# Top Gear US Season 3 Premiere 8/14/2012 (possible season thread discussion)



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Overall, I thought the Season 3 premiere episode was rather lackluster, and reminded me much of Season 1.

However, I naturally wanted to see them do the cop car comparison.



Spoiler



I was surprised that the Ford actually beat the Dodge and Aussie-Chevy, given that it is a FWD car adapted to AWD and has a turbo. I especially thought that turbo lag would hamper the Ford, but it hit 100 MPH faster than the others did. I would have liked to see them do some sort of real slalom course to test out the handling, and not that crummy "test" involving eating donuts and Rockford u-turns.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

Meh, had it on in the background. Good filler material.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Didn't realize this show was back on. Not a show I love, but I like it enough to watch. Pretty much always fast forward through the celebrity interview and drive around the track. Just not as good as the UK version.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

No celebrity interview or any of that in the premiere. All one big challenge, though there is a bit at the end that is a somewhat different but related challenge.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

For the love of all that's holy, put this [email protected] to rest!

I HAVE to watch because it's _called _Top Gear, but it really is nothing close. Third season and it still looks so fake - right down to the cut shots of traffic in among the off-road reality. There is absolutely no chemistry between the presenters and even the open door gag was forced.

BTW, the Taurus IS designed as an AWD car. It's available as an option and, I think the SHO is AWD as standard.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

As the old adage goes, these guys could screw up a wet dream. 

This is really a perfect subject for this show. A legit 3 cars competing in the same market, which one is better. First test actually had some validity to the question. But the rest were crap. 

The donut thing was stupid and insulting. And overall, is a dirt road really a major concern for most departments? And the tear gas. I understand the symbolism, but again, is that really a concern?

I think overall comfort and how it manifests itself in fatigue is a genuine, and testable concern. As mention above, a real handling test would have been valid. And finally, it would have been interesting, if not really relevant, to test their winner against the old Crown Vic.


----------



## billboard_NE (May 18, 2005)

I laughed a few times, better than most shows on now (reality shows). 
Its season three, if you don't like it stop watching. I am going to scream if I read another comparison to the UK version.

UK Top Gear not coming back until 2013....


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

I still say I'd love to see a Top Gear US with Tim Allen, Jay Leno, and Chris Titus. That'd be an entertaining version.

This version? Watchable, but not all that great.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

TonyTheTiger said:


> BTW, the Taurus IS designed as an AWD car. It's available as an option and, I think the SHO is AWD as standard.


For that reason alone, many departments are hesitant to buy it, just like many departments (including mine) refused to buy the Impala for patrol work. In addition to the perception that FWD/AWD is not as robust as RWD, there's the real added complexity of AWD and the increased servicing as well.



midas said:


> The donut thing was stupid and insulting. And overall, is a dirt road really a major concern for most departments? And the tear gas. I understand the symbolism, but again, is that really a concern?
> 
> I think overall comfort and how it manifests itself in fatigue is a genuine, and testable concern. As mention above, a real handling test would have been valid. And finally, it would have been interesting, if not really relevant, to test their winner against the old Crown Vic.


The donut thing was stupid, but some perceptions refuse to die. You're far more likely to find a cop at a convenience store than donut shop, and far more likely to find a cop holding a Big Gulp than a donut, but somehow that meme never caught on.

Dirt road performance is a concern for rural departments, but that test was absolutely meaningless, and really wasn't even that entertaining. And while there could be a reason for a sharpshooter to be shooting out of a moving car (our SWAT guys practice it from a helicopter), that's not car-dependent. That's dependent on the ability of the driver to drive smoothly so the sharpshooter can take and maintain a good sight picture.

I hope they plan on replacing the entire interiors of those cars, or those cars were going to be sent to the crusher anyway, because there is no way you'll fully get that tear gas out of the fabrics, foam, etc.


----------



## NetJunkie (Feb 19, 2003)

midas said:


> As the old adage goes, these guys could screw up a wet dream.
> 
> This is really a perfect subject for this show. A legit 3 cars competing in the same market, which one is better. First test actually had some validity to the question. But the rest were crap.
> 
> ...


Uh..have you ever actually watched the original Top Gear? It's not a real car review show..well, it was the first and maybe second season but it hasn't been in over 10 years. It's pure entertainment.

