Top Gear!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sonic

Well, we have several nuke plants due for decommissioning. As I understand it, there are plans to replace those, but many more would be needed to power all the cars on the road. Getting the finance in place to pay for the replacement plants is tricky enough so where will the money come from to pay for the additional plants?

---

Again the answer is so easy that I'm not sure I understand the question.

Of course it'll be you or I that pays the bill. Do you honestly think that the price of petrol/dismal is going to go down anytime soon or we will suddenly discover infinite reserves of it to power our cars for many generations to come? Whilst I certainly won't be buying an electric car anytime soon, there will come a day when a petrol or diesel car is simply too expensive to run as anything more than a weekend plaything. The thing with nuclear is that if people weren't such dimwits, we'd have built more plants already and we'd be reaping the rewards of nuclear which is less airborne pollution, cheaper electricity and less radiation being released into the atmosphere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Just because he had a rant everything he says is irrelevant? :dozey:

---

Not at all. I just said that I don't like watching stuff with him in it because he's a knobend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

The fact of the matter is that if Top Gear had done what you and I would have done and plugged the car in the night before, they would have got to their destination.

---

Then they would have picked a destination 115 miles away. Because the point of the film was not to actually tear down electric cars per se, it was to highlight the fact that they aren't practical because of a lack of charging points and a lengthy charging time. It's a shame that there has been so much drama about the 'misleading' nature of the film, rather than the media talking about actual point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barryfullalove

Not at all. I just said that I don't like watching stuff with him in it because he's a knobend.



Then they would have picked a destination 115 miles away. Because the point of the film was not to actually tear down electric cars per se, it was to highlight the fact that they aren't practical because of a lack of charging points and a lengthy charging time. It's a shame that there has been so much drama about the 'misleading' nature of the film, rather than the media talking about actual point.

---

and then it would have been a fair test :) I'm sorry, but there's a reason why the media are making a bit of a fuss and why Nissan are kicking up a stink too.

I definitely agree that electric cars aren't ready for widespread use right now, but a lot of people do seem to use them with a minimum of fuss, they seem very much a commute/shopping car, rather than something you can do distances in.

Tbh Caroline could happily use an electric car, her drive to work is only about a mile and the shops are only 5 miles away. But then of course with such small distances and not much traffic, she can afford to run a thirsty car and we're not talking loads of money. But then due to such small distances the saving of having an electric car would be very small! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

and then it would have been a fair test :) I'm sorry, but there's a reason why the media are making a bit of a fuss and why Nissan are kicking up a stink too.

---

Nissan should keep their mouths shut, the fewer people that know their car costs £30k and can only do 110 miles at a time the better. This is a non-event, the media shouldn't even be covering this. TG didn't lie, they slightly misled, yet this story gets more exposure in newspapers than far more important stuff, that's not right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barryfullalove

Nissan should keep their mouths shut, the fewer people that know their car costs £30k and can only do 110 miles at a time the better. This is a non-event, the media shouldn't even be covering this. TG didn't lie, they slightly misled, yet this story gets more exposure in newspapers than far more important stuff, that's not right.

---

The leaf is a technological showcase it's not for the mass market......

In the film they didn't say where they'd started from or what the charge level was. We joined them when the batteries were running down. The charge levels at the start of the test are completely irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

In the film they didn't say where they'd started from or what the charge level was. We joined them when the batteries were running down. The charge levels at the start of the test are completely irrelevant.

---

POW! discussion over. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

In the film they didn't say where they'd started from or what the charge level was. We joined them when the batteries were running down. The charge levels at the start of the test are completely irrelevant.

---

So Top Gear driving the car around till it ran out of charge is OK? :confused:

Quote:

---

But Nissan executive vice president Andy Palmer, in an interview with the U.K. newspaper The Times, said “Top Gear” made the whole thing up. Data from the car, automatically sent to Nissan, showed the car had only a 40 percent charge on its battery when Clarkson began his trip, although the car had been delivered to “Top Gear” with a full charge. Palmer also pointed out that the data showed the Leaf had been driven in circles around Lincoln until the battery went dead.

---

I'm sorry, but they manufactured the whole deal with the car running out of charge.

To intentionally run the battery down to the point where if you set off for your destination you certainly wouldn't reach a charging point is stupid. I'm sorry but that's not real world use, it's the way an idiot would use the car.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Theres little point discussing this further IMO. We all have our opinions and they are not going to change or change others views no matter how many times we repeat them. Lets call this a stalemate. :)

---

I disagree :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

So Top Gear driving the car around till it ran out of charge is OK? :confused:

I'm sorry, but they manufactured the whole deal with the car running out of charge.

To intentionally run the battery down to the point where if you set off for your destination you certainly wouldn't reach a charging point is stupid. I'm sorry but that's not real world use, it's the way an idiot would use the car.

---

Lets have Top Gear testing supercars and showing how they need to replace the tyres after one heavy track session at a grand all round. How about showing how uncomfortable it is trying to get in and out of one.

Instead of testing the new McLaren around the Top Gear track why didn't they show how good it is for going to the supermarket with the wife and kids and doing the week's shopping?

All vehicles have disadvantages, Top Gear always focuses on the disadvantages of certain ones they (or rather Clarkson) dislike. Electric cars are one, motorbikes are another.

Electric cars currently don't have that great a range although that is expected to increase, but it is more than enough for town use. Why have every review of an electric car marred by a 'ran out of charge' gag?