Top Gear!

[Retro Formula 1]

Running costs of a Merc will be astronomical though.

I think buying a new car only works if you're going to keep it forever, otherwise you're merely paying the depreciation so someone else can have a nice car.

Really? I have recently got rid of my CLK Rag Top. The one I quoted does 40+ combined and from personal experience, apart from servicing, I paid for one headlamp bulb in 3 years.

About £3 if I remember. RIPOFF!!!!!!!!

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Lots of Jaguars this week. This is a good thing.

[Daniel]

Jags are crap though.

Good episode so far :)

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Jags are crap though.


:mad:

on to the ignore list.

[driveace]

My last Merc C class 220 d,cost me apart from servicing which I did myself,£9 for a lower ball joint,£112 for 4 tyres,and wiper blades (3) at £5 ,in 15 years of use from new in 95 to selling two months ago,over 35K miles.Don't call that expensive at all

[Daniel]

My last Merc C class 220 d,cost me apart from servicing which I did myself,£9 for a lower ball joint,£112 for 4 tyres,and wiper blades (3) at £5 ,in 15 years of use from new in 95 to selling two months ago,over 35K miles.Don't call that expensive at all

You only replaced your wiper blades 3 times in 15 years? Do you live in a desert with no insects in the air?

[Gregor-y]

My last Merc C class 220 d,cost me apart from servicing which I did myself,£9 for a lower ball joint,£112 for 4 tyres,and wiper blades (3) at £5 ,in 15 years of use from new in 95 to selling two months ago,over 35K miles.Don't call that expensive at all
I'm staggered at how few miles cars in the UK seem to accumulate.

Rowan Atkinson did not disappoint, both as a guest and with his lap time.

[Retro Formula 1]

Popped down to see what was going on with Filming today. Just a GTR going around with Stiggy and Rowan Atkinson doing SiaRPC bit. Might be interesting to see that actually because Rowan has a bit of experience. We had his GT350 in in the Workshop for a couple of years but it might be slightly different in the Kia.

What did everyone think of the GTR? It really was rapid during testing.

Nice lap by Mr bean. So controlled and a lesson in how to drive a tight track correctly. (My mistake about the GT. It was a Falcon now I remember it in Pastle blue. Toooo many cars.)

[Captain VXR]

What did everyone think of the GTR? It really was rapid during testing.

Nice lap by Mr bean. So controlled and a lesson in how to drive a tight track correctly. (My mistake about the GT. It was a Falcon now I remember it in Pastle blue. Toooo many cars.)
I liked it, they'd be one of the first cars I'd buy if I somehow won the Euromillions
Rowan Atkinson was one of the best guests they've had in a while

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I'd buy the XKR everytime over the GTR.

[Daniel]

I'd buy the XKR everytime over the GTR.

To quote Tom Cruise..... Why would you do that?

[Brown, Jon Brow]

To quote Tom Cruise..... Why would you do that?

Whenever I see an XKR I always get a tingling sensation. The Nissan, whilst I appreciate that it is technically a better car, just doesn't make me tingle.

[Captain VXR]

I'd buy the XKR everytime over the GTR.

With the extra money you'd spend on the XKR, you could instead spend it on making the GTR into a complete beast
Nissan = £72000
Jaguar = £97000
Then upgrade to a spec like this:
Switzer e900 GTR Ethanol Powered Supercar: Driven (http://gas2.org/2010/08/20/switzer-e900-gtr-ethanol-powered-supercar-driven/)

[Daniel]

With the extra money you'd spend on the XKR, you could instead spend it on making the GTR into a complete beast
Nissan = £72000
Jaguar = £97000
Then upgrade to a spec like this:
Switzer e900 GTR Ethanol Powered Supercar: Driven (http://gas2.org/2010/08/20/switzer-e900-gtr-ethanol-powered-supercar-driven/)

Yes but if you step out in that you'll look a bellend.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

With the extra money you'd spend on the XKR, you could instead spend it on making the GTR into a complete beast
Nissan = £72000
Jaguar = £97000
Then upgrade to a spec like this:
Switzer e900 GTR Ethanol Powered Supercar: Driven (http://gas2.org/2010/08/20/switzer-e900-gtr-ethanol-powered-supercar-driven/)

You're missing the point. That still doesn't make me tingle. I'd rather have a standard XKR for £75k.

Also, why did Clarkson even compare the XKR-S with the GTR and not the equivalent Aston, Porsche or Audi?
Back when Jaguar and Aston were both owned by Ford, Clarkson used to always complain that the XK's were watered down as to not take sales from Astons.

[Daniel]

You're missing the point. That still doesn't make me tingle. I'd rather have a standard XKR for £75k.

Not to be funny, but the tingling seems to be more related to the badge. Why not put the badge on the Nissan and have the best of both worlds?

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Not to be funny, but the tingling seems to be more related to the badge. Why not put the badge on the Nissan and have the best of both worlds?

When looked at in the flesh I've always found the 2nd generation XK to be one of the fittest cars currently made. In my opinion the Nissan looks like AIDS. :)

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Not to be funny, but the tingling seems to be more related to the badge. Why not put the badge on the Nissan and have the best of both worlds?

When looked at in the flesh I've always found the 2nd generation XK to be one of the fittest cars currently made. In my opinion the Nissan looks like AIDS. :)

[Daniel]

When looked at in the flesh I've always found the 2nd generation XK to be one of the fittest cars currently made. In my opinion the Nissan looks like AIDS. :)

I agree somewhat. Whilst the GTR isn't a looker, the Jag isn't exactly that great. You can see that it's a DB9 ripoff with an E type style nose grafted on and a bit of Jaguarness added. Tbh it looks pretty unresolved to me.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I agree somewhat. Whilst the GTR isn't a looker, the Jag isn't exactly that great. You can see that it's a DB9 ripoff with an E type style nose grafted on and a bit of Jaguarness added. Tbh it looks pretty unresolved to me.

All current Astons and the last two XK's have all been DB7 ripoffs. :p

[Daniel]

All current Astons and the last two XK's have all been DB7 ripoffs. :p

So that makes it OK?

[Rollo]

For £75k you could have a VXR8 and enough petrol to run it for a week. The VXR8 puts out 430bhp; that ought to be enough power.

Heck for £75 you could have a VXR8 and a VXR8 Maloo. I don't think that there'd be many other cars on sale in Britain in which you could do 140mph with a grand piano in the back.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

So that makes it OK?

I don't think that drawing inspiration from a DB7 and the E-Type (two of the best looking machines ever made) is a bad thing. :)

And hardly surprising considering Ian Callum designed the DB7, DB9 and XK.

[Retro Formula 1]

Without a doubt the Kitty is the best looking of the 2 in the same way that Cheryl Cole is better looking than Susan Boyle but when it comes to singing, I know which one I'd choose.

[wedge]

XKR-S looks absolutely horrible. Even the seats.

[Mark]

I'm staggered at how few miles cars in the UK seem to accumulate.

.

Fuel is very expensive and the roads are very busy and we are a relatively small island with most places not too far away.

[Daniel]

I'm staggered at how few miles cars in the UK seem to accumulate.

Rowan Atkinson did not disappoint, both as a guest and with his lap time.

35k miles in 15 years is exceptional. Caroline's car is more typical at 17 years and 220k miles.

[Captain VXR]

For £75k you could have a VXR8 and enough petrol to run it for a week. The VXR8 puts out 430bhp; that ought to be enough power.

Heck for £75 you could have a VXR8 and a VXR8 Maloo. I don't think that there'd be many other cars on sale in Britain in which you could do 140mph with a grand piano in the back.
I'd rather buy a used, 400-500 BHP modified but not chavved up Evo/Impreza/Cosworth/Skyline/Supra etc for far cheaper

[rah]

Liked Rowan. Loved the GTR. Looks like a weapon on the roads.

[CaptainRaiden]

TG gave a crushing blow to the Jaguar's chances with this comparison. Who in the right mind would actually buy that crap Jag for almost 30,000 pounds more? :eek: It doesn't look any better, and would be absolutely MAULED by the GTR on the road or on the track. Loved Rowan's inch perfect fastest lap.

[Daniel]

TG gave a crushing blow to the Jaguar's chances with this comparison. Who in the right mind would actually buy that crap Jag for almost 30,000 pounds more? :eek: It doesn't look any better, and would be absolutely MAULED by the GTR on the road or on the track. Loved Rowan's inch perfect fastest lap.

There are still people like Jon who want something like a Jag which isn't as good as the opposition ;)

[CaptainRaiden]

There are still people like Jon who want something like a Jag which isn't as good as the opposition ;)

And it's not even like it's maybe 5000 or 6000 pounds more, it's almost 30,000 pounds more!! What would one pay that ridiculous amount for? Ahem, *cough* looks *cough* or some false sense of national pride about British engineering? For 97,000 pounds you could buy a Nissan GTR (which is already better than the Jag in every aspect) + two more cars or buy yourself a better house. :p

[Daniel]

And it's not even like it's maybe 5000 or 6000 pounds more, it's almost 30,000 pounds more!! What would one pay that ridiculous amount for? Ahem, *cough* looks *cough* or some false sense of national pride about British engineering? For 97,000 pounds you could buy a Nissan GTR (which is already better than the Jag in every aspect) + two more cars or buy yourself a better house. :p

Exactly. I've never been one for the whole national pride thing, but the Brits seem to really be up for it. There's a reason why most British cars aren't popular outside of Britain ;)

[CaptainRaiden]

Exactly. I've never been one for the whole national pride thing, but the Brits seem to really be up for it. There's a reason why most British cars aren't popular outside of Britain ;)

Also, Jaguar is now no longer entirely British. It's a wholly owned subsidiary of Tata Motors. So, even if the cars are still made in Britain at Jaguar's factory, the money goes to India. :p

[Malbec]

Exactly. I've never been one for the whole national pride thing, but the Brits seem to really be up for it. There's a reason why most British cars aren't popular outside of Britain ;)

Which would be fine if it just meant that Brits tended to buy more British cars, but that feeling of national pride extends to the media and even worse to the industry itself...

I've always been stumped as to why companies like Rover or the old motorbike companies felt that people should pay more for their stuff than 'inferior' Japanese or German products just because they were British... I guess thats why they disappeared.

[Robinho]

Like I said, "real" racing drivers. :p Besides that might be the one of the reasons why Villeneuve isn't in F1 right now. Also, I don't get how that is relevant. That wasn't a guy being passionate about his car, that was his freakin huge ego costing his team money and inconvenience.



Like I said in my earlier post, regular folks like us would never be able to get a supercar to the limit on normal roads to know the difference, EVER. That MAY BE possible at a track day, but they'd be afraid to wreck it. Probably only the folks who have money to throw, like millionaires or billionaires, would do it. So, we're really talking about a really small group here. Also, not all billionaires t necessarily have to be good drivers. There are also morons.

At one of the tracks in India where I took part in the national karting championship, Mr. Vijay Mallya was the guest of honor. Before the race he uncovered his brand spanking new Porsche Carrera GT, wore an Arai helmet, squeezed his fat ass into Alpinestars racing overalls, got buckled up and everything, wanted to showboat, there was applause when he started the engine, he accelerated and then drove it straight into the wall wrecking the half a million dollar supercar.

Clarkson, Plato and Needell can all say what they want to, I still am free to make up my mind. Probably Mclaren didn't pay them enough marketing money. :p And I would still prefer the Mclaren because of the way it looks, sounds and what was said about it. A sweet handling supercar is my dream car, but well, us mere mortals can only dream. :D If you've ever struggled with an ill handling car during a race, you'd know what I'm talking about. And mind you, the Mclaren at full throttle would also need 'taming'. It's not like the car suddenly has 200% grip and you just turn at 200 mph without braking. But the best part about that car is you would have full confidence going into a corner, because you know exactly what the car is capable of. I have never met anybody in my life who just "loves" catching understeer or oversteer.

It appears that McLaren took the criticism of Clarkson on Top Gear, as well as those from EVO, Autocar and various other reviews rather more seriously and have made several changes to the cars actually going on sale, including a louder induction noise under heavy acceleration, light movement on the gear change paddles and an improved feel on turn in. It appears that they are very much realising that if they want this car to be the equal or better of the Ferrari 458, which is being touted as the benchmark they do need to improve certain areas. I have no doubts the McLaren was a lready a stunning car, but it might already be a little bit better as a result of the reviews that you so quickly derided, including Clarkson's

[Daniel]

It appears that McLaren took the criticism of Clarkson on Top Gear, as well as those from EVO, Autocar and various other reviews rather more seriously and have made several changes to the cars actually going on sale, including a louder induction noise under heavy acceleration, light movement on the gear change paddles and an improved feel on turn in. It appears that they are very much realising that if they want this car to be the equal or better of the Ferrari 458, which is being touted as the benchmark they do need to improve certain areas. I have no doubts the McLaren was a lready a stunning car, but it might already be a little bit better as a result of the reviews that you so quickly derided, including Clarkson's

Did you get a copy of EVO through the door too? :) I doubt Ferrari would allow that. In fact here's what Ferrari do How Ferrari spins (http://ca.jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins)

I'll take a McLaren in Papaya Orange thanks :)

[Robinho]

as for the Jag v GTR thing, they really aren't genuine competitors, the Jag is a 2 seat sports GT coupe. It finished to a high standard and isn't built to be the last word in handling or trick electronics. It might be a base of a GT3 race car, but that will be a very different animal.

The GTR is all about showcasing the very best in electronically assitied chassis and driving dynamics, about going as quickly as possible, not about cruising, comfort or style. They are both very good at what they do, but they don't stack up as direct competitors for me. And being the absolute fastest is not the alsways the last word when you enjoy driving, its the feel you get from the car when driving it wherever you do your driving. If you spend a lot of time on the track then the GTR is more likely the car for you. As for buying British, we might be the only people buying Britis cars (more histroicvally than now as there really aren't any truly British mass manufacturers left), but the split of manufacturers is far wider in the UK than most other countries in Europe, where the French predominantly drive Renault, Peugeot or Citroen, the Germans VW, Audi, BMW, Merc and Opel, Swedes more Volvos and Saabs, Italians Fiats and Alfas. it was partly because the UK embraced the imports over the national manufactueres that they died out (and partly because they had a prolonged period of producing ****e)

[Robinho]

Did you get a copy of EVO through the door too? :) I doubt Ferrari would allow that. In fact here's what Ferrari do How Ferrari spins (http://ca.jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins)

I'll take a McLaren in Papaya Orange thanks :)

I did, and i have to say I'm very impressed with McLarens response and speed of implementing the changes. I think there are a lot of us who desperately wanted the McLaren to be the perfect car, and it seems it was so close in so many areas that these few changes might make all the difference.

[Daniel]

Which would be fine if it just meant that Brits tended to buy more British cars, but that feeling of national pride extends to the media and even worse to the industry itself...

I've always been stumped as to why companies like Rover or the old motorbike companies felt that people should pay more for their stuff than 'inferior' Japanese or German products just because they were British... I guess thats why they disappeared.

And because if I'm honest they British cars of the last 4 decades have in general been inferior in both quality and design to their continental and Japanese counterparts.

The British Leyland stuff and later Rover Group products were dismal. While their counterparts were starting to make advances in technology they were still churning out crap with live rear axles and so on. Type K series into google and the third result is head gasket, what does that tell you about the K series and its ability to blow head gaskets? ;)

Fords are better but take a look at previous model Ka's, the last Escorts and similar vintage Mondeos. They rust like buggery! Heck even Focii (though to be fair I don't think they were ever UK produced) are starting to rust. To me rust on the body of a car these days isn't acceptable at all.

[CaptainRaiden]

It appears that McLaren took the criticism of Clarkson on Top Gear, as well as those from EVO, Autocar and various other reviews rather more seriously and have made several changes to the cars actually going on sale, including a louder induction noise under heavy acceleration, light movement on the gear change paddles and an improved feel on turn in. It appears that they are very much realising that if they want this car to be the equal or better of the Ferrari 458, which is being touted as the benchmark they do need to improve certain areas. I have no doubts the McLaren was a lready a stunning car, but it might already be a little bit better as a result of the reviews that you so quickly derided, including Clarkson's

That's fine with me as long as they don't make the car's handling worse than before, just so that some people can get "thrills" from the back stepping out in corners. IMO if a car handles as perfectly as the new Mclaren, people really shouldn't complain. They should be happy that because of high level engineering they're now able to make a car which is just a precision beast. I don't find anything wrong with the looks either. Call me weird, but I prefer the look of the Mclaren than the IMO ugly Ferrari 458, especially its front arrangement.

[Robinho]

That's fine with me as long as they don't make the car's handling worse than before, just so that some people can get "thrills" from the back stepping out in corners. IMO if a car handles as perfectly as the new Mclaren, people really shouldn't complain. They should be happy that because of high level engineering they're now able to make a car which is just a precision beast. I don't find anything wrong with the looks either. Call me weird, but I prefer the look of the Mclaren than the IMO ugly Ferrari 458, especially its front arrangement.

i believe the issue with the handling, that i read anyway, was the lack of feeling on turn in which in turn left the driver with a lack of confidence that the car was doing what the inputs requested, rather than providing an edgy handling car. It was roundly praised for its cornering ability and ride and in turn the speed it could hold in a long corner, but the initial turn in was what was raised and has apparently been addressed. Therefore it didn't handle perfectly, and the changes should take it up to a level where the 458 currently rules, which again has been proclaimed as one of the best handling cars ever.

and personally speaking i don't think i have a favourite, it changes from day to day, they are both exceptional, both fantastic looking in their own ways and I'll probably never drive let alone own either

[CaptainRaiden]

i believe the issue with the handling, that i read anyway, was the lack of feeling on turn in which in turn left the driver with a lack of confidence that the car was doing what the inputs requested, rather than providing an edgy handling car. It was roundly praised for its cornering ability and ride and in turn the speed it could hold in a long corner, but the initial turn in was what was raised and has apparently been addressed. Therefore it didn't handle perfectly, and the changes should take it up to a level where the 458 currently rules, which again has been proclaimed as one of the best handling cars ever.

I'm guessing Top Gear's track is a power track and that's why the Mclaren smoked the Ferrari 458 there. But then the car that topped the time-sheets, Ariel Atom, is almost a formula based car with massive downforce compared to the Mclaren and the Veyron, so that means handling is also a big factor there. Is there a lap time comparison between these two cars at a track which favors handling? I'm guessing the Mclaren is the better handling of the two, but they prefer the Ferrari for its better feel, not really better handling.


and personally speaking i don't think i have a favourite, it changes from day to day, they are both exceptional, both fantastic looking in their own ways and I'll probably never drive let alone own either

Well, ain't that the truth. I love the new Mclaren, but probably would never be able to buy it. And actually my dream car would be a Nissan GTR with performance upgrades, so it handles just like the Mclaren and goes like the Veyron. :D *Daydreaming* Buy it for 70,000 pounds, and then put 30,000 pounds worth of upgrades, and have an absolute beast on your hands. *Daydreaming*

[Retro Formula 1]

Well, looked like a Rat was screaming round the track today. Hope he gets a bit more forward momentum rather than sideways on his fastest lap. Also a bit of fun with a F1.

[Robinho]

EVO timed the Ferrari and McLaren round the Bedford Autodrome, which has a pretty good mix of handling and power, on a flying lap, and the Ferrari was just 1 sec quicker, although with more track biased tyres the McLaren cut that to something like 3 tenths. In the latest issue they reckon the changes would make some of the difference up, so in reality there is next to nothing between them in standard form round a track. Also worth bearing in mind that the Top Gear lap is taken from a standing start, which has a large bearing, even including the Atom, which is the quickest accelerating car going really

[Mark]

Excellent racing feature tonight.

[Robinho]

want that Lotus, if i had £650k spare and my own race track I'd be all over one of them

[Daniel]

want that Lotus, if i had £650k spare and my own race track I'd be all over one of them

Do you actually own the car though? I was under the impression it was merely a service.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

There are still people like Jon who want something like a Jag which isn't as good as the opposition ;)

I don't really care how fast a car is around the Top Gear test track. I don't give a **** if the GTR can go round the Follow-Through at 92mph and the Jag can only do it at 88mph. It's irrelevant.

I will never spend my own money on a car that looks like a dogs dinner, such at the GTR. No matter how fast it can take the Follow-Through. The Nissan is just a car that science designed, and that just doesn't excite me at all. As for the price issue, I said earlier, I'd still prefer a standard XKR at the same price as the GTR.

Cars aren't a product like a fridge or a lawn mower that you buy just with your head. You buy cars just as much with your heart. So I don't care if I end up with something that is technically inferior. I don't plan to ever own a Japanese car, but hopefully I'll own plenty of 'hopeless' Jags and Alfa's. :)

[Malbec]

You buy cars just as much with your heart. So I don't care if I end up with something that is technically inferior. I don't plan to ever own a Japanese car, but hopefully I'll own plenty of 'hopeless' Jags and Alfa's. :)

I think thats a little unfair on Japanese cars.

Ever thrashed a Honda Type R Integra with a hand finished engine to an inch of its 8700 redline? Felt its tail step out in a way no European maker dared to do back in the late 90s?

How about a smooth rotary engine coupe that feels more like a turbine to drive matched to a well handling RWD chassis.

Or a thrummy torquey flat four ahead of you with a rally-bred chassis?

None of those cars I describe lack character or passion.

Jaguars do nothing for me, nor do Astons. Why not? Because they're all modular constructions spun off the same platform designed and built with a bottom line at heart and a market niche to fill. Each designed specifically not to take sales away from the models above and below. Nothing there for the heart I'm afraid.

Now Alfa? Guilty of platform sharing and everything I criticise Aston and Jaguar for without the build quality but... I still want one. Lancia too.

[Daniel]

I think thats a little unfair on Japanese cars.

Ever thrashed a Honda Type R Integra with a hand finished engine to an inch of its 8700 redline? Felt its tail step out in a way no European maker dared to do back in the late 90s?

How about a smooth rotary engine coupe that feels more like a turbine to drive matched to a well handling RWD chassis.

Or a thrummy torquey flat four ahead of you with a rally-bred chassis?

None of those cars I describe lack character or passion.

Jaguars do nothing for me, nor do Astons. Why not? Because they're all modular constructions spun off the same platform designed and built with a bottom line at heart and a market niche to fill. Each designed specifically not to take sales away from the models above and below. Nothing there for the heart I'm afraid.

Now Alfa? Guilty of platform sharing and everything I criticise Aston and Jaguar for without the build quality but... I still want one. Lancia too.

Quite agree.

Passion is something that ****y motoring journalists use as an excuse for something being a poor car, or an underperforming car.

I don't think Jon has ever driven any of the things you've mentioned, probably too busy driving his 1.2 8v Grande Punto which is a Corsa with passion :p

If that Jag didn't have a Jag badge on it I doubt most people would look twice.

[CaptainRaiden]

I think thats a little unfair on Japanese cars.

Ever thrashed a Honda Type R Integra with a hand finished engine to an inch of its 8700 redline? Felt its tail step out in a way no European maker dared to do back in the late 90s?

How about a smooth rotary engine coupe that feels more like a turbine to drive matched to a well handling RWD chassis.

