Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 12/15/2005 5:38:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/15/2005 5:38:51 PM EDT by www-glock19-com]
I love how they will do a review of anything American
lets say it is a $30K V8 300 HP sedan of some sort
what do dig up to compare it to? some $60K 400HP+ Euro car
then bitch how the American car feels cheap and slow , then declare the 100% higher priced car the winner
I had to laugh a bit when they were going on about Jaguar's engineers making such refined and powerful cars when they had a jag stacked against a American car that cost half as much they are owned by FORD ya know and share a fair amount of technology and outright components
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 5:40:12 PM EDT
I liked when they said the F-150 was rubbish. Yeah, that's why there are so many of them on the streets after 10, 15 and 20 years.

If you notice they don't get into reliability or maintenance costs much.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 5:53:19 PM EDT
They really did like the Mustang.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 5:56:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
They really did like the Mustang.



They semi liked it. said the VW GTi felt better.

I think that's called "damning praise"
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 5:59:58 PM EDT
they just seem to shit on anything not German or British
and you know Rover ,TVR ,and jag are deserving of all the praise they can get
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 6:10:00 PM EDT
Yeah, I have a CTS-V, which kicked ass in their performance tests, but all they could say about it was that it felt 'cheap' in the after interview. I lost a lot of respect for the show after that.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 6:10:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Tannim:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
They really did like the Mustang.



They semi liked it. said the VW GTi felt better.

I think that's called "damning praise"



Yea, they didn't realy like the car. They did like the nostalga (sp?) of it.

And what you have to realize when you watch the show is, they pay attention to interior quality, ride and styling. A lot of American cars do lag the European cars in these categories. Did anyone see the C6 on the show? They tore it apart because of the leaf springs and plastic.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 6:12:16 PM EDT
Do you deny American auto makers put out alot of crap with high hp numbers and poor handling (compared to euro or japanese counter parts)?

Thing that does bug me is they aren't comparing the aftermarket (saleen, rousche, etc) American cars. They simply compare a US factory model priced much less then the european factory model. Had they tested a real 99-04 Rousche stage III they would have liked the Mustang alot.

Link Posted: 12/15/2005 6:12:35 PM EDT
They absolutely hated Rover and even mocked the company when it went out of business.

In regards to their reviews, sure they'll pit cars of different prices against each other, but they're usually fair in factoring price in their decision. The comparo between the S2000, Boxter and Z4 for example -the S2000 is much cheaper than the rest, but Clarkson thought it was the better car with the cheaper price being one of his points for it.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 6:22:59 PM EDT
Is Top Gear still aired over here? I thought Discovery quite showing it.



I rather enjoy the show, regardless of their Euro bias, it's still entertaining with some crazy exotic cars being hung out, backed up with witty commentary.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 6:39:54 PM EDT
Clarkson also loved the new Dodge Viper and Ford GT (one of which he owns). With the Ford GT he bought he ended up having it replaced by Ford because of the endless problems with it.

They'll rip on any car if they feel it deserves it and have done so to plenty of British and European cars. Clarkson slammed every car Rover produced, slammed TVR for the ugliness of many of the cars and their unreliability. Mercedes, BMW and Porsche frequently receive a whipping for problems like Mercedes quality problems over the last few years, BMW's overly complex idrive system, Porsches always looking the same, etc. Just recently Clarkson criticised a new Aston Martin which along side Jag are his two favourite car companies.

Their main points about American cars are usually to do with the cheap interiors American cars often come with, even expensive cars, the generally poor ride quality and handling. Seem like fair points to me. When they love them, like with the GT they say it.

They don't spare anyone and I think this upsets people.

The three hosts also often disagree on opinions when they do comparisons between cars.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 6:47:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Slogger78:
Clarkson also loved the new Dodge Viper and Ford GT (one of which he owns). With the Ford GT he bought he ended up having it replaced by Ford because of the endless problems with it.

They'll rip on any car if they feel it deserves it and have done so to plenty of British and European cars. Clarkson slammed every car Rover produced, slammed TVR for the ugliness of many of the cars and their unreliability. Mercedes, BMW and Porsche frequently receive a whipping for problems like Mercedes quality problems over the last few years, BMW's overly complex idrive system, Porsches always looking the same, etc. Just recently Clarkson criticised a new Aston Martin which along side Jag are his two favourite car companies.

