***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 3 *****
==========================================================
Ongoing debate.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 2 Oct 15 at 01:40
|
|
Don't know if anyone saw BBC 6pm news this evening, but guess which 'expert' they'd roped in to explain all this to Joe Public - yep, the man in the hat, HJ himself.
|
|
Oh dear God. How did it go?
|
And what has the difference between Euro 5 and Euro 6 to do with the price of fish?
I didn't explain that but I chose it because 180mg, the Euro 5 limit, is what most engines manage without resorting to Adblue (or, so far as we know, to sharp practice.) So 100 mg is the amount to be made up using Adblue.
Even if there are extreme cases of engines emitting 40x the limit - 3200mg - and we rely on Adblue to zap it all, that still adds less than 2.4g/km to the vehicle's CO2 output. That's within one UK band - and a lot less than the price of a fish.
|
>> yep, the man in the hat, HJ himself.
Was there any mention of left foot breaking and varifocals?
|
>> Oh dear God. How did it go?
8:10
www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06bplrj/bbc-news-at-six-24092015
Last edited by: Focusless on Thu 24 Sep 15 at 20:30
|
|
No, no mention of left foot braking or varifocals. In fact nothing noteworthy at all in my view.
|
Crap fuel from supermarket retailers? Oh no, he's changed his tune on that. He's discovered that all fuel is exactly the same.
Anything on wheel-clamping?
|
|
I can't watch iPlayer [sulk]
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 24 Sep 15 at 20:47
|
|
I can assure you categorically that you have not missed anything of importance.
|
|
Actually one point that caught my attention (not part of HJ's bit) was the reporter outside the Wolfsburg factory, who has been told by a VAG spokesperson that 'tomorrow' would be a big day. By that he meant whether any other markets apart from the US were affected, if so to what extent and mutterings about further dismissals (or similar words anyway)
|
>> I can't watch iPlayer [sulk]
Ah right, sorry.
The 'long time industry watcher' said that it's status that keep VW values up and why people buy them 2nd hand. Current 'confusion' will cause values to soften (with a hard 't') but they will eventually recover. That was it.
First time I've heard him speak - wasn't quite what I'd imagined, 'lighter' somehow.
|
He's only a little bloke. And, as you say, a soft voice; and he usually speaks quietly.
I wish people would remember that he was a car dealer. And that's what he knows. Not techie stuff, not business economics, not anything other than buying & selling secondhand cars.
Although he does know quite a bit about that, to be fair.
|
>> I wish people would remember that he was a car dealer.
I've been laughing at others the BBC has interviewed - guy from Motorpoint and a girl from a small used car dealer (that specialises in "prestige" deisels).
|
"Not techie stuff"
That's a bit harsh - he seemed pretty knowledgeable when I met him at the Ace caff a few years ago. He knew, for instance, that RHD A-class Mercs had LHD steering racks and a tortuous linkage that made the steering less pleasant.
|
>> I can't watch iPlayer [sulk]
For a small fee, I can send you any iplayer stuff you want
or
tell you how to set up a proxy.
or
you can carry on sulking. Been about 5 years you have been sulking about this subject now, must be some kind of record.
|
|
How easy is it to set up a proxy to make it appear that I am outwith UK?
|
>> How easy is it to set up a proxy to make it appear that I
>> am outwith UK?
Its easy, I do it all the time. just google for proxy servers. I use Zen mate.
|
|
The London radio stations are full of this every news time, ENOUGH!! most of them don't know wht they are talking about, whipping up callers into hysteria about the UK situation, telling callers that their cars are worthless and won't pass their next MoT. I have a PD engine and as far as I know only undergoes the smoke-test at MoT time, did this start to come in with the CR engines? and are diesels now tested for emission levels or are they all still only having to pass the smoke-test? I'll put my hands-up and admit that I'm a diehard VW fan, every car I've owned as been a VW, this won't put me off.
|
Mmm that looks interesting, I want to subscribe to a club football channel that only shows the games live if you are outwith UK. This looks like it could maybe do the trick but would it affect anything else on the laptop?
