Was ‘Top Gear’ Test of the Tesla Misleading?

Top GearFrom left, Richard Hammond, Jeremy Clarkson and James May of “Top Gear.”

“Top Gear,” the British television show about cars, has a flair for the dramatic, but a recent episode featuring a review of the Tesla Roadster electric car has called the show’s methods into question.

In the segment, Jeremy Clarkson, one of the show’s three hosts, flogs a Tesla around a test track – to whoops and hollers – until the car slows down and unexpectedly stops. Mr. Clarkson looks at the camera, seemingly befuddled. He and three others are forced to push the car into a warehouse for a battery recharge. At least that’s what the video seems to show.

“Although Tesla says that it does 200 miles, we worked out that on our test track, it would run out after just 55 miles,” Mr. Clarkson says in a voice-over.

But did the car actually run out of juice?

No, says Tesla Motors, which stores its cars’ driving history in memory sticks. In fact, it didn’t lose its charge at all. According to Rachel Konrad, spokeswoman for the San Carlos, Calif., company, the battery charge of the two cars that Tesla lent to “Top Gear” never fell below 20 percent.

Wired.com first reported the false breakdown on Dec. 16 when it published a response from Ms. Konrad. “They never had to push a car off the track because of lack of charge or a fault,” she said.

A few days later, a spokeswoman for “Top Gear” issued a statement saying the car was “videotaped being pushed to show what would have happened if the Roadster had run out of charge,” according to Edmunds Green Car Advisor.

“‘Top Gear’ stands by the findings in this film and is content that it offers a fair representation of the Tesla’s performance on the day it was tested,” the BBC said.

Mr. Clarkson offered his own statement to the Telegraph.

“We never said once that the car had run out of power,” he said. “The car had to be pushed into the warehouse because you are not allowed to drive cars into a building.”

He added: “We calculated that it would have run out of power after 53 miles, but they can’t argue with that because that is a fact.”

Mr. Clarkson did not explain how “Top Gear” came up with that figure (or why he had said 55 miles during the show’s taping). Ms. Konrad said in an interview that the E.P.A.-certified range of the Tesla Roadster was actually 240 miles, but “if you’re constantly pushing 0-to-60 and running at the top speed of 120 miles per hour, it, like gasoline cars, will have lower range.”

But she said she couldn’t understand how the show calculated 55 (or 53) miles.

The 10-minute review of the Tesla, which will air on BBC America early next year, was generally positive about the performance of the car. In fact, Mr. Clarkson compares it favorably with the Lotus Elise, on which the Roadster is based. During a comparison drive, he storms past the Elise in a straight, amid tire squeals and music, and says in a voice-over: “This car really was then shaping up to be something wonderful, but then…”

His voice trails off. We see a shot of Mr. Clarkson, appearing confused, looking down to the gas pedal. The tire squeals and music dissipate as the car slows to a stop on the test track.

Tara Davies, a spokeswoman for the BBC, said: “We never claim that the car ran out of charge. The voice-over says, ‘If it does run out it’s not a quick job to charge it up again.”

But the sequence of images leading up to the car being pushed into the warehouse is powerful. And the segment ends with Mr. Clarkson walking alone down an empty track under a dark sky with no car in sight:

“So with the light fading, we had no cars at all,” he says.

He concludes: “What we have here then is an astonishing technical achievement: the first electric car that you might actually want to buy. It’s just a shame that in the real world, it doesn’t seem to work.” Fade to black.

Ms. Davies, the BBC spokeswoman, said several times in an interview that “Top Gear” was “an entertainment program.”

Indeed, the episode with the Tesla also included a segment on an attempt to jump an old Jaguar, towing a camper, over several cars.

Asked if “Top Gear” plans to amend the episode when it runs on BBC America to clarify the dramatized sequence, Ms. Davies said it would run “as is.”

Comments are no longer being accepted.

Mr Clarkson is enormously fun to read, so long as you arent looking for objective information regarding the vehicle he’s writing about.

Regular viewers of Top Gear already know that their “comparison” tests are not to be taken literally; often the track conditions are radically different between laps.

Seems to me that Tesla is fighting for survival and wants to squash any bad publicity. The Roadster is not ready for prime time, despite what they’ve told their investors.

I don’t want to start defending the TV show, but I don’t put a lot of stock in the manufacturer’s assertion that their memory stick shows the whole thing was a fake. In the final analysis, anybody buying a Tesla gets exactly want they deserve.

Oh, come on, I love Top Gear, but nobody who has watched the show any length of time could possibly take its “tests” seriously; like their challenges and wacky competitions, they’re obviously jiggered to produce results that reflect the presenters’ preferences and the producers’ ideas of humor.

