By on August 18, 2014

Aston-Martin One-77

Should you desire an Aston Martin in the near future, you may need to make your purchase sooner than later if the automaker fails to live up to the federal government’s newest expectations.

Bloomberg reports Aston Martin stores will likely suffer financial hardships should the DB9 and Vantage are no longer made for sale in the United States due to both vehicles’ failure to comply with new regulations regarding side-impact crashes. This would result in every dealership closing their doors barring an exemption for both vehicles, as explained by U.S. dealer advisory panel chairman James Walker in his petition to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:

The financial viability of Aston Martin dealers is very much in question. If dealers make the decision to shutter the franchise, a very likely outcome, the impact on employment is significant.

Aston Martin sent exemption requests last year for the DB9 through August of 2016, and the Vantage the following August. Next-gen models of both vehicles have been delayed due to financial issues.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

30 Comments on “Aston Martin Could Leave US Without Federal Crash Exemption Approval...”


  • avatar
    05lgt

    Well, count me out. I prefer to see the financial impact to the dealers than suffer the cranial impact with a T-boning SUV’s bumper. I wasn’t in the market for an “I’m a douche” sign anyway, but knowing it can’t meet federal crash minimums (to say nothing of IIHS) certainly closes the subject.

    • 0 avatar
      ellomdian

      If the feds would just get on board with Euro NCAP standards, this wouldn’t be nearly the issue it is. Having to run cars through 2 completely different standards testing is ridiculous when you could quite easily revamp guidelines (from a safety standpoint at least) to be compatible.

      At this point, it really only affects smaller marques, so I don’t see the justification from a trade barrier perspective. Forcing ‘botique’ manufacturers to write off twice as many cars so they can sell in NA and EU is retarded.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        This

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        If the Europeans would just get on board with FMVSS standards, this wouldn’t be nearly the issue it is.

        However, I doubt that they’ll ever match because the US standards can result in a heavier car, while the Europeans have fewer full-size truck and SUV impacts to worry about. There are sometimes good reasons why standards vary from market to market.

        (As it stands, the IIHS test and Euro NCAP are fairly similar to each other.)

        That being said, I would personally favor an exemption for low-volume cars such as these if enough disclaimers are provided to potential buyers.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Again Pch101 you seem to have everything assup. I couldn’t expect much different from you.

          I don’t think the US is leading in the global side impact standards. I do think you’ll find Australia actually required vehicles from the 70s to employ side intrusion bars.

          Maybe the US should adopt what Australia has put forward.

          http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/doc/2013/wp29/ECE-TRANS-WP29-2013-120e.pdf

          https://www2.unece.org/wiki/download/attachments/15237355/PSI-RD-06.pdf?api=v2

          From the US NHTSA and DOT

          http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv16/98S8O04.PDF

          You are such a joke, really a tosser.

          • 0 avatar

            Why the personal attack, you seem to support his argument, and you seem the tosser.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            @crazycarlarry
            Pch101 completely disregards the truth if it doesn’t fit his agenda.

            You can present hard credible facts and he will disregard this information.

            He present arguments that are generally baseless and misrepresent facts. In other words he has very little integrity.

            His general response is ‘because I said so it is true’.

            He considers himself a true socialist leader without being egalitarian and in true socialist fashion will misrepresent and lie to protect the ‘socialist dream’.

            He’s has the most French/Euro arrogance for any American Exceptionalist I’ve ever met.

            Deal with him and you will find out how arrogant he is.

            He’s a loser, like I stated.

          • 0 avatar
            cronus

            The superiority of the Australians in car design is obviously a reflection of their dominance in the global automotive market.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          @Pch101
          Forgot.

          http://www.minister.infrastructure.gov.au/jb/releases/2013/december/jb017_2013.aspx

          • 0 avatar
            wmba

            Pch101 has been on this board for years, attempting to beat back the hordes of know-nothings. Mostly people who don’t understand US bankruptcy proceedings, and like old springs, keep bouncing back with the same old arguments. The old editor Ed Niedermeyer is one of them. In one ear and out the other. Political leanings trump logic. Now writing inconsequential pontifications on Bloomberg, and also the occasional attempt at character assassination on Marchionne.