[sorry for thread drift]
|
>> Mmm that looks interesting, I want to subscribe to a club football channel that only
>> shows the games live if you are outwith UK. This looks like it could maybe
>> do the trick but would it affect anything else on the laptop?
No its just an add on to the chrome browser.
|
$6 a month buys a good VPN. I can appear to be in any one of 12 countries, with several locations in each country.
www.liquidvpn.com/
|
|
Zero is there any speed issues with a free one? Would it be suitable for watching live streaming or is it a case of "pay x for improved quality type thing"
|
|
I've not had any issues, costs you nowt to try
|
|
Costs me £13 for the monthly subscription to the football club!
|
|
will continue in Computer section if you don't mind?
|
>> yep, the man in the hat, HJ himself.
Thought you meant this man in a hat! s27.postimg.org/rwjwx8yyb/Jack_the_Hat_Mc_Vittie.jpg
|
>> www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11889732/VW-crisis-Volvo-Renault-and-Hyundai-could-all-fail-future-EU-tests.html
>>
The "explanation" there about VW is just ridiculous. The EU6 models have a new (and it's pretty different) engine.
|
VW did fit this technology to some cars in the US with the EA189 engine. Maybe they really did have it on the test cars and it's not on the customer cars. Maybe it's not all just software.
End of the day.... all that's happening is speculation. None of us knows what happened. All we know is they did wrong.
|
Senior banker I ran into last night told me he thought cost of VW emissions scandal cd be more than 10 times €6.5bn company has set aside
twitter.com/iankatz1000/status/647319998067834880
Last edited by: madf on Fri 25 Sep 15 at 14:40
|
I don't understand why VW are being criticized and alleged to have 'let motorists down'.
All vehicle makers publish skewed figures to make their products look better than they really are. It's bog standard commercial behaviour.
Clearly the company has broken some pointless regulation dreamed up by the Americans. How unutterably boring and silly. And wasteful and expensive.
|
>> I don't understand why VW are being criticized and alleged to have 'let motorists down'.
>>
>>
>> All vehicle makers publish skewed figures to make their products look better than they really
>> are. It's bog standard commercial behaviour.
>>
Indeed so, and not just car manufacturers; pretty much every product advertised makes some claim which is at best optimistic and at worst downright misleading. It's called marketing I suppose.
VW do seem to have over egged the pudding somewhat though, and now politicians are jumping on the 'something must be done' bandwagon any chance of rational, reasoned debate and response has been lost.
|
|
Perhaps it's time for said politicians to be tested against earlier promises? I bet their software switches modes all the time...
|
|
If it was simply a case of "the car must pass this emissions test", they might have a defence, if not a moral one. But there is actually an explicit rule that they must have a defeat mode that kills or cripples the emission controls, and that is the rule they broke.
|
>> If it was simply a case of "the car must pass this emissions test", they
>> might have a defence, if not a moral one. But there is actually an explicit
>> rule that they must have a defeat mode that kills or cripples the emission controls,
>> and that is the rule they broke.
>>
Yes, that's what I meant by 'over egged the pudding' really. I'm not sure there's a moral defense for any misleading advertising.
|
>> I don't understand why VW are being criticized and alleged to have 'let motorists down'.
>>
>>
>> All vehicle makers publish skewed figures to make their products look better than they really
>> are. It's bog standard commercial behaviour.
Cars are supposed to run in their "as tested" mode - hence stop / start re-engages every time you start the car and can't be turned off etc.
What VW did, which seems to (but may not) be unique is the car ran in a special mode while being tested.
|
>>
>> Cars are supposed to run in their "as tested" mode - hence stop / start
>> re-engages every time you start the car and can't be turned off etc.
