Panorama VW last night

I saw that, was quiet interesting perhaps more so because of the Zafira doing failing the same way. Just goes to show it's clearly bigger than just VW group.
 
Yep, and Vauxhalls defense was you didn't test the car correctly.

Diesel polution in London has been going up (not down like it should have been), is someone trying to tell us that this rise is down to only VW messing with the test results and every other car maker is doing better in the real world.......

I bet that just about every car maker under the sun is setting up the car to pass 'the test' and on the road pollution is far worse than test conditions.

Personally i see this as a failing of 'the test' rather than a failing by VW, they played the system and did what they needed to pass.
 
Last edited:
Whats the feeling of the couple saying they were duped into buying the Passat?

Seemed a bit OTT to me. Other than yes, they are probably killing more rabbits than expected but does it really affect them? Will the Passat really drop in 2nd hand value over this? Or is it a case of where there's blame etc etc
 
They were just jumping on the band waggon to try and score some free cash. You can't hold the manufacture responsible for 2nd hand prices if you yourself buy it 2nd hand... Once it's out of their control what if a terrorist used one in a propaganda video and they all went down in value, can't hold VW responsible for that..
 
EddScott said:
Whats the feeling of the couple saying they were duped into buying the Passat?
Click to expand...

Knew their angle before they even spoke. Found them to be a bit pathetic to be honest.

To me, the most annoying thing about the whole program was the utter garbage spouted about the ECU and what it controls. Wipers indeed :rolleyes: Yes the wipers are controlled by AN ECU, not that one though.
 
For me this whole new slant on the issue just highlights that the EU tests are misleading and unfit for purpose.

The figures they produce are laughably pathetic and of no real use to anyone. You only need to look at situations where the same car is sold in two different markets - a BMW 320d over here has a combined consumption figure of something utterly pathetic like 70mpg. The same car, sold as the 328d in the USA, has an EPA rating of 32 city, 42 highway (in US MPG).

Fancy that.

Car manufacturers are selling cars capable of '70mpg' to people who do not own a European testing facility and thus can never, ever see that fuel economy.
 
[TW]Fox;28857358 said:
For me this whole new slant on the issue just highlights that the EU tests are misleading and unfit for purpose.

The figures they produce are laughably pathetic and of no real use to anyone. You only need to look at situations where the same car is sold in two different markets - a BMW 320d over here has a combined consumption figure of something utterly pathetic like 70mpg. The same car, sold as the 328d in the USA, has an EPA rating of 32 city, 42 highway (in US MPG).

Fancy that.

Car manufacturers are selling cars capable of '70mpg' to people who do not own a European testing facility and thus can never, ever see that fuel economy.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you!
 
I'm just watching it now on catchup, I always thought as soon as the VW scandal was first announced that they wouldn't be the only manufacturer to be at fault.

It's similar with how the published MPG figures are usually impossible to actually achieve. Perhaps all manufacturers should be re-tested and the tests changed to be more like real world driving.
 
Clarkey said:
What would be the point in retesting them,it's a bit late now, no?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily re-test all diesels, but certainly the ones currently on sale, and change the type of test used to provide real world figures. Otherwise the buyers are buying cars based on incorrect figures.
 
[TW]Fox;28857358 said:
Car manufacturers are selling cars capable of '70mpg' to people who do not own a European testing facility and thus can never, ever see that fuel economy.
Click to expand...
The point of the EU test is that each car is tested in exactly the same conditions so you can compare the fuel economy of car 'a' to the economy of car b, c, d etc...
No where does it ever mention that customers should achieve the same mpg numbers. The manufacturer literature actually says you won't get the stated economy.

If the test was carried out on the road then it would introduce a whole number of uncontrolled variables.

Jonnycoupe said:
Dirty diesels!
Click to expand...
:)
 
chanjy said:
Yes apparently it's not illegal to cheat the EU test, unlike the US one?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be surprised if the test doesn't exclude the use of cheat devices because they never considered that manufacturers would actually do that, so essentially it meets the requirements of the law, because the law only requires them to pass the lab test.
 
SDK^ said:
The point of the EU test is that each car is tested in exactly the same conditions so you can compare the fuel economy of car 'a' to the economy of car b, c, d etc...
No where does it ever mention that customers should achieve the same mpg numbers. The manufacturer literature actually says you won't get the stated economy.
Click to expand...

This is the excuse that is trotted out, but it's simply that - an excuse. Being able to compare one completely meaningless number with another doesn't change the fact both numbers are meaningless. Just because Car A is 10% more efficient on the test than Car B doesn't mean it's 10% more efficient on the road, so it's dubious whether it even provides a figure you can use for comparison purposes.

How's your 48mpg Golf doing?

The excuse gets less and less tolerable as the figures climb ever higher. The current BMW 320d apparently acheives over 80mpg in the Extra Urban test. 80mpg! A completely pointless and meaningless figure. As I said, the same car in the USA gets 45 US MPG highway. Far more reasonable and realistic..

If the test was carried out on the road then it would introduce a whole number of uncontrolled variables.
Click to expand...

The US EPA seem to manage to have a test that provides meaningful and repeatable numbers. I often use them to judge the fuel efficiency I might achieve and have always found them to be bang on..
 
Last edited:
As Fox says, comparability is useful when the test cycle represents at least something akin to reality. Imagine the test was to idle for 2 hours and then drive at 10mph for 2 minutes, or to drive at 40mph for 4 hours - yes you'd get perfectly equal and comparable results, but they'd be totally useless both absolutely and relatively. A car that achieves 20% better economy on the test cycle may not be any more economical in reality, or may even be worse. What is the point in that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom