Jeremy Clarkson's Car of the Year: the Corvette ZR1

[csv8]

Jeremy Clarkson's Car of the Year: the Corvette ZR1

by Jonathon Ramsey (RSS feed) on Dec 28th 2008 at 8:01PM


Feel free to read that headline as many times as necessary, but yes, it's true: Clarkson-san wrote "Out of nowhere, my car of the year," the Corvette ZR1. The man who pooped on the spearhead of electric cars has given an American high horsepower pushrod V8 the gold and glory. And this is after comparing the ZR1's predecessors to Big Macs: "Cheap, plastic and at the right time, and in the right place, sort of just what you want."

Not only that, but to put the ZR1 on its pedestal, Clarkson went so far as to remove the Caterham 500 he had previously placed there. On the show, he said that the Caterham was the best of the year, but in his article writes, "However, if you broaden the search engine and look simply for the best car of the year, the Caterham isn't in with a shout because it's ugly and geeky and I wouldn't have one even if the option was the loss of my right testicle."

And so the ZR1 reigns, even though "it's not built very well." In Clarkson's words, it is "both docile and extraordinarily savage," looks good, goes fast in a straight line and around corners, "most of the time bumbles about like a forgetful uncle," and costs "lots for a Corvette" but is a bargain for the performance. His only lament about the car was this: "unless the healthcare and pensions company that makes it can be turned around, it will be the last of the breed." The ZR1 - winning hearts and minds... Hat tip to Pdexter!

[snappy]

That was last year . Plastic is not in this year

[Ghiadude]

Originally Posted by snappy84

That was last year . Plastic is not in this year

whoops

[csv8]

I realised after my dyslexic fingers clicked on the wrong link.
Its the VW GOLF GTI page 132.But Jeremy likes the FOCUS RS as Muscle Car of The Year. Top Gear magazine Dec issue

[snappy]

But Jeremy likes the FOCUS RS as Muscle Car of The Year

Well that cost him some credibility with me , phh muscle car
Brits anything with over a 2lt motor the think is massive 2lt over here doesn't even make a muscle bike

[Falcon Coupe]

Originally Posted by snappy84

Well that cost him some credibility with me , phh muscle car
Brits anything with over a 2lt motor the think is massive 2lt over here doesn't even make a muscle bike

True that.

[SSD-85]

Originally Posted by snappy84

Well that cost him some credibility with me , phh muscle car
Brits anything with over a 2lt motor the think is massive 2lt over here doesn't even make a muscle bike

how sad it is.

[mik]

what these blokes say does`nt hold much water with me either, most of these car show presenters are decent drivers but , but for testing, their methods are`nt very scientific , entertaining yes, i would rather see myth busters do car testing and come to conclusions lol.

[JC260]

Originally Posted by mik

what these blokes say does`nt hold much water with me either, most of these car show presenters are decent drivers but , but for testing, their methods are`nt very scientific , entertaining yes, i would rather see myth busters do car testing and come to conclusions lol.

But that's what makes them so good! Who seriously cares about car X being faster by one pooftenth compared to car Y? or being able to take that apex 5 km/h faster? :
There is so much "scientific" testing with cars nowadays it's borderline silly.
Personally I love the way they test cars. It's more about how they make you feel, rather than "oww look he went and purchased that corvette but he could've had car X thats 0.0000000000189 of a second faster! bad choice"

Yes, their methods are certainly different, but don't forget that it's this that's made them so sucessfull.

[mik]

i like scientific, they`re reasoning is just utter crap sometimes, i agree 1 /10 th of a second in a race who cares , but its just too over the top sometimes.

[XR 59 WA]

Originally Posted by BA5.4XR

But that's what makes them so good! Who seriously cares about car X being faster by one pooftenth compared to car Y? or being able to take that apex 5 km/h faster? :
There is so much "scientific" testing with cars nowadays it's borderline silly.
Personally I love the way they test cars. It's more about how they make you feel, rather than "oww look he went and purchased that corvette but he could've had car X thats 0.0000000000189 of a second faster! bad choice"

Yes, their methods are certainly different, but don't forget that it's this that's made them so sucessfull.

