That top inlet is actually a stroke of genius in terms of packaging, IMO. The scoop feeds straight into the turbo inlet and rams air to the intercooler heat exchangers, while ducting the hot air around the turbine to the rear deck where it can help the air flowing over it to stay attached and interact more cleanly with the rear wing.
@rolandotillit2867 would there be any benefit to the current configuration(air that cools the turbine leaving at the top of the bodywork) instead of routing the actual exhaust gas there? I assume it might have something to do with packaging and properly shielding the bodywork from such heat, but the exhaust air should be more energetic. Also, I guess that water ingress would be a way bigger problem when going into the exhaust system rather than just into the turbine cooling part
For reference, a GT3 car produces around 8500-9500N of downforce at 250km/h, or around 850-900kg of downforce, but that's a purpose built race car. That a road car with A/C, radio and storage space is within 20% of a full on race car with no consideration for comfort is pretty mental.
Except a lot of manufacturers have been making bold claims like their car has ridiculous "2000kg", "3000kg" or even more downforce. If that's true, those cars would've been faster than F1 in corners, and that isn't the case, so I am wondering if we can believe any claimed downforce figures at all for road cars.
@@АлексейКастевич Downforce acts on mass. An 850kg F1 car making 23,000N of downforce is going to have more grip than a 1650kg car making 6,000N of downforce. In F1 you have 4x more load than you have mass, in a road car you have 1/3 as much load as you have mass. The proportion is lopsided.
@@АлексейКастевичThat's really not how it works at all. Downforce is only one factor of the equation. Even on its own, you still have to look at the mass of the car and determine the ratio between downforce and mass to see how much grip that downforce actually gives you. Then you have to factor in tyres, suspension geometry, chassis stiffness, etc.
only the lower part with the fences are the actual diffusor. They just designed the whole exposed carbon piece like that to trick most people into thinking that its bigger (taller) than it is
@@Literature4343 😂 used to be when he was released and broken. I've stopped playing atm returned hope to return to brawl stars one day when I have the time to play
@@leomux2004 That's certainly a different way to route wastegate exhaust, normally the dump tube is the shorter one, not the longer one. With a hot V the wastegate dump tube exiting up top would make the most sense to me, as that would make it as short a possible. If I have it backwards that's certainly an odd choice.
@rolandotillit2867 Well, just look at the top exhaust, they are the bigger pipes while the wastegates are the smaller ones, which makes sense since the exhaust is the main downstream, while wastegates are the auxilary ones.
The forged carbon is the only thing I dislike about this car. Never thought that Aston would be the brand to build the cooles Road and race cars. Now they just need new drivers for f1 and they are set.
I feel like these "HyperCars" are strained back because of emissions etc and "Supercars" have caught up because of adding electric motors. Is Valkyrie the last or first "Megacar" from a mainstream manufacturer?
Also why can't these companies make sub companies that are technically not part of the main manufacturer so they don't need to reach such tight EU standards? For example Ferrari and AF Corse
@@XDG_97X Cause EU can catch that too. All tiny manufacturers that make less than 10,000 cars in order to dodge the emissions must show "improving of emissions every year" it's why Pagani tried Hybrid system for Utopia but went back to TT V12 instead. I am guessing they will try to force though TT V12. Not to mention the investments. Ferrari will be stupid in this instance.
Interesting analysis as always. The F80 is a shocking mess but I admire the temerity of Maranello. The W1 is more credible. The Lamborghini is rather unexciting. I recently saw a 1965 400GT for sale for less than the Lambordhini shown here: that would get my vote (Franco Scaglione...) Does anyone really need 1000 bhp? A vital statistic would be to find out how many minutes / distance covered a supercar can achieve at 250 km/h before it runs out of fuel. On a race track a historic Ford GT40 uses 60litres / hour to average say 150 kmh. The Valhalla has a tank capacity of 65 litres. My guess is that at 250kmh Valhalla would need a fuel stop every 40 minutes...In other words, the average maintained speed would be 200kmh per hour, taking into account a 10 minute stop to refill. Now how is that very much better than a very ordinary VW Passat Combi diesel being driven across Thuringia ? I rest my case.
Lamborghinis are usually good value for money because they usually have V10s and V12s over V8s and V6s. On amateur gentlemen racing, the Lamborghinis are fast because they usually have more power for the price than Ferraris and Porsches. Amateur racing drivers don't usually push their cars on corners as hard as professionals because it takes talents and skills to do those things and it is risky especially if you're not skilled. Thus it is more advantageous to have a high powered engine with good cornering abilities than to have great cornering abilities but lower power.
Lamborghini are bad value cause they tank in value. Same goes with Aston Martin. Unless u Ferrari which values which even then they're currently playing a dangerous game with themselves.
the prices are not artificial.. they represent normal supply-demand. ferrari hypercar has a waiting list of thousands above what is produced. mclaren, for a p1 successor will have something similar but still less hence the price difference. and lastly, aston produced something remarkable here but still dont have the pedigree. if this car does very well the successor will cost double
wish they had just kept the valkyrie design and made the tub bigger and put in a v8. The valhalla is kinda ungly, especially next to the magnificent valkyrie. that front end especially.
the reason y the cabin for the valkyrie is so narrow is bcuz the venturi tunnels that run on both sides right next to the occupants' legs/bottoms all the way to the diffuser. thats how it manages to generate so much relatively efficient downforce. if u make the cabin wider, there would be not space for the venturi tunnels, then it would be impractically to achieve such high downforce figures using only top surfaces like front and rear wings (wings are much less efficient in terms of downforce vs drag compared to venturi tunnels). Basically pretty much all the other sports cars/hyper cars use some version of a flat(er) floor with a diffuser to generate the main bulk of the downforce, thats why none of them are in the same league compared to the valkyrie in terms of both peak DF and DF efficiency. The valkyrie didn't sacrifice practicability just for the sake of it, it was a necessity, an integral part of the entire aero design philosophy. There are other such details like the occupants' seats being placed at a slight angle towards the centerline to make space for the front wishbone suspension (basically where the occupants' lower legs are). oh and also if u change the powertrain, the diffuser centerline/rear crash structure will have to be completely redesigned as well
@@Literature4343 That might be reason why Ferrari didn't went that route with the F80. Interior space is necessary for a roadcar. No wonder it generates so much DF. The Valkyrie uses Venturi tunnels.
@@boostav Says who? Mclaren never claimed their DF were peak. Henry Catch Pole is the only reviewer to get to bottom of such numbers. He clears says such as Mclaren engineer confirms it. Only can be seen on Hagerty channel. You clearly have not watched such yet.
@@boostav This video is using an estimate based off Mclaren 1000kg claimed numbers. If 1298 kg is peak at 174 mph/ 280 kph then these numbers are off that simple. Should be more than Ferrari numbers at 250 kph. I mean stop it. Mclaren not over such video. Anyone can be wrong. When these numbers are updated there will be an excuse of not knowing.
It's better looking than the F80 and W1, so there's at least that. I wonder if Porsche can get around EU emission regs by developing a hyper car... but putting it under the Manthey name. Perhaps they could adapt the upcoming GT2RS into a GT1 style long tail and integrate a light hybrid system (probably just for the front). It wouldn't be "bespoke" like Ferrari/McLaren/Aston, and having Manthey then Porsche in the name may be off putting to some... but I'm sure it could be competitive in terms of performance and will sell out regardless.
No, they're not making a hypercar because they are not sure of the best route for performance. Not emissions. Porsche can just as easily skirt around emissions as Ferrari. I think it's more just a case of struggling to understand if R'n'D is better spent on a more ambitious EV that no one cares about, even if it's faster, or a slower but more attractive combustion engine car, that might not perform as well with their current developments. This is why they're late to the table.
@@F1ll1nTh3Blanks Not sure if that where the case 12Cylindri should of been way more powerful also seems like more mute from comments. Not to mention 2025 Porsche GT3 RS gained more weight. Aero changes isn't changing the fact that the new 2025 Porsche GT3 RS has weight increase in weight so no both manufacturers just can't skirt emissions this time. EU seems to have a heavier hammer on the emissions and crash safety regulations this time on manufacturers. Not to mention not many are commenting it's dry weight for the Aston Martin Vallaha of 1655kg which is well over 300kg of the concept 1350kg! So EU regulations getting tighter.
@@gerogyzurkov2259 I mean of course emissions are restrictive for performance but that's not the point here. Porsche will not build a car like this for the sake of it. They wanna produce something they feel is a significant step on from everything else and sets a new benchmark for them. They're big and bad enough that they can just build any old hypercar any time they like, they can just put a V8 based on what is in the 963 into a chassis, make it compliant, slap a bunch of aero on it, and shove it out of the door, but that's not enough for them. What they have with their new vision concept is very different from what they traditionally design and they don't want to leave that performance on the table when it comes to building a car based on that concept. That's a lot of work, to please engineers, regulations and purists. It's the same pitfalls everyone faces in the end but ultimately, if they don't have something that speaks to their current vision and feels up to their standards, there's no point building any old hypercar just to please people that want a trinity again.
One of my friend actually ordered and payed a down payment of 150k more than 3 years ago, and got tired of waiting for a car with no appreciation potential. So he cancelled the order earlier this year
TBH, it's just another heavy turbo hybrid supercar in my mind... Between new cars, I find the GMA cars really exciting, but strangely also the Caterham Project V and McMurtry Spierling - both EVs 😮
I personally dislike the whole "Downforce figures" any car with a big wing and a decent diffuser can create bigs amounts of downforce but 500-1000 kg at 250 kmph means nothing if the car cant take corners at those speeds (which most cant in normal tires and most drivers qont push them to those limits) so i always think that it just doesnt make much sense. Lap times around race tracks are far more impressive than random figures.
It's impressive and interesting but in most countries, cars like this will be damaged by months and years of disuse due to being unsuited for much of anything aside from track use. It's awesome but I don't dream of owning it.
The first time I drove the LaFerrari on Assetto Corsa, my first thought was this car can't be tamed by a normal guy! I have never driven one of these, but I'm good enough on the sim to post some world records etc. I'm also competent karter. These cars are great, but a normal guy can't drive them to anywhere near close their limits. Too much power, too much downforce. It's just a giant status symbol. But these cars are getting into a territory where they're very dangerous on the road. Things simply happen too fast for normal untrained drivers. Also, they're very heavy and don't have good med/high speed braking. I'm afraid someone will make a giant mess out of this performance on public roads and there will be a massive outcry.
Yeah… we need higher taxes. Crazy how expensive all of these “smaller” supercars are getting and how many units each one sells. Tell us that the rich have too much
aston missed the mark imo valkyrie was too extreme, to the point where you could actually consider it unimpressive. taking a lmp prototype and do the bare minimum to get it street legal. If your streetcar is so bad on open roads that everyone treats it as a track only car -> whats the point? valhalla is underwhelming, they make an effort to design an actual road car. Yet Mclaren and ferrari are already ahead in offering a complete performant package. At 800k retail and 999units, price differences dont really matter anymore. it wont make it into the new holy trinity, irrelevant within months, wont sell entry astons -> whats the point? both cars irrelevant in their own way.
the valkyrie has this advanced aerodynamics and is light enough - i come from airplane technology and dislike the average car - too heavy and minor aero
love the thoughts given to convincing your wife
The wife aprroval factor is pretty important if often ignored
Euro/ kg downforce is the most absurd spreadsheet warrior metric i have ever seen 😂 And yes, I did make a spreadsheet last time I bought a motorbike
That top inlet is actually a stroke of genius in terms of packaging, IMO. The scoop feeds straight into the turbo inlet and rams air to the intercooler heat exchangers, while ducting the hot air around the turbine to the rear deck where it can help the air flowing over it to stay attached and interact more cleanly with the rear wing.
Older Nsx that runs in Super Gt had a top roof inlet too. It was more pronounce on the car.
@@gerogyzurkov2259 I remember, that was a beautiful car, still run it on the sim just for fun.
@rolandotillit2867 would there be any benefit to the current configuration(air that cools the turbine leaving at the top of the bodywork) instead of routing the actual exhaust gas there? I assume it might have something to do with packaging and properly shielding the bodywork from such heat, but the exhaust air should be more energetic. Also, I guess that water ingress would be a way bigger problem when going into the exhaust system rather than just into the turbine cooling part
@@peroplaninic2220 There's 2 dump tubes at the end as well as some screen mesh around the outlet to let that hot air escape.
For reference, a GT3 car produces around 8500-9500N of downforce at 250km/h, or around 850-900kg of downforce, but that's a purpose built race car. That a road car with A/C, radio and storage space is within 20% of a full on race car with no consideration for comfort is pretty mental.
Except a lot of manufacturers have been making bold claims like their car has ridiculous "2000kg", "3000kg" or even more downforce. If that's true, those cars would've been faster than F1 in corners, and that isn't the case, so I am wondering if we can believe any claimed downforce figures at all for road cars.
@@АлексейКастевич Downforce acts on mass. An 850kg F1 car making 23,000N of downforce is going to have more grip than a 1650kg car making 6,000N of downforce. In F1 you have 4x more load than you have mass, in a road car you have 1/3 as much load as you have mass. The proportion is lopsided.
@@АлексейКастевичThat's really not how it works at all. Downforce is only one factor of the equation. Even on its own, you still have to look at the mass of the car and determine the ratio between downforce and mass to see how much grip that downforce actually gives you. Then you have to factor in tyres, suspension geometry, chassis stiffness, etc.
I hope Aston do well this time, this company has had many ups and downs and somehow it managed to survive till today.
We have to see.
3:48 its shocking just how large the amg one diffusor is
only the lower part with the fences are the actual diffusor. They just designed the whole exposed carbon piece like that to trick most people into thinking that its bigger (taller) than it is
@Literature4343 it looks hollow from other videos I just checked but I can't say
@@lovelehstuff pretty sure its outlet for the engine compartment. Also, is Sam your main? lol just saw ur pfp
@@Literature4343 😂 used to be when he was released and broken. I've stopped playing atm returned hope to return to brawl stars one day when I have the time to play
@ try out squeak if u do return in the near future lol, he (it?) is quite meta now, somewhat surprisingly.
Crazy that this costs ⅕ of what the valkyrie costed.
The top exhausts are the dump tubes for the waste gate, while the bottom ones are the standard exhaust pipe.
It is actually the opposite, the top ones are the exhaust since this is a hot vee engine, while the lower ones are for the wastegates.
@@leomux2004 That's certainly a different way to route wastegate exhaust, normally the dump tube is the shorter one, not the longer one. With a hot V the wastegate dump tube exiting up top would make the most sense to me, as that would make it as short a possible.
If I have it backwards that's certainly an odd choice.
@rolandotillit2867 Well, just look at the top exhaust, they are the bigger pipes while the wastegates are the smaller ones, which makes sense since the exhaust is the main downstream, while wastegates are the auxilary ones.
Great video, your insights are Always on point. Though as far as valhalla competiton goes, i reckon the sf90xx Is probably a Better match
Interesting model names for Valkyrie and Valhalla. Which one is next, Odin?
probably not given they all have to start with an "V"
Valhiem?
Only thing i hate about it is the pop up wing. The silohuette without the wing or a wing as the valkyrie own is much more suited
I think the valhalla is more closely placed to the sf90 and revuelto for performance, maybe sf90 xx if you think about volume
The forged carbon is the only thing I dislike about this car. Never thought that Aston would be the brand to build the cooles Road and race cars. Now they just need new drivers for f1 and they are set.
I feel like these "HyperCars" are strained back because of emissions etc and "Supercars" have caught up because of adding electric motors. Is Valkyrie the last or first "Megacar" from a mainstream manufacturer?
Also why can't these companies make sub companies that are technically not part of the main manufacturer so they don't need to reach such tight EU standards? For example Ferrari and AF Corse
@@XDG_97X Cause EU can catch that too. All tiny manufacturers that make less than 10,000 cars in order to dodge the emissions must show "improving of emissions every year" it's why Pagani tried Hybrid system for Utopia but went back to TT V12 instead. I am guessing they will try to force though TT V12.
Not to mention the investments. Ferrari will be stupid in this instance.
5:51 Ferrari SF90 as well
Excellent analysis, as always.
It’s beautiful. Home run.
Thanks.
Would love a video explaining nuances of downforce. Eg what happens to downforce in a corner.. would f80 still have 1000kg mid corner etc
this is the true holy trinity, with w1 and f80. the porche mission x should go with the valkyrie and the amg one
That 1:36 valhalla was awesome
Downforce-at250kmh-Weight ratio (personal wet + driver estimation)
-Valkyrie: 1:1
-Ferrari F80: 0.6:1
-Mclaren W1: 0.5:1
-Valhalla: 0.33:1
Good video. Hardly a sports car though. Likely a supercar.
Interesting analysis as always. The F80 is a shocking mess but I admire the temerity of Maranello.
The W1 is more credible. The Lamborghini is rather unexciting. I recently saw a 1965 400GT for sale for less than the Lambordhini shown here: that would get my vote (Franco Scaglione...)
Does anyone really need 1000 bhp? A vital statistic would be to find out how many minutes / distance covered a supercar can achieve at 250 km/h before it runs out of fuel.
On a race track a historic Ford GT40 uses 60litres / hour to average say 150 kmh. The Valhalla has a tank capacity of 65 litres. My guess is that at 250kmh Valhalla would need a fuel stop every 40 minutes...In other words, the average maintained speed would be 200kmh per hour, taking into account a 10 minute stop to refill.
Now how is that very much better than a very ordinary VW Passat Combi diesel being driven across Thuringia ? I rest my case.
5:55 sf90 specifically sf90xx
Edit: so wrong 😂
Why wrong? SF90XX has a better price/dwf ratio than Valhalla, 530kg (250kph) for €630k before tax = 1190.
@@boostav yeah sf90xx is the best deal here, followed by the lambo,
Lamborghinis are usually good value for money because they usually have V10s and V12s over V8s and V6s. On amateur gentlemen racing, the Lamborghinis are fast because they usually have more power for the price than Ferraris and Porsches.
Amateur racing drivers don't usually push their cars on corners as hard as professionals because it takes talents and skills to do those things and it is risky especially if you're not skilled. Thus it is more advantageous to have a high powered engine with good cornering abilities than to have great cornering abilities but lower power.
Lamborghini are bad value cause they tank in value. Same goes with Aston Martin. Unless u Ferrari which values which even then they're currently playing a dangerous game with themselves.
@@gerogyzurkov2259 Yeah Ferrari is playing with fire, too many F80s. Should have been 599 instead of 799.
the prices are not artificial.. they represent normal supply-demand. ferrari hypercar has a waiting list of thousands above what is produced. mclaren, for a p1 successor will have something similar but still less hence the price difference. and lastly, aston produced something remarkable here but still dont have the pedigree. if this car does very well the successor will cost double
wish they had just kept the valkyrie design and made the tub bigger and put in a v8. The valhalla is kinda ungly, especially next to the magnificent valkyrie. that front end especially.
I think it looks better than the Valkyrie
Aftet that you need 2 parking spaces, because the car would be so wide.
the reason y the cabin for the valkyrie is so narrow is bcuz the venturi tunnels that run on both sides right next to the occupants' legs/bottoms all the way to the diffuser. thats how it manages to generate so much relatively efficient downforce. if u make the cabin wider, there would be not space for the venturi tunnels, then it would be impractically to achieve such high downforce figures using only top surfaces like front and rear wings (wings are much less efficient in terms of downforce vs drag compared to venturi tunnels). Basically pretty much all the other sports cars/hyper cars use some version of a flat(er) floor with a diffuser to generate the main bulk of the downforce, thats why none of them are in the same league compared to the valkyrie in terms of both peak DF and DF efficiency. The valkyrie didn't sacrifice practicability just for the sake of it, it was a necessity, an integral part of the entire aero design philosophy. There are other such details like the occupants' seats being placed at a slight angle towards the centerline to make space for the front wishbone suspension (basically where the occupants' lower legs are).
oh and also if u change the powertrain, the diffuser centerline/rear crash structure will have to be completely redesigned as well
@@Literature4343 That might be reason why Ferrari didn't went that route with the F80. Interior space is necessary for a roadcar. No wonder it generates so much DF. The Valkyrie uses Venturi tunnels.
@ yep
How old is that reflector 😅
W1 DF force numbers are conservative. Recent video said of 1298kg at peak. Mclaren chose a more consistent number vs peak at a few secs.
None of the numbers shown are at peak
@@boostav Says who? Mclaren never claimed their DF were peak. Henry Catch Pole is the only reviewer to get to bottom of such numbers. He clears says such as Mclaren engineer confirms it. Only can be seen on Hagerty channel. You clearly have not watched such yet.
@@jeffwill4923 Says the video you just watched, you squirrel. McLaren stated 1000kg at 280kph, which is 800kg at 250kph, as shown in the video.
@@boostav This video is using an estimate based off Mclaren 1000kg claimed numbers. If 1298 kg is peak at 174 mph/ 280 kph then these numbers are off that simple. Should be more than Ferrari numbers at 250 kph.
I mean stop it. Mclaren not over such video. Anyone can be wrong. When these numbers are updated there will be an excuse of not knowing.
@@jeffwill4923 Jesus you're dense, I already told you the Ferrari numbers are not at peak either.
Seems like obviously the right direction to me. After all, if you wanted a racecar why not just buy, ya know, a racecar?
It's better looking than the F80 and W1, so there's at least that. I wonder if Porsche can get around EU emission regs by developing a hyper car... but putting it under the Manthey name. Perhaps they could adapt the upcoming GT2RS into a GT1 style long tail and integrate a light hybrid system (probably just for the front). It wouldn't be "bespoke" like Ferrari/McLaren/Aston, and having Manthey then Porsche in the name may be off putting to some... but I'm sure it could be competitive in terms of performance and will sell out regardless.
Even 918 didn't sell well I heard. Toke a while
918 didn't sell well. It toke a while to sell out.
No, they're not making a hypercar because they are not sure of the best route for performance. Not emissions. Porsche can just as easily skirt around emissions as Ferrari.
I think it's more just a case of struggling to understand if R'n'D is better spent on a more ambitious EV that no one cares about, even if it's faster, or a slower but more attractive combustion engine car, that might not perform as well with their current developments. This is why they're late to the table.
@@F1ll1nTh3Blanks Not sure if that where the case 12Cylindri should of been way more powerful also seems like more mute from comments. Not to mention 2025 Porsche GT3 RS gained more weight. Aero changes isn't changing the fact that the new 2025 Porsche GT3 RS has weight increase in weight so no both manufacturers just can't skirt emissions this time. EU seems to have a heavier hammer on the emissions and crash safety regulations this time on manufacturers.
Not to mention not many are commenting it's dry weight for the Aston Martin Vallaha of 1655kg which is well over 300kg of the concept 1350kg! So EU regulations getting tighter.
@@gerogyzurkov2259 I mean of course emissions are restrictive for performance but that's not the point here. Porsche will not build a car like this for the sake of it. They wanna produce something they feel is a significant step on from everything else and sets a new benchmark for them.