>>
The stop / start can be turned off on every car I've seen with it (although not permanently de-activated) on every car I've seen with it. I've always found this bizarre, given that the owner is paying reduced 'road tax' based on an emissions test with stop / start activated.
|
Automatic stop/start may be a good thing but it's as bad as it is good, seems to me. It imposes a leisurely style on the driver, and impatient drivers will sometimes stall. Being one of those I sometimes stall or slip the clutch excessively, damn damn damn!
I hate driver aids on the whole. Old-fashioned cat.
|
|
Pain in the backside on the Volvo...(damned engine was too quiet)....nuisance on the 320...but I may have found a way to fiddle it. AC's right of course.
|
|
I turn the stop/start off nearly every time i get in the car, I find it really annoying ! Unfortunately it can't be turned off permanently !
|
>> and impatient drivers will sometimes stall.
If you mean you'll install because you have stop stop.... well if you have stop start and stall it will restart it for you. Did that once or twice on the Passat CC.
|
>> The stop / start can be turned off on every car I've seen with it
>> (although not permanently de-activated) on every car I've seen with it. I've always found this
>> bizarre, given that the owner is paying reduced 'road tax' based on an emissions test
>> with stop / start activated.
>>
You can't turn it off on my wife's car.
The engine is off before you come to a standstill, hold it on the brakes and before you can hit the throttle the car is already rolling.
You can knock the car into neutral while stationary and take your foot off the brakes, knock it back into drive and off you roll.
One major safety point for me though is when the car is in neutral, you can put it back into drive without proof anyone is in the driver's seat e.g. no foot on the brake, and off the car will roll.
|
>> The stop / start can be turned off on every car I've seen with it
>> (although not permanently de-activated) on every car I've seen with it.
Exactly. Whatever you do, it'll always start with stop/start activated.
Same with auto-boxes with different modes, such as Mercedes. They always start in E mode. If you want S mode (which will stick in my old Merc) you have to select it after each start now.
|
Vauxhall's CEO resigned suddenly. Vauxhall claims that it is not related to VW emission event :o)
www.motoringresearch.com/car-news/surprise-as-tim-tozer-resigns-as-vauxhall-boss-0923996630
|
|
In case nobody said this already, there should be some interesting offers on new diesels shortly.
|
>> Vauxhall's CEO resigned suddenly. Vauxhall claims that it is not related to VW emission event
>> :o)
>> www.motoringresearch.com/car-news/surprise-as-tim-tozer-resigns-as-vauxhall-boss-0923996630
>>
He's not been there long. It's being reported that he didn't resign.
|
VAG seem to have dug themselves an ever expanding hole. It will be interesting to see who gets dragged into it.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34373637
|
>>VAG seem to have dug themselves an ever expanding hole
I suspect that this was a bit of preemptive strike from Bosch. They've seemingly produced the software, and obviously would have known that they had put a test defeating mechanism into the software.
Their risk was then they were seen to be party to the scheme and the media and/or the government agencies widen the scope to include anybody that Bosch supply.
This is, I guess, to adopt the same argument as the gun companies. "Of course we designed and built something bad, but we told them not to do anything bad with it so its not our fault".
I suspect that Bosch will need some damage limitation going forward.
|
|
This whole affair reminds me of the MP's expenses scandal. Just as you think it cannot get any worse, something else comes along to widen and deepen it. I find it quite entertaining.
|
But the MP expenses scandal was largely a load of media ****** which was financially insignificant.
This one is stunning in its implications.
Last edited by: Webmaster on Tue 6 Oct 15 at 08:47
|
>> This one is stunning in its implications.
'Corporate execs tell fibs, play fast and loose with product safety and steal lots of money Shock Horror' you mean FMR? Forgive me but I must sit down, otherwise I may faint from the shock.
Nothing new under the sun comrade.
|
|
Will it have any effect on new UK prices, or even second hand values? Probably nobody knows, although as my next wheels will be petrol, and not VW, it doesn't affect me.
|
If I had meant "shock horror" I would have said so. I meant "stunning in its implications" and so that's what I wrote. Its a thing I do.
