Comments by "" (@appelpower1) on "Top Gear"
channel.
-
16000
-
3800
-
3500
-
3500
-
3400
-
3200
-
2600
-
1800
-
1700
-
1500
-
921
-
829
-
784
-
429
-
333
-
301
-
208
-
197
-
192
-
187
-
177
-
171
-
157
-
153
-
147
-
146
-
143
-
128
-
118
-
113
-
110
-
108
-
105
-
92
-
89
-
88
-
80
-
75
-
74
-
67
-
67
-
66
-
65
-
61
-
61
-
60
-
60
-
54
-
54
-
53
-
50
-
50
-
46
-
46
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
41
-
41
-
38
-
33
-
31
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
I normally hate it when people complain about the quality (360p at best) on these Youtube clips, but I agree here. A video as astonishingly, breathtakingly beautiful as this, deserves to be shown at the highest quality available, even if that goes against all the commercial interests of the BBC. This is why Top Gear can't work without Jezza, even if Chris Evans turns out to be a good presenter. The cinematography is beautiful, the background music provides an atmosphere that matches the gorgeous views, car and V12 soundtrack and Jeremy talks it all together with a short, but striking and touching commentary. To this day, this is one of my favourite Top Gear clips. It's completely different from the humorous 'ambitious but rubbish' films they normally do, but it pulls it off well. In that regard, only the Alfa 8C Disco Volante film (also presented by Clarkson) comes close. He is different from other motoring journalists in that he would never judge a car by its boot size, its fuel economy, or the build quality, ergonomical properties and soft materials of a dash. He judges a car by how it looks, and sounds, and makes you feel. In that, he and his co-presenters are unique, I genuinely, dearly hope they can continue that properly on their new show on Amazon Prime. Although I am confident they will.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Eight IV The Focus, Fiesta, Mondeo, S-Max, C-Max, B-Max, Ka, Tourneo and Transit are all European cars with an American name.
Oh, and besides, Fiats are decent. Alfas are rationally terrible, but they have soul (I know, a cliché, but it's true).
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
***** That flamewar, though. Anyway, crossovers are rubbish. Sure, they look nice, but do you really want to sacrifice handling, fuel economy, speed, running costs and even practicality (compared to an estate), yet pay much more, just because it looks slightly better?
The X1 and Q3 are just the worst examples, alongside the Renault Captur and Peugeot 2008.
Firemarioflower Regardless of whether the X3 has a soul or not, it's incredibly uncomfortable and very, very ugly, yet more expensive and less practical than the equivalent 5-Series, which has even better handling.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Musicman4HIM7 Didn't I mention how massive V8 engines have 200 bhp or less? V8's make a great noise, sure, but unless they actually provide some power, you're better off with a straight-four or a V6.
Saying 'getting 28 mpg on a motorway in a large car like that is not too bad', is like saying 'The T-Ford isn't a bad car, so why bother to innovate beyond that'. And about that Civic or Prius nonsense; any C6 or S-Class (with the exception of AMG versions) laughs at the fuel consumption of a typical huge Cadillac.
Recently, US cars have become better. For instance, the new Mustang, Viper and Corvette are good, and they aren't just fast in a straight line anymore. Those, however, are all sports cars. Their normal everyday cars just can't compete with high-quality products like the VW Passat, Merc C-Class, Ford Mondeo or Skoda Superb.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Firemarioflower Horses aren't a thing of the past, are they? Nobody uses horses for practical means anymore, because in the early 20th century, cars came along and outclassed them entirely. However, every weekend, thousands of people enjoy going to the countryside with their horse, because they like it. I feel that the same is going to happen with petrol cars. The more utilitarian spectrum of the automotive world will move to electric, hydrogen and other alternative drivetrains, but hobby cars for enthusiasts will always be around, and nobody will stop you from enjoying your petrol car in your free time.
Oh, and:
1) You are not the authority to decide whether opinions are right. Nobody is, in fact, it's called 'freedom of speech', a fundamental right of every developed country in the world.
2) The laws of nature are completely different from the type of car someone likes. One defines the behaviour of every single object in the universe, the other decides what hobby an individual has.
