Has Top Gear Gone Retarded?

Is it just me or does their logic often times seem that, that is less than that of a 2nd grader? As far as their comparisons around a track the race a Mustang GT vs a roadcourse built Lotus!? And then today, I watched them say, "well Ford claims 500hp out of the GT500 Shelby, let's see if it does it." They then proceed to put it on a dyno and are dumbfounded when it only puts down about 44*hp AT THE WHEELS. Are the British really that far behind that they have not yet figured out drivetrain loss? These are just a few examples of many stupid things they have done throughout the years. Do not get me wrong, I love the show, but sometimes it is like asking a 2nd grader to give the review or make up a comparison or just plain put 2 and 2 together. And God knows they would have boasted about the GT500 for 3/4 of an episode if it had a Jaguar badge on it. Funny how they never mention how many Jags breakdown about as often as a 13 year old emo school boy.

I think your missing the entire point of the show. Its not meant to be factual (although they did just win an award for it, lol), its infotainment. They would rather be entertaining and get a laugh and drive up ratings.

And yesterday's episode was great. Including such gems as:

The Team America Secret Signal and my favorite, The Stig trying to comprehend a cell phone.

I think your missing the entire point of the show. Its not meant to be factual (although they did just win an award for it, lol), its infotainment. They would rather be entertaining and get a laugh and drive up ratings.

And yesterday's episode was great. Including such gems as:

The Team America Secret Signal and my favorite, The Stig trying to comprehend a cell phone.
:1:

Also, that is a lot for drivetrain loss.

True, I agree it is supposed to be entertainment. However, at the same time, making a crack or a joke should not show through your clear dishonesty and lies. It would be like if I made fun of somebody for being too fat when they were in fact skinny. It's not really funny, it does not have any precedence, and is a lie......what is funny about that? Or imagine me going out and doing a write-up comparing about two different car products for everyone and I come back and just lie about it.......it's hilarious isn't it? :dunno:

I do think the show is entertaining, but at the same time they do have a responsibility to at least give clear cut facts out as they are, and not straight up lie about them. Would anyone here find it funny if I did a report on a LS1 F-body comparing it to a 94 Escort? And then complain about the lack of performance the Escort had compared to the F-body? My final conclusion is it is an entertaining show, especially when they do they challenges, but at the same time it is a bunch of somewhat talented bloaks blowing out hot air.

:1:

Also, that is a lot for drivetrain loss.

Not really, about 10%.

I believe it was making 447whp, which translates to over 500bhp. Too bad the new gt500 is a waste of money.

Retarded!?! Hardly. You must have missed the point of what they were doing. Go back and watch it again, maby you'll pick up on it.

I just rewatched the most recent episode, and now hold that The Stig trying to comprehend the use of a cell phone and public transportation (the esclator...LOL) is officially the funniest thing I have seen. Ever.

oliver!!!! the stig not using a cell phone was pretty funny. i swear, that car is pretty fast they did on the test track. too bad its not reliable.

One of the stupidest things Ive seen on top gear was when they complained that the EVO MR FQ400 was slow from a 5th gear start.

oliver!!!!

It was a story about a man who went to Africa and fell in love...

Or better yet...

Clarkson: I know where it lands, and when it lands
Hamster: No!

I just rewatched the most recent episode, and now hold that The Stig trying to comprehend the use of a cell phone and public transportation (the esclator...LOL) is officially the funniest thing I have seen. Ever.
How about the one where he drives the Caterham from the factory and has to use a credit card? Funny stuff.

I thought it was funny that they pointed out, in the latest episode, that they haven't posted anything factual for years. :iceslolan

I thought it was funny that they pointed out, in the latest episode, that they haven't posted anything factual for years. :iceslolan

We've won an award for the best factual program on the television this year. This is odd, as we have never actually said anything factual.

:1:

Also, that is a lot for drivetrain loss.
440-something at the wheels from a 500 hp motor is only like 10-12% loss. seems pretty normal to me for RWD.

