EPA says Volkswagen cheated on emissions with 482,000 diesel cars

Henry Ford III

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

Horray, my car's affected. Doesnt change anything really for the moment, car still runs well and is as safe as it ever was.

Wondering however that as i purchased it less than 3 months ago, its still under warranty, do i have any recourse?

I doubt it, as they will be offering to fix it for free.

everlast75

I've a GTD 151 and I'm not affected.....

gctest50

everlast75 wrote: »

I've a GTD 151 and I'm not affected.....

EA228 engine maybe ? newer, better more powerful

http://etcgreen.com/more-efficient-diesel-engine-from-vw/

Volkswagen’s new EA228 diesel features 150 horsepower, up 10 hp, and 236 pounds-feet of torque.

Irish_rat

tippman1 wrote: »

Trouble comin' down the line. . .


http://www.independent.ie/business/world/volkswagen-boss-tells-staff-to-brace-themselves-for-massive-cutbacks-and-job-losses-31587139.html

That's sickening, those that had nothing to do with it are getting rightly shafted.

Manic Moran

BoatMad wrote: »

The race between fuel consumption and emissions on diesel is over and it lost. You can have a clean diesel , with poorer fuel economy and performance , or you can increase the size of the engine , generate more c02 and particulate matter and make it " cleaner". Buyers buy diesels almost soley for fuel consumption , it that market advantage was lost ( as it will be ) you won't give away a diesel.

In future you'll see no diesels and their residuals will be worthless.

I'm not getting it. The BMW passed the US's strict emissions requirement. It gets better economy than petrol. I'm understanding that though my 2015 Passat has the cheat software, it is actually capable of passing the standards given that it is one of the newer engine with ad blue. I am getting substantially better economy than petrol. Why is this doom for diesel?

BoatMad

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm not getting it. The BMW passed the US's strict emissions requirement. It gets better economy than petrol. I'm understanding that though my 2015 Passat has the cheat software, it is actually capable of passing the standards given that it is one of the newer engine with ad blue. I am getting substantially better economy than petrol. Why is this doom for diesel?

The BMW had a bigger engine and in fact failed the emissions levels when driven up a steep hill.

The smaller VW engines even with urea ( gen 2) which at in the US since 2014 also badly failed and based on the CARB tests actually was never capable of passing the emissions tests , never mind the on road emissions

The fact is, manufacturers know the CANNOT make a Diesel engine that will pass the new on-road driving cycles being proposed in the early 2017. That's even with the much higher allowable NOX levels then the US. They are arguing for a compliance " factor " that would in reality make the car worse then the current euro5

The clean diesel is an utter myth , yes they are " cleaner " but the on road emissions are much worse then petrol.

Legislators are realising in Europe that diesel,pollution is a major factor in urban smog and we have been turning a blind eye to this real world emission scandal for years. As laws tighten , diesels technology can't respond

H.E. Pennypacker

Euro 2.0 litre engines will just need a software update

http://www.wsj.com/articles/volkswagen-has-refit-plan-for-emissions-rigged-vehicles-says-ceo-1443525496

dr.fuzzenstein

^^^
OK, but what about trucks, buses, trains, etc...?
They will either have to go, or special allowances will have to be made.
Because we can't say "what comes out of the tailpipe of that Passat is absolutely unacceptable, but that truck, bus, bin lorry, digger, streetsweeper, train, etc... is perfectly alright even though it's the exact same stuff and is not poisoning me at all"

5W30

BoatMad wrote: »

fired I think

Fired HA! Good joke.

It was funny when one of the VW executives launched "an investigation into the scandal", when the chances are he was the one who would come up with such a cheat.

I can't see Joe on the factory line suggesting using a cheat to those higher in power!

Special Circumstances

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

^^^
OK, but what about trucks, buses, trains, etc...?
They will either have to go, or special allowances will have to be made.
Because we can't say "what comes out of the tailpipe of that Passat is absolutely unacceptable, but that truck, bus, bin lorry, digger, streetsweeper, train, etc... is perfectly alright even though it's the exact same stuff and is not poisoning me at all"

Some articles suggest that emissions from small diesels are worse than large diesels. I presume they mean nox rather than particulates, and I don't know if there is some magic "per passenger" , "per km", "per litre" equation used to justify that.

It is plausible that the smaller highly stress engines would be good on fuel but very very bad on NOX (applies to direct injection petrol too I'll admit). But I'm wary of the agenda behind any of these articles at this stage, there's a lot of money* at stake and there are at least as many completely BS articles about this VW emissions thing as there are good articles.

It would be nice if there was some official word on diesel rather than marketing and pseudo science passed through journalist distortion.


