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

BoatMad

cadaliac wrote: »

Sorry, don't get what you are saying here. Why wouldn't European scrutineers be as effective as yanks?
I accept that american standards (nox) might be higher/better/more difficult to pass but outside of regulations in the US, why should the Europeans (smaller market) be made to suffer a substandard quality of emissions from the same car? That is of course, if European decision makers say it's ok to do so.
I think it boils down to market share. Americans won't stand for it but what? Europeans will?
No, no I don't think so.

When this story broke I thought, yerra, it'll be swept under the carpet. Now, I don't think so. This is ****!ng huge.
In a bad way for VW.

The sheer size of the compensation package in the US of A will depict the size of the correction bill in Europe.
It's Europe just watching the States again - "let's see what happens" kind of an effort. Again, I think it's down to the size of the market in the states.

I read somewhere recently, "they are too big to fail", funny, I read that about the Irish banks one time before too.

hah hah, "ve vill fit a belly small wire mesh dokicky to you car ind perform a meaningless sofvare upgrade," alles ist klar. drive on

read that about the Irish banks one time before too.

yup all too big too fail , hence bailout or in Vws case , fit a wire mesh ( €10) and sweep it all under the carpet

mickdw

BoatMad wrote: »

I see, a software " upgrade" and perhaps a wire mesh

yep, smoke and mirrors, why,

because as I said before, the engines are compliant in so much as the EU NEDC test is sh1t to begin with anyway

So why admit to an eu wide fraud if they could have claimed that there were issues in usa but they were compliant in eu?
I think we have not even got to the real issue yet. Something stinks and hopefully they are caught out further.

BoatMad

mickdw wrote: »

So why admit to an eu wide fraud if they could have claimed that there were issues in usa but they were compliant in eu?
I think we have not even got to the real issue yet. Something stinks and hopefully they are caught out further.

VW were forced to continue the "nonsense " story of so called "defeat software " because they could not claim inconsistent systems for engines in the EU and USA.

However the reality is the cars passed the NEDC test, and legally thats all that matters,

This is clearly a smoke and mirrors exercise, the cars will continues to emit more NOX on the road then in the test

Nonoperational

Hilarious how people that have no idea of the facts nor have any idea about the tests involved are getting so upset. Relax.

BoatMad

Nonoperational wrote: »

Hilarious how people that have no idea of the facts nor have any idea about the tests involved are getting so upset. Relax.

There are no tests involved , in Europe VW has compliance certification that has not been officially deprecated , hence it doesnt have to do any retesting

mickdw

Going back to the very basics of it,
As I see it, nobody should have any issue with the cars putting out higher levels of nox under hard driving conditions - that is to be expected.
What I would consider a cheat is if the car on the road driven basically in line with the test procedure puts out higher nox than during the test.
It would be interesting to see if some university or agency would do some research on this, running tests on a pre and post fix car to see if there are any on road differences.

cadaliac

mickdw wrote: »

Going back to the very basics of it,
As I see it, nobody should have any issue with the cars putting out higher levels of nox under hard driving conditions - that is to be expected.
What I would consider a cheat is if the car on the road driven basically in line with the test procedure puts out higher nox than during the test.
It would be interesting to see if some university or agency would do some research on this, running tests on a pre and post fix car to see if there are any on road differences.

Nail + Head.

BoatMad

What I would consider a cheat is if the car on the road driven basically in line with the test procedure puts out higher nox than during the test.

I see so you are gong to do a cold start , with precisely defined humidity and temperature conditions , taped joints and Seans , bald tyres and disconnected engine ancillaries , drive at a constant 23 miles per hour and also measure the nox output.

Do you know how silly your logic sounds. If you subject the car to the NEDC test and it passes , that's that. The law requires no further proof. What happens on the road is not governed.

The evidence of on road testing is irrelevant , we already know that all diesel cars emit anything up to 20 times the regulatory figures in on road conditions. Nothing is being fixed in reality , because nothing is wrong , what's wrong is the stupid test.

