PDA

View Full Version : Dave Gorman - America Unchained


toasterman
06-02-2008, 8:54 PM
I watched Dave Gorman's new documentary last night - "America Unchained", where he attempts to drive from one side of America to the other without using any chain-garages, chain-supermarkets, chain-hotels, etc.. along the way.

I don't know why this bothers me, but I'm sure they said the car he was driving (big American estate car, wood paneling on outside.. really ugly it was) had around a 20 gallon tank, and did about 18 miles to the gallon. But being as it's America, is this an English gallon or an American gallon?
An English gallon seems more likely, as 20 gallon (American) tank, would be...well..huge. But then, American cars are huge.

Either way, next time you hear an American complaining about the price of their fuel (and they do), tell them to stop buying such rubbish cars.
An episode of Reaper recently was going on about this hybrid car they had (it was a Prius) that did 42mpg overall...how rubbish is that? You can get better in most modern diesels.

harveybobbles
06-02-2008, 10:37 PM
And most modern petrols too...

toasterman
06-02-2008, 11:30 PM
Yeah thats very true actually.
A quick Google search finds owners saying they get 40-50mpg average overall. Thats rubbish really. You can get more than that out of a good diesel.

I wish I'd known that when Friends Of The Earth came round my house a few months ago trying to get me to give them money (door to door chuggers).
During the "awareness" section of the conversation that chuggers offer for free, she askied me if I'd considered buying a hybrid (my job requires a car). I just told her they were too expensive (my 12-year old Rover was £575). I think I'm doing the world a favour because:
a) I'm keeping an old car on the road, rather than contributing to junking/building of new cars all the time
and
b) If I'm driving an old Rover, it means there's one less in the world that you might end up having to drive :rotfl:

goldspanners
06-02-2008, 11:39 PM
american gallons are smaller than british gallons. so why would a british gallon be more likely?
the benefits from a hybrid car is more to do with emissions,the engine is powering a generator at a fairly constant speed,its under very little load compared to a conventional cars engine,it still has to rev up,but for shorter periods.
the best benfits will be when they are running on electricity at slow speeds, i.e city and around town driving,but switches to engine power when on the motorway,this is where the fuel consumption gets better.

balsingh
06-02-2008, 11:58 PM
why are US and UK gallons different anyway? Doesnt make sense!!

Thomas99
07-02-2008, 12:16 AM
why are US and UK gallons different anyway? Doesnt make sense!!

None of these gallons make sense, should be litres every where

Pew Pew Pew Lasers!
07-02-2008, 1:08 AM
There are very stringent emissions regulations in the USA regarding diesels. For instance, you can't import a diesel that isn't certified in the USA. You just can't, full stop.

Frankly if I was paying what they're paying for petrol, I wouldn't have a diesel either. I'd have a nice big V12.

Hintza
07-02-2008, 8:16 AM
8 pints in a gallon US and UK but 16oz in US Pint and 20oz in UK pint. So quite a difference.

Or

US = 3.785 litres
UK = 4.561 litres

Biggles
07-02-2008, 8:50 AM
None of these gallons make sense, should be litres every whereAh, but US liters or UK litres?

rdwarr
07-02-2008, 8:55 AM
.....Why?:D

As this thread has demonstrated few people really understand what a "gallon" is! I only know the difference between a US gallon and a UK one because I used to work in the oil industry.

Metric is so much easier. For example, a cubic metre of water ways a tonne. Anybody know (without working it out) what a cubic yard of water weighs in Imperial?

toasterman
07-02-2008, 9:08 AM
american gallons are smaller than british gallons. so why would a british gallon be more likely?
the benefits from a hybrid car is more to do with emissions,the engine is powering a generator at a fairly constant speed,its under very little load compared to a conventional cars engine,it still has to rev up,but for shorter periods.
the best benfits will be when they are running on electricity at slow speeds, i.e city and around town driving,but switches to engine power when on the motorway,this is where the fuel consumption gets better.
I thought it must be a british gallon, because they said it had a 20 gallon tank.
Hang on.. I've just realised my maths has been totally wrong. I had the us and uk gallons the other way around..

Ok, so if thats US gallons, a 20 gallon tank is 74 litres. I've never been in an estate car with bigger than about a 50 litre tank. It'd be huge.
Whereas 20 gallons UK, is 90 litres...which...well thats massive.

