Quake3World

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-pe ... test-drive

TLDR

The logs show again that our Model S never had a chance with John Broder. In the case with Top Gear, their legal defense was that they never actually said it broke down, they just implied that it could and then filmed themselves pushing what viewers did not realize was a perfectly functional car. In Mr. Broder’s case, he simply did not accurately capture what happened and worked very hard to force our car to stop running.

Caught a corrupt moron with an obvious pro-oil agenda, nicely done.

Also shame on Top Queer.

More proof there is no such thing as journalism and never was. "Infotainment" and reinforcing existing prejudices is all that matters.

GONNAFISTYA wrote:More proof there is no such thing as journalism and never was. "Infotainment" and reinforcing existing prejudices is all that matters.

^^
What he says

edit

edit

edit

there's also a rebuttal
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02 ... it-doesnt/

2 sides to every story but the rebuttal is kinda shit imo

And by 'laying down some ownage' you mean 'crying like little bitches' amirite? It's Top Gear, it's more a comedy show than an auto show. If your product gets on there, they're going to make fun of it.
They also said the Passat handles like a shopping cart with one limp wheel. You don't see Volkswagen 'owning' them with charts and diagrams to prove that a shopping cart does in fact handle differently.

Bit of a difference between saying a car doesn't handle well to a car is completely unreliable, but I get where you are coming from.

MKJ wrote:And by 'laying down some ownage' you mean 'crying like little bitches' amirite? It's Top Gear, it's more a comedy show than an auto show. If your product gets on there, they're going to make fun of it.
They also said the Passat handles like a shopping cart with one limp wheel. You don't see Volkswagen 'owning' them with charts and diagrams to prove that a shopping cart does in fact handle differently.

Did you read the article? It's not about Top Gear. It's about the New York Times.

I took the tldr version and thought it was still about that top gear courtcase from a while back

Memphis wrote:Apparently a couple CNN reporters are reenacting the journey. Could be intere...snore.

Lol CNN... i remember a semi recent Daily Show clip where John Oliver interviewed one of the CNN bigwigs about his recent firing of the whole investigative journalism unit (that's right, CNN does not have any investigative reporters anymore). The man sat there and enthusiastically defended this decision using reasoning that was tremendously stupid, it was quite hilarious

Top Gear also drove Reliant Robins and Regal Supervans fast around corners just to make them tip over (they have 3 wheels) just for jokes. the fact that you can't drive them fast around corners isn't the reason those cars are shit though; the reason they're shit is that they're shit

also, anyone who thinks Top Gear is a serious consumer advice show isn't getting the joke. they race Veyrons against RAF Tornadoes ffs. you can't afford either of those toys

Ryoki wrote:

Memphis wrote:Apparently a couple CNN reporters are reenacting the journey. Could be intere...snore.

Lol CNN... i remember a semi recent Daily Show clip where John Oliver interviewed one of the CNN bigwigs about his recent firing of the whole investigative journalism unit (that's right, CNN does not have any investigative reporters anymore). The man sat there and enthusiastically defended this decision using reasoning that was tremendously stupid, it was quite hilarious

Probably their best fake journalist segments ever The Newsroom part was awesome.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-j ... journalism

Memphis wrote:Apparently a couple CNN reporters are reenacting the journey. Could be intere...snore.

For what it's worth, turns out the trip is easy to complete without problems. Broder's full of shit.

bitWISE wrote:

Ryoki wrote:Lol CNN... i remember a semi recent Daily Show clip where John Oliver interviewed one of the CNN bigwigs about his recent firing of the whole investigative journalism unit (that's right, CNN does not have any investigative reporters anymore). The man sat there and enthusiastically defended this decision using reasoning that was tremendously stupid, it was quite hilarious

Probably their best fake journalist segments ever The Newsroom part was awesome.

lol I remember that.

Eraser wrote:Broder's full of shit.

That entire newspaper is full of shit. Iraq war anyone?

I heard that actually happened

Two sides of a story really. I don’t trust Tesla’s data logs more than what Broder wrote. Tesla could’ve made up the data logs just to discredit Broder. Who knows?

I can believe some of Broder’s rebuttal (e.g., driving around the parking lot in circles at night desperately looking for a charging station that’s not clearly marked), and if Tesla had indeed changed the size of the wheels/tires without recalibrating the system, they just invalidated their own data logs altogether.

The fact is most people probably will not be willing to put up with the nuisances of owning/operating an all-electric vehicle. Broder operated the car in a manner that’s more consistent with people who operate petrol cars, while Valdes-Dapena from CNN Money effectively went out of his way (so to speak) to accommodate the car.

In any case, I’m sure the Tesla S is a nice car, but I think electric vehicles are no more sustainable than petrol vehicles, and in most cases, they’re not necessarily more efficient or environmentally friendly either (you’re simply shifting the pollution source from the car to somewhere else). Money would be better spent researching and developing a non-carbon-based, renewable alternative fuel that’s sustainable, burns cleanly, and is economically/environmentally friendly to produce.

This is why I'm waiting for antimatter and fusion before I build my spaceship.

Looks like my shitty state is rushing an amendment into a bill tomorrow that would block Tesla from opening the dealerships they just announced to build in Ohio.

4517.12 Denial of license as motor vehicle dealer, motor vehicle leasing dealer, manufactured home broker, or motor vehicle auction owner.

(A) The registrar of motor vehicles shall deny the application of any person for a license as a motor vehicle dealer, motor vehicle leasing dealer, or motor vehicle auction owner and refuse to issue the license if the registrar finds that the applicant:
…
(11) Is a manufacturer or a subsidiary, parent, or affiliated entity of a manufacturer. applying for a license to sell or lease new or used vehicles at retail. Nothing in this division shall prohibit a manufacturer from disposing of vehicles at wholesale at the termination of a consumer lease through a motor vehicle auction. This division shall not serve as a basis for termination, revocation, or non-renewal of a license granted prior to the effective date of this provision.

Hopefully the morons in power know that:

With a service center in Dublin and stores opening in Columbus and Cincinnati this month, Tesla will support 26 employees, and every location will add an initial $7 million in direct economic activity to the State. Tesla will be banned from creating additional jobs, opening new locations and bringing substantial economic investment from a U.S. company to Ohio if this legislation passes.

People are so stupid it literally makes my brain hurt. Fucking hell.

As a side note, them Teslas are very quiet. Had one sneak up on me the other day when I was walking around. Didn't even realize it was there until it was almost up my ass.

How was the fit?

lol Tesla can't even get their own defence straight.

Clarkson never said it broke down cos it never (the part they're contesting anyway), it *supposedly* run out of juice as he explains during the same scene which is why they were pushing the car into the garage. Tesla were arguing the toss to get over the bad publicity from factually correct brake failures later in the show, when they got owned they tried claiming the power never fell below 20% at any point, meaning it couldn't run out of juice and claim misrepresentation, at which point a different judge had a laugh then explained that its supposedly a representation of the facts as explained by Clarkson in the same scene.

They also never contested the part at the beginning where he said they had to change cars twice cos it was broken, nor did they contest the speed at which the battery drained.

And now they try to make out they were right all along and were blown away by something trivial, bunch a cunts