            You BAFO arrived out of nowhere NT with an attitude a couple of years ago, and I haven’t read much of anything you’ve said that even makes sense. Abetted by another almost incomprehensible Aussie by the name of Ryan. I’d have some respect if you made sense and were not demagogic.

            Like the other day, you advised us that the new Colorado truck to be sold here had a thinner frame than the world market version. Did the good lord above whisper the news in your ear? Did you email or telephone GM in Detroit to find out? No, you made it all up in that intellectually giant mind of yours. Absolute bolloc*ks.

            America is evil because of the chicken tax and unions, etc. etc.

            You drone on and on about towing ratings which the SAE must have wrong because world trucks tow three times as much, tell one and all why Australia is a paradise because the minimum wage is $17 an hour, advise on how the US should run its economy because helicopter mechanics are well-known financial geniuses, blah, blah, blah.

            Only dimwits think they’re always correct. They demand proof and links on this and that from others, being unable to formulate cogent arguments of their own, proffer their own links when it suits them, but only sometimes are they germane to the point, and bleat when someone tells them they’re full of it.

            Which you most assuredly are.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            “I haven’t read much of anything you’ve said that even makes sense.”

            I solve that problem by scrolling right past him. I haven’t read one of his posts in months, as he generally doesn’t know what he’s talking about. (And judging from his inability to understand his own links, let alone his literacy skills aren’t anything to write home about, either.)

          • 0 avatar

            “Pch101 has been on this board for years, attempting to beat back the hordes of know-nothings. Mostly people who don’t understand US bankruptcy proceedings, and like old springs, keep bouncing back with the same old arguments. The old editor Ed Niedermeyer is one of them. In one ear and out the other. Political leanings trump logic. Now writing inconsequential pontifications on Bloomberg, and also the occasional attempt at character assassination on Marchionne.”

            So I’m here wondering why a defense of PCH101 entails an attack on the old TTAC staff. That seems rather crass, IMHO.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          Pch-
          100% agree

        • 0 avatar
          heavy handle

          “the Europeans have fewer full-size truck and SUV impacts to worry about.”

          If you mean that they have lower overall traffic fatalities, then you are correct. If you mean that they have significantly fewer trucks, then you are not, but it’s a common misconception.
          European daytime traffic is made up of a huge number of commercial vans (Promaster/Sprinter). They are to the “old” continent what commercial pickups are to the US. Look-up some European traffic cameras if you don’t believe me.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            “If you mean that they have lower overall traffic fatalities, then you are correct.”

            That would depend upon the country. Some Europeans crash and die more than Americans. So no, that isn’t what I meant.

            “European daytime traffic is made up of a huge number of commercial vans (Promaster/Sprinter).”

            Much of the commercial van traffic is comprised of vehicles based on compact cars.

            The US safety challenge comes from the weight and difference in bumper heights that are typical of the full-size pickup and SUV classes, which have no counterpart in Europe. That is certainly not the issue in Europe that it is in the US (and I’ve spent quite a bit of time in Europe and I do read data, so I’m not basing this on watching reruns of Chevy Case in “European Vacation.”)

          • 0 avatar
            05lgt

            PCH and I mean what we said: cranial impact with a T-boning SUV’s bumper. It’s not as much of an issue in the EU because of bumper heights and intersection design differences. And before you get all high and mighty about roundabouts; ever try one as a pedestrian?

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        I agree with this. There’s no reason we need to have completely separate crash regs from the EU. It would result in the US getting many more car options than previously.

  • avatar

    Can’t they strengthen the sills, put an extra (strength) beam in the door, etc.? I mean, Astons are almost hand-made cars. You would expect a car that wide, especially if it’s meant to be driven at high speed, to comply with any new regulations. Epic fail.

    • 0 avatar
      hgrunt

      You still need to put in the R&D time, make the production tooling changes, validate all of that, crash test and certify the car meets the standards. That process can cost millions of dollars that Aston won’t be able to make back on the small volume of cars they sell. Major automakers can make it back in volume by adding a few bucks here or there to various products.

  • avatar
    petezeiss

    Non-issue. 95% of us would never see an AM to get all jealous and class-hatey even if they got the exemption. Where’s the fun in that?

  • avatar
    dwford

    These cars comply with current regulations, so they are hardly frail flowers in the crash tests. An exemption for 2 years on such low volume cars doesn’t seem unreasonable.

    • 0 avatar
      seth1065

      Well I do not know if they are on a waiver now so not sure if they are up to snuff. IF AM wants the waiver , they should have to pick up any ins claims from being in a side impact accident. And the buyers should have to sign a waiver. What happens when their two year waiver runs out, do they get to apply for a new one or is this we are two years away from reaching the US standards.???

      I have no idea who has the better safety standards, does AM pass the European standard or do they request a waiver for that as well?

  • avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

    How long have these standards been mooted, and how long has it been since these vehicles have been refreshed? Seems to me that updating standards, short of some critical urgent safety issue, should be timed such that engineers have a reasonable amount of time to adapt to them. I have a suspicion that A-M has let their cars get a bit long in the tooth, and they really should be doing an update anyway.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Very true. From my memory, the DB9 is from 05 or so, and the Vantage from 07. They both needed replaced already. They’re in the same boat as Jag, with no new product created without the umbrella cover of Ford.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        @CoreyDL
        Crash regulations are gradually harmonising. Washington does hold meeting and brief with it’s global counterparts.

        US regulations aren’t any better, or worse than the global safety regulations. This can be shown by the US having a much higher fatality rate on it’s roads.

        It comes down to protectionism and technical barriers.

        As for Pch-101. Well the other day he stated that handouts for EV is there to modify and influence the EV segment.

        But, yet he refuses to consider the 25% chicken tax can and does influence the light truck segment.

        He tends to argue his arguments with little thought of what his paradigms are. He changes like a chameleon.

        His comments are to defend the UAW and it’s interests. I have very little time for thugs.

        • 0 avatar
          Eyeflyistheeye

          Ever since I started reading TTAC, I always wondered what pleasure BAFO could get from arguing almost daily about something as inconsequential to his life as small trucks in the United States seeing how he is not a citizen of the United States, has no interest in being one and doesn’t purchase trucks in North America anyways.

          This makes about as much sense as me discussing everyday how Australia has a closed toaster waffle market and that Eggo should be let in to defeat the Walcrisco monopoly. On the other hand, I’m Tony Abbott’s eighth or ninth cousin and I’ve dated a few bogan sheilas, so I’m sure BAFO won’t mind if I tell him how his country should be run as well.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            It’s a bizarre manifestation of anti-Americanism, a vision that holds the US in contempt for being a deviant outlier that lords over what is allegedly a global community of nations.

            That he can’t get his facts straight and has questionable literacy skills is merely icing on the cake. Bogans aren’t known for being bright.

  • avatar
    ja-gti

    Whew, so glad the Feds are forcing this company out of the US! Think of all the lives saved by keeping the thousands (or is it hundreds?) of these rickety vehicles off the road!

    Now I’m going for a ride on my motorcycle. With no helmet. ‘Cause THAT’S perfectly legal here.

    • 0 avatar
      James2

      You could try explaining it to a bureaucrat but these people would only look at you blankly.

      Tim Cain would know for sure, but I imagine Aston sells at most a couple thousand cars here annually –of this number just how many get bashed in the side? If it happens twice a year I would be surprised.

  • avatar
    CriticalMass

    I have often wondered to what degree the varying standards are, in the end, mainly trade barriers to protect the local boys at both ends. If my failing memory serves, I think economists call it “rent seeking” – “I already own this patch brother and it’s gonna cost you to get in”.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • ToolGuy: JimZ, A couple of Hella Rallye 3003’s should help – with “Clear real-glass lens”:...
  • JimZ: “in 4 months it will be painfully obvious this is just another flu.” www.detroitnews.com/story/n...
  • millerluke: I wish Kia would put in a V8. When has any vehicle been made worse when eight glorious cylinders were...
  • bullnuke: They’re built in the mother country (Japan).
  • millerluke: I have a 2019 Camry with the 2.5L. It’s rated for around 7.2 L/100km, and I routinely get around...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Timothy Cain
  • Matthew Guy
  • Ronnie Schreiber
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth