-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Do you bet on sports?
Top Gear lying about EVs again.
- Thread starter BCO
- Start date
Mike Hoxbig
Honorary Master
I'm not sure about the complaints being made against them, but one thing that they were correct about is the time taken to charge.
If your battery runs flat, then you're stuck at wherever you broke down for a very long time.
If your battery runs flat, then you're stuck at wherever you broke down for a very long time.
Perhaps there's a method to their madness? Something they know that you don't?
I watch a lot of the shows on the ignition channel, none of the motoring journalists are in favour of EVs.
Now if your job requires you to know an industry inside out, they might have a point right?
Biased or not, I share the similar view they do.
I watch a lot of the shows on the ignition channel, none of the motoring journalists are in favour of EVs.
Now if your job requires you to know an industry inside out, they might have a point right?
Biased or not, I share the similar view they do.
alloytoo
Honorary Master
Which is really the point, if you run out of petrol, the AA can wander along with a jerry can and get you going in 5 minutes, not so with an EV.
How many of us have started a journey with a half empty tank and simply topped it up en route?
Captain Beer
Executive Member
Nothing new here. Top Gear is staged. Ev's are ****. We already knew that.
alloytoo
Honorary Master
How often do they tell us that the fuel tank is half empty?
Roadrunner
Expert Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 1,653
- Reaction score
- 1
James May said it was definitely the future, just not as it is today with the limited range and long recharge times.
He is obviously looking at it from a British perspective where the technology is not commonplace yet. In the States they have already made some progress in negating these obstacles.
He is obviously looking at it from a British perspective where the technology is not commonplace yet. In the States they have already made some progress in negating these obstacles.
Last edited:
dj_jyno
Executive Member
Be that as it may, the problem is that they were deliberately trying to make the car look bad. If it were a sportscar and they used some clever editing to make it seem better than it is, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
nakedpeanut
Expert Member
I think they stage allot of the show, but this is what makes it enjoyable to most. Not to mention it helped prove the cons of having a EV. Even though I won't be buying one any time soon.
Still a good show!
Sent from my super sexy SGS2
Still a good show!
Sent from my super sexy SGS2
alloytoo
Honorary Master
It's not their job to sell the car, it's their job to review it. If they perceive a potential problem should they ignore it? Or should they illustrate it?
This is a visual medium, so they illustrate it in film.
On plenty of occassions I've seen them use footage of fancy sports cars spinning out or losing grip. Do you think that happens in the very first shot? Likewise do you think the fancy empressive driving all happens on the first take?
Their job is to review the vehicle and illustrate it's strength and weaknesses. (and to entertain in the process)
EVs (for now) are intended as city vehicles. Given that many people only travel about 80km on their daily commute, a car with a 200km range is perfectly acceptable. Also, you don't have to fill up at a petrol station or whatever, you just plug it in when you get home each night and it's full by the morning. A lot of the "problems" around EVs are easily resolved simply by changing one's habits (and the cars themselves also provide a lot of information about whether or not you can reach your desired destination on a charge). What Top Gear did is engineered the situation for the car to fail - they deliberately drained the battery before setting out, then ignored the car's navigation system that was telling them they'd have insufficient juice to get where they're going and THEN still had to drive around in circles so the car would run out of charge in the town they wanted it to (one that happened not to have any charging stations). This is extremely damaging to nascent the EV industry - one that can only benefit our environment and delay global oil depletion - and all for no other reason but libertarians like Clarkson have somehow decided that electric cars are a threat to one's "freedoms".
The way that Top Gear fabricates, or at the very least, exaggerates, the "problems" with EVs is akin to them taking a Ferrari on a 4x4 course and then writing off all sportcars as useless because they can't bundu bash. An EV is intended for a specific purpose, and most of them are able to fulfill that purpose very effectively provided one operates the vehicle as it was designed.
Other Pineapple Smurf
Honorary Master
I cannot belive the public falls for Top Gear antics - its a soap opera for guys (and girls). Most is staged and if you watch enough episodes you will realise this.
So sit back, relax, switch your mind off and watch your Top Gear.
So sit back, relax, switch your mind off and watch your Top Gear.
HavocXphere
Honorary Master
Weak. While nobody expects serious car reviews from them (its entertainment) that is just plain BS.
Driving around in loops demonstrates a clear intention to artificially distort the view presented. And the distortion isn't even entertaining. So not cool.
