Jeremy Clarkson's greatest flops
Thread Starter
99 TL, 06 E350
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,030
Likes: 164
From: Toronto
Jeremy Clarkson's greatest flops
There's some funny stuff here:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/dri...cle3289827.ece
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/dri...cle3289827.ece
Why do you not lie awake at night yearning for the day when you can own a Hyundai? Simple. Because Hyundais are not made to plunge their hand into your pants. Only to plunge their hands into your bank account. It’s the same story with the Tata Nano, and the Vauxhall Vectra, and the BMW 3-series, and the Mercedes GL. All the cars you don’t like and don’t want were made, like white goods, solely to make money.
The sizzle in the Steak
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 71,436
Likes: 1,877
From: Southern California
As a general rule, Japanese cars have no magic “want one” factor. Except for various Hondas, which do. And it’s no coincidence that Honda was started by one man with an engineering vision while Toyota was started by a committee to make Japan rich. Subarus, for God’s sake, are made by Fuji Heavy Industries.
Ever wondered why so many people genuinely love Jaguars and why Lexuses are always thought of as being a bit dreary? It’s because Jaguar was started by Sir William Lyons, who had a vision, and Lexus was started in a meeting driven by PowerPoint presentations and accounting principles.
The sizzle in the Steak
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 71,436
Likes: 1,877
From: Southern California
Then there’s the Golf GTI. Created back in the late 1970s by a small team of enthusiasts who were fiddling about putting big engines into little cars, it was ruined over the years by the marketing department who thought that a good badge would act like yummy gravy if poured over a poor car. But then, with the new one, they asked the engineers to break out their slide rules, and put the magic back. The result is a fantastic car.
Trending Topics
Senior Moderator
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 47,710
Likes: 801
From: Toronto, Canada
As a general rule, Japanese cars have no magic “want one” factor. Except for various Hondas, which do. And it’s no coincidence that Honda was started by one man with an engineering vision while Toyota was started by a committee to make Japan rich. Subarus, for God’s sake, are made by Fuji Heavy Industries.
Registered but harmless
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 14,889
Likes: 1,164
From: Los Angeles, CA
The entire section about the Mustang is true (except for the being beaten off the lights part) to me- yes, it's old tech, but I still carry a torch for one, and the engine/manual tranny are surprisingly good-and cited in full below:
Originally Posted by Clarkson
This brings me on to the Ford Mustang. It’s a terrible car. Bouncy, underbraked, nowhere near as fast as it should be and equipped with a live rear axle. Something that went out of fashion at about the same time as the Bailey bridge.
Ford argued that it had fitted museum technology because that’s what America’s drag-racing fraternity had asked for. I see, so you wreck a car’s handling and ride simply to keep half a dozen fat men in Kentucky happy. Sure, I believe you. And the decision had nothing to do with the fact that live axles cost 4p whereas more modern alternatives don’t.
Anyway. None of this matters, because whenever I see a Mustang I’m filled with a sometimes uncontrollable urge to buy one. I know the stripes are silly, I know the wheels are slightly wider than is strictly necessary and I realise the big bulge on the bonnet is as laughable as the hosepipe attachment Robert Plant used to sport in his pants.
I’m also aware that the seats are made from UHT leather, that the dash is made from materials that Lego would reject, that it can be beaten off the lights by a Golf (cart) and that in England such a car would mark me out as someone who in pubs says, “I’ll take a Bud,” because secretly I want to be American.
And yet the feeling persists. Maybe it’s the badge and all that Bullitt nonsense. Maybe it’s the style. It is a good-looking car. But mostly it’s the fact it’s the only Ford made today with rear-wheel drive. That shows that beneath all the rubbish it was designed by someone who cares.
In every way, it’s worse than a dull-as-ditchwater Kia Rio. But because it was plainly created by an enthusiast it has a heart and a soul. That’s why I’d buy a Mustang and why, even if my dog’s life depended on it, I wouldn’t buy a Rio.
Ford argued that it had fitted museum technology because that’s what America’s drag-racing fraternity had asked for. I see, so you wreck a car’s handling and ride simply to keep half a dozen fat men in Kentucky happy. Sure, I believe you. And the decision had nothing to do with the fact that live axles cost 4p whereas more modern alternatives don’t.
Anyway. None of this matters, because whenever I see a Mustang I’m filled with a sometimes uncontrollable urge to buy one. I know the stripes are silly, I know the wheels are slightly wider than is strictly necessary and I realise the big bulge on the bonnet is as laughable as the hosepipe attachment Robert Plant used to sport in his pants.
I’m also aware that the seats are made from UHT leather, that the dash is made from materials that Lego would reject, that it can be beaten off the lights by a Golf (cart) and that in England such a car would mark me out as someone who in pubs says, “I’ll take a Bud,” because secretly I want to be American.
And yet the feeling persists. Maybe it’s the badge and all that Bullitt nonsense. Maybe it’s the style. It is a good-looking car. But mostly it’s the fact it’s the only Ford made today with rear-wheel drive. That shows that beneath all the rubbish it was designed by someone who cares.