I guess, after you do the math and everything. . . . :p

Do european/japanese car manufacturers list bhp at the wheels?
I recall a few dyno tests of factory cars in magazines that dyno higher or even pretty much the factory spec (5-10bhp off)

Not usually. Some cars whether the be American, German, Japaese or anything else can be over rated under rated, or spot on. Just depends on the car and manufacturer. I know GM under rated the SS/SC and same with Dodge on the SRT-4.

For those of you who dont know what hes raving about here is the link to the Shelby GT500 review: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGbhKQlUhLo

For clarity the British are a more automotive oriented nation per square foot then Americans so yeah, I think they know about drivetrain loss. What they dont know is why american cars have so much of it because Jags, Austins, Lotus, Nobels, and other brit cars loose so little of it.
They never said it was "at the wheels" or "at the crank". they filmed it and edited that way because the point is to poke fun at the car and its actual power and the fact that despite the truth of it Ford still puts the name "500" on it.

They also go on to poke fun at its terrible handling, tini tiny itty bitty rear brakes, the way it's tail bounces around corners and the fact that it has a live rear axle. all of which by the way is.....factual.

as for the unfairness of a Mustang GT racing a raced prepped Lotus around a race track???? When did that happen? cause if Im not mistaken it was actually a VERY raced prepped VERY modded Roush Mustang Stage 3 against a VERY stock Loutus Exige-S ! No no no, thats not fair at all is it?
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/339382/mustang_roush_vs_lotus/

For those of you who dont know what hes raving about here is the link to the Shelby GT500 review: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGbhKQlUhLo

For clarity the British are a more automotive oriented nation per square foot then Americans so yeah, I think they know about drivetrain loss. What they dont know is why american cars have so much of it because Jags, Austins, Lotus, Nobels, and other brit cars loose so little of it.
They never said it was "at the wheels" or "at the crank". they filmed it and edited that way because the point is to poke fun at the car and its actual power and the fact that despite the truth of it Ford still puts the name "500" on it.

They also go on to poke fun at its terrible handling, tini tiny itty bitty rear brakes, the way it's tail bounces around corners and the fact that it has a live rear axle. all of which by the way is.....factual.

as for the unfairness of a Mustang GT racing a raced prepped Lotus around a race track???? When did that happen? cause if Im not mistaken it was actually a VERY raced prepped VERY modded Roush Mustang Stage 3 against a VERY stock Loutus Exige-S ! No no no, thats not fair at all is it?
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/339382/mustang_roush_vs_lotus/


While they did do a Roush Stage 3 (which is still considerabley less in cost than the Exige S), I did not mention that:

As far as their comparisons around a track the race a Mustang GT vs a roadcourse built Lotus!?

And I stand by that comment. They put a roadcourse built Lotus that costs about twice as much as it's competitor........the Mustang GT. And agian, I do enjoy their comedy, but that is like someone going out and comparing a Vespa to a Repsol CBR1000RR........it's hilarious isn't it. :rolleyes: And like I said, I do enjoy their humor, it's their small-headed ideas that I find pointless and pedantic.

Wait until about 7 1/2 minutes in.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=9kep0K0w8Mg

What they dont know is why american cars have so much of it because Jags, Austins, Lotus, Nobels, and other brit cars loose so little of it.


So they test drive American cars, give off various facts that most of us did not even know about...but they don't know that our cars have different kinds of drivetrain loss? They have been testing them for years. How long will it take them then? How come you know this but they still have not yet figured it out? Agian, I ask, are these guys just really just not that smart. They test drive almost everything under the sun and do not know about this....I guess that does affect how much they know. I had never looked at it like that before. I know I am going to get a bunch of replies saying, "hey the show is not factual, the show is not factual." Well, that may be, but it does not mean it needs to be a lie or ridiculously setup show. Funny yes, at the same time...dumb, yes.