I think you guys are being too hard here. I commented that I thought it was the best episode yet and the end race was very much Top Gear-like and more interesting than any other challenge they've done. Last year they played it too safe..hopefully they open it up a bit more this year.

The big problem with the US version is US television. We get 40 mins of actual content. They get a real hour in the UK so you can fit more things like the "Big star, small car" stuff in where I think in the US it won't be in every episode.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

I thought this episode was pretty bad. I keep watching because there were a couple segments didn't suck last season, but no evidence of that so far this year. It's amazing how these 3 guys can have so little chemistry going into their 3rd year.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

NetJunkie said:


> Uh..have you ever actually watched the original Top Gear? It's not a real car review show..well, it was the first and maybe second season but it hasn't been in over 10 years. It's pure entertainment.
> 
> I think you guys are being too hard here. I commented that I thought it was the best episode yet and the end race was very much Top Gear-like and more interesting than any other challenge they've done. Last year they played it too safe..hopefully they open it up a bit more this year.


This. I don't get BBCA and I've only seen one episode of the UK Top Gear. I'm sure it's a great show. But I don't think everyone should judge the US version in comparison to the UK version. Just view it as a reality/entertainment show about cars and you'll be much happier.

I really wish the original NBC pilot with Adam Carolla rather than Adam Ferrara had been picked up, but other than that, I have no problem with the hosts. I like the playful banter back and forth among them and the way they tease Adam about being a crappy driver and loving American land yachts, and the way they make fun of Rutledge's huge head and always wearing plaid, and the way they crack on Tanner about being preppy and always preferring Japanese cars, etc.

And the challenges rarely have anything to do with the real capabilities of the cars. They're just designed to be entertaining. If you want to complain about a show that should be measuring the real capabilities of the cars but isn't, complain about Tanner Faust's other show, "Battle of the Supercars," with Paul Tracy. That show should be a lot more informative/entertaining than it is.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

I get what you are saying, but it is hard not to compare it to the UK version when entire episodes/challenges are lifted directly from the UK episodes. You just have to be able to let it go.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> This. I don't get BBCA and I've only seen one episode of the UK Top Gear. I'm sure it's a great show. But I don't think everyone should judge the US version in comparison to the UK version. Just view it as a reality/entertainment show about cars and you'll be much happier.
> 
> I really wish the original NBC pilot with Adam Carolla rather than Adam Ferrara had been picked up, but other than that, I have no problem with the hosts. I like the playful banter back and forth among them and the way they tease Adam about being a crappy driver and loving American land yachts, and the way they make fun of Rutledge's huge head and always wearing plaid, and the way they crack on Tanner about being preppy and always preferring Japanese cars, etc.
> 
> And the challenges rarely have anything to do with the real capabilities of the cars. They're just designed to be entertaining. If you want to complain about a show that should be measuring the real capabilities of the cars but isn't, complain about Tanner Faust's other show, "Battle of the Supercars," with Paul Tracy. That show should be a lot more informative/entertaining than it is.





ClutchBrake said:


> I get what you are saying, but it is hard not to compare it to the UK version when entire episodes/challenges are lifted directly from the UK episodes. You just have to be able to let it go.


If it looks like a duck...

My argument is precisely this...it's CALLED Top Gear! For it to be a different show, it should be named something else. Otherwise, comparisons are not only inevitable, they are expected!

I could suggest other titles like "Three Completely Unfunny Guys Doing Stupid Things With Cars." or "How To Copy A Successful British Show With Something That Doesn't Even Come Close." and a few others!


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

TonyTheTiger said:


> "How To Copy A Successful British Show With Something That Doesn't Even Come Close."


That one's already been used a couple times...


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

More than a couple!!!


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

I was entertained for forty-two minutes, or whatever it is these days. I thought it was kind of weird they went to the Ford proving ground and all they apparently decided to do there was go 0-100-0. Didn't this place have anything else interesting to do? Certainly there must've been something better than the teargas idea.

The dirt challenge was lame given one of the cars was AWD, but I still found it amusing enough to watch. 

In the last segment with the Z06, I enjoyed watching Tanner drive the crap out of that car. These sort of nonsensical "races" are as lame on the UK show as they are here, but I still enjoy watching the driving talent. I thought some of the editing oddly emphasized that there were multiple different "takes" being used.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Speaking of the dirt challenge, did Adam actually win on time? Adam skipped eating about 3/4 of a donut, and then finished in 2:12, and they gave him a one-minute penalty, to put him at 3:12. Tanner threw about half a donut out the window, sped through the shooting section, and then when he finished, they told him he also got a one-minute penalty, putting him at 3:33. Does that mean his actual time was 2:33, and that Adam beat him by over 20 seconds? I find that hard to believe.