I assume that it is outside your interest or beyond your understanding, I think you've explained before that you don't understand all this stuff. This will, I believe, begin a fundamental shift in the automotive industry, controlling bodies and the behaviour of the customer.
It won't kill off the diesel, albeit that it was likely to diminish anyway. It is going to change other stuff though.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sun 27 Sep 15 at 23:03
|
Everyone writes what they mean FMR, or tries to. But 'stunning in its implications' seems to me a vague, faffing phrase.
You make confident predictions about the future of the diesel engine. No doubt your business experience encourages you to do so. I'm not really convinced though. Heard a lot of that Scheiss from cats perhaps a bit - I don't mean to offend - like you.
|
>>Everyone writes what they mean FMR,
Then why ask the question?
>>.............. you mean FMR?
And I don't know about vague & faffing. Perhaps you could help me understand how to phrase it unfaffingly if I want to say that the aftermath, impacts and fall out from the current events are going to be impressive and surprising.
>>I'm not really convinced though
Well I guess we'll see, won't we.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 28 Sep 15 at 01:13
|
Do relax a bit FMR.
Of course interesting things will happen in the car market and of course the diesel engine will be with us for the foreseeable future. Who could doubt it?
|
A friend of mine had a new Passat Alltrack(?) until it was written off a month or two back. Due to the model change (and logistics of getting anything in Australia) he couldn't get a direct replacement and opted for a new Outback instead, also to get the safety tech he opted for petrol (well it's only 55p/l here) after many years of VAG diesels. At the time he wasn't overly happy with this.
He's now counting himself lucky as the press is full of 'diesel residuals will plummet' talk and coupled with the still troublesome DSGs (albeit the DQ200 which is in many/most petrol models) the brand is sleighed to suffer a lot in Aus.
It'll be interesting to see if/how the market or regulation changes, initially I thought it would be another storm in a teacup but I feel that more fundamental changes may now occur if only in regulatory regimes.
Last edited by: idle_chatterer on Mon 28 Sep 15 at 04:51
|
We all know the vehicle testing authorities are complicit in cheating on CO2 and mpg testing.
Does anyone seriously suggest they will reform themselves and thus admit that complicity?
Last edited by: madf on Mon 28 Sep 15 at 07:49
|
>> We all know the vehicle testing authorities are complicit in cheating on CO2 and mpg
>> testing.
Do we really know that as a fact? If so how?
Genuine open question, not challenge.
|
>> >> We all know the vehicle testing authorities are complicit in cheating on CO2 and
>> mpg
>> >> testing.
>>
>> Do we really know that as a fact? If so how?
>>
>> Genuine open question, not challenge.
The vehicle testing authorities are not complicit in cheating. They are however completely at the mercy of the very restrictive and proscriptive nature and specifications of the tests. How you make the testing more flexible yet completely 100% reproducible standard is a tricky one.
However, maybe because VW have been caught cheating, and the outcome, for them, has/may be very painful indeed, that might be enough for car makers to become a little more responsible.
For now.
Till the next time
|
Well the existing rules are open to cheating and the authorities know that. It was originally planned new regulations would be brought in in 2017..World Light Duty Test Procedure (WLTP).
tinyurl.com/oq7mpmb
The car makers want a three year delay..
The authorities know none of the published figures are achievable . But they have signed up to the various Global Warming initiatives,, so they should not be discussing ANY delays but doing the opposite - bring tests forward to reduce CO2 emissions.
And as we know, if you propose a delay, you'll make sure you all cannot meet teh earlier date - to make your point.
So here we have the EC supporting cuts in CO2 emissions - except for cars where there are no cuts in the real world.
The Regulators have been captured by the car industry.. (Like the FSA were by the banks, and OFGEM by the electricity and gas companies, )
|
>> Everyone writes what they mean FMR,
Yeah, right !
|
Not been online for a while and new to this debate but my take on it is that VW developed a system which under certain driving conditions used less fuel than normal.
In other driving conditions it uses more fuel.