In closing, I would like to say I find the show hilarious (ie custom made limos, amphibious vehicles, etc), but logistically put together, the show can be "bunk" :wink: at times.

look bro, Brits have a dark sense of humor. They are very pedantic and they really hate American cars. So what? its the same bull we do to the Japanese.

Edit: just saw the video you where reffering to.

SO thats it? Thats why your so pissed off and raving about?
Bro you missed the point of that comparrison by a mile! Where did they say that those two cars where equals? when did they mention that it was a fair run?
The point of that comparison was to show that the Lotus is quicker then a car with twice as much pistons and 3 times the displacement. Price, hp and lap times are irrelevent in that comparison.

look man your looking at that show as if it where somehow responsible for bringing us the most up to date info and reports on the automotive world.
Thats not what Top Gear is. They call it a show about "Fun with cars".
thats all it is. You think they are CNN or MSNBC but they are The Daily Show.
relax, sit back and forget about fair trials and equal matches. Sometimes they like to take two cars that are lightyears from eachother in performance and pit them just to show how much of a real world difference it makes.

First and foremost, I am not pissed off. I know posts can turn a different demeanor with no voice flucutation in them. Secondly, I saw it as a comparison because they compared to. I know it is not a factual show. But I still stand by my previous comments. I think parts of it are just stupid. Overall, I love the show, but some parts just seem dumb. I think it amiss that they put a GT Mustang agianst a car that costs more than twice as much as it and then put it agianst that car in its purpose-built environment. What is in fact the point about it? It is like a comic standing up and making completely irrelavant and extremely obvious comments. Is it factual? No, but it's still dumb. If you like watching them make comparisons that are far apart and already have a pre-determined ending/analysis between the two, that is your choice. I don't care if it is European, American, Japanese, or Italian, I just wish they would put together some more useful comparisons. It's not like when they put them together it is a joke. Or even lying about a cars specifications. It's not agianst the law or any broadcasting violations....I just don't see any point in it.

If you are honestly that bothered by it (and you are, as you continue to go after these guys), then just don't watch it. Just turn it off and watch that self righteous jack off Neddle on Fifth Gear. Who cares if the show has zero entertainment value, its factual.

Oh, and its a damned perfectly reasonable comparison of a Mustang to a Lotus. I see plenty of Loti around here, as well as Mustangs. Chances are that both will take their cars to a road course. So what, if the Mustang driver looses, is he supposed to say "well, the Lotus is more expensive, so technically I won?" Hell no. And the Mustang and Lotus compare perfectly. Shitty interior, two doors, rear wheel drive.

Man, fuck that. Threads on here have lived and died over that argument. Its simple, run what you brung. And the producers brought a Lotus and a Mustang.

And at the end of the day, Clarkson, Hammond, and May are journalists. And its their show. Therefore, its all about their opinion. I mean, its not like Clarkson is sitting in your back yard with a gun to your head saying "YOU MUST AGREE WITH US!"

I know nothing about this TV show, but you guys are missing a fundemental with the horsepower rating. That "500" is SAE "Net" power, not GBHP. "Gross brake" horsepower is measured at the flywheel (or flexplate) using a "water brake" dyno and no accessories attached. It is accepted that there is a 15% loss for a manual transmission and about 20 for automatic-equipped cars when using a chassis dyno. A "500" GBHP engine should show about 400 RWHP with an auto trans... Ford "rates" the car at 500 "net" (all accessories installed and operating, power measured at the tailshaft of the transmission). A 10% loss is a LOT, based on that rating. Their point is probably that the Ford is over rated (imagine my surprise...). I saw an '05 GTO on a chassis dyno last month. It was basically stock, with a few little electronic "tweaks". It put down 410 RWHP. That from an engine "rated" SAE "net" at 400. It appears, LS2 is under rated, where the Ford is not. (this last statement for comparison sake, ONLY)

FWIW

Jim

It was rated at the wheels. The Brits realize just as much as we do that its the only spot that matters. Although I hold that no numbers matter at all.

