Tesla Sues Top Gear

[cmhs75]

Sorry if this is a repost, searched and didn't find anything like it


So here's the news:

Tesla Motors Sues BBC Over Top Gear's Scathing Roadster Review


http://www.dailytech.com/UPDATED+Te...ars+Scathing+Roadster+Review/article21258.htm


I'd call this shooting your own foot

 

[socalx]

1) why would top gear care... the lawsuit is for 100 thousand pounds (200k us)

2) top gear said the brakes failed in one of the cars, the lawsuit claims it was a fuse that blew rendering the electric assist for the brakes not to work. (this would be like the vacuum assist on a normal car failing). I think tesla is splitting hairs. if the fuse blows, the assist stops workng and the braking system isn't working properly, which to me could be considered a failure.

3)the lawsuit says that top gear claimed one of the cars overheated which wasn't true. Tesla says what really happened was the car reduced power output, as a failsafe. (again likely due to it being on the verge of overheating. so again, seems like splitting hairs.

the interesting comments are about the script stating that the car doesnt work in the real world prior to the test, the claim that the car being pushed in the show had not run out of charge (which bbc apparently aggrees with, and says they were showing what would happen due to the less then expected range) and the comments that Jeremy issued a satement after the show aired that the car was pushed not due to running out of charge, but for health and safety reasons-- which tesla claims is a lie.

the bottom line is the problem with the tesla roadster isn't top gear, it is that the car costs 140K and aside from being a neat toy, doessn't have enough utility.

What scares me, -- is this another case of a us based company using the overbearing us way of suing anyone for anything? Will this lead to journalists thinking twice about testing cars from us manufacturers?

 

[chumch]

Given the small amout of money being persued in the lawsuit, my guess is that they are doing it as a sort of publicity stunt...to gain some "buzz"

 

[Harpoon]

LOL at the MS upgrade - 20% in two days! Buy now and you're a sucker.

 

[jonas1jp]

Elon Musk is an egotistical douche bag. This guy is in his own world.

 

[Sumeronthechain]

In my opinion if it was Clarkson's intentions so paint a misleading picture of the car, then he is at fault. A lot of what he says is very obviously in jest, but in this review he wasn't stating comical opinions, more along the lines of facts.

However it appears that the failures of the car actually occurred, and Clarkson did indeed intentionally make them out to be worse than they actually were. Is it illegal? I'm not sure, but it is sort of a jerk thing to do on Clarkson's behalf. Especially since the Tesla is a first-of-its-kind sort of thing made by a small startup company.

 

[jond]

The core points are that:
- The car CAN run out of electricity in the middle of driving, and it might take several hours(days?) to recharge.
- The car cost 3x what a similar looking/performing lotus cost.
- Electricity is not any more green than gasoline.

The more people who watch the review, the less likely Tesla will still be in business in 5 years. IMO.

 

[NsXMas]

The core points are that:
- The car CAN run out of electricity in the middle of driving, and it might take several hours(days?) to recharge.
- The car cost 3x what a similar looking/performing lotus cost.
- Electricity is not any more green than gasoline.

The more people who watch the review, the less likely Tesla will still be in business in 5 years. IMO.

While I agree with you, imho electric and alternative energy vehicles are still immature and need to continuously improve.

Gasoline cars were also horrible in the first decade or two of their introduction. Gasoline cars now have had a century to improve. I'm sure alternative energy vehicles would improve significantly if they had more time to work on it.

 

[jond]

While I agree with you, imho electric and alternative energy vehicles are still immature and need to continuously improve.

Gasoline cars were also horrible in the first decade or two of their introduction. Gasoline cars now have had a century to improve. I'm sure alternative energy vehicles would improve significantly if they had more time to work on it.

Very good point....
And as much as I bash electric cars, the second I have a solar panel on my house that generates enough excess electricity to drive to work for free, you'll see me in one.
$180/month in gas is not fun.

 

[PhiAlpha44]

Given the small amout of money being persued in the lawsuit, my guess is that they are doing it as a sort of publicity stunt...to gain some "buzz"

Elon Musk is an egotistical douche bag. This guy is in his own world.

Yes and Yes.

 

[nsxlover]

Very good point....
And as much as I bash electric cars, the second I have a solar panel on my house that generates enough excess electricity to drive to work for free, you'll see me in one.
$180/month in gas is not fun.

My wife and I spend almost $1000/month in gas

 

[cmhs75]

My wife and I spend almost $1000/month in gas

not to rub it in, but I spend roughly 30$/month on Gas :biggrin:

I estimated your mileage to be around 60 miles per day each. That is a big wow for me.

 

[M Baker]

The Top Gear review was just fine. We aren't talking about a Consumer Reports review - Top Gear is entertainment. Lawsuit is just a publicity stunt. It looks like it was cold the day they drove it. Cold and batteries means reduced life. Tesla will have its best range in warmer weather. You would laugh at the range if they did the range tests in International Falls, MN in January.

 

[akira3d]

Very good point....
And as much as I bash electric cars, the second I have a solar panel on my house that generates enough excess electricity to drive to work for free, you'll see me in one.
$180/month in gas is not fun.

I went solar and made sure my system produced enough juice to cover charging an electric car...just in case one would finally get made that meets my criteria. I just want a cheap, no-frills, short range (100 mile range is fine) commuter car that has a lot of zip and doesn't look like ass. I do like the Tesla Roadster, just not its price. Would I ever get rid of my gasoline powered sports car? No way!

