Top Gearは本気

Gigazineでも紹介された、BBC Top GearにおけるTesla Roadsterこき下ろし事件。

→いつまでこの動画が残ってるかわからんが...

中々良い番組ではなかろうか。特に「電気がどこから来ているのか」という描写とか。

だが...Gigazine記事にあるように、TeslaはTop Gear制作陣を訴える。San Jose Mercury記事によれば:

• 放映されたのは2008年
• 裁判を起こしたのは...先月だと

どうやら、「この番組のせいでTesla注文が減った」と文句を付けているらしい。へー。

そして...Top Gear側は受けて立つ模様。

San Francisco Citizen: All Electric Cars Suck (Except the Nissan Leaf): #1 – Tesla Motors Sues the BBC for No Apparent Reason

→日産Leaf以外の電気自動車はクソである、という題名の記事。

ここではTop GearのExecutive Producerの反論が記載されている。全文引用しておく。

1. We never said that the Tesla’s true range is only 55 miles, as opposed to their own claim of 211, or that it had actually ran out of charge. In the film our actual words were: “We calculated that on our track it would run out after 55 miles”. The first point here is that the track is where we do our tests of sports cars and supercars, as has happened ever since Top Gear existed. This is where cars are driven fast and hard, and since Tesla calls its roadster “The Supercar. Redefined.” it seemed pretty logical to us that the right test was a track test. The second point is that the figure of 55 miles came not from our heads, but from Tesla’s boffins in California. They looked at the data from that car and calculated that, driven hard on our track, it would have a range of 55 miles.

2. We never said that the Tesla was completely immobilized as a result of the motor overheating. We said the car had “reduced power”. This was true.

3. Tesla claims we were lying when we said the brakes were “broken”. They now say that all that had happened was that the fuse to the vacuum pump had failed, which meant that the brake just had to be pushed down much harder than usual. Well – to my mind, if the brakes are broken, then they’re broken, and if this happened to your car, you’d take it to the garage to get it fixed. Odd it seems so trivial to Tesla now, because on the day of filming they insisted on repairing the fuse before we could carry on driving the car.

The above points will be argued over in the near future by brainy people wearing wigs, but in a layman’s nutshell, this is where we stand on the matter. Before I finish though, I must clear up one important issue: scripting. It’s alleged by Tesla that on the day of filming one of their employees caught sight of a script that had been written, before the car had even been driven, already containing the verdict that in the “real world” the Tesla doesn’t work. This, they say, proves our guilt, because we’d condemned the car in advance. May I just say in reply:

a) The truth is, Top Gear had already driven the car prior to filming, to enable us to form a view on it in advance

b) Our primary reasoning behind the verdict had nothing to do with how the Tesla performed; our conclusion was based mainly on the fact that it costs three times more than the petrol sports car upon which it’s based. It takes a long time to recharge, so you can’t use it as easily for the carefree motoring journeys that are a prerequisite of sports car driving. You can actually reach that conclusion without driving the car. As it happens, when it did come to the subjective area of how the car drove on the track, we were full of praise for its performance and handling.

c) Just so you understand there’s nothing devious going on, you need to know how this filming business works. When you film a car review, the reviewer is only the tip of the iceberg. Behind the lens is a film crew, and only a day’s worth of light to shoot the eight minute film. This means we have to prepare in advance a treatment – a rough draft of a script so that the director and film crew can get to work right away, knowing what shots they will need to capture. It will contain the facts about a car, and what we think of its looks and so on, but how well the car actually drives is added on the day. If we’ve driven it ahead of filming, as we do with most cars, we will also have an idea how it feels to drive. But, and this is crucial, as we uncover fresh information about a car whilst filming it, it is entirely normal for the treatment to be modified as the day unfolds. Jeremy is always tweaking the scripts to reflect what his driving experience has actually been on the day.

There you go. I’ve said my bit, and now we’ll hopefully shut up and prepare for our day in court.

PS: As this is going through the courts right now, we’re afraid we’ve had to turn off comments on this one, but we wanted to let you all know how we see it.

Andy Wilman is the Executive Producer of Top Gear

反論の要点:

1) 「55マイルでガス欠した」ではなく「55マイルで電池が切れる計算だ」と言ってる。そしてこの「55マイル」は、テストに使ったサーキットとテスト内容を元にカリフォルニアのTesla技術陣が算出した値である。
2) 「Teslaがオーバーヒートで動かなくなった」とは言ってない。「オーバーヒートで出力低下した」と言ってる。
3) 「Teslaのブレーキが壊れたという嘘を流した」という件。ブレーキの真空ポンプを制御する部分のフューズが飛んだだけ、とTeslaは主張しているが、結果としてドライバーはブレーキをおもいっきり踏み込む必要があったわけであり、これは「壊れた」と表現するしかないだろう。

ということで、Top Gear側は全面的に戦うようである。

考察

そもそもTesla Roadsterは2010年で製造打切りの予定だったわけだから、2008年放映の番組をもとに「番組で間違った情報を流されたせいで売上が落ちた」と今更ケチをつけるのは不条理である。S-Modelは未だに売られてないし、鳴り物入りで発表されたToyota RAV4との合弁もまだ「口先だけ」で終わっている。Toyota RAV4で選べるエンジンは2.5リットル4気筒か、3.5リットルV6しかない。

売るものも作るものもないから裁判でもしましょーね、ってところか。まさかねぇ...