Fifth Gear new series
Discussion
loveice said:
Tiff didn't like the original Gallardo (2003-2004 model). I'm pretty sure he still doesn't like that model.
I am refering to the same car in the same two day test. He drove it one day and said it was uninvolving and had no character.he then drove it the next day. I remember his words exactly
"what a difference a day makes" he then raved about it.
Been reading this months evo and they all agree the fezza is a more fun car to drive.
Odd thing is they all praise the macca for its composure on road saying it goes over bumps without even noticing them that would cause problems for the Ferrari.
perhaps the Mclaren susspension set up has been done for our pot holed roads and the suspension in coping with it removes some feeling.
Bedazzled said:
All it seemed to prove though, was the Fezza is better if you're driving like a cock.
As we've said. Drifting shows a good balance on a chassis. It shows driveability. The MOST important thing in a supercar is how it drives. Not it's class leading emmissions!Bedazzled said:
Shame to see a British car programme knocking the best of British engineering,
So they should say it's the best as it's put together in Surrey from Austrian manufacturered CF parts? Or should they be objective and accurate?Bedazzled said:
and I wouldn't trust Plato's opinion anyhow,
Do tell? Would you have trusted it 100% if he'd said it was the best car ever?Edited by Rich_W on Sunday 26th June 16:20
Bedazzled said:
VShame to see a British car programme knocking the best of British engineering, and I wouldn't trust Plato's opinion anyhow, but I do respect Tiff's views and he seemed genuinely disappointed. Mind you, he criticised the F1 for being twitchy and yet it's probably the best supercar of all time.
Would you respect them more if they said the McLaren was great (as it is British) even though it appeared to be a complete handful?Bedazzled said:
No it doesn't, it just shows you're driving like a cock, and they think it makes good telly. If your idea of fun is sliding about go and buy a Caterham, it's not what supercars are for, or how they should be driven. If you tried drift angles like that on a track-day you'd be sent home, so what relevance does it have? We're none the wiser how they compare on the road.
Exactly how different do you think they will be on the road at road speeds? How would you like them to drive supercars to test them then? Round a track? They did that. McLaren lost.Bedazzled said:
They should be celebrating a great piece of British engineering, can you imagine Italian TV criticising a Ferrari?
So you DO want biased journalism. As for Italians criticising Ferrari's products. Maybe they do, maybe they don't. I take freedom of the press first though.As mentioned by Chris Harris, Ferrari have a habit of asking TV companies where they are going to be testing their cars and setting them up for that track. They then turn up and hand over a setup car that it's been tuned for track use.
http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins
http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins
FourWheelDrift said:
As mentioned by Chris Harris, Ferrari have a habit of asking TV companies where they are going to be testing their cars and setting them up for that track. They then turn up and hand over a setup car that it's been tuned for track use.
http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins
Yet the hypocrite Harris doesn't care when McLaren turn up with a LARGER team of people for the Evo tests (Brunters and Bedford) than Ferrari did! http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins
And that's before we mention that 5th Gear test was at Dunsfold where McLaren have industrial property to work on the car! You think the car wasn't optimised for that place??
Bedazzled said:
[
The requirements for track and road driving are completely different, it's pointless assessing any road car, even a supercar, on a race track. How much time will owners spend hooning around race tracks with the tail out? Did the Bugatti Veyron sell on its drifting ability? It's completely missing the point of supercars.
Answer the question! How would YOU have them tested???????The requirements for track and road driving are completely different, it's pointless assessing any road car, even a supercar, on a race track. How much time will owners spend hooning around race tracks with the tail out? Did the Bugatti Veyron sell on its drifting ability? It's completely missing the point of supercars.
Rich_W said:
FourWheelDrift said:
As mentioned by Chris Harris, Ferrari have a habit of asking TV companies where they are going to be testing their cars and setting them up for that track. They then turn up and hand over a setup car that it's been tuned for track use.
http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins
Yet the hypocrite Harris doesn't care when McLaren turn up with a LARGER team of people for the Evo tests (Brunters and Bedford) than Ferrari did! http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins
Ferrari didn't need to, they could play it cool no doubt because they were there a few weeks before pounding round all day
FourWheelDrift said:
As mentioned by Chris Harris, Ferrari have a habit of asking TV companies where they are going to be testing their cars and setting them up for that track. They then turn up and hand over a setup car that it's been tuned for track use.
http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins
He is just on a little ego trip there, you would think he didn't know every manufacturer did this.. perhaps he got a spit latte.http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins
Bedazzled said:
Firstly I'd have dedicated 15-20 mins to it, not 5. The rest of the programme was garbage anyhow.
I'd have tested the McLaren against criteria more relevant to a supercar, performance yes, but also subjective factors such as heritage, desirability, and the experience of buying and owning one, for the lucky few. That way the viewer could get a sense of what it would be like to own a supercar like the McLaren. They could have taken it to London, a tour of the best roads in Europe, the paddock at a race meeting, maybe even Ferrari's own turf Italy(!), and gauged the experience of driving it in the real world and people's reactions to it. They could have visited the McLaren factory too, as it's pretty unique.
Comparing it with a Ferrari on track is only useful to describe subtle differences in the driving experience, not to pick which is 'better'. Most owners will never take them to the limit, and drifting these cars is just stupid.
I can understand the argument that says you have to drive it the way the designers intended to get the best out of it, but surely the car should be adaptable to your style rather than the other way round? If I was paying that much money for a car I would at least want to enjoy the driving experience, it didn't look like TN or JP really enjoyed driving the McLaren.I'd have tested the McLaren against criteria more relevant to a supercar, performance yes, but also subjective factors such as heritage, desirability, and the experience of buying and owning one, for the lucky few. That way the viewer could get a sense of what it would be like to own a supercar like the McLaren. They could have taken it to London, a tour of the best roads in Europe, the paddock at a race meeting, maybe even Ferrari's own turf Italy(!), and gauged the experience of driving it in the real world and people's reactions to it. They could have visited the McLaren factory too, as it's pretty unique.
Comparing it with a Ferrari on track is only useful to describe subtle differences in the driving experience, not to pick which is 'better'. Most owners will never take them to the limit, and drifting these cars is just stupid.
The idea of putting the cars to the limit was to see which car could handle the limit. Supercars are supposed to be the pinnacle of road cars. The Ferrari proved to be more nimble, agile and easier to drive than the Mc. Face it more people who have driven them both prefer the Ferrari.
k to have dropped 
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff