Roadster on Top Gear

[vfx]

(And when looking at total miles traveled, should you include reduced-speed miles?)

Building on this thought.

It should be argued that the Tesla with it's smart energy system actually saves you from running out of fuel in the middle of nowhere.

Say you go racing through the hills buring up gasoline in your Lambo and without warning, you run out of fuel, Next thing you know you are walkin in the pouring rain begging for a red can. Knowing that that one gallon will only get you 4.1, maybe 11 miles down the road.

Try doing the same day of fun in the Tesla and if you were to run out, no surprises. It just powers lower to conserve and lets you drive to the nearest plug safe and dry. As you charge while eating lunch the Lambo guy trudges in cold and muddy.

 

[malcolm]

........it's a good thing that the BBC recanted their on screen insinuation that the Tesla ran out of juice.........

Link already posted yesterday: http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/17512-post209.html

 

[just-an-allusion]

Link already posted yesterday: http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/17512-post209.html

Yeah, I hate it when that happens....

 

[vfx]

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

Guess not

 

[JRP3]

Guess not

Too bad he missed the whole point of the original rant.

 

[vfx]

Too bad he missed the whole point of the original rant.

I almost did not post it because it was such a waste of time. he even asked for comments but sometimes I just say, why bother?

 

[doug]

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.

When I mentioned the car blogosphere, I meant in terms of the Roadster's US reputation. I'm assuming those here that saw the episode saw it online, and most of those people probably also read car blogs. You're certainly right to consider the wider market.

At any rate, the "controversy" is now outside the internet nerddom, and may be raising Clarkson's ire.

Jeremy Clarkson in Top Gear fakery row over electric car - Telegraph

But Clarkson denied the programme ever showed the car had stopped running.

"We never said once that the car had run out of power. The car had to be pushed into the warehouse because you are not allowed to drive cars into a building.

"We calculated that it would have run out of power after 53 miles but they can't argue with that because that is a fact."

And speaking about the allegations of misrepresenting the brake failure, the outspoken presenter: "Nobody gives a flying **** how the brakes failed. Whether it was a blown fuse or not, they were still not working."
...
A spokesman for Mr Clarkson said he did not want to comment further.

 

[doug]

The car had to be pushed into the warehouse because you are not allowed to drive cars into a building.


I suppose that's because of the exhaust fumes, of which the Roadster has none. Certainly feels like they used that footage as a deliberate misrepresentation.

 

[graham]

Awesome Clarkson photo...

I hope it does not go much farther than this with the he-said/she-said bit. Tesla will lose this battle. a) Clarkson has the bully pulpit, and will be much louder than Tesla and will cast them in a very childish light. b) While TG did exaggerate the problems, the fact remains that the Roadster did have problems. The "brake failure" (no matter how minor) is still unacceptable.

Tesla's best hope to come out of this is the quick admission that TG exaggerated some of their complaints (which they currently have) - don't push Top Gear further than that, or it will backfire.

 

[vfx]

Exactly, you don't want to get him mad.

 

[malcolm]

don't push Top Gear further than that, or it will backfire.

Agreed. Even though TG is more entertainment than serious reporting I think it's important to allow viewers to be adults and make up their own minds.

EVs are becoming more car-like. It would be unfortunate if EV fans become the worst of all the car-bores.

 

[GSP]

Exactly, you don't want to get him mad.

Absolutely. But as Doug pointed out, it may be to late. It's probably not smart for Tesla (or Tesla Fans) to push the point too hard.

I did get a kick from this quote from the telegraph.co.uk link:

"We calculated that it would have run out of power after 53 miles but they can't argue with that because that is a fact."

I guess it was a fact that they calculated it! Maybe with bad data and inaccurate, overly simplistic models (formula). In science it is necessary to prove that your model is accurate, or at least better than any others available. But, did someone say JC was an entertainer, not a scientist? :biggrin:

TG's 53 mi estimate is probably in the ballpark, IF the Tesla continued to run laps at top speed until the battery is exhausted.

I think it would be a great if Top Gear (or MythBusters :wink did a follow up where the Stig just kept lapping as fast as he could until the battery was exhausted. They could report the time for the first lap, second lap, etc. and comment on how the Tesla has to protect itself from overheating by reducing power (not the same thing as "overheating!"). Then they could show when the battery gets low and power is reduced even more to allow you to limp home. Then, they could compare the total distance to their 53 mi "calculation," and deride the car for having to slow down (this is TopGear, so derision is a must :tongue.

This would be a hugely entertaining segment for either TG or MythBusters, and the public would learn about just what the Roadster can, and can't, do. I think the public would be hugely comforted by knowing that the "limp mode" would let them get to a plug, vs. getting stranded.

GSP

 

[vfx]

... I think the public would be hugely comforted by knowing that the "limp mode" would let them get to a plug, vs. getting stranded....

I propose we (and Tesla) stop using the term, "limp".

 

[shark2k]

I propose we (and Tesla) stop using the term, "limp".

Would "protective" mode or "safe" mode work better? Since that is kind of what it is doing?

-Shark2k

 

[mt2]

...
I think it would be a great if Top Gear (or MythBusters :wink did a follow up ...

Hmm, MythBusters; not a bad idea! They have at least the same appeal in the US as Top Gear does in the UK, and they are right there in SF. They do questionable science, not unlike Top Gear - although better documented. They take viewer suggetions, and having Kari Byron tool around in a Redian Red Roadster would be a ratings booster. I'm sure Tesla Motors would be up for it if they saw it as a prime-time rebutal.

So, the myth is... what? That the Roadster really only gets less than a quater of the advertised milage?

 

[malcolm]

"Safe Mode" is a convenient shorthand that many people would understand immediately. Good choice

 

[JRP3]

So, the myth is... what? That the Roadster really only gets less than a quater of the advertised milage?

Lot's of myths to work on: EV's are slow, ugly, golf carts, have no range, and will leave you stranded. Not exactly typical Mythbuster stuff but it might work.

 

[GSP]

So, the myth is... what? That the Roadster really only gets less than a quater of the advertised milage?

I was thinking something like "After 53 miles of road racing, the Tesla Roadster will abruptly lose all power, and must be pushed into the pits to get a 32 hour (or whatever TG said) re-charge."

It would be excellent if they also tested range during "normal" driving, and on the EPA combined cycle, to prove the Roadster does get its advertised range of 244 mi.

GSP

 

[Palpatine]

It would be excellent if they also tested range during "normal" driving, and on the EPA combined cycle, to prove the Roadster does get its advertised range of 244 mi.

GSP

I think that some 3rd party needs to do that range test and confirm the range advertised by Tesla Motors. But Mythbusters is likely not the right one.

Now that 150 Roadsters are in private hands, I am sure that the numbers on real world range will become more known. I have heard that in standard mode (90% to 10%) that most owners believe 150 miles is expected even with fun driving (quick accelerations to the speed limit).

They need for the most reputable international car magazines and websites to confirm the range and other performance claims.

Top Gear has been discredited sufficiently with the web and main stream media coverage of the "faking" incident.

 

[vfx]

They need for the most reputable international car magazines and websites to confirm the range and other performance claims.

The EPA is the standard that all car makers use and buyers happily use the numbers on ICE cars to make comparison decisions.

The problem is that even though the EPA has certified the Tesla, there is still no other like cars to compare it to yet. That said. maybe some more independent testing may quell some fears, but really we just have to wait for some more EVs to get EPA numbers.