Tesla suing Top Gear (UK).
- Thread starter adam46
- 37 comments
- 6,586 views
- 17,158
- United Kingdom
Clarkson hates lots of cars... sorry, but this is ridiculous.. US lawsuit culture seems to win out over it's much defended freedom of speech?
- 87,105
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
It's worth a note that in their 2008 season, Top Gear did a supercar test of the McLaren SLR, the Aston Martin DBS, the Audi R8 4.2, the Ferrari 599 and the Lamborghini Murcielago. Each was given a gallon (Imperial, not US) of fuel and they had a race around the track.
The 599 ran out in 1.7 miles, followed by the Aston (no distance given), the SLR (no distance given), the Murcielago (4.1 miles) and the R8 won with 5 miles. This would give equivalent trackwork ranges for the cars of 39 miles (Ferrari 599), 30-70 miles (Aston Martin DBS), 38-84 miles (McLaren SLR), 90 miles (Lamborghini Murcielago), 99 miles (Audi R8 4.2). And I recall Clarkson's own Ford GT would manage 75 miles at speed out of a tank - with Dunsfold being 76 miles from his own home... All of these numbers are well below manufacturer economy ratings and at no point in the episode is it mentioned that hard track driving results in poorer economy figures, presumably because this is assumed knowledge. That the Tesla didn't get the manufacturer range rating during trackwork is unsurprising - and that it wasn't mentioned that trackwork leads to poor economy ratings isn't bias against Tesla, because it wasn't mentioned for Mercedes, Audi, Aston Martin, Lamborghini or Ferrari either - and in fact the reduction in range for the Tesla (55 miles compared to 211 for normal use - a 74% reduction) is much better than for some of the supercars (82-92% for the SLR, 76-90% for the DBS, 89% for the Ferrari 599) and ballpark for the others (70% for the Murcielago, 75% for the R8).
In the same episode, they pushed a Prius to ten laps of the track at speed and found it averaged 17.2 mpg - while a BMW M3 going around the same track at the same time at the same speed managed 19.4 mpg. The stated point here wasn't that the Prius is rubbish, or gets far below manufacturer economy, or that the M3 is more economical - none of which are true - but that how you drive has a significant effect on fuel economy. The Prius gets poorer fuel economy when pushed to its limits on a track than a V8 BMW using very little of its potential despite them being driven at the same speed. It wouldn't take much reduction in pace to see the Prius overtake the M3 in economy.
The 599 ran out in 1.7 miles, followed by the Aston (no distance given), the SLR (no distance given), the Murcielago (4.1 miles) and the R8 won with 5 miles. This would give equivalent trackwork ranges for the cars of 39 miles (Ferrari 599), 30-70 miles (Aston Martin DBS), 38-84 miles (McLaren SLR), 90 miles (Lamborghini Murcielago), 99 miles (Audi R8 4.2). And I recall Clarkson's own Ford GT would manage 75 miles at speed out of a tank - with Dunsfold being 76 miles from his own home... All of these numbers are well below manufacturer economy ratings and at no point in the episode is it mentioned that hard track driving results in poorer economy figures, presumably because this is assumed knowledge. That the Tesla didn't get the manufacturer range rating during trackwork is unsurprising - and that it wasn't mentioned that trackwork leads to poor economy ratings isn't bias against Tesla, because it wasn't mentioned for Mercedes, Audi, Aston Martin, Lamborghini or Ferrari either - and in fact the reduction in range for the Tesla (55 miles compared to 211 for normal use - a 74% reduction) is much better than for some of the supercars (82-92% for the SLR, 76-90% for the DBS, 89% for the Ferrari 599) and ballpark for the others (70% for the Murcielago, 75% for the R8).
In the same episode, they pushed a Prius to ten laps of the track at speed and found it averaged 17.2 mpg - while a BMW M3 going around the same track at the same time at the same speed managed 19.4 mpg. The stated point here wasn't that the Prius is rubbish, or gets far below manufacturer economy, or that the M3 is more economical - none of which are true - but that how you drive has a significant effect on fuel economy. The Prius gets poorer fuel economy when pushed to its limits on a track than a V8 BMW using very little of its potential despite them being driven at the same speed. It wouldn't take much reduction in pace to see the Prius overtake the M3 in economy.
- 17,158
- United Kingdom
Seems like a good time to dig this one up from the dead.
To answer the last post...
www.theguardian.com
Emphasis added is mine.
As he heaved the ÂŁ92,000 electric sports car off the Top Gear track, little did Jeremy Clarkson know the incident would be the topic of legal argument for years to come.
But that December 2008 episode of the BBC2 show has been examined repeatedly by some of Britain's most senior media judges in an three-year libel battle brought by the US car maker, Tesla.
The court of appeal signalled the end of the road for Tesla's legal claim on Tuesday, rejecting the company's complaint that its reputation was damaged by Clarkson's typically provocative review of the Tesla Roadster car.