Incidentally, I leased my system through Solar City...one of Elon Musk's companies.

 

[cmhs75]

T It looks like it was cold the day they drove it. Cold and batteries means reduced life. Tesla will have its best range in warmer weather. You would laugh at the range if they did the range tests in International Falls, MN in January.

I thought they had an issue with the batteries overheating to the point of needing to cool them down in the Tesla?

 

[Tom239]

While I agree with you, imho electric and alternative energy vehicles are still immature and need to continuously improve.

Gasoline cars were also horrible in the first decade or two of their introduction. Gasoline cars now have had a century to improve. I'm sure alternative energy vehicles would improve significantly if they had more time to work on it.

It's not like no one did any R&D over the past century on the technology needed for electric cars.

Electric propulsion is a mature technology. Electric buses and trains are in wide use. We have diesel locomotives running on non-electrified track driving the wheels with electric motors (the diesel engine drives a generator to make electricity).

The obstacle to having electric cars is in energy storage. There are many applications that have driven research in that area over the past century, and there have been advances. (If you are 50 years old, you remember when flashlights typically used carbon-zinc batteries.) But despite all the work that has been done, it remains very hard to beat gasoline as a means of storing energy.

I'm not saying there is no hope for further improvement. My point is that it's not accurate to say that we don't have electric cars because no one worked on the relevant challenges during the century that we had gasoline-powered cars.

 

[BD]

So Honda had the EV Plus, as a pilot program, they leased out about 300 total between 1997 to 1999. The lease payment was 500 a month including insurance. From what I heard, Honda lost $300k for each one sold.

GM had EV1 and leased out about 800 units. They too lost shit loads.

Neither products had any impact and attracted no consumers. AND all of them were leased only vehicles and have all been crushed with the exception of few in the factory museum.

Ten years later, Tesla is the only legit evolution of EV in the market and the improvements are arguably minimal - when compare to other automotive related technology. It is not hard to see why GM and Honda dropped the idea.

Unfortunately for Tesla, they want to present this vehicle as a high tech super car running on electricity; therefore, the combination is deadly.

Tesla will be better off producing a mini hatchback or something, give it a legit long range and practicality. If that was the case, they would certainly sell more cars to Green Energy lovers. I bet you the Hollywood community alone will make that company profitable and can allocate more funds for R & D into that technology. If that happens, maybe there is immediate hope for electric car. Anything else right now are just dreams.


Than again, even if they can do 300 MPC, the tide is not on EV's side, with rising energy cost desired by our current politicians, it is doomed to fail.

 

[Keahistight]

I was under the impression that the pure electric car was essentially dead and the Hydrogen-Electric powerplant was the next step. Due to my lack of knowledge, what is the road block with Hydrogen-Electric?

 

[egprelude]

I was under the impression that the pure electric car was essentially dead and the Hydrogen-Electric powerplant was the next step. Due to my lack of knowledge, what is the road block with Hydrogen-Electric?

Producing the hydrogen is difficult and costly at the moment.

 

[jond]

Top Gear responded to Tesla.
It's worth the read.

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2011/04/top-gear-responds-to-teslas-lawsuit/

 

[Keahistight]

Guess there is no such thing as bad publicity. Top Gear has torn apart tons of cars including the Ford GT.

 

[akira3d]

Producing the hydrogen is difficult and costly at the moment.

Didn't Obama effectively kill hydrogen?

I had been looking forward to the FCX...

 

[Vega$ NSX]

Didn't Obama effectively kill hydrogen?

As in, he raced it in his supercharged NSX and beat it by several car lengths? I thought this forum frowned upon discussing street racing stories?

:biggrin:

 

[NsXMas]

It's not like no one did any R&D over the past century on the technology needed for electric cars.

Electric propulsion is a mature technology. Electric buses and trains are in wide use. We have diesel locomotives running on non-electrified track driving the wheels with electric motors (the diesel engine drives a generator to make electricity).

The obstacle to having electric cars is in energy storage. There are many applications that have driven research in that area over the past century, and there have been advances. (If you are 50 years old, you remember when flashlights typically used carbon-zinc batteries.) But despite all the work that has been done, it remains very hard to beat gasoline as a means of storing energy.

I'm not saying there is no hope for further improvement. My point is that it's not accurate to say that we don't have electric cars because no one worked on the relevant challenges during the century that we had gasoline-powered cars.

Correction - few people worked on electric cars because gasoline was so cheap, part of an attempt by OPEC to stall alternative energies.

I have no doubt that if / when gasoline becomes exorbitant, we will see very interesting battery powered and alternative powered technologies coming up to speed rapidly. Right now there is just not enough economic reward for investing in those technologies due to the cheap price of gas.

 

[Tom239]

Correction - few people worked on electric cars because gasoline was so cheap, part of an attempt by OPEC to stall alternative energies.

My point was that the challenges are not unique to electric cars and that many applications have been driving research into the same issues. There are other industries that would kill for the kinds of batteries that would also make electric cars more practical.

Tesla did nothing especially original. They use battery technology that had been developed in response to needs for portable electronic devices.

I have no doubt that if / when gasoline becomes exorbitant, we will see very interesting battery powered and alternative powered technologies coming up to speed rapidly. Right now there is just not enough economic reward for investing in those technologies due to the cheap price of gas.

Rapldly, you say. We'll see.