GTS MC Shift vs Aston Martin Vantage Roadster
- Thread starter iainw
- Start date
iainw
Member
- Messages
- 3,386
Had it 9 months. Beats SPX record of 10 days for a QP I think.
It's less than 50:50 but considering a Vantage convertible or a grancabrio.
Depends on the cars available and It will need to be sold via a Maserati specialist who appreciates the value of the options
And spec. Wouldn't dream of part ex.
D Walker
Member
- Messages
- 9,827
lol - I told you that RR thing was no good.......haha...... Love your car but feel it will be out of range for me!!!!
rossyl
Member
- Messages
- 3,312
Good thing it is then. However, I would also apply my comparison to a GT.
Also, the next time you have a £15k 4200 up for sale please give me a shout.
murph7355
New Member
- Messages
- 245
Not a roadster but I had a V8 Vantage coupe for 8.5yrs and traded it for the GT.
The single main factor in that decision was the number of seats. I have a young family now and 2 seats was meaning the Aston was being left in the garage more often than it deserved.
To answer/counter some comments above...
- the 4.3 is not underpowered. Yes, it has 10% less than than the 4.7, but in a car that weighs over 1,600kg 40bhp isn't the be all and end all and 99% of people will be no quicker point to point in the 4.7.
What the 4.7 does have is better torque spread, which makes it feel a lot quicker. You don't have to use the gearbox as much to keep it on the boil. There used to be a time when people in the UK laughed at US cars because they weren't "drivers'" cars and didn't need working hard. How things change
There is absolutely nothing wrong with working a smaller capacity engine hard, especially when you realise how they sound in their upper reaches.
- build quality...very early V8s had lots of issues. A couple of years in most were fixed. 4 or 5yrs in and pretty much all were sorted (except for paint! Don't get me started on paint quality). In the first year I had quite a few warranty fixes (parts/design issues that were still being ironed out), but beyond that it was a very reliable car and never, ever left me stranded. One of few "non-typical service" parts that needed changing was an O2 sensor...which is no big deal and great in 8.5yrs and 55k miles IMO.
- mine didn't cost any more to run than other similar marques. I'm expecting the GT to be similar too over a reasonable period.
- interior. They are a very lovely place to be with alcantara all over the place and great quality leather on most surfaces (and where there isn't it's usually good quality ali etc). My GT has a lot of alcantara in it too, and plenty of carbon...I wish it had an alcantara roof lining. More typical GTs do not feel as nice inside as a Vantage IMO. That's not to say they are bad. They are just not as good.
The tech in my 07 car wasn't up to much, but by 2008-2010 Vantages were a match for what the GT can offer. Even the latest cars aren't top end on tech though.
Space wise I'm 6'4" and never felt cramped. You do have to spend time getting the seat position right though. And you need to remember it's a 2 seater!
- gearshift. Just like a poster above noted, my 5'4" wife loved driving the Aston, and loved the weight of all controls. Anyone complaining about these aspects ought to have a word with themselves or get to the gym Sports cars aren't meant to be over assisted blobs. The one thing I disliked a lot about the 355 I had prior to the Aston was the over assisted steering. Awful.
- sound. Out of the factory they are not as good as the GT. Not even close. Removing fuse 22 (note 22 Dicky) helps. As does removing the parcel shelf (n/a for the roadster). But neither will get it sounding as good as the GT. Mine had a Tubi exhaust fitted which got it very close to the GT in terms of sound, but still not quite there. (NB The startup sound can be a double edged sword if you need to be stealthy at 5am!).
- handling. The Aston is still a GT car really. Yes, it can be chucked about a bit more than the GT. But it's still not a razor sharp sports car. It will be quicker point to point than a GT.
The key thing is, do you need 4 seats? Even occasionally? If you do, then you have to forget the Aston.
If you don't, I'd probably question why you have a GT in the first place But an Aston would be well worth trying. They are incredibly good cars and great value at present. That I owned mine for so long after it replaced an F355 (still the greatest sports car ever produced IMHO) is great testimony to them.
The single main factor in that decision was the number of seats. I have a young family now and 2 seats was meaning the Aston was being left in the garage more often than it deserved.
To answer/counter some comments above...
- the 4.3 is not underpowered. Yes, it has 10% less than than the 4.7, but in a car that weighs over 1,600kg 40bhp isn't the be all and end all and 99% of people will be no quicker point to point in the 4.7.
What the 4.7 does have is better torque spread, which makes it feel a lot quicker. You don't have to use the gearbox as much to keep it on the boil. There used to be a time when people in the UK laughed at US cars because they weren't "drivers'" cars and didn't need working hard. How things change
There is absolutely nothing wrong with working a smaller capacity engine hard, especially when you realise how they sound in their upper reaches.
- build quality...very early V8s had lots of issues. A couple of years in most were fixed. 4 or 5yrs in and pretty much all were sorted (except for paint! Don't get me started on paint quality). In the first year I had quite a few warranty fixes (parts/design issues that were still being ironed out), but beyond that it was a very reliable car and never, ever left me stranded. One of few "non-typical service" parts that needed changing was an O2 sensor...which is no big deal and great in 8.5yrs and 55k miles IMO.
- mine didn't cost any more to run than other similar marques. I'm expecting the GT to be similar too over a reasonable period.
- interior. They are a very lovely place to be with alcantara all over the place and great quality leather on most surfaces (and where there isn't it's usually good quality ali etc). My GT has a lot of alcantara in it too, and plenty of carbon...I wish it had an alcantara roof lining. More typical GTs do not feel as nice inside as a Vantage IMO. That's not to say they are bad. They are just not as good.
The tech in my 07 car wasn't up to much, but by 2008-2010 Vantages were a match for what the GT can offer. Even the latest cars aren't top end on tech though.
Space wise I'm 6'4" and never felt cramped. You do have to spend time getting the seat position right though. And you need to remember it's a 2 seater!
- gearshift. Just like a poster above noted, my 5'4" wife loved driving the Aston, and loved the weight of all controls. Anyone complaining about these aspects ought to have a word with themselves or get to the gym
Sports cars aren't meant to be over assisted blobs. The one thing I disliked a lot about the 355 I had prior to the Aston was the over assisted steering. Awful.- sound. Out of the factory they are not as good as the GT. Not even close. Removing fuse 22 (note 22 Dicky
) helps. As does removing the parcel shelf (n/a for the roadster). But neither will get it sounding as good as the GT. Mine had a Tubi exhaust fitted which got it very close to the GT in terms of sound, but still not quite there. (NB The startup sound can be a double edged sword if you need to be stealthy at 5am!).- handling. The Aston is still a GT car really. Yes, it can be chucked about a bit more than the GT. But it's still not a razor sharp sports car. It will be quicker point to point than a GT.
The key thing is, do you need 4 seats? Even occasionally? If you do, then you have to forget the Aston.
If you don't, I'd probably question why you have a GT in the first place
But an Aston would be well worth trying. They are incredibly good cars and great value at present. That I owned mine for so long after it replaced an F355 (still the greatest sports car ever produced IMHO) is great testimony to them.
iainw
Member
- Messages
- 3,386
This is really useful from a previous owner.
I agree with your comments re: 4 seats. I initially got the GTS as a car to use a lot of the time, with a young family and a Mito as a second car.
I still love the GTS, especially with what I have done to it, but my drive is narrow and its a big big car. For theatre I cant imagine anything better in the price range.
I hated the mito - it was stupid to get a 2 door with a small child, and it was a manual. Total waste of the 2k I lost in 3 months to sell it fast.
Then I got the evoque - which is just IMO a great everyday car, I got so many specs on it that its just a pleasure to drive. 0-60 of 6.9 isn't bad for an SUV, but I find I just put it in auto and cruise around. the family love it.
I just miss my convertibles now - just really adds to the experience when you take a car out for an occasional blast- so it counts out a change to another couple. I woudn't swap my GTS for a Vantage Couple even with significant cash to me.
i am getting slowly to know the differences between Ams - I think paddle shifts would be a must as would be a roadster - so do I need to look out for sports-shifts roadster. It helps that you say the 4.3 vs 4.7 isn't a big difference as that opens up more possibilities.
The sound worries me a lot though. If that was a massive disappointment I would think I have made a massive mistake.
the Roadsters are just so rare near me its hard to go and have a drive of one..
there is a shocking colour combo blue one in Cardiff - but the nice ones I like are Cambridge / Manchester way.
I agree with your comments re: 4 seats. I initially got the GTS as a car to use a lot of the time, with a young family and a Mito as a second car.
I still love the GTS, especially with what I have done to it, but my drive is narrow and its a big big car. For theatre I cant imagine anything better in the price range.
I hated the mito - it was stupid to get a 2 door with a small child, and it was a manual. Total waste of the 2k I lost in 3 months to sell it fast.