FortySeven

BoatMad wrote: »

I see so you are gong to do a cold start , with precisely defined humidity and temperature conditions , taped joints and Seans , bald tyres and disconnected engine ancillaries , drive at a constant 23 miles per hour and also measure the nox output.

Do you know how silly your logic sounds. If you subject the car to the NEDC test and it passes , that's that. The law requires no further proof. What happens on the road is not governed.

The evidence of on road testing is irrelevant , we already know that all diesel cars emit anything up to 20 times the regulatory figures in on road conditions. Nothing is being fixed in reality , because nothing is wrong , what's wrong is the stupid test.

I think what everyone would like to see is these cars being taken from the factory, driven for a few months without ANY modification bar a capture system, in normal, everyday driving conditions and them pollutants averaged over that period in time to come up with an honest, reliable figure that everyone could look at and form an opinion on exactly where we go from here.

Bull**** tests like the one we have in Europe instill no confidence in me that our very laws and policies are dictated by large corporate interests these days.

BoatMad

FortySeven wrote: »

I think what everyone would like to see is these cars being taken from the factory, driven for a few months without ANY modification bar a capture system, in normal, everyday driving conditions and them pollutants averaged over that period in time to come up with an honest, reliable figure that everyone could look at and form an opinion on exactly where we go from here.

Bull**** tests like the one we have in Europe instill no confidence in me that our very laws and policies are dictated by large corporate interests these days.

We know from the already published data that virtually every diesel n Europe is emitting pollutants well over the test limits in normal driving. This is not new.

What does an honest reliable figure look like , certainly 200-500% percent greater then current nox emissions
So what , what have we achieved , nothing.

Either public policy just bans diesels r we accept the current levels of technology and we can onply proceed to tighten such levels as technology developments allow

But in general the average car user doesn't give a hoot , so instilling confidence in " you" is irelevsnt.

FortySeven

BoatMad wrote: »

We know from the already published data that virtually every diesel n Europe is emitting pollutants well over the test limits in normal driving. This is not new.

What does an honest reliable figure look like , certainly 200-500% percent greater then current nox emissions
So what , what have we achieved , nothing.

Either public policy just bans diesels r we accept the current levels of technology and we can onply proceed to tighten such levels as technology developments allow

But in general the average car user doesn't give a hoot , so instilling confidence in " you" is irelevsnt.

People used to believe smoking was acceptable in hospital wards. Opinions can be changed once we have the statistical evidence to prove those opinions are wrong.

BoatMad

FortySeven wrote: »

People used to believe smoking was acceptable in hospital wards. Opinions can be changed once we have the statistical evidence to prove those opinions are wrong.

We already know nox output in Europe is unacceptable. We also know it's primarily from diesels. We know that particulate pollution is also an issue, again laid at the door of diesels.


What we don't have are viable alternatives at this point. The process of change has already begun. Diesels will disappear over time as rules change.

FortySeven

BoatMad wrote: »

We already know nox output in Europe is unacceptable. We also know it's primarily from diesels. We know that particulate pollution is also an issue, again laid at the door of diesels.


What we don't have are viable alternatives at this point. The process of change has already begun. Diesels will disappear over time as rules change.

Hopefully this will speed up the process.

BoatMad

FortySeven wrote: »

Hopefully this will speed up the process.

Maybe , I doubt it, the tests get stricter next year , but the manufacturers have already gained several compromises. Europe isn't going to throw its auto industry under a bus overnight

mickdw

BoatMad wrote: »

I see so you are gong to do a cold start , with precisely defined humidity and temperature conditions , taped joints and Seans , bald tyres and disconnected engine ancillaries , drive at a constant 23 miles per hour and also measure the nox output.

Do you know how silly your logic sounds. If you subject the car to the NEDC test and it passes , that's that. The law requires no further proof. What happens on the road is not governed.