If you are honestly that bothered by it (and you are, as you continue to go after these guys), then just don't watch it. Just turn it off and watch that self righteous jack off Neddle on Fifth Gear. Who cares if the show has zero entertainment value, its factual.

Oh, and its a damned perfectly reasonable comparison of a Mustang to a Lotus. I see plenty of Loti around here, as well as Mustangs. Chances are that both will take their cars to a road course. So what, if the Mustang driver looses, is he supposed to say "well, the Lotus is more expensive, so technically I won?" Hell no. And the Mustang and Lotus compare perfectly. Shitty interior, two doors, rear wheel drive.

Man, fuck that. Threads on here have lived and died over that argument. Its simple, run what you brung. And the producers brought a Lotus and a Mustang.

And at the end of the day, Clarkson, Hammond, and May are journalists. And its their show. Therefore, its all about their opinion. I mean, its not like Clarkson is sitting in your back yard with a gun to your head saying "YOU MUST AGREE WITH US!"

Bothered by it yes. Angry no. And as I have said repeatedly, I do like the show over all, I really do. And I could not agree more with run what you brung. But in most cases, it is people who have brought their own car to whatever race. They have an option to choose from any car out there. I just think it would actually be worth watching some of those comparisons if they put the Lotus agianst, let's say an EVO or a STi. And you are right, it is their show and they CAN do what they want, but that doesn't mean we have to like every aspect of it. And I could give a rats ass if it reflects bad on the Mustang, I just want to see a good rivaled match....that is all. I find that more entertaining. Just like I would rather watch a close football game than watch a pro team go agianst a division 2C highschool team. To me, that is entertainment. And agian, I am not looking for a factual show. I mentioned that in my last post if you want to go back and read it. And I also said, while it does not have to remain factual, it does not have to be a lie either. I see nothing wrong with what I am asking. Is it actually unfair that I (in my own opinion) would like to see a comparison that I can really get into rather than already clearly knowing what the results will be. I could have done that test in my head. At least leave something to the imagination as to who will come out on top.

how much does a roush stage 3 mustang cost?
round these parts an exige s costs around £35000.
how does that compare with what i'd have to pay for the mustang?

how much does a roush stage 3 mustang cost?
round these parts an exige s costs around £35000.
how does that compare with what i'd have to pay for the mustang?

Core components is +21k not including shipping and handling.
In that you get:

ROUSHcharged 4.6L powertrain system
ROUSH 7 Piece Aerobody Kit
Lower Valance Fog Lamps
ROUSH 18-Inch Forged Chrome Wheel & Ultra-High Performance Tires
ROUSH Rear Exit High Performance Exhaust w/ Chromed Tips
ROUSH Fender Badges
ROUSH Decklid Emblem
ROUSH Embroidered Floor Mats
ROUSH Front Windshield Banner
ROUSH Billet Aluminum Shifter Handle
ROUSH Pedals w/ Dead Pedal
ROUSH Stage 3 White Face Gauge Cluster
ROUSH Stage 3 Sport Leather Seating
ROUSH Suspension System
ROUSH Brake Kit
ROUSH Serialized Engine Bay Plaque


So add that to the mustang gt you have already purchased, and then there are optional things such as:

Mustang Racing Stripes - $530
Interior Dash Trim Kit - $350
Quarter Window Louvers - $315
Rear Window Louvers - $875
Locking Lug Nuts - $60
Convertible Light Bar - $910
Billet Aluminum Shift Knob w/ Grips - $63
Short Throw Shifter - $340
Short Throw Shifter w/ Chrome Shifter Arm and White Ball Knob - $445
Short Throw Shifter w/ Chrome Shifter Arm and Black Ball Knob - $445
Trunk Mounted Tool Kit - $295
Door Sill Plates - $57

Overall, it ain't cheap

And, thats just for an American sale. I have no clue what the cost is on the other side of the pond

well, I was just wondering how "unfair" the comparision is in terms of cost.
I do know that you guys do pay more for Lotus cars than we do.