They're big and bad enough that they can just build any old hypercar any time they like, they can just put a V8 based on what is in the 963 into a chassis, make it compliant, slap a bunch of aero on it, and shove it out of the door, but that's not enough for them. What they have with their new vision concept is very different from what they traditionally design and they don't want to leave that performance on the table when it comes to building a car based on that concept. That's a lot of work, to please engineers, regulations and purists. It's the same pitfalls everyone faces in the end but ultimately, if they don't have something that speaks to their current vision and feels up to their standards, there's no point building any old hypercar just to please people that want a trinity again.
I like the Lupo more, much better value I think.
One of my friend actually ordered and payed a down payment of 150k more than 3 years ago, and got tired of waiting for a car with no appreciation potential. So he cancelled the order earlier this year
It's dificult to ser that car after the valkyrie. Looks like a normal car even being a crazy concept
NEVER TRY TO MAKE SOMETHING FROM A MISTAKE IN THE FIRST PLACE .............
I didn't like the Valhalla when it was first shown, but I love how the production version looks. Better than other cars in this video.
TBH, it's just another heavy turbo hybrid supercar in my mind...
Between new cars, I find the GMA cars really exciting, but strangely also the Caterham Project V and McMurtry Spierling - both EVs 😮
AMG One is only 360kg of dwf? That number seems wrong, isn't it almost 700kg?
That surprised me also. Seems way too low while it can lap nurburgring with good laptimes.
@@devzs5251 Exactly, I think he might have mixed up the AMG One numbers with the LaFerrari
I know it peaks at 675KG or there abouts but this is the figure at 155mph/250k
it's insane there has to be voodoo involved. but remember it has crazy suspension and awd so it has great levels of grip
@@boostav if it truly has this low downforce, then the mechanical grip has to be insane, and it has extra electric motors on all wheels
Im no longer fascinated by these cars. Too fast and expensive. Yes, too fast. And speed is attainable at reasonable prices nowadays.
I personally dislike the whole "Downforce figures" any car with a big wing and a decent diffuser can create bigs amounts of downforce but 500-1000 kg at 250 kmph means nothing if the car cant take corners at those speeds (which most cant in normal tires and most drivers qont push them to those limits) so i always think that it just doesnt make much sense. Lap times around race tracks are far more impressive than random figures.
It's impressive and interesting but in most countries, cars like this will be damaged by months and years of disuse due to being unsuited for much of anything aside from track use. It's awesome but I don't dream of owning it.
The first time I drove the LaFerrari on Assetto Corsa, my first thought was this car can't be tamed by a normal guy!
I have never driven one of these, but I'm good enough on the sim to post some world records etc. I'm also competent karter. These cars are great, but a normal guy can't drive them to anywhere near close their limits. Too much power, too much downforce. It's just a giant status symbol. But these cars are getting into a territory where they're very dangerous on the road. Things simply happen too fast for normal untrained drivers. Also, they're very heavy and don't have good med/high speed braking.
I'm afraid someone will make a giant mess out of this performance on public roads and there will be a massive outcry.
918 erased the traditional powertrain.
the Valhalla is no longer an egg, as seen in its original concept. thank goodness.
Well, it's now a frog
egg? because it's white?
they ruined it
Completely agree it's hideous
Yeah… we need higher taxes. Crazy how expensive all of these “smaller” supercars are getting and how many units each one sells. Tell us that the rich have too much
aston missed the mark imo
valkyrie was too extreme, to the point where you could actually consider it unimpressive. taking a lmp prototype and do the bare minimum to get it street legal.
If your streetcar is so bad on open roads that everyone treats it as a track only car -> whats the point?
valhalla is underwhelming, they make an effort to design an actual road car. Yet Mclaren and ferrari are already ahead in offering a complete performant package.
At 800k retail and 999units, price differences dont really matter anymore. it wont make it into the new holy trinity, irrelevant within months, wont sell entry astons -> whats the point?
both cars irrelevant in their own way.
the valkyrie has this advanced aerodynamics and is light enough - i come from airplane technology and dislike the average car - too heavy and minor aero
Go Lambo!
price per downforce 🤣
1600+kg is a complete bust
Ofc is not strutural
Too bad this thing is vaporware not likely seen soon…if ever.