The evidence of on road testing is irrelevant , we already know that all diesel cars emit anything up to 20 times the regulatory figures in on road conditions. Nothing is being fixed in reality , because nothing is wrong , what's wrong is the stupid test.

It would certainly be an interesting study. Yes I get it. The cars passed the test. but a study driving the car in a manor similar to the test and looking at nox results would be interesting. Driving with many of the items you describe taken care of, and driving in a manor similar to the test in terms of speed, acceleration and distance, one would expect nox to be surely within a range of 150 percent of tested figure.
If it is 600 percent, one would imagine a cheat system is in full use.
I'm only using example figures but I imagine if some research was done, some quite telling info could be gathered.
The second point related to a comparison between a car in fixed configuration and an unfixed car. Again, this could prove quite interesting. After all vw have had the fix approved and I assume they would have to have detailed the effects of the proposed fix. It would be interesting to see firstly if the cars perform differently across a while range of driving condition and then see if there are any negative effects of the update again across a range of use age conditions. After all surely this fix if not to alter test result is to alter real world driving results.

BoatMad

mickdw wrote: »

It would certainly be an interesting study. Yes I get it. The cars passed the test. but a study driving the car in a manor similar to the test and looking at nox results would be interesting. Driving with many of the items you describe taken care of, and driving in a manor similar to the test in terms of speed, acceleration and distance, one would expect nox to be surely within a range of 150 percent of tested figure.
If it is 600 percent, one would imagine a cheat system is in full use.
I'm only using example figures but I imagine if some research was done, some quite telling info could be gathered.
The second point related to a comparison between a car in fixed configuration and an unfixed car. Again, this could prove quite interesting. After all vw have had the fix approved and I assume they would have to have detailed the effects of the proposed fix. It would be interesting to see firstly if the cars perform differently across a while range of driving condition and then see if there are any negative effects of the update again across a range of use age conditions. After all surely this fix if not to alter test result is to alter real world driving results.

Tests have shown in the USA and Europe that diesels including VW , are somewhere in the 2-8 times worse on road for general no taxing driving. VW are not the worst b any means Either. Bigger diesels at 3l and over are much better as power can be sacrificed to reduce nox.

The fact is real life on road testing is very scientifically dubious since it's very difficult to establish repeatable results. This is why it's never used.

VW I believe don't have to prove anything on road as there is no limits to test against.

The fix purely relates to the official NEDC test. There are no tests to test against at for on road emissions , people seem to have a problem understanding or accepting that.

Also in Europe I don't believe any official EU certified test house has claimed VW gamed the tests. Hence I dont believe VW have to " certify " anything

Do you really believe a €10 mesh is in reality fixing anything - please let's not be naive here. This is a pr stunt.

josip

BoatMad wrote: »

...
Do you know how silly your logic sounds. If you subject the car to the NEDC test and it passes , that's that. The law requires no further proof. What happens on the road is not governed.
...

I dunno BoatMad, if anyone asked me which poster was coming across as silly at this stage of the thread, I wouldn't say it was Mickdw.
Not that anyone is going to ask me.

Long Time Lurker

20% drop in UK sales.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/volkswagen-suffers-20-sales-slump-november

vectra

Long Time Lurker wrote: »

20% drop in UK sales.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/volkswagen-suffers-20-sales-slump-november

End of year drop possibly?

Despite the one-month result, Volkswagen’s new car registrations for the whole of the year to date are up on last year by 4.50%.

Joe 90

FortySeven wrote: »

I think what everyone would like to see is these cars being taken from the factory, driven for a few months without ANY modification bar a capture system, in normal, everyday driving conditions and them pollutants averaged over that period in time to come up with an honest, reliable figure that everyone could look at and form an opinion on exactly where we go from here.

Bull**** tests like the one we have in Europe instill no confidence in me that our very laws and policies are dictated by large corporate interests these days.

But even if you do that the result will very much depend upon who is driving.

Leonard Hofstadter

vectra wrote: »

End of year drop possibly?

Down nearly 17% in Ireland despite November sales being up by almost 30%. They still managed to come second, only four cars behind Ford.

Doesn't mean a whole lot really given how quiet things are at this time of the year anyway, but January sales will be very telling.

BoatMad

josip wrote: »

I dunno BoatMad, if anyone asked me which poster was coming across as silly at this stage of the thread, I wouldn't say it was Mickdw.
Not that anyone is going to ask me.

He's was suggesting an on road test. Since there no legal test limits for on road emissions , how can you draw any conclusions. Equally we already know that ALL small diesels are polluting much more more on road.

Hence my claim his idea is silly and is based on a misunderstanding of how emissions are tested

To be specific by way of example, since you can't precisely re-create the NEDC n the real road , you then can't make any real comment in relation to nox emmisuons levels. , so if it's 2x , 3x etc. How do you judge

The major issue to come from the VW scandal , is that the current European emmisuons tests are a joke. The second thing to come from it , is don't make up imaginary software to try am explain a failure !

mickdw

BoatMad wrote: »

He's was suggesting an on road test. Since there no legal test limits for on road emissions , how can you draw any conclusions. Equally we already know that ALL small diesels are polluting much more more on road.

Hence my claim his idea is silly and is based on a misunderstanding of how emissions are tested

To be specific by way of example, since you can't precisely re-create the NEDC n the real road , you then can't make any real comment in relation to nox emmisuons levels. , so if it's 2x , 3x etc. How do you judge

The major issue to come from the VW scandal , is that the current European emmisuons tests are a joke. The second thing to come from it , is don't make up imaginary software to try am explain a failure !

You don't appear to be able to understand anything beyond the black and white of the situation. I'm aware of the testing situation and how there is no legal on road test in Europe. You have certainly educated me on the differing requirements re usa and Europe.
My point is that in would be of interest if a third / independent party were to carry out some tests of there own, not to establish whether the cars were legal or not (we all understand that once they pass the test, they are road legal in Europe ) but for example to see how on road emissions performance when driven in a comparable fashion to the official test compares. I'm talking university standard testing to a point where a reasonable person could form an opinion that yes, the car is running the same emissions mode in actual road use as the emissions results are within a percentage of official test or
No, the car is not running the same emissions mode because test figures are multiples of official figures.
Multiple car models should be used to get a conversion factor as to what is an average increase from test result to on road test result when driven in similar manner. Specific results outside that range would stand out somewhat to the point of being able to form an opinion that mode switching was taking place.

BoatMad

mickdw wrote: »

You don't appear to be able to understand anything beyond the black and white of the situation. I'm aware of the testing situation and how there is no legal on road test in Europe. You have certainly educated me on the differing requirements re usa and Europe.
My point is that in would be of interest if a third / independent party were to carry out some tests of there own, not to establish whether the cars were legal or not (we all understand that once they pass the test, they are road legal in Europe ) but for example to see how on road emissions performance when driven in a comparable fashion to the official test compares. I'm talking university standard testing to a point where a reasonable person could form an opinion that yes, the car is running the same emissions mode in actual road use as the emissions results are within a percentage of official test or
No, the car is not running the same emissions mode because test figures are multiples of official figures.
Multiple car models should be used to get a conversion factor as to what is an average increase from test result to on road test result when driven in similar manner. Specific results outside that range would stand out somewhat to the point of being able to form an opinion that mode switching was taking place.

Huh , all this has been done and it's the cause the highlighted the whole issue , please read, as I have done , the key reports on co2 and nox on the ICCT site www.theicct.org . These are " university grade " tests and reports covering a considerable range of small euro diesels.

Mode switching is irelevant, because we already know that VW was not the worst performer on road. It's merely the one that got caught. We specifically know there are models that performed much worse in Europe in on road testing.

