***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 4 *****
==========================================================
Ongoing Emissions
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 9 Oct 15 at 01:43
|
VW is suspending the sale of 4,000 vehicles in the UK in the wake of the emissions scandal.
The move will involve vehicles across the VW group including the VW, Audi, Skoda and Seat brands.
VW said it was a temporary measure and that it intended to return the vehicles for sale once a fix is identified for the cars.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34410390
|
|
I'm still unclear what the 'fix' could usefully be. Putting them back to the low-emissions state will presumably render them undrivable, but removing that state from the software will make no difference, as they will never (normally) be tested under those conditions again.
|
>> I'm still unclear what the 'fix' could usefully be. Putting them back to the low-emissions
>> state will presumably render them undrivable, but removing that state from the software will make
>> no difference, as they will never (normally) be tested under those conditions again.
There will be a whole range of options I should think, all with one big trade-off or another.
Reducing maximum power and torque may enable a compromise that will pass the all tests and hit its CO2 rating using a single mode without hardware changes (it's not the fact that the cars emit more when not on test that's the issue - it's the use of a different emissions-control-defeating configuration - optimising for the test is fine, they all do it). The problem with that is then a customer one - you paid for a car with 170bhp and 350Nm and now you have 130bhp and 250.
Other options to maintain claimed performance and hit the emissions limits using clean up measures will most likely increase fuel consumption and the CO2 which will affect the measure on which the car's tax rating is based and the average for the manufacturer (they all have a target for this linked to the average mass of their cars).
The customer has arguably been a winner here, at the expense of air quality - VW did what it did to sell cars with strong performance and economy. One of those is going to suffer if they "fix" them without coming up with some other offsets. Narrower tyres inflated to 100psi might help:)
EDIT - just seen Zero's comment, he's right. None of this will fix their credibility, or the 'damage' already done.
Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 2 Oct 15 at 11:10
|
"optimising for the test is fine, they all do it"
I'm not that 'they all do it' makes it fine. If the whole emissions (esp. CO2) thing was to keep the Greens happy, why did the Greens not insist that the figures obtained were realistic? The law of unintended consequences is always ready and waiting to bite the unwary, and unworldly environmentalists are more unwary than most.
|
>> I'm not that 'they all do it' makes it fine. If the whole emissions (esp.
>> CO2) thing was to keep the Greens happy, why did the Greens not insist that
>> the figures obtained were realistic?
To some extent it doesn't matter. The test is a benchmark. How are you going to stop manufacturers fiddling with gear ratios and variable valve timing/lift to optimise for the test?
Once a benchmark is established it can be gradually reduced to achieve concomitant reductions in real output, or used as a basis for tax, like RAC horsepower.
The extent to which it is dysfunctional is as you say the unintended consequences. RAC horsepower was calculated from piston area not swept volume, so one way of getting more power was to have longer and longer stroke; the 'tax' horsepower was unaffected but efficiency overall must have suffered. One further unintended consequence, or so it has been said, is that the tax regime delayed the general introduction of overhead valves - they couldn't easily be fitted in the narrow bores.
|
"How are you going to stop manufacturers fiddling with gear ratios and variable valve timing/lift to optimise for the test?"
Ensure that the MOT includes the key emission tests and adjust the VED accordingly, with a penalty if the difference is too much.
Personally, I don't think the taxation class should have anything to do with CO2, as I don't believe it has much to do with global warming (which seems to have been on hold for the last 18 years anyway) but sadly, I'm not in charge.
|
>> Ensure that the MOT includes the key emission tests and adjust the VED accordingly, with
>> a penalty if the difference is too much.
Not sure how that helps, if the car has been optimised to pass the test, it will pass.
Ignoring of course the fact that the full precision test will be impractically expensive and time-consuming to conduct, using equipment they don't have.
I suspect we are at cross purposes.
|
The answer to this test cheating is of course obvious.
The manufacturer will be required to provide 100 new cars on sale in showrooms to gov inspectors.
gov inspectors will install test measuring equipment
100 volunteers will be asked to drive said cars over a determined route.,
average of the runs will be the test results.
That way we get no fixing or cheating of the test by manufactures, and we get real life pollution and mpg figures.
|
"I suspect we are at cross purposes"
Very possibly! AFAIK, the standard MOT includes a CO2 measurement, and although diesels currently only undergo a 'smoke' test, NOx sensing must be doable. I'm also assuming that the 'optimisation' software will be unavailable very soon.
I admit to playing devil's advocate here, as I'm not bothered by CO2 which, among other things, helps plants grow. CO and particulates should be minimised, but as long as they are within sensible limits and not the basis for a taxation regime, then the problem goes away, or would if the Greens could get their polar bears in a row...
|
>> I admit to playing devil's advocate here, as I'm not bothered by CO2 which, among
>> other things, helps plants grow.
It's the other things that bother. There's not much serious science that doesn't accept the CO2= Climate Change scenario.
|
AFAIK, the standard MOT includes a CO2 measurement...
Don't think so. CO, certainly, but not CO2. If you're going to be a proper climate change denier, you really ought to sort those two out.
};---)
|
@JBJ:
By "optimise" I didn't mean special test settings - just that the manufacturer, knowing what the outdated European Driving Cycle is, knows exactly how much time is spent in each gear and at what speeds, therefore rpm, so has the option to make gears a bit higher, reduce slightly the time the engine is on the performance cam profile, and so on. Part of the extra-urban period of the cycle is spent in the highest gear, so no surprise that many cars have an over long one. I also think that first gear (which figures highly in the urban part) is too high on my own car.
Acceleration in the test is very slow, well below typical real world rates. Knowing the speed/rpm means that manufacturers can tweak engine settings at selected points - as long as they don't overdo it, real life customers will just unconsciously 'drive around' any performance limitations introduced by the tweaked settings (e.g. by using more accelerator or changing up later) to achieve the performance they use - resulting in higher emissions and fuel consumption.
The recognised fact that NOx pollution has not reduced in line with expectations based on limits has for some time been attributed to this - although it appears now that special "test settings" were involved in some cases.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_European_Driving_Cycle
|
>> I'm still unclear what the 'fix' could usefully be. Putting them back to the low-emissions
>> state will presumably render them undrivable, but removing that state from the software will make
>> no difference, as they will never (normally) be tested under those conditions again.
Indeed. There is no "fix" There is no physical problem to "fix" The problem is perception and honesty. Software changes wont fix that.
|
>>Indeed. There is no "fix" There is no physical problem to "fix"
IIRC from what I read some cars wil
lneed a new or partial exaust system
>> The problem is perception and honesty. Software changes wont fix that.
Agreed . A long up hill struggle ahead
Last edited by: henry k on Fri 2 Oct 15 at 11:57
|
Anybody heard anything about other manufacturers' models being scrutinised similarly?
-Could be a few CEOs around the world packing suitcases with cash for a suddenly-needed 'holiday' in Cuba or Argentina...
|
German Gov seems to think its only VW... and I would think they would prefer if there were other, non German manufacturers ;)
BERLIN/PARIS (Reuters) -- The German transport ministry has no evidence that any carmakers other than Volkswagen have manipulated emissions tests, a spokesman said on Friday.
"At this point we have no indication of other manufacturers being involved," the spokesman said at a government news conference.
Separately, authorities in France, Italy and Switzerland took action against the automaker on Friday for using a so-called "defeat device" in vehicles sold in the countries.
Prosecutors in Paris have opened a preliminary inquiry into suspected "aggravated deception" by VW, an official from the prosecutor's office told Reuters on Friday.
The move adds to the legal burden the German carmaker faces after U.S. investigators found that it had cheated on diesel emissions tests.
France's consumer protection code allows for prison sentences of five years and a fine of 600,000 euros ($669,600) for aggravated deception, the prosecutor's office said.
French consumer protection and fraud control authorities have launched a separate investigation on whether VW cheated on emissions focusing in particular on vehicles software devices.
The results of that probe, which is not a penal investigation, are expected in November or December.
Volkswagen has said there were 946,092 vehicles in France equipped with the EA 189 engines affected by the emissions data manipulation carried out by the company worldwide. A total of 11 million vehicles are affected globally.
Italy probe
Italy's antitrust body has opened a probe into possible commercial wrongdoing by VW Group.
