Roadster on Top Gear

[mpt]

I've never seen this video before. It's all very comical, at a stretch, until they crash the G-Wiz into the table and Clarkson puts on the serious tone. It's that intonation that transforms the piece from stupid to serious and the point where the damage is done.

I feel that Keith Johnston, former managing director of GoinGreen, the company behind the G-Wiz electric vehicle imports has a case.

 

[TEG]

connEVted: Tesla vs Top Gear - where is the line between entertainment and misrepresentation?

In the article:

"That video is...erm...significantly misleading. The table was actually built from one inch thick steel veneered with wood and mounted into the ground with 3 foot long stakes.
The chassis on the G-Wiz was cut in several places in order to ensure it crumpled correctly. How do I know? I met and spoke to the person who engineered the whole exercise..."

 

[dpeilow]

We don't have class action but if we did the entire industry probably has a case.

 

[JRP3]

Yeah that table didn't move an inch, had to be spiked into the ground.

 

[Jaff]

The time has come for Top Gear's bullying farcical "reviews" to end.

One gets the feeling that if individual auto makers had grown a pair & stood up to TG's bullying (as an industry) years ago, TG might actually have become a valid & worth while source of automotive information for the general viewing public. Shame is, TG did not need to stoop to the chicanery and buffoonery of it's current format...it would have been extremely entertaining after a factual review to see the stig plying his craft every show...

 

[dpeilow]

Clarkson is laughing all the way to the bank. The others aren't doing too badly either. Clarkson could afford to buy 50 Teslas and trash the lot and still be a millionaire. When they had a factual show he was just another hack. That's the difference.

 

[Norbert]

I suppose using a steel table anchored into the ground and disguised as wooden, could *perhaps* still be seen as an entertaining way to conduct a crash test, since it is quite obvious even in a fast-paced video that it had to be faked (although the impact of the image remains).

However making physical cuts into the chassis of a commercial product ???

 

[Jaff]

:smile:You have the benefit of knowing his past, so I trust your judgment here David (re Clarkson being just another hack when being a factual reporter).

To me, if Clarkson had to buy his vehicles for the show (Tesla or not), it puts the vehicle manufacturers in a much stronger position to challenge and refute TG's absurdities.

The vehicle manufacturers could issue blanket statements in the press, on TV, etc. advising the public that they do not furnish their vehicles to the show due to the high number of inaccuracies in Clarkson's reporting, yada yada yada...if an action such as TM's had been started even 5 years ago, think of the overwhelming body of evidence that the automotive industry as a whole could bring against TG.

Either way, Clarkson does laugh all the way to the bank...in today's society, spin doctors and prevaricators are always well paid...but at least his consumer impact would be somewhat marginalized.

Clarkson is laughing all the way to the bank. The others aren't doing too badly either. Clarkson could afford to buy 50 Teslas and trash the lot and still be a millionaire. When they had a factual show he was just another hack. That's the difference.

 

[Norbert]

Tesla V Top Gear: Top Gear’s Track Record With Electric Cars

But given the BBC’s past reputation with all cars electric do we see Tesla winning its David vs Goliath match? We hate to say it, but it's looking unlikely.

 

[Norbert]

Just noticed the fire under the G-Wiz after the crash, which was surely artificial as well. Didn't noticed it the first time, but it is probably what creates the smoke cloud...

 

[Jaff]

I thought the funniest part was where Clarkson said (to the effect) "hear that sound?...that's acid..." :biggrin::biggrin:

I wonder if Clarkson's hearing is acute enough to be able to hear the difference between a leaking MiMH battery and a Lith-Ion one? :biggrin::biggrin::wink:

 

[mpt]

Thing is, the batteries in the G-Wiz are in a sort of bucket in the frame... in the middle, if they leaked they'd still only fill the bucket underneath the floor inside the car, not at the front.

G-Wiz Batteries

 

[rabar10]

Don't like the road test? So, sue me! - driving.ca - April 7th

So, this is what it's come to. You will like electric cars. You will see the beauty of our engineering, the elegance of our design and you will agree that electricity is the future of all automotive propulsion.

Or we will sue you.

Reissued on April 8th in the National Post and again today (18th) in the Montreal Gazette, where I saw it pop up in a Google News link.

Interesting how his shilling for the FCX Clarity in the original post (simply quotes TG and then says "I agree with every word" - way to dig deep there buddy) is missing from the two reissued pieces.

 

[Dragon]

Wow, so many posts here.
Didn't read everything, I only want to share what was my experience with the show.

