Support NeoGAF

[Zaptruder]

Okay first of them all, I believe they did have a segment to find which supercar has the best real world mileage, I think the Audi R8 won.

But seriously, nobody who actually uses a car would think that the range of an electric car is a non-issue. If you normally get around everywhere by public transportation and want a car ONLY to cut your commute time, then of course having 100 mile range/8 hour charging time isn't considered a big compromise compared to 300 miles/5 minute refuel as you're used to not needing a car for all your random traveling.

For people actually own a regular gas-powered car, these electric cars have huge trade-offs and consumers have to be aware that the electric car will not be a solution for all their driving needs. It doesn't matter what agenda anybody has, a Nissan Leaf is pretty useless as far as weekend road trips or for days where you just have a lot of errands to do. Range is going to be the number one thing that any potential electric car buyer would consider so it's completely necessary that Top Gear get that point across.



A while ago, they tested out the FCX Clarity, a hydrogen car, which they loved and said it would legitimately replace all the things people use their cars for. The only problem at the moment is that hydrogen powered cars are way too expensive for regular consumers so it'll be a few more years before we see them offered in the Nissan Leaf price range.

The TRUTH is that the only practical difference between the Clarity and the Leaf is their range and convenience. The hard-to-accept-if-you-want-everybody-to-only-love-currently-available-"green"-cars-truth is that most people can't replace one gasoline car with one electric car. The only time they ever mention environmentalism is when they do the occasional mileage tests with real-world, practical cars and even then they're never serious. If they're going to spend 0.5% of their show being political, then nobody should watch the show for the politics.

Distance driving issues related to electric cars are generally overblown.

Not that I can remember the name of the study of the top of my head, but it basically showed that for 80% of the population, an electric vehicle would be sufficient to meet their driving needs for all but a handful of days in a year.

It's like people buying SUVs just in case - when instead they'd get better value for money renting SUVs or vans only when they're needed.

 

[fabricated backlash]

Leave it to Top Gear to make people lose their collective mind and cry foul all the time. At times I really wonder if people really don't understand after 17 seasons, that Top Gear is a show presented by 3 childish petrol heads that make great and enjoyable shows with cars in them. If you want to watch a simple Car Review Show, then there are plenty of that. And all of them are boring as shit to start with.


And the segment about both electrical cars highlighted exactly one major problem with Battery fueled electric cars: The charging time, the availability of an outlet to charge them, the life expectance and the shortcomings.

Battery fueled cars like the two they showed are indeed the wrong direction to go for. They have no true benefits and aren't exactly as eco friendly thanks to the batteries.

But please continue your forced outrage over a non issue.

 

[seanoff]

i didn't see much wrong with it.

an electric car where i live would be totally impractical. and it's not like lincoln is in the boonies and it didn't have the infrastructure to recharge a car. i'm sure the lincoln tourism people would have been happy.

they were extremely positive about the fit and finish of the nissan, less so about the other car but that was right.

it was an essay on the use of electric vehicles as a complete replacement for internal combustion vehicles is not currently viable. nothing wrong there.


oth they were very positive about the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle from Honda, going so far as to say that it was THE future of motoring. they also often make fun of supercars, call them completely impractical, laugh at the fuel consumption, refer to the "Cockster" etc.

this is a complete beat up.

 

[favouriteflavour]

A car is a convenience vehicle. The whole idea is that I pay what is essentially a premium over other travel alternatives so that I am able to travel in any way that I like. Yes 90% of my driving would be possible with an electric vehicle but the 10% of the times where I would need to find an alternate way to travel would mean that it would not be a viable vehicle for me. I think that comes through is this segment fairly well.

Picture this conversation with your mates.

"Road trip, lets go!"
"Where are we going?"
"Anywhere within a 50 mile radius of my house or 100 miles if we can overnight and recharge!"

