[mac187]

While i enjoy the humor on Top Gear, its also worth a thought that many people would base their opinion or purchase based on reviews like this. No car manufacturer wouldnt like to hear that the technology on which they have spent alot of time and money is useless.

Nissan being upset is understandable.

[mayankk]

ah, another day, another top gear controversy.

I feel that what JC and company do is take whatever minor doubts you may have in your mind, and amplify it a thousand times.

Recharging infrastructure, recharge time, range, are all the current drawbacks of the EV right now.
So what he has done is to show everyone what could go wrong, just amplified a bit.
Hey, if nisssan wants a feature about their car which only says power=x, range=y, cost=z, you send it to aajtak and CNBC, or their equivalent in UK.
they'll do a 2 minute segment on it.
done.

When you know how TG works, and have been seeing it for the past decade or so, and you know how opinionated they are about drawbacks, of ANY car, for that matter, it was your choice, you shouldnt have sent it across.

Nissan being upset is hypocrisy.
JC pitching the skyline against the mclaren f1, they were not up in arms(after all, youre being put up against ussain bolt!!), them going on about the package that was the skyline, quite ok.

But they come out with something negative, oh no no no...back to russia!!

TG has been, always be 80% entertainment, 20% useful review for folks like us, who would actually be looking at something in the sub 15k range.
Serious reviews, there are other places.

[alpha1]

If Clarkson said that Electric cars are not the future - the he is dead wrong.
What he should've said in that case is that the current breed of electric cars in totally not the future (with all their issues and problems) - and need a lot of work to bring them at par with gasoline vehicles.

Anyway - has anyone really experienced the torque and acceleration of a DC series motor (actually universal series motor, can fed with AC also)?
If performance is your criteria - then I believe Electric traction IS the way to go forward.

[mayankk]

Originally Posted by alpha1

If Clarkson said that Electric cars are not the future - the he is dead wrong.
What he should've said in that case is that the current breed of electric cars in totally not the future (with all their issues and problems) - and need a lot of work to bring them at par with gasoline vehicles.

Anyway - has anyone really experienced the torque and acceleration of a DC series motor (actually universal series motor, can fed with AC also)?
If performance is your criteria - then I believe Electric traction IS the way to go forward.

Agreed.
Just not the EVs time yet.
In fact, i remember JC himself, some seasons ago, during the news mentioned about alternative energy, and said some thing to the effect of "children, if youre watching, study hard, and find a feasible solution, it'll make you the richest man on the planet."

For the performance bit, check up on tesla vs porsche on google.
good read.
pros and cons, currently, are amply highlighted.

[BBR_SHR]

Clarkson has never liked hybrids/electrics. It would have been a miracle if he would have liked the leaf as is. I am not surprised that Nissan objected to his comments since Clarkson's comments have been attributed to plant closures (Vauxhall) in the past.

[Rahulkool]

Originally Posted by mayankk

Agreed.
Just not the EVs time yet.
In fact, i remember JC himself, some seasons ago, during the news mentioned about alternative energy, and said some thing to the effect of "children, if youre watching, study hard, and find a feasible solution, it'll make you the richest man on the planet."

For the performance bit, check up on tesla vs porsche on google.
good read.
pros and cons, currently, are amply highlighted.

I think he said that in regard of storing hydrogen fuel.

I don't think anything wrong in what was said in leaf review. IMO electric cars are not future. There are many issues with them like charging, battery life, range, batteries disposal etc. I think there will be alternate solutions.

[julupani]

Looking at where present technology is and where research seems to be heading, JC is definitely correct in saying that pure electric cars are not the future. Its definitely hydrogen which seems to be the fuel for personal transport in the future.

Also most of us forget that at the end of the day, the major source of electricity is still thermal energy, which is not clean at all. We still dont seem to have anything yet which can replace coal as a source of electricity in equivalent amounts. And its not like the world will stop needing electricity for all other purposes. Almost everything will use a bit of electricity in the future.

Even if we could make a pure electric car work, we would still need to look into the fact that we may run out of cheap electricity generation technologies in may be another 70-100 years. So what's really the point in pure electric cars.

