Top Gear Tonight

**Garrett** · 26-10-2003, 6:36 PM

Head up Top Gear is back on tonight at 8 BBC2.

26-10-2003, 7:46 PM

quality

Dimmy · 26-10-2003, 8:56 PM

Damn - missed it

It get repeated any time in the week ?

GrahamC · 26-10-2003, 9:09 PM

Stig.....nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

JonathanKnight · 27-10-2003, 8:16 AM

The Stig could have survived if they had taken the precaution of fitting the cheap and cheerful ejector seat from the DIY Bond Car they did in the last series. Didn't notice him jumping out though.

I wonder where we send our CVs if they need a new Stig

27-10-2003, 8:19 AM

That was very sloppy: you go to all the effort of taking a car to an aircraft carrier, then you don't bother to hide the launch device bolted to the back of the car.

They should have used the steam catapult instead!

MartinImber · 27-10-2003, 9:49 AM

Quote:

They should have used the steam catapult instead!

What's a steam catapult - note

Harriers & Ski jump = Invincible class aircraft carrier

Ed Selley · 27-10-2003, 10:40 AM

Realised this morning that if I sell the house, I can have both the funds required for a Ford GT AND enough to beat the waiting list.
Cabin looked big enough to squat in- didn't it?

Noodle · 27-10-2003, 1:30 PM

Wasn't it gorgeous.

Dimmy · 02-11-2003, 1:38 PM

Again tonight - I'll be sure to catch it this week after missing last week's

russraff · 02-11-2003, 6:58 PM

Yep, I'll be watching it, tonight.
I am waiting for them to do a review of the new Mazda RX-8. It was briefly shown last series and, though they didn't drive it then, hopefully they will test it this series. I like Clarkson's views - honest and to the point and the RX-8 looks like just the thing to replace my Celica GT-4, if I ever have the money saved up

That Ford GT looked awesome, though.

Russell

russraff · 02-11-2003, 7:32 PM

I must be going blind! They are reviewing the RX-8 according to DigiGuide.

Russell

ellie666 · 02-11-2003, 10:35 PM

if you're going to use the oppurtunity to "Kill" off the Stig then atleast get the editing right so that it looks like the car flying hitting the 100mph then flying off the ship is all 1 shot.

**Garrett** · 02-11-2003, 10:59 PM

Looks like the old Stig is the new Stig to me.

03-11-2003, 8:57 AM

Was it just me, or was that a half hour advert for BMW?

Oh, and I thought the original M3 was 4-cylinder, not 6? The b****d son of Roy Castle is nothing if not irritating, misinformed and hypocritical.

**Garrett** · 03-11-2003, 10:13 AM

Which ones him?

Mylo · 03-11-2003, 10:21 AM

The original M3 was a 4 pot.
Was it not the first production car with more than 100 Bhp per Ltr, over 200 Bhp from a 2 ltr engine?

MartinImber · 03-11-2003, 10:44 AM

M3 = 2.3l 200 bhp

Mylo · 03-11-2003, 10:55 AM

Wasn't sure, that's why I asked.

Engine: S-14 coded, in-line iron block four cylinder, aluminium head, DOHC (chain drive), 16 valves. Bosch ML Motronic injection/ignition. 2302cc producing 200 bhp at 6750 rpm and 176 lb/ft torque at 4750 rpm. 98 octane leaded petrol.

03-11-2003, 4:00 PM

That's what amused me: they praised the M-series cars for their high specific output, then a couple of them complained about the engine in the Honda S2000! That's got 240 bhp from a 2.0 litre, normally aspirated 4-pot!

Seems if it ain't German, they don't like it.

Mylo · 03-11-2003, 4:02 PM

They complained that it revved too high !
What could be better, a car that revs like a bike.

03-11-2003, 4:09 PM

I didn't get that at all: Honda make amazing engines. I also didn't understand why they liked the M3 CSL so much: to me, it seemed far too compromised to use on the road, whilst at the same time it wasn't a proper race car.

For that sort of money, you could have a really nice saloon for the road, and a bonkers track car. There's really no point trying to do both things with one car, especially if it costs so much.

Nobber22 · 03-11-2003, 4:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mylo
They complained that it revved too high !
What could be better, a car that revs like a bike.

The (universal) complaint is that Honda V-Tec engines lack low-end torque. Means you have to rev the nuts off the engine wherever you go - no worries on a 180kg bike, bit of a pain with a 1.2 ton car, especially in traffic.

Mylo · 03-11-2003, 6:44 PM

Much like a 306 diesel turbo, unless I'm 'on boost' my motor is sluggish. Even when the turbo kicks in I only get 2500rpm to play with. Far too much changing gears. The honda sounds like a screem, for me at least, if I had the money.

The purpose of the DOHC(Double Overhead Camshaft) VTEC is to give production model engines power to rival that of racing engines. It is the concept of bringing customers a car that is an extension of the driver's will and a joy to handle. The technological challenge lies in designing an engine that combines the merits of high power in the upper rpm range, and powerful torque at low to middle rpm - a requirement long seen as contradictory. The DOHC VTEC successfully combines superior power with a high torque in an engine that is fast and tractable.

Torque at low speeds. Hmmm

gringottsdirect · 03-11-2003, 8:21 PM

So Honda have never had a VTEC failure ?
......the ones they gave Mr Button and Mr Villeneuve to play with blew up whenever they got in the car !

Mylo · 03-11-2003, 8:32 PM

Close, but surely they were V10s not vtec's

26-10-2003, 7:46 PM	#2
bobbles Guest Posts: n/a	quality
	Quote

27-10-2003, 8:19 AM	#6
rhoamish Guest Posts: n/a	That was very sloppy: you go to all the effort of taking a car to an aircraft carrier, then you don't bother to hide the launch device bolted to the back of the car. They should have used the steam catapult instead!
	Quote

03-11-2003, 8:57 AM	#15
rhoamish Guest Posts: n/a	Was it just me, or was that a half hour advert for BMW? Oh, and I thought the original M3 was 4-cylinder, not 6? The b****d son of Roy Castle is nothing if not irritating, misinformed and hypocritical.
	Quote

03-11-2003, 4:00 PM	#20
rhoamish Guest Posts: n/a	That's what amused me: they praised the M-series cars for their high specific output, then a couple of them complained about the engine in the Honda S2000! That's got 240 bhp from a 2.0 litre, normally aspirated 4-pot! Seems if it ain't German, they don't like it.
	Quote

03-11-2003, 4:09 PM	#22
rhoamish Guest Posts: n/a	I didn't get that at all: Honda make amazing engines. I also didn't understand why they liked the M3 CSL so much: to me, it seemed far too compromised to use on the road, whilst at the same time it wasn't a proper race car. For that sort of money, you could have a really nice saloon for the road, and a bonkers track car. There's really no point trying to do both things with one car, especially if it costs so much.
	Quote