My guess is that Clarkson deflated the Tesla’s range by 72.5% because he calculated it was 72.5% American, and he hates Americans and American vehicles of any sort.

I don’t see any question whether it’s misleading. The question would be whether it is deliberate misinformation or even slander (can you slander a product?).

“We calculated that it would have run out of power after 53 miles, but they can’t argue with that because that is a fact.” It may be a fact that they calculated that (if they didn’t just make it up), but unless they can produce some kind of data to support their “calculation” it could easily be an error. I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they did some kind of casual back-of-the-envelope calculation, but not that they made any effort to check its veracity.

Its pretty clear they acted like the car ran out of juice, and they over emphasized it, “it just doesn’t work in real life!” Suddenly, they say this is an “entertainment” show, out of all the episodes I’ve watched, I see them acting like professionals not entertainers…this car is a good step in the right directions, we cant all afford $500K super cars. Good job Tesla..keep it up.

I think the only thing misleading has been Tesla’s wildly optimistic schedule.

“Top Gear” is, first and foremost, entertainment programming – dry British chuckles and absurdest humor, with a sprinkling of high-speed thrills. It’s improbable that anyone considering the high-end Tesla would find Top Gear’s presentation anything but good natured fun, and certainly not a deterrent to their purchasing decision.

Then again I’m just a car guy, not a corporate lawyer or media spinner.

The British have entirely different standards for veracity in media. Witness their tabloids. That said, their law courts are rather generous in slander suits. Tesla may well sue and use the money to finance future developments. They could double their money by suing in the States should BBC America air the segment as described.

The ONLY thing being tested on this show is “wit” :)

Read a magazine or newspaper review for a better perspective. People looking to get any actual information from t.v. programs (with the possible exception of Frontline) should realize its just b.s. meant to entertain.

I find the program to be anti environment ..

Top Gear has offered poor reviews of Hybrids/Electrics — They trashed prius while comparing it to Volkswagen TDI ,, They are trashing Tesla now..

If you have seen an episode featuring an electric car REVA .. it was compared to a TABLE ( Yes ,,, a Wodden table with 4 legs) and in a race with the TABLE ( carried by 4 men) .. The Table won …

So that tells me more about the program than it does about the cars …

Too bad that is is on BBC — which automatically lends it more credibility than it would have on any other channel.

Oh good grief! In the current economy, how many people can afford $85,000-$100,000 for a car? The wealthy don’t care how much gas they use, and the rest of us can’t afford to gamble on such a new and expensive car.

Top Gear can be a little hard on alternative powered vehicles. Jeremy Clarkson is a traditionalist when it comes to cars, he is equally dismissive of hybrids and diesels. But with that said I believe that the Tesla roadster, as impressive as it is, is just another feel good toy for wealthy environmentalists. A $110,000 renamed Lotus with all the shortcomings of a compact roadster, no cargo capacity, limited usability in adverse conditions and limited space within. This car is ultimately like those multi million dollar “green” homes we see on television from time to time a luxury for the very rich. This is the challenge build an electric car with at least 450 miles range on a single charge. Make it a sedan a SUV or a coupe and sell it for less than $20,000.

Truth hurts….

I stumbled onto “TOP GEAR” only recently and have become completely addicted. It’s great fun, with zany stunts and friendly co-host banter about cars that is vastly amusing. Anyone who for one second believes that ANYTHING on the show is completely on the up-and-up “facts-wise” hasn’t been paying attention to (especially) British telly since Queen Mary was prosecuting Protestants.

The only thing serious about the show is, perhaps, Mr. Clarkson’s dry and witty observations about the lack of quality when it comes to many things American, especially our cars. (Have truer words ever been spoken, no matter how much banterish sparkle is in one’s eye?)

Tesla is a great experiment and I wish them well, even though I’ll never have enough disposable income to buy one. Their better defense to the show would have been a very sporting and humorous reaction, commenting directly on the “crazy humor” of the hosts and the general silliness that the show represents. Said in a fun way, of course…

Then invite even more “press” to take a spin!

Clarkson is a git. Yes he can be funny, but if you want good comedy watch “A Little Bit of Fry and Laurie” and leave the car reviews to Autoweek or CAR magazine

There’s no legitimate reason for Top Gear to stage a “dramatization” that leads to an unsubstantiated claim that the car ran out of juice when it clearly HADN’T. Why TG’d be so desperate to condemn an innovative, if imperfect, car is the real point.

