[Wyatt]

2000-2005 Aston Martin V12 Vanquish , casting #014, date 2002.

Known variations: Right-hand and Left-hand drive.



JLCollector link: http://www.jlcollector.com/014.html

[zilleonti]

I've always been a fan of the Aston's (especially the DB5, DB7, & V8 Vanquish) and this one's no different.

I haven't came across any of the JL Aston's but I do own one of the HW Code Car Aston's and I will admit... the JL version looks alot better than the HW. It looks like there's alot more detail on the JL, heck... I'm just impressed with the addition of headlights & taillights, lol. The Aston detail on the front and back is in scale on the JL and on the Code Car the Aston logo is WAY oversized.

<announcement>
... and another point is awarded to Johnny Lightning!

[lummox]

Aston has had some amazing cars - all hand build with the best of the bunch being coach built.
Don't know anything about these new ones - isn't there a Bentley based on this car?
If not, it sure looks alot like it.

Someone over at HT has a clear plastic pre-pro of this one. Even the tires are clear! That thing is w a y cool!
The only thing on it that's not clear are the axles.

Beautifully done pic as always, sir!

[Jeff Koch]

No known variations.

Not entirely true ... two dashboards were tooled simultaneously: LHD and RHD. You can see them both in the picture. Bond's was RHD of course, but we tooled the LHD dash for future use. Nice to see that RC2/Mac was able to make future use after the debacle of the James Bond license, and all the nonsense that ensued.

jk

[zilleonti]

Aston has had some amazing cars - all hand build with the best of the bunch being coach built.
Don't know anything about these new ones - isn't there a Bentley based on this car?
If not, it sure looks alot like it.

Someone over at HT has a clear plastic pre-pro of this one. Even the tires are clear! That thing is w a y cool!
The only thing on it that's not clear are the axles.

Beautifully done pic as always, sir!

I know you're thinking of the Continental GT
Now your question is a good one but I don't know the answer to it.

Now I'm wondering if Bentley and Aston Martin have any connections.
I do know that recently (within the past few years or so) Ford purchased Aston Martin.
^Nevermind... I'm thinking of Jaguar... I'm not entirely sure if they bought Aston Martin as well.

This post has been edited by zilleonti: 10 November 2007 - 11:18 AM

[lummox]

Yeah, the Contenental GT - that's the one. And the only reason I know that is MB just relesed one.
They do look similar, but I haven't looked at either one enough to compare.

I think Bentley is still under the Rolls Royce moniker, but I'm not sure if they're still independent as well.
Modern cars just ain't my specialty!

This post has been edited by lummox: 10 November 2007 - 11:37 AM

[James]

Yeah, the Contenental GT - that's the one. And the only reason I know that is MB just relesed one.
They do look similar, but I haven't looked at either one enough to compare.

I think Bentley is still under the Rolls Royce moniker, but I'm not sure if they're still independent as well.
Modern cars just ain't my specialty!

Bentley is a rolls, don't know if anybody different owns them.

[Guntownal]

I don't collect too many of the modern cars but this one in black is awesome.
Great pics Wyatt.

[Wyatt]

Not entirely true ... two dashboards were tooled simultaneously: LHD and RHD. You can see them both in the picture. Bond's was RHD of course, but we tooled the LHD dash for future use. Nice to see that RC2/Mac was able to make future use after the debacle of the James Bond license, and all the nonsense that ensued.

jk

Thanks, Jeff, I'll fix the description. I did not know that.

[Jeff Koch]

I think Bentley is still under the Rolls Royce moniker, but I'm not sure if they're still independent as well.
Modern cars just ain't my specialty!

Let me kill this now please. Aston and Bentley have nothing to do with each other, beyond being built in England.

Aston was recently sold by Ford, who had owned it since the early '90s. They are now independent again.