*money on the line for businesss and reputation on the line for "environmentalists" who still believe diesel is the wonderfuel.

dr.fuzzenstein

It's very much a Human problem rather than a technical problem. No one thinks "what is the best solution for everyone", but "what is the best solution for me and screw everyone else".
If the Birkenstock brigade was serious about people's wellbeing, they would ban all ICE from built up areas. Including public transport. Electric or fcuk off.
Everyone is just pushing their own little agenda for their own purposes.

Tea 1000

BoatMad wrote: »

The BMW had a bigger engine and in fact failed the emissions levels when driven up a steep hill.

The smaller VW engines even with urea ( gen 2) which at in the US since 2014 also badly failed and based on the CARB tests actually was never capable of passing the emissions tests , never mind the on road emissions

The fact is, manufacturers know the CANNOT make a Diesel engine that will pass the new on-road driving cycles being proposed in the early 2017. That's even with the much higher allowable NOX levels then the US. They are arguing for a compliance " factor " that would in reality make the car worse then the current euro5

The clean diesel is an utter myth , yes they are " cleaner " but the on road emissions are much worse then petrol.

Legislators are realising in Europe that diesel,pollution is a major factor in urban smog and we have been turning a blind eye to this real world emission scandal for years. As laws tighten , diesels technology can't respond

Whether that will actually happen or not is one thing, but if it does, claiming that the used value of diesels will be terrible is false. People don't care about any environmental law. They only care about cost. If there were no more diesels on sale tomorrow, the used price of existing diesels would sky rocket, not plummet!

Markcheese

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Whether that will actually happen or not is one thing, but if it does, claiming that the used value of diesels will be terrible is false. People don't care about any environmental law. They only care about cost. If there were no more diesels on sale tomorrow, the used price of existing diesels would sky rocket, not plummet!

Of course people vote with their pockets- they always do - if the powers that be decide against diesel cars (and they have) - the general punters will vote with their pockets and head away from diesels when policy makes them expensive-
They won't be banned - just made undesirable- especially when most engines won't hit euro 7 (or 8 or whatever)
As to what they'll do about light commercials - who knows

osheen

Oh how I dream of a nice petrol car van - only reason companies dont run them is you cannot claim back the VAT on petrol but you can on diesel .

pippip

I see VW headquarters in Germany has been raided for potential evidence by prosecutors.

http://news.sky.com/story/1566112/vw-scandal-german-hq-raided-by-prosecutors

moleyv

The USA top exec is getting questioned now live.

Of 500,000 cars in USA, 430,000 will need mechanical changes/additions.

No proper detail of what models.

Special Circumstances

Trick or treat!
http://www.halloweencostumes.com/blog/p-830-diy-volkswagen-diesel-costume.aspx



The gas mask and the combat boots are bit heavy handed tbf

BoatMad

moleyv wrote: »

The USA top exec is getting questioned now live.

Of 500,000 cars in USA, 430,000 will need mechanical changes/additions.

No proper detail of what models.

There's no clear evidence evidence that VW can fix the problem. The gen2 engines already have urea systems and they didn't pass either.

I suspect VW cannot make the ea 189 engine pass the EPA tests especially when it will be the carb doing the testing and not VW internally

everlast75

I spoke to my local VW. As mentioned above I have a 151 GTD. Firstly, carcheck said my car was in the clear.

She confirmed that my car has the EU6 engine, which is fine as the issue is with EU5 engines.

She also said that she has heard nothing at all about finance being pulled from VW which might have had an effect on the finance.

I was advised to carry on as normal.

Special Circumstances

everlast75 wrote: »

She also said that she has heard nothing at all about finance being pulled from VW which might have had an effect on the finance.

I was advised to carry on as normal.

Was the phrase "soft landing" used at all?
"limited stock, get on the ladder" maybe?

fret_wimp2

BoatMad wrote: »

There's no clear evidence evidence that VW can fix the problem. The gen2 engines already have urea systems and they didn't pass either.

I suspect VW cannot make the ea 189 engine pass the EPA tests especially when it will be the carb doing the testing and not VW internally

So two outcomes from my perspective:

1. They come good for the customer. Car is fixed/new car provided or refund/compensation provided.

2. Customer is shafted. Cars are taxed higher at best or at worst put off the road(unlikely)


I know what scenario my money is on (if i had money and wasnt saving it for impending higher tax!)

Tea 1000

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

So two outcomes from my perspective:

1. They come good for the customer. Car is fixed/new car provided or refund/compensation provided.

2. Customer is shafted. Cars are taxed higher at best or at worst put off the road(unlikely)


I know what scenario my money is on (if i had money and wasnt saving it for impending higher tax!)

