Roadster on Top Gear

[vfx]

wet liberal weekly rant-tastic

On Top Gear, Tesla, and CFX

(not for work or kids)

YouTube - wet liberal weekly rant-tastic

 

[just-an-allusion]

OnCars' review of the Tesla is much, much better...and more indepth.

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/17362-post1.html

 

[rsquared99]

I would thinki even a dry conservative could understand and agree with that rant.

 

[malcolm]

Top Gear admit the car didn't need pushing

BBC: Top Gear Tesla didn't run out of juice ? Register Hardware

according to the Top Gear spokeswoman, the tested Tesla was filmed being pushed into the shed in order to show what would happen if the Roadster had run out of charge.

Wow

Thanks guys. I have such problems visualising what that might look like.

 

[doug]

Top Gear admit the car didn't need pushing

BBC: Top Gear Tesla didn't run out of juice ? Register Hardware

Well I'm glad the car blogosphere seems to be picking this up. I don't think Tesla should push too hard, though, since it could back fire. This victory added to the fact that most of the review was quite positive is indeed a great result.

Top Gear: Shocking Scandal! Top Gear Tesla Didn't Run Out Of Juice - Jalopnik

 

[graham]

I don't think Tesla should push too hard, though, since it could back fire.

Yes, I totally agree. Victory achieved on this one. Back off and let the public figure it out for themselves. Anything more from Tesla itself will backfire.

 

[Kevin Harney]

I would say that Rachel can put this victory squarely in her quill. Good Job !!:smile:

 

[malcolm]

Agreed.

Elon? Step away from the lawyers.

 

[JRP3]

Top Gear admit the car didn't need pushing

BBC: Top Gear Tesla didn't run out of juice ? Register Hardware

Wow

Thanks guys. I have such problems visualising what that might look like.

Yes, it looks surprisingly similar to what happens when you run out of gas :wink: Maybe they could also demonstrate what getting a flat tire looks like?

 

[JRP3]

Now if they just retract all the pro hydrogen nonsense we'll be all set. That was probably more damaging than anything they did to the Roadster :frown:

 

[vfx]

A few good commenters out there point out the TG "one gallon challenge" where 4 supercars were filled with exactly one gallon of gas and insanely raced around the track.

The Audi won at 4 miles before running out. The Ferrari got 1.7 miles. That would put it's total avalible miles per tank at 44 miles.

We never see any of those cars getting pushed off the track.

 

[just-an-allusion]

I don't think Tesla should push too hard, though, since it could back fire.

I agree, too, and admit that much of my animosity towards the Top Gear review is due to their obviously pandering to the still predominant ICE crowd even though they have the future right in front of them, let alone in their very hands...perhaps it was out of some long ingrained (you know, like inbreeding) expression of loyalty to the old school tech of ICE's (still pandering though)?!

 

[DaveD]

The Audi won at 4 miles before running out. The Ferrari got 1.7 miles. That would put it's total avalible miles per tank at 44 miles.

I'd like to see that race run again, with the Tesla included. I've seen 35KWh quoted as the energy contained in a gallon of gasoline. Charge the Roadster with that amount of energy and race it against the gassers.

 

[dpeilow]

Well I'm glad the car blogosphere seems to be picking this up. I don't think Tesla should push too hard, though, since it could back fire. This victory added to the fact that most of the review was quite positive is indeed a great result.

It is good that the car blogosphere has picked up the story, but Top Gear apparently has a global audience of 385 million. I'm sure this has hit Tesla's brand in the wider market - in a way that it will be hard for internet sources to undo.

 

[graham]

It is good that the car blogosphere has picked up the story, but Top Gear apparently has a global audience of 385 million. I'm sure this has hit Tesla's brand in the wider market - in a way that it will be hard for internet sources to undo.

I agree, but I think Tesla has done as much as they can prudently do at this point in time with trying to discredit TG. They can and should link to the retraction on their own site, but other than that, their best defense is continuing to deliver good product out in front of everybody.

 

[vfx]

The TG lie will be out there forever. We just need to stomp when the uninformed and the Kents of the blogo-world light the fires.

 

[malcolm]

More sites are picking it up:

BBC responds to Tesla's Top Gear complaints - Autoblog

Why'd they push that Tesla into the garage? Top Gear responds - AutoblogGreen

Edited to Add: http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/12/top-gear-fudged.html

 

[JRP3]

Gorr strikes again:

The problem with a battery car is that the meter that show the state of charging is not working and will never work because a battery work and then stop to work when depleted and it's impossible to know at a given instant when you gonna be stuck on the road.

The newer, dumber Kentbot.

 

[malcolm]

Huh? Since when is a battery gauge harder to read than a fuel gauge? Whatever your car, you drive it a few times and you get used to the readouts.

Found this over at FinalGear. The info comes from the test TG did, where they gave five supercars just one (imperial) gallon of fuel and then raced them:

After reading another comment about this elsewhere, I got curious. So I got out the 11x01 and looked up the fuel tank sizes of the cars that took part in this. The results are sorted by the range these cars would have around the track, starting with the shortest. The data is the (imperial) MPG figure as worked out by Top Gear, (imperial) tank size in gallons, the distance the car would cover on one tank and what the manufacturer claims it will cover in combined circle.

The Ferrari 599 did 1.7 mpg, has a 23 gal tank, would go 39.1 miles on the track and do 306 miles according to the manufacturer.

The Aston Martin DBS (approx.) did 2.6 mpg, has a 17 gal tank, would go 44.2 miles on the track and do 199 miles according to the manufacturer.

The Tesla Roadster did go 55 miles on the track and would do 220 miles according to the manufacturer.

The Audi R8 did 5.0 mpg, has a 16 gal tank, would go 80.0 miles on the track and do 320 miles according to the manufacturer.

The McLaren Mercedes SLR (approx.) did 3.9 mpg, has a 21 gal tank, would go 83.9 miles on the track and do 410 miles according to the manufacturer.

The Lamborghini Murcielago LP640 did 4.1 mpg, has a 22 gal tank, would go 90.2 miles on the track and do 242 miles according to the manufacturer.

The verdict is that the Tesla Roadster is well within the figures when it comes to the differences of racetrack economy and claimed economy as well as overall range. One might argue that this is a different set of cars, and that models closer to the Tesla would put out better figures. Nevertheless, The Tesla manages to cover exactly a quarter of the distance the manufacturer claims for combined cycle, which is not that bad by any standards.

Could add in cost of fuel/electricity and purchase price.

 

[vfx]

Found this over at FinalGear. The info comes from the test TG did, where they gave five supercars just one (imperial) gallon of fuel and then raced them:
Could add in cost of fuel/electricity and purchase price.

This is great!

Yeah a grid with the following added for each car.

Fuel cost -per gallon. per tank, per mile, per gallon(GPM).

Actual traveled miles on a full tank.

The thing is though, the TG films says they figured that the Roadster would go 55 miles. Everyone is quoting it as what TG actually did in the Tesla but that number was probably never noted.
(And when looking at total miles traveled, should you include reduced-speed miles?)