"Consumers might have erroneously made their purchase decisions based on the emissions claims made by Volkswagen," the antitrust watchdog said in a statement on Friday.
It did not say how long it expected its investigation to last.
Volkswagen has said some 650,000 cars sold in Italy carried the software that was designed to cheat diesel-emissions checks.
Swiss ban
The Swiss Federal Roads Office on Friday issued a preliminary ban on registering new VW Group diesel vehicles that may be outfitted with software designed to cheat emissions tests, it said in a statement.
The agency also banned registering newly imported used vehicles affected by the manipulation scandal. Friday's announcement does not apply to used VW vehicles already on the roads in Switzerland.
Up to 129,000 VW Group vehicles registered in Switzerland are affected by the rigged emissions testing scandal, VW's Swiss distributor AMAG has said.
AMAG has already halted sales of new VWs affected by the manipulation.
VW Group said Thursday that its investigation into rigged diesel engines will probably take months to complete. The group will work closely with U.S. law firm Jones Day to unravel how software to cheat diesel-emissions tests was developed and installed for years in millions of vehicles, the Wolfsburg-based company said.
|
After you've sued VW, you can come home and sue Samsung too.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34412501
|
|
Can the Govt. also guarantee the TV licence for my Samsung TV won't go up?!? :-)
|
>> www.gov.uk/government/news/government-confirms-consumers-who-bought-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs
>>
Interesting departure from the usual case that if you buy something illegal in good faith you are still subject to the penalties for using it.
|
|
One word, 'votes'. Potentially a very large group.
|
Researchers have found BMW, Ford, Mazda and Mercedes cars emitted levels of nitrogen oxides up to seven times the legal limit.
tinyurl.com/q53une4 - Daily Wail.
|
I just watched HIGNFY with Clarkson and a comment he made struck me. When speaking of the VW affair he said that the car detected when it was on test and gave the wrong information.
Perhaps it was a careless phrase, but I wonder did he mean that the car changed its parameters and ran differently, which is what I'd assumed until now, or that it simply gave false information about what it was doing.
|
|
I don't see how the car could give false information. The 'road speed' and the emissions are measured using the external equipment. The rolling road also adds a load to simulate the effect of aerodynamic drag using individual settings for each model, and the measuring equipment logs the emissions.
|
|
I agree, but it seemed a strange thing to say.
|
|
I remember it actually, but I just put it down to clumsy wording. I suppose Clarkson knows a bit more than he pretends to about cars, but I wouldn't look to him for anything technical despite his declared enthusiasm for engineering and the fact that he went to school with Adrian Newey.
|
|
Engine mapping could be changed when the defeat device chimes in. Later injection, fully open EGR and the effect might be lower combustion temperatures in a lessened oxygen percentage. NOx levels lowered as if by magic.
|
>> I suppose Clarkson knows a bit more than he pretends to about cars
I find him very entertaining but I have always thought he understands very little about what goes on under the bonnet.
Last edited by: commerdriver on Tue 6 Oct 15 at 14:43
|
|
I was told recently that the testing of cars in the US now uses the onboard sensors via the OBD port for readings. If that really is the case, then maybe that's how they 'cheated'?
|
I am sure that early on it was reported that 'detection of test in progress' was achieved by sensing the lack of steering information, ie the steering wheel was not moved for a period time. Presumably American tests are also conducted on a rolling road.
At that time I suggested that it was detection of condition typically seen in slow moving heavy traffic on a straight freeway, hence a valid supression of emissions under certain driving conditions.
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Tue 6 Oct 15 at 21:05
|
|
I'd be very surprised if anyone, even if they're trying to, can drive any significant distance with zero steering input. Nobody holds the wheel so firmly that it never deviates at all from its centre position - and even at low speed on a straight road there are little bumps and irregularities to compensate for. Superficially similar, perhaps, but actually very different from the steering locked straight on a rolling road.
|
|
The car has to be told its on the test, because the rear wheels don't move on the rolling road (for front wheel drive only..obviously) and in normal driving the car would think it was skidding if the rear wheels weren't matching the front ones... and anti skid stuff etc would kick in.
|
As an aside does ABS work front to back? I thought it was just side to side?