The trouble is here is you are using a engineering test to attempt to prove VW is a moral or immoral car company , whether it " mode switches " or not is frankly irelevant to the issue of on road pollution production.

What is relevant is simply the specific pollution the car emits while you a d I are driving around , and we know that all diesels are hugely problematic.

The moral issue isnt VW , it's the doublethink inherent in the NEDC tests that are immoral. These tests give rise to claims of " clean" diesels , when in fact the do nothing of the sort in reality.

So to summarise , what you wanted has been done, and the results are in the public domain. The conclusion drawn , is clearly all shall diesels are emiting on road , orders more pollution then in controlled tests and VW isnt the worse.

Of course the authorities are supporting the fitment of a €10 wire mesh as the solution. !!!!! Wtf.

mickdw

BoatMad wrote: »

Huh , all this has been done and it's the cause the highlighted the whole issue , please read, as I have done , the key reports on co2 and nox on the ICCT site www.theicct.org . These are " university grade " tests and reports covering a considerable range of small euro diesels.

Mode switching is irelevant, because we already know that VW was not the worst performer on road. It's merely the one that got caught. We specifically know there are models that performed much worse in Europe in on road testing.

The trouble is here is you are using a engineering test to attempt to prove VW is a moral or immoral car company , whether it " mode switches " or not is frankly irelevant to the issue of on road pollution production.

What is relevant is simply the specific pollution the car emits while you a d I are driving around , and we know that all diesels are hugely problematic.

The moral issue isnt VW , it's the doublethink inherent in the NEDC tests that are immoral. These tests give rise to claims of " clean" diesels , when in fact the do nothing of the sort in reality.

So to summarise , what you wanted has been done, and the results are in the public domain. The conclusion drawn , is clearly all shall diesels are emiting on road , orders more pollution then in controlled tests and VW isnt the worse.

Of course the authorities are supporting the fitment of a €10 wire mesh as the solution. !!!!! Wtf.

I pretty much agree with you in all that but has on road testing been done here in eu in the manner i describe?
furthermore since the software fix proposed here, similar tests would be interesting to see if any notable difference is observed in on road behaviour re emissions.
My point which you do seem to gloss over is that yes we are all aware of poor on road performance and there is little we can do about that unless the tests change but it is the performance on road but driven in a manner similar to test that would be really interesting.
That would perhaps tell us which car companies are really taking the piss out of customers.

BoatMad

mickdw wrote: »

I pretty much agree with you in all that but has on road testing been done here in eu in the manner i describe?
furthermore since the software fix proposed here, similar tests would be interesting to see if any notable difference is observed in on road behaviour re emissions.
My point which you do seem to gloss over is that yes we are all aware of poor on road performance and there is little we can do about that unless the tests change but it is the performance on road but driven in a manner similar to test that would be really interesting.
That would perhaps tell us which car companies are really taking the piss out of customers.

I still find your logic puzzling. I mean if you ape the NEDC test utterly , you just get the NEDC compliance values.

If you deviate from the test , given that by definition each car you test will be different , how do you make comparisons

Let's say your VW produce 100 mg/km at 30 mph , your say Nissan is 95 , then at say 45 mph your VW is 180 and the Nissan is 190 , and at 55 the VW is 220 and the Nissan is 210.

I mean since the user tests on road tests can't be identical what conclusions can you draw other then the car is producing x times nox over the lab NEDC , which we already know from the ICCT data.

Remember this supposed " no one has seen it software " is supposed to be switched off on the road, so by definition you can't see its effect. , ( nor can you find a road that involves you not moving the steering wheel fir minutes at a time )

Your logic simply doesn't make sense.