 

[Seanspeed]

Problem is that while Top Gear is supposed to be an 'entertainment' show, there's also plenty of people out there who unfortunately take their opinions seriously. And with a show as popular as this one, having these jokers shit all over a product becomes a problem for these companies trying to sell it.

I dont blame Nissan for being upset and they deserve anything they get from it. This sort of thing was bound to happen sooner or later, I think.

 

[BobTheFork]

Problem is that while Top Gear is supposed to be an 'entertainment' show, there's also plenty of people out there who unfortunately take their opinions seriously.

Yes, most the people involved in the making of the show take what they represent on the show too seriously. I tend to roll my eyes when they try and back off like this.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

It was entertaining so I don't really care.

People take this way too seriously. The show is so obviously staged, every aspect of it, that this discussion is moot. When they say, "no dicking about, a proper test", guess what? They're being ironic. Never take anything said on Top Gear as fact. It is an entertainment show pure and simple.
But to put my thoughts forward, the article was about the practicality of electric cars, so they had to run out of juice so they could highlight how hard it can be to charge them. And I found the revelations about the price of replacing a battery and the wear on the battery after a fast charge to be fascinating. Staged or not, the info you get out of the article is fairly accurate IMO.

 

[jett]

Stupid complaint. Like TG said, they never said where did they start the trip from or for how long they were driving. It's just an entertainment show too, and frankly the "review" was extremely sensible for them. :lol

Electric cars are garbage, anyway.

 

[-PXG-]

Electric cars are still an idiotic idea.

They wouldn't be so bad if they didn't look so stupid. I woudn't be caught dead driving one of those things.

 

[kitch9]

Top gear defence force has mobilised.

-

I HATE Top Gear, and this sort if shit is the exact reason. They're proving a point and shitting over a good technology because they're cunts. It goes completely against BBC guidelines. And I don't see how watching a car being rigged to run out of battery is entertaining.

You fucking drama queen.......

LOL.

 

[renitou]

Well, I'm never watching this show again.

 

[Zeppu]

TG being shitty/staged/entertainment show/etc is all irrelevant.

The point still remains that, with electric cars, you're bound to run out of charge at some point and a 10hr+ charge time is something which needs to be mentioned when reviewing such a car. You still won't find many charging stations around (and if I did I wouldn't leave my car there for half a day) and I, for one, don't drive with satnav when I know where I'm going, so having the satnav tell you that the trip is too long for your current charge is useless.

That topped off with the fact that the actual miles-left counter isn't accurate to the mile (but rather x±y miles + z miles on reserve) means that traffic, a detour, closed roads, or planning for a round trip is a problem which must be highlighted.

What if they were reviewing a laptop with a 4 day battery life, but which would take 12 hours to recharge and you can't stop charging midway (and can't turn on laptop until it's done charging). How much shit would Engadget get if they only mentioned the splendid 4 day battery life and never mentioned this huge disadvantage?

People who can't even reason this simple thing out are just finding an excuse to shit on Top Gear, especially when it's followed by statements like: "this show has been shit for bla bla bla".

I don't want to have to preplan usages of my car that far in advance. If I want to leave now, I will leave now. A 5 minute detour is no big problem, but having someone call me up in an emergency and me telling him: "Yeah, I'll be there in 7 hours cause I left it at half charge" is not something which is acceptable.

 

[Meier]

I love Top Gear and I knew they would rag on electric cars but purposely faking something to discredit them is pretty disappointing.

 

[kitch9]

Questions:

Does the Leaf do more than 80 miles?

Can I charge it up anywhere I go quickly?

Is it nice to drive?

How did Top Gear answer these questions?

 

[genjiZERO]

I have to say I've lost a lot of respect in the show. Don't think I'll be able to take them seriously anymore. Their response is bullshit too. It doesn't matter if you aren't telling people how far you are going, if the car stops in the middle of the road the natural inclination is to believe it didn't have enough fuel. Fie on them!!

