Builders of the "Hawk" Stratos replica hit out against TopGear!

they make the T-rex in canada. (quebec actually) something for you petrolheads to look up if you've never heard of it.

3535_01.jpg


Let's see the Stig spin that one! Actually, it would probably be very easy!

credit: that pic is from http://www.gizmag.com/go/3535/
 
Last edited:
Fords biggest problem is the states. It takes cars that are good in the U.K./Europe then makes them here watered down to the point that it's just a shell of what it originally was designed to be, then they slap a standard run of the mill engine in it, take out the independant rear suspension, and half of the quality interior parts.

if they just refocused everything (and they are finally starting to) just make the same car in both part of the world and the problems would be solved, and they would have a lot less parts to worry about.
 
if they just refocused everything (and they are finally starting to) just make the same car in both part of the world and the problems would be solved, and they would have a lot less parts to worry about.

Yep, that's exactly what the new CEO is after.

However, back to this little fiasco from TG. I have to admit that were I Ford, GM, or whomever, I would think more than twice about giving TG a car to ...."test", after the way this little guy was treated. After all:

1. you're not going to win a pissing match with Carkson & company

2. you'll probably get your press car back damaged

3. as has been said ad nauseum, this is (no longer) journalism, but entertainment.



If this kind of nonsense continues I have to say that were I a car manufacturer, I might not outright refuse Top Gear, but might have to regretfully inform the production team that the vehicles they wanted were in very short supply and usually "unavailable".
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWF
you have to remember though, they find ways of tracking them down. ie, Enzo, that weird rover that james tested with a pin camera in his tie. and i'm sure there were a couple of others.


or in the american muscle car challenge, buy one then sell it after using it as i believe chrysler wouldn't lend one.
 
Couple of things:

- the problem is not so much that the TG guys thrashed and thus damaged the car. That is to be expected in a proper car review. However, the manufacturer seemingly wasn't told what they're planning to do with his car, so he was only able to react and make the best of the situation.
TG asked for a sample for static photos, then JC thrashed the car, and the Stig blew the engine. So the manufacturer took it back to repair it as good as possible in the given time frame. Then, TG did a number of laps including deliberate spins prove a point.

- after this, there is no way left to determine whether the TG guys are factual or not in any situation. Problem is that they often pretend (and sometimes explicitly say) to be factual, which now also has to be questioned. That effectively renders TG a pure entertainment show. No problem there, they just should stop pretending that they are factual at all then.

- proving your point is an essential part of journalism. But if a journalist has any sense of honor left, he should put a limit to the amount he wants to bend the facts to make the goal. The Tesla Roadster being an example, it has way enough faults to prove that the electric car still isn't very practical. In the same way the TG crew could have made that point and still stick to the facts, they could have demonstrated the shortcomings of a replica by representing the Stratos kit car truthfully. There is no actual need to lie to make their points, but they still do, because they want to.
 
I'm actually with the guy. I think that proving a point to the expense of others is very bad journalism. Sure, Top Gear is very much entertainment and very little journalism, but this has reached a level it never should have.

Forget that you're a Top Gear fan for a second. Instead, imagine you're the builder of a kit car. You invest huge chunks of your life and your money to make the car as good as possible, and you create a kit car that actually works. Then, Top Gear asks you whether they can feature your car on the show, because they're doing a special on the original manufacturer. You give them your car, and they completely misrepresent its actual behaviour, because they had the bit scripted priorly and needed the car to comply. Would you just shrug and say "Hey, that's television!"???

I do believe that he will sell more of his kit cars now than he would have before, simply because many more people know of it now (though I must say that it was very easy to find on the internet if you were in the market for a Statos replica already before Top Gear). However, I also believe that he would have even more customers if they had represented the car as it actually is. Sure, a lot of people are still drooling from what they saw, but when their brain kicks in when the hand reaches for the wallet, who wouldn't have second thoughs now? "A great looking and sounding car, but the wiper just tears off at speed, the brakes lock up and even a pro driver spun it repeatedly. Do I really want that car?".

As for Top Gear, where do these pieces take us? Which words the guys speak out am I to believe, and which shouldn't I believe? Is it all just entertainment? Am I to choose wildly which bit is a true fact, and which bit is just imaginary? They give so much information on any car they review, what do I end up with if its all worthless? Yeah, a nice hour of HD car entertainment at its finest, but a hollow stage behind a curtain of "We tell you what a car is really like!".