Remember this

1. In Europe to my knowledge. No official test house, involved in the NEDC has claimed VW failed or faked the NEDC test.

2. The eu regulator has not make any official allegations against VW.

3. The Swiss testing house did recently claim that Renault was not in compliance

4. Bosch has denied there was " defeat software " , VW have never extended any proof to backup their own claim of its existence

5. What exactly n Europe is VW fixing and how technically are they fixing it with a wire mesh !!!!

Something smells in this whole game and it's not just from VW.

colm_mcm

I reckon potential buyers are over the scandal, owners are being told it's all ok now and they trusr vw again, and pundits are sick of talking about it.
vw are masters of smoke and mirrors (no pun intended) and everything that say/do has been carefully calculated.

mickdw

BoatMad wrote: »

Remember this supposed " no one has seen it software " is supposed to be switched off on the road, so by definition you can't see its effect. , ( nor can you find a road that involves you not moving the steering wheel fir minutes at a time )

.

Now you are getting it.
You replicate the test conditions but exclude some condition thereby defeating the defeat device. So say for example you very closely replicate all test parameters except you do put steering angle in occasionally.
would we then see massively altered results [you could factor in an effect for resistance due to turning] - if we saw results that in anyway compared to official test, all is good. If on the other hand the results were 8 times higher while driving through a similar process as per the official test , in my opinion this would be a damn good indication of switching taking place and would in effect be revealing the presence of the invisible software.

gctest50

BoatMad wrote: »

Let's say your VW produce 100 mg/km at 30 mph , your say Nissan is 95 , then at say 45 mph your VW is 180 and the Nissan is 190 , and at 55 the VW is 220 and the Nissan is 210.

How about " Let's say" nothing and look again

The BMW X5 passed the road test.


The school’s Center for Alternative Fuels, Engines and Emissions had the right equipment -- a portable emission measurement system to stick in the car trunk, attached to a probe to shove up the exhaust pipe.


Testers drove the monitor-equipped diesels from San Diego to Seattle because if Volkswagen had gamed the emission test, they couldn’t be sure how.

The 1,300-mile trip under varying conditions would expose any such scheme in the VWs, German said.

“We were astounded when we saw the numbers,”

On the open road, the Jetta exceeded the U.S. nitrogen oxide emissions standard by 15 to 35 times. The Passat was 5 to 20 times the standard.

“It was shocking,”

The BMW X5 passed the road test.

BoatMad wrote: »

I still find your logic puzzling. I mean if you ape the NEDC test utterly , you just get the NEDC compliance values.

If you deviate from the test , given that by definition each car you test will be different , how do you make comparisons

Let's say your VW produce 100 mg/km at 30 mph , your say Nissan is 95 , then at say 45 mph your VW is 180 and the Nissan is 190 , and at 55 the VW is 220 and the Nissan is 210.

I mean since the user tests on road tests can't be identical what conclusions can you draw other then the car is producing x times nox over the lab NEDC , which we already know from the ICCT data.

Remember this supposed " no one has seen it software " is supposed to be switched off on the road, so by definition you can't see its effect. , ( nor can you find a road that involves you not moving the steering wheel fir minutes at a time )

Your logic simply doesn't make sense.


Remember this

1. In Europe to my knowledge. No official test house, involved in the NEDC has claimed VW failed or faked the NEDC test.

2. The eu regulator has not make any official allegations against VW.

3. The Swiss testing house did recently claim that Renault was not in compliance

4. Bosch has denied there was " defeat software " , VW have never extended any proof to backup their own claim of its existence

5. What exactly n Europe is VW fixing and how technically are they fixing it with a wire mesh !!!!

Something smells in this whole game and it's not just from VW.

BoatMad

the bms x5 pass the road test

Well it passed the ICCT , test in that the nox levels remained approximately within the Carb , EPA. Limits. ( except on a hill climb )

However it has always been easier for 3l diesels fitted with scr to generate low nox levels as power and fuel economy demands are not anywhere as stressful

The issue is at 2l and below and VW have 1.3 and 1.6 l technology that is especially problematic ( as are other car engines in similar power levels )

If we all could drive around in 4l diesels snubbed down , sure there'd be no issue

It's also worth noting that the ICCT tests on co2 on road emissions in Europe flagged bmw as a problem