Bentley was owned by Rolls-Royce until the late '90s and was part of a very complicated split up involving BMW and Volkswagen. After a massive bidding war, BMW ended up with Rolls, and VW ended up with Bentley. The two marques share hardly anything anymore--I'm not even sure Bentley still uses the famed (Rolls-developed) 6.75 litre V8.

This news is nearly a decade old ... but I guess we all have our own definition of what "modern" is?

jk

Thanks, Jeff, I'll fix the description. I did not know that.

No worries ... it's always the quiet stuff that trips everyone up!

jk

[lummox]

Let me kill this now please.

This news is nearly a decade old ... but I guess we all have our own definition of what "modern" is?

Yup - I know I sure do......


And isn't a ten year old car considered modern? I'd say yes.

This post has been edited by lummox: 10 November 2007 - 11:44 PM

[Jeff Koch]

I'd call "modern" anything over the past five years. Maybe the past three.

When I was in high school, my car was 11 years old when I got it. I thought it was ANCIENT. Today a decade on may not seem all that long ago, and items from that era not that old, but it's only because I'm older and have a longer span to look back on. The time doesn't change, just the perspective. How many computers have any of us had since 1997? (I can count at least four, not counting work models.) How many of us didn't use email or the internet a decade ago? Ten years is a long time, whether you're old or young.

jk

[James]

Thank You Jeff

for bringing us up to date on the affairs of the British Auto industry. I really appreciate it.

[lummox]

I'd call "modern" anything over the past five years. Maybe the past three.

How many computers have any of us had since 1997? (I can count at least four, not counting work models.) How many of us didn't use email or the internet a decade ago?

jk

There may not be too many 10 year old computers around but there sure are alot of 10 year old
cars still on the road around here. There seriously is. If it wern't for them, I'd be out of a job.
And speaking from a automotive historical perspective, a '97 car is modern.
Is a '97 car in a different automotive generation than a '07? My opinion is no.
You say a 3yr old car isn't modern. Is there a styling difference in a 3yr old car from a '07? IMO, no.
Not even in most 10yr old cars.
The only thing majorly different about a '97 and an '07 is it's more refined electronics.
To me most 10 year old cars don't look much different than a newer one, so stylistically a '97 is a modern car imo. Probably 'cause I'm old as dirt.
Interestingly though I'd say this was NOT the case from the '60s on back. Mosty just stylistically though.

Ask yourself this; what is NOT modern about a '97 or as you say an '04?
The mileage on the odometer?
The number of years it has existed?
But you are right - time doesn't change, just perspective. And everyones is different.
It's Flexable....
like the term "modern".

This post has been edited by lummox: 11 November 2007 - 12:00 PM

[Jeff Koch]

And speaking from a automotive historical perspective, a '97 car is modern.

So in the history of mankind, stretching tens of thousands of years, the Roman Empire was relatively recent?

what is NOT modern about a '97 or as you say an '04? The mileage on the odometer? The number of years it has existed? You say a 3yr old car isn't modern. Is there a styling difference in a 3yr old car from a '07? IMO, no.

In my eyes, styling has little to do with what makes a car modern or not. GM used to facelift cars yearly to trick everyone into thinking they were getting something new when it was the same basic stuff underneath. They still do that, except now it’s software instead of sheetmetal.

Frankly, a lot of brand new cars on the road aren't that modern. Each needs to be taken in its own context. A 2008 Impala SS with V8 runs a 20-year-old chassis architecture (GM10/W-body) using a ten-year-old engine architecture (LS engines debuted in the '97 Vette). It's a newly made car, but it's hardly modern. (And they’re talking about keeping it going into 2010 or longer!) The upcoming Pontiac G8 will be a new car (launched just this past summer in its home market of Australia), but it's still running a tried-and-true engine.

The new Ford Focus coupe they're showing on TV has the same chassis as the one we've had here since 2000 (and in Europe since '98). Does the new styling make it a new car?