I already intended to buy a Tesla Roadster and found this test on Youtube. I watched it and by the end I was shocked, cause I couldn't believe the car went powerless in such short time. I was skeptic only because I did read and watch a gazillion of other tests before. So I did some research on Google and was relieved as I found out the truth.

So therefore I am convinced that this report from Top Gear scared some interested people away, but only people who haven't looked for an electric sports car before. Nonetheless I stay with Tesla for suing this guys, these years of lies are an image loss.
Compare it to this, for example: They review the new Ferrari FF, drive it and let the gas run out with a surprised face on the driver. They push it back into the garage and claim that the car must consume some 60 liters (16 gallons) per 100 km (60 miles). When Ferrari gets back the car, the tank is still half full. Ferrari would sue the hell out of Top Gear!

 

[Jaff]

I just posted this in the National Post website...

"David,

I just finished reading your article and feel somewhat dismayed that you are echoing Top Gear’s ridiculous conclusions regarding the Tesla Roadster. Both you and Top Gear need to remember that the Roadster is a vehicle to drive in the real world, not a racing track.

The Top Gear review was disingenuous at best.

The intent of their actions insofar as pushing the Roadster off of their road course inferring it had run out of charge (when it hadn’t), stating that the brakes had broken (when the malfunction was in fact a blown fuse), and calculating track range then trying to slough it off as comparable to real world range leads the viewer to draw unfair conclusions about the Roadster and EV’s in general.

Jeremy’s utterance that “It’s a shame that in the real world, it just doesn’t work” makes me wonder about his state of mind. I’m not sure that a viewer with even a modicum of intelligence would consider speeding around a closed circuit race track at 100 mph for nearly an hour is remotely a “real world” comparison.
Thus, Top Gear’s referral to the estimated track time before the battery is exhausted is meaningless, unless of course if you know of any unpatrolled highways where one can drive for an hour at 100 mph or better.

The mileage rating for the Roadster was EPA certified. Now we both know that EPA certifications for ICE vehicles are rarely matched by real world driving. For some reason, you seem to think that an EV should be exempt from the laws of physics that cause driving in the real world to differ from a range test on a dynamometer (wind / elevations / energies lost from continuous stop and go traffic, etc.)
The bottom line is that just as an EV’s EPA range will be reduced by these factors, an ICE vehicles EPA range will reduced in the same manner.

Spirited driving also is a major cause of lower mileage. If you continuously drive your Roadster at 85 mph on the highway, you will not achieve EPA range estimates. If you continuously drive an ICE vehicle at 85 mph on the highway, you will not achieve your ICE vehicles EPA range estimate either.
I fail to see why this is a surprise to you.

Your comments on the recharge time of the Roadster are also not real world in my opinion. I do not know of any Roadster owner who has not either installed a high powered charger in their home, or, installed a 50 amp circuit with a NEMA 14-50 (modern dryer or RV jack) in their garage. Recharging with these units varies between 3.5 to 6.5 hours for a full standard charge. Most Roadster owners recharge their vehicles at night (taking advantage of cheaper hydro rates) and allowing them to leave their house with a full “tank” in the morning. Again, for some reason, both you and Jeremy seem to have “forgotten” to mention this in your reviews.

Perhaps the thing that puzzles me the most about your article is your statement that “Top Gear is the most acclaimed automotive TV show”.
The regular viewer / staunchest fans of Top Gear fully admit that it is an entertainment show, not to be taken seriously.

Herein lays the problem. The casual viewer of Top Gear does not understand this and views Top Gear as a credible, factual source of automotive information to be used when considering which vehicle to purchase.

Being that you’re in the automotive reviewing business, I fail to understand why you consider Top Gear worthy of the title “most acclaimed automotive TV show”.

Regardless of this, I am here to offer you a ride…a day away from the office so to speak.

I propose that we meet in a few weeks, and I’ll take you on a nice 200-300 km ride here in Southern Ontario. I will even let you drive a bit, and will treat you to lunch.

Are you willing to review the Roadster in a real world scenario as opposed to Top Gear’s ludicrous racing track extrapolation to real world fiasco?

Jaff"





Google News link.