Okay, I'm a kit car builder that gets a call from Top Gear asking to use one of my cars. After I've finished thanking whatever gods may be listening for the MASSIVE amount of free publicity I'm about to receive and the chance to take my cottage industry from a dozen cars a year to a few hundred I spend every waking moment between now and then preparing a car for them to use.

I am fully aware of Top Gear, their take on cars and that they push them very very hard. I take every possible step to make sure that the car they receive off me is perfect in every way. If I do not do this then I am an idiot. It's not as if Top Gear is a new unknown show is it? This is a worldwide audience of hundreds of millions of people and it WILL generate orders for my product - a good business owner will take that opportunity and milk it for all its worth.

Personally I think that Skylock's post is bang on - the owner of the car knew damn well it wasn't set up correctly and couldn't keep it going in a straight line. That doesn't sound like Top Gear had to look very hard to find faults. There are personal agendas at play here and I think it's a shame that they're now pissing away all the good will and publicity they've gained with this whinning nonsense. Certainly I wouldn't ever want to do business with this firm as a customer simply because of the attitude expressed in the initial post. They knew what they were getting into and if they didn't, or didn't think they could handle it, it is THEIR responsibility to decline the offer. Simple as that.
 
Okay, I'm a kit car builder that gets a call from Top Gear asking to use one of my cars. After I've finished thanking whatever gods may be listening for the MASSIVE amount of free publicity I'm about to receive and the chance to take my cottage industry from a dozen cars a year to a few hundred I spend every waking moment between now and then preparing a car for them to use.

I am fully aware of Top Gear, their take on cars and that they push them very very hard. I take every possible step to make sure that the car they receive off me is perfect in every way. If I do not do this then I am an idiot. It's not as if Top Gear is a new unknown show is it? This is a worldwide audience of hundreds of millions of people and it WILL generate orders for my product - a good business owner will take that opportunity and milk it for all its worth.

Personally I think that Skylock's post is bang on - the owner of the car knew damn well it wasn't set up correctly and couldn't keep it going in a straight line. That doesn't sound like Top Gear had to look very hard to find faults. There are personal agendas at play here and I think it's a shame that they're now pissing away all the good will and publicity they've gained with this whinning nonsense. Certainly I wouldn't ever want to do business with this firm as a customer simply because of the attitude expressed in the initial post. They knew what they were getting into and if they didn't, or didn't think they could handle it, it is THEIR responsibility to decline the offer. Simple as that.

It's at this point I feel the only suitable response is.....







n00b! Get him!:mrgreen:
 
Yeah; our new guy was totally talking sense.

:welcome: by the way!
 
Okay, I'm a kit car builder that gets a call from Top Gear asking to use one of my cars. After I've finished thanking whatever gods may be listening for the MASSIVE amount of free publicity I'm about to receive and the chance to take my cottage industry from a dozen cars a year to a few hundred I spend every waking moment between now and then preparing a car for them to use.

I am fully aware of Top Gear, their take on cars and that they push them very very hard. I take every possible step to make sure that the car they receive off me is perfect in every way. If I do not do this then I am an idiot. It's not as if Top Gear is a new unknown show is it? This is a worldwide audience of hundreds of millions of people and it WILL generate orders for my product - a good business owner will take that opportunity and milk it for all its worth.

Personally I think that Skylock's post is bang on - the owner of the car knew damn well it wasn't set up correctly and couldn't keep it going in a straight line. That doesn't sound like Top Gear had to look very hard to find faults. There are personal agendas at play here and I think it's a shame that they're now pissing away all the good will and publicity they've gained with this whinning nonsense. Certainly I wouldn't ever want to do business with this firm as a customer simply because of the attitude expressed in the initial post. They knew what they were getting into and if they didn't, or didn't think they could handle it, it is THEIR responsibility to decline the offer. Simple as that.

Aside from my earlier totally frivolous response to this post here are the true facts that I was able to gain from the MD of Hawk cars when I called him earlier today claiming to be from the Daily Mail.