3) So far, you're a minority here, so you definitely don't speak for 'the people'.
And do I love eco-cars? No, I don't. There are eco-cars that I like, but not because they're eco-friendly, but for other reasons, such as the torque delivery and drag racing prowess of a 700 bhp Tesla.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Dyflinn Golf R. Like MrThePrivateer said, more practical, cheaper to insure, cheaper to run, better interior, discrete sleeper exterior, more stable at high speeds, etc.
This time, however, it's faster, much faster. And more stable too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sean Place We might at some point, but until then, electric cars aren't that clean. And with ranges like these, they're not very practical either. They'll fix that some time in the future, but I'd rather see the rise of the hydrogen car. Plug-in hybrids, by the way, are not the solution either; the unrealistic fuel economy and pollution figures (at least in Europe) are impossible to get outside of cities.
Fuel costs, by the way, will indeed be conveniently low, even if the demand for electricity at charging points will rise dramatically. However, the Dutch government will inevitably find a way to make personal transport overpriced despite that.
1
-
***** You're still being dramatic. Where in the definition of 'cars' is it written that they should make a noise? Also, vacuum cleaners do make noise (a lot of it), and so does the Prius - if you go above 30 kph, that is.
You don't like automatic gearboxes? Well, for the Prius's CVT (and other, traditional, comfort-oriented automatics), I understand. But what about a DSG/PDK/etc?
You don't like hybrids? Well, the Porsche 918, McLaren P1 and LaFerrari are hybrids too...
Basically, what you've done is recycle all of your previous arguments (even though none of them are any good) and then add another one, sound, which is no good as well. Admit it, you're just holding on to principles for no reason, without any second thought. Open up, damnit!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
mining maniac These are the cars I don't want to buy:
VW Golf, VW Polo, VW Lupo, Vauxhall anything, etc.
Basically every boring hatchback everyone drives, except for the Ford Focus or Peugeot 206.
I would, however, like an ancient Volvo. Those indestructible, prehistoric barges that will never break down.
An old Mini is perfect; low running costs, easy to drive, easy to park and you can be incredibly agressive in traffic without breaking any laws. Sadly, old Minis are surprisingly expensive.
I'd like a 406 Coupé simply because they're stylish. And 18-year-old drivers need a lesson in style, IMO (I hate tuned up Golfs with massive bodykits). And cheap too!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** Determining which spelling is correct is a complicated matter. 'Color' is used by Americans. Every other English-speaking country (so that includes Australia, Canada, etc.), uses 'colour'. Technically, that makes the American spelling wrong. However, due to the immense cultural influence of US, most non-native speakers use American spelling. Although I, despite not being a native speaker, prefer British spelling, both can be correct, depending on where you live.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** Really? So it's what Flemish is to Dutch, then. I've always found Belarus a fairly fascinating country, partly because it's the only dictatorship in Europe.
Well, it is fairly nice, if you don't mind the occasional traffic light. And, of course, the rain. But seriously, you love cycling?
130 km a week, all of which is courtesy to my school commuting. If you can call it 'commuting'.
It isn't. I do fairly like animals, depending on which ones, though I'm still an avid meat eater.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Firemarioflower The problem is, that the X3 has no advantages over an estate whatsoever. It's less practical, less sporty, less comfortable, worse looking and more expensive.
Besides, a petrolhead would much more easily sacrifice fuel economy for more power, sound, torque and everything that makes an engine nice. That said, out of two cars that are on par with each other in every aspect but fuel consumption, everyone, including petrolheads, will always choose the more economical car. Not to mention how petrolheads have limited running cost budgets, like everyone. That's why I want a 2-litre Peugeot 406 Coupé, rather than the magnificent, yet thirsty V6.
I simply like the word 'rubbish'
The Captur handles less sporty than the Clio, yet is much, much more expensive, to buy and run. And like I said, even petrolheads have limited budgets. And it's less practical too.
I have a tendency of calling every somewhat hostile argument a flamewar.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Firemarioflower Mind the word 'almost'.
Stop hating on cars you don't like. I cannot believe you are the one saying that.