The car can sense a test situation and reduces fuel usage is the same as the car can sense gentle throttle usage and straight level roads and reduces fuel usage.
Why should anyone be surprised?
My Octavia allows me to select from Eco/Normal/Sport and among other things it affects throttle response and acceleration.
The last car I had was a Passat and at a steady 55-60 on a straight road it used very little fuel - perhaps it thought it was on test.
Do we really want to enforce a regime that forces the manufacturers not to use every skill to reduce fuel usage because it can be seen as improving the test figures or do we want to encourage the manufacturers to produce cars which use as little fuel as possible.
|
Not been online for a while and new to this debate but my take on it is that VW developed a system which under certain driving conditions used less fuel than normal.
It has nothing to do with fuel consumption.
It's all about emissions of NO and other pollutants.
|
>> It has nothing to do with fuel consumption.
>>
>> It's all about emissions of NO and other pollutants.
So while it's in "clean beat the test" mode is it using more or less fuel?
Can it enter "clean" mode in normal quiet road driving?
I know that's not the purpose of the workaround, just thinking...
|
>> >> It has nothing to do with fuel consumption.
>> >>
>> >> It's all about emissions of NO and other pollutants.
indeed, so unless your vw owner can prove a loss they have no legs to stand on when it comes to compensation.
>> So while it's in "clean beat the test" mode is it using more or less
>> fuel?
>> Can it enter "clean" mode in normal quiet road driving?
>>
>> I know that's not the purpose of the workaround, just thinking...
now claimed fuel consumption is a whole new ball game, one that hasn't been touched upon yet, and of course we all know the makers wouldn't possibly put "cheat devices" in place for that test don't we.
|
>>
>> Do we really want to enforce a regime that forces the manufacturers not to use
>> every skill to reduce fuel usage because it can be seen as improving the test
>> figures or do we want to encourage the manufacturers to produce cars which use as
>> little fuel as possible.
>>
I thought that the assertion here is that the 'defeat code' in question was included to address the testing regime rather than to ever contribute to real world results where that behaviour is (was) never activated ? This resulted in cars certified to meet regulations actually never meeting those regulations outside the test process and by a large margin (I read a factor of 40x). I'm not sure this is comparable to the results for fuel economy which might differ by say 10 or 20% and be an annoyance? I imagine that the typical motorist would be unlikely to measure their car's NO output whereas they might notice it using 4000% of the claimed fuel ? Moreover, this potentially renders these cars illegal to operate in some regulatory regimes which might also be something of an inconvenience to their owners ?
So, I don't think the two are comparable but I do not feel strongly on the issue either.
|
One of the several criminal complaints to the prosecutors in Germany against the VW CEO is from VW.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34381459
|
We don't know what the effect on fuel economy would be if the cars ran in test mode all the time, but we can speculate. Other things being equal, there is a three way trade-off between economy (linked to CO2), NOx and particulates. A four way one if you include performance.
So if the test mode is configured for minimum NOx, it would be reasonable think that economy and particulates would be worse unless performance was capped.
Last edited by: Manatee on Mon 28 Sep 15 at 13:45
|
NOX comes from high combustion temperatures . High CO2 comes from inefficient combustion - typically rich mixtures or low combustion temeratures .
So to reduce NOX, increase fuel intake. Lowers combustion temperatures = worse fuel consumption..
Or reduce air intake: lowers power.
Or inject AdBlue.. Tank runs dry very quickly.
Last edited by: madf on Mon 28 Sep 15 at 15:03
|
|
It seems the emissions gap between the cars in the VAG stable and other German cars is vast, if they have managed to do this by mechanical engineering alone then hats off to them... we will have to wait and see.
|
>> It seems the emissions gap between the cars in the VAG stable and other German
>> cars is vast
if they have managed to do this by mechanical engineering alone then
>> hats off to them... we will have to wait and see.
no we wont, they have admitted that it was only achieved by putting in a cheat cycle.
Question is, have other makers go as close as they have by doing the same.
|
|
Sorry that's I meant, it will be interesting to see how the other manufactures have achieved this big gap without any software tweaks.
|
Audi and Skoda join the party and put their hands up (yes, I know they're part of the VW group)
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34377443
EDIT - and also SEAT
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34390369
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 29 Sep 15 at 13:14
|
Volkswagen has announced that nearly 1.2 million of its vehicles sold in the UK are fitted with the software behind the emissions scandal.
It includes diesel-powered cars with the VW brand, Audi, Seat and Skoda as well as VW commercial vehicles.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34399503
The specific number of vehicles affected under each brand are:-
â– Volkswagen cars 508,276
â– Audi 393,450
â– Seat 76,773
â– Skoda 131,569
â– VW commercial vehicles 79,838
â– Total 1,189,906
|
|
The BBC were talking to a "vehicle technician" on the 1 o-clock news who was suggesting that the re-fit was an engine out job!
|
>>suggesting that the re-fit was an engine out job!
McLaren could bid for the contract - they can swap an engine in 2 hours after all the practice they've had recently, and it would help to restore their depleted finances.
|
|
Why is it an issue in the UK, though, when the car is sold on the basis of CO2 emissions (which it apparently achieves without any farting about with AdBlue or fancy software) when the problem lies with NOX emissions?
|
As far as I can see, its not.
The lawyers wish it was and the Daily Mail hasn't got much else at the moment.
|
>> Why is it an issue in the UK, though, when the car is sold on
>> the basis of CO2 emissions (which it apparently achieves without any farting about with AdBlue
>> or fancy software) when the problem lies with NOX emissions?
I've been trying to understand that one as well, The reporting in main stream media has done a fine job of conflating/confusing the differing pollution threats and the techniques to to measure and control them.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 30 Sep 15 at 17:24
|
|
Does anywhere in Europe test NOX?
|
Yes, they all do - within the EU anyway. The limit for the latest vehicles is 80mg per km.
To its credit, the BBC report does at least mention the difference between oxides of nitrogen and carbon dioxide, and explains which one UK tax is based on, but then includes some pointless vox pops with VW customers who clearly don't get it at all. Of course, if their vehicles are above the required NOx level, tax doesn't come into it; they're not legal to be on the road at all. And it seems to be the Euro 5 standard (180mg, introduced 2009) that the VW offenders breach, not the 2014 80mg Euro 6. That widens the net considerably
|
The trouble is likely that the fix may increase consumption of AdBlue or fuel or both - or make the car less pleasant to drive.
I would imagine if that is the case, large sums of compensation ...
Last edited by: madf on Wed 30 Sep 15 at 18:04
|
|
Is VAG engineering really so poor that they are the only manufacturer who can't meet the regulations without a fudge?
|
>> Is VAG engineering really so poor that they are the only manufacturer who can't meet
>> the regulations without a fudge?
I don't think it's poor engineering. They must be perfectly capable of building compliant engines. It's just that they would have greater CO2 output (worse fuel economy) and/or cost more.
|
Whether it is tested or not is immaterial to the point which is that there is a NOx limit.
Euro 5 emission limits (petrol):
CO - 1.0 g/km
HC - 0.10 g/km
NOx - 0.06 g/km
PM (Particulate matter) - 0.005 g/km (Direct Injection only)
Euro 5 emission limits (diesel):
CO - 0.50 g/km
HC+ NOx - 0.23 g/km
NOx - 0.18 g/km
PM (Particulate matter) - 0.005 g/km
PM (Particulate matter) - 6.0x10 ^11/km
Euro 6 emission limits (petrol):
CO - 1.0 g/km
HC - 0.10 g/km
NOx - 0.06 g/km
PM (Particulate matter) - 0.005 g/km (Direct Injection only)
PM (Particulate matter) - 6.0x10 ^11/km (Direct Injection only)
Euro 6 emission limits (diesel):
CO - 0.50 g/km
HC+ NOx - 0.17 g/km
NOx - 0.08 g/km
PM (Particulate matter) - 0.005 g/km
PM (Particulate matter) - 6.0x10 ^11/km
In addition to being sold as compliant with the above limits (albeit in test conditions) cars are sold as having a given CO2 output (agian in test conditions).
I believe the rules in Europe, as in the US, are designed to prevent compliance being achieved through the use of settings are clean up measures that are suppressed or defeated for normal use, notwithstanding that real world use will in most cases bust some or all of the limits or stated CO2 emissions, since it is not AFAIK illegal to optimise the vehicle's emissions at test condition (provided the control systems are the same as in normal use).
So -
As to the effect on CO2 of making the cars pass the tests with a set up that is also used in normal running, back to the trade-offs. The obvious starting point would be to use for normal running the settings and configuration that the car passed the tests with (the presumed condition on which compliance and declared emissions are based).
The problem then is that the three way trade-off, between economy (a proxy for CO2 output), particulates and NOx, bites. NOx goes down, the other two go up. The extra particulates may just accumulate in the DPF - although that will require more frequent burn-offs, so that will increase CO2 further.
To WdB's point made sometime, another starting point would be to continue to use the dirty "road" settings, and apply clean up measures (e.g. selective catalytic reduction using Adblue) for the NOx. That will also increase CO2 output and possibly require impractically large amounts of Adblue, dependent on the amount of NOx to be eliminated.
If it was simply a case of disabling the dirty "road" mode, and everything being hunky dory, they wouldn't have had to cheat in the first place.
|
>>If it was simply a case of disabling the dirty "road" mode, and everything being hunky
>>dory, they wouldn't have had to cheat in the first place.
Indeed. It would seem that the only possible retrofit is to fit a different engine which *does* legally pass the limits. If this engine was capable of doing so, then there would have been little point in the cheat.
But then, presumably, the engine would not perform as it was supposed, and they would end up paying compensation.
Or, they buy every car back? Or they swap every car?
Or what?
Even if they could totally fix the car the US would still sue them for emotional distress or some such, but I find it difficult to see how it would get that far.
Unless they have a better engine underwraps that they can use.
|
tinyurl.com/olftv4d (What Car?)
Explains it's about NOx but then spoils it by mentioning particulates.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Wed 30 Sep 15 at 18:08
|
>> tinyurl.com/olftv4d (What Car?)
That article is rubbish.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 30 Sep 15 at 18:56
|
How can VW now recall and fix cars so easily?
Why they have not done it in the first place then?
|
>> How can VW now recall and fix cars so easily?
>>
>> Why they have not done it in the first place then?
>>
IMO, from what I have read about the problems this will not be fixed for many many weeks or months.
it appears that it is not just a software update but now reports of new exhaust parts to be fitted.
If this is true then manufacturing, unplanned production, distribution etc will extend the time to fix all these vehicles.
Just tracing and contacting owners is task in itself.
|
>> tinyurl.com/olftv4d (What Car?)
>> Explains it's about NOx but then spoils it by mentioning particulates.
>>
I think the use of a defeat device is a bit more than "This is felt not to be in the spirit of the tests".
|
I'm pretty sure my Transporter (2.0 diesel) is affected by this. Do I want VW to tinker with the software such that it emits less but gives inferior economy and performance, even though the present emissions pass the MOT test?
What do you think!?
|
>> I'm pretty sure my Transporter (2.0 diesel) is affected by this. Do I want VW
>> to tinker with the software such that it emits less but gives inferior economy and
>> performance, even though the present emissions pass the MOT test?
>>
>> What do you think!?
>>
I think you are a cad and a bounder if you don't get VW to fix it.
And an idiot if you do...
:-)
But then anyone who buys a VAG product has - to my mind - been brainwashed by a quality image now twenty years out of date,
Last edited by: madf on Thu 1 Oct 15 at 17:47
|
>> What do you think!?
>>
I think you'll get it done, eventually, after a few months when you've read the reviews. No point in being an early adopter.
|
Volkswagen Recall. Volume 2. - Focusless
