[12x07] December 14th, 2008

[iam-nobody]

I can't believe i did this but i watch the ep of the one show on bbc i player and did not see the cars.

[Crash Biker]

I don't think this has been mentioned so far, but in the minor trivia department:

Ironlord kindly identified the morse code on page 1 referred to Gary Newman. I am quite sure Stiggy did mean Gary Numan. Mr Numan rose to general fame in the UK in 1979 with two charming little ditties, both #1 hits, "Cars" and "Are Friends Electric?". Somewhat appropriate for the Tesla lap.

Cheers

Crash

[AarheadC]

Originally Posted by Heathrow

Well I watched the OneShow as it went out live on Monday 15th December, to see if Adrian would make some response to 12x07 the previous night – but nothing was said.

As to transmission with the little cars on the wall, that could have been filmed anytime in the previous week or so before Top Gear filming 12x07 took place on Wednesday 10th December. Probably set up on the 4th December, when Jezza was a guest on the show the week before.

I really hope that actually happened during one of the episodes. It would make it that much funnier!

[Spudgy]

Pork sword was a cracker. Tom Jones was a dud, as they usually are when they're just there to plug something. His hair is starting to look kinda freaky.

Interesting to see people here saying the Tesla review was fair and honest. I don't think Tesla would think the same

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/12...acterizations/

"Never at any time did Clarkson or any of the Top Gear drivers run out of charge. In fact, they never got below 20 percent charge in either car; they never had to push a car off the track because of lack of charge or a fault."

"The "brake failure" Clarkson mentions was solely a blown fuse...I'm going to leave out comments as to why the good folks at Top Gear might have mischaracterized the blown fuse as a brake failure, which is was decidedly not."

"The vast majority of people who have taken delivery of their Roadsters (and there are more than 100 of them now) have much faster systems that recharge from dead to full in as little as 3.5 hours."

Seems the 16 hour charge time is for 110v sockets. With 220v (or with an adapter for those with 110v sockets) you get the 3.5 hour charge times.

As has already pointed out. It's not surprising the batteries didn't last as long as the specifications say either. Do they get anywhere near the same mileage in the petrol cars that they test that people would get in normal driving? Of course not.

It does make the review appear pretty biased towards making hydrogen look better IMO, which they didn't need to do.

[TomCat]

Originally Posted by Spudgy

Interesting to see people here saying the Tesla review was fair and honest. I don't think Tesla would think the same

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/12...acterizations/

"Never at any time did Clarkson or any of the Top Gear drivers run out of charge. In fact, they never got below 20 percent charge in either car; they never had to push a car off the track because of lack of charge or a fault."

"The "brake failure" Clarkson mentions was solely a blown fuse...I'm going to leave out comments as to why the good folks at Top Gear might have mischaracterized the blown fuse as a brake failure, which is was decidedly not."

"The vast majority of people who have taken delivery of their Roadsters (and there are more than 100 of them now) have much faster systems that recharge from dead to full in as little as 3.5 hours."

Why am I not surprised.

[bluetaxi]

like the 1st 7 min... miss those days of car racing.

[hudd]

Originally Posted by Spudgy

"The "brake failure" Clarkson mentions was solely a blown fuse...I'm going to leave out comments as to why the good folks at Top Gear might have mischaracterized the blown fuse as a brake failure, which is was decidedly not."

Well, it would eventually be a 'brake failure' if that fuse blows when the car is on the road..

Still, they should cherish such a positive review..

[TomCat]

Originally Posted by hudd

Well, it would eventually be a 'brake failure' if that fuse blows when the car is on the road..

The brakes didn't fail. The fuse was for the system built into the brakes that utilize the friction to generate electricity to recharge the batteries. Water and electricity don't mix. They were thrashing the car in the rain and managed to blow a fuse. I seriously doubt Tesla would design the braking system to rely solely on a single fuse, otherwise you'll careen off the nearest cliff to very un-explosive death.

