10 ms·

Top Gear responds to Tesla

271 points by vaksel 16y ago

olivercameron 16y ago
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.
- dman 16y ago
  I think any victory in courts is going to be a pyrrhic one. Ive said it before on earlier threads and I will say it again here - Tesla is alienating a large section of auto enthusiasts by going after Top Gear. It might be that some marketing guru has figured out that suing Top Gear is a cheaper way to get headlines than running a campaign. But they have picked the wrong target - Top Gear is at the heart and centre of Auto culture worldwide. Also not a good sign when a tech company starts using the courts instead of the market and their product to win points.
  - trafficlight 16y ago
    Just look how it turned out for Morris Marina fans.
  - kwis 16y ago
    I've got a deposit down on a Model S, and I don't think I could care less one way or the other. I thought the review was misleading and stupid, and I think the lawsuit is a stupid response. But whatever, I'm still excited about the Model S.
    - protomyth 16y ago
      Since you have a deposit down, just out of curiosity, are you a home owner?
    - blhack 16y ago
      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)
      - reitzensteinm 16y ago
        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.
        dnautics 16y ago
        you can make hydrogen via other means, directly from sunlight, for example, although admittedly that technology is not here yet.
        borism 16y ago
        you mean the technology where you connect electrodes to solar panel or wind turbine, put them into water and hydrogen and oxygen come out?
        A1kmm 16y ago
        The energy has to come from somewhere, but it doesn't have to come from electricity (every conversion means energy is lost, and a light -> electricity -> water conversion is potentially less efficient than a more direct conversion). Hydrosol-2 (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrosol-2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrosol-2) is an example of solar hydrogen production with no electric current intermediate - it involves high temperatures, so I'm not sure how much energy is lost maintaining that temperature compared to captured producing hydrogen, but it could theoretically be more efficient.
        Retric 16y ago
        His point was Hydrogen was just another form of battery.
  - machrider 16y ago
    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.
    - khafra 16y ago
      I do think Clarkson is a bit over the top anti-conservation; but suing him for that seems like the worst possible response. Something along the lines of a clever rebuttal in the form of a short video could've scored them some goodwill points.
      - Quarrelsome 16y ago
        He's over the top because he plays it up. Its not a documentary. Its a play and the actors play roles to a degree of excess (although tbf their roles are pretty close to their real life personas).
    - estel 16y ago
      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 feel that they're "biased" against me, but the review didn't come across as any more negative than 90% of car reviews on Top Gear.
      - olivercameron 16y ago
        Compared to a lot of car reviews on Top Gear, Tesla got off lightly.
        nettdata 16y ago
        Just imagine if it were made in Mexico. EDIT: For those that don't get the reference, there is a running bit/theme on Top Gear about a so-called Mexican Supercar that was released a while ago. They've been thrashing it, and Mexico, ever since. So much so that the US version of Top Gear has been edited to remove the comments, and the Mexican Government has issued official communications about it. Just Google "top gear mexico supercar" and you'll see. It's not like I just randomly slammed Mexicans with this post. That's what the Dutch are for.
  - lyso 16y ago
    I suspect it is about headlines. They have even taken out a google ad on the search "tesla top gear" pointing to teslavstopgear.co.uk However, the review is clearly heavily scripted (do Teslas really just run out of power and then require pushing down the road?). In the UK, the powers-that-be at the BBC have recently taken a dim view of this sort of constructed TV posing as reality (after "Socksgate" and "Sachsgate", an explanation of which is probably beyond the scope of this discussion...).
  - c2 16y ago
    I think you are VASTLY overstating the importance of Top Gear, which is essentially an entertainment talk show which happens to talk about cars.
    - dman 16y ago
      Name another entertainment show which talks about cars and has Top Gears global reach.
      - nettdata 16y ago
        Sure, they're the global leaders when it comes to automotive ENTERTAINMENT, but that is precisely because they are entertaining, not journalistic. Just about EVERY "review" they do on cars is heavily biased, and in more than a few cases, outrageously so. Anyone who watches the show without understanding that it is entertainment, first and foremost, needs to lighten up, get a sense of humour, and not take themselves so seriously. Those are the types that TG go out of their way to ridicule on the show.
        deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]
    - robryan 16y ago
      This is kind of like how we discuss things like privacy concerns on Facebook here where the vast majority don't care. Sure there are real motoring enthusiasts talking about stuff where TopGear is irrelevant, but for the rest of the world, the vast majority, I don't think this is the case.