Then again, it looks like the new M3 is going to be bargain for you compared to what we're going to be paying.

The Loti themselves don't cost more over here. We just have to pay protectionist tariffs and shipping taxes and outragous dealership mark up. I think I saw one on our side of the pond go for about $55k. I've seen plenty in my area (mostly optioned out Elises), about as many M3s. They (the Loti and BMWs) seem to be the more popular weekend/dad picking up kid from school car around here.

Bothered by it yes. Angry no. And as I have said repeatedly, I do like the show over all, I really do. And I could not agree more with run what you brung. But in most cases, it is people who have brought their own car to whatever race. They have an option to choose from any car out there. I just think it would actually be worth watching some of those comparisons if they put the Lotus agianst, let's say an EVO or a STi. And you are right, it is their show and they CAN do what they want, but that doesn't mean we have to like every aspect of it. And I could give a rats ass if it reflects bad on the Mustang, I just want to see a good rivaled match....that is all. I find that more entertaining. Just like I would rather watch a close football game than watch a pro team go agianst a division 2C highschool team. To me, that is entertainment. And agian, I am not looking for a factual show. I mentioned that in my last post if you want to go back and read it. And I also said, while it does not have to remain factual, it does not have to be a lie either. I see nothing wrong with what I am asking. Is it actually unfair that I (in my own opinion) would like to see a comparison that I can really get into rather than already clearly knowing what the results will be. I could have done that test in my head. At least leave something to the imagination as to who will come out on top.

I UNDERSTAND YOU EXACTLY!!!!!!

actually everytime you respond to someone you make me laugh because it would almost seem as if they dont understand your point or just want you to understand there's and yet you have to try to prove your point again while letting them know they dont have to agree with you lol...this is actually one of the funniest threads i've ever read:lol: :lol:

basicaly these people feel that there not gonna make this an all out tv show for only car guys/car enthusiasts
but that at times they need to make comparisons for newbs so they can get everyones attention. imagine ricer when he first got to the boards, he wouldnt had a clue what car would win between a mustang gt and a tuned up lotus. lol seriously

i like the show. overall its good.

when they dyno'd the stang i already knew that its was 440+hp to the ground, not what the engine was making. not when u consider its the same engine in the gt500 as the ford gt, and that's rated at 535hp(i do believe)

i'd like to see them do a comparison on some older cars compared to new ones. see just how far technology has come. i know they put a jag xj220 against an enzo...or new supercar, but still how bout something that the average person can afford

You know what I'd like to know. Where the hell do they get the money to light an airplane on fire or launch and blow up a HUGH rocket?

we pay for it.
that's why when we complain, they actually have to listen.

I wish my tax dollars went to something cool like Top Gear.

i like the show. overall its good.

when they dyno'd the stang i already knew that its was 440+hp to the ground, not what the engine was making. not when u consider its the same engine in the gt500 as the ford gt, and that's rated at 535hp(i do believe)

i'd like to see them do a comparison on some older cars compared to new ones. see just how far technology has come. i know they put a jag xj220 against an enzo...or new supercar, but still how bout something that the average person can afford

The engines of the GT500 and the GT are not exactly the same, but I would like to see some older car vs never comparo's.

The engines of the GT500 and the GT are not exactly the same, but I would like to see some older car vs never comparo's.

how bout this for a new episode...2002 camaro vs. 09 camaro when it arrives.

how about the merkur xr4ti vs the new eclipse

how about a shelby cobra vs new gt500

or better yet, lotus esprit vs 03 Z06

i did love the one they had between the lambo merc and the zonda

How about the Muira vs the Zonda? :naughty:

original gt40 vs. 05(or last yr of) the ford gt?

