Of those many reasons, the lack of car tests/reviews is the one that irks me.
The lack of tests/reviews? The obstreperous trio reveal their opinions of various vehicles and automobilia every episode. We find out if a car has enough torques, if the flappy-paddle gearbox really does change faster than a blink, or just what the cargo capacity is in more visual cheese terms. Each review is full of what Clarkson, Hammond and May want us to know about that particular vehicle - often bits camouflaged by cold-hard numbers in austere automotive magazines.
Although I'm guessing by 'review' you mean something something burdened with less-layperson-useful information such as intricate adenoid-inducing technical specifications and numerical representations with radix points. Perhaps utilising less ambiguous terms than "top gear" in favour of more accurate descriptors like 'fifth gear'.
Or, in
Clarkson's words (May 2007, in response to Series 9):
...these people want to know why there aren't two or three proper car tests a week. And not car tests where I drive around shouting "poweeeeer", but proper ones done by James where every nut, bolt and torque is taken out and examined.
What they want, secretly, is Chris Goffey back. And I'd love to oblige. I'd love to spend the day hooning around in a 599 or a lightweight Gallardo...
... But galloping like a huge, shit-stained horse over the horizon comes the problem: is that what the vast majority of the viewers want? Not you. Not your mates in cyberland.
But the vast swathe of people who just want to flop down on a Sunday night and watch entertaining telly. I suspect the answer is a Thatcheresque "No. No. No."
That sounds like a clear indication they weren't looking to revert back to traditional car reviews.
As the fans (mainly petrolheads) who gave the show its' audience 10 seasons ago, you have the right to be slightly annoyed when the shows' new direction leaves it's original fan base out to dry.
Of course you have the right to be disappointed, but not to a sense of entitlement that the show 'owes' you anything as phrases like "gave the show its audience 10 seasons ago" and "new direction leaves its original fan base out to dry" suggest.
Revamped Top Gear outgrew the 'original fan base'. Sure, they said 4 million viewers was enough, and an additional 4 million weren't worth selling-out for...
Wilman, October 2007:
So the quandary is: which way now - cars and four million viewers, or cocking about and eight million viewers? It's a fair question, given we're a motoring show on the one hand, and egotistical TV people who like a nice set of ratings on the other - and one we knew we'd have to address come this series.
We have, and I think we're all agreed that chasing the eight million is bollocks; a false dawn, a night with a hooker when you're drunk. The thing is, the Top Gear audience is made up of several million who like cars, and then several million more bonus viewers; the ones who say "I'm not interested in cars but I like Top Gear...".
...
But if we decided to go that way with TG we'd go mad. The bonus viewers want the next film that tops the space shuttle, or the next challenge that out-loonies the limos, and you just can't keep going like that. We'd burn out in two series and look like tits.
But that was the same time they said they'd never mention Hammond's crash again. Clarkson made it quite clear they had made a conscious decision to be an entertainment show, rather than motoring program.
Clarkson, May 2007:
Do we go back to the old days, driving round corners in saloon cars, to the accompaniment of Bad Company and 'His Mobiness'? Or do we keep on annoying the internet dweebs from Norway and North Carolina by continuing to cock about?
...
I suspect the majority of the audience would rather we loaded both cars into a large plane, flew over the Arizona desert and then pushed them out to see which hit the ground first.
...
Anyway, although we won't chase figures, we still have to give the audience something you want and like.
Which means we should make Top Gear an entertainment show featuring cars, rather than a car show, that isn't as boring as your wife and kids feared. Or have I got that all wrong?
Seven series later, the entertainment show featuring cars - rather than a car show - seems to be working quite well for them.
the show has been an "Entertainment show with cars" for longer than just the last episode. It started out mainly for the 'car freaks' and then became the compromise of entertainment and cars till about the end of the last season. Everybody's happy. The first 5 shows of this season however, have for the most part ignored the petrolhead following, and completely gone after pure entertainment. The balance is quite broken.
The balance is broken? Doesn't seem like the audience minds. The current viewing figures haven't dipped for the past couple of years - still significantly higher than before they seriously started cocking about.
No one here is boycotting the show. Just venting frustration as serves the purpose of the Internet.
Venting? It's just unnecessarily repetative criticism/bitching (that appeals to a limited audience) about other people's hard work - work that still appeals to a huge audience.
You (not you personally rideclutch) don't need to boycott it... nor do you need to fill each post-episode discussion with lists of non-episode specific things you think is wrong with Top Gear and lists of things in earlier episodes you though were much better.
Even Clarkson tempers his reviews with both positive and negative remarks. Here we have 'axe the show or reformat it to my personal tastes'.
Take the excellent "James drives to the studio"-videos for example. When you have to wonder why the show can't be more like the outtake-/promo-clips on the TG-website, something's definetly not right
You really think
James' drives to the studio would appeal to a mainstream audience?
Weight is not just about improving acceleration and improving economy. The effects of going around a corner compounds the problem of excess weight.
If you look at things like racing motorcycles, they will move the master cylinder on the handlebars inboard by a few inches, because that reduces its polar inertia when the handlebars are turning.
Inherently interesting to 'enthusiasts', but surely four million and two pairs of eyes (including Hammond's and Clarkson's) just glazed over.
Really need to evolve the show into a top gear / man lab hybrid. Still include articles on cars where appropriate but let the presenters discuss whatever they want.
Richard Hammond on restoring american muscle cars... James and Jeremy on firearms of WW2...
Gun talk and muscle car restoration doesn't really sound like evolution for Top Gear. They already regularly touch the subjects (in a light-entertainment way). It would make more sense to create a separate show.
.
.