And I totally agree on the Ford Proving Ground footage. I guess they showed some footage of the three cars cruising around on the high-speed test track, but you would think they would have made better use of that facility. A 0-100-0 challenge can be performed on any old abandoned runway. By the way, the 0-100-0 challenge is a staple on Tanner's "Battle of the Supercars" show.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Speaking of the dirt challenge, did Adam actually win on time? Adam skipped eating about 3/4 of a donut, and then finished in 2:12, and they gave him a one-minute penalty, to put him at 3:12. Tanner threw about half a donut out the window, sped through the shooting section, and then when he finished, they told him he also got a one-minute penalty, putting him at 3:33. Does that mean his actual time was 2:33, and that Adam beat him by over 20 seconds? I find that hard to believe.


Like so many of their challenges, there is so much cheating and/or sabotaging going on to really determine a winner.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

RonDawg said:


> Like so many of their challenges, there is so much cheating and/or sabotaging going on to really determine a winner.


I'm not worried so much about the "winner" or whether there was cheater. I'm just surprised Adam's time appeared to be faster than Tanner's, but over 20 seconds. Tanner is never slower in challenges where driving skill is the primary factor.


----------



## billboard_NE (May 18, 2005)

DevdogAZ said:


> I'm not worried so much about the "winner" or whether there was cheater. I'm just surprised Adam's time appeared to be faster than Tanner's, but over 20 seconds. Tanner is never slower in challenges where driving skill is the primary factor.


There was no way they would have let Adam or Rutledge drive that Z06! The outcome of the challenge was already set in stone before it began. I still enjoyed it anyway.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

billboard_NE said:


> There was no way they would have let Adam or Rutledge drive that Z06! The outcome of the challenge was already set in stone before it began. I still enjoyed it anyway.


Again, I don't think the driving of the Vette had anything to do with who won the cop car challenges. I don't care at all who won the cop car challenges. I'm simply commenting on the fact that it appears Adam drove the course faster than Tanner, and I find that surprising.


----------



## NetJunkie (Feb 19, 2003)

They cut a lot out..Tanner probably took longer on the donut or something.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

I don't see any reason to expect the times they announced had anything to do with reality, or that they even drove the course in an uninterrupted lap as depicted.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

NetJunkie said:


> They cut a lot out..Tanner probably took longer on the donut or something.


Tanner spent a very long time doing donuts. Way longer than Adam.


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

Just got around to watching the first episode of the season. I understand they have 3 hosts and there's the Big Three, but I really would have liked for the car from Carbon Motors to be part of the test. While the other cars are police versions of civilian cars they are still versions of familiar cars, unlike the Carbon Motors vehicle.

I got a little excited when they went to the Ford facility in Romeo, MI. I went there for work in the 90s and got to ride around on the high speed oval, straightaway, rough roads, steep hills and over curbs at speed. I spent 3 days there and got to ride around a bunch, but unfortunately some union rules prevented me from driving anything there. ( probably something about insurance too ) Too bad they only did the oval, especially when they mentioned one of the cars being designed to handle hitting curbs at speed.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Is the Carbon Motors concept even still in the pipeline? I thought I read awhile back that it had hit some snags and was unlikely to ever be produced.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Is the Carbon Motors concept even still in the pipeline? I thought I read awhile back that it had hit some snags and was unlikely to ever be produced.


Yeah, pretty much what I heard. The DoE loan that they were depending on was unceremoniously yanked; they were going through some motions to try and get it reinstated, but last I heard the chances of that is laughable.


----------



## SteveInNC (Jun 23, 2005)

re: the Corvette

I live in Wake County where that car is. I suspect that the one on the show was a replica, A) because I don't think the Wake County sheriff would let them borrow it for this purpose, particularly completely across the country, and B) it is or was an unmarked car here, whereas the show version had all kinds of markings. Local article from 2009:

WRAL

and confirmed, that is not Wake County's car:

News and Observer


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Is the Carbon Motors concept even still in the pipeline? I thought I read awhile back that it had hit some snags and was unlikely to ever be produced.