Originally Posted by hudd

Still, they should cherish such a positive review..

If you click the link, they are very happy with the review and think the cynical Clarkson gave their car very high praise.

They were just alittle concerned about all the lies in the review.

[hudd]

Originally Posted by TomCat

The brakes didn't fail. The fuse was for the system built into the brakes that utilize the friction to generate electricity to recharge the batteries. Water and electricity don't mix. They were thrashing the car in the rain and managed to blow a fuse. I seriously doubt Tesla would design the braking system to rely solely on a single fuse, otherwise you'll careen off the nearest cliff to very un-explosive death.

I see now, thanks for clearing that one up.

Originally Posted by TomCat

If you click the link, they are very happy with the review and think the cynical Clarkson gave their car very high praise.

They were just alittle concerned about all the lies in the review.

To be fair, the entire Tesla part felt like a segue into Clarity; first getting people warmed up to an alternative-car in Top Gear way.. Personally I found that more concerning, and I would like to see a road review of Tesla as well. Fuse example above is just one example of how much had gone into the Roadster. But I suppose its lap time says a lot more than the Clarkson's review

[Dr_Grip]

Originally Posted by TomCat

The brakes didn't fail. The fuse was for the system built into the brakes that utilize the friction to generate electricity to recharge the batteries. Water and electricity don't mix. They were thrashing the car in the rain and managed to blow a fuse.

Firstly, i think a green motoring blog quoting Tesla's marketing director might be even more biased than TG. Second, even on my 30-year-old-classic there are no problems with blown fuses in the rain. A blown fuse because of water entering sounds like a much more dramatic failiure for an electric car than some "it's not a supercar if it doesn't break down" brake failiure.
Additionally, IF, i am only guessing here, the Tesla uses the same wartning light for the "friction reuse charging system" and "other braking problems", what you get is a "general braking problem" error. On newer-model VWs, for example, you got a steady warning for any remotely braking-related problem (what the driver's manual translates as "visit service asap") and the same light blinking for massive failiure (which said manual translates as "stop the car immediately, do not drive under any circumstances)". Thus, eventhough with the brakes working fine, i would not give the car any more trakc action with some warning lights on. But as i said, all that's just a lucky guess.

They were just alittle concerned about all the lies in the review.

And i am a little concerned of you using a big word like "lies" as long as its Tesla's marketing director's word against TG's word. Especially when the marketing person uses a lawsuit-proof wording like "most likely did not run out of juice"....

As you might have noticed, the possiblilty for faster recharge times with special equipment was mentioned on the show... and anyone who uses a prase like "as little as 3,5 h" is clearly working in marketing. 3,5 hours to fill up a car is still unacceptable long.

Originally Posted by Crash Biker

I don't think this has been mentioned so far, but in the minor trivia department:

Ironlord kindly identified the morse code on page 1 referred to Gary Newman. I am quite sure Stiggy did mean Gary Numan. Mr Numan rose to general fame in the UK in 1979 with two charming little ditties, both #1 hits, "Cars" and "Are Friends Electric?". Somewhat appropriate for the Tesla lap.

Argh. I should have thought of this too! Thanks!

[TomCat]

Originally Posted by Dr_Grip

Firstly, i think a green motoring blog quoting Tesla's marketing director might be even more biased than TG.

I don't think so here. They admit they're happy with the review. They don't say that TopGear and the BBC necessarily "lied" about anything in the review, but apparently what was said in the show and what actually happened are not one and the same. TopGear is no longer concerned about being factual and educational. All TopGear cares about anymore is ratings. The show is 95% scripted now and that also includes the car reviews. They stage accidents and crashes, why not running out of gas or an overheating electric motor? It's not like they actually showed any warning lights on the car saying it was out of juice or overheating...

Originally Posted by Dr_Grip

Second, even on my 30-year-old-classic there are no problems with blown fuses in the rain. A blown fuse because of water entering sounds like a much more dramatic failiure for an electric car than some "it's not a supercar if it doesn't break down" brake failiure.

Do your 30 year old brakes generate electricity under braking that travels back into your cars electrical system?

It sounds to me that all the rain water drenching everything and all the extremely heavy braking may have had something to do with the blown fuse. But that's just my opinion, which is based on nothing. Maybe it was just a bad fuse, who knows.

[szeis4cookie]

Originally Posted by TomCat

The brakes didn't fail. The fuse was for the system built into the brakes that utilize the friction to generate electricity to recharge the batteries. Water and electricity don't mix. They were thrashing the car in the rain and managed to blow a fuse. I seriously doubt Tesla would design the braking system to rely solely on a single fuse, otherwise you'll careen off the nearest cliff to very un-explosive death.

Considering that every single one of the current crop of hybrids uses regenerative braking to recharge the batteries, and their regenerative braking fuses don't blow in the rain, I'd be even more concerned.

[TomCat]

Originally Posted by szeis4cookie

Considering that every single one of the current crop of hybrids uses regenerative braking to recharge the batteries, and their regenerative braking fuses don't blow in the rain, I'd be even more concerned.

You're telling me hybrids have never blown a fuse? Are you sure about that?

And like I said, I'm only speculating about the rain thing. I'm not an engineer and I don't know how the system in the Tesla works. It could have just been a bad fuse or it could have been the result of something else. Cars blow fuses. That's what they're there for. A fully electric car probably has a lot more of them for obvious reasons and they're probably a great deal more sensitive then normal cars and even hybrids.

[Dr_Grip]

Of course the car reviews are scripted, but not to lie, but to make a point. Just like a written review in the motoring press is not dictated while driving, a review on a motoring programme like TG is planned beforehand. You test the car, get the facts, make up your mind and sit down before your laptop. But instead of writing a review that is printed, you write a story outline and then a detailled script to communicate your findings in the audiovisual medium that is TV. THEN you get your director and camera crew, shoot whatever footage you need for your review, record some voiceovers and after some hours in the cutting room, voilá, a car review. That's the way every motoring programme does it and has done it since the beginning of television.
Of course the Tesla would not stop in the middle of the track. Cause like a normal car, it has a fuel gauge. Clarkson _definitely_ made it back to the plug. But that's beside the point. The whole "pushing the car to the plug" bit was a TG test track visualisation of "what if electricity runs out right in the middle of nowhere".
I fully believe that the Tesla runs out of juice much faster than the advertising says, and that's the whole point Jezza tried to make. Why? Cause my laptop computer, my flashlight, my car, my camping stove, every single piece of technology i ever owned runs out of juice/petrol/gas much faster than the manufacturer says.

I am not defending anything TG does but we should keep in mind that great TV always is "scripted" in some way. That's the only way TV can work.
TV news are scripted. Even in documentary films, people interviewed discuss their answers, maybe even the wording of their answers with the director before the camera rolls and do multiple takes. "Traveling documentations", where someone goes on a trip with, let's say, the orient express, are filmed on multiple journeys to get all the shots needed, just like TG races are.
Ask our forum friend Plissken about how tedious live TV production is, our just read about it.

[Goose+]

10/10

[alihaig]

Originally Posted by TomCat

The brakes didn't fail. The fuse was for the system built into the brakes that utilize the friction to generate electricity to recharge the batteries. Water and electricity don't mix. They were thrashing the car in the rain and managed to blow a fuse. I seriously doubt Tesla would design the braking system to rely solely on a single fuse, otherwise you'll careen off the nearest cliff to very un-explosive death

But you are quite happy for them to design a recharging system that doesn't work when its wet? Why would people pay £90,000 for a car they can only use when its sunny?

EDIT: Also I just noticed the source those comments are coming via - Autobloggeen "We obsessively cover the green scene" - hardly the most unbiased of sources.

[the Interceptor]

Originally Posted by Dr_Grip

Of course the car reviews are scripted, but not to lie, but to make a point.