  - flojo 16y ago
    I could not agree with your more. Even if there was nothing wrong with the car. What Tesla should have done is, take it on the chin, say something in the lines of 'we will correct and make it better', even though nothing is wrong, and then do a retest, and simply have that test on their terms. And then really, they could have gone from good to great.
- Cherad 16y ago
  While I'm sure Tesla wouldn't accept just an apology from Jeremy Clarkson, there'll be "lost sales" damages in the squillions, this is very true. Clarkson's offended entire countries without remorse and everyone involved moves on and gets on with their lives. Does anyone know the jurisdiction for this legal action? I suspect treatment of the case in the UK will differ to that in the US.
  - redthrowaway 16y ago
    Actually, the papers they've filed with the courts specify damages <100k GBP. Which further makes one wonder why they would bother. http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/tesla_-_claim_form_claimants_copy_29_03_11.pdf http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/tesla_-_claim...
    - Cherad 16y ago
      Oh, that's interesting. And yes, boggles the mind why they'd bother.
      - spullara 16y ago
        I think the intent of the lawsuit is to stop that episode from continuing to air rather than get damages.
- joeguilmette 16y ago
  I dont watch Top Gear and while I follow tech news and new technology, I'm not a car person. That said, this public débâcle has not played out in Tesla's favor to this consumer. It seems to me that they got an unfavorable review and aren't happy with it, and it seems that Top Gear is winning the war of public relations.
- eli 16y ago
  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.
  - timthorn 16y ago
    I'd like to see references for that. Truth is an absolute defence against libel.
    - burgerbrain 16y ago
      http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/sep/20/richard-dawkins-libel-laws http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/sep/20/richard-dawkin... Simon Singh has since won that case last I heard, but it was by no means a given. That it took so long for him to get off for saying fucking chiropractors of all people "quacks" (if they aren't, who possibly could be?) should say a lot about the extent to which correctness or belief in correctness is a real defense. edit: spelling
      - xiaoma 16y ago
        fucking chiropractors of all people "quacks" (if they aren't, who possibly could be?) You're mis-informed. Chiropractic treatments are very useful for certain problems. Some quacks say it will treat any and all illness, but most licensed chiropractors I've dealt with have been highly professional. I have first-hand experience. After a knee injury playing on my high school basketball team, I suffered from mild swelling in my right knee. As a result it was difficult for me to fully bend it. This condition persisted for 4 months, despite icing, anti-inflammatories and several treatments by multiple physicians. Eventually, one referred me to a chiropractor. It took him about 10 minutes to find the problem, and he was able make the proper adjustment. Within two hours, the swelling was gone and the range of motion was back to normal. Many whiplash victims are also referred to chiropractors. (FYI, my mother is an MD. I'm hardly a healing crystal using homeopathy enthusiast.)
        burgerbrain 16y ago
CoffeeDregs 16y ago
Seems as though a better plan would be to challenge Top Gear to a rematch of some sort. Make something fun out of this and get the auto enthusiasts cheering. Southwest did this perfectly: got sued, took it to the ring, arm wrestled over it, got crushed, paid the other guy, laughed all the way to the bank and everyone cheered them on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwU9m4oCtRE&#38 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwU9m4oCtRE&
- Klinky 16y ago
  Suing over a stolen slogan is a bit different than suing over slander/libel. When you read this excerpt from the article it does sound like Tesla is trying to either force Top Gear to give a better review or give them more publicity: Why even last night the Top Gear office accidentally received an email sent from a Public Relations firm to The One Show, asking if it would like to have the Tesla spokesperson on their programme to talk about the case. It says: “PHA Media represent Tesla and this could make for a fantastic interview.” And the PHA man’s not finished there. “The presenters could have some fun with this.” He adds. “Matt and Alex could even take the Tesla for a spin and test it out, reaffirming its virtues?”
- elliottcarlson 16y ago
  Since I grew up in Europe, I wasn't familiar with this story. Here's some additional information for people unfamiliar as well: http://www.adslogans.co.uk/ww/prvwis09.html http://www.adslogans.co.uk/ww/prvwis09.html
what-to-do 16y ago
You cannot make a better car by suing people.
akashs 16y ago
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 releases that I can find, but the two I can find are much closer to Top Gear's number and were also from less aggressive testing than what Top Gear did: 93 miles: http://www.autoweek.com/article/20080124/green/398811820/1636 http://www.autoweek.com/article/20080124/green/398811820/163... 95-120 miles (says 105-120, but I think there's a math error on the writer's part): http://green.autoblog.com/2008/01/29/so-whats-the-downside-to-the-tesla-roadster-the-range/ http://green.autoblog.com/2008/01/29/so-whats-the-downside-t... Third, Top Gear says Tesla calculated the 55 mile figure themselves, so not sure how they can sue them for that claim.