Driving around in loops demonstrates a clear intention to artificially distort the view presented. And the distortion isn't even entertaining. So not cool.
Mike Hoxbig
Honorary Master
I'm actually more surprised that anyone takes Top Gear (the TV show) seriously. Their verdicts are sometimes completely nonsensical, but that's ok because the showed is made for entertainment value. You'll find the magazine to be much more sensible.
With that said, they did highlight the shortfall of electric cars i.e. the high cost vs. the cons (limited range, long charge times, etc.). Keep in mind that if you have to recharge every day (or 2nd day), all you're doing is replacing fuel with electricity, and electricity isn't exactly as cheap as it used to be. Also unless we're talking about solar, wind and hydro power, the processes used in generating electricity isn't exactly green.
They are genuinely excited about the hydrogen powered Honda though, and personally I agree that it's a better alternative to electric cars. We should focus our efforts on making hydrogen cheaper and easier to produce, instead of extending the range and reducing the charge times of electric cars.
With that said, they did highlight the shortfall of electric cars i.e. the high cost vs. the cons (limited range, long charge times, etc.). Keep in mind that if you have to recharge every day (or 2nd day), all you're doing is replacing fuel with electricity, and electricity isn't exactly as cheap as it used to be. Also unless we're talking about solar, wind and hydro power, the processes used in generating electricity isn't exactly green.
They are genuinely excited about the hydrogen powered Honda though, and personally I agree that it's a better alternative to electric cars. We should focus our efforts on making hydrogen cheaper and easier to produce, instead of extending the range and reducing the charge times of electric cars.
alloytoo
Honorary Master
So you're really complaining that they ran out of charge in a place convienent to them and not at random like some other poor sod. There are comprehensive petrol station networks throughout many countries yet people still run out of petrol. By your logic they shouldn't report of fuel economy, and illustrate running out of petrol because they didn't specifically tell people how much fuel was in the tank.
So what? As James May pointed out while reviewing the Honda Hydrogen hybrid, "It works today." EV's don't the industry should be working on that.
Nonsense, EV's just result in a concentration of pollution around oil and coal fire stations. Unless the vast bulk of your electricity supply is generated with a small carbon footprint the EV has (given it's higher production and disposal costs) a higher carbon footprint over it's lifetime.
EV's are just not up to snuff.
Last edited:
alloytoo
Honorary Master
Sports cars aren't sold as Bundu bashers, your illustration is spurious.
I don't see them slagging the electric milk truck, a vehicle intended for a specific purpose.
To most people their car is a general purpose vehicle.
While I generally choose small economy cars for use in urban centres I have also used my cars for extended 600Km trips, used it lug sand and firewood, used it on muddy farm roads.
I do not leave home every single morning with a full tank of petrol, nor do I stick to a planned pre-determined route.
In order to compete with the internal combustion car, or even the hybrid, the EV needs to be general purpose. It doesn't have to do all these tasks well, but it does need to do them "Good enough", that is to say as good as a comparatively sized small hatchback.
Right now the EV's are struggling to do these things "as well" as a 1958 Austin 850.
For all practical purposes the technology is 50 years behind.
alloytoo
Honorary Master
James May's comments in that article illustrate where they're coming from.
EV's, hyrbrids etc have to work today.
Diesel is a great example. When they got small diesels responding like petrol engines they became a viable small car option.
They went out of their way to esnure the vehicle failed, and then bemoaned the technology afterwards. For many people - but not all - an EV would meet their motoring requirements, and as long as the charged the car each night they would not have any problems. The fact that an EV has a limited range is NOT a problem or a failure of the technology. If you require a vehicle with a range of longer than 200km then don't get an EV.
Producing hydrogen takes a hell of a lot of energy and storing it is difficult. Ostensibly, there are far fewer hydrogen filling stations out there than even EV charging points, so I'm not sure how a hydrogen vehicle "works today" compared to a battery EV.
Depends on the energy supply. In countries with high nuclear and renewable inputs into the grid, EVs are definitely cleaner.
Again, for MANY people, an EV is perfectly up to snuff. I'd wager that the majority of motorists even in Joburg do well under 200km a day. No, EVs aren't perfect. Yes, they are limited, but Top Gear went out of their way to misrepresent the Leaf, purposefully exaggerating its shortcomings.