"Top Gear" sued over lies

[verytalldave]

More trouble for Top Gear team as show is sued over 'rigged' electric car test | Mail Online

Surprise surprise.................

 

[Scott_F]

I remember when that particular episode went out Tesla complained and said that what happened wasn't representative of their product.

The program makers response was that they were trying to show what could happen. In other words it was yet another silly scripted stunt by Top Gear.

 

[manalishi]

It was only a matter of time before someone got annoyed enough. Surprised it took this long.

Doesn't Wilman want to end TG anyway?

 

[camerafodder]

I'm always amazed at the influence that a show like top gear can excercise. If brains were leather, I doubt these three oafs combined would have enough to saddle a cockroach. They deserve all they get in my opinion. Why set out (allegedly) to denegrate a cutting edge product that is after all manufactured here in the UK?

 

[Druk]

^ and a pretty small cockroach at that.

 

[snoop51]

As someone points out in the comments if you don't like it don't watch it. Who's going to buy a Tesla anyway at £83000? Only the likes of Clooney who I would hazard a guess doesn't give a cr*p what Top Gear says anyway.

Quite frankly anyone who buys one of these green cars electric or hybrid needs there head looking at if they think they're saving the planet by purchasing one of them. Where the hell do they think the electricity comes from? Fairy dust? The manufacturing process for the batteries alone puts most conventionally powered vehicle way in front in terms of energy used. Of course you never ever ever see Toyota Prius running down the motorway in the fast lane running on petrol do you?

Green Cars My Ar*e

 

[snoop51]

I'm always amazed at the influence that a show like top gear can excercise. If brains were leather, I doubt these three oafs combined would have enough to saddle a cockroach. They deserve all they get in my opinion. Why set out (allegedly) to denegrate a cutting edge product that is after all manufactured here in the UK?

It's a light entertainment show, it's not meant to be taken seriously. It ceased being a car show years ago, it's an entertainment show which happens to have cars on it.

As for the Tesla being cutting edge, sorry I disagree anyone can take rechargeable batteries and shove them in something. Electric motors have been powering trains for years, they used to be huge DC things but about 12 years ago Adtranz to name one produced a train with small AC motors now used on the C2C line. The acceleration is phenomenal for something which weighs so much, Tesla have just reused the tech that's all.

When they can show me an electric car which recharges from a proper green source, runs for a week between charges and fits a full family in it then they may get my interest, until that point it's just a rich man's toy in the same league as remote control planes etc.

 

[Scott_F]

As someone points out in the comments if you don't like it don't watch it. Who's going to buy a Tesla anyway at £83000? Only the likes of Clooney who I would hazard a guess doesn't give a cr*p what Top Gear says anyway.

Quite frankly anyone who buys one of these green cars electric or hybrid needs there head looking at if they think they're saving the planet by purchasing one of them. Where the hell do they think the electricity comes from? Fairy dust? The manufacturing process for the batteries alone puts most conventionally powered vehicle way in front in terms of energy used. Of course you never ever ever see Toyota Prius running down the motorway in the fast lane running on petrol do you?

Green Cars My Ar*e

Of course we can switch off - but the program still has an obligation to present accurate and balanced information to those who do watch.

And despite your dismissive talk of fairy dust etc., emerging technologies will never be given a real chance to show what they can or can't do if they are mocked and derided by program makers on the look out for cheap stunts.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

As someone points out in the comments if you don't like it don't watch it.

I'm afraid it's not quite as simple as that though in this case, is it.... It's a case of a cocky knobhead (sic) who has never done an decent days work in his life and had everything handed to him on a plate, thinking that he can run roughshod over everything and everyone because of 'high ratings'.

Joking aside, these stupid tricks put peoples jobs at risk, British jobs at that.
I'm with you on the whole electric car fallacy thing though Snoop

 

[camerafodder]

I wasn't really meaning that snoop. The tesla is cutting edge in its concept and is really only made practical because of advancements in Lithium Ion battery technology also as you undoubtedly know electric motors develop full torque from the point that they are energised right the way through their rev range making an interesting proposition for a sports car. I don't think for one minute that the Tesla is 'green' in the conventional sense (although they have some interesting 'efficiency' figures on the website) but when charged it goes off like a greased weasel turd! I applaud the courage of the Tesla guys to take their concept to market. Yes we've been using it in Loco's for decades (and machine tools for that matter) but its the application that I feel is cutting edge.

My reference to Top Gear refers to the way in which your average 'gadget fanboy' type will actually be influenced by what Clarkson and his gimps say and the next thing you know we have a rumour that becomes a 'fact'.