Spot on.. As for Snappy84, i think Jeremy has driven more hot cars than we've all had hot dinners, i dont think he likes that just cause its 2.5 litre. He's driven some massive cubed engines, some big forced induction cars and obviously he didnt judge them to be his muscle car of the year. In saying that how much pull does he have, i personally love their method of testing as what they do is what I want to see in a car, but in Oz wheels COTY has more pull wouldnt you say?

[JC260]

Originally Posted by mik

i like scientific, they`re reasoning is just utter crap sometimes, i agree 1 /10 th of a second in a race who cares , but its just too over the top sometimes.

Thats exactly what Jeremy, James, Richard and Top Gear are all about. You just need to look at the Stig to figure that one.
It looks like their methods and reasoning aren't for you, but thats ok, because you're obviously not the target audience.

Instead of watching Top Gear, perhaps you should tune into the car show with Glenn Ridge.

[DJR-351]

Originally Posted by mik

i like scientific, they`re reasoning is just utter crap sometimes, i agree 1 /10 th of a second in a race who cares , but its just too over the top sometimes.

You missed the point of the show....

It's about an average twat driving the best there is and giving his opinion, and if what gave him the biggest roger was a Focus RS then thats his choice!!...

...he's not telling you to buy it...

[snappy]

Originally Posted by marty_88

Spot on.. As for Snappy84, i think Jeremy has driven more hot cars than we've all had hot dinners, i dont think he likes that just cause its 2.5 litre. He's driven some massive cubed engines, some big forced induction cars and obviously he didnt judge them to be his muscle car of the year. In saying that how much pull does he have, i personally love their method of testing as what they do is what I want to see in a car, but in Oz wheels COTY has more pull wouldnt you say?

Not taking away from the RS its probly a great car , But its not a muscle car
Plain and simple its a Hot Hatch . Personally the closet thing the brits have to a muscle car is the vauxhaul holdens .

[csv8]

Clarkson on: the new Focus RS



I'm reliably informed, by my 14-year-old daughter, that there are two types of people in the world - Chavs and Sloanes. And there are no prizes for guessing which type will be most interested in the new Focus RS - a car that comes in a choice of three colours: DFS blue, Stiletto white and Bacardi Breezer green.

On the very day production of this new car started in Germany, I took it for a spin up herein the Cotswolds and, frankly, I couldn't find one house outside which it might look even vaguely appropriate. If it were a garden ornament, and it sort of is when it's parked outside your house, then it would be a stone lion and, as a result, I feel fairly sure that if you were to apply the Top Gear cool test - would Kristin Scott Thomas like it? - the answer would be: "No thanks. I'll go on the bus."

So let's ignore the Sloanes, shall we, and start off by saying, "Chavs. This one's for you."

I'm the man for the job, because I'm a sucker for flared wheel arches. I've often said that in the same way a man can never be too rich, his wheel arches can never be too flared. And the RS, to accommodate its wider track, has some whoppers.

There's another reason I'm a man for the job, though. I love fast Fords. My first love was a GT40, my first car was a Cortina 1600E and back in the Nineties, I ran two Escort Cosworths. And I've always loved RSes too. From the X pack Capris through the Escort 1600i to the 150mph Sierras.

That's why I was so quick off the mark with the new car. I wanted to see what it was like. And when it arrived at my house, the aural promise of greatness was unmistakable. Its big exhausts, through which the Palestinians of Gaza could smuggle the entire contents of a zoo, make the sort of rumble that rattle even the most beautifully finished sash windows. I honestly thought as it reversed into my yard that my wife was out there in her Aston. It's low loud. Bass loud. Dog- frighteningly loud.