Or a thrummy torquey flat four ahead of you with a rally-bred chassis?

None of those cars I describe lack character or passion.

Jaguars do nothing for me, nor do Astons. Why not? Because they're all modular constructions spun off the same platform designed and built with a bottom line at heart and a market niche to fill. Each designed specifically not to take sales away from the models above and below. Nothing there for the heart I'm afraid.

Now Alfa? Guilty of platform sharing and everything I criticise Aston and Jaguar for without the build quality but... I still want one. Lancia too.

^^ This. I wonder how many people actually ignore really magnificent cars just because they're Japanese or Korean. IMO the Japanese have built some of the best cars in the last three decades. I especially love the Mazda RX-7, what a beast. Also, call me unconventional, I like the looks of the Nissan GT-R than the Jaguar. I also don't get what's the big deal with the Aston Martins, seriously. The Bond movies and Top Gear have made what's a so-so looking car into somewhat of a hyped up phenomenon. It's big, clunky, never wins anything in world competitions. The Porsche 911 ate it for breakfast around a track, with much lesser BHP.

What's the big deal about looks really? It's not like the Jag is so jaw droppingly beautiful. It's an OK looking car with crap engineering. Doesn't deserve the extra money.

http://www.jaguar-addict.co.uk/acatalog/jaguar-xkr-s-pictures.jpg

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2009/01/02_nissan_gt-r_specv_opt.jpg

I think the GT-R looks awesome. Also, knowing that it's a ridiculously stonking fast, neck-breaking monster, adds to its appeal.

[Dave B]

Regarding Top Gear itself, last night's episode was one of the dullest I've watched. The Jensen piece was pointless, Saint Bob was mildly amusing, Jean Alesi was wasted, and the demolition challenge was just boring.

[Daniel]

Regarding Top Gear itself, last night's episode was one of the dullest I've watched. The Jensen piece was pointless, Saint Bob was mildly amusing, Jean Alesi was wasted, and the demolition challenge was just boring.

The Interceptors tv theme bit was hilarious, but it was only a tiny bit of the episode. Agree with you on the rest though.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I don't think Jon has ever driven any of the things you've mentioned, probably too busy driving his 1.2 8v Grande Punto which is a Corsa with passion :p


:laugh: :up:




What's the big deal about looks really?

'That's like asking what was so great about Marilyn Monroe. If you have to ask the question in the first place then you will never understand'

I don't understand the obsession with speed on road cars. Maybe my opinion will change when I own something with more power or have enough free time to do track days, and if I was buying a car with the intention of using it for track days I'd get a Caterham or Westfield. But when a modern 1.2 supermini is comfortable at 85mph on the outside lane of a motorway, a young expensive to insure driver can't justify the cost of a fast car.

[Malbec]

If that Jag didn't have a Jag badge on it I doubt most people would look twice.

What do you think about the new Lancia Chryslers then? Looks like we'll be getting Lancias in the UK with a different name on them. I've always wanted a new Lancia but not sure I'd stretch that wish so far that I'd be prepared to buy one with a Chrysler badge on it...

[Malbec]

I don't understand the obsession with speed on road cars. Maybe my opinion will change when I own something with more power or have enough free time to do track days, and if I was buying a car with the intention of using it for track days I'd get a Caterham or Westfield. But when a modern 1.2 supermini is comfortable at 85mph on the outside lane of a motorway, a young expensive to insure driver can't justify the cost of a fast car.

Personally I don't like the Skyline GTR either for the same reason, its way too fast.

Even if you head 'down' to BMW Z4 territory the cars are still way too fast to enjoy on the road safely.

Stick with classics, they'll give far more fun 90% of the time even when you're at or below the speed limits.

[CaptainRaiden]

'That's like asking what was so great about Marilyn Monroe. If you have to ask the question in the first place then you will never understand'

I don't understand the obsession with speed on road cars. Maybe my opinion will change when I own something with more power or have enough free time to do track days, and if I was buying a car with the intention of using it for track days I'd get a Caterham or Westfield. But when a modern 1.2 supermini is comfortable at 85mph on the outside lane of a motorway, a young expensive to insure driver can't justify the cost of a fast car.

I have never found Marilyn Monroe "beautiful". She was a bimbo at best, a product of Hollywood propaganda, with next to no acting skills. I like other unconventional, non-mass-propagated beauties which have not won some pageant or I should like them because other people say so. Sure, if it's only superficial looks you're concerned with, then I won't bother with any of those two cars. There are much better looking cars in the market for much, much cheaper.

The discussion was about how can Jag justify that kind of price for giving that less, not about what you would choose as your everyday car. I don't think anybody on this forum is realistically looking to buy either of those cars. But if I was in the hypothetical situation of choosing one, I would choose the GT-R every time. I'll be shocked if after that TG episode, anyone would be a big enough sucker to buy the Jag for 30,000 GBP more. I'm not willing to pay more and get inferior machinery, just because of some "tingling" and "looks" that for some reason only the Brits find pretty.

As is the case with Monroe, and that Jaguar, beauty is only skin deep, and that doesn't interest me one bit.

[Retro Formula 1]

Cars are like women. Some like them cheap, some expensive, some like vintage whereas others go for new models. Fat, thin, Single seaters or mpv's, European, Japanese, American or whatever.

Me, I like driving lots of different ones as often as possible :D

[Daniel]

What do you think about the new Lancia Chryslers then? Looks like we'll be getting Lancias in the UK with a different name on them. I've always wanted a new Lancia but not sure I'd stretch that wish so far that I'd be prepared to buy one with a Chrysler badge on it...

I like the Delta, the Ypsilon is OK, but apparently the interior is a bit cheap and, well the others are just rebadged Chryslers so for me would be a no go.

[Daniel]

I don't understand the obsession with speed on road cars. Maybe my opinion will change when I own something with more power or have enough free time to do track days, and if I was buying a car with the intention of using it for track days I'd get a Caterham or Westfield. But when a modern 1.2 supermini is comfortable at 85mph on the outside lane of a motorway, a young expensive to insure driver can't justify the cost of a fast car.

I'm sorry, but if you think your GP is "comfortable" @ 85mph then I'll have what you're smoking!!!!!

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I'm sorry, but if you think your GP is "comfortable" @ 85mph then I'll have what you're smoking!!!!!

More comfortable than walking.

[Retro Formula 1]

Well, looked like a Rat was screaming round the track today. Hope he gets a bit more forward momentum rather than sideways on his fastest lap. Also a bit of fun with a F1.

Sorry, I should have said F1 lookalike.

Don't know if it's still there but Hams military vehicle was still parked around the corner Thursday. Wonder if they've forgotten about it. Finders keepers :D

[MrJan]

There are still people like Jon who want something like a Jag which isn't as good as the opposition ;)

How many people that own a GT-R or an XKR would be able to actually tell the difference, in terms of speed, when on the road?

I agree with Jon, not on the Jag part but on the GT-R just not doing it for me. Yes it has brutal acceleration, yes it has great torque and road holding, but it's still leaves me feeling 'meh'. A tidy MK1 Mexico would be left for dead by a GT-R, but that doesn't mean I don't want one more than the Nissan. An E-Type would be blown into the weeds but guess what, yup I'd rather own one than the GT-R (in fact I'd be willing to pay over the odds if it was a choice between the two). F*** me, if I had 70k burning a hole in my pocket I'd rather knock it all on one of these Alfa Romeo 2000 GTV Bertone for sale, classic cars for sale uk (Car: 141870) (http://www.classiccarsforsale.co.uk/classic-car-page.php/carno/141870) than to chuck it on the GT-R.

And ultimately, as pointed out, it's pointless in the UK. Even my less than a grand, 160bhp (when new) falling apart 'Jap crap' will exceed the NSL before I hit the redline in 2nd gear.

And you know the thing that really brings it home for me? The GT-R is the sensible choice, not in terms of all cars available, but in comparison to the XKR and ones that I've listed above. And I just can't bring myself to make the sensible choice when it comes to cars, it all comes down to what feels right. That's why I'm still spunking my money on fuel for a car that runs on petrol, 8 months or so since I decided that I needed a diesel that was cheap to run. It's why I've repeatedly made silly offers on diesel cars that will never be accepted, and it's why I've repeatedly walked away and got back into my impractical 2-seater that I can't really afford.

Anywhoo, I enjoyed TG last night. It was ridiculous and stupid but if that's not what you want then it's been clear for the last 5 years that Top Gear isn't the show for you. Now to scour the internet and buy a tank, shame it'll get beaten off the lights by some guy in a Skyline ;)

[Brown, Jon Brow]

How many people that own a GT-R or an XKR would be able to actually tell the difference, in terms of speed, when on the road?

I agree with Jon, not on the Jag part but on the GT-R just not doing it for me. Yes it has brutal acceleration, yes it has great torque and road holding, but it's still leaves me feeling 'meh'. A tidy MK1 Mexico would be left for dead by a GT-R, but that doesn't mean I don't want one more than the Nissan. An E-Type would be blown into the weeds but guess what, yup I'd rather own one than the GT-R (in fact I'd be willing to pay over the odds if it was a choice between the two). F*** me, if I had 70k burning a hole in my pocket I'd rather knock it all on one of these Alfa Romeo 2000 GTV Bertone for sale, classic cars for sale uk (Car: 141870) (http://www.classiccarsforsale.co.uk/classic-car-page.php/carno/141870) than to chuck it on the GT-R.

And ultimately, as pointed out, it's pointless in the UK. Even my less than a grand, 160bhp (when new) falling apart 'Jap crap' will exceed the NSL before I hit the redline in 2nd gear.

And you know the thing that really brings it home for me? The GT-R is the sensible choice, not in terms of all cars available, but in comparison to the XKR and ones that I've listed above. And I just can't bring myself to make the sensible choice when it comes to cars, it all comes down to what feels right. That's why I'm still spunking my money on fuel for a car that runs on petrol, 8 months or so since I decided that I needed a diesel that was cheap to run. It's why I've repeatedly made silly offers on diesel cars that will never be accepted, and it's why I've repeatedly walked away and got back into my impractical 2-seater that I can't really afford.

Anywhoo, I enjoyed TG last night. It was ridiculous and stupid but if that's not what you want then it's been clear for the last 5 years that Top Gear isn't the show for you. Now to scour the internet and buy a tank, shame it'll get beaten off the lights by some guy in a Skyline ;)


If speed and performance is so important than why not buy a Caterham R500 for £30k less than the GTR?

[Mark]

That's a good point. If you want a track day car, then you might as well buy a real track car.

There are plenty of road cars with more than enough power to be fun but you don't have to have a supercar.

[CaptainRaiden]

I don't think people are getting the point. We're only talking about those two cars there, not the whole market. Of course, I would never even think about buying any of those. But let's say, hypothetically, you had 100,000 GBP and you wanted to buy a 2-door coupe supercar. You narrowed it down to those two cars. If you are a Brit, and you love the look of the Jag, are you willing to pay 30,000 GBP extra for a car that is technically inferior but looks prettier?

Or even 5000-6000 GBP more for a technically inferior, but better looking car?

[Daniel]

That's a good point. If you want a track day car, then you might as well buy a real track car.

There are plenty of road cars with more than enough power to be fun but you don't have to have a supercar.

But the segment wasn't strictly about the use of the car on a track. Handling and acceleration translate to the real world as well.

I can have fun on the road in my 500, heck there's a lot more fun to be had in the Subaru with almost 2 times the power but to be let loose in a GTR on the road would be fun.

[Daniel]

How many people that own a GT-R or an XKR would be able to actually tell the difference, in terms of speed, when on the road?

