Top Gear still hates Tesla

[why?]

and you claim to not be a fanboy. lol. why won't Tesla do what the entire rest of the auto industry does and give it's new buyer info to JD Powers? Really odd.

They've made a profit in 3 quarters. I didn't realize that. It's a start in the right direction and maybe they might stand the test of time, although I doubt it.

The number of cars they sell isn't that important. Morgan sells about 700 a year and is still successful at what they do. But come on, we can all go see Engineering Explained's video about his Model 3. A serious car company does not deliver a car with obvious visible paint issues like that. The article you linked prove Tesla doesn't get it. They are nowhere near the standard any other auto company would even remotely consider acceptable.

You can't compare Tesla to Amazon. I know why Amazon doesn't make a profit. They actually explain it. Musk just tweets foolish crap that gets him in trouble.

The only thing Tesla has done is prove electric cars are feasible. Now we get to watch the auto industry make useful cars and demolish Tesla. You will not see a Porsche that has issues with its dents or paint, or door handles for that matter.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Tesla is more than one man, and the company is profitable (see below).

Sorry, but there is a difference between "making a profit" and being "profitable". I do get the whole reinvestment of profits into the business, and Tesla is building out a lot of infrastructure, but aren't they basically doing that with debt and not rolling profits back into the company?

In the end, I appreciate what Tesla is doing, but I wouldn't own one for a whole list of reasons that have nothing to do with it being an electric car.

So in the end, based on the title of this thread, I guess Top Gear and I agree on this subject, I'm just more upfront about it.

[Lantanafrs2]

How much do we really know about anything a company is doing outside of its products?

[korhun]

Why there is so much hate for Tesla? Is proving "electric cars are feasible" a small/easy thing? Are all Lamborghinis, Lancias, Alfa Romeos produced perfectly? Are they bad brands?

Years ago, I've watched a documentary about space travel. I remember Nasa engineers don't ever bother thinking on re-using rockets, because it was impossible for them to make the rockets to land. Elon Musk proved that it can be done. Doesn't he deserve some respect for that at least?

I have watched every episode of Top Gear when it was hosted by Jeremy, May and Hammond. I don't understand why, but they really hate American and electrical cars. They hate many other countries as well. This is not nice.

[Lantanafrs2]

It's a tv show. Take it for what its worth.. nothing

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by korhun

Years ago, I've watched a documentary about space travel. I remember Nasa engineers don't ever bother thinking on re-using rockets, because it was impossible for them to make the rockets to land. Elon Musk proved that it can be done. Doesn't he deserve some respect for that at least?

They knew it could be done, it was a matter of economy of scale and timeframe. To fly enough fuel to safely land the booster back again, you have to have enough fuel to fly the fuel, all adding weight. It is the same reason they went with Lunar orbit rendezvous (the method used to land on the moon) rather than earth orbit rendezvous where they would build a single ship in orbit around Earth that would land and take off from the Moon. They actually started down that path then released it would not be completed by the timeline given.

Heck, every B movie maker in the 50s knew you could feasibly do booster recovery.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Lantanafrs2

It's a tv show. Take it for what its worth.. nothing

And not even a particularly good one. Was never sure what the big interest in it was myself. I found them all to be arrogant, pompous assess and not even the slightest bit entertaining much less informative.


I know...I know

[korhun]

It is unfair to bury Top Gear. They used to shine.
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWQAPBFAJPw[/ame]

[bcj]

It's "Idiots doing dumb stuff".
Don't cross the threads!


can't look away though.

[korhun]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

They knew it could be done, it was a matter of economy of scale and timeframe. To fly enough fuel to safely land the booster back again, you have to have enough fuel to fly the fuel, all adding weight. It is the same reason they went with Lunar orbit rendezvous (the method used to land on the moon) rather than earth orbit rendezvous where they would build a single ship in orbit around Earth that would land and take off from the Moon. They actually started down that path then released it would not be completed by the timeline given.

Heck, every B movie maker in the 50s knew you could feasibly do booster recovery.

I'm not an expert on this subject, and my mind may be fabricating things about this, but I remember some engineers saying "stabilizing a rocket is very difficult, it is very very hard to launch them. It is impossible for us to land them; so we have to find another way to achieve cost efficient space travel."

[Lantanafrs2]

At least the American version had a real driver

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by korhun

I'm not an expert on this subject, and my mind may be fabricating things about this, but I remember some engineers saying "stabilizing a rocket is very difficult, it is very very hard to launch them. It is impossible for us to land them; so we have to find another way to achieve cost efficient space travel."

Well true, with the tech at the time. A lot of that difference is a function of computing power available at the time. The computer on the Apollo mission weighed over 70lbs, was 2 cubic feet in size (2ft x 1ft x 0.5ft) and had far less computing power than a throw away calculator these days.

I'm not sure how much processor power it takes to land one of the rockets ass first on a moving/wabbling barge, but it is most likely not insignificant.

[Rampage]

Top Gear may not like them but it appears that someone does. I just took at trip from the Jacksonville FL area to Myrtle Beach NC via I95. An hour or so into the trip I started to realize that I was seeing more Tesla cars on the highway than I had ever seen before so I started counting. Going north I ended up counting 12 southbound Tesla models. Most of them were the 3. On the return trip, I counted 9. All total that was 19 more than the number of twins I saw during the trip and 14 more than the number of Porches that I counted.

Yes, I am bored driving on the highway and I have to find ways to entertain myself. It is still better than sitting home and watching an episode of Top Gear though.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Rampage

Top Gear may not like them but it appears that someone does. I just took at trip from the Jacksonville FL area to Myrtle Beach NC via I95. An hour or so into the trip I started to realize that I was seeing more Tesla cars on the highway than I had ever seen before so I started counting. Going north I ended up counting 12 southbound Tesla models. Most of them were the 3. On the return trip, I counted 9. All total that was 19 more than the number of twins I saw during the trip and 14 more than the number of Porches that I counted.

Yes, I am bored driving on the highway and I have to find ways to entertain myself. It is still better than sitting home and watching an episode of Top Gear though.

There is a charging station a few blocks from my work. It is just off the busiest Canadian highway (401) almost exactly between the US border and Toronto. There is a full shit ton of Telsas driving around here every single day. I probably see 20 of them for every Twin I spot in a month.