Top Gear Australia responds to damage criticism
BBC's Top Gear is the undisputed leader when it comes to producing entertaining automotive-related content on television. So popular are the show's antics that the franchise has branched out into the Australian market and should be airing Top Gear America here in the States soon. Recently, though, the Oz-branch has ran into some serious questions regarding its treatment of automaker's products. Is it possible for a television show such as Top Gear to go about its business – that of putting the coolest cars through their paces under sometimes ridiculous circumstances – without sending the automakers back a hunk of broken machinery? Is the show good enough that it doesn't matter? That seems to be the $200,000 question, which is the total estimated amount of damage (in Aussie funds) that Top Gear Australia is suspected of having inflicted on its assortment of test vehicles. TGA co-host Warren Brown has come to the show's defense, and we've pasted his complete response after the break.
[Source: Carsguide]
Newspaper reports have this week suggested that Top Gear Australia has racked up a significant figure in car repair bills as a result of "eager driving" and "wild and silly stunts".
Anyone who knows anything about either the UK or Australian versions of Top Gear knows the basic premise of these programs is pretty much about "eager driving and wild and silly stunts". Then again, anyone who knows anything about Top Gear will recognise that this is actually a program about a passion for motoring - and not about a suggested disregard, disrespect nor wilful destruction of motor vehicles.
But let's get this straight. I'm a host on Top Gear Australia and can tell you that like its UK sibling, it is not the kind of cardigan-wearing motoring program that will simply embrace a car and go on to say what a lovely radio it has and what scrumptious colours it comes in and how it will reduce whatever hole in the ozone layer that happens to hover above it.
If Top Gear Australia loves a car, then the presenters will say so. But if they don't - well that's how it goes.
And, one of the reasons the UK version has climbed toward the 500 million (yes, half a billion viewer mark) is because they pull no punches. The same for Top Gear Australia.
What other motoring program in the world would put astonishing motor cars like the Holden W427 or Falcon F6 Turbo in their correct positions as world-beating cars in a world of BMW M5s and Mercedes Benz AMG Blacks.
Forget the cultural cringe - Australia produces some of the world's most crackerjack cars and TGA puts those facts right in front of the motoring world.
The report says a spokesman for one of "the damaged brands" suggested "we have no appetite for automotive jackass" - which is fair enough.
However, in the course of pushing different vehicles to demonstrate to viewers - and potential buyers - what various machines are capable of, there is always a risk of some form of damage. Ask any motoring journalist.
Top Gear's production company Freehand works closely with car manufacturers to ensure they are comfortable with the stunts or conditions in which we would be filming.
But the fact is, we push cars to their limits in order to deliver a verdict on their performance. Anyone familiar with the UK series knows that and the kind of out-there stunts we might undertake.
Certainly, car manufacturers and dealers in Australia might not have seen their products displayed on local television in such a manner before - like the example of using six Holden Astras in a lawn bowls segment.
Watching the stunt on video screens during a studio filming, an astonished audience of 800 cheered the Astras, which meandered their way to an inflatable jack, ultimately receiving damage to their chin-spoilers, but accruing far less damage as compared to the UK version's soccer challenge where two teams of cars belted a gigantic soccer ball around a paddock.
The Astras came out as terrific little cars, as Youtube favourites (see vidoe below)and as a great story for Top Gear fans.
What more could a manufacturer want as an advertisement?
Video:
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
aaron 5:04PM (12/10/2008)
Running over roos is an expensive business me thinks.
Reply
geo.stewart 5:52PM (12/10/2008)
testing a car's limits- priceless
testing the driver's limits- $200K
I'm sorry. if you dont have the experience to know what a car feels like when you are losing it, and rein it back in, you shouldnt be a 'test driver'. if you dont have a feel for where the car sits what kind of space it takes, you shouldnt be pushing it.
idk, maybe TGA needs to buy them, then they can break em with impunity
ckm 9:23PM (12/10/2008)
@geo
I think that TGUK did more damage to one car in one episode than all of TGAU combined. And that manufacturer was GRATEFUL.
It resulted in a feature on the car being named after the show.
blackadvent 5:18PM (12/10/2008)
Damage during normal testing is one thing. Damage during stunts that can prove a car's abilities is one thing. Damage for the heck of it is a different animal of it's own.
The Holden Astra bocce ball tournament was simply an unnecessary stunt that, if I were a Holden executive, would rightly decide as reckless as discovering the limits of a rental insurance agreement. Jumping a Toyota Rav4 over a sand dune like a MotoX bike, while it does show the capabilities of it, is not how Toyota intended for the Rav4 to function. Toyota didn't design the Rav4 for flight, and most owners will not use this feature uncovered by the TGAus boys.
Get it together guys. Top Gear is about passionate driving and reviewing cars in a funny yet truthful manner. Top Gear Australia, as far as I've seen in the first run, is about doing donuts and reaching no conclusions about their test drives. Happy motoring.
Reply
Seminole 5:54PM (12/10/2008)
Really?
I guess you missed Top Gear UK driving a Fiesta and Corvette through a mall running into things this weekend. OR doing a beach assault with the same Fiesta. Lets not forget Toyota Aygo vs VW Fox soccer... the list goes on and on.
Aki 5:58PM (12/10/2008)
Well, Top Gear UK had some pretty outlandish stunt drives too. Remember their soccer game?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpCldAb2x6s
fastwgn286 10:26PM (1/29/2009)
It doesn't seem like any manufacturers are denying Clarkson cars to drive. Maybe BBC actually has comprehensive insurance, or they brought the cars outright, or something else. They didn't just return them and stick the manufacturers with the bill like these guys apparently did, or we wouldn't be here discussing this right now.
