Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Top Gear responds to Tesla

transmission.blogs.topgear.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 123 posts

Re: Top Gear responds to Tesla

#41

Post by bron »

akashs wrote: post #12

First, Top Gear is testing on track conditions, and that will certainly give different results than the 220 mile range found on the EPA's ideal testing conditions. Top Gear has previously shown that a BMW M3 gets better mileage than a Prius in track conditions, but I don't think anyone believes this is representative of the cars on the whole. Second, there's very few data points on the range aside from Tesla's press…

Not quite sure where Tesla is expecting this to be headed towards? Are they expecting the compensation to cover their sales? Or better sales after the suit? Or do they really want not to have anymore review coverage? Or someone in Tesla really hates Top gear/Stig/Clarkson?

Re: Top Gear responds to Tesla

#42

Post by mc2k »

eli wrote: post #17
olivercameron wrote: post #2

I just can't see how Tesla can win this case in court. As anyone who has ever watched Jeremy Clarkson will tell you, you know he would rather resign from Top Gear than apologise for this.

Are you familiar with British libel law? It's infamously plaintiff friendly. People have lost even though the statements in question were, in fact, truthful.

I doubt the BBC's legal team would have allowed it to broadcast if they didn't think it would end up in their favour. The losers in this are the British public, who are presumably paying to defend the broadcaster from some car manufacturer who didn't like a review.

Re: Top Gear responds to Tesla

#43

Post by subway »

reitzensteinm wrote: post #23
blhack wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What part of it did you think was misleading? At least according to this article, everything they said in it was true (and was supported by Tesla)

While it didn't directly involve Tesla, what got me about that episode was the claim that battery cars are totally irrelevent because of 'hydrogen power'. They point out that the power for electric batteries has to come from somewhere, and completely gloss over that for hydrogen. Why they didn't go all the way and advocate fusion powered cars is beyond me.

Hydrogen is not an energy source, but a means by which to store energy. You know, like a battery.

Re: Top Gear responds to Tesla

#44

Post by Tycho »

cormullion wrote: post #34

I'd forgotten just how much Clarkson sings the praises of the Tesla in the first half of the review. The electric Tesla thrashes the petrol Lotus Elise in a drag race. Clarkson is obviously amazed - "God almighty:, "this is biblically quick!" - "this car is electric, literally!". "Wave goodbye to dial-up, welcome to broadband motoring!". Then he says how much torque it produces, how quick it is from 0 to 60, and then…

Bathos is Clarkson's style though. Or inverse bathos. He'll spend say half the review mocking a car, and then he'll stop and say 'and all that is true, but there's just one other thing you've got to consider: it's the most fun you've had since Woodstock '68.' Basically goes to extremes, then changes the complexion of the whole piece in an instant.

Re: Top Gear responds to Tesla

#45

Post by Retric »

estel wrote: post #25
machrider wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I think if you're an enthusiast who cares about the environment, Clarkson isn't your favorite guy ever. I felt like the piece on the Tesla was pretty offensive in how biased it was, and I normally like the guys on Top Gear.

I genuinely didn't feel as though the piece on Tesla was particularly biased though? Sure, they pointed out the flaws inherit to the car (recharge time) and filmed the car being pushed in for entertainment, but overall the piece still came across as pretty positive about the car: at times he was gushing about its performance and how enjoyable it could be to drive. I'm sure if I were invested in Tesla it's easy to fee…

They took a worst case mileage and recharge time and said a specific trip would take you 3 days. Without saying if you actually drove that distance and used a larger power source than a normal wall outlet it would take a few hours. They also pretended one of the cars ran out of power which did not actually happen.

Now, I don't mind making fun of actual issues. And they had some things that actually broke, but making shit up crosses a line IMO.

Re: Top Gear responds to Tesla

#46

Post by estel »

mc2k wrote: post #42
eli wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you familiar with British libel law? It's infamously plaintiff friendly. People have lost even though the statements in question were, in fact, truthful.

I doubt the BBC's legal team would have allowed it to broadcast if they didn't think it would end up in their favour. The losers in this are the British public, who are presumably paying to defend the broadcaster from some car manufacturer who didn't like a review.

At least we have Loser Pays, so it feels unlikely that the license fee payer will actually lose out.

As Top Gear is a big winner for BBC Worldwide (commercial, not-license fee funded), it's been frequently the case in the past that they will fund any legal action should that become necessary.

Re: Top Gear responds to Tesla

#47

Post by Retric »

dnautics wrote: post #32
reitzensteinm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it didn't directly involve Tesla, what got me about that episode was the claim that battery cars are totally irrelevent because of 'hydrogen power'. They point out that the power for electric batteries has to come from somewhere, and completely gloss over that for hydrogen. Why they didn't go all the way and advocate fusion powered cars is beyond me.

you can make hydrogen via other means, directly from sunlight, for example, although admittedly that technology is not here yet.

His point was Hydrogen was just another form of battery.

Re: Top Gear responds to Tesla

#49

Post by reitzensteinm »

subway wrote: post #43
reitzensteinm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it didn't directly involve Tesla, what got me about that episode was the claim that battery cars are totally irrelevent because of 'hydrogen power'. They point out that the power for electric batteries has to come from somewhere, and completely gloss over that for hydrogen. Why they didn't go all the way and advocate fusion powered cars is beyond me.

Hydrogen is not an energy source, but a means by which to store energy. You know, like a battery.

Exactly my point. I've put hydrogen power in quotes in case that was unclear.

Re: Top Gear responds to Tesla

#50

Post by mc2k »

estel wrote: post #46
mc2k wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt the BBC's legal team would have allowed it to broadcast if they didn't think it would end up in their favour. The losers in this are the British public, who are presumably paying to defend the broadcaster from some car manufacturer who didn't like a review.

At least we have Loser Pays, so it feels unlikely that the license fee payer will actually lose out. As Top Gear is a big winner for BBC Worldwide (commercial, not-license fee funded), it's been frequently the case in the past that they will fund any legal action should that become necessary.

True, but if Worldwide end up paying/losing, that means less money paid back to the corporation, therefore a lower budget for other productions (effectively the same thing).

I'm a fan of electric cars, but I am disappointed by Tesla on this... using the legal system like this leaves a bad taste.

Post reply on HN