Tesla v the BBC

[autogyro]

I see that Tesla has issued a writ in the high court against the BBC for the coverage given to its electric roadster by the Jeremy Clarkson motor head benefit club.
The program that showed the Tesla in a very poor light has been given coverage all around the world and there is a DVD out.

I do hope that readers in the UK will fully understand that the BBC is going to defend this case to the bitter end, in the interests of the car manufacturers and fossil fuel users. It will do so using YOUR LICENSE FEE MONEY.

[Pup]

Well the BBC has to defend themselves I suppose. Though it wouldn't surprise me in the least little bitty bit to learn that the tests were rigged. At times, it can be a fun show to watch, but their prejudices are grating to say the least.

[forty-two]

I see that Tesla has issued a writ in the high court against the BBC for the coverage given to its electric roadster by the Jeremy Clarkson motor head benefit club.
The program that showed the Tesla in a very poor light has been given coverage all around the world and there is a DVD out.

I do hope that readers in the UK will fully understand that the BBC is going to defend this case to the bitter end, in the interests of the car manufacturers and fossil fuel users. It will do so using YOUR LICENSE FEE MONEY.

Don't get me started on the BBC at the moment. Granted they provide probably one of the best F1 coverage examples in the world, and they should be proud of that, but their failure to cover or rather their cover-up of events at Fukushima are getting right on my teats at the moment.

Top gear is a fun show which courts controversy, but even Tesla's comments suggest to me that both are a bit right. If driven hard, their car will use it's juice up more quickly, doesn't sound too slanderous to me.

Unusually, Top gear was right about the Prius, shocking MPG (i.e. worse than a 160bhp diesel) when driven in the same manner.

Anyway, that's at least two off topic remarks so far, I might even report myself on this occasion

[autogyro]

I did not think you were off topic at all 42.
You are also correct about the Prius but it is a first generation hybrid not a pure electric car. The Prius can at least be driven in Cities without using the ic engine and has a reasonable range.
Direct comparisons are next to impossible between fossil fueled vehicles and EVs.
To change the vehicle park to electric will need a modernisation of the electricity grid and better energy generation including home and business sources.
Clarkson is given cars from the motor industry to test , which is mainly promoting 19th century technology ic vehicles. He is hardly likely to give an electric car a fair report is he. It could reduce his available box of toys.
The Tesla in my experience is in fact a reasonably practical vehicle, limited a bit by its range between charges. It is fine if you are prepared to learn a new routine in vehicle use. The main problem is a lack of re-charging sites, which is not the vehicles fault.

[andrew]

What nonsence! Only a complete fool would take a programme like Top Gear or a person who looks like a giant lavvy brush (go look at one then look at Clarkson in profile - same hair-do and both thin) seriously.

I think Tesla are getting their knickers in a twist over nothing. So what if Top Gear showed this car in a poor light? It is the opinion of 1 clown that no one in their right mind takes seriously.

Tesla have had a couple of product recalls, the most recent in October 2010, so quite a financial loss there. They also have a history of lawsuits, all of which they have dropped. Call me cynical, but I am seeing a pattern. Anyone who is interested in having an electric car will judge for themselves if the Tesla is worth buying or not.

[Saribro]

So, there are still people around who think Top Gear is an informational program instead of just entertainment? That used to make me chuckle, now it's just sad.

[autogyro]

Hahaha poor old Jeremy, exposed at last.
The problem arrises when the program gets used by vested interests in the motor industry, that is the point.

[Just_a_fan]

their failure to cover or rather their cover-up of events at Fukushima are getting right on my teats at the moment.

Ooh, what cover-up?

[Caito]

Well, in top gear the reviews are obviously skewed. It depends on the likes of the driver. As jeremy likes ferraris and hates beetles(porsches).

Also, the conclusions were according to the test done. It's not a track car, it will go fast but exhaust quickly. The review is out of the context of the car. If you take a truck and analyze it as a ferrari, it will suck.

So they did that with the tesla.

That's the good thing. Or you'd rather see all good reviews about cars? According to their parameters, the car was like that.


About the money fee thing, I don't have the least idea 'cause that's not my country.


This is for reference:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DfHyGD7 ... re=related[/youtube]

[autogyro]

I missed the bit about battery cars being totaly irelevent.
What was that all about?

[Pandamasque]

Fifth Gear did a better test of Tesla, concluding it with calculating the difference in price vs. similarly fast (in a straight line, but better handling) Lotus into years of buying petrol.

[scotty86]

Tesla really don't have a case on this one. A sad case of 'any publicity is good publicity' for a dying company perhaps?

[autogyro]

Tesla definitely need to up their technical game. They will be left way behind from what I have seen in new generation electric traction.
Mind you, so will internal combustion.

[andrew]

Tesla really don't have a case on this one. A sad case of 'any publicity is good publicity' for a dying company perhaps?

Looking at the history of the company on Wikipedia, there have been a could frivolous cases which are all eventually dropped by Tesla.

[Pandamasque]

'any publicity is good publicity'

Exactly. Attacking TG is a VERY easy way to get publicity.
Here's Wilman's response http://transmission.blogs.topgear.com/2 ... al-action/