 

[kitch9]

I have to say I've lost a lot of respect in the show. Don't think I'll be able to take them seriously anymore. Their response is bullshit too. It doesn't matter if you aren't telling people how far you are going, if the car stops in the middle of the road the natural inclination is to believe it didn't have enough fuel. Fie on them!!

You average Leaf owner would know their vehicles limitations though and wouldn't deliberately run of of fuel.

Electric cars are a pain in the arse and they simply portrayed why electric cars are a pain in the arse. You can't go further than 40 miles at most in a Leaf as you won't get back in the same day.

That's all they said and psst, guess what? IT'S THE TRUTH.

 

[Number45]

Questions:

Does the Leaf do more than 80 miles?

Can I charge it up anywhere I go quickly?

Is it nice to drive?

How did Top Gear answer these questions?

If memory serves they mentioned that it will do ~100 miles, and they had no complaints really as far as driving it went. They did mention the difficulty and potential time taken to recharge (as well as talking about quick charge etc.).

As has been said (and really, the response from the Top Gear producer answers pretty much every question that keeps being asked about the show in here), there was very little wrong with the segment. It's clear they're not fans of the technology (if it can take them to 200mph some day I'm sure you'll see them change their mind on that), but I don't recall anything deliberately (or even accidentally for that matter) misleading in there.

 

[JetBlackPanda]

what a bunch of garbage, would it have killed them to decline to even test any electrics? instead they go out of the way to make it look bad??

what a sham.

 

[kitch9]

what a bunch of garbage, would it have killed them to decline to even test any electrics? instead they go out of the way to make it look bad??

what a sham.

Electrics are bad, for the reasons Top Gear stated?

Sham?

Wut?

 

[PflargBlarg]

The car tells you you need to recharge when you are about to get out of range of a station. It's impossible to run out.

This is absurd. The point was the combination of range and charging time. It's all well and good to be on my way to work and be told I need to recharge, doesn't really help much when it takes 11 hours to do so.

I don't know what people want, should they have just not mentioned the charge time or range at all? It may not matter to some people and that's fine, but it's certainly a very serious issue to think about before you buy an electric.

I will say one thing, the bit where they were talking about the battery only lasting a certain amount of years sounded fishy to me, and I do not know how accurate their numbers were there. So if there's anything to complain about, it's that.

what a bunch of garbage, would it have killed them to decline to even test any electrics? instead they go out of the way to make it look bad??

what a sham.

Oh look, someone else who hasn't even watched the segment and has no idea what they're talking about.

 

[jett]

what a bunch of garbage, would it have killed them to decline to even test any electrics? instead they go out of the way to make it look bad??

what a sham.

angry panda is angry

at you

The Top Gear segment never stated how long it took for the battery to run out, or for how long they were driving. It was pretty much a hyopthetical situation of what could happen if you ran out of battery charge in a town. It just so happened that in said town there were no charging stations of any kind, the nearest one was 80-100 miles away and they were shit out of luck. :lol They really didn't do anything wrong.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

This is exactly like the time when Pagani sued the BBC for showing how inconvenient it is to own and drive a Pagani Zonda in Paris by purposefully choosing a car-park that had too steep a slope for the car to manage.

Really, the damage Top Gear does to companies cannot be over-exaggerated on the internet.

 

[soqquatto]

This is exactly like the time when Pagani sued the BBC for showing how inconvenient it is to own and drive a Pagani Zonda in Paris by purposefully choosing a car-park that had too steep a slope for the car to manage.

they've done it with a ford gt40 as well if I remember correctly. I love these things, because it's a reminder of how a car like that can fare in a real world environment. any goon can tell you that it's quick, that acceleration is mind-blowing, that it handles like a dream. in that segment though they also shown that cars like those had zero luggage space (hey, rich people have luggage as well) and stuff like that. you're still in awe for those cars but you've learned to put them in a real world context. besides, it's not like that paris car park is the only "difficult to get in and out" garage in the world.

finally, I also approve the leaf test. not planning enough for your trip can lead you to have to refuel in the most inconvenient of times. they ALWAYS do this, they always spice up everything with problems, to have a more entertaining segment and to have a more practical (yes!) angle.