EDIT: on two wheel drive vehicles I mean.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 6 Oct 15 at 22:44
|
>> As an aside does ABS work front to back?
All 4 brakes independently I think. That's why each hub has a sensor so the ABS system knows which wheel(s) is/are locked up and act accordingly.
Stability control takes it one stage further and applies the brakes to one or more of the wheels to bring the car back under control.
|
>> I'd be very surprised if anyone, even if they're trying to, can drive any significant
>> distance with zero steering input.
But the self-steering action arising from the front wheels' castor-action also represents steering input. On a rear-wheel drive car you can certainly drive a significant distance without any steering input from the driver - that's how one can open a sandwich packet or remove a sweater on the move, or as when young, swap drivers.
Obviously you have to be vaguely aware of direction in order to grab the wheel if it wanders too far.
I have noticed front-wheel drive cars aren't as relaxed and forgiving in this respect, but even so, not holding the wheel is a far cry from having it locked.
|
|
Presumably there needs to be a test mode for cars to turn off like ABS or traction control. And this is accepted. It's just that VW did things with the engine when in test mode.
|
VW expects to start a recall of cars affected by its emissions scandal in January, the car giant's new chief executive, Matthias Mueller, has said.
All affected cars will be fixed by the end of 2016, he told German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34455328
Hmmm! Not a quick fix then.
|
>> Hmmm! Not a quick fix then.
Well there's 11 million to fix. So it will take time.
|
I suspect it will be a quick fix, or it would take even longer.
If they have 1,189,906 affected cars in the UK, then to do them in a year is nearly 5,000 a day.
That doesn't sound like much more than a software flash, and maybe a simple/plug-in component change.
Last edited by: Manatee on Wed 7 Oct 15 at 13:41
|
|
Sottware flash, no test drive ... then 2 years for owners to sue for compensation due to loss of power/mpg/smooth running..
|
>> I suspect it will be a quick fix, or it would take even longer.
>>
>> If they have 1,189,906 affected cars in the UK, then to do them in a
>> year is nearly 5,000 a day.
>>
>> That doesn't sound like much more than a software flash, and maybe a simple/plug-in component
>> change.
>>
Yes, but how many dealers do VW have in the UK? I'd be surprised if it was even as many as 500... So 10 cars per dealer per day seems like significant increase in workload just from an admin perspective. Actual workshop time might not be that bad?
|
The Dealers will love it, they will get paid a standard rate for the job. VW might have to do it for free, but the dealers don't.
I would not be at all surprised to see the Dealer network fighting for the work, which will drive the rates down a bit, but it'll be no hardship on them.
|
|
Actually, it's just occurs to me that it's not just VW dealers is it? Audi, Seat and Skoda are all involved and have dealers too of course. So maybe over 1,000 in total. 5 cars per dealer per day, so not too bad after all...
|
There are 5,000 franchised dealers in the UK. From memory Volkswagen has about a 10% market share by sales. That is Volkswagen, I think, not VAG.
I guess you can extrapolate from there.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 7 Oct 15 at 21:17
|
|
I believe there are about 140 VW dealers.
|
>>I believe there are about 140 VW dealers.
I'd be surprised. There were 200 VW Main Dealers last time I was there, and that wasn't recently.
|
>> I'd be surprised. There were 200 VW Main Dealers last time I was there, and
>> that wasn't recently.
>>
It's about the same today.
|
Yes, I had doubts about that 5,000 figure. There are only three in Norfolk.
I'm not sure if anyone has yet mentioned it but you can check if your car is affected by going to the VW, Skoda, or SEAT website and entering your car's VIN number. I originally thought by 2012 Golf with a 1.6 TDI engine would be affected but was pleased to find it was not.
|
>>I had doubts about that 5,000 figure.
If you mean my figure, then perhaps I wasn't clear - 5,000 franchise dealers in the UK IN TOTAL (ALL dealers) NOT 5,000 VW franchises.
|
>> That doesn't sound like much more than a software flash,
I have no idea on a VW, but on my Merc some of the software updates take literally hours.
I imagine with VW the dealers will be hoping a lot of them can be combined with the annual service visit.
|
>> Well there's 11 million to fix. So it will take time.
