP/L
M6 V8 5.0L 508HP - 101.6HP/L
S2000 I4 2.2L 240HP - 109HP/L

the aston is not that bad :dunno:


----------



## SmoothCruise (Jul 23, 2005)

HW said:


> :rofl: good one!
> 
> lets see
> *Aston V12 6.0L 530HP - 88.3HP/L*
> ...


It's not that bad, but you can get comparable HP with a V10, or a V8. Why make a car heavier and more expensive with a V12? If you're gonna put a V12 motor in, then at least give it like 655hp like the Racing Dynamics V12 motor. Otherwise, the saved money could have been spent on "cooler" things, and the saved weight could have made the car perform better, and hence be more desireable, e.g., more expensive. That's my point about the V12 motor being "weak".


----------



## HW (Dec 24, 2001)

SmoothCruise said:


> It's not that bad, but you can get comparable HP with a V10, or a V8. Why make a car heavier and more expensive with a V12? If you're gonna put a V12 motor in, then at least give it like 655hp like the Racing Dynamics V12 motor. Otherwise, the saved money could have been spent on "cooler" things, and the saved weight could have made the car perform better, and hence be more desireable, e.g., more expensive. That's my point about the V12 motor being "weak".


output is all about displacement. the drawback to the v12 is it's long compared to say a v10 or v8. it's the same length as an inline 6. but the reason for using a v12 is similar to using an inline6 engine configuration and that is super smooth output. every other engine configuration uses balancing shafts to take out the harmonics.

http://www.autozine.org/technical_school/engine/smooth4.htm

and check out the W12 engine. the benefits of a v12 in a short package.


----------



## AW328i (Aug 14, 2006)

That has got to be one of the most beautiful coupes I have ever seen. Also, it wouldn't be real "exotic" and price worthy if it didn't have a V12 engine in it. People pay for that kind of thing. And at my current rate, I'll be able to pay for that thing in 145 years!! The wait is killing me! :thumbup:


----------



## joe joe (Apr 6, 2006)

WOW..... Beautiful coupe! :jawdrop:


----------



## hugh1850 (Jun 20, 2003)

God I love Astons.:smokin: 

I understand this will be the next Bond car.


----------



## dboy11 (Mar 6, 2006)

I love the lines on that car...even if it had a 6 cylinder


----------



## lupinsea (May 23, 2006)

My aunt had a '79 (I think) v12 sedan. . . I think the XJ12 or so, back in the day. God what a smooth engine. Nothing since then that I've driven even came close. Nothing. It was a good high way cruiser. The wierd thing was that there was zero theatrics when you hit the throttle. Not much noise, no vibration, but the car just pushed you back in your seat and took off down the road.


----------



## HW (Dec 24, 2001)

lupinsea said:


> Not much noise, no vibration, but the car just pushed you back in your seat and took off down the road.


that's what the v12 is all about.


----------



## Jever (Apr 16, 2003)

something strange just happened in my pants when I looked at those pictures.


----------



## BmW745On19's (Aug 12, 2005)

Jever said:


> something strange just happened in my pants when I looked at those pictures.


Do you need a new lightdays with wings now?


----------



## Jever (Apr 16, 2003)

BmW745On19's said:


> Do you need a new lightdays with wings now?


I think a bucket would be more efficient.


----------



## BmW745On19's (Aug 12, 2005)

Jever said:


> I think a bucket would be more efficient.


Yeah, I mean they keep you dry but they aren't designed for large amounts of flow like that.


----------



## cwsqbm (Aug 4, 2004)

SmoothCruise said:


> http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/secret_new_car.php?sid=110&page=1
> 
> Question for the Aston Martin connoisseurs, I've noticed that Aston's have V12 motors with anemic horsepower. I mean anemic when you consider it's a V12 motor. Why is that?


530 hp from 6.0L (I think) V-12 is the same as 275 hp from a 3.0L I-6. Do you consider the E90 330 motor anemic, because it puts out less power than that? True, an M3 motor puts out a lot more power, but its not comparable on smoothness. Aston Martins are for "gentlemen", not hooligans.


----------



## Jspeed (Dec 23, 2001)

cwsqbm said:


> 530 hp from 6.0L (I think) V-12 is the same as 275 hp from a 3.0L I-6. Do you consider the E90 330 motor anemic, because it puts out less power than that? True, an M3 motor puts out a lot more power, but its not comparable on smoothness. Aston Martins are for "gentlemen", not hooligans.


I think you meant 265 HP, which is a very respectable output for an NA 3.0.


----------



## SmoothCruise (Jul 23, 2005)

cwsqbm said:


> 530 hp from 6.0L (I think) V-12 is the same as 275 hp from a 3.0L I-6. Do you consider the E90 330 motor anemic, because it puts out less power than that? True, an M3 motor puts out a lot more power, but its not comparable on smoothness. Aston Martins are for "gentlemen", not hooligans.


I'm not going by hp/L exactly. I just expect V12's to have more power. Something like in the 600HP range, regardless of the capacity of the engine or the hp/L ratio.


----------