Then I got the evoque - which is just IMO a great everyday car, I got so many specs on it that its just a pleasure to drive. 0-60 of 6.9 isn't bad for an SUV, but I find I just put it in auto and cruise around. the family love it.
I just miss my convertibles now - just really adds to the experience when you take a car out for an occasional blast- so it counts out a change to another couple. I woudn't swap my GTS for a Vantage Couple even with significant cash to me.
i am getting slowly to know the differences between Ams - I think paddle shifts would be a must as would be a roadster - so do I need to look out for sports-shifts roadster. It helps that you say the 4.3 vs 4.7 isn't a big difference as that opens up more possibilities.
The sound worries me a lot though. If that was a massive disappointment I would think I have made a massive mistake.
the Roadsters are just so rare near me its hard to go and have a drive of one..
there is a shocking colour combo blue one in Cardiff - but the nice ones I like are Cambridge / Manchester way.
Tipmethewink
Junior Member
- Messages
- 366
I moved from a GTS to a Vantage which I've got currently. I can't add a lot to what's already been said but the biggest thing I miss about the Maser is the comfort over long distances, it wins hands down but then I expected that to be the case when I bought it. Both cars had/have the comfort seats, not the light weight numbers btw. Also I don't know if Maserati have updated their tech. but I've got DAB radio and BT streaming from my phone which I didn't have in my GTS and is a pretty important plus for me. The satnav's a whole world better too (though I don't think that's always been the case).
PS. Servicing with main dealers has been 3/4s the cost of the Maser too.
PS. Servicing with main dealers has been 3/4s the cost of the Maser too.
Ewan
Member
- Messages
- 6,811
Very interesting. I've been toying with the idea of swapping my QP GTS for a Vantage as I hardly ever use the rear seats (and have several other 4-seat cars anyway). Also thought of a 2 seat Strad, but I just can't help but think that the GT is simply too big. Hence the thought of Vantage (or possibly another 911). I'll not drive it fast (my commute to work is nearly all 30) so I'm pleased to hear that I don't need to go for the 4.7 which is what all the magazine reports seem to imply.
Needamaser
Member
- Messages
- 1,499
Iain,
Few years ago I was in garage showroom looking at cars and heard something arriving outside which reversed up to the showroom wall.
I couldn't see the car but said to the salesman I didn't know what had just arrived but I think I need to buy it.
It was a Roadster.
Go and look and try and see for yourself.
You will either love it or hate it but with the Roadster you will hear the exhaust much better than in a hard top and you might find it is perfect as it is.
Most folk seem to pull fuse 22 and live with the standard system from what I hear from owners. However several months in the GTS will have permanently impaired your hearing!!
iainw
Member
- Messages
- 3,386
With you Ewan. If I ever use the GTS - its on my own or with a mate. Just not comfy for the little one and the wifr hates the noise and says the seats are too hard! :O
How much smaller is the vantage - downsizing was one of the attractions as well as lack of roof.
Interestingly the main dealer ones seem to be more reasonable than a Trident. Didn't expect that. And they come with a fully comp 1 year warranty which is extendable at the off.
They seem ridiculously good VFM - but then again so do the GTSs and QPs.
Still need to know I can get the exhaust sounding somewhere near as good. Even the dealers say its 'sedate' under 4000 Revs.
Contigo
Sponsor
- Messages
- 18,376
That's true. When it was my daily - I got used to it!
Now I take it out and drive down the built up streets nearby...Even I think its ludicrous and I would give myself an ASBO.
God knows what Stuarts sounded like at its peak!
You'll find out soon
iainw
Member
- Messages
- 3,386
You'll find out soon
Is he coming to Llandow?
Would be good to hear yours too. Has anyone put and Aitch Pipe on a Vantage?!
Contigo
Sponsor
- Messages
- 18,376
No but I am.
rockits
Member
- Messages
- 9,172
I think that 4.4-4.5m packaged size is perfect. The 4200/GS hits it spot on. Also a Merc SL hits it as well. I have had 3 x R129's including an SL60 AMG and an R230 which was an SL55 AMG. They are cracking value for money.
I would guess a Vantage hits that packaged size as well. I had a TT that was too small so think these sized cars are perfect. I have been tempted by a Vantage as well but I think if I had an Aston it would be the V12 Vantage.
I have never been brave enough to go for a V12 yet but always wanted one and will get one. Just not sure what or when.
I would guess a Vantage hits that packaged size as well. I had a TT that was too small so think these sized cars are perfect. I have been tempted by a Vantage as well but I think if I had an Aston it would be the V12 Vantage.