At least Dacias are good for something. They're cheap, giving them a niche. The X3 is more expensive than the 5-Series estate, which is clearly the better car.
The Q3, again, is almost objectively ugly. Not only that, but it's not very practical, not very reliable, not very good to drive, not very new or cutting-edge and more expensive than an A3. It's even outclassed by the Mazda CX-5, BMW X1 (the new one), Merc GLC and all the other crossovers of its size.
1
-
Firemarioflower Some people will want to buy new cars, either because they have to (company cars) or because the depreciation is significantly lower. That, or it simply feels better (more longevity). Unlike the X3, Dacias have a niche. They're worse than their Renault counterparts, but the price matches that. The X3 is worse yet more expensive than a 3-Series Touring, leaving it entirely niche-less.
When asked, a vast majority will say it's ugly.
An A3 is just as practical, a C-segment estate much more so. It handles significantly worse than lower cars, as well as the competition from BMW, Ford and Mazda. It's been around since 2011, which is old by today's standards. The infotainment is old, there isn't a lot of safety equipment. And reliable? TSI engines are notorious for their unreliability, same for DSG gearboxes. The VW Golf, which uses the same technology, is known for its rather unreliable electrics.
It's the same car, just slightly higher up, heaver, older and more expensive.
A CX-5 not 'premium'. But 'premium' is mostly a load of marketing bollocks. It's the shiny badge. Panel gaps and soft-touch plastics are not quality. The CX-5's naturally aspirated engines represent proper longevity and reliability. It's great to drive, looks good thanks to the Kodo design, it's at least as practical and much cheaper. It's only 'lower' from a marketing point of view.
VAG-bashers? Given that you're Dutch, I suppose you're familiar with the comment sections of Autoweek?
1
-
Firemarioflower Technically, it's a new car, since you can buy it new and spec it out the way you want it. That's what matters to some people.
The vast majority, so 80+%
How is a higher ride height better, if it doesn't provide comfort or off-road capability?
True, but the Fiat 500 is a relatively bad car that sells on charm alone these days. At least, until the facelift. The Jimny is just awful by today's standards, hence nobody buys one. The Q5 is there, but it's a decent car at best, hardly class-leading.
What's it with you and the Prius? Yes, it's an awful car, but anyone who disagrees with you seems to drive a Prius in your head...
A well-thought out NA engine like Mazda's SkyActiv engines is more economical and reliable than a tiny 3-cylinder turbo engine. That, however, doesn't necessarily make NA engines the better engines in performance cars, that's still up for debate. I think I already said the same thing in that comment section.
Soft touch plastics aren't very important, unless you hug your dashboard. The difference in build quality is only noticeable if you really pay attention. Real quality is reliability and toughness, and Audis are questionable in that regard. Frankly, those tiny details and the badge aren't worth the extra money if you have the self-esteem to not need a 'premium' brand. Oh, and if anything, it's the automotive media that keep the 'premium' myth alive.
The Q3 has one of the worst integrated screens you can get today, it just sticks out on top of the dash: https://www.audi.co.uk/content/dam/audi/production/Models/NewModelsgallery/Q3range/Q3/2436x1552_Q3_Interior_Front_Dash.jpg
At least the CX-5's screen is inside the dash: https://www.mazda.com.au/assets/cars/cx5/interior/gallery/cx5-2015-interior-gallery-1.jpg
Yes, Kodo is presented with a load of marketing bollocks. But at least it's a recognisable design language, a very pretty one at that.
Ah, thought so. You give off the impression that you are one of them. 'lennie' or 'fileflirter', or 'Voitures Allemandes'. Frankly, both the VAG-bashers and VAG-lovers are being ridiculous, since both bring the company into the arguments in the most ridiculous ways imaginable.
It's a matter of fashion, similarly to how coupé-convertibles were fashionable at some point. That, and road presence, which is apparently a big deal. Either way, sales don't determine the quality of a car. Just look at the Outlander PHEV.
And I'm quite curious as to how socialism has anything to do with this...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** I don't know about the OP, but for me, I just don't like their looks. I also don't like how their interiors almost all look the same, or how the 3- and 5-Series can't be told apart, unless they're standing next to each other (so you can compare sizes). Same goes for the X3 and X5, X4 and X6, and the 3 and 5 GT. I don't like how they come up with a myriad of useless niche cars, including aforementioned X4, X6, 3GT and 5GT, as well as the X1. And I don't like how they're a tad overpriced.
They're not necessarily bad cars, but they are overrated. And I personally don't like them; I only like the i8 and the 6 Gran Coupé (the latter still being outclassed by the CLS and A7 IMO)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
andyouf Stop saying I'm a 'fanboy'. On a racetrack, the Nissan GT-R (both Nismo and regular) are incredibly fast, and beat cars that are much more expensive than it. That makes it great value compared to many exotic super- and hypercars. However, it shows in the car's looks, interior, luxury equipment, etc.
This is where the Porsche comes in. On a track, it's a tad slower than the Nissan, but compensates for this with a large amount of typical, German luxury and build quality. It's also very pretty. Despite that, it still gets to easily keep up with many, many super- and hypercars, and while it's more expensive than the Nissan, it's still a bargain speed-wise.
Given the choice, I would even go for the Porsche, but I still admire the GT-R for how fast it is.
With the 0-60 times; well, maybe I was wrong. I usually trust the factory figures, but this time, that turned out to be a bad choice. I could hardly have known. That's good to know, then.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Leo the Weirdo A lot of cars use transmissions from ZF, the German company that indeed provides the transmission for some Jaguars and Land/Range Rovers. Those Ford engines are just an inheritance from being owned by Ford (who did an afwul job, by the way).
TiddlyOrange Gaming TVR is now owned by a Russian businessman, isn't it? Still as British as can be, like those other companies. Same as Lotus, even though their F1 team is apparently officially from Luxembourg and about to be bought up by Renault.
Also, I would like to make an argument for Bugatti being incredibly complicated in this area: it's a French brand, founded by an Italian in Molsheim, a town in the Elzas area, which throughout history has been claimed by both the French and the Germans. The town itself is currently French, but the name sounds German. Moreover, Bugatti is now owned by the German company of Volkswagen, although the earlier revival in the form of the EB110 was done under the Italian flag. On the outside, the Veyron looks as though it could be Italian or French, but the technology is made by Germans (including the two Audi engines that make up the mighty W16 engine). Confused? That's okay, so am I.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
DesertStateInEu What exactly is sad about learning English from Top Gear?
'It performs better'. On a racetrack, it does. On an incredibly long stretch of road, it might. But anywhere else? I don't think so.
'Looks better'. It looks like (and is) a Lotus Exige (which isn't a beauty) with too many spoilers. Sure, you may think the Veyron is vulgar, but that's entirely up to your taste. In order to like the looks of the Venom, an age of 8 is required.
'Costs less'. That's true. I can't argue with that (though there is a reason it costs less).
'Will likely last longer'. Rubbish. The engine is a random V8, pushed to near unhealthy limits. Overly tuned engines simply aren't reliable. And that, while there are plenty of Veyrons that have done 50.000 sandy, fast miles through the UAE, without any issues.
An Aston is infinitely more stylish, practical and easy to drive, not to mention cheaper, than a Henessey Venom. And I haven't even mentioned the Ferrari 458 Italia, McLaren 650S, Lambo Aventador and, god forbid, the Nissan GT-R.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** I'd recommend a Legacy estate (or 'wagon', as Americans call them). Reliable, well-built, pretty without being posh and very safe. It's also spacious, sounds surprisingly good with its flat-four and flat-six engines and comes with quite a lot of luxury (which won't break easily). It comes with 4WD too, always useful in the winter. If you want to go off-road (you know, climbing and stuff), I recommend the Subaru Outback. It's the same car as the Legacy, but with more ground clearance as well as low-range gearing and such. It is slightly more expensive, though, and heavier. If you don't need the off-road capabilities, you're better off with a Legacy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** Any specific demands regarding practicality (boot/trunk size, amount of seats), engine (4, 6 or 8 cylinders, how much power, fuel economy), budget, looks, driving (comfortable, sporty, RWD vs. AWD) and reliability?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1