[02x10] February 21st, 2012

[02x10] February 21st, 2012

  • Total voters
    102
kenzimone said:
That... was awesome. I'm getting to the point where, once the weekend rolls around, I'm actually looking forward to the US version more than I am the original one. I don't quite know how to handle that (other than roll with it).
Click to expand...

yeah same here. i've convinced a few other people to watch the us version and they're starting to like it too! been watching tg-uk since day one.. last couple of tg-uk episodes have been good, but it's just getting old + hammond is annoying

i love the fact that they've slowly changed around a few things to make it more unique, like the theme music, lap times, SIARPC. it's not copy paste and insert american accent. me likes change!

a solid 9/10 for me.. :)
 
...and the battle between the three icons continues.

This was a solid episode. Laughed pretty hard on a number of occasions.
Really enjoyed it!

9/10
 
Interesting that the Mustang didn't win (either the main segment or the horse race) and this episode was sponsored by Ford.
 
The horse segment we can blame on Rutledge for his pedestrian driving...
 
Viper007Bond said:
I suspect he is as well but even if he isn't, he still would have been able to do very close or the same as the Stig. He's a professional driver after all!
Click to expand...

Foust is not the Stig. I'm not sure it's the same driver for Season 2 as it was in Season 1 (haven't heard one way or the other), but it's likely to be the same guy as the Pilot season - and it's not Tanner. I'm not going to give away who the US Stig is, but he has more circuit racing experience than Tanner, who is more of a slip technique specialist (that's in no way saying he's "slow" as a grip driver.)

As for this Episode - the "oops" moments are still coming across a little less than organic, but maybe I'm just getting jaded. The look of the episode was pretty good. I see that Slow-mo is the new vignetteing. That said, TG UK just made much better use of it in their Ferrari vs. Bentley in Lapland episode last weekend and I'm still swooning over the slo-mo snow churning shots. Season 2.5 of TGUSA hasn't given me that feeling yet.
 
Last edited:
Pure Mustang Wankfest. I lost interest quickly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JCE
Leadfoot866 said:
The horse segment we can blame on Rutledge for his pedestrian driving...
Click to expand...

Blame the script. :) If they'd gone flat out they would have been standing around for 20 minutes waiting for the horse to show up.
Still, would have been nice to see them open the Roush up more.
 
cars I'd like to see on Top Gear USA: Dodge Challenger manual, check!
Puddy, my favorite character from Seinfeld
Coco...that chimp's all right, hi five!
I'll tell you what's stupid: You...stupid!
 
I guess I was the only one who has some complaints about this one. It was a good episode, but I think they could have done some things better.

First minor thing I noticed, since when has the camaro been a 'girly' car in any way? I just thought it was a dumb thing to make fun of Tanner for. The paint job wasn't my preference, and it obviously would have been better with a manual, but 'girly', whatever.<_< Also, Rutledge implying the challenger would be faster than the 302, just plain wrong, considering it is much heavier it is and the soft suspension it has.

Making Tanner's lip fall off so he couldn't win the last challenge was just lame. Now they conveniently all tie? What a cop out. Just have one 'win' and tell us your opinions of the cars, you know like the UK version does. Can't upset Ford letting the camaro win though I guess.:rolleyes:

The big thing that bothered me was the horse race. It was so dumb to follow the speed limit when you are on a clearly closed road and just did a huge burnout in the middle of the road. If you need to sandbag to not blow away the horses, fine, but don't be dumb about it. Worse yet, the hand off could have been an awesome stunt and almost was, but you have to drop it for 'comedy'?:blink: That silliness really spoiled the fun and killed the pace of a cool race. What was worst of all, was that even though they failed to make a really awesome race, they also failed to review the cars. All we found out was the hp of the Roush and the Boss and that there was a Boss in the '60s. I would have really liked even a brief review of both cars and why I would spend $15 more for the Roush or should just get the Boss.

It was a good episode, but it could have been great if they had less fake silliness and had some actual information. They 'reviewed' 5 cars and all we found out was the hp numbers and that the mustang has a live axle. No additional facts, no real comparison, and no opinions at all. I guess it's completely an entertainment show at this point. I wish it was a little more entertaining then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TC
crashmaxx said:
I guess I was the only one who has some complaints about this one. It was a good episode, but I think they could have done some things better.

First minor thing I noticed, since when has the camaro been a 'girly' car in any way? I just thought it was a dumb thing to make fun of Tanner for. The paint job wasn't my preference, and it obviously would have been better with a manual, but 'girly', whatever.<_< Also, Rutledge implying the challenger would be faster than the 302, just plain wrong, considering it is much heavier it is and the soft suspension it has.

Making Tanner's lip fall off so he couldn't win the last challenge was just lame. Now they conveniently all tie? What a cop out. Just have one 'win' and tell us your opinions of the cars, you know like the UK version does. Can't upset Ford letting the camaro win though I guess.:rolleyes:

The big thing that bothered me was the horse race. It was so dumb to follow the speed limit when you are on a clearly closed road and just did a huge burnout in the middle of the road. If you need to sandbag to not blow away the horses, fine, but don't be dumb about it. Worse yet, the hand off could have been an awesome stunt and almost was, but you have to drop it for 'comedy'?:blink: That silliness really spoiled the fun and killed the pace of a cool race. What was worst of all, was that even though they failed to make a really awesome race, they also failed to review the cars. All we found out was the hp of the Roush and the Boss and that there was a Boss in the '60s. I would have really liked even a brief review of both cars and why I would spend $15 more for the Roush or should just get the Boss.

It was a good episode, but it could have been great if they had less fake silliness and had some actual information. They 'reviewed' 5 cars and all we found out was the hp numbers and that the mustang has a live axle. No additional facts, no real comparison, and no opinions at all. I guess it's completely an entertainment show at this point. I wish it was a little more entertaining then.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. They said nothing about the cars. Really, The Boss is composed? That is it. Not that it is probably one of the best handling American cars on the market? Not that it is faster than a M3. Nothing about its fantastic racing history with Parnelli Jones? Nothing. I feel like they dumb things down for American audiences, and I am an American. The race was also kinda meh. It was filmed well, but I did not find it entertaining. The only saving grace was the drift.

The other segments were ok. Electro shock was funny. And the drag race was a cool idea. NASCAR, not for me, but I get it.

Overall the whole thing felt generic. 7/10
 
Better than most but still fairly bad in my opinion. Too much screwing around and not enough discussing the cars. The best part was Tanner's brief stint in the 302. That was quite an epic powerslide. :p

Not that it is faster than a M3.
Click to expand...

Gonna need a reference on that. The Laguna Seca is faster than an M3 but not the basic 302. The 302 was barely faster than the Evora on a wet lap around the TGUS track and an Evora is quite a slow pig.

I rated it a 3. Better than most TGUS episodes though. My favorite one so far was 2-5, which was the Jag, Fauxari and Roller and the epic 911 GT2RS film (one of I'd say the top 10 films of ANY Top Gear, not just TGUS). Rated that episode a 6/10 and it was far better than any other episode in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
jsausley said:
Gonna need a reference on that. The Laguna Seca is faster than an M3 but not the basic 302. The 302 was barely faster than the Evora on a wet lap around the TGUS track and an Evora is quite a slow pig.
Click to expand...

Have you read this? http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...ang_gt_vs_2011_bmw_m3_comparison/viewall.html

In the hands of an amateur, the *regular* 5.0 is faster around the Streets of Willow than a Competition Package M3 (which is faster than a *regular* M3), while in the hands of a pro, it's practically tied with it. Do you *really* believe that a Boss 302 will be slower than it's "lowly" sibling in the same conditions?
 
gave it a 7 :_)


+


Gyvon said:
Interesting that the Mustang didn't win (either the main segment or the horse race) and this episode was sponsored by Ford.
Click to expand...

if indeed it was (sponsored by ford) than it was quite fair
 
Last edited:
Am I the only one that thinks that Tanner's fake splitter falling off was really an accident? He really looked like he had no idea what had gone wrong when he was driving the car.

It might be acting, but it looked real, at least to me.
 
A.J. said:
Am I the only one that thinks that Tanner's fake splitter falling off was really an accident? He really looked like he had no idea what had gone wrong when he was driving the car. It might be acting, but it looked real, at least to me.
Click to expand...