Granville4879 7:50PM (12/10/2008)
I support your view wholeheartedly!
I do really enjoy the Oz version, because it is more relevant to what I drive...or would like to drive! But it upsets me to see silly, pointless "tests" carried out on NEW cars.
May I suggest TGA sticks to $1000 bangers for the fun stuff and keep the new/good cars for serious tests?
FThorn 5:35PM (12/10/2008)
This never happens. But my jaw dropped open when I saw that photo.
Beautiful car.
Reply
rodan32 5:44PM (12/10/2008)
The Reliant Robin was never meant for space flight. . .
I know these are new cars we're talking about, but that's what Top Gear is for. I think the car companies would be a little silly to make enemies out of the Top Gear guys (well, only if the show has anything like the following the BBC version has).
Reply
subaru guru 286 6:31PM (12/10/2008)
TGUK didn't stick Reliant with a bill for a new Robin, either. That's kind of the big argument here.
moyoi 5:51PM (12/10/2008)
wow, destruction
Reply
Mobius_1 5:54PM (12/10/2008)
Can they explain their attempts at being entertaining though?
Reply
Andre Neves 5:57PM (12/10/2008)
See, Top Gear in the UK does damage cars every now and then. But most of the time, they aren't new. AND most importantly they are actually entertaining to watch.
I wouldn't let these bunch of retards test any of my cars if I were a manufacturer.
Reply
Jef 6:37PM (12/10/2008)
I can tell you, that in the tradition of not being TopGear, they are overscripted, and underacted hosts, who seem to be in a rush to get their lines out with no proper training in delivery. Ive yet to see a real criticism of a car. Ive yet to laugh also.
The short guy seems to be standing with his legs apart all the time arms flailing around like he pregnant trying to deliver his well rehearsed one-liner.
Cox has no on-air personality, Id rather watch his trench coat dry from the rain on it. Warren seems to be the only one with a decent TV personality and voice. Tear the scripts up - and do it on air, then ad-lib the rest of the show.
It will take a few years and a few hosts before it finds its rythmn and all the host gel, even when they are in the cars with walkie talkies they are trying to think of something to say, something funny, but it never happens, they are trying too hard.
And if we have to hear for the 17th time in each episode the steve was a Porsche Factory driver - he wasnt - Im gonna go down there with an axe! Id be making fun of that on air rather than placate to it. He ay have been a intructor, but I dont think he did Bathurst, nor Sebring, nor the Nurburgring, so I can't say he's a factory Porsche driver. Guest once maybe, but that pushing it. Give it a few years, let it go through the hosts till it finds a good bunch, then it will be good.
Reply
jcar302 6:35PM (12/10/2008)
Me personally i could do without all the stunts.
I like to see onroad tests and impressions then the car pushed to the limit on the track. Which is where the only damage i would tolerate should happen.
Reply
Jack 7:10PM (12/10/2008)
I could be wrong, but I thought the main difference here was that the BBC paid for any damage caused by the UK team, but the AU show leave that to the manufacturers... Is that right?
Reply
Rob 6:21AM (12/11/2008)
While they buy the older cars for the stunts newer cars they do not pay the damage on. They borrowed a highly modified car for some testing and toasted the gearbox causing > £10,000 ~ $18,000 damage. What did they do - just hand back the car.
As a result you will not find many people who will loan cars other than the manufactureres that a) need the advertising b) can take the hit i.e. koenigsegg when they caused £1,000's of damage by putting the top end car into a tyre wall.
Dave 7:25PM (12/10/2008)
There are big differences between the stuff the Top Gear UK guys do and what the First Gear Aussie guys did.
Firstly, Top Gear UK is entertaining and loads of people watch it. In contrast, First Gear Australia is very boring and has a very small audience (most or who watch it just to yell at the TV how bad it is). Manufactures will pay just to have their products in front of a large audience.
Secondly, the stunts that they do enhance the cars’ image. The football/soccer/ice hockey stunts enhanced the image of the Toyota Aygo, which would otherwise be considered and unremarkable ‘town’ car. It can be now looked at as being a bit more exciting and capable. The same can be said about the new Fiesta test drive in the shopping centre. It’s not really about whether they get damaged or not, how much was the reputation of the Toyota Hilux enhanced by the attempts to destroy one (all be it an old 2nd hand one)?
The Astra stunt, tied the image of a boring hatchback to a boring sport for the over 80 crowd, and then smashed them in a very boring and stupid way.
Thirdly, the manufactures sell more cars by having them on Top Gear UK. It gives the cars credibility and cool. I’m willing to bet that having the Lambo on First Gear Australia did nothing to help them sell more cars, but rather the Lambo was about trying to give First Gear more credibility and cool. It didn’t really work and they caused $25,000 worth of damage to the car by carelessness, which the manufacture has to pick up the cost for.
If I was a manufacture I would I lend them any of my cars?
UK – Yes.
Australia – No.
What would I get out of it, other than a repair bill?
Reply
Smeagle 7:28PM (12/10/2008)
I hate Aussie Top Gear so much its hard to describe. I wanted to like it, I wanted to be proud of it... and failing that I just wanted to be mildly entertained. It failed dismally on all counts. I mean, I would gladly sit there and watch an Audi R8 being driven in anger down the runway on Lord Howe Island with nothing but the engine as a soundtrack. But add these pathetic presenters with nothing useful to say and have them try really, really, really hard to be just like the UK guys, and I flicked over to Australian Idol.
I think the manufacturers should be less worried about the damage and more worried about the complete waste of time having their cars on this show is.
Reply