"Wobbles the Mind" (wobblesthemind)
12/20/2016 at 23:00 • Filed to: Car Buying
1
11|
"Wobbles the Mind" (wobblesthemind)
12/20/2016 at 23:00 • Filed to: Car Buying | 1
| 11 |
The 2010 Aston Martin Rapide has depreciated from over $200,000 to under $80,000. But that 6-speed takes 5.1 seconds to get that 4,300 pound super sedan from 0-60 mph even with the 470 hp / 443 lb-ft of torque producing 6.0L V12. Now the facelifted, 190 mph, 2014 Rapide S with the revised 550 hp / 457 lb-ft of torque producing V12 takes 4.7 seconds (at best) to get up to 60 mph from a standstill.
I only bring up these numbers because it’s going to feel obscenely slow for what it is. I’m talking about around town, on the highway and in parking lots you’ll be great! The 8-speed I think these got for model year 2015 improved the performance astonomically (including a 203 mph top speed) which means those 6-speed cars are going to keep tanking down to $50,000.
That’s the only one that’s depreciating at an alarming rate even by British car standards.
PS9
> Wobbles the Mind
12/20/2016 at 23:04 |
|
Even at $50k, pass. That $80 grand is a down payment. When it breaks, you are repairing a $200k car still. Hard paaaaaass
CB
> Wobbles the Mind
12/20/2016 at 23:05 |
|
I very much doubt anyone will care about the difference between 5.1 and 4.7 seconds to sixty. “Going to feel obscenely slow for what it is” my arse. The fact that it weighs nearly 4400 pounds and can accelerate that quickly is insane.
|
Wobbles the Mind
> CB
12/20/2016 at 23:17 |
|
Woah woah woah, wait a minute! When I pointed out the Hyundai Genesis 5.0 / Genesis G80 5.0 weighs nearly 4,600 lbs, makes 420 hp and 383 lb-ft and accelerates from 0-60 mph in 5.1 seconds you all said it was slow (so I took your word for it). If a $200,000 V12 Aston is going to be quick but a $55,000, heavier, less powerful Hyundai is slow with the same acceleration times around town then we need to create some consistency.
|
CB
> Wobbles the Mind
12/20/2016 at 23:18 |
|
Then argue it with the other people on here. I think anything under six seconds is fast enough that we can’t complain. Anything under five is stupid. Anything under four is needless.
|
Wobbles the Mind
> CB
12/20/2016 at 23:22 |
|
No argument. I dont care whats slow or fast, I just need the terms to be same when the numbers are the same.
sm70- why not Duesenberg?
> Wobbles the Mind
12/20/2016 at 23:27 |
|
I had this exact same experience on here before. I claim a 2005 BMW X5 that does 0-6o in 6 and a bit seconds is quick, people point out to me that their grandma’s V6 Altima is faster. I answer the question of “What’s the slowest car you’d ever want to daily” with “Nothing slower than 8 seconds to 60" and I get told that “I don’t know a single person who has a car that fast, you must be some spoiled rich kid who only drives Ferraris and Porsches.”
My opinion, 5.1 seconds is decently brisk, but yeah, it should be faster. The amount of stuff out-running your V-12 Aston at that speed is astonishing. Hell, our X3 is almost that quick.
Do I care that it’s slow? Not really.
|
sm70- why not Duesenberg?
> CB
12/20/2016 at 23:28 |
|
He’s got a point. The 2011 Panamera, a direct competitor, does it in 5 seconds flat.
That would be the base model V6 Panamera 4 with 300hp .
NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
> Wobbles the Mind
12/21/2016 at 00:04 |
|
I love how those look!
Steve in Manhattan
> Wobbles the Mind
12/21/2016 at 01:01 |
|
“astonomically” ... I see what you did there ...
190octane
> sm70- why not Duesenberg?
12/21/2016 at 06:52 |
|
I agree, my 2013 Infiniti, which can now apparently be had for less than $20k hits it in 5.1-5.6 seconds (depending on where you look) at just over 3600 lbs and with 330 hp.
Hell, the 2014 x5 v8 with 445 hp that the wife and I are looking at weighs 4680 and supposedly can hit 60 in as little as 4.3 seconds.
I love the way Astons look and obviously any car that gets to 60 in less than 6 is fast, but it should be way faster than it is.
greenagain
> Wobbles the Mind
12/21/2016 at 20:27 |
|
Depreciation. They all do that.