 

[snoop51]

Of course we can switch off - but the program still has an obligation to present accurate and balanced information to those who do watch.

Because we all know everything else is true on the show eg. A Ford Fiesta storming the beaches with 3 marines in it shooting out of the windows or a ex drug dealers Mitsubishi being shot with 30mm cannon whilst Clarkson was driving it and him walking away! Those are balanced are they what about the caravan fire, the dropping of pianos on cars, the biased against anything which isn't a Ford, BMW or a Ferrari?
The show has never presented accurate, balanced information about anything, it will always be biased because it has 3 self opinionated pr*cks presenting it.

[/QUOTE]
And despite your dismissive talk of fairy dust etc., emerging technologies will never be given a real chance to show what they can or can't do if they are mocked and derided by program makers on the look out for cheap stunts.
[/QUOTE]

Watch Fifth Gear instead, although still not brilliant it's slightly more like a factual program.

Cheap stunts is what TG has been about for years, any manufacturer of anything "new" who opts to allow their product to go on TG should check the contract before allowing it. If they want serious programs to be made about their "new" product then don't give it to Clarkson, Hammond & the Lank haired one.

 

[snoop51]

I wasn't really meaning that snoop. The tesla is cutting edge in its concept and is really only made practical because of advancements in Lithium Ion battery technology also as you undoubtedly know electric motors develop full torque from the point that they are energised right the way through their rev range making an interesting proposition for a sports car. I don't think for one minute that the Tesla is 'green' in the conventional sense (although they have some interesting 'efficiency' figures on the website) but when charged it goes off like a greased weasel turd! I applaud the courage of the Tesla guys to take their concept to market. Yes we've been using it in Loco's for decades (and machine tools for that matter) but its the application that I feel is cutting edge.

My reference to Top Gear refers to the way in which your average 'gadget fanboy' type will actually be influenced by what Clarkson and his gimps say and the next thing you know we have a rumour that becomes a 'fact'.

I agree with what you are saying I just think it was a horrendous error of judgement by the Tesla team in allowing their product to be shown on a program known to deride anything which hasn't got a conventional power plant in it, without checking the contracts first.

IMHO the Tesla Team are at fault for not stating they didn't want the car shown in a bad light.

As for "average 'gadget fanboy' type" they couldn't afford a Tesla anyway and most are only interested in Impreza, Evo or M3 as their "dream wheels"

 

[Scott_F]

Because we all know everything else is true on the show eg. A Ford Fiesta storming the beaches with 3 marines in it shooting out of the windows or a ex drug dealers Mitsubishi being shot with 30mm cannon whilst Clarkson was driving it and him walking away! Those are balanced are they what about the caravan fire, the dropping of pianos on cars, the biased against anything which isn't a Ford, BMW or a Ferrari?
The show has never presented accurate, balanced information about anything, it will always be biased because it has 3 self opinionated pr*cks presenting it.

There is a huge difference between one of their silly games such as storming beaches and what was supposed to be an objective assessment of the Tesla where fairness and accurate facts should be paramount.

 

[snoop51]

There is a huge difference between one of their silly games such as storming beaches and what was supposed to be an objective assessment of the Tesla where fairness and accurate facts should be paramount.

Fair enough but see my post above in reply to camerafodder. Tesla surely knew what sort of show TG is, surely their legal team should have had this tied up prior to agreeing to the car being allowed into the hands of the 3 muppets.

They have not done a fair assessment of ANY vehicle since Clarkson was made main presenter. IMHO

 

[camerafodder]

IMHO the Tesla Team are at fault for not stating they didn't want the car shown in a bad light.

As for "average 'gadget fanboy' type" they couldn't afford a Tesla anyway and most are only interested in Impreza, Evo or M3 as their "dream wheels"

I agree that the Tesla team were silly not to safeguard their reputation.

I also agree about what 'gadget fanboys' can afford. I just worry about the 'rumours' that can kill a fledgling industry, just by being in the public domain, before it starts , leaving at the very least a big hill to climb....in your electric sports car of course!

 

[snoop51]

I agree that the Tesla team were silly not to safeguard their reputation.

I also agree about what 'gadget fanboys' can afford. I just worry about the 'rumours' that can kill a fledgling industry, just by being in the public domain, before it starts , leaving at the very least a big hill to climb....in your electric sports car of course!

Despite all bad publicity generation of electric by wind turbine hasn't been killed off yet, I know I earn my living putting the things up. I don't think the type of people who can:

A/ Afford a Tesla
B/ Have any interest in owning one

Would give a rats ass what Clarkson and his chums say, think or do.