- d2 16y ago
  Tesla's corporate officers have a fiduciary duty to respond to something that hurts their brand this badly. Top Gear is the most popular car review show globally with around 350 million viewers world-wide. Apparently a lawsuit is the best response they could come up with.
  - ascendant 16y ago
    Apparently their fiduciary duty also includes waiting almost 3 years after the review to finally do react. Seems like well-timed headline grabbing to me. I'm sure in 3 years they'll sue me for saying that.
  - nl 16y ago
    So they'll be suing themselves now? Because this lawsuit is hurting their brand a lot more than the Top Gear review did. I remember seeing it when it came out, and thinking how positive it was. Sure, Jeremy ridiculed it for running out of power, but at the same time he spent a long time talking about how fast it was. From memory he said something like "if this is the future, bring it on" By your logic, what should Audi do when he said (paraphrasing): "All Audi drivers are cocks"?
sliverstorm 16y ago
Considering the tenuous relationship between the presenters and the studio as portrayed in the show, it's pleasing to see the rest of the company getting behind Top Gear and providing a united front.
d2 16y ago
This is an incredibly well written blog entry. Having followed the accepted pre-court etiquette that Andy mentions in the past, this inspires me to take a different approach next time around and have my say in hopefully as professional a manner. [...In close consultation with my legal team as I'm sure Andy did]
Cherad 16y ago
Jeremy Clarkson's column in The Sunday Times shortly after the Top Gear review is an interesting read and covered most of the points made in this article back in 2009. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/jeremy_clarkson/article5483422.ece http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/jeremy_clarkson/art...
- Lennie 16y ago
  The article was mostly ok until all the way at the end. Where he completely messes up and mentioned that hydrogen cars are "completely green". Just a few sentences before that he says the car from Tesla is powered by "so-called green power" (electricity) from "dirty great power station". Mr. Clarkson where do you think most of the hydrogen comes from ? Or the power to compress the hydrogen to make it compact enough for use by a car ? Yes, there is a possibility someone will find a good way to produce to create hydrogen from algae. Or some breakthrough in the science of nuclear fission. We really don't know what will happen. Anyway the real problem is efficient storage of energy and efficient conversion from storage to action/motion if I can call it that. Batteries seem to be the current solution. But if we want to talk about environmentally friendly I don't know if they really are. I just know that batteries, like hydrogen use materials which come from nature which are just as finite as oil or matterial needed for fusion for that matter. Although on Wikipedia it says: 'In addition, new Nickel-metal hydride and lithium batteries are non-toxic and can be recycled, and "the supposed 'lithium shortage' doesn’t exist"' I don't know if that is true.
  - JoeAltmaier 16y ago
    Hey, there's another article recently on HN about an MIT professor's "artificial leaf" meaning a solar cell that produces hydrogen directly. So now we know when that will happen.
Joshhannah 16y ago
The tesla roadster is unfortunately just not competitive with other internal combustion performance cars if you don't want to give it credit for either (1) being a super innovative EV or (2) being environmentally friendly. Top Gear (and all the car mags) basically review it as a cool, fun novelty. But if you measure on looks + performance, as car enthuiasts do, it's just fundamentally not competitive in its price bracket. Suing is obviously a mistake. Hoping Top Gear, Evo, Road & Track will push it is just naive. Tesla listens too much to their own marketing.
cormullion 16y ago
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: "it's even more 'not bad' when you start looking into the costs": £40 to fill the petrol Elise, electricity just £3.50. Wind noise is a problem, but "a small price to pay when you consider the upsides". "And I haven't even got to the big upside yet: 200 miles between trips to the plug." Some adverse comments about the handling, but then he waves goodbye as "the volt head" cruises past the "petrol head". "It is snowing in hell!". "This car was shaping up to be something wonderful..." After a pretty positive first half, Clarkson does indeed go on to make fun of the car's electrical problems, and then is unimpressed by the practicalities and ecological claims of electric vehicles. Even with a range of 250 miles, and a 16 hour recharge cycle (if you're not throwing it around a track), it's just not - yet - a practical car for many people, or a supercar to compete with the likes of Ferrari or Porsche. Clarkson's final words on the Tesla: "Incredible - but irrelevant [in the light of the hydrogen car reviewed later]". As Top Gear and Clarkson reviews go, I thought it wasn't overly biased. I mean, he could have dropped a piano on it, or set it on fire... I suspect Tesla are just in the need for some publicity at the moment.
- kalleboo 16y ago
  « I mean, he could have dropped a piano on it, or set it on fire...» Exactly. People have to keep in mind this is a Clarkson review we're talking about. If you want to see how he deals with cars he really doesn't like, just search YouTube for "clarkson perodua kelisa".
