Editing Sinclair C5 (section)

===Reviews===
<!-- Deleted image removed: [[File:Sinclair C5 Gus Desbarats.jpg|right|thumb|Guy Desbarats, the C5's industrial designer, in a publicity photograph issued to Sinclair in an attempt to address the issue of the driver's height]] -->
It soon became apparent that the C5 faced more serious problems with public perception than merely a botched launch event. Media reactions to the C5 were generally negative when the first reviews appeared over the following days. As the ''[[Financial Times]]'' observed, "the few hardy journalists who ventured out on the roads returned shivering and dubious about the C5's abilities in such harsh conditions."<ref name="FT-15-Oct-1985" />

A common concern was that it was simply too vulnerable in traffic. ''[[Your Computer (British magazine)|Your Computer]]'' commented that "a periscope would be handy if you intended driving the C5 on busy roads since your head is only at bonnet level."<ref name="YC-Feb-85" /> ''The Guardian's'' motoring correspondent wrote of her "grave misgivings about its use in congested traffic&nbsp;... On a sharp turn it too easily lifts a rear wheel, is hazardously silent, and low down. It disappears below a car driver's sight-line when pulling up alongside. The prospect of these vehicles merging into heavy traffic, dwarfed by heavy lorries, buses, and cars, is worrying. Their low speed risks turning them into mobile chicanes for other traffic."<ref name="Guardian-13-Jan-85" /> Another ''Guardian'' writer wrote that he "would not want to drive [the] C5 in any traffic at all. My head was on a level with the top of a juggernaut's tyres, the exhaust fumes blasted into my face. Even with the minuscule front and rear lights on, I could not feel confident that a lorry driver so high above the ground would see me."<ref name="Guardian-11-Jan-85" /> Sinclair issued a publicity photograph showing the C5's industrial designer, Gus Desbarats, in a C5 alongside a cardboard cutout of an [[Austin Mini]] to illustrate that the C5 driver's seated position was actually higher than that of a Mini driver.<ref name="Dale164">Dale, p. 164</ref>

As teenagers were among the target audiences for the C5, some commentators also raised the prospect of (in Adamson and Kennedy's words) "packs of 14-year-olds terrorising the neighbourhood in their customised C5s".<ref name="AK193" /> The secretary of the [[Cyclists Touring Club]] raised the prospect of "kids us[ing] them in a pretty wild way. They may run them over paths and pavements and knock people down."<ref>{{cite news|title=Alarm over space-age trike|last=McKie|first=Robin|work=The Times|date=6 January 1985|page=4}}</ref> Sinclair dismissed such concerns – "I have qualms about seven-year-olds riding bicycles on the open road, but I have far fewer qualms about a 14-year-old driving one of these".<ref name="Guardian-13-Jan-85">{{cite news|title=Youth puts trike to the test|last=Baker|first=Sue|work=The Guardian|date=13 January 1985|page=3}}</ref> Teenagers interviewed by ''The Guardian'' were doubtful about whether they would want a C5, commenting that while it was fun to drive they felt insecure in it and preferred their bicycles.<ref name="Guardian-13-Jan-85" />

Sinclair's claims to have revolutionised the electric vehicle were dismissed by many reviewers; ''Your Computer'' called the C5 "more of a toy than the 'ideal solution for all types of local journey' which the brochure claims".<ref name="YC-Feb-85" /> ''The Guardian's'' motoring correspondent also characterised it as "a delightful toy"<ref name="Guardian-13-Jan-85" /> ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'' described it as "a cleverly-designed 'fun' machine that can hardly be regarded as serious, everyday all-weather transport",<ref>{{cite news|title=Sinclair trike 'costs £1.87 for 1,000 miles'|last=Langley|first=John|work=The Daily Telegraph|page=2|date=11 January 1985}}</ref> while ''[[The Engineer (UK magazine)|The Engineer]]'' viewed it as "a smashing big boy's toy, tough enough to take teenage thrashing and possibly a serious vehicle for fit adults to nip out in for the Sunday papers".<ref>{{cite news|title=Technology stands the test|last=Dunn|first=John|work=The Engineer|page=37|date=17 January 1985}}</ref>

On the plus side, the C5's handling characteristics were praised by reviewers. ''The Guardian'' called it "very easy to master once you have become familiar with the under-thigh handlebar steering and the semi-recumbent driving position with feet on bicycle-type pedals."<ref name="Guardian-13-Jan-85" /> The ''[[Daily Mirror]]'' described the arrangement as "surprisingly easy" to master, although it cautioned that "on full speed and on full lock it's very easy to tip it onto two wheels."<ref>{{cite news|title=Skinny Mini!|last=Rimmer|first=Bryan|work=Daily Mirror|date=11 January 1985|page=9}}</ref> The ''[[Daily Express]]'' motoring correspondent wrote that he found the C5 "stable, comfortable and easy to handle".<ref>{{cite news|title=Give it a trike|last=Benson|first=David|work=Daily Express|date=11 January 1985}}</ref>

The verdict from motoring organisations, road safety groups, and consumer watchdogs was decidedly negative and probably sealed the C5's fate. The [[British Safety Council]] (BSC) tested the C5 at Sinclair Vehicles' headquarters in Warwick and issued a highly critical report to its 32,000 members. Sinclair was furious and announced that he would sue the BSC and its chairman, James Tye, for defamation (although nothing came of it)<ref name="AK194-5">Adamson & Kennedy, pp. 194–5</ref> after Tye told the press: "I am shattered that within a few days 14-year-old children will be allowed to drive on the road in this Doodle Bug without a licence&nbsp;... without insurance and without any form of training."<ref>{{cite news|title=And now – an electric car that is legally a bicycle|agency=United Press International|date=10 January 1985}}</ref> Several years later, Tye was happy to take responsibility for the C5's failure, describing himself as "the man entirely to blame for the failure of the Sinclair C5".<ref name="Times-11-Aug-1989">{{cite news|title=Revival of the C5|date=11 August 1989|work=The Times|page=11}}</ref>