LoadStar said:


> Yeah, pretty much what I heard. The DoE loan that they were depending on was unceremoniously yanked; they were going through some motions to try and get it reinstated, but last I heard the chances of that is laughable.


The Carbon Motors car is more than just "dead to me." As far as I was concerned, it was vaporware, with lots of pie-in-the-sky promises.

I think even Preston Tucker had more working prototypes than CM did.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

BTW here's a couple of pics of the first police-spec Aussie-Caprice I've seen "in the wild", specifically at a training conference in San Diego:



















This El Cajon PD unit is the first one I've seen personally, though I had seen a news clip a while back featuring a small school district police department that had one. Unfortunately between the other things I wanted to see on demo day, and my need to get back to class on time, I didn't have time to ask the ECPD officer how he liked the car nor get a chance to sit inside it.

One of the LAPD officers I was in that class with told me that his agency had ordered a bunch of these. CHP though is going with the Explorer-based Police Interceptor, although they have many of the previous generation Charger.

My department was one of many that stockpiled the last production year of the CVPI, so we will be issuing "brand new" 2011 CVPI's until probably 2014 or 2015.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Discussion about "Small Cars" episode

I've liked some of the "fish car out of water" episodes they've done in the past, like hauling manure in Texas with small $2,000 2-door cars, or trying to drive across the Continental Divide in minivans. But this one with small cars in the Louisiana swamp was pretty silly. The "race" around New Orleans was clearly staged. The stuff with the hunters in the swamp was lame. The tug-of-war with an airboat was pointless. The only parts of the episode that were enterning were Rutledge driving with crawdads crawling around in his car, and then Rutledge driving that tiny car around his town, including inside the supermarket.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

That whole sequence was a direct rip of Clarkson's drive of the Peel P50 around BBC Television Center.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJfSS0ZXYdo[/media]


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Watching the beginning of that video reminds me that in the first two episodes this season, we haven't seen them doing any segments in the airplane hanger, nor have we had the "Big Star in a Small Car" race segment. Are they getting rid of both of those aspects of the show?


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

TonyTheTiger said:


> That whole sequence was a direct rip of Clarkson's drive of the Peel P50 around BBC Television Center.
> 
> [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJfSS0ZXYdo[/media]


The Clarkson/P50 version is far funnier.

Rutledge's skit was just a mere giggle.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Watching the beginning of that video reminds me that in the first two episodes this season, we haven't seen them doing any segments in the airplane hanger, nor have we had the "Big Star in a Small Car" race segment. Are they getting rid of both of those aspects of the show?


Likely, especially with Big Star/Small Car. These aspects of the UK version just didn't click when translated into "American."


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

RonDawg said:


> The Clarkson/P50 version is far funnier.
> 
> Rutledge's skit was just a mere giggle.


Of course it was - it was Clarkson!

I didn't think Rut was even remotely funny. Sorry.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

I just watched the episode about "misunderstood" cars. It was pretty lame. 

Tanner's Merkur XR4Ti did look really good on the outside, but the interior definitely showed its age. That repaint looked like it cost more than the car was worth. The Subaru SVX and the Cadillac Allante looked every bit their age though, inside and out.

And considering how their car sales episode in Season 1 was easily the most boring episode in the series, why oh why did they think being car salesmen was going to work this time?

The BMW "10" series double-decker race was copied exactly from the UK version, which has been done twice before: once against the German equivalent of Top Gear including Sabina "Queen of the Nurburging" Schmidt, and once against Top Gear's Australian version in which the steering cars were mounted upside down.


----------



## MarkofT (Jul 27, 2001)

You say that like it's a bad thing. It's a great concept for a race. I just wish they would have shown it in proper order. One of the 7s had a crumpled hood, then a straight hood, then a crumpled hood, but they never shows what happened to cause the crumpling.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Yeah the frames are definitely out of order. The one with the crumpled hood rear-ended the other, that's how it got the crumpled hood. But in some frames afterward, the hood has mysteriously fixed itself.

The race itself is a great concept...the UK guys did a great job of it twice. But the US version made it lame.