  - bron 16y ago
    Here is the link for the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI2MpcIiO6A&feature=youtube_gdata_player http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI2MpcIiO6A&feature=youtu... This is Clarkson we are talking about, not some wuss who kiss up to asses when he gets sued... and seriously imo that is a pretty decent review for the Tesla coming from Clarkson.
bugsy 16y ago
With this response, it sounds like both sides are now in complete agreement and there is no remaining dispute.
motters 16y ago
My question is: how did this get to the top position on HN? I could hardly care less about Jeremy Clarkson's opinions, or TV shows such as Top Gear.
- elvirs 16y ago
  exactly, and why this comment gets downvoted? I dont give a crap, its like following those lawsuits Calacanis filed against Arrington, and Arrington filed agains JooJoo guys. This is soap opera, and you make fun of soap opera when there are is love, cheating and stuff involved but you discuss it as a serious issue because in this case the auto show and very techy electric car manufacturer is involved. feel free to downvote me too but I think smart and talented people of HN community (which I observed them to be) must have better things to discuss. cheers
  - PagingCraig 16y ago
    People like things you don't. What else is new?
- nikcub 16y ago
  > how did this get to the top position on HN? I'm going to take a wild guess and say because 173 people clicked on the 'vote up' button
jrspruitt 16y ago
I like what the Tesla company is doing, in regards to attempting to make alternative fuel cars, I'm all for such things. And yes, its an up hill battle, which I'm sure the internal combustion engine faced, while trying to oust horses for a viable mode of transportation. Not only is the technology not up to par/cost effective on a mass scale, there is the issue of charging station locations, and the nay sayers like the host of Top Gear, who isn't the only one that grumbles at the thought of electric or "eco-friendly" read Hot Rod magazine sometime. Which seems to be what Tesla wants to answer, electric cars can go fast to. But this lawsuit seems like its disingenuous, more like they are playing off a couple social issues for their benefit. 1 "Environment" is an emotional trigger second only to stuff like racism and sexism level stuff, its got some emotional appeal just by saying the word, either for or against. So claiming foul on someone who is notoriously pro fast powerful cars, who inherently isn't going to like commuter based cars, really nails that emotion. 2 Taking it to the media, to hit a full scale marketing campaign about it, years after it happened, to help fuel that emotion and go after the media justice that seems to easy to do, like O.J. we all "know" he did it, but was proven innocent pretty much. Enough press coverage to one side, and we all start forming our own judgments. I think these are dirty tricks, that only add fuel to the opposition's fire. Like the scientists who were busted with bad data on global warming. Regardless if the position is true, getting caught doing dirty tricks, is going to make you look bad regardless, doing more harm than good. Just because I agree with their environmental position, doesn't mean I have to look the other way, when they break other beliefs of mine. I'm angered cause of the damage this could do for environmentalism, which I believe in first, their company second.
johnconroy 16y ago
I enjoy Top Gear but their (ie Clarkson's) animosity towards hybrids, electrics etc. is pretty pathetic, epically antiquarian.
cl8ton 16y ago
Clarkson is a bit of a prick when it comes to favoritism on cars (you know, kinda like some top tier tech blogs) He is a 98% octane gear head and will not tolerate electric cars, so his review did not surprise me much when I watched it. I'm a long time Porsche owner and will never forgive him on an episode when he dropped a Piano on an older 911 or when he totally disrespected the Porsche GT for comparing its composite disk rotors to anti-acid. Guess I will never get British humor.
rlfromm 16y ago
I agree with top gear. UK top gear rules, hopefully the US crew can get their show together.
rlfromm 16y ago
So what is the issue? Pure electric is cool in 55 minute segents. ;)
CornishPasty 16y ago
did they deliver the legal case via a tesla roadster? seems that way given how long it's taken...
jrockway 16y ago
PS: As this is going through the courts right now, we’re afraid we’ve had to turn off comments on this one, but we wanted to let you all know how we see it. Good thing that you can't comment on articles elsewhere on the Internet. Their legal strategy is saved!
stuhood 16y ago
Why would Top Gear use a calculated track capacity number (55 miles), given that they could have measured an actual number? I understand that 30 minutes of hard driving can be exhausting, but how exactly could they have calculated an accurate value? Say what you will about EPA numbers, but at least they involve standardized measurement.
- dagw 16y ago
  Why would Top Gear use a calculated track capacity number (55 miles), given that they could have measured an actual number? Probably because they had a show to shoot. They where apparently already having trouble getting all the shots they needed due to the short battery life, combined with the break problems. I'm guessing they simply didn't have the time to take the car out again and run it until the battery died.
periferral 16y ago
ohhhh the tesla jokes on top gear for years to come from jeremy is something i'll look forward to.