[alpha1]

^ the point is that thermal power via coal or gas or oil is NOT the only way to produce electricity.

Tomorrow, we can have nuclear and/or thermonuclear generated electricity (either via thermal means or via MHD).
We can have efficient solar cells.
We can have portable and efficient fuel cells.

Do you realize that everything that you do today involves electricity to some (or all in most cases) extent?
That is the power of electricity.

The only question is finding means of generating it effectively and economically.

Even when you talk about Hydrogen being used, its never used in combustion sense.
Its not that you are going to feed H2 into an Otto cycle or a Diesel cycle engine.
The Hydrogen would be used to charge the fuel cells.
These fuel cells generate ... guess what?
ELECTRICITY.

[HKap]

I think Clarkson uses exaggeration to drive home the point. The only point that he was trying to make was that charging the electric car is not as easy as refueling the petrol powered cars. Yes it would be great for the city but has anyone calculated the carbon footprint in manufacturing the car? What about generating additional power to charge cars? How will those power stations be powered? What about disposing the batteries? Is it really that green? Investing in charging stations will be an expensive proposition and possibly not the best idea. The FCX clarity does look like a better option and harnessing energy from Hydrogen will become easier over the next few years.

BTW, he did say a lot of good things about the Leaf and he also said that he loves the torque that an electric motor generates. I think Nissan are taking it too far!!

[julupani]

Originally Posted by alpha1

^ the point is that thermal power via coal or gas or oil is NOT the only way to produce electricity.

Tomorrow, we can have nuclear and/or thermonuclear generated electricity (either via thermal means or via MHD).
We can have efficient solar cells.
We can have portable and efficient fuel cells.

Do you realize that everything that you do today involves electricity to some (or all in most cases) extent?
That is the power of electricity.

The only question is finding means of generating it effectively and economically.

Even when you talk about Hydrogen being used, its never used in combustion sense.
Its not that you are going to feed H2 into an Otto cycle or a Diesel cycle engine.
The Hydrogen would be used to charge the fuel cells.
These fuel cells generate ... guess what?
ELECTRICITY.

Thats why I made a a distinction and mentioned "pure electric cars".

As for electricity generation, you said it yourself, everything we do involves electricity. So as even it in present situation is not unlimited, should we not do something to save its sources and reduce its usage.

As for nuclear, first its crazy dangerous. And even its sources are very limited, not enough to provide even a small percentage of our needs.

Solar/wind are not reliable and economic enough yet.

Hydrogen based fuel cells are the only realistic fuel in the present scenario and what seems most probable in the future as a replacement to petrol/diesel.

[vb-saan]

Maybe a case of Nissan not understanding the wacky British humour.

If Nissan if upset for this, think of the reactions from the likes of Hyundai and Kia – Clarkson's favourite brands for undiluted sarcasm

[mayankk]

Originally Posted by vb-san

Maybe a case of Nissan not understanding the wacky British humour.

If Nissan if upset for this, think of the reactions from the likes of Hyundai and Kia – Clarkson's favourite brands for undiluted sarcasm

you forgot perodua and rover!!

TG is thick skinned enough now to let these sort of protests just sliiiide!

[GTO]

Nissan should have been prepared when they gave a demo car to Clarkson; I mean, haven't they watched any Top Gear episode? And about getting *upset* publicly, well....it's given Nissan just what they did NOT want = 10X more publicity around the world.

While they aren't really informative, Clarkson's reviews are always witty, intelligent and entertaining. Nissan needs to get broader minded if they are to make an issue out of this.

[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by mayankk

you forgot perodua and rover!!

TG is thick skinned enough now to let these sort of protests just sliiiide!

Oh yes, infact his remarks on the Kelisa was discussed even in the Malaysian parliament!

Actually Nissan should know better. This is not the first time Clarkson is reviewing a Nissan. I remember the episode in which he drives across Japan in a GT-R. Well, the remarks were mostly positive then

[sajo]

All car manufacturers should know that handing their cars over to the most popular motor show on the planet is actually a double edged sword.
Remember the Tesla review ?
I heard even Bentley now refuses to give cars to the show. But they have a big budget, they can go ahead and buy some if they dont get a loaner from the company.