1. He had previously loaned one of his own cars to original TG 15 years ago and received very positive press and was treated with respect as was his vehicle.
2. He assisted with arranging for the car that was featured to appear on the basis that it was to be used for static filming only. Neither he nor the current owner had built the car that was used.
3. It was made clear to the production team from the off that the car was not in a fully driveable state.
4. Having had the brake issue sorted the car was then thrashed by a Stig (not the one we believe to be the principle one as I am sure he has more of an idea of mechanical sympathy) and the engine blew.
5. The Power lap was edited in such a was as to portray the product as sub-standard and shoddy even though they said it depended on the skill of the builder. At no point was it made clear that the car was on dry tires, had been garaged for 9 months and so on.

Small businesses in this country and elsewhere are going to the wall daily in the current climate, and for a brand as big as TG to behave in such a way is irresponsible.

I'm not one to jump on a "knock TG at every chance" bandwagon like so much of the UK press which is why I called Gerry Hawkridge for his side of things. I will be happy to do the same in future to get the true facts rather than soundbites so the Daily Fail et al can fulfil an agenda. However in this case I feel that TG were unfair in the way they portrayed things and more to the point I am disappointed that someone who has put his heart and soul into something about which he is truly passionate should be forced into spending money he can (probably) ill afford in engaging lawyers to defend his product.

I have been a TG fan for over two decades, but in this case and in my humble opinion I think they fucked up big time. If ever there was a time for a genuine apology during the News and a bit of proper humble pie from Jeremy then this is it. Morris Marina fans may be a bunch of sad, rust-bucket driving nerds and therefore a target for TG and us alike however Hawk Cars is a business employing people, some of whom will have families who depend on them for their wellbeing and security so before you reach for the neg rep button be grateful you have a job and can feed, house and clothe yourself and anyone for who you have responsibility.
 
I'm with MWF on this, I was hugely disappointed by the Hawk review and especially the Stig lap. I think Top Gear did both Hawk and its fans a disservice by putzing about with the review.
 
At no point was it made clear that the car was on dry tires

original post from the guy ranting said:
At 9am the editor came to ask me if I wouldn't mind fitting the 2nd set of wet weather tyres as it was pouring with rain and he said that they wouldn't get far on the slicks - I duly obliged.

Sounds to me like TG gave it proper footwear.
 
Sounds to me like TG gave it proper footwear.

That may be so but they sure as hell didn't give it a fair or decent review. And anyway what the fuck does Jeremy know about footwear? ;)
 
That may be so but they sure as hell didn't give it a fair or decent review. And anyway what the fuck does Jeremy know about footwear? ;)

Of course not, no fair review. No reason for the hawk guy to make up stuff though, essentially doing what he accuses TG of - misrepresentation of facts.


It was never intended to be a fair review anyhow. In the entire Lancia segment they bashed the brand.
Nobody complained about the Lancias-will-rust-overnight-from-a-shower or the it-changes-shape-from-a-light-breeze.
No Gamma explodes from turning the steering wheel, yet nobody complained about this outrageous lie.
Driving along on a smooth road doesn't cause everything to fall off, yet nobody...
An engine bay doesn't just catch fire in such a pretty way with flames shooting out of every slot, yet...



...my point is, they made it quite clear the Lancia bits were not supposed to be factual. Pure cocking about.


PS: The footwear thing might be a German issue, means tyres :p
 
Personally I think that Skylock's post is bang on - the owner of the car knew damn well it wasn't set up correctly and couldn't keep it going in a straight line. That doesn't sound like Top Gear had to look very hard to find faults. There are personal agendas at play here and I think it's a shame that they're now pissing away all the good will and publicity they've gained with this whinning nonsense. Certainly I wouldn't ever want to do business with this firm as a customer simply because of the attitude expressed in the initial post. They knew what they were getting into and if they didn't, or didn't think they could handle it, it is THEIR responsibility to decline the offer. Simple as that.

Indeed, a good point and welcomes from here in Texas as well!

My earlier comments were, of course, directed at Top Gear and staff. Perhaps I should have spoken to the car supplier as well.

I can imagine a small kit car manufacturer doing whatever it can to get on a worldwide automotive program. But yes, perhaps it's just as well sometimes if it doesn't. If you can't supply a sample of your product that's the best you can make, you'd better beg off. Otherwise, you need to take what comes your way.