271 points by vaksel 16y ago

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.

dman 16y ago
I think any victory in courts is going to be a pyrrhic one. Ive said it before on earlier threads and I will say it again here - Tesla is alienating a large section of auto enthusiasts by going after Top Gear. It might be that some marketing guru has figured out that suing Top Gear is a cheaper way to get headlines than running a campaign. But they have picked the wrong target - Top Gear is at the heart and centre of Auto culture worldwide. Also not a good sign when a tech company starts using the courts instead of the market and their product to win points.
- trafficlight 16y ago
  Just look how it turned out for Morris Marina fans.
- kwis 16y ago
  I've got a deposit down on a Model S, and I don't think I could care less one way or the other. I thought the review was misleading and stupid, and I think the lawsuit is a stupid response. But whatever, I'm still excited about the Model S.
  - protomyth 16y ago
    Since you have a deposit down, just out of curiosity, are you a home owner?
  - blhack 16y ago
    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)
    - reitzensteinm 16y ago
      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.
      - dnautics 16y ago
        you can make hydrogen via other means, directly from sunlight, for example, although admittedly that technology is not here yet.
        borism 16y ago
        you mean the technology where you connect electrodes to solar panel or wind turbine, put them into water and hydrogen and oxygen come out?
        A1kmm 16y ago
        The energy has to come from somewhere, but it doesn't have to come from electricity (every conversion means energy is lost, and a light -> electricity -> water conversion is potentially less efficient than a more direct conversion). Hydrosol-2 (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrosol-2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrosol-2) is an example of solar hydrogen production with no electric current intermediate - it involves high temperatures, so I'm not sure how much energy is lost maintaining that temperature compared to captured producing hydrogen, but it could theoretically be more efficient.
        Retric 16y ago
        His point was Hydrogen was just another form of battery.
- machrider 16y ago
  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.
  - khafra 16y ago
    I do think Clarkson is a bit over the top anti-conservation; but suing him for that seems like the worst possible response. Something along the lines of a clever rebuttal in the form of a short video could've scored them some goodwill points.
    - Quarrelsome 16y ago
      He's over the top because he plays it up. Its not a documentary. Its a play and the actors play roles to a degree of excess (although tbf their roles are pretty close to their real life personas).
  - estel 16y ago
    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 feel that they're "biased" against me, but the review didn't come across as any more negative than 90% of car reviews on Top Gear.
    - olivercameron 16y ago
      Compared to a lot of car reviews on Top Gear, Tesla got off lightly.
      - nettdata 16y ago
        Just imagine if it were made in Mexico. EDIT: For those that don't get the reference, there is a running bit/theme on Top Gear about a so-called Mexican Supercar that was released a while ago. They've been thrashing it, and Mexico, ever since. So much so that the US version of Top Gear has been edited to remove the comments, and the Mexican Government has issued official communications about it. Just Google "top gear mexico supercar" and you'll see. It's not like I just randomly slammed Mexicans with this post. That's what the Dutch are for.
- lyso 16y ago
  I suspect it is about headlines. They have even taken out a google ad on the search "tesla top gear" pointing to teslavstopgear.co.uk However, the review is clearly heavily scripted (do Teslas really just run out of power and then require pushing down the road?). In the UK, the powers-that-be at the BBC have recently taken a dim view of this sort of constructed TV posing as reality (after "Socksgate" and "Sachsgate", an explanation of which is probably beyond the scope of this discussion...).
- c2 16y ago
  I think you are VASTLY overstating the importance of Top Gear, which is essentially an entertainment talk show which happens to talk about cars.
  - dman 16y ago
    Name another entertainment show which talks about cars and has Top Gears global reach.
    - nettdata 16y ago
      Sure, they're the global leaders when it comes to automotive ENTERTAINMENT, but that is precisely because they are entertaining, not journalistic. Just about EVERY "review" they do on cars is heavily biased, and in more than a few cases, outrageously so. Anyone who watches the show without understanding that it is entertainment, first and foremost, needs to lighten up, get a sense of humour, and not take themselves so seriously. Those are the types that TG go out of their way to ridicule on the show.
      - deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]
  - robryan 16y ago
    This is kind of like how we discuss things like privacy concerns on Facebook here where the vast majority don't care. Sure there are real motoring enthusiasts talking about stuff where TopGear is irrelevant, but for the rest of the world, the vast majority, I don't think this is the case.
- flojo 16y ago
  I could not agree with your more. Even if there was nothing wrong with the car. What Tesla should have done is, take it on the chin, say something in the lines of 'we will correct and make it better', even though nothing is wrong, and then do a retest, and simply have that test on their terms. And then really, they could have gone from good to great.
Cherad 16y ago
While I'm sure Tesla wouldn't accept just an apology from Jeremy Clarkson, there'll be "lost sales" damages in the squillions, this is very true. Clarkson's offended entire countries without remorse and everyone involved moves on and gets on with their lives. Does anyone know the jurisdiction for this legal action? I suspect treatment of the case in the UK will differ to that in the US.
- redthrowaway 16y ago
  Actually, the papers they've filed with the courts specify damages <100k GBP. Which further makes one wonder why they would bother. http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/tesla_-_claim_form_claimants_copy_29_03_11.pdf http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/tesla_-_claim...
  - Cherad 16y ago
    Oh, that's interesting. And yes, boggles the mind why they'd bother.
    - spullara 16y ago
      I think the intent of the lawsuit is to stop that episode from continuing to air rather than get damages.
joeguilmette 16y ago
I dont watch Top Gear and while I follow tech news and new technology, I'm not a car person. That said, this public débâcle has not played out in Tesla's favor to this consumer. It seems to me that they got an unfavorable review and aren't happy with it, and it seems that Top Gear is winning the war of public relations.
eli 16y ago
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.
- timthorn 16y ago
  I'd like to see references for that. Truth is an absolute defence against libel.
  - burgerbrain 16y ago
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/sep/20/richard-dawkins-libel-laws http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/sep/20/richard-dawkin... Simon Singh has since won that case last I heard, but it was by no means a given. That it took so long for him to get off for saying fucking chiropractors of all people "quacks" (if they aren't, who possibly could be?) should say a lot about the extent to which correctness or belief in correctness is a real defense. edit: spelling
    - xiaoma 16y ago
      fucking chiropractors of all people "quacks" (if they aren't, who possibly could be?) You're mis-informed. Chiropractic treatments are very useful for certain problems. Some quacks say it will treat any and all illness, but most licensed chiropractors I've dealt with have been highly professional. I have first-hand experience. After a knee injury playing on my high school basketball team, I suffered from mild swelling in my right knee. As a result it was difficult for me to fully bend it. This condition persisted for 4 months, despite icing, anti-inflammatories and several treatments by multiple physicians. Eventually, one referred me to a chiropractor. It took him about 10 minutes to find the problem, and he was able make the proper adjustment. Within two hours, the swelling was gone and the range of motion was back to normal. Many whiplash victims are also referred to chiropractors. (FYI, my mother is an MD. I'm hardly a healing crystal using homeopathy enthusiast.)
      - burgerbrain 16y ago