As for the Prius, doesn't it use petrol to power whatever sort of generator keeps the batteries charged? So it's still using petrol.
And you're still apparently damaging the environment more than keeping an old car on the road.
I guess the question would be whether producing a diesel car creates more pollution than producing a hybrid car, or not.. and say if the diesel is better - how long would you have to run it for to create as much pollution as the other one did on-birth. You kinda need a total-pollution-of-ownership figure, based on keeping it say 3, 5, 7, or 10 years.

It's an American car in America!...go on have a guess!
Lol. Yes its an American car, in America.. but the presenter is British, the production company is British, and they know it'll more likely be watched by a British audience.


There are very stringent emissions regulations in the USA regarding diesels. For instance, you can't import a diesel that isn't certified in the USA. You just can't, full stop.

Frankly if I was paying what they're paying for petrol, I wouldn't have a diesel either. I'd have a nice big V12.
Lol they have big engines. Doesn't mean they go fast though, or corner well, etc. American cars all seem to weigh more than my house, and are HUGE. You're right though - if petrol was half the price, what would I care if my car did 20mpg.

toasterman
07-02-2008, 9:26 AM
As this thread has demonstrated few people really understand what a "gallon" is! I only know the difference between a US gallon and a UK one because I used to work in the oil industry.

Metric is so much easier. For example, a cubic metre of water ways a tonne. Anybody know (without working it out) what a cubic yard of water weighs in Imperial?
Someone tried to sell me on the benefit of metric last night. I think most people use both systems - drinks in pints, but oil (cooking or car) in litres, height in ft.
When there's a drugs bust, the amount the police find.. if it's cocaine it's in grams, and if it's marijuana it's in ounces.

I think it works keeping both because nobody converts from one to the other. People I know who enjoy cooking have about 8 different types of measurement devices for the different systems.
Plus I don't think anyone does imperial accurately..a pint of beer is measured by eye, people will say they're "about 6ft", it's "a couple of hundred yards to the junction", and if you buy apples...how much do they weigh? "2lb as near as makes no difference". If you wanted it accurately, you'd use metric.

And I had no idea what a us or uk gallon was.
As fuel is measured in litres, and fuel tank size is measured in litres, I find it annoying that how economical a car is, is measured in miles per gallon.
I reckon they just do it to make it sound better. 8 miles to the litre sounds rubbish.. but 36 miles to the gallon sounds...well.. its a bigger number, even if I had no idea what a gallon was.

On that note, when manufacturers release cars and quote an MPG, which system are they using? imperial or us?

CrustyMcMuffin
07-02-2008, 9:40 AM
Any idea if this program will be repeated any time soon?

epninety
07-02-2008, 11:58 AM
Ok, so if thats US gallons, a 20 gallon tank is 74 litres. I've never been in an estate car with bigger than about a 50 litre tank. It'd be huge.
Whereas 20 gallons UK, is 90 litres...which...well thats massive.


IIRC, Mk1 Land Rover Discovery has a 79 litre tank, and it's physically not *that* big.
Volumes can be deceptive too - your 50L tank might be 30cm x 30cm x 55cm (=49.5L), but changing to a 79L tank only makes it 36cm x 36cm 61cm so only 6cm bigger in each direction.

Modern tanks are often plastic and moulded into complex shapes making use of wasted space where it's expensive to make a metal tank fit.

toasterman
07-02-2008, 12:03 PM
Any idea if this program will be repeated any time soon?
It was on more4, so normally I'd say yes, BUT they're releasing it on dvd on Monday, so maybe not in this case.

goldspanners
07-02-2008, 7:38 PM
i though the big wigs in brussels were going to outlaw the use of imperial measurement?

LandyAndy
08-02-2008, 11:02 AM
How many people know their fuel consumption in litres/100km or what would be a good or bad figure?

Keep to good old mpg.

toasterman
08-02-2008, 7:32 PM
How many people know their fuel consumption in litres/100km or what would be a good or bad figure?

Keep to good old mpg.
So long as all cars are measured the same, I guess it doesn't really matter what its measured in.
But as gallons don't seem to be used to measure anything else car related, it'd surely make more sense to measure it in litres.. even if it's miles per litre.. thats what people really want to know - how far they get on a tank of fuel, and how many miles they can go for how much.

Redhouse
08-02-2008, 7:36 PM
The point of US/UK gallons to me was irrelevant...more to the point was that when he got stuck in Idaho (?) for a week awaiting a new cameraman he went to a Best Western and ate in McDonalds...therefore defeating the object of the challenge and as such despite his self-congratulory back-slapping on the beach on the East Coast, he had in fact failed. So there.

(Entertaining program though :) )

toasterman
08-02-2008, 7:44 PM
Well theres some spoilers for people who didn't see it.
He did go a bit mental there, yes..I don't really understand why out of frustration you would do that.

And he might have ate the McDonalds, but as he vomited it all back up again, I'm not sure that counts. Technically he paid for it and gave money to "the man".. I suppose.
I was amazed at how well that bit was filmed actually - from the side so you knew he was vomiting, but you didn't actually see any vomit.. considering he didn't have anyone to hold the camera for him! If I'm throwing up, the last thing I'd be able to concentrate on was how much of my face was in shot.

I must admit I thought it sounded quite boring from the tv listings..but it was entertaining. I should have guessed as much - Gorman always finds ways to make something that could be dull, interesting.

tomstickland
08-02-2008, 7:49 PM
Someone tried to sell me on the benefit of metric last night.
In terms of measuring a single quantity then no measurement system can have benefit over another. They are simply an aribtrary definition of a single unit.

Personally I prefer to use metric measures because they're what I'm used to.
I don't think anyone does imperial accurately..a pint of beer is measured by eye, people will say they're "about 6ft", it's "a couple of hundred yards to the junction", and if you buy apples...how much do they weigh? "2lb as near as makes no difference". If you wanted it accurately, you'd use metric.

You can be just as inaccurate with both methods. There's nothing wrong with approximation though.

Redhouse
08-02-2008, 7:54 PM
Sorry about the spoilers. I'm new :(

*slaps himself*

Redhouse
08-02-2008, 7:58 PM
Oh yeah, just thought of another one...he seemed to use his mobile (cell) phone quite a bit...wonder who that contract was with...AT&T? More money to 'The Man' methinks!!! ;) Heh heh...

toasterman
08-02-2008, 10:33 PM
Lol to be fair, it's hard to go with a locally owned phone company.

On that same note though, I mean his car he was driving was made by a big corporation.. Ford. If he wanted to go entirely small non-international companies, he should have driven it in an Ariel Atom or something else made by a small independent car company. It couldn't have broken down any more than his car did really, can it.
The camera they filmed it on was probably manufactured by some big corporation. Bound to be really.

I was quite surprised at how much it cost him overall.. I've wondered about travelling across America myself, but if it's gonna cost the best part of £5,000 - maybe have to save up a bit first.

Biggles
09-02-2008, 12:34 AM
Gorman always finds ways to make something that could be dull, interesting.Or, as I see it, he always makes something that sounds dull, dull.

Like his first (to my knowledge) appearance on our screens. Though he calls himself a 'comedian', that involved travelling the world looking for other people named Dave Gorman. How humorous was that? Er, not at all.

He's a guy who isn't funny doing things that aren't funny. This idea for a show (America Unchained) sounds as though it could have been interesting if done by someone with a bit of character.

Redhouse
09-02-2008, 6:25 AM
Wasn't his final spend something like $8800? And he was there for about 5 weeks wasn't he? I reckon that's pretty darn good.

I'm pretty well travelled in the States but to be honest once you've driven along one strip of Highway with the ubiquitous McD's, Burger King, Wendys, Wal-Mart, Circle K etc etc etc it doesn't matter if you're in Utah or Illinois. I think Gormans idea had credibility but aside from the spur of the moment decision to visit places called 'Independence' it really lacked a point. Going 'unchained' seemed very tenuous and weak to me.

toasterman
09-02-2008, 9:22 AM
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there Biggles. I liked his thing of finding other people with the same name as him...because it seemed like such an odd thing to do, and was an idea that came out of a drunken night with his housemate.
Because it didn't involve a huge fancy set, flashy graphics, a band, or the word "celebrity" in it's title - just a basic idea, kept simple...and I thought it was funny.

As for unchained.. I've read up on it a little bit and it was never originally going to be a film.
He was just going to travel because he didn't get a chance to see anything on a tour he did. A production company approached him and wanted to make it a film, and he didn't like the idea.. felt he'd get treated differently by people if he had a camera crew and another car following him everywhere he went.. plus he'd have to get permission to film everywhere, etc.
I think they twisted his arm and he agreed so long as it was one person with a camera filming him, from the same vehicle.

boatman
10-02-2008, 5:57 PM
When i was out in the states before christmas, there were car adverts on the radio proclaiming 'our car does 28miles to the gallon!', WOW!! Different world.