Yes, not their finest "vorsprung durch technik" moment.
|
A major software update will surely require a test drive?
|
>> A major software update will surely require a test drive?
And I wonder how many test drives and inspections will generate further "recommended work". A fair amount of which will actually be done and paid for.
|
To overly simplify a car has to meet;
Stated emissions levels
Stated performance characteristics
Stated economy figures
Essentially three sides of a triangle requiring a compromise.
The VWs concerned were unable to meet all three targets without cheating on the test and lying.
If a car could be recalled and amended, whatever that took, and could then meet all three metrics, you would have to wonder why they bothered in the first place
If a simple software change, or even a simple device on the exhaust, could achieve the compromise they need, then why risk the well being of your company?
So, I do not believe that there is a simple software change or device addition that can achieve this, unless they have had some world beating piece of kit in development which they will now have to release. Even then it would need re-engineering to retrofit these cars.
It may be a change to make the car legal and then financial compensation to the owner since it now runs like a dog, perhaps buying back the car, part-exing it for another model or some combination thereof.
But this is *NOT* going away after a 60 minute recall.
No way.
|
It's not even the three stated criteria you mention. Engine longevity is a factor too.
I can't see how they can fix the emissions without affecting something else. Otherwise they'd have not cheated.
With hindsight, they needed AdBlue for even Euro V.
|
>>Engine longevity is a factor too.
Indeed, and value also.
These additional factors simply make it less and less likely that there is a complete fix available.
|
My understanding is that at least in the USA it is the 2.00 litre TDI engine that is affected. An interesting article here explaining that there are two pollution control systems being used. the "lean NOX trap" being easier to fix than the "Selective Catalytic Reduction System". As has been stated fixing both systems to reduce emissions will have an effect on performance/economy.
www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/29/volkswagen-emissions-technology-idUSL1N11Z1XQ20150929
|
>> easier to fix than the "Selective Catalytic Reduction System".
I don't think these engines have SCR using AdBlue. If they did they probably wouldn't have cheated the tests. My Passat CC with this engine certainly didn't.
I suspect a lot of cars in the US will be bought back by VW.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 8 Oct 15 at 00:11
|
>>I suspect a lot of cars in the US will be bought back by VW.
I agree. I cannot see what else they can do. I would expect them to try to decrease the impact by offering new cars in exchange.
|
|
In the UK it looks like you won't be forced to get an update and the government won't retrospectively go after extra taxes. If I had a VW group diesel I'd leave it as it was for now. My Passat CC ran really well and had good performance and flexibility. Something it might not have after an update.
|
>> If I had a VW group diesel I'd leave it as it was for now.
>> My Passat CC ran really well and had good performance and flexibility.
>> Something it might not have after an update.
>>
I wonder how a subsequent buyer might react ?
" Has it had the VW mod done ?" irrespective of the effect on performance.
|
>> I wonder how a subsequent buyer might react ?
Note I said I'd leave it for now. With the option of updating it later.
But it was a company car and not my decision. But if the mod reduced performance/torque or increased MPG I'd tell them either they end the lease or wait until the end of contract. I got a car I wanted.
|
In the UK it looks like you won't be forced to get an update and the government won't retrospectively go after extra taxes.
Those are two independent statements, RTJ, and I'm not sure they're both true. Tax on vehicles (VED and BIK) is based - as I'm a little sorry to keep repeating - on emissions of CO2, which is not the subject of VW's cheating. The UK government has said owners and users of these vehicles will not have to pay extra tax.
But that is not to say that they will have the option to leave their vehicles alone. A car of Euro 5 age that emits more than 180mg of NOx per kilometre is not legal for use anywhere in the EU. If all that has got these vehicles through pre-sale testing and the MoT is the defeat device, then when that device is removed or disabled, the vehicle is not legal with the device still in place. Whether it takes just more Adblue (which, as noted, most Euro 5s don't use) or extra equipment in the exhaust remains to be seen; if owners are left with a car that's less satisfactory to own and drive, that's between them and VW. Either way, though, I don't think they'll be allowed to just do nothing.
|
|
But any changes to reduce NOx emissions is likely to impact CO2 emissions. If the government retrospectively increases taxes that's a bit unfair. Better to fine VW to cover the total.
|
>> If the
>> government retrospectively increases taxes that's a bit unfair.