CoffeeDregs 16y ago

Seems as though a better plan would be to challenge Top Gear to a rematch of some sort. Make something fun out of this and get the auto enthusiasts cheering. Southwest did this perfectly: got sued, took it to the ring, arm wrestled over it, got crushed, paid the other guy, laughed all the way to the bank and everyone cheered them on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwU9m4oCtRE&#38 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwU9m4oCtRE&

Klinky 16y ago
Suing over a stolen slogan is a bit different than suing over slander/libel. When you read this excerpt from the article it does sound like Tesla is trying to either force Top Gear to give a better review or give them more publicity: Why even last night the Top Gear office accidentally received an email sent from a Public Relations firm to The One Show, asking if it would like to have the Tesla spokesperson on their programme to talk about the case. It says: “PHA Media represent Tesla and this could make for a fantastic interview.” And the PHA man’s not finished there. “The presenters could have some fun with this.” He adds. “Matt and Alex could even take the Tesla for a spin and test it out, reaffirming its virtues?”
elliottcarlson 16y ago
Since I grew up in Europe, I wasn't familiar with this story. Here's some additional information for people unfamiliar as well: http://www.adslogans.co.uk/ww/prvwis09.html http://www.adslogans.co.uk/ww/prvwis09.html

what-to-do 16y ago

You cannot make a better car by suing people.

akashs 16y ago

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 releases that I can find, but the two I can find are much closer to Top Gear's number and were also from less aggressive testing than what Top Gear did: 93 miles: http://www.autoweek.com/article/20080124/green/398811820/1636 http://www.autoweek.com/article/20080124/green/398811820/163... 95-120 miles (says 105-120, but I think there's a math error on the writer's part): http://green.autoblog.com/2008/01/29/so-whats-the-downside-to-the-tesla-roadster-the-range/ http://green.autoblog.com/2008/01/29/so-whats-the-downside-t... Third, Top Gear says Tesla calculated the 55 mile figure themselves, so not sure how they can sue them for that claim.

d2 16y ago
Tesla's corporate officers have a fiduciary duty to respond to something that hurts their brand this badly. Top Gear is the most popular car review show globally with around 350 million viewers world-wide. Apparently a lawsuit is the best response they could come up with.
- ascendant 16y ago
  Apparently their fiduciary duty also includes waiting almost 3 years after the review to finally do react. Seems like well-timed headline grabbing to me. I'm sure in 3 years they'll sue me for saying that.
- nl 16y ago
  So they'll be suing themselves now? Because this lawsuit is hurting their brand a lot more than the Top Gear review did. I remember seeing it when it came out, and thinking how positive it was. Sure, Jeremy ridiculed it for running out of power, but at the same time he spent a long time talking about how fast it was. From memory he said something like "if this is the future, bring it on" By your logic, what should Audi do when he said (paraphrasing): "All Audi drivers are cocks"?

sliverstorm 16y ago

Considering the tenuous relationship between the presenters and the studio as portrayed in the show, it's pleasing to see the rest of the company getting behind Top Gear and providing a united front.

d2 16y ago

This is an incredibly well written blog entry. Having followed the accepted pre-court etiquette that Andy mentions in the past, this inspires me to take a different approach next time around and have my say in hopefully as professional a manner. [...In close consultation with my legal team as I'm sure Andy did]

Cherad 16y ago

Jeremy Clarkson's column in The Sunday Times shortly after the Top Gear review is an interesting read and covered most of the points made in this article back in 2009. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/jeremy_clarkson/article5483422.ece http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/jeremy_clarkson/art...

Lennie 16y ago
The article was mostly ok until all the way at the end. Where he completely messes up and mentioned that hydrogen cars are "completely green". Just a few sentences before that he says the car from Tesla is powered by "so-called green power" (electricity) from "dirty great power station". Mr. Clarkson where do you think most of the hydrogen comes from ? Or the power to compress the hydrogen to make it compact enough for use by a car ? Yes, there is a possibility someone will find a good way to produce to create hydrogen from algae. Or some breakthrough in the science of nuclear fission. We really don't know what will happen. Anyway the real problem is efficient storage of energy and efficient conversion from storage to action/motion if I can call it that. Batteries seem to be the current solution. But if we want to talk about environmentally friendly I don't know if they really are. I just know that batteries, like hydrogen use materials which come from nature which are just as finite as oil or matterial needed for fusion for that matter. Although on Wikipedia it says: 'In addition, new Nickel-metal hydride and lithium batteries are non-toxic and can be recycled, and "the supposed 'lithium shortage' doesn’t exist"' I don't know if that is true.
- JoeAltmaier 16y ago
  Hey, there's another article recently on HN about an MIT professor's "artificial leaf" meaning a solar cell that produces hydrogen directly. So now we know when that will happen.

Joshhannah 16y ago

The tesla roadster is unfortunately just not competitive with other internal combustion performance cars if you don't want to give it credit for either (1) being a super innovative EV or (2) being environmentally friendly. Top Gear (and all the car mags) basically review it as a cool, fun novelty. But if you measure on looks + performance, as car enthuiasts do, it's just fundamentally not competitive in its price bracket. Suing is obviously a mistake. Hoping Top Gear, Evo, Road & Track will push it is just naive. Tesla listens too much to their own marketing.

cormullion 16y ago

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: "it's even more 'not bad' when you start looking into the costs": £40 to fill the petrol Elise, electricity just £3.50. Wind noise is a problem, but "a small price to pay when you consider the upsides". "And I haven't even got to the big upside yet: 200 miles between trips to the plug." Some adverse comments about the handling, but then he waves goodbye as "the volt head" cruises past the "petrol head". "It is snowing in hell!". "This car was shaping up to be something wonderful..." After a pretty positive first half, Clarkson does indeed go on to make fun of the car's electrical problems, and then is unimpressed by the practicalities and ecological claims of electric vehicles. Even with a range of 250 miles, and a 16 hour recharge cycle (if you're not throwing it around a track), it's just not - yet - a practical car for many people, or a supercar to compete with the likes of Ferrari or Porsche. Clarkson's final words on the Tesla: "Incredible - but irrelevant [in the light of the hydrogen car reviewed later]". As Top Gear and Clarkson reviews go, I thought it wasn't overly biased. I mean, he could have dropped a piano on it, or set it on fire... I suspect Tesla are just in the need for some publicity at the moment.

kalleboo 16y ago
« I mean, he could have dropped a piano on it, or set it on fire...» Exactly. People have to keep in mind this is a Clarkson review we're talking about. If you want to see how he deals with cars he really doesn't like, just search YouTube for "clarkson perodua kelisa".
- bron 16y ago
  Here is the link for the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI2MpcIiO6A&feature=youtube_gdata_player http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI2MpcIiO6A&feature=youtu... This is Clarkson we are talking about, not some wuss who kiss up to asses when he gets sued... and seriously imo that is a pretty decent review for the Tesla coming from Clarkson.