Their main points about American cars are usually to do with the cheap interiors American cars often come with, even expensive cars, the generally poor ride quality and handling. Seem like fair points to me. When they love them, like with the GT they say it.

They don't spare anyone and I think this upsets people.

The three hosts also often disagree on opinions when they do comparisons between cars.



Pretty much. I watched an episode on the BMW M3 CSL. They LOVED the car and at one point ripped the hell out of the stupid paddle shifting only option.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 6:50:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/15/2005 6:52:34 PM EDT by www-glock19-com]

Originally Posted By Slogger78:

When they love them, like with the GT they say it.





Naw they shit on it for gas mileage ( this is a 100K sports car for gods sake ) and for having a engine that came from a truck


It just annoys me that they will take a 30K car with standard equipment and compare it to a 60k car with a supercharger and electronic suspension and super high end radio when the same company makes a similar car that costs the same has the same HP and comparable equipment
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 6:58:50 PM EDT
I remember watching just one of the shows. They were trying to see if an Apache could lock onto some sports car or another at close range with the IR system. I distinctly remember them saying something about "soft American underbelly" and I haven't watched the show since then.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 8:07:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/15/2005 9:17:21 PM EDT by Manic_Moran]

Originally Posted By Czexybeast:
I distinctly remember them saying something about "soft American underbelly" and I haven't watched the show since then.



It's a bloody Apache. Would you expect 'soft Taiwanese underbelly?' And yes, he does also describe it as the best attack helicopter in the world.


lets say it is a $30K V8 300 HP sedan of some sort
what do dig up to compare it to? some $60K 400HP+ Euro car
then bitch how the American car feels cheap and slow , then declare the 100% higher priced car the winner
I had to laugh a bit when they were going on about Jaguar's engineers making such refined and powerful cars when they had a jag stacked against a American car that cost half as much they are owned by FORD ya know and share a fair amount of technology and outright components



Their statement of perfection appears to be (Per Marcos review last week) an American engine combined with a European body. Seems that they can see some American benefits. Let's take the situation you have at hand: V8 sedan. Well, by sheer coincidence, they did a comparison in Season 5 episode 1 of the Monaro (Pontiac GTO) (35K pounds), the Chrysler 300C (29K) and the Jaguar S-type R. (50K). The Jaguar was not declared the 'winner' of the three.

Now, go download the file, and tell me with a straight face that anything that they said about any of the cars was a lie, or that they missed out any of the main advantages. Quotes, for example about the Chrysler "It looks fantastic" "An astonishingly good price".

With the CTS-V, they were sure to point out that it was affordable, and that it was able to keep up with the S-4 driven by the Stig, which are its main selling points.

The F-150 review was pretty accurate, down to stealing things out the back. (Part of the reason vans are a lot more popular over there). The conversion to RHD was shoddy, they showed the dash. I wouldn't be too worried about them not mentioning maintenance costs, an F-150 Lightning is going to be pretty damned expensive to maintain in the UK. "But", I hear you cry, "That has absolutely no bearing on the standard truck available in the US" It's a British car show. Why should they bother reviewing American spec-cars? They want to review the cars as available in the UK, for prices that the UK viewer is going to be paying.

They do give the American makers credit where it is due. They are also known as equal opportunity insulters. They'll make fun of anyone. Down to their own government and police services.

NTM
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 8:10:21 PM EDT
I've watched that show soooooooo much, I've started calling a hood a bonnet and a trunk a boot.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 8:13:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Illinigunner21:
I've watched that show soooooooo much, I've started calling a hood a bonnet and a trunk a boot.



Curiously, I go half-way. I'll say 'hood' and 'boot'

NTM
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 8:16:30 PM EDT
i love that show but i admit they really can get annoying.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 8:18:06 PM EDT
you guys are so easily offended?

The F-150 review was pretty honest. This is a show geared towards speed freaks who would prefer slick sports cars to utilitarian trucks.... from the perspective of a pure automotive enthuisiast, yes, the F-150 is junk. However, the F-150 has saved my ass a number of times! Like the time we ordered 3 times more sand for our fraternity beach party than we needed, or every time I move, haha. Then, the F-150 suddenly doesn't feel like rubbish.

And yes, the CTS-V really does feel cheap on the interior, especially for a car of that cost. Last time I checked, American automotive press said the exact same thing...

It takes a little getting used to, that british humor! But watch monty python a few times and you'll start to get it.

"Every sperm is precious! Every sperm is good!"
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 9:15:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By gordon_freeman:
you guys are so easily offended?

The F-150 review was pretty honest. This is a show geared towards speed freaks who would prefer slick sports cars to utilitarian trucks.... from the perspective of a pure automotive enthuisiast, yes, the F-150 is junk. However, the F-150 has saved my ass a number of times! Like the time we ordered 3 times more sand for our fraternity beach party than we needed, or every time I move, haha. Then, the F-150 suddenly doesn't feel like rubbish.

And yes, the CTS-V really does feel cheap on the interior, especially for a car of that cost. Last time I checked, American automotive press said the exact same thing...

It takes a little getting used to, that british humor! But watch monty python a few times and you'll start to get it.

"Every sperm is precious! Every sperm is good!"




The thing about the CTS-V spot wasn't about the interior so much as how that was really all they had to say about it at the end; it's times were smoking, handling, feel, everything they said during the track time was very good to great... but then they go back to the studio audience and all the big guy can say is "but the interior was sooo cheap! I disliked it!" and then went on to gush about a frickin mazda RX8. I agree Caddy could've done better with the interior materials, but for them to hate the car because of some carpet and plastic? It's the same as them bashing the new C6 for having leaf springs... who gives a damn if the car performs like the C6 does!? It's moronic!
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 9:23:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/15/2005 9:25:05 PM EDT by Manic_Moran]

Originally Posted By Gunbert:
but then they go back to the studio audience and all the big guy can say is "but the interior was sooo cheap! I disliked it!"



When I was new-car-shopping after my Iraq jaunt, the CTS-V was within the price range. I picked the Audi S4 over its competitors for the primary reason that its interior was fantastic. I considered the interior to be more important than price, external looks or in-a-line-speed, and voted such with my money. Are you saying that interior quality isn't a valid reason to make a preference?

NTM
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 10:05:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/15/2005 10:05:34 PM EDT by Gunbert]

Originally Posted By Manic_Moran:

Originally Posted By Gunbert:
but then they go back to the studio audience and all the big guy can say is "but the interior was sooo cheap! I disliked it!"



When I was new-car-shopping after my Iraq jaunt, the CTS-V was within the price range. I picked the Audi S4 over its competitors for the primary reason that its interior was fantastic. I considered the interior to be more important than price, external looks or in-a-line-speed, and voted such with my money. Are you saying that interior quality isn't a valid reason to make a preference?

NTM



Not at all. But it bothered me that it overshadowed everything else. It just struck me as an easy way of knocking the car off it's performance pedestal; it was about the only thing they could complain about. I give you your opinion, I just don't look at the interior as the key selling point. I don't think the CTS-V's interior is horrible. It looks allright, they just could've used better carpet and plastic for the trim and dash. Otherwise, the seats are great, the gauges are awesome and the nav center is functional and attractive. I just don't see it as bad as they made it out to be. To your point, I've been in Audi's and, while nice, didn't think they were anything to write home about... as a matter of fact, it reminded me too much of the VW Jetta I was trading in on the caddy. And the S4's exterior looks are rather bland (IMHO, no offense meant). Everyone is going to differ, but I'd be willing to be you wouldn't have bought that nice audi if it only had the 1.8T in it... no matter what the interior looked like.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 11:02:59 PM EDT
I agree, the exterior is kindof bland, but it does seem to be growing on me for some reason.

I never realised that Audi interiors could vary as much as they do until I used a loaner car. The interior of the 1.8T was not on a par with its more expensive brethren (3.0 and S4). The materials struck me as cheap. It was still well put together, but I wasn't, say, so keen on the plastic in places where I had wood on mine. The inside alone (after all, I spend more time inside looking at the interior than outside looking at the exterior!) would have been enough to put me off the 1.8T version, before I went anywhere near the engine.

NTM
Link Posted: 12/16/2005 11:11:49 AM EDT
When is it on????
Top Top