I agree with Jon, not on the Jag part but on the GT-R just not doing it for me. Yes it has brutal acceleration, yes it has great torque and road holding, but it's still leaves me feeling 'meh'. A tidy MK1 Mexico would be left for dead by a GT-R, but that doesn't mean I don't want one more than the Nissan. An E-Type would be blown into the weeds but guess what, yup I'd rather own one than the GT-R (in fact I'd be willing to pay over the odds if it was a choice between the two). F*** me, if I had 70k burning a hole in my pocket I'd rather knock it all on one of these Alfa Romeo 2000 GTV Bertone for sale, classic cars for sale uk (Car: 141870) (http://www.classiccarsforsale.co.uk/classic-car-page.php/carno/141870) than to chuck it on the GT-R.

And ultimately, as pointed out, it's pointless in the UK. Even my less than a grand, 160bhp (when new) falling apart 'Jap crap' will exceed the NSL before I hit the redline in 2nd gear.

And you know the thing that really brings it home for me? The GT-R is the sensible choice, not in terms of all cars available, but in comparison to the XKR and ones that I've listed above. And I just can't bring myself to make the sensible choice when it comes to cars, it all comes down to what feels right. That's why I'm still spunking my money on fuel for a car that runs on petrol, 8 months or so since I decided that I needed a diesel that was cheap to run. It's why I've repeatedly made silly offers on diesel cars that will never be accepted, and it's why I've repeatedly walked away and got back into my impractical 2-seater that I can't really afford.

Anywhoo, I enjoyed TG last night. It was ridiculous and stupid but if that's not what you want then it's been clear for the last 5 years that Top Gear isn't the show for you. Now to scour the internet and buy a tank, shame it'll get beaten off the lights by some guy in a Skyline ;)

Christ almighty that 105 is overpriced and it's not even a particularly pretty one with the ugly stepped 2000 GTV grille.

Tbh I don't think I'll ever buy a diesel car. Petrol is just so much more fun and with the advancements of late petrols can be pretty economical too if you drive them right. Putting diesel in your car is just such a joyless way to go motoring IMHO.

[MrJan]

Likewise the development of diesel engines means that they're getting much more fun to drive, you just have to drive it in a different way.

[Daniel]

Likewise the development of diesel engines means that they're getting much more fun to drive, you just have to drive it in a different way.

They're better, but I still don't think they're properly fun to drive.

[MrJan]

They're better, but I still don't think they're properly fun to drive.

But then you have to weigh up the money saved against the extra fun you can get from a petol. And as time goes by the fun that you're able to have is only going to diminish as roads become busier and speed limits stricter.

[Daniel]

But then you have to weigh up the money saved against the extra fun you can get from a petol. And as time goes by the fun that you're able to have is only going to diminish as roads become busier and speed limits stricter.

I don't buy the whole busier roads and stricter speed limits bs. Speeding enforcement here is very lax compared to back in Australia. In the 5 years I was driving in Australia I got 4 speeding fines and 1 point on my licence. Been in the UK for 5 years and have probably done 2 or 3 times the mileage I did in Australia in that time and no fines, just being pulled over once I've been here and to be fair what i was doing did look suspicious.

Plenty of roads to have fun on as well :)

[Daniel]

Meant to say as well that with the Euro V emissions standards and the ones coming in the future, diesels will be handicapped more than petrols. You'd be surprised at the consumption figures modern turbocharged engines are doing ;)

[MrJan]

Watch this space with regard to speeding. I wasn't saying it's bad now, but it's definitely getting worse. I also appreciate that other countries are much stricter, I've just come back from Ontario where (if you're over 50km/h over the limit) you get a $10,000 fine, road side license suspension and road side vehicle conviscation. It's only a matter of time before we get that kind of thing being introduced over here.

And with respect you're hardly placed to talk about busier roads, 5 years isn't really that long to spend in a country and judge what the traffic is like. I'm more going by what my old man says. He used to drive pretty enthusiastically back in the mid to late 70s and he now says that it's a long way from what it used to be. He even drives a lot slower than he did 10 years ago because he says that there is so much risk with the rise in traffic numbers. Feel free to produce some statistics that prove him wrong though.

[Daniel]

Watch this space with regard to speeding. I wasn't saying it's bad now, but it's definitely getting worse. I also appreciate that other countries are much stricter, I've just come back from Ontario where (if you're over 50km/h over the limit) you get a $10,000 fine, road side license suspension and road side vehicle conviscation. It's only a matter of time before we get that kind of thing being introduced over here.

And with respect you're hardly placed to talk about busier roads, 5 years isn't really that long to spend in a country and judge what the traffic is like. I'm more going by what my old man says. He used to drive pretty enthusiastically back in the mid to late 70s and he now says that it's a long way from what it used to be. He even drives a lot slower than he did 10 years ago because he says that there is so much risk with the rise in traffic numbers. Feel free to produce some statistics that prove him wrong though.

When I'm talking about busy roads I'm saying that if you try you can find some nice quiet roads.

With regards to speeding, if anything it's getting better, loads of counties are scrapping their speed camera schemes.

[ioan]

Speeding?!
Is it speeding doing 90 km/h where there are no restrictions even though the car in front is only doing 50 while it's driver holds tight to his steering wheel in each turn?
If yes then I am doing a lot of it, still I've never got a fine for my driving habits.
You can get a lot of pleasure from driving fast if you do it properly.

[wedge]

Regarding Top Gear itself, last night's episode was one of the dullest I've watched. The Jensen piece was pointless, Saint Bob was mildly amusing, Jean Alesi was wasted, and the demolition challenge was just boring.

I really enjoyed the first half/two-thirds

The Jensen was terrific. Not the stereotypical Jezza review considering its an updated muscle car.

The Intercepters would make a brilliant tv show, even if it would be an Austin Powers rip-off.

This series/season has been rather good, the consistency is a bit better.

[Malbec]

F*** me, if I had 70k burning a hole in my pocket I'd rather knock it all on one of these Alfa Romeo 2000 GTV Bertone for sale, classic cars for sale uk (Car: 141870) (http://www.classiccarsforsale.co.uk/classic-car-page.php/carno/141870) than to chuck it on the GT-R.

Lovely car but as already mentioned thats a steep price for the model, and it isn't even the 1750GTV...

Now if I had 70k in my pocket I'd buy one of these:

2003 HONDA VTR 1000 SP2 | eBay (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2003-HONDA-VTR-1000-SP2-/330593438218?pt=UK_Motorcycles&hash=item4cf8e78a0a#ht_1292wt_1141)

for 6k, spend another k or so returning it back to original spec. There, I've already got something quicker than a GTR for a tenth of the price.

Then I'd have one of these please:

Richard Thorne Classic Cars » Lancia & Classics (http://rtcc.co.uk/index.php?do=lanciaclassics&car=e2c0be24560d78c5e599c2a9c9d0bbd2)

A series 1 for 12k. Something I've always wanted.

Now for some waft. Can't make my mind up between these two:

Richard Thorne Classic Cars » Lancia & Classics (http://rtcc.co.uk/index.php?do=lanciaclassics&car=a597e50502f5ff68e3e25b9114205d4a)
French Classics | Citroen DS, Citroen HY Vans for Sale (http://www.frenchclassics.co.uk/cars/For+Sale/Citroen+DS/Citroen+DS23I.E+Pallas/212247960)

Though I'd prefer a semiautomatic for the Citroen. I'll probably go for the DS because I don't want two Lancias.

So thats 36k or so I think. What to do with the rest of my money? I think I'll press the boring button and go for one of these:

Ducati Multistrada 1200 (http://www.multistrada.ducati.com/jspducatimultistrada/index.jsp?lang=en)

for everyday which should take me up to 50k.

And with the rest? Think I'll go for a bloody nice holiday.

All for the price of a GTR....

[Bezza]

35k miles in 15 years is exceptional. Caroline's car is more typical at 17 years and 220k miles.

Probably about time she got a new car ;)

[Daniel]

Probably about time she got a new car ;)

Why? Only a person who doesn't know much about cars thinks that a car is worn out because it goes over 200k miles :)

[rsmith16]

What did folks think of last night's episode. Well the last item in particular - the disabled servicement planning on doing Dakar. Amazing bunch of guys.

[Dave B]

I missed last night's programme and for the first time wasn't bothered. It's on my Sky hard drive but I'm not sure I'll get a chance to watch it. For me, it's gone from "must-see" to "meh".

[Daniel]

I missed last night's programme and for the first time wasn't bothered. It's on my Sky hard drive but I'm not sure I'll get a chance to watch it. For me, it's gone from "must-see" to "meh".

Fast forward through the Louis Walsh bit..... the rest is actually decent enough.

[Daniel]

It was yes, truly inspirational and I hope they make it to the start. They all spoke about their experiences with such bravery and it was hard watching when one of the chaps broke down with Hammond, but apart from the physical injuries it highlighted how much these guys have to deal with day to day. A nice segment overall.


One thing I noticed was that they weren't wearing their HANS devices properly in the Freelander, I hope if they do the Dakar they wear them properly.

[Daniel]

I'm sure it'll be a requirement and will be checked when they enter the actual event.

Your equipment doesn't get checked for how you're wearing it when you enter an event, simply that it is there, that it's functional and not damaged. The straps on their belts were simply too loose to hold the HANS device in place or the belts were under the HANS device, and not above as is meant to be. If you watch again you'll see what I mean.

http://onebadwheel.com/img/articles/hans-device-02.gif

[306 Cosworth]

The clips they showed when the HANS was above the belts was only from 1 run and not several runs. You've got to bare in mind this was their first ever off road event, and first time in competition.

[Daniel]

The clips they showed when the HANS was above the belts was only from 1 run and not several runs. You've got to bare in mind this was their first ever off road event, and first time in competition.

I guess, it's not a criticism, I just hope someone shows them how to use it properly that's all :) It would be very sad if either of them got injured even further. Their HANS devices seemed to be used properly in the Wildcat which was good.

[Malbec]

First Tesla, now Nissan.

Nissan hits back at Top Gear - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/top-gear/8676473/Nissan-hits-back-at-Top-Gear.html)

I know modes of transport Jeremy doesn't like don't get a fair showing on Top Gear but this is stretching things too far.

[52Paddy]

I think the part about the disabled parking bays is a blown out of proportion on the account of Disabled Motoring UK, to be honest. But the 40% charged battery did an injustice to the report on the car - speaking as someone who did not actually see the episode, by the way.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Something I've always wanted to know.

Why do disabled people get to use pay-and-display car parks for free?

[Mark]

They don't always. Quite a few around here still charge. I guess the point is that quite often disabled people cannot use public transport or 'walk' to a destination so they need the parking places and offering them for free allows them to access the local businesses.

[Daniel]

First Tesla, now Nissan.

Nissan hits back at Top Gear - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/top-gear/8676473/Nissan-hits-back-at-Top-Gear.html)

I know modes of transport Jeremy doesn't like don't get a fair showing on Top Gear but this is stretching things too far.
Completely agree. I don't see why Top Gear should be allowed to lie like this.

[Sonic]

Completely agree. I don't see why Top Gear should be allowed to lie like this.

Did they lie? I'm fairly certain they never claimed the car was fully charged. Merely that the car had a range of 14 miles left, and the nearest charge point was 30 odd away.

[Daniel]

I'm sorry henners but misrepresenting a product is not on

[Rollo]

Misrepresentation? How?

[Daniel]

Misrepresentation? How?

Jeez I can't think how.......

[CaptainRaiden]

And again the annoying "not wild enough" crap from Hammond on the Lambo Aventador segment. :mad: Why they are bashing good handling cars these days is beyond me. I'm sorry but it's just idiotic.

Teams running in several GT championships around the world, who slave and slave to find the perfect handling setup would be quite happy to run a good handling Lambo, thank you very much. And that competition environment is where these cars will be pushed to the max anyway, so what's the fuss? Nobody is gonna feel the difference EVER between the new Lambo and the old one in normal road conditions.

Why don't they break the steering column and put sand in the gearbox? A lot of this "fun" they're seeking will follow for sure.

[Sonic]

Back on the electric car topic. I could (just) about understand Nissan's point if it were only electric cars that TG lambasted for poor range. Was it 'the worlds greatest road' episode, when jezza's Lambo ran dry? I don't recall a single complaint, or cries of misrepresentation then.

[Mark]

The point they were making was the time taken to recharge NOT the range.

[Sonic]

The point they were making was the time taken to recharge NOT the range.

Exactly. Even if the Leaf had been run from full on the show they would have still run it flat. This is a total non-story.

[rsmith16]

And the biggest bit I picked up was that where ever they were when he was down to about a dozenish miles of range that the nearest official charging point, as picked up by the Nissan's Sat-Nav was about 35 & then 75 miles away.

The local council office wasn't any help in finding once closer either.

He also said that he really quite liked the car - well built, comfortable, well equipped etc but until the range / durability / lifetime of the batteries used improved then there were other cars that were "better."

[Mark]

In fact James May commented on driving efficiently because recharging will take so long. I don't remember any specific complaints about the range on full charge. I do wonder if Nissan actually watched the feature.

[Daniel]

In fact James May commented on driving efficiently because recharging will take so long. I don't remember any specific complaints about the range on full charge. I do wonder if Nissan actually watched the feature.

Yes, the point was that it took ages to recharge, but if they'd been like normal people and actually fully charged the cars then they wouldn't have run out so soon. Even Fifth Gear managed to have an electric car segment without being bellendtastic and they also showed how long it took to charge the car.

[Sonic]

Yes, the point was that it took ages to recharge, but if they'd been like normal people and actually fully charged the cars then they wouldn't have run out so soon. Even Fifth Gear managed to have an electric car segment without being bellendtastic and they also showed how long it took to charge the car.

Yoink! I am shamelessly stealing the phrase 'bellendtastic'.

[Rollo]

Jeez I can't think how.......

From the Top Gear website:
Transmission (http://transmission.blogs.topgear.com/2011/08/02/electric-cars-charges-answered/)
So yes, when we set off, we knew we would have to recharge at some point, because that was an experience we wanted to devote part of the film to. Now granted, James and Jeremy’s stopover – which included brass rubbings, adult scrabble and tattoos – was more knockabout than an average motorist would experience, but the consumer points coming out of the film were quite clear:

1) Electric cars are still very expensive.
2) The recharging infrastructure is patchy.
3) The range readout varies enormously, unlike the information given by a petrol gauge.
4) The Leaf is a very good car per se, and there’s nothing wrong with electric motors, but the battery, in our view, remains the Achilles’ heel of the whole package.

I think that that's all fairly reasonable.
Misrepresentation is a a false statement of fact; that was never done. Nissan may have come out of it looking badly, but the big picture point that as it stands owning an electric car is not as viable as it could be is still perfectly valid.

[Daniel]

From the Top Gear website:
Transmission (http://transmission.blogs.topgear.com/2011/08/02/electric-cars-charges-answered/)
So yes, when we set off, we knew we would have to recharge at some point, because that was an experience we wanted to devote part of the film to. Now granted, James and Jeremy’s stopover – which included brass rubbings, adult scrabble and tattoos – was more knockabout than an average motorist would experience, but the consumer points coming out of the film were quite clear:

1) Electric cars are still very expensive.
2) The recharging infrastructure is patchy.
3) The range readout varies enormously, unlike the information given by a petrol gauge.
4) The Leaf is a very good car per se, and there’s nothing wrong with electric motors, but the battery, in our view, remains the Achilles’ heel of the whole package.

I think that that's all fairly reasonable.
Misrepresentation is a a false statement of fact; that was never done. Nissan may have come out of it looking badly, but the big picture point that as it stands owning an electric car is not as viable as it could be is still perfectly valid.

Why didn't they just drive into a wall, die and then claim that electric cars are unsafe?

I know where you're coming from, but to set out with only 40% power is moronic


However, Nissan has responded by saying that a telematics device sent to the car company showed that the battery was only 40 per cent charged when Clarkson set off on his journey.

Why go out in a car which takes AAAAAAGES to refuel with only 40% charge?

[Alfa Fan]

The point they were making was the time taken to recharge NOT the range.

I'm guessing you missed this Daniel.

[wedge]

And again the annoying "not wild enough" crap from Hammond on the Lambo Aventador segment. :mad: Why they are bashing good handling cars these days is beyond me. I'm sorry but it's just idiotic.

Teams running in several GT championships around the world, who slave and slave to find the perfect handling setup would be quite happy to run a good handling Lambo, thank you very much. And that competition environment is where these cars will be pushed to the max anyway, so what's the fuss? Nobody is gonna feel the difference EVER between the new Lambo and the old one in normal road conditions.

Why don't they break the steering column and put sand in the gearbox? A lot of this "fun" they're seeking will follow for sure.

It's called hooning.

Supercars aren't competing in the Harrods Grand Prix aiming for lap times.

[wedge]

Why go out in a car which takes AAAAAAGES to refuel with only 40% charge?

Errr, that was the point of the electric car test. Captain Slow - aptly enough - made the point of having an electric car will make you change the way you drive.

[Daniel]

I fail to see why people don't get it. Why would anyone in their right mind set out on a short journey that the car would be able to do on one charge with only 40% of power knowing full well that they'd have to stop and charge for hours and hours and hours and hours and hours in the middle. It's daft and whilst it might satisfy people with single digit IQ's, the BBC should be doing a bit better when doing what would appear to most people to be a factual real world review. What kind of moron takes an electric car on an x mile drive when it's got less juice than is needed to get to the destination or a refuelling point? It is idiotic and was done purely to paint electric vehicles in a needlessly bad light.

Sadly Fifth Gear did a MUCH better job of it, all without doing anything which you or I would do.
2lNPWwPopRQ

[Mark]

Sigh.... Point missed entirely.

[Daniel]

Well thats what we get for disagreeing with you. Thanks

Not to be funny, but everyone knows that electric cars take ages to recharge, it says it on the spec sheets. Did someone really need to intentionally go out in a car that was low on juice to illustrate that?

I'm sorry, but you're missing the point, when you see a test like that most people will assume that it's a real world test and it wasn't.

[52Paddy]

Consider this as a comparison: driving a petrol car for 10 miles, with 7 miles of juice will require a re-filling. This takes a few minutes at the nearest petrol station, of which there are many. Driving an electric car for 10 miles with 7 miles of charge will require hours of recharging. I think that this was the point they were trying to illustrate. Driving on full charge would not make this problem arise and so, they could not bring it to the viewers' attention. In the real world, human error must be considered.

[MrJan]

An extra 60% of charge would have only got them an extra 66 miles. Regardless of misleading video(which I don't think is actually as big an issue as is being made out) that's a **** range. It's a shame that Top Gear have done something which has taken away from the fact that electric cars are still not viable for the majority of the UK. 30% 10% or 100% the fact is that a 110 miles range (when driven carefully) is shocking. Likewise an 11 hour charge is shocking. And the price is shocking, especially for that basic spec Pug.

Incidentally the Times didn't run with the anti-TG story, instead they did a piece about replacing the battery and how much it costs.....only it's difficult to find out because Nissan don't really like to share that information. Now which is worse, showing an electric car running out of juice or not telling people the truth when they spend £30,000 on one of your cars?

[Sonic]

I think starting from a 40% charge actually demonstrates the real world far better. How many of us have a full tank right now? As it goes, I'm on the red as I have no intention of driving until tomorrow, but, if I had an emergency and I needed the car, I could replenish my fuel supply in a few seconds, whereas the electric...well, nuff said. It simply is not viable, and TG highlighted that. If thats not consumer advice I don't know what is.

[Daniel]

I think starting from a 40% charge actually demonstrates the real world far better. How many of us have a full tank right now? As it goes, I'm on the red as I have no intention of driving until tomorrow, but, if I had an emergency and I needed the car, I could replenish my fuel supply in a few seconds, whereas the electric...well, nuff said. It simply is not viable, and TG highlighted that. If thats not consumer advice I don't know what is.

So if you had an electric car and you were planning to go on a trip on a Saturday which was lets say 70% of the range of the car, you'd happily go out with 40% charge and not bother charging it on Friday night? :confused:

If you watch the Fifth Gear clip, Robert Llewellyn tells you what real world electric car owners do when it comes to driving distances......

[MrJan]

If you watch the Fifth Gear clip, Robert Llewellyn tells you what real world electric car owners do when it comes to driving distances......

They realise that they're idiots and bought electric too soon, so sell the car at a hugely depreciated price and buy a diesel?

Electric doesn't work in most real world situations, it's as simple as that.

[Sonic]

So if you had an electric car and you were planning to go on a trip on a Saturday which was lets say 70% of the range of the car, you'd happily go out with 40% charge and not bother charging it on Friday night? :confused:
...

Nope. But what about the unplanned trips Daniel? You come home with let's say 15% in the tank and plug in for the commute tomorrow. You then have to go out unexpectedly 2 hours later. The car has 30% odd charge and is not enough for the journey.

This is the real world, and the electric car is not ready for it. TG have (with their usual humour) pointed this out.

[Daniel]

They realise that they're idiots and bought electric too soon, so sell the car at a hugely depreciated price and buy a diesel?

Electric doesn't work in most real world situations, it's as simple as that.

Why not watch the Fifth gear clip before saying something silly.

In a city like London most people could get away quite happily with an electric car. Heck I've got a commute which is 40 miles each way and in theory I could run an electric car. Now of course I won't because of the cost and the fact that it's simply not cost effective now. But as always someone needs to be the first and technology always gets better and better. Heck in the early days cars were worse than horse drawn carriages, but look at things now.


I've always maintained that the future is battery change stations where they just swap a new pack in rather than charging them which takes ages. The technology for battery change stations is around now, all that's needed is enough cars to justify the stations and of course standardisation of batteries. How many of you would really say no to an electric car if you could just swap the battery pack out like this?
Better Place Unveils an Electric Car Battery Swap Station | Autopia | Wired.com (http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/05/better-place/)
KKA4GhVn0a4

[MrJan]

I'm not saying that electric isn't the future, I'm saying that it isn't the present. Without a bigger range, a better battery life and cheaper cost it isn't going to work. And to my mind speccing out a car and charging £30k isn't the way to improve, that would be better done by having low spec cars and working on range/battery life first.

And I won't watch anything with Robert whatshischops since he had a rant about TG doing something about hydrogen cars. It wasn't the point he was making but the fact that he came across like a really unpleasant guy. He looked like a twat...on coke, and for that reason I dislike him and anything he's in.

[Mark]

I certainly do agree that the electric car is viable should certain conditions be met

approx. 250 mile range on a full charge. You could get away with less but this is a realistic minimum to not have to worry about range.

A battery lease model, you don't actually own the batteries but lease them such that would allow them to be swapped in a reasonably quick manner for fully charged ones.

Where swapping is not possible allow for quick charging in no more than 20 minutes.

The fact that the developed world already has an excellent electricity distribution system which should mean setting things up is a simpler job than setting up petrol distribution was but still a massive undertaking.

[Sonic]

All sounds peachy until you ask yourself where the juice is gonna come from? The national grid is hardly blessed with a huge surplus of power, so if we all switch to e cars, where is the power for millions of cars on charge each night?

[Daniel]

I'm not saying that electric isn't the future, I'm saying that it isn't the present. Without a bigger range, a better battery life and cheaper cost it isn't going to work. And to my mind speccing out a car and charging £30k isn't the way to improve, that would be better done by having low spec cars and working on range/battery life first.

And I won't watch anything with Robert whatshischops since he had a rant about TG doing something about hydrogen cars. It wasn't the point he was making but the fact that he came across like a really unpleasant guy. He looked like a twat...on coke, and for that reason I dislike him and anything he's in.
Just because he had a rant everything he says is irrelevant? :dozey: He was also right, because Top Gear said that the Hydrogen car was the future and said that the Tesla was too expensive when hydrogen cars are so expensive now that virtually no one can afford them.

He might be carrying on like a tit, but tell me the fault in his reasoning
LPi8EhT_fYA

The fact of the matter is that if Top Gear had done what you and I would have done and plugged the car in the night before, they would have got to their destination. That is the long and short of it. I agree that electric cars aren't for everyone at the moment and it'll be a long time till they are for everyone, but there's no need to artificially set a car up for a fall......

[Daniel]

All sounds peachy until you ask yourself where the juice is gonna come from? The national grid is hardly blessed with a huge surplus of power, so if we all switch to e cars, where is the power for millions of cars on charge each night?

Well I'm a firm believer in nucular (sic). Nuclear would easily satisfy the demand.

[Mark]

A very good point indeed. We are already facing a very serious energy crisis as it is which successive governments have failed to face up to instead indulging in platitudes about renewables and efficiency and ignoring the fundamental issues.

[Daniel]

A very good point indeed. We are already facing a very serious energy crisis as it is which successive governments have failed to face up to instead indulging in platitudes about renewables and efficiency and ignoring the fundamental issues.

Agreed. Sadly the stigma of nuclear power has put people off. If Fukushima killed 100 times the amount of people it will kill with slightly elevated levels of cancer it'd probably still be better than coal power generation. People seem to wilfully ignore the fact that burning coal releases FAR more radioactivity than nuclear power generation does.

[Sonic]

Well I'm a firm believer in nucular (sic). Nuclear would easily satisfy the demand.

I agree, but who's gonna pay?

[Daniel]

I agree, but who's gonna pay?

I'm not sure I understand that question?

[Sonic]

I'm not sure I understand that question?

Well, we have several nuke plants due for decommissioning. As I understand it, there are plans to replace those, but many more would be needed to power all the cars on the road. Getting the finance in place to pay for the replacement plants is tricky enough so where will the money come from to pay for the additional plants?

[Daniel]

Well, we have several nuke plants due for decommissioning. As I understand it, there are plans to replace those, but many more would be needed to power all the cars on the road. Getting the finance in place to pay for the replacement plants is tricky enough so where will the money come from to pay for the additional plants?

Again the answer is so easy that I'm not sure I understand the question.

Of course it'll be you or I that pays the bill. Do you honestly think that the price of petrol/dismal is going to go down anytime soon or we will suddenly discover infinite reserves of it to power our cars for many generations to come? Whilst I certainly won't be buying an electric car anytime soon, there will come a day when a petrol or diesel car is simply too expensive to run as anything more than a weekend plaything. The thing with nuclear is that if people weren't such dimwits, we'd have built more plants already and we'd be reaping the rewards of nuclear which is less airborne pollution, cheaper electricity and less radiation being released into the atmosphere.

[MrJan]

Just because he had a rant everything he says is irrelevant? :dozey:

Not at all. I just said that I don't like watching stuff with him in it because he's a knobend.


The fact of the matter is that if Top Gear had done what you and I would have done and plugged the car in the night before, they would have got to their destination.

Then they would have picked a destination 115 miles away. Because the point of the film was not to actually tear down electric cars per se, it was to highlight the fact that they aren't practical because of a lack of charging points and a lengthy charging time. It's a shame that there has been so much drama about the 'misleading' nature of the film, rather than the media talking about actual point.

[Daniel]

Not at all. I just said that I don't like watching stuff with him in it because he's a knobend.



Then they would have picked a destination 115 miles away. Because the point of the film was not to actually tear down electric cars per se, it was to highlight the fact that they aren't practical because of a lack of charging points and a lengthy charging time. It's a shame that there has been so much drama about the 'misleading' nature of the film, rather than the media talking about actual point.

and then it would have been a fair test :) I'm sorry, but there's a reason why the media are making a bit of a fuss and why Nissan are kicking up a stink too.

I definitely agree that electric cars aren't ready for widespread use right now, but a lot of people do seem to use them with a minimum of fuss, they seem very much a commute/shopping car, rather than something you can do distances in.

Tbh Caroline could happily use an electric car, her drive to work is only about a mile and the shops are only 5 miles away. But then of course with such small distances and not much traffic, she can afford to run a thirsty car and we're not talking loads of money. But then due to such small distances the saving of having an electric car would be very small! :D

[MrJan]

and then it would have been a fair test :) I'm sorry, but there's a reason why the media are making a bit of a fuss and why Nissan are kicking up a stink too.

Nissan should keep their mouths shut, the fewer people that know their car costs £30k and can only do 110 miles at a time the better. This is a non-event, the media shouldn't even be covering this. TG didn't lie, they slightly misled, yet this story gets more exposure in newspapers than far more important stuff, that's not right.

[Daniel]

Nissan should keep their mouths shut, the fewer people that know their car costs £30k and can only do 110 miles at a time the better. This is a non-event, the media shouldn't even be covering this. TG didn't lie, they slightly misled, yet this story gets more exposure in newspapers than far more important stuff, that's not right.

The leaf is a technological showcase it's not for the mass market......

[Mark]

In the film they didn't say where they'd started from or what the charge level was. We joined them when the batteries were running down. The charge levels at the start of the test are completely irrelevant.

[Sonic]

In the film they didn't say where they'd started from or what the charge level was. We joined them when the batteries were running down. The charge levels at the start of the test are completely irrelevant.

POW! discussion over. ;)

[Daniel]

In the film they didn't say where they'd started from or what the charge level was. We joined them when the batteries were running down. The charge levels at the start of the test are completely irrelevant.

So Top Gear driving the car around till it ran out of charge is OK? :confused:



But Nissan executive vice president Andy Palmer, in an interview with the U.K. newspaper The Times, said “Top Gear” made the whole thing up. Data from the car, automatically sent to Nissan, showed the car had only a 40 percent charge on its battery when Clarkson began his trip, although the car had been delivered to “Top Gear” with a full charge. Palmer also pointed out that the data showed the Leaf had been driven in circles around Lincoln until the battery went dead.

I'm sorry, but they manufactured the whole deal with the car running out of charge.

To intentionally run the battery down to the point where if you set off for your destination you certainly wouldn't reach a charging point is stupid. I'm sorry but that's not real world use, it's the way an idiot would use the car.

[Daniel]

Theres little point discussing this further IMO. We all have our opinions and they are not going to change or change others views no matter how many times we repeat them. Lets call this a stalemate. :)

I disagree :p

[Malbec]

So Top Gear driving the car around till it ran out of charge is OK? :confused:

I'm sorry, but they manufactured the whole deal with the car running out of charge.

To intentionally run the battery down to the point where if you set off for your destination you certainly wouldn't reach a charging point is stupid. I'm sorry but that's not real world use, it's the way an idiot would use the car.

Lets have Top Gear testing supercars and showing how they need to replace the tyres after one heavy track session at a grand all round. How about showing how uncomfortable it is trying to get in and out of one.

Instead of testing the new McLaren around the Top Gear track why didn't they show how good it is for going to the supermarket with the wife and kids and doing the week's shopping?

All vehicles have disadvantages, Top Gear always focuses on the disadvantages of certain ones they (or rather Clarkson) dislike. Electric cars are one, motorbikes are another.

Electric cars currently don't have that great a range although that is expected to increase, but it is more than enough for town use. Why have every review of an electric car marred by a 'ran out of charge' gag?

[Daniel]

Lets have Top Gear testing supercars and showing how they need to replace the tyres after one heavy track session at a grand all round. How about showing how uncomfortable it is trying to get in and out of one.

Instead of testing the new McLaren around the Top Gear track why didn't they show how good it is for going to the supermarket with the wife and kids and doing the week's shopping?

All vehicles have disadvantages, Top Gear always focuses on the disadvantages of certain ones they (or rather Clarkson) dislike. Electric cars are one, motorbikes are another.

Electric cars currently don't have that great a range although that is expected to increase, but it is more than enough for town use. Why have every review of an electric car marred by a 'ran out of charge' gag?

Following on from what you're saying, Top Gear could get a car with 1.7mm of tread and say "We took car x onto our track with legal tyres and within two corners it had killed them to the point where the car wasn't legal to drive on the road"

[rah]

Again the answer is so easy that I'm not sure I understand the question.

Of course it'll be you or I that pays the bill. Do you honestly think that the price of petrol/dismal is going to go down anytime soon or we will suddenly discover infinite reserves of it to power our cars for many generations to come? Whilst I certainly won't be buying an electric car anytime soon, there will come a day when a petrol or diesel car is simply too expensive to run as anything more than a weekend plaything. The thing with nuclear is that if people weren't such dimwits, we'd have built more plants already and we'd be reaping the rewards of nuclear which is less airborne pollution, cheaper electricity and less radiation being released into the atmosphere.

Actually top gear was right. The best thing to power cars now and for a long time is petrol and diesel. While there are not infinate reserves of fossil fuels, getting petrol, diesel and jet fuel from second gen biofuels is getting easier and cheaper. Nukes are too expensive and take too long to contruct. Plenty of renewables available.

[donKey jote]

Classic Top Gear had me literally rotflmao with their banners in India:

The UK promotes **** for your company
Eat English Muff

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
:bandit:

[Mark]

100% predictable as all of it was but still good!

[Brown, Jon Brow]

That poor Mini :(

[Allyc85]

The India adventure was ok, but not the best by far and it seems like JC has offended a few people again!

Jeremy Clarkson 'offensive to Indians in Top Gear Christmas special' - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8984362/Jeremy-Clarkson-offensive-to-Indians-in-Top-Gear-Christmas-special.html)

[donKey jote]

100% predictable as all of it was but still good!

yes, I saw the banners overlapping the carriages and knew they would tear but I admit the message bit caught me napping...

The repeat of the toilet gag was still funny, although not as funny as the original polar bog :laugh:

[racingfanatic]

Well people tend to be offended very fast. Actually this time Jeremy spoke the truth, a lot of people going to India will have stomach issues. It's the truth whether they like it or not

[Gregor-y]

I was expecting some comment about the person to toilet ratio in Bombay being something like 12,000 to 1. Sanitation is a big issue though a friend who resells paper making equipment says there is a lot of business with India as tissues are becoming popular.

And it's a shame they ruined all those cars; but there wasn't any real drama with them as in earlier specials. And I wonder why they took the train at all; are the roads in between that bad or was the budget that short?

[Mark]

Because if they hadn't taken the train they couldn't have done the gag with the banners or have May missing the train and hence them sabotaging the aircon etc.

That's the thing that it's all scripted in advance. Rather than just set them off and see what happens.

[CaptainRaiden]

Predictable and boring IMO, even if the banner tearing/wrong message thing was amusing.

As for people getting offended, I don't get it. I honestly didn't see or hear anything that I would consider offensive, but then again lots of people these days fly off the hook and get offended rather quick. Plus, I'm guessing many are not aware of or used to Clarkson's humor much, and probably only watched the show as a one-off because it was about India.

As for his comment about the stomach issues, that's a fact. I'm an Indian, and when I go home after a year or two of eating bland European food, the spicy curries are a shock for the system and it takes two or three days to get used to it again. And again, I'm guessing Indians who got offended about the stomach issues part, haven't actually experienced it, because living in India and eating spicy food on a daily basis, their bodies are perfectly suited to it and they'd assume that salt-and-pepper eating foreigners wouldn't have any problem also.