bugsy 16y ago

With this response, it sounds like both sides are now in complete agreement and there is no remaining dispute.

motters 16y ago

My question is: how did this get to the top position on HN? I could hardly care less about Jeremy Clarkson's opinions, or TV shows such as Top Gear.

elvirs 16y ago
exactly, and why this comment gets downvoted? I dont give a crap, its like following those lawsuits Calacanis filed against Arrington, and Arrington filed agains JooJoo guys. This is soap opera, and you make fun of soap opera when there are is love, cheating and stuff involved but you discuss it as a serious issue because in this case the auto show and very techy electric car manufacturer is involved. feel free to downvote me too but I think smart and talented people of HN community (which I observed them to be) must have better things to discuss. cheers
- PagingCraig 16y ago
  People like things you don't. What else is new?
nikcub 16y ago
> how did this get to the top position on HN? I'm going to take a wild guess and say because 173 people clicked on the 'vote up' button

jrspruitt 16y ago

I like what the Tesla company is doing, in regards to attempting to make alternative fuel cars, I'm all for such things. And yes, its an up hill battle, which I'm sure the internal combustion engine faced, while trying to oust horses for a viable mode of transportation. Not only is the technology not up to par/cost effective on a mass scale, there is the issue of charging station locations, and the nay sayers like the host of Top Gear, who isn't the only one that grumbles at the thought of electric or "eco-friendly" read Hot Rod magazine sometime. Which seems to be what Tesla wants to answer, electric cars can go fast to. But this lawsuit seems like its disingenuous, more like they are playing off a couple social issues for their benefit. 1 "Environment" is an emotional trigger second only to stuff like racism and sexism level stuff, its got some emotional appeal just by saying the word, either for or against. So claiming foul on someone who is notoriously pro fast powerful cars, who inherently isn't going to like commuter based cars, really nails that emotion. 2 Taking it to the media, to hit a full scale marketing campaign about it, years after it happened, to help fuel that emotion and go after the media justice that seems to easy to do, like O.J. we all "know" he did it, but was proven innocent pretty much. Enough press coverage to one side, and we all start forming our own judgments. I think these are dirty tricks, that only add fuel to the opposition's fire. Like the scientists who were busted with bad data on global warming. Regardless if the position is true, getting caught doing dirty tricks, is going to make you look bad regardless, doing more harm than good. Just because I agree with their environmental position, doesn't mean I have to look the other way, when they break other beliefs of mine. I'm angered cause of the damage this could do for environmentalism, which I believe in first, their company second.

johnconroy 16y ago

I enjoy Top Gear but their (ie Clarkson's) animosity towards hybrids, electrics etc. is pretty pathetic, epically antiquarian.

cl8ton 16y ago

Clarkson is a bit of a prick when it comes to favoritism on cars (you know, kinda like some top tier tech blogs) He is a 98% octane gear head and will not tolerate electric cars, so his review did not surprise me much when I watched it. I'm a long time Porsche owner and will never forgive him on an episode when he dropped a Piano on an older 911 or when he totally disrespected the Porsche GT for comparing its composite disk rotors to anti-acid. Guess I will never get British humor.

rlfromm 16y ago

I agree with top gear. UK top gear rules, hopefully the US crew can get their show together.

rlfromm 16y ago

So what is the issue? Pure electric is cool in 55 minute segents. ;)

CornishPasty 16y ago

did they deliver the legal case via a tesla roadster? seems that way given how long it's taken...

jrockway 16y ago

PS: As this is going through the courts right now, we’re afraid we’ve had to turn off comments on this one, but we wanted to let you all know how we see it. Good thing that you can't comment on articles elsewhere on the Internet. Their legal strategy is saved!

stuhood 16y ago

Why would Top Gear use a calculated track capacity number (55 miles), given that they could have measured an actual number? I understand that 30 minutes of hard driving can be exhausting, but how exactly could they have calculated an accurate value? Say what you will about EPA numbers, but at least they involve standardized measurement.

dagw 16y ago
Why would Top Gear use a calculated track capacity number (55 miles), given that they could have measured an actual number? Probably because they had a show to shoot. They where apparently already having trouble getting all the shots they needed due to the short battery life, combined with the break problems. I'm guessing they simply didn't have the time to take the car out again and run it until the battery died.

periferral 16y ago

ohhhh the tesla jokes on top gear for years to come from jeremy is something i'll look forward to.