Granted, but why would they make the point that the Tesla Roadster is unreliable when actually it wasn't?

Originally Posted by alihaig

But you are quite happy for them to design a recharging system that doesn't work when its wet? Why would people pay £90,000 for a car they can only use when its sunny?

May I just say that this is exactly the same as with the gearbox of the Nissan GT-R: it will not always break, will it? Where the f*ck does this thought come from? Why do you assume that because a fuse blew on this test car, the fuse will always blow when someone drives a Tesla Roadster in the rain?

[Dr_Grip]

Originally Posted by the Interceptor

Granted, but why would they make the point that the Tesla Roadster is unreliable when actually it wasn't?

It _was_ unreliable. Not even Tesla's head of marketing says it wasnt.

Originally Posted by Ecomentalist blog

Our take on this is that a blown fuse, while not a big problem and easy to fix, is still an issue and all that the average driver would know is that the brakes aren't working properly. Surely, though, Clarkson isn't the average driver, so perhaps he should have reported on the cause of the brake failure, but whatever.

Yep, Jezza might have known better, but what he did was communicate how it would look to the average driver: As if the brakes would not be working properly, just as he said on TV.

Even if some people are unhappy with the direction they feel TG is taking in the last seasons, don't attack them when, to everyone's, including my own surprise, they did the right thing and not make fun of the Tesla, but take it seriously. They treated it like any other sportscar.

[alihaig]

Originally Posted by the Interceptor

May I just say that this is exactly the same as with the gearbox of the Nissan GT-R: it will not always break? Where the f*ck does this thought come from? Why do you assume that because a fuse blew on this test car, the fuse will always blow when someone drives a Tesla Roadster in the rain?

I was clearly just exaggerating the point - of course it won't break all the time, but it was the poster I replied to that said "Electricity and Water don't mix" and his post generally came across as "If you drive the car in the rain of course it will get wet and blow a fuse".

Edit: Here it is:

Water and electricity don't mix. They were thrashing the car in the rain and managed to blow a fuse

[NecroJoe]

Originally Posted by alihaig

Showed the big flaw in all the arguments about electric cars having enough range for everyday use - it might be good 90% of the time but I can't afford another car for the infrequent but important trips I make that are more than 250 miles, and I'm not going to wait for a 16 hour charge half way.

So the once every two months you do, you rent a car for $60, you're still money ahead, and you "footprint" is much much smaller...if you care about that.

It's the same argument for a 7-seat minivan or SUV for people with 2 kids. "But we need it sometimes." and "well I can carry 3 more kids in a carpool." Yeah? You know what? When I got rid of my pick-up truck, people stopped asking me to help them move their furniture. When it comes time for ME to move MY furniture, I'll spend $60 and rent a van. I don't need to be driving one, everywhere, every day.

Originally Posted by kurthest

The future looks scary tbh, if cars are gonna be like that Honda.
Who the hell wants to drive around in a car that doesnt make a glorious noise when you put your foot down?

You can't have something spinning at 12,500rpm and NOT make a glorious noise. Seriously, it's an awesome noise when you're in one...just different.

Originally Posted by TomCat

I think the Tesla is a great car, but it's not perfect. If you drove the thing normally, I'm sure you could get over 200 miles a charge.

I was in one that had over 300 miles on a single charge, and it still had more to go because he was driving in the hills and because of that used the regen braking a lot to keep the battery charged. He wasn't thrashing it, just on a leisurely drive. I'm sure had kept the loud pedal down, he'd have gotten less mileage.

Originally Posted by The Chad

The Tesla, after doing some quick math, on a normal drive would get approx. 25 miles to the gallon, give or take. 10 gallon tank, 250 mile range under normal driving.

Under hard driving, sports cars on the Top Gear Test Track get about 5 miles to the gallon. That would effectively give the car a 50 mile range. It ran dead at 55 miles. I don't see the bloody problem.

Thank you for that math. That's interesting...

Originally Posted by JosefCarlin

25 miles to the gallon of what? Electrons?

He's talking about range, dude.

Originally Posted by JosefCarlin

...novelties owned by aging ecomentalist freezing their butts of from all that "global warming."

The funny thing is that the people freezing are in Mexico, and Canada is suffering drought and heat waves. :-p

Originally Posted by Randonimity

Why do people forget that there's a middle step between hardcore track driving, and driving your kids to school? There's this whole middle step of just having an enjoyable drive in something fun. That's where cars like the Tesla are belong. Heck, the DB9 and Maserati Gran Tourismo belong there, too, I think.

The Tesla is a genuinely interesting electric car if not for the fact my old iPod runs longer than it.

Well, your ipod has a lot less work to do... :-p Also, adding 50% battery capacity to your ipod would add a negligible amount of weight...adding 50% battery capacity to the car would likely add a couple hundred pounds. They also say it takes 16 hours to charge...that's just if you take an extension cord and plug it into your wall. You can get a wired unit that cuts that to 6 hours. Also, and I know I'm in the minority here, I'm not saying they are everywhere...but my local parking garage has space for electric parking. You pre-pay for the electricity, and charge it while you're at work, and it's charged to your PIN-numbered account. They'd like to have it RFIDd so you don't even need to enter your pin...just pull up, and fill up.

Originally Posted by klankymen

Oh, about the water vapour causing greenhouse effect... if one thinks about all the potential energy trapped in water vapour (just think of a steam engine, or a tea kettle), shouldn't it be possible for the car to use up that energy as well, before releasing the water as a simple trickle of liquid water?

Wouldn't it just need to be cooled?

[QUOTE=acabinian;859728]I genuinely think he was impressed with it on the basis that it is a car that you can drive and enjoy (partly because it basically is a Lotus Elise). /QUOTE]

That's taking it a bit far...some of it's chassis is based on the platform... That's like saying my cakes are as good as the local bakery's because we use the same flour.

Lastly, the Tesla isn't meant to be a track car, but a sports card for the road.

Originally Posted by JosefCarlin

Even if all those new electric power plants were nuclear what are we going to do with all the toxic waste that lasts for hundreds of years,

I don't think you mean "hundreds" of years. :-p

Originally Posted by efoolution

why didn´t they go "we had to wait quite a bit for this, but now it´s here, and Honda were the first to build one they will sell you"?

Because you can't buy it. You lease it for $600 a month (which is still a loss for Honda) and you have to give it back. You also had to be pre-approved to get one. They would only give it to people who had certain automotive useage requirements.

Originally Posted by Spectre

Both of my petrol powered cars DO have a 500 mile unrefueled range. In fact, the Series III can go 624+ miles on a refuelling. The XJR can get 513+.

My car gets just shy of 300...that means you have a huge tank, or you somehow get better mileage than my 2.5L. :-p

My dad's pick-up had two fuel tanks. Enormous range for that I-6. At some point, though, there's a level of reasonable range, and a point of ridiculousness when it comes to how much "fuel" should the vehicle store. 250-300 is a good level, I think for most everyone.

Originally Posted by PettR

And, Jeremy said: ''in the meantime though, we hope you have a very happy jul.''
Did he say ''jul''? Because that means christmas in norwegian

I'll bet he said it as "yule." Like a Yule log or "Troll the ancient Yule tide carol." It probably comes from jul, but he probably mentioning the english language's meaning.

Originally Posted by the Interceptor

The only question that remains is how much water vapour the FCX emits.

1 teaspoon or water for every 15 miles, if I remember correctly...something like that. Anyways, the water vapor created from a fuel cell is still less than the water vapor from the combistion process. I'd be more willing to drink what is collected from a fuel cell car than a gasoline powered car.

Originally Posted by evowlaf

I wondered this before if hydrogen fuel cells work out, will airplanes go back to prop driven engines that are powered by electricity?

Why not turbines powered by electricity? (pardon the ignorance, that's a serious question...I don't know the answer. )