TopGear US, Episode 3

alfadriver wrote:

digdug18 wrote: Have you watched the newest british top gear episodes? if you do you'll realize how much the US version $ucks a$$

If you want to condem a US version of a show that is 3 episodes into it's life, vs the UK version that is 10 SEASONS into it's life, well, go for it. You'll also note how few get BBC America. I didn't until recently. As long as you feel superior to us that we watch the History channel, you sleep well at night.

This. I swear you people are friggin elitist, unhappy freaks that can never be pleased..... It's a great show. Get over yourselves. It's not TGUK, it will never be TGUK.

Does the in studio crowd have to stand around the set looking as uncomfortable and out of place as the crowd in the US version? Please give those people some chairs. It is so forced when the clap while just standing there. Do they only stand in order to hide the guests before they are announced and walk up on stage?

The TGUK crowd stands...it makes it look like there are a lot more people there...

plus, chairs cost money.

They actually bashed on some cars! Tanner seemed to hate the Mustang.

They all hated on the Buicks (duh).

I hope they keep this up and tell us how they actually feel about the cars.

digdug18 wrote: Have you watched the newest british top gear episodes? if you do you'll realize how much the US version $ucks a$$

I like the Rolling Stones. When they come on the radio I turn up the volume. I'll pull up a Stones album on my iPod from time to time.

Now, I really like the Beatles. I think they are a far better band. More innovative, more interesting ideas, more revolutionary. Some people may disagree, but that's how I feel.

But the Beatles being amazing doesn't make the Stones "$uck a$$". It just makes them different.

rutledge doesn't strike me as funny or witty. He strikes me as yutzy and awkward with absolutely no flannel cred.

JoeyM wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

DoctorBlade wrote: I like how they've switched up on the Celeb Interview. Although the bit with them drinking the "moonshine" (was it real? I didn't catch that part)

Hard to tell, for me. It WAS alcohol, without a doubt. But based on how it burned, I don't think it was E100. Wait, Everclear in drinkable versions. It burned too much like 80 proof vs. 200 proof.

Rewatching it right now. They just picked up the liquor, and described it as, "more than 50% alcohol" so we should assume around 100 proof.

"cask strength" single malt is around 65-70% alcohol, so around 130-140 proof. moonshine, which would be like "new make" is more like 160-180 proof or more, as a lot of alcohol evaporates via the barrel aging. either is plenty enough to be flammable. not sure 90-100 proof would burn like that. i thought that to spit fire you needed at least 150 proof.

Did anyone else notice that Tanner and the Stig were in the same shots a couple of times this episode? Maybe he's not the stig after all.

During the time when Ben Collins was "the" Stig for Top Gear UK, they used other people when they needed to. Rumor was that there were six people.....the number was probably much higher. In the "perfect car for 17 year olds" challenge (Series 13, Episode 2) the Stig was in the background of one shot, photocopying his head. I doubt they used Ben Collins for that. Similarly, I'm sure that it was not him on the moving dolly or on the bus in the London Race (Series 10, Episode 5).

I expect that the TG USA series will occasionally use someone else when the shot requires it. Regardless, I think that Tanner's probably the Stig most of the time.

Well they showed all 3 episodes today back to back and I watched them all. The first one still basically sucked though they are getting better. Next episode looks interesting with arming an El Camino.

I watched the 3rd episode last night. It's getting better and I'll be watching Sunday night again. Give 'em time and we'll see what they can make this into.

Just watched the third episode. The hosts lines still feel forced but the show itself was decent. I do like how the celebrity segment is pretty short. I always skip over the celebrity portion in the british version because it's like 20 minutes long.

Does anybody think they will acknowledge the UK show? Is the US version its own show or a partner of the UK show?

I would like to see some sort of challenge between the US guys and the UK guys.

The first episode of the 'new' Australian TG was a challenge episode between them and the UK guys. So I'd say it's definitely a possibility for USA TG, too.

I really enjoyed this episode. There was banter. It finally felt like they were starting to get off of a script. They don't have the chemistry of the TGUK guys... but they don't have years of experience with each other.

I really thought this challenge was great. It was hilarious and very uniquely American.

I also love the fact that they have made fun of drifting and NASCAR.

Strizzo wrote: "cask strength" single malt is around 65-70% alcohol, so around 130-140 proof. moonshine, which would be like "new make" is more like 160-180 proof or more, as a lot of alcohol evaporates via the barrel aging. either is plenty enough to be flammable. not sure 90-100 proof would burn like that. i thought that to spit fire you needed at least 150 proof.

As I understand (and someone on the internets will probably jump in to prove me wrong), but that is actually the origin of the "proofing" of alcohol. Basically, 100 proof is what you need for an alcohol to burn when just lit strait. That is the "proof" that the moonshine you're buying is high enough alcohol.

I know 120 proof catches really easily. You can (and I have) set 80 proof on fire without too much trouble. You just have to warm the shot before you light it, and it has a greater tendency to go out, so you have to be quick. (Bananas foster is tasty and fun to cook!)

Warmed in your mouth, and then sprayed out (more surface area), it should light pretty well. The biggest problem would be it getting diluted by your saliva.