Herein lies the difference between my earlier statement about lying which I to NOT mean to accuse anyone of and exaggeration. Actually, what we're discussing here is dramatization. For instance...if the car went around the track and spun out, but they were not able to get the spin on film, then it would be acceptable to recreate the spin for the program, as long as it was labeled as such. Were they to spin the car on purpose simply to make a point that they felt the car was unstable, I feel that would be completely unacceptable and, frankly, a lie.

I get a feeling this will wind up being one of those cases where we never know what exactly went on, it may be a he said/she said kind of thing. Perhaps the TG representatives who secured the car were under the impression it was to be a straight review, and the focus of the piece was changed during production. Believe me, that happens a LOT in TV.

All I know is that any auto manufacturer needs to think twice before handing over a car to Top Gear.

And once again, welcome!
 
Last edited:
I get a feeling this will wind up being one of those cases where we never know what exactly went on, it may be a he said/she said kind of thing. Perhaps the TG representatives who secured the car were under the impression it was to be a straight review, and the focus of the piece was changed during production. Believe me, that happens a LOT in TV.
!

i think this is the bottom line when it comes down to it. there was likely a huge miscomunication somewhere in there and everyone is to blame.

however what it really boils down to is show ratings. they did the piece for the sake of viewer interest. so as nice as it is to blame others, it's really down to the viewers needs to be entertained completely instead of being informed.

all in the name of entertainment.
 
Just enjoy the show (or don't) and don't read too much into the things that they do. They give their opinions on cars that I will probably never get a chance to drive, so I couldn't care less about the consumer advice aspect of the show. Their reviews are pretty similar, in content at least, to the reviews by EVO, Autocar, and Motor Trend. So for the most part you know what the objective part of the review is going to be like. I like watching Top Gear because they tend to gloss over the objective stuff and go straight for the personal opinions.
That's what I mean though. The only way to enjoy the show is by not reading too much into things. Including their "personal opinions". We know that TopGear, like all tv shows, is scripted. But scripted by who? Who writes the car reviews? That's what I'm curious about. When they show a segment with Hammond reviewing a car, we know he's going off a script, but did he write that script? Those are the little things that bother me. Because let's face it, we all know that the show shouldn't be taken seriously, but not everyone else does. I constantly hear people, even on this very forum, discussing cars and quoting TopGear. And remember the last time TopGear came to America to film? They got in trouble with their permits because they were trying to misrepresent themselves as a "documentary program". :lmao:

I still love the show, and would like to see it actually improve, but it would be nice if they didn't do things like this.
 
I saw the episode last week and logged on to the site to see what was going on when I stumbled across the post. Having read the comments I am a little surprised to see people saying how unfair the testing was and that vehicle manufacturers should think twice about lending their cars to the Top Gear team. I do not recall anyone mentioning unfair test conditions for a Ferrari, Bentley, Porsche, or other car quite the way they are for this manufacturer.

Other kit cars have been on before and not done well, and Jeremy et. al, have said not to buy many other cars because they are rubbish. I do not differentiate between the 'rubbish' comments and this recent test scenario with a kit car. I agree with Skylock's assessment and would further say the letter seems to me like a precursor for a massive lawsuit. I know 'Mineworksfinetoo' called Hawk Motors and I have no doubt the MD of Hawk Motors said all kinds of "truthful" things to him, but it is only one side of the story - that of Hawk Motors.

I would also like to say the stunts on TG are just that, stunts, meant for entertainment. Stunts mean a high degree of wear and tear on a vehicle, much more than a simple test drive that have high revs, squealing tyres, and glowing rotors. If Hawk did not understand this either they have not watched TG lately or they were just incredibly naive, so for me this is all just a little bit of buyers remorse. The Koenigseggeggegg CCX with TG wing as someone wrote nearly killed the Stig and I doubt Stiggy was taking the car for a leisurely Sunday drive to gran's house when that happened.

In summation I would like to say shit happens and while I feel for Hawk and that its car did not hold up well I also think it incredibly naive of them to think the car would not be well and properly thrashed on the track. Top Gear did not do anything to this car they have not done to so many others. It is an entertainment show, if you want facts watch Paxman.
 
Top