Most who have any interest in running an alternative fuel vehicle are the type to already have, solar panels for hot water, photovoltaics for electric, ground source heat pumps for heating etc. Very few with those types of principles would be watching the show anyway. Let alone pay any attention to what was blatantly always going to be a biased interlude in between doughnutting a supercar around on a track or getting the back end out on an alpine type pass somewhere.

The show is there for one thing and one thing alone, ratings and unfortunately as we have dumbed down the general population through years of crap like TG, Eastenders, Corrie etc the fan base of sub humans who think it represents factual motoring reports has grown. Sad but the general standard of programming in UK has not only been put in the loo, it's been flushed too.

 

[Burger]

What a complete and utter pile of twaddle! (The situation, not anyones comments)

Firstly they're suing because they're an American company and it's the first word in their vocabulary. Clarkson didn't give the car a bad review, he actually praised it enormously on many fronts but simply pointed out its impracticalities. It won the drag race and I don't think anywhere it was presented in an unfair light. I'm sorry, but as stupid as Top Gear are, and as much as I don't like the scripting, I don't think even they would claim a car had a mechanical defect unless it actually did.

This is a company bleating because a popular programme simply pointed out the impracticalities of their business. Yes, that might damage their sales, but it doesn't make it false. Seems to me they must be on their way out.

Load of nonsense.

Regards.

 

[renault12ts]

What a complete and utter pile of twaddle! (The situation, not anyones comments)

Firstly they're suing because they're an American company and it's the first word in their vocabulary. Clarkson didn't give the car a bad review, he actually praised it enormously on many fronts but simply pointed out its impracticalities. It won the drag race and I don't think anywhere it was presented in an unfair light. I'm sorry, but as stupid as Top Gear are, and as much as I don't like the scripting, I don't think even they would claim a car had a mechanical defect unless it actually did.

This is a company bleating because a popular programme simply pointed out the impracticalities of their business. Yes, that might damage their sales, but it doesn't make it false. Seems to me they must be on their way out.

Load of nonsense.

Regards.

Whilst I agree that it was generally a good, even enthusiastic review, I do not think they should have faked anything (if that is what they did).

If the car did indeed run out of charge, and the brakes did fail and the engine did overheat, then fine. But if none of these things did happen, but merely could have happened then they were unfair.

 

[Mr E]

Not necessarily a fan of electric vehicles - especially considering, as some have mentioned, the impact of production. However, it's way things seem to be going, especially in terms of efficiency.

OK, so you don't get dramatic range, but then how many times a year does the average person need more than 200 miles in a day?

Taking the Tesla numbers - 4 hours @ 17KwH is a full charge. 68 KwH equals approx 37kg CO2 produced at the power station. For 220 miles, that's 105g/km - so not too bad. If you were paying 15p/unit, then those 220 miles would cost you £10. Or to put it another way, 7.4 litres of unleaded. That's 3.36l/100km, or 84 mpg in real money by comparison.

The i-MiEV is taking about 22KwH to charge, with a range of 90 miles. So with the same numbers, 6kg CO2 (42g/km) and costing £3.30.

At the moment, no-one in the industry is seriously talking about EVs replacing ICVs, especially with current technology. However, as a daily driver (average out 10k miles per year across 5 days per week (48 weeks) = about 40 miles per day) then it begins to make sense. If you look at the i-MiEV, that's going to cost about £1.70 per day - or to put it another way 1.3 litres of unleaded. How many vehicles can do 40 miles on 1.3 litres? (2.8l/100km or 101mpg)

As I say, there's a lot to be sorted out though - vehicle cost (i-MiEV is £24k!!), battery production/disposal, and so on. Yet the major OEMs see why it's worth investing in - and there is a lot of work going in in this area. None of those are currently saying (unlike Tesla) that you'd use their car for long, cross country/continent runs - that's why they are concentrating on the smaller citycar platform. But for the journeys where an ICV is most inefficient - short runs, city/town traffic - they begin to make a bit more sense.

 

[Scott_F]

Fair enough but see my post above in reply to camerafodder. Tesla surely knew what sort of show TG is, surely their legal team should have had this tied up prior to agreeing to the car being allowed into the hands of the 3 muppets.

It would be easy to blame the "3 muppets" but decisions on how items are presented in the program are taken in production meetings months in advance.

And although it does seem that Tesla were rather unwise, that still doesn't mean that the program has no responsibility to present the true facts in what was supposed to be a detailed assessment of the car.