Associate
Just seen this pop up on FB :
Volkswagen cheats emissions tests!
- Thread starter coolsurfer
- Start date
Caporegime
There was a really interesting article on Jalopnik about this long before the story broke over here. ( http://jalopnik.com/your-guide-to-dieselgate-volkswagens-diesel-cheating-c-1731857018 )
The US has incredibly strict emissions standards and most other diesel engines in the states have a system called "Ad Blue" to inject a urea based solution into the engine to cut down nitrogen oxide emissions. Looking at the Honda USA site, they don't appear to offer this engine in the US. This may even be because it wouldn't meet the US standards as most diesel engines in the states have these extra systems apart from VWs. VW went on a massive marketing campaign stating about how their diesel engines were so clean. Everybody wondered how they managed it without ad blue.
Turns out, they didn't manage it.
http://jalopnik.com/understanding-the-test-mode-that-let-vw-trick-the-emiss-1732175835
They changed the ECU to recognize when it was being put in the dyno mode, what speed the car was doing, the steering angles etc.. to work out it was being tested and then switched to another engine map that produced less emissions to get by the test. Chances are, that in most of the countries where this software is present, the cars will still pass the local emissions tests without the dyno mode, VW just found it easier to put the ECU code on every engine world wide, rather than trying to specifically target the countries they couldn't get past the testing of.
Last edited:
Caporegime
[TW]Fox;28598532 said:Except most consumers incorrectly believe they should be able to, how stupid of them to think quoted fuel economy figures in advertising are something they should see themselves if they buy the product
The point jonny is trying to make is that this is completely different.
We all know that every car now does less MPG than quoted, but yet in the article I quoted above
I bet that same BMW X5 also doesn't meet its average MPG claims in real world driving.
Although having said that, Autobild reckon the BMW X3 uses a similar system
http://jalopnik.com/german-magazine-claims-the-bmw-x3-diesel-also-violates-1732767600
Soldato
I think posters in this thread need to be clear if they are referring to the US or UK/Europe.
Soldato
How far off was it?
Soldato
On that Jalopnik page, it says how BMW is just using the **** rules to pass whereas VW are cheating by using a device to pass.
Caporegime
the autobild revelations are interesting and appear to explain the link between us not seeing the manufacturer MPGs and what was going on at VW
So BMW diesels won't meet the required standards of emissions either, when driven in the real world and outside of the test cycle. This "cycle beating" is the optimization they use to get the better MPG figures and lower emissions. This is dodgy, but legal
VW however, went one further and overstepped the line by turning systems off when the steering wheel was being used and drive on the road.
So BMW diesels won't meet the required standards of emissions either, when driven in the real world and outside of the test cycle. This "cycle beating" is the optimization they use to get the better MPG figures and lower emissions. This is dodgy, but legal
VW however, went one further and overstepped the line by turning systems off when the steering wheel was being used and drive on the road.
Just seen this pop up on FB :
The joke is depending upon what happens during the investigations, we might actually see this type of thing.
"I only bought my 1.6 VAG TDI to save the planet, why else would I put up with this engine!.... Now where's my compo?!?"
I guess even if such devices were not required to meet EU regulations, if they have been fitted (as seems likely if the quoted figure of 11m vehicles is accurate given that less than 5% were sold in the US) then it could open a large can of worms in terms of people claiming they were mislead, that it has adversely affected the resale value of their car etc.
My wife drives a VAG Diesel I will wait and see what transpires on the off-chance some sort of benefit can be gleaned (most likely just hassle of car being recalled if anything).
Caporegime
Let's say VW are forced to fit some form of nitrogen oxide trapping device, or release a software update which forces the emissions control mode to always one.
Where would you stand regarding being miss-sold a product if it no longer performs as per their started specifications after the modification ?
The above is a joke, but could well end up happening.
Where would you stand regarding being miss-sold a product if it no longer performs as per their started specifications after the modification ?
The above is a joke, but could well end up happening.
I hope so. I lost about £3-4k back in 2012 because my A4 was around 40% off the official figures. 20% I could have lived with, maybe a little more. But 40% shy, on a 2.0 TDI was too much. So after 3 months I sent it back, and it cost me thousands.
Would appreciate some of that back, if it transpires that anything untoward happened.
Although I doubt I'll see a penny.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
[TW]Fox;28607580 said:
but what if they are then forced to re-quote the quoted figures.
They can get away with saying that you can only obtain these quoted figures if you drive like we do in our tests.
But if they change their figures ...... Just pondering
[TW]Fox;28607580 said:
Clearly not. I knew the figures were somewhat based on fantasy, and not achievable.
However, I did expect it to be within 20% or so. I had traded in 2009 A4 2.0 TDI (143) Multitronic that was easily within 18-20% of the quoted figures. My 2.0 TDI A3 (140) I had before that was within around 10% too.
I expected to get low to mid 40's out of a car that's official figures were mid 50's on the combined cycle. Something I didn't think was unreasonable. In the end, I was only getting mid 30's. Even on a run, I was only seeing 34-36 mpg, at 70 mph, on a dual carriageway. From a 2.0 TDI. I was not happy to the point that I returned the car, as I was not willing to take any further depreciation hit on a vehicle that was clearly under performing, whether due to a fault or poor design, or as now transpires, simply cheating.
Which is pretty much the ONLY reason I now drive a BMW. I took a taxi from the Audi dealer to the BMW dealer to pick up my 335d when I handed back the A4. A car which, despite the extra litre capacity, extra turbo, and extra 140 BHP (after the remap admittedly), still returned a good 2-4 mpg better economy. And that was driven properly too. Not driven to try to get better economy, as I had been doing in the A4.
Most seemed to rolling road between 365 and 380 in my experience and they never felt like the full 414bhp experience. Mine was just a smidge quicker than an E46 M3 up to 120 then little in it really. Rollers never the most accurate and some American spod came here to tell me we were all wrong, they were all done wrong in wrong gear etc but he was wrong. People claim to be able to make them run the numbers claimed but I wanted Audi to do that, not people.
[TW]Fox;28607638 said:
That was also my argument, but Audi UK were having none of it, and claimed it was expected. Then said I would have to take them to court to prove otherwise. I couldn't be assed with the hassle, and sold them the car back just to wash my hands of the situation. I didn't fancy going up against their lawyers, despite feeling I had a reasonable case.
Soldato
Not really anything to do with this federal emissions though is it. If anything you would be benefiting from lower urea use thanks to the cheat.
Soldato
They all probably do it - they were just the ones who got caught.
Global Warming - it's just fictional isn't it? Or is it really caused by emissions from cars etc where the manufacturers have just been caught out.... lol.
Global Warming - it's just fictional isn't it? Or is it really caused by emissions from cars etc where the manufacturers have just been caught out.... lol.