I guess, like all TG duct-taped modifications, it was expected to fail (gradually?) at speed out on the track, but not at 75mph while still in pit lane - hence his genuine look of surprise.
 
carrrnuttt said:
Have you read this? http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...ang_gt_vs_2011_bmw_m3_comparison/viewall.html

In the hands of an amateur, the *regular* 5.0 is faster around the Streets of Willow than a Competition Package M3 (which is faster than a *regular* M3), while in the hands of a pro, it's practically tied with it. Do you *really* believe that a Boss 302 will be slower than it's "lowly" sibling in the same conditions?
Click to expand...

TG tested the Competition Pack which was slower than the bone standard M3. Just for reference. Here's the important part:

VIR Grand West, C&D Lightning Laps (high speed circuit)

28 3:02.8 FORD MUSTANG BOSS 302 LAGUNA SECA LL2 2/12
29 3:03.6 CHEVROLET CORVETTE LL2 8/07
30 3:03.8 PORSCHE BOXSTER SPYDER LL3 2/11
31 3:03.9 PORSCHE CAYMAN R LL3 2/12
32 3:04.0 CADILLAC CTS-V SEDAN LL2 11/08
33 3:04.0 FORD MUSTANG SHELBY GT500 LL2 2/11
34 3:04.2 CADILLAC CTS-V COUPE LL3 2/11
35 3:04.5 LOTUS EXIGE S LL3 8/07
36 3:04.8 AUDI TT RS LL3 2/12
37 3:04.9 MERCEDES-BENZ CLS63 AMG LL3 2/12
38 3:05.3 LOTUS EVORA S LL3 2/12
39 3:05.4 BMW M3 COUPE LL2 2/10
40 3:05.4 LEXUS IS F LL2 2/11
41 3:05.6 BMW M3 COUPE LL2 11/08
42 3:05.6 PORSCHE 911 CARRERA S LL3 2/10
43 3:05.8 PORSCHE CAYMAN S LL3 2/10
44 3:05.8 PORSCHE 911 TURBO LL4 8/07
45 3:05.9 FORD MUSTANG SHELBY GT500 LL2 8/07
46 3:06.3 MERCEDES-BENZ C63 AMG COUPE LL3 2/12
47 3:06.4 JAGUAR XKR LL3 2/10
48 3:06.5 MERCEDES-BENZ C63 AMG LL2 11/08
49 3:06.5 MERCEDES-BENZ E63 AMG LL3 2/11
50 3:06.6 BMW 1-SERIES M LL3 2/12
51 3:07.4 FORD MUSTANG SHELBY GT500 LL2 2/10
52 3:08.3 LOTUS EVORA LL3 2/11
53 3:08.4 AUDI TTS LL2 2/10
54 3:08.6 FORD MUSTANG GT 5.0 LL2 2/11
55 3:08.9 JAGUAR XFR LL2 2/11
56 3:09.2 LOTUS ELISE LL2 11/06
57 3:09.3 CHEVROLET CORVETTE (Z51) LL2 11/06
58 3:09.4 DODGE CHALLENGER SRT8 392 LL2 2/12
59 3:09.5 PORSCHE CAYMAN S LL2 11/06
60 3:09.5 CHEVROLET CAMARO SS LL2 2/10
61 3:10.0 BMW M6 LL3 11/06
62 3:10.1 DODGE CHARGER SRT8 LL2 2/12
63 3:10.4 BMW Z4 sDRIVE35is LL3 2/12
64 3:10.5 BMW 335i COUPE LL2 8/07
65 3:10.6 MITSUBISHI LANCER EVOLUTION SE LL2 2/11
66 3:10.8 AUDI S4 LL2 2/10
67 3:11.0 FORD MUSTANG SHELBY GT500 LL2 11/06
Click to expand...

I'll be honest, I don't really trust Motor Trend that much... C&D is much better in my opinion, but that is just opinion I suppose.

*EDIT* Would like to see the two run with the same set of rubber. M3 as tested is with Continentals and the Mustang has PZeros. I'm sure that makes a big difference. I will say that I'm impressed by the new Mustangs. I'd love to see 2000-ish era Mustang compared to these... it would be hilariously bad.
 
Last edited:
jsausley said:
I'll be honest, I don't really trust Motor Trend that much... C&D is much better in my opinion, but that is just opinion I suppose.
Click to expand...

The same C&D that had the 2005 Mustang beating the 2005 GTO due to the infamous "Gotta-have-it Factor" that they made up just for that test since the GTO beat it in every meaningful category?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top