>>
I don't think anyone is suggesting it should be retrospective, simply corrected in future from a date to be announced.
|
If the government retrospectively increases taxes that's a bit unfair.
Which is why it's stated that that won't happen. But that wasn't my point; I was more concerned with what will happen to the vehicles we now know or suspect to be illegal. Even if it's not a feature of the MoT test, these are now vehicles that have obtained their UK type approval on a false premise.
I suppose the government (or the EU if it's decided at that level) could opt to make an exception for this group of vehicles, but then it would be neglecting its stated aim of improving air quality. So I'd imagine there'll have to be a mandatory technical change to all vehicles to bring them back within their type-approved specifications, with a time limit by which the work must be done. I can't see users being allowed simply to go on using illegal vehicles.
|
CO2 and Nox are not checked at the MOT - only smoke opacity is.
I haven't seen any suggestion that defeat code is active in EU spec cars - it has been said that it detects US test regime and switches to 'low emissions mode'. So if EU cars can meet the Euro V regs as they are running without the defeat active, then removing the defeat will make no change to EU cars. US cars on the other hand....
Is there a chance this could take VAG under????
|
>>Is there a chance this could take VAG under????
Depends what you mean;
Force it under? No I very much doubt it.
Make it no longer viable, then possibly.
You'd have to be closer than I am to know, but this could finish VW in the US. They're funny people the Americans - their [lack of] enthusiasm is down to a single Oldsmobile engine goodness knows how long ago.
So a combination of the money this is going to cost to actually fix, plus the law suits for poor Californians and the stress they've suffered, plus the damage to a reputation which wasn't that strong in the first place, plus their existing difficulties growing in that market would suggest to me that they might just stop bothering - a touch of the News of the Worlds perhaps.
In Europe I'd expect their reputation to take a hammering until the media find something else to worry about. I'd guess the company will weather the storm in Europe.
|
Interesting in the article that SCR was disabled. And that it could need refills every 5000 miles if it was turned on. Many VW group diesels have 18000+ mile service intervals.
If I went for the new Audi A4 next time as a diesel, I'd certainly get the 24 litre AdBlue tank. I only get my car serviced around the 2 year mark.
|
Adblue is now readily available and not that dear at garages / factors. Filling it up is no more difficult than filling the screen washers. I wouldn't be paying dealer rates for Adblue, nor the workshop rates for filling it up if I had an SCR equipped car (mind you, it would be unlikely to be near the dealers anyway!).
I've read that the PSA system will stop the engine if it runs out of additive!
|
>> Filling it up is no more difficult than filling the screen washers.
>>
I'd say it's considerably more difficult. For one thing the filler on most VW is buried under the spare wheel (yes, VW still supply a spare!) and it requires bottles or a filler with a special nozzle which cuts off the flow - you can't just pour it in. If you spill any it's got to be fully cleaned up.
>> I've read that the PSA system will stop the engine if it runs out of
>> additive!
>>
Similar with VW - you get a warning, then linp mode, then it won't restart. Snag is with the increased rate of use, these come quite close together.
|
"I don't think these engines have SCR using AdBlue. If they did they probably wouldn't have cheated the tests. My Passat CC with this engine certainly didn't."
Only the later US models had this I believe. They cheated the test because as the article explains without it urea consumption would have been excessive.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Thu 8 Oct 15 at 00:53
|
|
In the EU, AdBlue/SCR was needed for Euro VI emissions. Euro V was not an issue.... or so it seemed.
|
The Bottom Line on Radio 4 this evening discussed the VW issue but concentrated on headline management failures rather than a detailed discussion on the technical issues but one of the guests was an engineer by training but were all now senior people in industry.
One comment was made along the lines of: "If you compare a BMW engine that meets all the emission targets and a VW one, the BMW engine has about £500 of extra components that are required to meet the targets. The VW didn't. Engineers within VW must have been asking how could the emission targets be met without the extra hardware and the directors should have known as well."
|
For a few weeks I've wondered about VW group diesels compared to others. Many other manufacturers have used AdBlue for years. VW have used it for Euro 6 diesels. £500 per car might have covered the cost of such a system?