I have never been brave enough to go for a V12 yet but always wanted one and will get one. Just not sure what or when.
SPX
Junior Member
- Messages
- 271
It took nearly two month to sell!
murph7355
New Member
- Messages
- 245
Few additional notes...
- the 4.3/4.7 thing will depend on the way you drive really. The 4.7 is the punchier engine. But to me it's not worth a huge premium (over and above the age of the car 4.7s being newer). Note also that you are likely to be subjected to steroidal side skirts, a more fussy instrument/switch panel and bus like wing mirrors in the 4.7 as Aston "improved" it
- size...
Aston = http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=126170
Maserati = http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=281226
Summary...the Aston is *a lot* shorter, as you'd expect (50cm). It's a bit narrower, but tbh driving you don't notice this quite so much as the shape of the front end of the Aston is less easy to place than the Maser (which has a crisp edge to the top of the wings). The Aston has a lot more ground clearance IME - enough to make the difference between it going up my drive (Aston) and not (Maser). It could of course only be a cm or two. But it's there!
The Aston's around 10% lighter, but it's still a chunky monkey at over 1,600kg. You notice the difference, but not as much as you'd think.
- deals from dealers...I had great experience with HWM (Walton on Thames), Grange (Brentwood) and Strattons (Norwich). I'd recommend them all. Note, however, that there are a lot more Astons produced than Masers. Especially around between 2007 and 2009 if that's the age that you're looking at as Aston let production get away from them IMO. So more room to negotiate. Of course if you're fussy on colour (most are grey/silver/black) or spec you have less to choose from.
- comfort. I can't impress upon you enough to have a long play with the seat position. They are very comfy IME (the wife and I did 3.5k miles in ours around Portugal and Spain). But the seat position is sometimes counter intuitive. e.g. I'm 6'4" with long legs...I needed to have the seat an inch or two forward from the rearmost position which allowed the seat back to be reclined more and the seat base to be dropped at the back, which gave more support under my knees. I then had the wheel closer towards me and in the higher setting.
- sound...they're really good. The Tubi I had on mine made it another level up and I'd recommend it. As it aged there was a lot of crackling on the overrun and much burbling. At full chat, it sounded like a Nascar. The exhaust also saved a good 20kg in weight I think as well (the std rear silence is nearly the width of the car and made from pig iron!).
- the 4.3/4.7 thing will depend on the way you drive really. The 4.7 is the punchier engine. But to me it's not worth a huge premium (over and above the age of the car 4.7s being newer). Note also that you are likely to be subjected to steroidal side skirts, a more fussy instrument/switch panel and bus like wing mirrors in the 4.7 as Aston "improved" it
- size...
Aston = http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=126170
Maserati = http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=281226
Summary...the Aston is *a lot* shorter, as you'd expect (50cm). It's a bit narrower, but tbh driving you don't notice this quite so much as the shape of the front end of the Aston is less easy to place than the Maser (which has a crisp edge to the top of the wings). The Aston has a lot more ground clearance IME - enough to make the difference between it going up my drive (Aston) and not (Maser). It could of course only be a cm or two. But it's there!
The Aston's around 10% lighter, but it's still a chunky monkey at over 1,600kg. You notice the difference, but not as much as you'd think.
- deals from dealers...I had great experience with HWM (Walton on Thames), Grange (Brentwood) and Strattons (Norwich). I'd recommend them all. Note, however, that there are a lot more Astons produced than Masers. Especially around between 2007 and 2009 if that's the age that you're looking at as Aston let production get away from them IMO. So more room to negotiate. Of course if you're fussy on colour (most are grey/silver/black) or spec you have less to choose from.
- comfort. I can't impress upon you enough to have a long play with the seat position. They are very comfy IME (the wife and I did 3.5k miles in ours around Portugal and Spain). But the seat position is sometimes counter intuitive. e.g. I'm 6'4" with long legs...I needed to have the seat an inch or two forward from the rearmost position which allowed the seat back to be reclined more and the seat base to be dropped at the back, which gave more support under my knees. I then had the wheel closer towards me and in the higher setting.
- sound...they're really good. The Tubi I had on mine made it another level up and I'd recommend it. As it aged there was a lot of crackling on the overrun and much burbling. At full chat, it sounded like a Nascar. The exhaust also saved a good 20kg in weight I think as well (the std rear silence is nearly the width of the car and made from pig iron!).