In every way, it’s worse than a dull-as-ditchwater Kia Rio. But because it was plainly created by an enthusiast it has a heart and a soul. That’s why I’d buy a Mustang and why, even if my dog’s life depended on it, I wouldn’t buy a Rio.
TQ > MPG
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,624
Likes: 8
From: Metro Detroit
It was well written, and had some very true points, but theres a reason so many people love it.
And I would never want a IRS versus a live axle in a street/strip car. Axle hop is not fun, plus what kinda man cares about the ride quality in a car thats meant for performance??
And I would never want a IRS versus a live axle in a street/strip car. Axle hop is not fun, plus what kinda man cares about the ride quality in a car thats meant for performance??
Moderator
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 29,869
Likes: 3,489
More of the same, he continues to make highly biased and funny comments. Whatever sells magazines. He's clearly out of touch with the Mustang crowd. He probably doesn't even know that people with 03-04 Cobras do solid rear swaps. 
Drifting
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,386
Likes: 42
From: PK NY
my favorite, Cadillac SRX 4.6
thanks for the link, pretty entertaining 
Verdict- One star for the sunroof, none for anything else
The Cadillac SRX is a very ugly car. So ugly in fact that you’ll want to get inside and shut the door as quickly as possible. But sadly, when you are inside, it’s even worse.
Cadillac has gone for a half-timbered look with bits of wood nailed to every flat surface, and some that aren’t flat at all - the steering wheel, for instance.
Now this kind of thing worked in Elizabethan times. Team it with some wattle, some daub and a hint of thatch and all is well. But polish your wood until it gleams and then team it with plastic and I’m afraid the end result will be, and is, absolutely revolting.
Officially the SRX can achieve 16mpg, but unofficially, on the school run say, you’d struggle to get more than 12. Couple that with the £36,895 asking price, and the likelihood of “piano falling from a tower block” depreciation, and this car could well turn out to be more expensive to run than the Iraq war.
And get this. It’s marketed as a seven-seater, but it isn’t really. To fit into the rear seats you’d have to be so badly deformed that you’d need all manner of specialist equipment to keep you alive. An iron lung, for instance, and that isn’t going to fit.
It’s not going well for the Cadillac, so I suppose at this point I should mention its good points.
Er . . . I liked the enormous sunroof. And I suppose the V8 Northstar engine is pretty potent when you bury your foot in the nylon, and I’ll admit that for an off-roader the ride is pretty smooth as well. So smooth in fact that it made all three of my children feel sick.
So if you want an unnecessarily big antisocial 4x4, you can do better than this. The Volvo XC90 remains my favourite. I like its sensible layout, its reasonable price tag and its nonthreatening exterior. It’s better looking, too.
The Cadillac SRX is a very ugly car. So ugly in fact that you’ll want to get inside and shut the door as quickly as possible. But sadly, when you are inside, it’s even worse.
Cadillac has gone for a half-timbered look with bits of wood nailed to every flat surface, and some that aren’t flat at all - the steering wheel, for instance.
Now this kind of thing worked in Elizabethan times. Team it with some wattle, some daub and a hint of thatch and all is well. But polish your wood until it gleams and then team it with plastic and I’m afraid the end result will be, and is, absolutely revolting.
Officially the SRX can achieve 16mpg, but unofficially, on the school run say, you’d struggle to get more than 12. Couple that with the £36,895 asking price, and the likelihood of “piano falling from a tower block” depreciation, and this car could well turn out to be more expensive to run than the Iraq war.
And get this. It’s marketed as a seven-seater, but it isn’t really. To fit into the rear seats you’d have to be so badly deformed that you’d need all manner of specialist equipment to keep you alive. An iron lung, for instance, and that isn’t going to fit.
It’s not going well for the Cadillac, so I suppose at this point I should mention its good points.
Er . . . I liked the enormous sunroof. And I suppose the V8 Northstar engine is pretty potent when you bury your foot in the nylon, and I’ll admit that for an off-roader the ride is pretty smooth as well. So smooth in fact that it made all three of my children feel sick.
So if you want an unnecessarily big antisocial 4x4, you can do better than this. The Volvo XC90 remains my favourite. I like its sensible layout, its reasonable price tag and its nonthreatening exterior. It’s better looking, too.
That one is pretty funny.
Senior Moderator
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 34,937
Likes: 638
From: Chicago Burbs
Burning Brakes
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Senior Moderator
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 20,067
Likes: 4,698
From: Cleveland area, OH
and double 
, AND his vision. What's happened this decade is a lot like what I imagine would happen to Apple if Steve Jobs died.
Already happened, while he was away from the company, they almost collapsed. Acura already had this problem once before when they switched from using names to alphanumeric nameplates, that first gen was very LAME IMO. When I think about it, it's almost as though Acura has a rule that every other Generation has to suck.
Senior Moderator
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 17,085
Likes: 740
From: Brooklyn, NY USA
I think he's the only one that still likes Jaguar as an overall brand...The only two that I like, and only a little, is the XK and XF. He can bash Ford all he wants, but I doubt those two would have ever seen the light of day if it wasn't for Ford...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