06 gto vs. 09 gto

I love when there was the comparison between the Viper SRT-10 and the BMW Z4 lol. If there was ever a rigged race that was it lol. I was almost in tears at the end I was laughing so hard. It was a pretty feeble attempt to make the Z4 shine and the Viper look like crap. Go to about 6 mintues and 40 seconds on the video which is where the race starts. The most priceless part is in the final strech where for some unforseen reason the Viper just can't seem to pull on the Z4 :rofl:

Agian, don't tell me I don't like the show and that I need to cool down. I do like the show, and sometimes when they make races like these I go into a belly laugh. It was especially interesting how the Viper would take the fartherst most outward part on each turn because "it can't take those turns on the inside" :lol:

I love when there was the comparison between the Viper SRT-10 and the BMW Z4 lol. If there was ever a rigged race that was it lol. I was almost in tears at the end I was laughing so hard. It was a pretty feeble attempt to make the Z4 shine and the Viper look like crap. Go to about 6 mintues and 40 seconds on the video which is where the race starts. The most priceless part is in the final strech where for some unforseen reason the Viper just can't seem to pull on the Z4 :rofl:

Agian, don't tell me I don't like the show and that I need to cool down. I do like the show, and sometimes when they make races like these I go into a belly laugh. It was especially interesting how the Viper would take the fartherst most outward part on each turn because "it can't take those turns on the inside" :lol:

brand new viper vs. bmw z8. there's a comparison. if they say the viper cant handle wait till the z8 spins going around EVERY single corner. of all the performance cars i've ever driven it had the shitiest handling. and yes i've driven a viper tho it was a 96 gts, still it's only gotten better since. and i know damn well the viper can out handle a lil z4(not to say the bmw isnt good) just come on. for american muscle of the viper, it compares pretty well with the new z06, and that can almost out pace a 430 around a track

brand new viper vs. bmw z8. there's a comparison. if they say the viper cant handle wait till the z8 spins going around EVERY single corner. of all the performance cars i've ever driven it had the shitiest handling. and yes i've driven a viper tho it was a 96 gts, still it's only gotten better since. and i know damn well the viper can out handle a lil z4(not to say the bmw isnt good) just come on. for american muscle of the viper, it compares pretty well with the new z06, and that can almost out pace a 430 around a track


The Viper can handle.....very well. It was pretty obvious they had this setup up to a degree. Even if you just watch the very end of the race when they are in a long stragiht away, the guy in the Viper for some reason won't pass the guy in the Z4. And going into every turn they go "well the Viper has to take the outside because it's not as nimble" :rolleyes: And I do remember when they did a review on the Z4 M, it's back end spun out around every turn they went around. Now all the sudden it is the little nimble Viper beater. :rolleyes: :lol:

you know what sl300, when i watched the zonda vs the lambo merc, i thought to myself they could have taken off in the lambo much much faster than they did. the guy claimed he had to gently let of the clutch in order to get a good launch or something like that.
i'm gonna try to find that video and post a link again so you know what i'm talking about.
maybe the guy is right, but i beleive he could have made that awd lambo take off far better than that.

you know what sl300, when i watched the zonda vs the lambo merc, i thought to myself they could have taken off in the lambo much much faster than they did. the guy claimed he had to gently let of the clutch in order to get a good launch or something like that.
i'm gonna try to find that video and post a link again so you know what i'm talking about.
maybe the guy is right, but i beleive he could have made that awd lambo take off far better than that.

i watched that too, i thought u know...i have awd, i dont let off the clutch on a launch easily. i just drop it and go. that and doesnt that car have a clutchless paddle shift?

it does. check this out at 5 min.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwpouwvTAn8

top gear is a great show. yes, most of the comparisons are redicious, but they're fun to watch as well. thats what makes the show enjoyable. plus, if you diddnt realize, top gear is british based. thus the brits hate american cars. do everything you can to bash american cars, and you got high ratings.

I love watching top gear just cause its funny. Like when they made the convertible van and ended up setting a drive through car wash on fire! Priceless! Or just recently I saw the one where they made cars into limos, what were they thinking? I think the only good one (If it was thought out a bit more) was Hammonds limo. But that was a good episode.