£500 x 11 million is only £6bn (ish)... But this will cost them far more.
If I was buying a car, £500 difference in cost if the right car was only £500 more expensive is not an issue. I will personally still consider a VW group car again. They messed up granted... still good cars.
|
|
£500 in bits, perhaps. But how much to retrofit to an engine not designed to take them? New engine and exhaust, new ECU, goodness knows what else.
|
Having read www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/29/volkswagen-emissions-technology-idUSL1N11Z1XQ20150929 linked to by CGN above, I conclude many of the VWs affected will be uneconomic or unpleasant to drive after upgrade.
I expect multi thousands of dollars refunds to US car buyers..that's each car..
And ditto in Europe.
VW are talking about cutting capital spending and the fate of Bugatti..
tinyurl.com/p8cjphv
I confidently expect the costs of this to exceed $30B .
As for VW PR..www.autocar.co.uk/blogs/industry/navel-gazing-volkswagen
Last edited by: madf on Thu 8 Oct 15 at 03:29
|
|
VW have certainly killed the US ( and maybe Canadian ) diesel car market for decades, if not completely.
|
tinyurl.com/obmnqzd
Is this the problem?
|
>> Having read www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/29/volkswagen-emissions-technology-idUSL1N11Z1XQ20150929 linked to by CGN above, I conclude many of the VWs affected
>> will be uneconomic or unpleasant to drive after upgrade.
The article in interesting to me as we have an EU6 Tiguan using Ad Blue and that's the first time I've seen it written that Ad Blue consumption will likely increase.
We were told it would last between services (as apparently it does on Audis) but VW recently amended their website with an odd ration of 1.5 litres per 620 miles. In practice some Tiguan owners are getting through a litre every 200 miles. With a 12 litre tank they're needing to top up every 2000 miles.
>> I expect multi thousands of dollars refunds to US car buyers..that's each car..
>>
>> And ditto in Europe.
>>
In the US VW are already offering $2000 loyalty bonus - which basically takes care of the upfront payment on a typical personal lease there, which is how most new cars are bought in the US. Bear in mind cars are far cheaper there - Tiguan lease is $179 (£120) / month so $2000 is quite significant.
VW UK is notoriously unfriendly towards customers - they'll do the absolute minimum they're legally required to and there will be absolutely no "surprise & delight" offer to UK owners.
|
>>VW UK is notoriously unfriendly towards customers
I'm surprised by that. I've only had one Volkswagen in recent times, however the service was always excellent. Including a warranty repair. [Reading, Oxford & Aylesbury].
|
>> I'm surprised by that. I've only had one Volkswagen in recent times, however the service
>> was always excellent. Including a warranty repair. [Reading, Oxford & Aylesbury].
>>
Yes, they do what they have to. If something breaks and it's in warranty they'll fix it. Owners seems to have a lot of trouble with cars just out of warranty needing expensive repairs.
My specific issue was with stupid diamond cut wheels (on a fairly basic model) that corroded in warranty. Dealer lied to us that VW had extended the warranty in a first effort to fob us off, then said they weren't bad enough to change. VW UK said dealer's answer was unacceptable, but then cheerfully accepted the dealer changing their response to "wheels are OK", and closed the case.
|
>> odd ration of 1.5 litres per 620 miles.
620 miles = 1000km approx FWIW
|
>> 620 miles = 1000km approx FWIW
>>
I did think of that, but then they're Germans and 1000Km is exactly 625 miles, so why not do that?
|
>> >> 620 miles = 1000km approx FWIW
>> >>
>>
>> I did think of that, but then they're Germans and 1000Km is exactly 625 miles,
>> so why not do that?
621.371 according to google
|
1000Km is exactly 625 miles, so why not do that?
621.4 miles would be more exact. The 'five eighths' you may have been taught at school was only ever a convenient approximation.
|
>> The 'five eighths' you may have been taught at school was only ever a convenient approximation.
1) I didn't know that. How embarrassing.
2) Damned close though.
|
>> >> The 'five eighths' you may have been taught at school was only ever a
>> convenient approximation.
>>
>> 1) I didn't know that. How embarrassing.