 

[leadbelly]

You notice how things always seem to set on fire or break in humorous ways?

Of course a lot of the stuff is staged. They want it to be entertaining and funny. The thing about the BBC is, it doesn't have to rely on advertisement so they can say and do whatever the fuck they like.

 

[Guardian Bob]

Honestly, I've been watching this show more for comedy than actual car facts.

 

[jett]

Honestly, I've been watching this show more for comedy than actual car facts.

That's the reason I've always watched the show.

 

[bengraven]

I can't believe anything I've seen on Top Gear anymore.

This proves that Clarkson is wearing a wig.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

It amazes me that people don't get that it's a comedy/entertainment show first, car show second.

We have the brand new awesome fast car, what shall we do? Race it against a man on rocket-propelled roller skates!

Let's do a serious review of a car! Question: How capable is it of performing a beach landing during a military operation with three armed marines in the back?!

 

[Al-ibn Kermit]

Distance driving issues related to electric cars are generally overblown.

Not that I can remember the name of the study of the top of my head, but it basically showed that for 80% of the population, an electric vehicle would be sufficient to meet their driving needs for all but a handful of days in a year.

It's like people buying SUVs just in case - when instead they'd get better value for money renting SUVs or vans only when they're needed.

The comparison to an SUV is stupid, only a few people actually get them for their off-road traction. People with vans probably have kids and need the 7-8 seats so that they can take their own kids plus their kids' friends which is probably a pretty common thing.

For me, I make at least a couple trips a week that are beyond the Leaf's range and I know several people who have daily commutes that are longer. So recommending an electric car to most people with the way battery tech is right now isn't being realistic.

If the Leaf was like $10,000, then it makes sense as an extra car to cut down on your commute costs. That's cheap enough that you could still keep your old gas/diesel car around for longer trips. At $30,000, the only way the average consumer can justify the cost is if it absolutely fulfills all of their driving needs.

For what it is, the Leaf is either too limited in range or too limited by price. However, for about the same price you could get the Chevy Volt which seems like the perfect compromise. I hope Top Gear reviews that sometime soon.

 

[JWong]

Nah, this has nothing to do with the leaf.

Nissan is pissed that the GTR wasn't car of the year.

 

[DrForester]

For what it is, the Leaf is either too limited in range or too limited by price. However, for about the same price you could get the Chevy Volt which seems like the perfect compromise. I hope Top Gear reviews that sometime soon.

Is the Volt being released in Europe?

 

[paskowitz]

Their overall point is still correct. Electric cars are not ready for the world and the world is not ready for electric cars. The problem is not with the car or Nissan but the market and the infrastructure. People who don't see that as their point should really get their heads checked.

Top Gear can come off as pricks, but that is better than most automotive "journalism" that basically acts as a press release venue. The Tesla review was harsh, but the roadster has had several reported instances of mechanical failure. Regardless if their "testing procedures" were faulty, their points are still valid.

Personally I think they should review a system like "Better Place" in Israel. Google it.

 

[markot]

What car doesnt have mechanical faults >_<?

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

I know not much for cars, but but I do know this show is amazing, and I will continue to watch.

It amazes me that people don't get that it's a comedy/entertainment show first, car show second.

We have the brand new awesome fast car, what shall we do? Race it against a man on rocket-propelled roller skates!

Let's do a serious review of a car! Question: How capable is it of performing a beach landing during a military operation with three armed marines in the back?!

Hahaha, hell yeah!

 

[duderon]

Nissan are good sports.

