Top Gear 'hooligans' damage classic car

Has this been shown?

I'm still looking for where it says they were doing doughnuts in it :eek:

wheel spins and getaways, i read.
To me thats not spinning the car round and round.

The car may have been a top class racer 50 years ago, but do you really think that it's got the same durabilty of a modern car? Hardly fair to put it in the same group imo

like doing the paris dakar in a model T :)

He would have been able to hear the engine noise and possibly had it in sight (even away from the airfield).

I'm dams sure he'd have gone over and demanded they stop, if he wasn't happy at the time.

he just wants someone to foot the bill imo
 
Tbh I think both parties are to blame for this. The guy agreed to let the Beeb "drive it hard", but on the other hand you don't expect people to trash something you lend them.

Full credit to the beeb for coughing up for repairs though.
 
Originally posted by [TW]Fox
TG guys were not driving the car, and the record attempt would have put his car in the record books, so why is it top gears fault/problem and why should they pay?

I haven't seen the show which contained this, but from reading the Lancer thread and a couple of others Ive come across, it does look like TG provided the driver.

One would presume that if it wasnt a TG nominated driver then Simon himself would drive, he states quite clearly that he wasnt driving the car and not able to monitor it.

Theres also a post from Mike Rainbird (anybody who knows about Cosworths should have heard of Mike) which states:

I think its pretty obvious why the engine let go, after five attempts (which I'm sure would have been done consecutively without much of a break in between), the internal temps just climbed and climbed and despite the EGT showing 1100°C, the stupid TG driver just kept his foot in (what did he care, it wasn't his £60k engine ).

http://www.lancerregister.com/showthread.php?threadid=23337&perpage=15&pagenumber=1
 
Originally posted by IntegraR
I haven't seen the show which contained this, but from reading the Lancer thread and a couple of others Ive come across, it does look like TG provided the driver. [/url]
Aired the other day, tbh the guy didn't look too bothered at the time. I think the driver will have been some kind of stunt driver, insured incase things went pear shaped.

I'd want Top Gear to pay for that rebuild but tbh fiestas pull caravans without blowing up, his 770bhp obviously aren't reliable, maybe he should work on that before he nominates his car for such a task again. I dunno run Prime95 on boot or summit ;)
 
I still cant believe how many people are saying "its only a driveshaft and a clutch"

There are THREE of these cars in existence, and i defy you to find a bloody C type driveshaft at Halfords.
 
Originally posted by Rich
I still cant believe how many people are saying "its only a driveshaft and a clutch"

There are THREE of these cars in existence, and i defy you to find a bloody C type driveshaft at Halfords.
Bespoke ones will be custom made. It isn't very tricky or expensive to have custom shafts built, particularly if you have the originals to work from.
Same goes for the clutch.
 
Originally posted by Rich
I still cant believe how many people are saying "its only a driveshaft and a clutch"

There are THREE of these cars in existence, and i defy you to find a bloody C type driveshaft at Halfords.

Its a car get over it!!!!

please :)
 
Just to add my 2p to this thread:

1. TG generally make people sign contracts for their car to be allowed to be used, for the whole filming, you can't say "no, i'm taking my car back" because they will sue and given most people don't understand that this could possibly be thrown out of most courtrooms, people don;t back down, who wants to sue the BBC and incur the possible costs?

2. TG do not pay for repairs or give proper reimbursement for the use. The 911 turbo that featured a few weeks ago was owned by a PH person. They said they were given money but not even enough for 2 rear tyres. TG have insurance for damages done to the car, but not through hard use (only general accidents like on a road test)

3. TG has gone down to Lax Power levels to get audiences. I know what tyre smoke looks like, i don't need to see you donuting a classic car and damaging it which for the most part is irrepairable. Some pieces of motoring history were desgined to be preserved to be studied and admired, not to screw around with for ratings.

4. JC has become a completely benign presenter, bar a few anti-european jokes. The TG format is terrible IMO, remember Tiff? someone who gave cars a thrashing but still respected them, go watch his Mclaren F1 piece, there's an expensive RWD car that could do insane speeds.....did he donuting it? wheelspin? no, he took it round a test track for a few laps and kept within Murray's guidelines of how to treat the car. Does anyone care what car a celebrity drives? what Anne Robinson thinks of certain people's cars? I'm more for when TG was, Tiff taking a piece of exotica far out of the average person's budget and giving everyone something to drool at, then Quentin explaining something about the 2ndhand market and finally JC being amusing and slating a vauxhall or something. But JC has changed, read his column today finishing with "i know where you live" kind of commenets :rolleyes:

5. A certain manufacturer manager who lent a car to TG has said to some people (myself included) "Stig was an arrogant and egotistical **** with no respect for people's property" whereas "Tiff was a true gent, chatted to the team and mechanics and asked about anything he should know not to do or what limits there are".

6. I know it's expected for journo's to trash the cars a bit, but we weren't talking about a production car here, we're talking about a limited edition racing car for which parts have to now to specially made which take away from it's history. But whatever they're dealing with, it should be remembered, it's not theirs and they're not paying for it. Nor are they doing anyone a favour, it's someone else's proeprty and needs to be treated with respect and obeying the owners requests. Put it this way, if you go out to test drive an STI from a private advertiser in autotrader, do you give it a good trash before you buy it with the owner sat next to you? you probably give it some stick, but you don't donut and wheelspin it. Other people's property needs to be treated with respect, it seems everyone forgets that in this country :rolleyes:
 
i saw the bit and thought at the time that it was out of order the way it was driven. driving it like it was meant to be is one thing but there is no need for full tyre smoking powerslides and donuts. the car is a racing car not a toy to burn the tyres off.
 
Originally posted by cossey3
i saw the bit and thought at the time that it was out of order the way it was driven. driving it like it was meant to be is one thing but there is no need for full tyre smoking powerslides and donuts. the car is a racing car not a toy to burn the tyres off.

so what IS a toy to burn the tyres off ?

a £500k Mclaren F1 ?

a £200k Lambo ?

a £150k Ferrari

a £100k Porsche ?

a £50k TVR ?

a £20k Vauxhaul ?

where do you draw the line ?

and WHY
 
Originally posted by EyeDot
so what IS a toy to burn the tyres off ?

a £500k Mclaren F1 ?

a £200k Lambo ?

a £150k Ferrari

a £100k Porsche ?

a £50k TVR ?

a £20k Vauxhaul ?

where do you draw the line ?

and WHY


I think you are missing the point. If it was your car, you could do what the hell you liked with it at your own risk.

As this was not being driven by the owner its a different matter.
 
Originally posted by Moby-Dick
I think you are missing the point. If it was your car, you could do what the hell you liked with it at your own risk.

As this was not being driven by the owner its a different matter.

The owner lent it to Top Gear. If he hadn't even seen the show he was lending his pride and joy to beforehand, he was stupid. If he had, but didn't specifically prohibit donuts, he was stupid.
 
Originally posted by Moby-Dick
I think you are missing the point. If it was your car, you could do what the hell you liked with it at your own risk.

As this was not being driven by the owner its a different matter.

TopGear would rarely ever show their own cars, be really rather boring wouldnt it, so, the point of who owns it is mute.

I for one, want to see what a car can do, It next to useless to see it driven around at 50mph.... shows you nothing.

but, for the sake of this thread, I wont go on, some ppl just need to realise, theres more to life than worrying :)
 
I dont see how people are getting their opinions here, especially those who claim to be fans of cars in general.

Yes he lent top gear the car, but if you knew you were driving 1 of only 3 in the world would you not treat it with some respect?

These cars dont keep themselves, and I am sure its owner has spent a very long time looking after it.

I see it liike this:

either a) Have classic car and keep it looked up and never drive it

or b) drive it.

Yes drive it by all means, but driving it and breaking it are two different things. If it was an accident then it would be difefrent, but they pushed the car to the extent that it was damaged which isnt fair and isnt right. I am sure that if it was their car they would have treated it with some respect.


Having watched classic Ferrari racing, I take my hat off to the owners who put thier million pound cars on a track in competitive racing. But doing donughts in cars of this age is just plain stupid especially from one who should know better.

Says it all for me tbh
 
I find myself chuckleing reading this.

Its still there

its not dead

its not blown up

its gonna get a new drive shaft and clutch


BIG DEAL

its gonna be BETTER than it was before.

Had they ploughed it thru a hedge, dropped it from a crane, played conkers with it AND THEN did what they did, then sure, complain.

As it is, they treated it EXACTLY the same as they treat EVERY CAR.

Fair Comparison :!
 
Originally posted by rare
But by saying that you are missing the point all together.

I must be .. what IS your point ?

he approached THEM, to celebrate his dad winning by thrashing the car round Le Mans faster than everyone else..

you think it would be a fitting tribute to pootle it around at 30 mph ?

its an old skool pukka sports car, they were just driving it like it was built to be driven...

you will be telling me next, if someone offters then a 1980s Origional Audi Quattro, or a GT40, or Lancia Delta... they shouldnt floor it, and should short shift, so as not to RISK anything ?
 
That they should have treated the car with more respect in the first place so that it didnt break.

You cant say "oh this and this didnt happen..so its ok" Its what happened as a result of their actions thats the problem.
 
Who said anything about driving around at 30mph?

They know what they are doing. I am sure they have driven before *cough*. Theres driving fast and then theres driving which results in things being damaged.
 
It broke,

its a shame, it will get fixed

things break

who is to say that had they NOT done a donut, it wouldnt STILL have broken ?

Maybe the clutch was just ON the way out..

I read elsewhere that the car is a regular driver, takes parts in lots of rallys and races,, so by all accounts its not the ;museum piece; that some are making out (source Piston Heads thread on this subject)

So, would that make any difference ? if it was a daily driver which COULD WELL have been in need of a service?

no one knows..

its a SHAME it got broke, just like it would be a shame if ANY car broke, but if you asked me if they should do anything differently if they were to do it again.

i would say NO.

Its a car, like any other, just happens to have a higher price tag on it!

If we treated things differently just cos they cost more, ferraris, porsches and lambos would NEVER get driven, and think of the waste that would be!


I am not ashamed to say, sod fear of breaking it,

DRIVE IT
DRIVE IT
DRIVE IT

if it breaks

FIX IT

if it cant be fixed

move on and get another / summin different.
 
Back
Top Bottom