Quote:
Originally Posted by MulsanneMike
I haven't been so bold to suggest as much, but since I now see it out in the open, Aston's project DOES indeed screams of a car designed to a minimal budget with the hope that it will be performance balanced competitive. I certainly HOPE that's not the case, but I wouldn't put it past GHC. They did pull the trigger based on the ACO's reassurances regarding Article 19 of the regulations. Why were they so concerned about that? Because the choice of the I6 was so totally awesome?
|
Mike, to put an alternative spin on that, is there any chance AMR could have realised from the start that there was no way a petrol engine was going to be competitive, and so opted to spend the minimum possible until a better performance balance is on offer- and meanwhile in the background someone at Prodrive is quietly beavering away designing a more advanced concept ready for that time?
What I
really don't get is why, if they're working to a minimal budget, they've opted to go out on such a limb over the engine, by adopting a configuration no-one's used in a prototype for years?
Wouldn't something a bit more mainstream have been cheaper and still given them a bargaining chip over performance balancing?
OK, the straight-6 gives them the marketing link to their history and future road cars, but right now it looks like a high-risk option, done on the cheap which has really turned round and bitten them in the most embarrassing manner.