<ul><li><a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/07-VANTAGE-BLK-BK-1-181MLS-MSRP-128-300-00-LOADED_W0QQitemZ200092905700QQcategoryZ5358QQrdZ1Q QcmdZViewItem">i don't think i could choose an R8 over THIS</a></li></ul>

380 hp in a 115K car - sorry that ship has sailed. I remember a comparison test where a 997 C2S was quite a bit faster.

Gorgeous yes, take it over a R8 (even the lowly 420 hp version) - no way

but the look doesn't deliver its promise. and no matter how you cut it, the substance is not the same as the promise with the vantage. and even top gear's editor, who loves aston as much as i do, agrees.

at the same cost, with 425 hp i'd change my mind in a heartbeat. sadly, the day that it does..... it will cost too much to justify too. perhaps 150K.

and a car can't make you james bond. only a casting director can. :p

btw- search the aston forum. the vantage has a real BIG problem with gremlins, the most infamous is the "chirping birds" problem under the hood until the engine is at its op temperature. very diconcerting issue for a 125K car. i would not be able to live with it with the demands i plan on making on my daily driver. and that is just for starters.

you really felt it was a bit underpowered? I have heard that before as well...and yes, especially in Top Gear....but i kept thinking it would feel slow to people who are used to testing 500hp supercars....

for normal peeps like me, i'd be happy with that 'underpowered' Aston! ha.

but yeah, performance wise, an R8 would walk over it...

lowest common denominator was the substance issue and my personal equation for it yielded no justification for a test drive. further, closest dealer is 2 hrs away, never had one i could drive anyway, and i could only imagine the headaches that distance could one day produce with regards to some of the aforementioned issues.