And then came the crushing disappointment. Despite the enormity of Ford's global operation, they had fitted the steering wheel on the wrong side of the car. The man who had brought it tried to argue that in other parts of the world people drive on the wrong side of the road, but obviously he was covering up for some other bloke's massive -up. Wrong side of the road? Whatever next?

"The engine is epic. Yes, it is essentially the blown 2.5-litre Volvo five-pot from the ST, but with a new, dog-baiting exhaust"

Assuming that they get this fixed before the car goes on a sale, and I'm assured they will, the interior is much as you'd expect. Extra dials (which you can't read), a satnav with a woman who cannot be silenced unless you are Steve Jobs, and excellent bucket seats. If you have a tweed jacket in your wardrobe, you will hate it in there. If you do not, you will find it great.

But what about on the road?

The last Focus RS was a huge disappointment. It looked good - better than this one, in fact - but to tame the engine's not particularly stratospheric power, it had been fitted with a front differential of such monumental hopelessness, it probably thought it was a biscuit. You got a ton of torque steer when you set off, then the steering system would jam and then you'd hit a tree, fly through the windscreen and be killed. Technically, engineers called the system ‘'.

I was hoping, as the new RS produces 300bhp, it would have four-wheel drive. But no. That would have been too expensive to engineer, so they've stuck with a diff. I'm told it's all new, and softer in its responses. In other words, it's designed for people who like to drive on roads and not be killed.

Does it work? Well, because it has a revo knuckle - and if you know what this is, you are James May - the driveshafts always stay level with something or other. This means you can blast one wheel through a puddle and not have the steering wheel wrenched from your hand. It also means the car doesn't follow the camber of the road with anything like the hopelessness of the previous RS.

I have to say that even when the weather is awful, the grip and the poise are excellent. Better than excellent. I can't imagine that even an Evo X is going to pull away. I know for a fact that on a damp road, it would leave my CLK Black for dead. It's that good, and not once did I encounter any of the dreaded tread shuffle that seems to plague the testers on other magazines.

But there's no getting away from the fact that the torque steer is still there. I suppose it's a consequence of putting 300 horses through a system that also has to deal with the steering. It's physics. Get used to it. It's worth it.

The engine is epic. Yes, it is essentially the same blown 2.5-litre Volvo five-pot from the ST, but it has new pistons, a new blower, a new intercooler, a new inlet manifold and that new, dog-baiting exhaust system. Of course, there's some lag, but from less than 3,000rpm you can feel the shove, you can feel the urgency, you can feel the 324lb ft of torque. And unlike most turbo engines, which run out of puff when you get near the red line, this one keeps right on singing. Well, shouting.

Ford says the ST is like a dolphin, and the RS is like a shark. I'd like to laugh at them for this, but they're right. It's a good analogy.

Except the RS is nowhere near as hard as you might imagine. Of course it's firm, but it's not "Oh Christ. My Teeth!" firm. It's more sort of reassuring.

So let's talk money. The Focus RS costs £24,995, and at that sort of price, this sort of speed and this sort of engineering is unheard of. Especially as it comes with seating for five, a big boot, fold-down rear seats and lots of buttons.

As a result, I wouldn't hesitate for a moment. I'd have a slower but more discreet Golf GTI. But that's because I've moved on. My house is yellow, and my wellies are French. But if you haven't moved on. If your hat is still on back to front. If you still think the Boss is God and your collar's still blue, then trust me: life has never been better. The RS glory days, after a momentary blip, are back.

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by BA5.4XR

But that's what makes them so good! Who seriously cares about car X being faster by one pooftenth compared to car Y? or being able to take that apex 5 km/h faster? :
There is so much "scientific" testing with cars nowadays it's borderline silly.
Personally I love the way they test cars. It's more about how they make you feel, rather than "oww look he went and purchased that corvette but he could've had car X thats 0.0000000000189 of a second faster! bad choice"

Yes, their methods are certainly different, but don't forget that it's this that's made them so sucessfull.

Agreed