the stig !!

I really don’t know the circumstances as to why the programmes’ own producor would say such a thing

You could try the concept “Because it is true” ?

Moggy

Quite true Stangman, and by Clarksons admission was created as much to sell TG merchandise as much as to provide entertainment.

T64, it’s about that most of us (the audience) don’t really care about the ins and outs of deals etc. I don’t care if he was given a GT40 (personally I don’t believe he got one cheap), and that made him say nice things about it.
It would be very nieve to think that there arn’t much worse back handers going on that actually use public funds.

If I was serious enough to buy a GT40 I wouldn’t be that stupid that I would let Top Gear persuade me into it! There is plenty of good car advive and buying sources about, TG is entertainment – for some at least.

Personally I value the show because they say what they want to say, and not too many programmes can do that these days. The fact that cars are in it is just a bonus for me.

you don’t think for a minuite clarkson paid even half price for the gt 40

Whatever you say about Ford, you can’t fault their marketing.

And nobody there was going to reduce the price of a car when the 100 (?) allocated to the UK were oversubscribed by many times, very quickly.

As I recall there was a draw for those few cars. I don’t doubt Clarkson’s application by-passed that procedure. But reduced price? Not a chance (Particularly as they were expected to increase from list price in the resale market)

Moggy

you miss the whole point of the mystery behind it , to say you knew it was a proffesional is stating the glaringly obvious

but the intrigue was trying to work out wich professional or indeed if it was a difrent one each week

No i didn’t miss the mystery of who is the Stig, i just don’t care who the stig is in real life, The Stig is a character that is all to me.

what was that about??

my exact argument is any tv programme is mearely bubble gum for the brain !!

i’d say 99% of what you hear or see on tv and read is to some degree influenced by sales and company sweetners

you don’t think for a minuite clarkson paid even half price for the gt 40

it was worth that for the one road trip on top gear let alone all the other mentions

it is the way the car industry and business works

ferrero rochet gave away a jaguar xj220 to a customer for continued business:eek: at the hieght of production just about the most expensive vehicle built

but i full well realise it is entertainment just as fith gear nearly manages !!

Well I can only talk for myself, most people that I know, and the very populor Facebook page, but its seems like alot of people still find it entertaining, certainly enough to keep the programme going.
In contrast to what you said, I found this last series to be really good with just one not so good episode, and that was the very first one and I thought it was probably going to be bad news for the rest of the series.

I really don’t know the circumstances as to why the programmes’ own producor would say such a thing, seems a silly thing to come out with even if your show is going downhill.

But the problem is it’s no longer entertaining. I watched the first two or three series in the new format with huge enjoyment, then it just trailed off to the repetitive, unfunny mess it is now.

Even the afficionados tell me there has only been one episode out of the current series – something about Senna? – that was worth the price of the electricity to turn the TV on.

When the producer says it’s gone downhill, who are we to argue? He should know.

Moggy

To be honest I don’t think MoggyC and tornado64 get the programme, I think Moggy has genuine reasons for it, but T64, sadly I just think you don’t get it!

It’s an entertainment programme firstly, the cars are just a vehicle (pardon the pun) for it. I’ve never heard anyone at work on a Monday morning say, corr did you see that the new Suzuki can do 40mpg, but they will comment on what Clarkson or May have been up to.
The Stig is a major part of that entertainment.

for those that remember far enough back ( about the time he owned the escort coswoth ) clarkeson was being given sweetners to promote ford from ford !!
so not impartial journalism then , he was even taken through the courts !!

but all this comparing like for like racing against each other is bunk realy ( wichever programme does it )

as so far as i’m aware the speed limit is 70mph on road

and if used as track cars and track cars differ wildly from road cars

for instance my friend is presently building a race car ( the ultima gt ) he’s presently ditched the junk american v8 that a previous build had put in

and in favour has replaced it with a ferrari enzo unit sourced from a masserati but essentialy the same unit ( the prancing horse casting badges confirm it !! ) only the rocker boxes differ !! but before it went in it was stripped and tuned to give more power

Not entirely.

Top Gear is ‘Last of the summer wine’ for those with a vague interest in cars. Clarkson, Hammond and May are just three men with nothing to do, too much time to do it in and a seemingly limitless amount of other people’s money to waste in trying to fill their time.

Regards,

kev35

The thread is about the ‘Stig’ thing. Not Top Gear itself.

I am entitled to the opinion that the BBC is being patronising in the extreme to the Top Gear audience in believing that ‘revealing’ the identity of a journeyman racing driver employed to do the odd few laps will somehow destroy the enjoyment of those who watch the programme.

I am involved in the motor industry and I am involved in the process of monitoring and predicting consumer behaviour.

I had credited the public with more savvy than the BBC did. Regrettably I am being proved wrong here.

Moggy

Some say….

strictly speaking niether can i , i have lost count of cars driven

but dreadful ones are remembered !!

Sorry, I really can’t recall the clutch effort required on a car half a lifetime back.

I’m sure compared to today’s technology it was a lot heavier though

Moggy

Tornado Please note the CoC and its reference to pointless requoting of the post directly above – Moggy

exactly built new in 1997!!

That’s a thirty year old car

Moggy

you’re joking the 911 certainly the carrera 3 had a dreadful cluth i used to drive 2 and both of the boneshakers can’t have been faulty !!

they have got to be the most overated car in history derived from little more than a utility vehicle

a posh beetle !!

some modern ones have improved but lets face the real truth , they needed to !!

one was so bad at handling it departed through a bus stop !!

Can’t say I have ever had any issue with the 911 in traffic, and I’m a long way from Arnie.

I think fast cars should be driven, and driven well, not messed about with by a gang of amateurs. This, of course, was the Stig’s purpose. But even then they couldn’t just enrol a racing driver but had to gild the lily with phoney ‘mystery’

Moggy

in my employ i have driven cars trucks and motorcycles cars ranged from vauxhall novas up to porsche 911 ‘s ( dreadful in traffic unles you have a clutch leg like arnold ! ) ferraris , testarossa , 344 , 345 , bentley brooklands , astons etc etc ‘

and mostly niel armstrong milage in a year

i realy do not want to know factual !! i want to watch them c**ed around with !!

Ah, but where can you see two really skilled drivers going head-to-head in different cars for comparison on the web?

I haven’t found that site yet.

Besides which you don’t have to ‘change’ you can watch both you know. One to see three egos thnking they are being amusing and one to learn about cars and motoring

Moggy