Top Gear finally gets its comeuppance

[MikeD]

Tesla's own particulars of claim make it clear that the "doesn't work in the real world" line came just after a discussion of charging times from various means, and an assertion (that appears to be essentially true) that to drive a Roadster from Oxfordshire to the north of Scotland would take three days if you had to rely on domestic outlets for charging.

Interestingly, it appears that TG didn't say, "It lasted 55 miles", but rather that, "We worked out that it would have lasted 55 miles." Not sure which way that counts, though

Having read all the stuff, I don't think they'll get far with the libel thing. The malicious falsehood bit, on the other hand, looks a bit more iffy for the Beeb. Especially as Tesla's claiming that one of its people saw the script, complete with "pushing car into hangar" before the car had been driven...

They're also complaining about the brake failure bit and the overheating bit, but admit that a fuse did fail in the brake system that made the powered thing that behaves like a brake servo would in a petrol car fair, and it did go into a "reduced torque" mode to prevent overheating. So not sure they'll get that far there either.

Anyway, they're only going for £100k max, so it's clearly not about the money.

 

[MikeD]

Why have they waited til now to kick off????

They complained at the time, since when it's been repeated endlessly around the world and included in a DVD box set. Seems fair enough to have another go, really.

 

[Neil]

Personally I think it's six of one/half a dozen of the other...

Tesla, like every other car manufacturer can't back up their mpg figures, but for some reason they've got the hump about TG for ridiculing them, IN DECEMBER 2008!!! Why have they waited til now to kick off????

The TG team, especially Clarkson, has perhaps(?!) exaggerated the cars shortcomings, to provide greater entertainment.

They're both essentially wrong though really aren't they?!?

As to why they've waited, it appears because the programme is still being broadcast, and sold on DVD.

As to what TG may have done, well the pdf linked has claims that the:-

"It's just a shame that in the real world it doesn't seem to work."

line was scripted before the car was even driven.

And to me, that's the crux of this. Saying that line, if not doing any "real world" testing is quite damning, definitely a smoking gun, and IMO underhand.

 

[MikeD]

That bit is indeed considerably iffy

 

[rosstheboss]

I've just read the legal bumf and to be honest, I can't see Tesla winning anything (I'm no lawyer by the way!)

To reiterate what MikeD said the "real world" doesn't really mean what Tesla want it to mean i.e. ranting it round a track isn't real world driving. I understand it to mean you having to leave it on charge for more than half a day is not practical.

Also think perhaps what TG interpret what "real world" driving is to someone who wants to buy a sports car, specifically a very focussed one like an Elise, they're going to want to give it full beans at some point!!!

How they worked out the 55 mile range is a mystery, but they could also turn round and say their calculations were flawed perhaps?!?

Having read the transcript of what JC said there were also plenty of positives in there too

Still think it got a distinct whiff of sour grapes - look how Koenigsegg came back at TG - the took the criticism on the chin and made a better product!

 

[Neil]

I've just read the legal bumf and to be honest, I can't see Tesla winning anything (I'm no lawyer by the way!)

To reiterate what MikeD said the "real world" doesn't really mean what Tesla want it to mean i.e. ranting it round a track isn't real world driving. I understand it to mean you having to leave it on charge for more than half a day is not practical.

Also think perhaps what TG interpret what "real world" driving is to someone who wants to buy a sports car, specifically a very focussed one like an Elise, they're going to want to give it full beans at some point!!!

How they worked out the 55 mile range is a mystery, but they could also turn round and say their calculations were flawed perhaps?!?

Having read the transcript of what JC said there were also plenty of positives in there too

Still think it got a distinct whiff of sour grapes - look how Koenigsegg came back at TG - the took the criticism on the chin and made a better product!

Personally, I'm not convinced they'll win.

However, what I would say, is if what they claim has any basis in fact - the claims that the "real world" line, and the filming of them pushing it into a garage were both scripted before actually driving it, is damning - and potentially damaging for TG.

I suspect nobody expects unbiased facts from TG. I suspect many expect dilettantes trying-to-be-funny-by-being-edgy-and-controversial, hubris and ignorant arrogance, and a certain anti-pc-bandwagon. What I suspect many don't expect is misleading and snide-y contrivance - and if the claims in the pdf are true, then it's a side I'm not comfortable about.

edit: and the relevance of the "real world" quote, will come down to how it was presented within that segment of the show. It may have been scripted a certain way, but broadcast in a different way. I only have a vague recollection of the episode, so would have to watch that whole bit about the Tesla to appreciate how it was presented.

 

[rosstheboss]

The motoring industry and certainly the press is full of contrived thinking though - everyone's got their own opinion of the different manufacturers strengths and weaknesses, from Kia to Ferrari people make up there own opinions without ever having stepped foot in one.

The fact that TG had looked at the potential headache of running a Tesla before they drove one, and written a piece about it, isn't in my mind at least, a particularly bad thing - how many car reviews are based on running a car for a year as opposed to first impressions? Not many!

TG isn't a serious motoring programme and hasn't been for a long while, it's (allegedly!) an entertainment programme, to see how fast they can make a car go round a track with lots of explosions thrown in, and some views that inflame Daily Mail readers sensibilities!

 

[Neil]

The motoring industry and certainly the press is full of contrived thinking though - everyone's got their own opinion of the different manufacturers strengths and weaknesses, from Kia to Ferrari people make up there own opinions without ever having stepped foot in one.

The fact that TG had looked at the potential headache of running a Tesla before they drove one, and written a piece about it, isn't in my mind at least, a particularly bad thing - how many car reviews are based on running a car for a year as opposed to first impressions? Not many!

Reading between the lines, though, it's not an argument or claim about a pre-emptive perspective, so much as a pre-existing bias that was going to be outed, regardless of the facts or testing it - and on those grounds, I think they have a fair point.

There's one other aspect to this, that is truly a smoking gun. Go read the bit in the pdf where this "We don't want to be sued." is quoted.

 

[FMJ]

Why are they taking legal action now anyway? Two years after the show was broadcast? They've realised they aren't selling any perhaps and have a case of sour grapes?

If it was a one shot deal it would be different. The show is being shown in syndication and is available on demand (here) on Nexflix, which in effect perpetuates the "myth" in perpetuity.

 

[highlandsflyer]

Certainly seems Clarkson has a bent he plays up to.

I remember well his eventual conversion to diesel.

Pushing electric as featured in the Tesla as viable for the type of driving we use a sports car for is frankly ridiculous, even if it had twice the range.

If it were a hybrid it would be a different matter.

See Ferrari.

I like it, but I see it as a test bed for the technology, and we are beyond that already.

Even at 40k it would be massively flawed.

None of this takes away from TG misrepresenting the capabilities of the vehicle, and as such I think they would have some case for requesting clarity at least.

I am much more excited by vehicles like LincVolt.

http://www.lincvolt.com/

While I am here, I do think they should be prosecuted en mass for claiming to be the 'zero emissions' blurb.

Displaced emissions, remote emissions, whatever would apply to indicate the reality would be preferable.