[wedge]

Nowt wrong with squatting over a hole - apart from the fact you have to remember to take your own tissues or sore knees if you're constipated.

In fact, even highly developed parts of Asia like Hong Kong or Japan there is a likelihood of public toilets being the squat type.

[wedge]

4 straight episodes that I've thoroughly enjoyed watching. What's wrong with this picture?

[donKey jote]

indeed :laugh:

[PuddleJumper]

4 straight episodes that I've thoroughly enjoyed watching. What's wrong with this picture?
The series so far has been very good. A happy mix of jokes and fooling around with informative entertainment. I thought The Sweeney film last week was great, as was the film from China a couple of weeks ago. It's quite astonishing how quickly car ownership is expanding out there!

Not sure if it is for this series or the next, but a colleague from work was skiing in Val d'Isere a couple of weeks ago and saw James May with a film crew and a Mini rally car. It seems there is going to be some sort of race up (yes, up) a ski slope!

[donKey jote]

Not sure if it is for this series or the next, but a colleague from work was skiing in Val d'Isere a couple of weeks ago and saw James May with a film crew and a Mini rally car. It seems there is going to be some sort of race up (yes, up) a ski slope!

hehe reminds me of a small "incident" at a winter tyre launch event in Sierra Nevada a few years back :erm: :laugh:

[Gregor-y]

That's a nice place to do an event, though (assuming it was Tahoe).

[donKey jote]

no, very nice but not as nice as Tahoe... near Granada in southern Spain :)

[Knock-on]

Slash is recording this week in SiaRPC. May pop down and see what he's up to.

[DexDexter]

I'd say that is the best Top Gear in a long, long time IMO. Chris Evans and his Ferrari collection, Slash and Raikkonen and a fairly sensible delivery without the cheesy acting. Shame its the last one in the series, but I did enjot it. :)

Me too, it was excellent. Just pure quality British television.

[Mark]

Extra points for using the 'Rally Report' music during the Rallycross feature!

I think the BBC should bring back their rally coverage just to use that music!

[PuddleJumper]

yLhYxLE8uCA

[Gregor-y]

Extra points for using the 'Rally Report' music during the Rallycross feature!

I think the BBC should bring back their rally coverage just to use that music!
I kept falling asleep before the rallycross segment was over. I finally saw it tonight; great choice of music!

[wedge]

A full house IMO. Thoroughly enjoyed the series. Best in a long time. Weakest feature IMO was the The Sweeney car chase but I still managed to LOL rather than what has become a usual groan and moan: "stop pretending to be numpties just to crash and blow things up".


Extra points for using the 'Rally Report' music during the Rallycross feature!

I think the BBC should bring back their rally coverage just to use that music!

Aussies used it too for Bathurst 1000/Aussie Touring car coverage.

[Lousada]

It's interesting to see the influence Top Gear has. Look at the google searches on 'Rallycross' the past month:
Google Trends: rallycross (http://www.google.com/trends/?q=rallycross&ctab=0&geo=all&date=mtd&sort=0)

[Gregor-y]

I would like to see more rally cross courses set up at all the dirt oval tracks that are all over the US.

Besides the functions and features of the CCTV, you will also have to make perfectly sure that it takes high-quality video footages. Loads of home CCTV systems have cameras that provide good quality as well as crystal clear video footages. This can help make you recognize just who goes inside and out of your property. cctv security system (http://cctvsoftware.blogspirit.com/)

Aside from the features and functions of your CCTV, you also have to make sure that it's going to take high quality video clip footages. Loads of home CCTV systems include cameras which offer good quality and distinct video footages. This can assist in making you identify who goes inside and out of your property. cheap cctv cameras (http://cctvcamerasblinker.blog.co.uk/)

[BleAivano]

anyone remember this clip? http://youtu.be/dJfSS0ZXYdo

I also enjoyed this TG season, especially when Clarkson visited Arjeplog. The final episode was also very nice.
I really liked the interview with Kimi, especially when Kimi said that he didn't ask Ferrari for a permission before
he went Snowmobile racing despite having allot of "forbidden things" in is contract.

[306 Cosworth]

Really enjoyed the last episode of the series. The rallycross feature whilst not particularly well informed, was thoroughly enjoyable and the Kimi interview was a surprise too as he actually smiled and laughed.

Anyone know when they last did a 'Top Gear Race' too? Haven't seen one for a while? They must be out of ideas?

[Mark]

Looks like it won't be back until 2013 now - but there will be a Christmas special.

[gloomyDAY]

Looks like it won't be back until 2013 now - but there will be a Christmas special. :(

[Gregor-y]

It's going to be tough to beat the Middle East special. But then a lot of the quality lies in the filming and writing since they were able to make a trip from San Francisco to Utah interesting.

[Mark]

There was the India special last year which was far too scripted for my tastes.

[Gregor-y]

I think it's the quality of the scripting. Otherwise it'd be like a recurring Magical Mystery Tour.

[ruth_holloway]

yes i know :p

[BleAivano]

To celebrate the 50 years of the Bond’s history, Richard Hammondthe presenter of the show, Top Gear which is aired on
BBC Entertainment channel, will reveal the behind-the-scenes of the iconic cars including Goldfinger Aston Martin DB5 and the Lotus Esprit submarine car.
The show will premiere on 2nd November

http://motoroids.com/news/top-gear-bond-special-premiering-on-november-2/
BBC Entertainment's Top Gear Bond Special | CarDekho.com (http://www.cardekho.com/india-car-news/bbc-entertainments-top-gear-bond-special-8851.htm)

[autoxgymkhana]

cool!!! :eek:

[BleAivano]

Have anyone seen the new "Top Gear--The Worst Car in The History of The World (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gear---Worst-History-World-Blu-ray/dp/B008WANV42/ref=sr_1_1?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1353424236&sr=1-1)" yet?

[Gregor-y]

I saw some pictures from filming being done around Las Vegas last week. The latest US visits have been kind of tepid so I don't know how good it's going to be.

[Langdale Forest]

The Stig should have taken the P45 round the TG test track.

[inimitablestoo]

He probably did. He's probably still doing it now ;)

[BlueShift]

Great!

[przemson]

Love top gear!

[Daniel]

Love top gear!
I also love spamming. Jagshemash!

[donKey jote]

Really? :andrea:

[przemson]

nice one

[Gregor-y]

I started watching it around 23:30 fell asleep again. Right at the start of the race. I'll try again tonight at some point.

No Impreza for the UK is bad, but then what's sold here as the Impreza these days isn't something I'm wanting to trade my car in for, anyway. The Forester would be a nice option if it hadn't gotten so big. My parents have one that if anything feels like my original Impreza.

If I'm ever in that part of England I should have no trouble getting a ticket to Top Gear:
http://imageshack.us/a/img715/396/100aw02.jpg

[donKey jote]

the latest series has been pretty crap so far :( :dozey:

[BleAivano]

Apparently there is a South Korean version as well.

Here is a video clip of an American Ah1 Cobra chasing one of the Korean hosts (?):

Helicopter Crash Caught On Camera - Top Gear Korea - Top Gear - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EsoWpTO2qg)

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I enjoyed the race to Milan. Yes they've done it before but it was still good television.

[Gregor-y]

A friend of mind has one of those Mustangs. Lots of power, but I can't imagine a long trip in one.

[BleAivano]

Just 30 days until top gear's 20th season is on.

I know they've been to New Zealand and Clarkson also have been to Norway, uncertain if the latter is TG related.

uppppppppppppppppp
Múi giá»

uppppppppppppppppp
Múi giá»

uppppppppppppppppp
Múi giá»

[Scuderia]

I discovered TG this spring, and it has become my favorite program. I cannot wait to see more from the lads...

[BleAivano]

I discovered TG this spring, and it has become my favorite program. I cannot wait to see more from the lads...

Hello. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LauKGP26ZSg/TleLIiPVAqI/AAAAAAAAAL8/diqGSBJObiA/s1600/animated-smileys-waving-015.gif

Yes I agree about TG, the latest season was short but really good.

[Langdale Forest]

Very good start to series 20 today, especially Clarkson's rally driving in the rented Toyota. Some of the gravel roads looked like the roads used for WRC New Zealand. The hovercraft should be fun to watch .

[Rollo]

In Ep3 of Season 20, Jeremy drives a McLaren MP4-12C. Now I know that this is only a minor thing but the badge in the centre of the steering wheel is that little upside-down swoosh thing which was a replacement for the Marlboro logo when they parted company.

The four-ring Audi logo represents the four firms which were blended together to form the new company. Lamborghini uses the raging bull which is both because Ferruccio was a Taurus and because his friend Don Eduardo Miura bred fighting bulls. Ferrari's prancing horse was suggested an Italian WW1 flying ace because it would bring good luck.
In comparison, the upside-down swoosh looks passionless and cold; certainly not what you'd expect on a supercar. Heck, even Vauxhall's logo looks better.

Am I the only person who noticed this? Would it hurt McLaren to put Bruce's little Kiwi on their cars?

[Daniel]

Call me silly, but the swish could be said to be a sort of stylised Kiwi?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RZq7fHV-sMk/UP6Pj8eqauI/AAAAAAABU-U/uW6iJr8X0U4/s640/50th_McRALEN_04.jpg

[D-Type]

I'd like to agree with you, but I don't think so, I think it's a case of: "Any resemblance is purely coincidental"

[beardyfinn]

Oh, the new series is on again? I've totally missed that! Now I know what I'll be watching next few weeks :)

[BleAivano]

Oh, the new series is on again? I've totally missed that! Now I know what I'll be watching next few weeks :)

Well its almost over, I think next week is the final episode for this season.

[Mark]

Well its almost over, I think next week is the final episode for this season.

It's always over very quickly isn't it! Feels like they are just getting started!

PS I'm still of the opinion that the current format has gone on too long and should be retired, although I enjoy it when it's on, I think it's 'jumped the shark'.

[BleAivano]

well I agree with you Mark that this season haven been quite boring. Last season started pretty weak but the got better and better.
This season is nothing special but I don't know if Jumping the shark is the right expression here, I think the problems is the opposite
that they haven't changed hardly anything and that they are re-making some stuff that they have already made.

I think they should take a break for maybe year or so. Then Start filming next autumn and perhaps only do a special.
The latest special in Africa was one of their best. Then they show needs to be more spontaneous at the moment it is
too much scripted/directed. Give the boys some room for improvisation rather then having every dialogue scripted.

[555-04Q2]

The problem with TG is that after 20 seasons they have run out of ideas. Plus the three stooges are getting...well...erm...old! :p :

[Bezza]

Based on the episode just gone, it is still the best show on TV.

The viewing figures are still high, and those complaining about it still watch it every week so no change there!

I see they've upset caravanners now, by suggesting they like dogging. It seems some people really can't take a joke! Who goes out of their way to complain about a joke on a TV show!

[555-04Q2]

I used to be a massive fan up until the 14th or 15th season. I've given the last few series a miss (except for one episode in the 18th season I think it was) and haven't really missed it at all! Same thing every season :(

[Franky]

I think the producer or someone else of the production staff said that the first and last episode are the best on this season.

But yeah, the end of Top Gear as it is now is near

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I'm just looking forward to see the Jaguar F-Type. Normally I find the power tests a bit dull, I personally find group tests of more reasonable cars more entertaining. I used to like the used car challenges before they became totally scripted, but the Top Gear specials are always very fun, Bolivia, Africa, Vietnam etc, I'm sure there are more possibilities here that they haven't explored.

[Gregor-y]

I finally stayed awake long enough to watch the most recent episode and even the hosts were making fun of the current format.

[MrJan]

Having been a keen viewer of the Drive 'Chris Harris on Cars' channel on YouTube I find it interesting to see shorter, less informative films of cars several months after seeing Chris Harris review it. For example:

fJQ4hQSusjE
Which was done in January, or:

IElqf-FCMs8
Which aired in April, or:

ruFXKEIPTvA
From 6 weeks ago.

I think that Top Gear still has it's place though, the Drive reviews aren't as easily accessible for most people and it doesn't quite have the entertainment factor. The problem is that I'm not quite sure exactly what the place of Top Gear is, and I don't think the producers and crew know either. The 'jokes' are generally getting far too old and stale, things like banging on about Dacia and the set ups that rival You've Been Framed for obviousness (e.g half of the Hovercraft sketch).

[flatheader]

Never miss it!!!

[flatheader]

They go in a nice, fast, straight, line. Anything else, not so much...

[BleAivano]

anyone else that thinks that the new Jaguar F-type looks like cross breed between an Aston Martin and a Maserati 3200GT?

[Brown, Jon Brow]

The F-type is prettier than any Aston. The rear lights are to die for.

[wedge]

I think that Top Gear still has it's place though, the Drive reviews aren't as easily accessible for most people and it doesn't quite have the entertainment factor.

Agreed.

The fact that nobody in the audience knew what a Hennessey Venom tells you all you need to know who TG is aimed at.

The Electric SLS was handled very well given the complexity and technology involved, but then the BMW 1M and Pagani Huayra I thought were poorly reviewed that resorted to cliches.

Chris Harris isn't perfect either. His review of the Golf GTi was absolutely dire and I thought Auto Express did a much better review without their tame racing driver.


The problem is that I'm not quite sure exactly what the place of Top Gear is, and I don't think the producers and crew know either. The 'jokes' are generally getting far too old and stale, things like banging on about Dacia and the set ups that rival You've Been Framed for obviousness (e.g half of the Hovercraft sketch).

There is a formula such as the big race, the dicking about in the garage and real life test of a machinery of some such, road trip cum group test, more dicking about in cars but they are running out of ideas for fillers. There's only so much you can test a car and doing it with races have bored me for a number of years now.

I don't mind the jokes. They're still good IMO - schoolboy humour doesn't particularly tire me. Jezza does what he does best: a troll with a microphone though Hammond isn't particularly funny.

[yodasarmpit]

But little beauties like Webber "Dad told me not to hit boys" make up for any of the other areas where the show is lacking :)

[Rollo]

Just saw the last episode of Season 20. I feel a little sad that if the same experiment of putting all the motor vehicles that Australia built in one place... there'd be about two dozen and that's it.

[555-04Q2]

Last week I watched episode 6 of season 20 and I was highly disappointed. It's like I never left after not watching the last few seasons. All that has changed is the cars are current models and the boys are all looking rather, well :erm: .........old!

[Gregor-y]

It wasn't helped by the sunburns and kid's clothes. I know it wasn't quite the same intent but I really liked the E-Type fanfare from a few seasons ago compared to this season's finale. Mark Webber was good, though.

[donKey jote]

Spain and it's ghost towns and brand new airports never to have seen a plane (Granada is only one of many) was interesting.

They haven't entirely lost it yet... I even laughed at the entirely predictable Hovervan and was mildly amused with some of the caravan antics :eek:

As for the car reviews and most of the star drivers (exception: F1 drivers)... boring as ever :dozey:

[BleAivano]

So what do you say about the latest season? The hatchbacks could have been good but they ruined it.
Last weeks episode was ok but nothing special. The Danish (!) supercar Zevo interesting look but
interior finish wasn't anything special really. We shall see how the rest of the episodes turns out.

[BleAivano]

This episode was actually pretty good. The Ukraina mini-special was actually very good.
The most important thing with is what they kept i fairly serious but still a bit funny.

Spoiler: they visited a submarine base, a former nuclear missile launch site and Chernobyl. end Spoiler
To see the text mark the entire line with the mouse pointer.

The car Clarkson drove a VW Up! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_up!) looked very nice.

[Mark]

Rarest of things, I actually learned something from Top Gear! I might end up buying a 1.0 litre petrol ;)

[Gregor-y]

Hopefully not for seventeen thousand.
I would have liked to see more challenges with the small cars; driving 750 miles across Ukrane is about as exciting as 1000 miles across Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska and eastern Colorado and I do that twice a year.

[Mark]

Hopefully not for seventeen thousand.

That's for the top of the line 125bhp model. You can get a more normal 80bhp version for about £12,000.

[MrJan]

Rarest of things, I actually learned something from Top Gear! I might end up buying a 1.0 litre petrol ;)

The 1.0l engine in that Fiesta is extremely impressive. First discovered it when my company Fiesta was being serviced and I ended up getting a Focus. THe bloke told me it was petrol (which I wasn't sure about because I could hear that it had a turbo and definitely wasn't a normal sounding petrol engine). Really enjoyed thrashing it around all day so asked if I could keep it, at which point the bloke told me it was a 1 litre. I responded in less than favourable fashion (think I said "bollocks").

When I switched jobs and had to change cars I looked at getting a Fiesta Zetec S with the EcoBoost and test drove one. Really flies and was very enjoyable to drive but the cost was a bit more than I'd have liked (think it was nearly £15k) so I ended up with a second hand diesel Focus instead (limited by car allowance policy to 115 on the emissions). When I have to replace the Focus though I will probably look to get something with an EcoBoost engine in it. The one downside is that Ford's economy are MASSIVELY over egged. On a gentle-ish run I was averaging nearer 40 than 65mpg and even the bloke in the showroom (who was using it as a company car) admitted that his average was around 40mpg.

[steveaki13]

I am enjoying this series.

I see people in other forums complaining that its not a proper motoring show.

However the original Car show that was top gear was flopping hence it was cancelled.
Fifth Gear was more about cars and that folded.

So its clear a proper motoring show is not what the people want. So take Top Gear as what it is and either enjoy it or don't watch it. Don't expect it to be something its not.

[Mark]

The 'new' Top Gear has been going for 12 years now, so I find it hard to believe that people still don't get the format of it, it's not a motoring show as such, no. I've heard it said that it isn't a show about cars, it's a show about driving cars.

[steveaki13]

I know what you mean, but in other places I do still see people question why they don't do more proper car tests.

Sadly this format is dead.

[BleAivano]

I think the most complaint aren't that it ain't a motor show but rather that the scripting have
become too exaggerated, that the "driving stunts" go too far and etc. I agree with Mark that
TG is about driving and that was that which made the latest episode so good. They took a couple
of cars and went for a drive through Ukraine and they didn't exaggerate and it was still good.
The submarine base, the missile base and Chernobyl made it good.

Like the first episode this season with the deliberately crashing in the supermarket,
the "bombing" of the cars at the "police chase", Hammond destroying his car on purpose
or going off the road (off camera of course) on purpose.

I'd would like a little more car driving and a little less stand up comedy.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I still watch Top Gear because it is still a good TV show, but I would like it more if it was less scripted and they did more consumer advice. I liked it most during the earlier series when there was a good mix between proper road testing and d1ck1ing about with cars, but now they just seem to d1ck about all the time.

I still think many of the challenges would be better if they weren't scripted and didn't try so hard to be funny. The 80s hot hatch challenge could have been really good if they have done it the same way they did the original £100 car challenge or £10000 Italian supercar challenge in earlier series.

[henners88]

I used to watch Top Gear religiously for about 20 odd years. It would be one program in the week I would make sure I watch. I don't have that urge any more and I think in the last 3 years I've seen maybe 3 or 4 shows. I caught the end of the show on Sunday where they were driving to Pripyat and I found it interesting just for the way it was filmed and felt Clarkson did convey the seriousness of the place quite well. The way they try and make other aspects funny makes me cringe. I do think they need to tone the comedy sketch elements down a little and try and get a balance of having serious consumer segments where the average person will be interested, and keep some of the entertainment stuff. It could still be a good show, but sadly its looking past its best on the occasions I have watched it. If I had my way I would get rid of Hammond and hire someone who has something useful to offer.

[Mark]

It's certainly true that the show is past it's best, even Clarkson a while ago said there are more episodes behind them than ahead. Personally I wish they'd say something like there are going to be 2 more series - and that'll be that.

Yes the scripting is an issue, as they try to do ever more outrageous stunts. Much better when they set out to do something, and whatever happens, happens, instead of generating scripted mishaps and the like.

[Rollo]

Hopefully not for seventeen thousand.

You can get a Fiesta ST or a Mondeo new for less than that... or a six-month old Transit van.

[Mark]

Top Gear in trouble again.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2591500/BBC-sued-1-MILLION-Jeremy-Clarkson-racism-allegations-presenter-makes-slope-remark-Top-Gear-Burma-special.html

[steveaki13]

Depends how it was said. I remember the episode but cant remember the context.

To be fair the bridge did slope sideways.

[BleAivano]

Top Gear in trouble again.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2591500/BBC-sued-1-MILLION-Jeremy-Clarkson-racism-allegations-presenter-makes-slope-remark-Top-Gear-Burma-special.html

Perhaps not a very wise thing to say, but the lawsuit demand is just pure ridiculous.
It seems that person making these demands is "constantly looking" for comments that might be racisim
and then use that as an excuse to file a lawsuit.

[Langdale Forest]

The new Top Gear series start on Sunday, with 10 episodes, could this be an extra long final series?

[Mark]

The new Top Gear series start on Sunday, with 10 episodes, could this be an extra long final series?

No sign of that at the moment but it is unusually long. I think this time last year it was 7 episodes with two of them being the 'Christmas Special' which we've already had this year.

[Rollo]

*don't read if you haven't watched last episode*

Such a great pun in Australia to their problems with licence plates :D :D Nicely done, lads!

Except that you're not likely to offend anyone with monarchist style number plates in Australia; not even if you happen to be his Tonyness who awards Prince Phillip a knighthood on Australia Day.

Re that green Maloo in the mine... I saw one like it with bags of concrete in the back, at a building site earlier in the week. Thanks to GM for killing it forever... I hope that come 2017, you never ever sell a single car in Australia again.

[Rollo]

Also:
How did James import English Stig?
http://www.customs.gov.au/site/page4369.asp

Did he get a permit under the Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Management Act 1989? I'm pretty sure that the Stig is an "Ozone Depleting Substance"

[inimitablestoo]

Quite fun going on the Autocar website immediately after TG's on and seeing what their "Most read" road test is. After episode 1 it was the Renault Twizy, after this week's... was it the Bentley? Was it the 6-series? No... Holden (Vauxhall) Maloo!

[Rollo]

? Was it the 6-series? No... Holden (Vauxhall) Maloo!

June 30, 2017... and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.

[driveace]

Will anybody beat Australian Daniel Ricciardo,s time in the "Reasonably priced car " lap of 1.42.2
Lewis did 1.42.9

[Rollo]

Re the Yellow Corvette at the beginning of the episode:
£65,000, 190mph

Compare with the Maloo Ute:
Australian list price:
£40,156, 184mph


Which one would I have? The Maloo. You can't out a cement mixer in the back of the Corvette; ergo, if that's "the best car America can do" then I'm sorry, the American car industry is a sad sad joke.

[steveaki13]

In keeping with a post on another thread about the trio going to amazon.

What do people see the BBC doing with Top Gear? Trying something similar? Going back to how it was way back or try something different again.

[D-Type]

They can't try and do 'more of the same' with different, erm, actors - it would be compared unfavourably with the last trio. The way it was is classed as dull; petrolheads liked it but John Q Public didn't so it didn't get the all important ratings which in turn reflect its saleability. So they simply have to try something different. But what?