You forgot the actual outcome... which is drivers will keep on driving, and the cars will get the recall work done whenever the owners are bothered getting it done, and the world will keep turning and everyone will forget.
Except the US, they'll get money.

fret_wimp2

Tea 1000 wrote: »

You forgot the actual outcome... which is drivers will keep on driving, and the cars will get the recall work done whenever the owners are bothered getting it done, and the world will keep turning and everyone will forget.
Except the US, they'll get money.

That actually works ok for me. As long as the car is not devalued by this specific issue, and it costs me nothing, happy days.
But it again comes back to the problem, can they actually fix the issue & keep the same fuel economy? if they could, they wouldnt be in this situation.

So regardless il be stung for the cost of more diesel.

Tea 1000

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

That actually works ok for me. As long as the car is not devalued by this specific issue, and it costs me nothing, happy days.
But it again comes back to the problem, can they actually fix the issue & keep the same fuel economy? if they could, they wouldnt be in this situation.

So regardless il be stung for the cost of more diesel.

Probably not, but depending on your engine. The fix for most is just cheat software removal, which will not change one iota of your cars day-to-day running.
The other fix might be injectors and something else, but I reckon the difference will be negligable on those too so as to minimise any potential further backlash.

Special Circumstances

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Probably not, but depending on your engine. The fix for most is just cheat software removal, which will not change one iota of your cars day-to-day running.
The other fix might be injectors and something else, but I reckon the difference will be negligable on those too so as to minimise any potential further backlash.

There was some mention of fuel pumps for the smaller engines. Seems strange, I also thought removing the technicality of illegal software would be sufficient for Europe (ie the engines must be shocking altogether if they can't pass EU nox emissions )

everlast75

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Was the phrase "soft landing" used at all?
"limited stock, get on the ladder" maybe?

I take your point, but its a bit of a stretch.

Are you saying i should sell my car 'cause the brand is going to collapse?

I don't think I will be doing that, thanks all the same.

Mercedes-Benz’s diesel cars produced an average of 0.406g/km of NOx on the road, at least 2.2 times more than the official Euro 5 level and five times higher than the Euro 6 level. A spokesman for Mercedes-Benz said: “Since real-world driving conditions do not generally reflect those in the laboratory, the consumption figures may differ from the standardised figures.”

Honda’s diesel cars emitted 0.484g/km of NOx on average, between 2.6 and six times the official levels. A spokesman for Honda said: “Honda tests vehicles in accordance with European legislation.”

Mazda’s diesel cars had average NOx emissions of 0.293g/km in the real world, between 1.6 and 3.6 times the NEDC test levels. One Euro 6 model, the Mazda 6 2.2L 5DR, produced three times the official NOx emissions. A spokesman for Mazda said: “In compliance with the law, Mazda works hard to ensure that every petrol and diesel engine it makes fully complies with the regulations.”

Mitsubishi diesel cars produced an average of 0.274g/km of NOx, between 1.5 and 3.4 higher than in the lab. “The NEDC was never intended to represent real-world driving,” said a spokesman for Mitsubishi.

The Emissions Analytics data seen by the Guardian also found Citroen, VW and Audi NOx emissions to be higher on the road than in the EU lab test.

“MEPs have been fighting for years to reform EU rules on diesel emissions-testing so they reflect real-world emissions. Yet the powerful car lobby and national governments have fiercely resisted these life-saving changes,” said Catherine Bearder, a LibDem MEP and a lead negotiator in the European parliament on the EU’s new air quality law. “The people of Europe have waited long enough for cleaner air, they must not be made to wait any longer.”

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/09/mercedes-honda-mazda-mitsubishi-diesel-emissions-rowhttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/09/mercedes-honda-mazda-mitsubishi-diesel-emissions-row

Special Circumstances

I wonder what those "2x-5x the NEDC limits" look like compared to the EPA limits.
That is, does "5x the NEDC limit" equate to the Passats "40x EPA limits"?

BigEejit

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

..... As long as the car is not devalued by this specific issue, and it costs me nothing, happy days....

I am pretty sure that there are some people in the market to buy a car right now would not touch a VW with a bargepole ... How many potential VW purchasers will be in that camp when it comes time for you to sell your car? more? less?

I suspect that this has damaged the image of VW and diesel cars in general and will reduce the number of buyers which will reduce the selling price.

thierry14

osheen wrote: »

Oh how I dream of a nice petrol car van - only reason companies dont run them is you cannot claim back the VAT on petrol but you can on diesel .

That's why my boss drives a diesel Porsche 😀
I thought it was the mpg he was watching