Aston Martin wants hyper-car to be faster than F1 cars

[Just_a_fan]

You can't compare this to the F1. The F1 is unique - designed as the ultimate driver's road car, it comes with a full set of fitted luggage carried in panier stores. Three people plus luggage.

The AMR is a gorgeous thing but it's focused in an entirely different way to the F1.

The funny thing about the AMR is the amount of changes required to make it meet its original track brief. The one in the video above won't meet the brief, that's for sure.

[roon]

...its original track brief.

That being?

[Just_a_fan]

...its original track brief.

That being?

Their original brief was to make a road car that would lap Silverstone as quickly as an F1 car.

They have made a track-only car to do that.

[roon]

...its original track brief.

That being?

Their original brief was to make a road car that would lap Silverstone as quickly as an F1 car.

They have made a track-only car to do that.

We don't know what the actual track brief was, or if there was one. If by track brief you mean contracts or deliverables we don't know those either. We have articles from 2016 quoting Andy Palmer who was at the time giving interviews to journalists. In those there was a lot of "could be" and neither Newey nor Horner quotes from the time seem to express the intent of this thread's title explicitly. The RBAT employee line seemed to be more referential of the general potentials of unregulated aerodynamics. But mostly I gathered that it was Palmer drumming up press in interviews without RB people present. The articles at the time I've found make no mention of press releases nor press conferences, just one on one interviews.

What we do have is milestone in automotive history which has yet to be measured with accelerometers and stopwatches. The earliest performance claims that I can find from RBAT reference LMP level performance.

This thread's title should have been changed three years ago.

[Just_a_fan]

Aston Martin CEO Andy Palmer said that the mission was clear: its limited edition model will have to be quicker than F1.

When asked if the AM-RB 001 had to be the fastest road car ever created, he said: "If you put it out there, somebody will always try to beat you - which is probably the point.

"As we sit here today, the raison d'etre that we've given the team is to be faster than an F1 car around Silverstone – or indeed any other F1 track.

That's fairly unequivocal it seems to me. If the boss stands up and says that then that's what we have to take on face value.

That they have built a track-only version tells me that the road car won't do it. Which is entirely expected / understandable.

[roon]

Regarding that quote: We don't have a recording of the interview, just transcribed segments of it displaced from order and context. As journalists do.

"...to be faster than an F1 car around Silverstone..." With what? A road car? A track car? We don't know. A track car could have been planned from the beginning. If Palmer discussed a road car as part of the overarching partnership goals, perhaps some conclusions were assumed by journalists and forums lacking full knowledge of the project's scope.

What I'm getting at is that neither AM nor RBAT made claims of making a road car faster than an F1 car. And seemingly neither did Palmer, explicitly.

Palmer wanted a halo car to be faster than an F1 car of unknown era. A halo car often has editions and derivations. We just found out this year that they'll contest LeMans with a derivation of this car. How long has that been part of the plan?

A more accurate title for the thread would be "Palmer told journos he asked RB boffins for a quicker-than-F1 halo car." Ideally, a moderator might simply re-title it as "Aston Martin Valkyrie."

Given what the 919 Evo could do, the Valkyrie project may still deliver on its TT aspirations. Does the Valk need to match the 919's metrics in order to contest F1? Those being 849kg and 1160 hp for the 919 Evo. The Valkyrie road car is +81kg and -30hp. L:D ratio for the Valkyrie may be superior to the Evo given its clean sheet design which is free of FIA source dimensions.

They're not far off the 919 Evo specs and may surpass them in certain areas with the road car. I think this bodes well for the track version.

[ME4ME]

Can't wait to see an onboard video of this car running at full speed pushing that V12 to its limit. I imagine we'll still have to wait a good while for testing to be completed, but one's got to be patient i guess.

[bill shoe]

Bad analogies.

No, it's not. It's apt. Apt!

...Lisa Simpson quote from 20 years ago.

[roon]

Bad analogies.

No, it's not. It's apt. Apt!

...Lisa Simpson quote from 20 years ago.

[Just_a_fan]

Regarding that quote: We don't have a recording of the interview, just transcribed segments of it displaced from order and context. As journalists do.