>>
Nor me. Can't say I feel embarrassed although I will have to let VW off with that one, which does grate slightly.
|
>> It's not even the three stated criteria you mention. Engine longevity is a factor too.
>>
VW have plenty of engine longevity issues and it hasn't worried them up to now.
|
The Road Vehicles (Approval) Regulations 2009 is a stonking read, packed with ripping yarns. I was on the edge of my seat.
Regulation 19.2 provides for the suspension or withdrawal of an EC type approval if two or more vehicles are found to fail to conform to the type. However, 19.7 says that while a manufacturer cannot continue to affix the suspended approval to new vehicles, the suspension does not extend retrospectively to vehicles produced before the date of the suspension.
So perhaps there will be a Do Nothing option after all.
|
Which is why after I'd read statements like this:
The Department for Transport said drivers with cars fitted with Volkswagen’s pollution-cheating software were under no obligation to send the vehicles back to VW dealerships to get them modified.
“If a driver didn’t return the vehicle, that wouldn’t be illegal,†a DfT spokesman said, although he added that failure to do so could affect any warranty on the car as well as its resale value.
Motorists would not be fined or penalised in any way if their cars weren’t fixed, “but it is in their interest to do itâ€, the spokesman added.
That I'd not get my car updated if I had one.
|
|
The Department for Transport won't penalise you, but the Department for the Environment will impound your car.
|
>> That I'd not get my car updated if I had one.
>>
I was watching 'Breakfast' on BBC1 a day or two ago - this is a programme that avoids using too many long words, to avoid frightening viewers - if you get my drift.
The male presenter, Charlie Stayt(?) said that cars will go back to the dealers to be repaired. No doubt he was reading from a script, but I thought 'what is broken on the cars that needs to be repaired'? Will it start? Will it stop? Will it do all of the functions that a car is supposed to do?
If a VW owner doesn't take their car to a dealer, why should there be any reduction in value?
|
>>If a VW owner doesn't take their car to a dealer, why should there be any reduction in value?
People have commented on here before that people pay too much for a Volkswagen because of their perception of its quality. Well, perhaps they will now have less of such a perception.
|
>> People have commented on here before that people pay too much for a Volkswagen because of their perception of its quality. Well, perhaps they will now have less of such a perception.>>
Overall it's only a small percentage of diesel engines manufactured over the years by VW.
I still suspect that other marques will become embroiled in the situation ere too long.
|
>> Overall it's only a small percentage of diesel engines manufactured over the years by VW.
Yes, 11 million.
VW's USA CEO has been in front of some congressman and says some cars cannot be fixed with software alone. They need 'hardware'. That's apparently 430,000 cars in the USA.... !!!
Now some might say it is not cost effective to retrofit AdBlue injection etc.... But buying back 430,000 cars might be even less cost effective.
|
>> But buying back 430,000 cars might be even less cost effective.
Maybe. But..
- A HUGE tax write off.
- A s***load of spare parts, albeit used.
- No reason why the cars cannot be sold again in different markets or under different terms.
- Recognisable value in removing 2 - 3 years of car production from the second hand market.
I'm sure I could think of more.
The cost in this saga is not going to be the value of the cars, I don't think.
Reputation, law suit and punishment will, I believe, dwarf it.
|
>>VW's USA CEO has been in front of some congressman and says some cars cannot be fixed with software alone. They need 'hardware'. That's apparently 430,000 cars in the USA.... !!!>>
Yes, I watched it. But out of all the (diesel) engines manufactured over the years by VW and in whichever model or marques they are used, it's still a comparatively small number involved over the past five years.
The key problem even for such a motoring giant are the costs involved in putting matters right and that involved several different avenues, all of them expensive....
|
>> So perhaps there will be a Do Nothing option after all.
I don't think so. VAG are into damage limitation now. Even if technically they could do the Do Nothing Option, their corporate reputation would sink even lower, if having been caught out, they decided not to do anything about it.
|
|
I think the Do Nothing option referred to was for the consumers. VW can only coerce them (should they even feel it is in VW's interest to do so) by declining to service the cars in its network, and/or warrant the cars if the owners decline the 'upgrade'.
|
VW takes 4,000 cars off the UK market - VxFan