Interesting how his shilling for the FCX Clarity in the original post (simply quotes TG and then says "I agree with every word" - way to dig deep there buddy) is missing from the two reissued pieces.[/QUOTE]

 

[felixtb]

jaff,

you have to be a little careful when you talk about real world scenarios and non real world. I have just bought a roadster and will receive it next week FINALLY! However, being European and living in that real world, I am used to driving legally at a much higher pace than you are on the American continent. and yes there are thousands of kilometer stretches of as you call it un patrolled roads (not un patrolled but free speed!) on the autobahn in Germany. so in that real world of where a lot of European petrol heads love to take their SUPERCARS, as tesla often does call the roadster due to it's phenomenal acceleration (that's part of my reason for buying) the milage between charges becomes more limited and suddenly even those three to six hours of recharging between does make for a completely different driving experience than the petrol head is used to. Sure he has to stop VERY often and pay extraordinary amounts of money to the petroleum companies, especially in Europe where gas is murderously expensive. however, in the petrol heads mind he does not give a flying F. because this is what he loves to do. and if he is not on the road in Germany or in southern France or Spain running about in beautiful sencery at breakneck speeds then YES he would go to the track and thrash his SUPERCAR around. So the real world for you and soon me and the real world for clarkson and his likes are different.

I think this is one of the reasons why we Europeans are screaming for three phase or DC fast charging for the roadster. this way our habits of driving these types of cars would be better satisfied.

I do think you have to want to be Eco-friendly to consider buying a roadster and use it as the everyday sports car. but you might also want to keep the old Elise or what ever for the weekend thrills at SPA or the Nord-schliffe. because there in that real world of the euro petrol head of the likes of clarkson et al, the roadsters real limitations become a real factor.

so hopefully they, the petrol heads will become more Eco aware and notably buy a roadster as well to use as their primary, everyday not supercar but sportscar for their office comuting and then keep the old petrol guzzler for those weekends of endurance fun.

so in conclusion I think the suit has some merit, but it also has some real problems to win. because it all depends on who's real world is more real. and even the occasional viewer of TG would instantly recognize that clarkson and the boys are very serious PETROL HEADS. I sincerely hope the suit will not damage Tesla's reputation but probably not as they seem to be going three phase and DC charging with the S which will once and for all extinguish the fear of not running out, but having to live that much slower long stoping life we have such a hard time to take in....... before we live it.

PS sorry for being a little bit inconsistent, it's a little hard to write when you do not see all the text at once!, but I think you get my point!

felix b.

 

[Jaff]

Felix, since my Roadster's wheels will never "set foot" in Europe, I'm speaking of real world in the terms of my own backyard (no autobahn) and obeying the speed limits (within reason say 5-10 km over) as most drivers in my country do.

Regardless of what Tesla, Ferrari, or any other exotic or ""supercar" choose to call themselves, if you drive as you suggest you can in your backyard over here, you might as well call your vehicle a "garden gnome" because after you've lost your license, that's all it'll be.

 

[stopcrazypp]

you have to be a little careful when you talk about real world scenarios and non real world.
felix b.

There's always going to be a "real world" case that is going to consume a lot of energy. You may have a case of a person who frequently goes to tracks and that's "real world" for them.

I think "real world" as most people understand it will instead be the kind of route an average Roadster driver would typically drive, and from most accounts it seems to be mainly (spirited) daily driving, with more focus on acceleration. Doing top speed runs on the autobahn seems to be a niche application that the Tesla wasn't designed for in the first place (that's why the top speed is low compared to other cars in its segment). In fact most EVs (even performance ones) are not going to be designed for top speed, as that is the most energy consuming and least efficient way to travel (most of your energy is going to pushing air).

You can make an argument about carving mountain roads, but in that case the Tesla seems to still be able to travel pretty far (mountain roads usually have lower average speed and lots of opportunity for regen).

 

[felixtb]

Regardless of what Tesla, Ferrari, or any other exotic or ""supercar" choose to call themselves, if you drive as you suggest you can in your backyard over here, you might as well call your vehicle a "garden gnome" because after you've lost your license, that's all it'll be.

that's exactly what I mean. the real world is different in different places and therefore your now garden gnome is my weekend thrasher with out fear because my real world is different than yours and clarksons is different again. this is my fear for the suit

cheers.

 

[felixtb]

You can make an argument about carving mountain roads, but in that case the Tesla seems to still be able to travel pretty far (mountain roads usually have lower average speed and lots of opportunity for regen).

I agree that here there is more range but as I said my worry is not range anxiaty and that is not the petrol heads worry either. the worry is wait anxiety! sitting by my plug looking at the beautiful day turning into evening before I can get back to thrashing that mountain road again. That's the real world clarkson is talking about and we just have to respect that. just as much as he has to repect the real world the tesla was made for and this is why I say the suit has some merit BUT it will be a tough battle to have it stick on TG and the BBC...... this is my worry!