In the town of Lincoln, where presenters Jeremy Clarkson and James May supposedly ran out of juice in a Nissan Leaf (it was all staged), Nissan will install two charging points, one dedicated to each of the TV stars.

http://green.autoblog.com/2011/08/04/nissan-top-gear-here-have-two-chargers/

What electric car haters should take out of this debate is you've already lost. Nissan has sold 10,000 Leafs, charging stations are being installed all over the world, and hydrogen fuel cells are perpetually 10 years off. Battery technology will not stay stagnant. Tesla is launching the Model S next year with the top of the line model having a 300 mile range. Most automakers have an electric vehicle in development.

What should really scare the petrol heads is the development of the autonomous car. Soon we won't even have to drive. Think of all the extra time you'll have to post on GAF! (yeah me too, I know)

 

[PflargBlarg]

Nissan are good sports.



http://green.autoblog.com/2011/08/04/nissan-top-gear-here-have-two-chargers/

What electric car haters should take out of this debate is you've already lost. Nissan has sold 10,000 Leafs, charging stations are being installed all over the world, and hydrogen fuel cells are perpetually 10 years off. Battery technology will not stay stagnant. Tesla is launching the Model S next year with the top of the line model having a 300 mile range. Most automakers have an electric vehicle in development.

What should really scare the petrol heads is the development of the autonomous car. Soon we won't even have to drive. Think of all the extra time you'll have to post on GAF! (yeah me too, I know)

Are you...a electric car fanboy? I don't think anybody here hates the concept of an electric car. I look forward to an electric car that could replace gasoline powered cars, we have to get off our dependence on gasoline. If I could get an electric right now that got good range and didn't take forever to charge, and the supporting infrastructure was available I would jump on that. The only reason there are 'haters' is because cars like the Leaf are not viable for many people right now.

Sheesh man, this isn't gaming side.

 

[kehs]

First the roadster, now the leaf?

Electric cars don't sound all that swell. I mean, the Roadster broke down unexpectedly and now the Leaf can't even make it to it's destinations.

I'm glad Top Gear is here to inform me of all the fallacies these chargers are tying to plug into us.

 

[Cereal KiIIer]

First the roadster, now the leaf?

Electric cars don't sound all that swell. I mean, the Roadster broke down unexpectedly and now the Leaf can't even make it to it's destinations.

I'm glad Top Gear is here to inform me of all the fallacies these chargers are tying to plug into us.

The roadster didn't even break down. They faked that as well (I know your comment is probably sarcastic, but just in case)

 

[adamsappel]

I think if my electric car runs out of juice in some random-ass town, I'll be able to find an electric plug somewhere. Yes, I'll be inconvenienced, but how is hydrogen supposed to be better? I'm going to rely on Hicksville having tanks of hydrogen at the local pump?

 

[Freshmaker]

Hilarius how?

Hydrogen has the same range as petrol cars, with new storage technologies they'll get further and you can refill a hydrogen car in minutes.

Given how many people utterly fail at pumping gasoline safely, I wouldn't be shocked if a half dozen people a month blow themselves up trying to fuel their hydrogen cars while smoking etc.

 

[milanbaros]

What if they were reviewing a laptop with a 4 day battery life, but which would take 12 hours to recharge and you can't stop charging midway (and can't turn on laptop until it's done charging). How much shit would Engadget get if they only mentioned the splendid 4 day battery life and never mentioned this huge disadvantage?

I don't know if you are talking about the leaf here but I asume you are otherwise the comparison makes little sense. Is that really true? That is pretty shocking.

 

[mrklaw]

Stupid complaint. Like TG said, they never said where did they start the trip from or for how long they were driving. It's just an entertainment show too, and frankly the "review" was extremely sensible for them. :lol

Electric cars are garbage, anyway.

as soon as they stopped in Lincoln and did their 'activities' while charging, it was obvious they weren't really testing the range.

Yes if you just drive to the shops its probably fine. But then you probably wouldn't spend £30k+ on a car for that.

 

[alphaNoid]

Top Gear owes Nissan a public apology on an episode or Nissan should take legal action, or both. Top Gear has great influence in the auto industry believe it or not, millions of viewers are wildly influenced by Clarkson and his ilk. Rigging a 'test' and then airing that is defamation and Top Gear got caught red handed. The irony is they were taking pot shots at all this fancy doo-dangled technology and its exactly what was their demise in the end.

Apologize Top Gear.

note : Top Gear fanatics are foaming at the mouth to chew me apart. dealwithit.gif

 

[Nappuccino]

Top Gear owes Nissan a public apology on an episode or Nissan should take legal action, or both. Top Gear has great influence in the auto industry believe it or not, millions of viewers are wildly influenced by Clarkson and his ilk.

Rigging a 'test' and then airing that is defamation and Top Gear got caught red handed. The irony is they were taking pot shots at all this fancy doo-dangled technology and its exactly what was their demise in the end.

Apologize Top Gear.

Did you watch the episode? Because if you did and you still feel this way, I can't help but think you completely missed something.

 

[mrklaw]

Top Gear owes Nissan a public apology on an episode or Nissan should take legal action, or both. Top Gear has great influence in the auto industry believe it or not, millions of viewers are wildly influenced by Clarkson and his ilk.

Rigging a 'test' and then airing that is defamation and Top Gear got caught red handed. The irony is they were taking pot shots at all this fancy doo-dangled technology and its exactly what was their demise in the end.

Apologize Top Gear.

likewise, I think they should apologise to me. I bought a Ford Fiesta on the strength of their detailed review, but had to spend thousands on repairs after storming a beach in a landing craft - something about salt water according to the dealer.

 

[Particle Physicist]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/aug/05/top-gear-bbc


I've only randomly watched a couple of episodes of this show, I can't say I'm a huge fan, but I always considered them to be interesting and entertaining, but WOW at this revelation. I honestly can't take the show seriously after this.

Theres tons more info at the link, its an interesting article!

edit: aww crap it was posted in the official top gear thread it seems! But still interesting piece of info for people who dont visit official threads

Didn't they do something similar to the Volt. lol and people defended them there as well.

 

[Enron]

Top Gear owes Nissan a public apology on an episode or Nissan should take legal action, or both. Top Gear has great influence in the auto industry believe it or not, millions of viewers are wildly influenced by Clarkson and his ilk. Rigging a 'test' and then airing that is defamation and Top Gear got caught red handed. The irony is they were taking pot shots at all this fancy doo-dangled technology and its exactly what was their demise in the end.

Apologize Top Gear.

note : Top Gear fanatics are foaming at the mouth to chew me apart. dealwithit.gif

Perhaps YOU should dealwithit.gif

 

[notworksafe]

Top Gear owes Nissan a public apology on an episode or Nissan should take legal action, or both. Top Gear has great influence in the auto industry believe it or not, millions of viewers are wildly influenced by Clarkson and his ilk. Rigging a 'test' and then airing that is defamation and Top Gear got caught red handed. The irony is they were taking pot shots at all this fancy doo-dangled technology and its exactly what was their demise in the end.

Apologize Top Gear.

So you didn't watch the segment.

Also it's too bad that this was the last episode of the season. I'd love for Clarkson to tell everyone where to stick their complaints in the next ep.

 

[Chichikov]

Did you watch the episode? Because if you did and you still feel this way, I can't help but think you completely missed something.

I watched the episode.
I think they were intentionally misleading to prove a preconceived point about electric cars.

But I don't mind it all that much, I always thought that if you're taking Top Gear seriously, you're watching it wrong.

Are people going to complain that they give British cars a laughable amount of love next?

 

[SneakyStephan]

It's always been obvious that they are sensationalist assholes who rig all their tests and games etc to be more 'interesting', but they really shouldn't manipulate the public opinion of this kind of stuff.

The average pleb who watches this show will take anything they say for granted anyhow, they could do some real damage here.
If I were a hybrid car maker or engineer I would be looking to sue, big time.