2012 Vantage S Coupe, $158k Msrp, Stratus White/black, Highly Optioned, Pristine on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Maybach and Aston Martin alliance talks fall apart

If you have, like us, been salivating at the notion of a new generation of Maybach and Lagonda ultra-luxury crafts built by Aston Martin, we've got some bad news: According to reports emanating from Germany, talks between AML and Daimler have broken down.
The proposal under negotiation would have seen Daimler outsourcing production of the next family of Maybach models to Aston Martin, which in return would benefit from Mercedes-Benz platforms and engines - not only for its svelte GTs, but also for its own future Lagonda line of limousines and luxury SUVs. That, and a boatload of money - or at least that's what AML was reportedly seeking, an issue that served as the stumbling block over which the deal reportedly collapsed.
That's not to say the two parties couldn't still reach some sort of a compromise, but short of that, Daimler may opt to either shut down Maybach altogether, find another partner, or take another stab at building new models internally.

Spectre shreds $37 million in cars

Much as you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, you apparently can't film a James Bond movie without trashing a few cars. And by "a few cars," we actually mean $37 million worth. That's how much the producers of the all-new 007 flick, Spectre, trashed in the process of filming. And yes, that's a record. "We set the record for smashing up cars on Spectre," stunt coordinator Gary Powell told The Daily Mail (with what we can only imagine was a very boastful grin). "In Rome, we wrecked millions of pounds worth. They were going into the Vatican at top speeds of 110 [miles per hour]. We shot one entire night for four seconds of film." But because this was Bond, producers didn't just destroy $37 million worth of budget hatchbacks. Instead, seven out of ten specially produced Aston Martin DB10s were sacrificed in the name of cinema, including a major crash sequence featuring Rome's Colosseum, River Tiber, and the Vatican. American filmgoers will be waiting until November 6 to see if the destruction of all those Aston Martins was worthwhile. Somehow, we don't think anyone is going to be disappointed. Related Video: News Source: Daily Mail via Vanity FairImage Credit: Angelo Carconi / AP TV/Movies Aston Martin Coupe Luxury Performance spectre aston martin db10

Aston Martin drops Fisker lawsuit, Thunderbolt will not be produced

If you were perhaps looking forward to getting your hands on one of Henrik Fisker's Project Thunderbolt cars, you're out of luck. In order to quickly resolve a lawsuit from Aston Martin, Fisker has agreed to not produce his one-off take on the Vanquish coupe. Fisker made a splash at this year's Amelia Island Concours d'Elegance when he showed Project Thunderbolt. It was Henrik's own take on the already pretty Aston Martin Vanquish coupe, and apparently, the guys and gals in Gaydon didn't take too kindly to Fisker's creation, issuing a lawsuit that "centres on Henrik Fisker's creation and promotion of automobiles that Aston Martin contends infringes Aston Martin's rights, by an improper and unauthorised attempt to exploit and free-ride off them," according to a statement obtained by Autoblog last month. In a new statement issued Wednesday, the two parties have agreed to resolve their differences. Aston Martin has agreed to drop the lawsuit so long as Fisker does not produce his Project Thunderbolt coupe. So, sorry, Fisker fans. The official statement is pasted below. On March 26, 2015, Aston Martin filed a lawsuit against Henrik Fisker and other parties alleging various infringements by "Project Thunderbolt" of Aston Martin's intellectual property rights. The parties are pleased to report that they have been able to swiftly and amicably resolve their differences. The terms of the resolution are confidential except that the Parties wish to confirm 3 points: 1. Henrik Fisker has decided that "Project Thunderbolt" will not be produced; 2. Aston Martin will withdraw the lawsuit; and 3. In view of some apparent misunderstandings surrounding reports of the case, the Parties wish to expressly confirm that the contentions made by AML were those, and only those, made in the lawsuit. The Parties confirm that that they have amicably resolved those matters, as well as any attendant misunderstandings. The Parties will not be commenting further.