It leads then to a lot of testosterone-poisoned, so-called “car guys” spreading misinformation to their pals and running down a very cool new car. That’s not entertainment. That’s misinformation in the service of making Clarkson et al to appear superior and snide on TV.

The TopGear credo is sarcasm and withering criticism at all costs. How could they allow the Tesla to come out clean and still heap their “fun” brand of scorn?

I’ve watched and enjoyed Top Gear for a long time. And, yes, I agree with several of the previous posts that Top Gear is primarily an entertainment program. But that does not justify a misleading video edit that leads viewers to believe that the car ran out of charge when in fact it did not. Clarkson’s assertion that “we never once said that the car ran out of power,” while technically true, is a poor defense of Top Gear’s actions. When you lead viewers to believe that the car stopped on its own, and then show people pushing the car into a garage, the implication you are making to the audience is clear. And, in this case, apparently untrue.

Face it, Top Gear. You got caught messing with the truth because you didn’t know about the memory stick in the car. It would be better to admit what you did than to make up a lame excuse like “we never said it ran out of power,” and then concluding that the car doesn’t work. Entertainment show or not, just a smidgen of journalistic integrity isn’t too much to ask. Even for the Brits.

And not that Tesla is necessarily on a bad publicity ‘squishing’ campaign, but with a technology which is emerging — and for some bizarre technical reason that only the Big Three understand, still barely viable in 2008 — we would hope for a fair assessment of it.

They should certainly show gas-powered vehicles that they test “…being pushed to show what would have happened…” if they had run out of gas, along this dim-witted line of reasoning.

I think the bigger question is whether they decided to fabricate this failure on their own, or it was a corporate friendly gesture between their owners and companies with vested interest in electric cars not gaining market share.

Sorry the whole world is not prostrating before the mighty Tesla.

So you took a Lotus Elise and put some batteries, motors and electronics in it. If you ask the four guys in the show ‘Prototype This’, they could probably do something similar in two weeks.

And then price it at 100,000 dollars. Brilliant! Get over it, Tesla.

As for Top Gear, you keep doing what you do best. A car show that makes me laugh out loud sometimes my wife comes in to watch.

This shamefully dishonest segment on “Top Gear” is, unfortunately, typical of the show’s approach to anything having to do with the U.S. Exhibit B is an episode they aired two or three years ago, in which they bought a couple of used cars in Miami and drove them to New Orleans, intending to sell them there, presumably to see what kind of car one could buy for under $2000 (as I recall) in America, and whether that would be cheaper than renting.

But the real agenda became clear during the segment, when they went to the most crime-ridden part of Miami to buy the cars, and found a used-car lot whose manager carried a handgun. Of the cars available, they chose the largest and most decrepit and then derided them as though they were typical of American cars. After arriving in New Orleans, within months after Katrina, they went very far out of their way to show the devastation, and instead of selling the cars, they tried to give them away to some poor black people, in a laughably condescending way. When one of the couples raised questions about the gift, they derided that response. The whole episode was really disgustingly biased – an obvious setup from start to finish. A similar anti-U.S. sentiment crept into the show on several occasions, which finally caused me to stop watching it. Too bad – I love cars.

I suspect that the anti-American approach is coming from the BBC as much as from the producers of the show itself. Whatever the cause, it’s quite offensive.

As a Brit now living in the US, I have been watching Top Gear for over 10 years and this is a standard over reaction to one of their pieces. Any regular viewer will work out that ANY praise for an alternative energy or Diesel car from Top Gear is an excellent review. Why? Because they are self-confessed petrol-heads who like to break things and drive very fast…..that’s the point of the show and that is what the viewer expects.
To those “offended” or hurt by this, I suggest you return to the glorious snoozeFest that is MotorWeek and your Prius if you are looking for a dead-pan approach to Motoring.
It’s funny….it’s entertainment…..

Did anyone watch the whole episode. They praised the Honda FCX Clarity!!! Watch the episode and you will see how they favored a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle that cost millions!
People get caught up in the outlandish things that they do. But it’s entertainment. Nothing more, nothing less. Factuality is not something of a top priority for the show. People should just watch and enjoy the show for what it is.

For any Car Show to intentionally Manufacture a fundamental problem seems dishonest, biased and unfair. The act appears to have been ‘sponsored’ – were they paid by competitors to discredit the Tesla? (T. Edison did his best to discredit Tesla’s claim that A/C was the future of electricity – so I guess there is a history of unfair treatment…)

The sequence, as described by this article, seems to have been put together solely to make it appear as though the car had abruptly run out of juice – an attempt to discredit a car based on ‘lies’. WHY? That’s not entertainment, it’s merely the act of misleading the Public.

I much prefer the Truth from my shows…