My Subaru WRX wasn't entirely new when I bought it in 2002--the model was new (to this country, anyway) but the mechanicals were tried and true, sorted out over years in Japan and Europe. Frankly, that was a selling point to me--sorted mechnicals means fewer changes of recalls and such, in my mind. Magazines grumping about a carryover engine in the 08 WRX models make me laugh--it was a carryover engine when we first got it!

The GM A-body musclecar ran from 1964 to 1972--the chassis stayed essentially the same, with suspension basics like wheelbase, steering geometry and such remaining the same throughout. Body changed, options changed, yes, and springs and shocks were tuned, but was the 1972 buyer really getting a "new" car? Freshly assembled, maybe, but in '72 it was a near-decade-old chassis with warmed-over five-year-old styling and, depending on model and engine, an engine that was more than a decade and a half old. Ever seen a stock A-body corner? That front end makes the tires do ridiculous and frightening things. GM engineers clearly learned a lot about cornering in the next half a decade or so, a lot of which ended up on the second-generation F-body, a remarkable handling car. Absolutely none of this was incorporated into the '70-72 A-body line. They saved all that for the '73s (and '75 for the Nova, which has F-body-based suspension).

Very little with car companies is ever all-new: besides spreading out the cost of engineering over years, it also minimizes the notion of things going horribly wrong all at once. Anyone remember the GM X-car? Or the Vega? Those were all-new, were they not?

There are exceptions, of course. A ’65 big-block Impala would be a good example of something that would have been virtually all-new: new chassis after the ’58-’64 platform (lasted till ’70), new styling of course, and as a bonus the 396ci big-block was new. The Ford Five Hundred from a couple of years ago was supposed to be all-new: the 250-odd-hp 3.5L V6 it now has was supposed to launch with the car, but $2 billion out of pocket for the whole Firestone debacle pushed that back until the recent facelift, where they changed the name back to Taurus.

Probably 'cause I'm old as dirt.

I'm no young'un--I'm pushing 40 meself.

Hemmings Classic Car magazine (my employer) utilizes the more liberal AACA definition of "classic," a rolling 25 year guideline. So if it’s modern after ten years, what happens in the fifteen years between then and it becoming a "classic"?

jk

[lummox]

The GM A-body musclecar ran from 1964 to 1972--the chassis stayed essentially the same, with suspension basics like wheelbase, steering geometry and such remaining the same throughout. Body changed, options changed, yes, and springs and shocks were tuned, but was the 1972 buyer really getting a "new" car? ).

That's it, that's exactly of what I'm saying. You just proved my point. It, - new or a few years old represents whats currently available to the consumer at that time. Exactly.
New or a few years old, it's still the same old-same old.
What was considered modern a few years ago is still modern 'cause it ain't changed a lick.
Couldn't have said it better myself.

This post has been edited by lummox: 11 November 2007 - 07:10 PM

[James]

Hemmings Classic Car magazine (my employer) utilizes the more liberal AACA definition of "classic," a rolling 25 year guideline. So if it’s modern after ten years, what happens in the fifteen years between then and it becoming a "classic"?

Its just old. As in Auto years, kinda like dog years, only worse.

a 53 year old car would be a classic, i am just old.

[60sMetal]

Thanks for all the info here. I never even noticed the LHD/RHD variation in the models.

[harrylee]

It's Monday morning and i've already been educated before my first cup of coffee!
Thanks for the very informative posts JK.

I love this place.

[STUTZ]

I never knew there was a RHD/LHD version either.

[martijn'75]

There's this guy across the street that owns a DB9, a Hummer and a black Mercedes CLK and his family name is angel. Call me jealous but that's one reason for me for not liking Aston Martins.

No to be serious, I'm sticking with Chevy's, Hot Rods and mustangs........although this guy really is living across the street.

Just a matter of taste I'm sure.

Martijn

[Jeff Koch]

I never knew there was a RHD/LHD version either.

Had the black and maroon versions not showed up, no one ever would have known--all the Bond variants were RHD. Good for Mac, or whoever extricated that casting from the licensing torpor, for bringing it back.

jk