The lengthy legal affair is likely to have proved expensive for Tesla, which hired London libel specialists Carter-Ruck and a top QC to fight its case from 2011. In the past year alone, Tesla has been ordered to pay ÂŁ100,000 in costs on account to the BBC.
Appeal court judge Lord Justice Moore-Bick said he had watched the whole of the one-hour Top Gear episode "a number of times". In his view, the judge explained, the programme did not libel Tesla.
Tesla complained about a passage of Clarkson's commentary in which he said: "Although Tesla say it will do 200 miles, we worked out that on our track it would run out after just 55 miles and if it does run out, it is not a quick job to charge it up again." Clarkson and others are then shown pushing the Roadster into the Top Gear hangar and recharging it.
Moore-Bick questioned whether Top Gear's influence among petrolheads was as great as Tesla claimed.
The electric car maker claimed that the scene cost it the sale of 200 Roadsters, caused costs of $171,000, damaged investor confidence, and prompted adverse comments on YouTube.
Comparing sales of its Roadster to a rival top-of-the-range model, Tesla said it had sold just 7% of what the Lotus Elise had sold in the UK.
The California-based company said pre-sale orders for its new Model S sedan have been far lower than expected in the UK because of Clarkson's bad review.
But the court of appeal was unconvinced. "In my view the case pleaded in support of the claim for special damages is, to say the least, very thin on its own terms," said Moore-Bick, who sat alongside Lord Justice Maurice Kay and Lord Justice Rimer.
He added: "Moreover, on the basis of the material currently before the court I do not think that there is any real prospect of Tesla's being able to demonstrate at trial that it has suffered any quantifiable loss by reason of any of the actionable statements."
There was no immediate comment from Clarkson following the judgment – the Top Gear host is understood to be on his way to Australia for a live edition of the show.
However, Andy Wilman, the executive producer of Top Gear, said: "I am pleased that the appeal court has upheld the previous ruling and the case has been struck out. I'd also like to apologise to the judges for making them have to watch so much Top Gear."
Last month Tesla got into a tit-for-tat online spat with New York Times writer John Broder over an unflattering review he wrote about its Model S.
...
For the reference, the Roadster sold low double digits in the UK.
To answer the last post...
Top Gear row: Tesla loses appeal over Jeremy Clarkson review
Appeal court dismisses claim that show damaged car's sales, after manufacturer gets into online spat with New York Times. By Josh Halliday
Emphasis added is mine.
As he heaved the ÂŁ92,000 electric sports car off the Top Gear track, little did Jeremy Clarkson know the incident would be the topic of legal argument for years to come.
But that December 2008 episode of the BBC2 show has been examined repeatedly by some of Britain's most senior media judges in an three-year libel battle brought by the US car maker, Tesla.
The court of appeal signalled the end of the road for Tesla's legal claim on Tuesday, rejecting the company's complaint that its reputation was damaged by Clarkson's typically provocative review of the Tesla Roadster car.
The lengthy legal affair is likely to have proved expensive for Tesla, which hired London libel specialists Carter-Ruck and a top QC to fight its case from 2011. In the past year alone, Tesla has been ordered to pay ÂŁ100,000 in costs on account to the BBC.
Appeal court judge Lord Justice Moore-Bick said he had watched the whole of the one-hour Top Gear episode "a number of times". In his view, the judge explained, the programme did not libel Tesla.
Tesla complained about a passage of Clarkson's commentary in which he said: "Although Tesla say it will do 200 miles, we worked out that on our track it would run out after just 55 miles and if it does run out, it is not a quick job to charge it up again." Clarkson and others are then shown pushing the Roadster into the Top Gear hangar and recharging it.
Moore-Bick questioned whether Top Gear's influence among petrolheads was as great as Tesla claimed.
The electric car maker claimed that the scene cost it the sale of 200 Roadsters, caused costs of $171,000, damaged investor confidence, and prompted adverse comments on YouTube.
Comparing sales of its Roadster to a rival top-of-the-range model, Tesla said it had sold just 7% of what the Lotus Elise had sold in the UK.
The California-based company said pre-sale orders for its new Model S sedan have been far lower than expected in the UK because of Clarkson's bad review.
But the court of appeal was unconvinced. "In my view the case pleaded in support of the claim for special damages is, to say the least, very thin on its own terms," said Moore-Bick, who sat alongside Lord Justice Maurice Kay and Lord Justice Rimer.
He added: "Moreover, on the basis of the material currently before the court I do not think that there is any real prospect of Tesla's being able to demonstrate at trial that it has suffered any quantifiable loss by reason of any of the actionable statements."
There was no immediate comment from Clarkson following the judgment – the Top Gear host is understood to be on his way to Australia for a live edition of the show.
However, Andy Wilman, the executive producer of Top Gear, said: "I am pleased that the appeal court has upheld the previous ruling and the case has been struck out. I'd also like to apologise to the judges for making them have to watch so much Top Gear."
Last month Tesla got into a tit-for-tat online spat with New York Times writer John Broder over an unflattering review he wrote about its Model S.
...
For the reference, the Roadster sold low double digits in the UK.
- 3,804