----------



## billboard_NE (May 18, 2005)

RonDawg, why do you watch US Top Gear, just wait for the UK version in 2013. It seems like watching just bothers you, even scenes that are copied from UK bother you. I say enjoy the show on its on merits or don't watch. I would much rather watch TG US than IRT of Gold rush something or other. How many shows are based on cars? I will agree that TG US is not great or world class, at least it is not about cup cakes or wedding dresses.

As I have also said before, go back and watch UK TG season 1 and you will see how bad that was. Of course the UK guys have some chemistry they will be on Season 18 in 2013!


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

I watch it because:


I was bored

Occasionally it can be entertaining, as last season showed. Unfortunately this season is so far looking much like Season 1.

I can still comment on how lame it is most of the time. It bothers me that History Channel can take an awesome show and just ruin it.


----------



## billboard_NE (May 18, 2005)

Fair enough, out of 42 posts 1/4 of them are yours, not all but most are stating how lame the show is....tell us how you really feel


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

Another 1/4 of them are probably mine stating how lame the show is.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

...and the other half are mine!

There's a FB poll called Top Gear UK vs. Top Gear USA - and there's not one single positive comment that I can see, both from UK and American fans.

Like I keep saying, change the name and carry on producing a lame show. Just don't associate it with the awesomeness that is Top Gear (UK)!


----------



## billboard_NE (May 18, 2005)

Not a TG USA lover, but did the pole compare season one USA to Season 17 TG UK? Not a fair fight in my book. Go get UK season 1 and see how bad that was, and see how far TG UK has come.

TG UK is one of my top 5 TV shows of all time, that does not mean I have to find everything else on TV lame. I will admit having the same name does beg for comparison, but compare season one to season one etc..


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

I can see the first season being rough. If you look at the previous season threads, you'll see I was a lot more forgiving. But they're up to Season 4 now, and I'm starting to lose hope that they'll ever come remotely close to Clarkson/May/Hammond.

Also, it's not like they are doing something totally different. They are taking an existing hit show and copying it, and yet they still manage to make it largely uninteresting.

The chemistry, or lack thereof, is a big reason why it comes out so lame. They should have replaced the hosts a long time ago.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Did anyone watch the "One Tank" episode where they had to drive 700 miles from Portland to San Francisco without filling up with gas? As one who has never watched the UK version of the show, I generally enjoy the US version (nothing to compare it to) and I think the chemistry between the hosts is pretty good, for the most part. But this episode was brutal. It was basically just the three of them driving the whole episode, talking to each other on walkie-talkies. Even the attempts at humor/ribbing seemed contrived, as Tanner/Adam suddenly had a shopping cart full of 400 lbs of kitty litter while at a gas pump, and Rutledge just conveniently stayed in the c-store long enough for them to procure the kitty litter and load it into Rut's trunk without him knowing.

It definitely seems that they've dropped the hangar/studio bits, as well as the Big Star in a Small Car segment.

The only good part was the truck racing the kayak at the end, which was pretty cool.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Did anyone watch the "One Tank" episode where they had to drive 700 miles from Portland to San Francisco without filling up with gas?


About 5 minutes, then I deleted it. Yet again no exotic cars, no track time. This season is pathetic.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Did anyone watch the "One Tank" episode where they had to drive 700 miles from Portland to San Francisco without filling up with gas? As one who has never watched the UK version of the show, I generally enjoy the US version (nothing to compare it to) and I think the chemistry between the hosts is pretty good, for the most part. But this episode was brutal. It was basically just the three of them driving the whole episode, talking to each other on walkie-talkies. Even the attempts at humor/ribbing seemed contrived, as Tanner/Adam suddenly had a shopping cart full of 400 lbs of kitty litter while at a gas pump, and Rutledge just conveniently stayed in the c-store long enough for them to procure the kitty litter and load it into Rut's trunk without him knowing.


At the risk of being asked "why do you even bother watching?"  I will say this:

1. Yes it is an exact copy of something the UK version did. Specifically, they drove 700 miles from Basel, Switzerland to Blackpool, UK. All 3 of them had diesels though: Jeremy in a Jaguar XJ, Richard in a VW Polo, James in a Subaru Legacy wagon. The only difference is that all of the UK cars were new; I don't know why Rutledge chose a 15 y/o Passat for this challenge, as you can get a 2012 model with a TDi engine.

2. Yes the "gag" of putting excess weight in one of the cars is a copy. Jeremy and Richard put a heavy-duty truck transmission in the back of James' Subaru. James figured it out right away; I find it hard to believe that Rutledge didn't notice his car was suddenly a lot more sluggish, and handled as if there was a lot of weight in the trunk.

3. I do believe both versions were rigged. There was no way Jeremy could have made it in one tank, and I don't believe Adam in his rolling-battering-ram-of-death could have either even with his two-tank bifuel system.

4. The reason I wasn't critical of this episode isn't because it was great (it was not) but the UK version was almost as lame.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Of course Rutledge "didn't notice" the extra weight in his trunk, because that's what the script told him to do. There's no way he stays in the c-store long enough for them to get the kitty litter and load his trunk otherwise. Similarly, Tanner and Adam were conveniently peeing for a very long time when Rut "discovered" the kitty litter and transferred it all into Adam's truck.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

I actually liked most of this week's episode with them going "off-roading" in their "rental cars". 

Sure the hang glider Mustang at the end was stupid, but overall a much better episode.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Yeah, I think they're doing too many of the scripted goofs. At least in earlier episodes, it seemed like some of them were for real.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

mattack said:


> Yeah, I think they're doing too many of the scripted goofs. At least in earlier episodes, it seemed like some of them were for real.


Yeah, that's the problem I had with it too. Either I'm more easily able to suspend disbelief with the UK version, or the US version comes across WAY more scripted.... or maybe some combination of the two.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Jonathan_S said:


> I actually liked most of this week's episode with them going "off-roading" in their "rental cars".
> 
> Sure the hang glider Mustang at the end was stupid, but overall a much better episode.


I actually thought flying (non-P51) Mustang was funny. It was a shame to destroy it as it looked like a fairly nice model, but I'm sure the Town Car and especially the Yaris (with its severely bashed in rocker panels) are also fit for the scrap heap after that challenge.


----------



## Big Deficit (Jul 8, 2003)

Gleaned from this thread, since I don't watch the US version anymore. I bailed after season 2 showed no improvement from the initial lousy product. Instead of destroying perfectly good cars, why not use that money to invest in better hosts?

I have watched every episode of the UK version and consider it one of my all time favorite series.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Just watched "Monument to Moab" last night. Sure, much of it was scripted, but it was still pretty entertaining to see those cars bounding over big boulders, etc. And I couldn't believe the Mustang bit at the end. The fact that they got it to land wheels up on top of the bouncy castle was freakin' amazing.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Big Deficit said:


> Gleaned from this thread, since I don't watch the US version anymore. I bailed after season 2 showed no improvement from the initial lousy product. Instead of destroying perfectly good cars, why not use that money to invest in better hosts?
> 
> I have watched every episode of the UK version and consider it one of my all time favorite series.


That was probably the most they have ever spent on vehicles since all the cars were around 5 or so years old. Even then they probably spent $50k max on vehicles, with the Town Car being the biggest expense. I'm sure the hosts are paid far more money than that.

In some ways I prefer this episode to the one in the UK version where they pretend to help with the filming of a movie, and gratuitously destroy two Ford Focus ST's and a new Jag.


----------



## jeff92k7 (Jan 18, 2006)

I realize this show is heavily scripted, but I enjoyed the Monument to Moab episode. I liked the hang gliding mustang at the end. Just the stupidity of it was what made it funny....These guys have travelled a log distance with almost nothing but what was in their cars, and suddenly, he has a whole hang glider assembly on the car!?!? It was pretty amusing.

I also enjoyed the shot at the end of them washing their rental cars before they "returned" them.... The yaris, then the town car, then the bumper...that was a good shot.

As has been mentioned, sharing the name "Top Gear" oversells this show. If they called it "two idiots and a race car driver destroying cars", then it would be a decent show on it's own. I still enjoy it though. It gives me one more show to offset the multiple cooking shows that my wife watches.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

LoadStar said:


> Yeah, that's the problem I had with it too. Either I'm more easily able to suspend disbelief with the UK version, or the US version comes across WAY more scripted.... or maybe some combination of the two.


I meant that I was being successfully fooled/it at least SEEMED that on the U.S. version, the various goofs/races were somewhat more realistic.. yes, I say somewhat.. it sure is "coincidental" that there's always a photo finish and they always get a great shot of one of the vehicles crossing the path of the other vehicle

Not U.S. vs British version. Heck, it's good that the U.S. version got rid of the celeb segment or at least made it much rarer.


----------

