Irresponsible Car TV Programmes [Archive] - SaabCentral Forums

: Irresponsible Car TV Programmes


jnorris
17th May 2004, 06:49 PM
Time for a bit of a whinge. :wink:

Well UK car tv programmes have really excelled themselves over the last two days.

1. Top Gear, Sunday BBC - A Volswagen Beetle and a Volvo Amazon crushed by a nun driving a monster truck (really!). Certainly the VW was pretty far gone and admittedly there are lots of them around. The Amazon wasn't quite so bad and having owned one I'm only too aware of how sound these cars can look whilst harbouring extensive rot, but it quite clearly had a number of useable parts on it, and these cars aren't all that common anymore. The irritating short one being hypnotised was quite funny though!

2. Fifth Gear, Monday Channel 5 - A fairly interesting (if a little pointless) feature on trying to break the world record for car and caravan jumping was only slightly spoilt when I noticed the car which the jumping BMW and caravan landed on was a burgundy Saab 99 saloon (1983 or thereabouts) which looked to me to be pretty tidy and definitely with useful spares.

At the risk of getting too precious about this it just seems to me to be a little hypocritical for these shows which both have frequent features on classics to go about wantonly destroying such cars. :evil:

Rant over, thanks guys :D . Out of my system now. Mrs Norris didn't seem to understand what I was on about! :roll:

SPG900
17th May 2004, 07:31 PM
The Volvo didn't seem that good, although I agree it could have been used for spare parts instead. I've yet to see that Fifth Gear episode, but crushing a Saab 99 doesn't sound too promising. :nono;

Rhino2.3t
18th May 2004, 04:52 AM
fair point i spose, if budget allowed they should use new cars rather than old, possibly salvageable, classics - much better if they took all the cabriolets from the poll elsewhere on this forum, and jumped them with the SAAB :D

mind you, i'm sure a line of daewoos or mitsubishi charisma's couldnt cost much more than an old saab and amazon..

Stumpage
18th May 2004, 06:37 AM
How do you know that some usable spares hadn't already been removed? You never saw them drive to there place of rest.

ragtopcav
18th May 2004, 06:41 AM
How do you know that some usable spares hadn't already been removed? You never saw them drive to there place of rest.That is a fair comment, all the worthwhile salvage may have already been removed.

Cuba
18th May 2004, 07:16 AM
If you've got the money, you can do whatever the F*&^K you like with it.

Paco
18th May 2004, 10:23 AM
And just because a Monster truck has driven over them, doesn't mean that there aren't any spares left, I mean you wouldn't suggest the roof was any use would you? :wink:

heavy_t
18th May 2004, 10:53 AM
I think they should have rounded up a few tarted up Saxos from outside Halfords and mangled them :wink:

nutcase
18th May 2004, 11:15 AM
But the owners have already mangled them! But it's a good point none the less :)

ragtopcav
18th May 2004, 11:16 AM
I think they should have rounded up a few tarted up Saxos from outside Halfords and mangled them :wink:You've just brought Watford Gap back to me :cheesy:

jnorris
18th May 2004, 11:17 AM
How do you know that some usable spares hadn't already been removed? You never saw them drive to there place of rest.That is a fair comment, all the worthwhile salvage may have already been removed.

Quite right, I wasn't there during filming to see the cars being driven into place so I have no idea to what extent parts had been removed or their true condition. All I can go on is what I could see. As it happens I doubt the VW or Volvo drove into place under their own power as it looks like it was some time since they were last on the road. Admittedly the VW looked like a reasonable number of parts had already been stripped off it, and so fair enough, even if not I don't care too much because there are millions of them about. Looking at the Amazon certain parts like the lights, grills, bonnet and front bumper hadn't been taken off. These parts tend to be very popular and the first to go because they are easy to remove, are normally very long lived and usually reuseable (and the bumper would be at least 500 for a new one). The fact that such parts were still on the car makes me think it likely that other spares would have been as well.

No idea about the 99 - I know nothing about these cars, all I can say is it looked fairly tidy.

And just because a Monster truck has driven over them, doesn't mean that there aren't any spares left, I mean you wouldn't suggest the roof was any use would you?

No, but I might suggest that that some of the other panels, the door, the glass and interior items might have been.

Maybe I'm making too much of a fuss about it but personally it just seems a little unnecessary to me. Clearly I am the only one who does though....

heavy_t
18th May 2004, 11:25 AM
I agree, if it was knackered they could have at least offered it to Tone before crushing it :cheesy:

Tomoose
18th May 2004, 01:34 PM
If I had the money, I would have a demolition derby with 10 brand new 9-5 aeros... If I had the money... :cheesy:

900t
18th May 2004, 08:43 PM
And I'd systematically replace them with 1994 Ford Tempos.

Mark P
19th May 2004, 03:43 AM
I agree, if it was knackered they could have at least offered it to Tone before crushing it :cheesy:

:lol: :lol:

kevitree @ work
19th May 2004, 03:49 AM
I agree, if it was knackered they could have at least offered it to Tone before crushing it :cheesy:

They probably did but the really useful towbar had already been salvaged!

SPG900
19th May 2004, 07:59 PM
:o

http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/images/freetext/61.jpg