So Top Gear lied about Tesla?

Hatmouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Messages
4,791
Location
Bay area, California
Car(s)
'03 Civic Si
It links to a Daily Fail article, as does every other news story about this, so take this with a lump of salt.
 
12x02_285.png
 
Seems like they did lie. Not sure why. Bad on them for making the life of a small car manufacturer (who IMO is making an interesting and important product) worse.
 
Because of one important fact that everyone (Including Tesla) seems to be forgetting. Top Gear is an entertainment program. If it's more entertaining to show a car breaking down all the time, that's what they'll do.

And it wouldn't surprise me if that turns out to be the BBC's defense in the suit.
 
Top Gear is an entertainment program.
So what? It's entertainment presented in a way that is very plausible and believable, but not wholly satirical.

Unless you're sarcastically-impaired, you know when Top Gear is dicking around and when they're being serious. Sorry, but the Tesla segment just did not carry a sense of satire to make one believe that the whole breaking-down thing was just a gag.

So, basically, this:
There's being entertaining by using exaggeration, and that's one thing, but then there's acting dishonorably, which is another thing entirely.
 
That doesn't make any sense, though. If a sitcom TV show were to show a car being a disaster, don't they usually cover the badges or use a sound-alike name so they don't get in trouble for defamation?

And Top Gear's defense of "well, we're showing what could happen" then they should show every other car having a gasoline explosion.
 
If Jezza&friends indeed made stuff up, more than just "enhancing the truth a bit", they're solely responsible for any and all bad press, law suits and whatnot that comes from this. Being "funny" is not an excuse. I applaud a small manufacturer standing up to the BBC about this, especially when they're completely in their right.
 
Last edited:
Even if Top Gear is essentially an entertainment program 60% of the time, there are times when things are presented in a factual manor (Ironically I wouldn't include the News in this factual part at all). Track tests make up the bulk of the factual space.

The whole thing doesn't sit well with me. That said, will still watch and frankly it won't even change my overall opinion of the show.
 
*COUGH* Hawk hf breaking down twice and stig spinning twice with it on the power lap *COUGH*
 
I think the biggest issue with this is the car review segments, even when silly at times, tend to give the impression they are actually reviewing the cars. Sabotaging a cheap car challenge and sabotaging a review are two very different things, people actually take the reviews seriously a lot of the time and could buy or not buy a car on what they say. The idea the scripting issues have infected the reviews is incredibly depressing.
 
...Tesla...let it go. Exaggeration or not your car has the same flaw of every other EV ever built. 55 or 155 miles, it doesn't matter. Runs out too quick, takes too damn long to recharge, and the weight ruins the car.
 
...Tesla...let it go. Exaggeration or not your car has the same flaw of every other EV ever built. 55 or 155 miles, it doesn't matter. Runs out too quick, takes too damn long to recharge, and the weight ruins the car.

Can we please keep the conversation away from the merits or demerits of electric cars? The battery-powered electric cars have disadvantages, just as ICE vehicles do. And, BTW, I rode in one that had put 225 miles on the charge and still showed 1/3 "tank" left. There are already other threads for that conversation, and it's neither here nor there for this specific topic and will just get muddled if it veers off in that direction.

It would be like chiming in on the Japanese earthquake/pacific tsunami and complaining that there aren't enough good nuclear disaster movies lately.
 
Last edited:
It would be like chiming in on the Japanese earthquake/pacific tsunami and complaining that there aren't enough good nuclear disaster movies lately.
Probably more like going into the thread and complaining about nuclear plants (which people did and were promptly chased out for being asses)
 
There's being entertaining by using exaggeration, and that's one thing, but then there's acting dishonorably, which is another thing entirely.

What he said.
 
The review was structured in a way that showed the viewers (in Top Gear's opinion) Battery Electric cars are not the way forward for motoring. This was complimented nicely by their approval of the Honda FCX - a hydrogen car.

Jeremy did misrepresent the facts, but he presented them in the way that would be most effective in reaching his audience. Showing (as the BBC put it) what 'could' happen is a more persuasive method of steering people away from an uncertain product (such as the Electric car) rather than just saying, "It's rubbish, don't buy it".

I'm not saying it wasn't a dick move by the BBC to do that to a small company, who on the most part built a reasonable car - but that's the way things are sometimes. I haven't seen numbers & figures but I'm interested as to how this episode affected Tesla sales in total - on the flip side, it opened mine and many others eyes to the possibility of Hydrogen fuel cells.

This however, especially the title, is just a publicity grab.
http://www.teslavstopgear.com/
 
If Tesla's side of the story is true .. they have every right to complain. Fair enough Top Gear doing a "track test" on the car for "entertainment" ... but for them not to retract the negative claims made in the "test" is very damaging to Tesla. I'd be interested to know how the car(s) came to loaned to Top Gear in the first place. Did Top Gear approach Tesla saying they wanted to track test the car, or did they say they wanted to make fun of it?

This story makes me more angry that Top Gear doesn't test cars on the road enough and instead thrashes them around an airfield in a fashion that no car deserves to be treated. If they wanted to make the point that the Tesla doesn't work in the real world, Clarkson should have driven it for a week on normal roads (in the real world) and then maybe done a Track Day at the end, then do the same thing back-to-back with an Elise. If he wanted to make his point about range and the inconvenience of charging time, this kind of format would've given him ample scope to convey the message his "lies" tried to convey in the test that they aired.

Oh, "misrepresented the facts" means lied ... :p
 
Well to be fair, the Tesla is supposed to be an electric sports car, it should be able to handle the track.
Though IIRC, the only big issue with the tesla other than the battery that is apparently false, was the handling. They should remarket it as a expensive electric muscle car instead
 
Top