"...to be faster than an F1 car around Silverstone..." With what? A road car? A track car? We don't know. A track car could have been planned from the beginning. If Palmer discussed a road car as part of the overarching partnership goals, perhaps some conclusions were assumed by journalists and forums lacking full knowledge of the project's scope.

What I'm getting at is that neither AM nor RBAT made claims of making a road car faster than an F1 car. And seemingly neither did Palmer, explicitly.

We're going to have to disagree on that one. I think it's fairly obvious that the intention, at the time, was to build a road car that was F1-car quick.

Building a track-only car that is F1-car quick and that is not controlled by any regulations is, to be fair, easy. Without a set of sporting/technical regulations placing limits on the car, any manufacturer should be able to turn out such a car in fairly quick time.

The challenge is doing so within a set of fairly prescriptive rules. If they are now suggesting that was never the aim, then they're a bunch of worthless **** that don't deserve the time of day.

[roon]

Regarding that quote: We don't have a recording of the interview, just transcribed segments of it displaced from order and context. As journalists do.

"...to be faster than an F1 car around Silverstone..." With what? A road car? A track car? We don't know. A track car could have been planned from the beginning. If Palmer discussed a road car as part of the overarching partnership goals, perhaps some conclusions were assumed by journalists and forums lacking full knowledge of the project's scope.

What I'm getting at is that neither AM nor RBAT made claims of making a road car faster than an F1 car. And seemingly neither did Palmer, explicitly.

We're going to have to disagree on that one. I think it's fairly obvious that the intention, at the time, was to build a road car that was F1-car quick.

Building a track-only car that is F1-car quick and that is not controlled by any regulations is, to be fair, easy. Without a set of sporting/technical regulations placing limits on the car, any manufacturer should be able to turn out such a car in fairly quick time.

The challenge is doing so within a set of fairly prescriptive rules. If they are now suggesting that was never the aim, then they're a bunch of worthless **** that don't deserve the time of day.

<personal stuff removed>

Agree to disagree =/= ignoring evidence

You have not addressed:
--No claim of a road car to be faster than F1 by Palmer
--Want of a halo car to be faster than F1 by Palmer
--No performance claims by AM
--No performance claims by RB until April 2017 (LMP1 comparison)
--The road Valkyrie has metrics similar to the 918 Evo (F1 beater at Spa)
--Multipronged approach including the LM version could have been in mind since inception
--Track (AMR Pro) version if successful can satisfy Palmer's statements

<personal stuff removed>

[Just_a_fan]

You have not addressed:
--No claim of a road car to be faster than F1 by Palmer

He has been quoted as saying that was the reason for the car's existence at the start of the project.

"As we sit here today, the raison d'etre that we've given the team is to be faster than an F1 car around Silverstone – or indeed any other F1 track."

You think a quote is not evidence. There's no point going any further with the discussion then, is there?

[roon]

You have not addressed:
--No claim of a road car to be faster than F1 by Palmer

He has been quoted as saying that was the reason for the car's existence at the start of the project.

"As we sit here today, the raison d'etre that we've given the team is to be faster than an F1 car around Silverstone – or indeed any other F1 track."

I've already addressed this quote in my last few posts in this thread. Again, that could be a reference to the project, not a road legal derivation. If only the track derivation succeeds, his claim still holds and they will have succeeded in satisfying it. Please attempt to address the other claims.

[Just_a_fan]

When it was announced, there was going to be a road-going hypercar whose raison d'etre was to be F1 quick. No mention of a track car, or a race car. It's obvious to anyone that they have had to introduce additional versions in order to try to get close to the original stated aim.

It's not surprising that they've had to change the project. The track car is apparently only just at LMP1 levels of performance and that is a ground hugging missile.

[roon]

Again, you don't know the original project scope, thus can't accurately comment on changes thereto. You have a couple of articles quoting one person from one on one interviews. No documents nor releases from AM nor RBAT.

As mentioned a couple posts ago, LMP1 performance claim is for the road car version, claim made by RBAT. Track version performance unknown. Performance for all versions unknown.