Seeing ALL emmissions related equipment has a designed MINIMUM life of 10 years (stainless steel exhaust being one of them) - would it not be reasonable to expect the single most important component , the EGR , to be required to go the distance in perfect working order?

I wonder if anyone has thought of testing out the theory that the manufacturer should be required to accept responsibility for it for its MINIMUM design life.......after all this started out decades ago as being a public health issue.

If it fails inside its minimum design life, why should we pick up the tab?.

The OEM for the part and VW for labour?.

+1  ^

Have now, at last, got the car back. Final bill over £1100  . Garage had taken a picture showing the bits they had to remove all over the workshop floor. Subframe transfer box, exhaust etc. Looked like most of the car!

 

I don't know if its just me but the car seems to be running quieter and smoother now. Idle is certainly better, a slight 'chirping' noise is gone. Perhaps a sign of the impending failure.

 

Andy

 

 

 

Offending item. Apparently its the servo motor (on the right) that fails.

 

 

^^^^^^so what does the above item do and what's the relationship with the EGR,oh glad u got it sorted so swiftly.

How old is the car and miles?

Under 5 years and 45k miles

 

Andy

Under 5 years and 45k miles

Andy

Hmm

You might MIGHT be a candidate for a refund

IF

The U.K. has an emissions 'serviceable life' requirement of 5 years/62,000miles (100,000km) which Australia APPEARS to adhere to.

It's a work v much in progress

Either way it won't be arguable as it'll be covered in some obscure doc

Edited 17 October, 201510 yr by Ryeman

Hmm

You might MIGHT be a candidate for a refund

IF

The U.K. has an emissions 'serviceable life' requirement of 5 years/62,000miles (100,000km) which Australia APPEARS to adhere to.

It's a work v much in progress

Either way it won't be arguable as it'll be covered in some obscure doc

 

It doesn't!!

(as has also been said elsewhere)

The head of the workshop tells me they are replacing an increasing number of the EGR's on all VAG vehicles. From what he said the vans aren't to bad to change, but the cars and the 4x4 in particular are a nightmare, so if it does go, be prepared to dig deep. The new parts have been revised since my Yeti was built in 2010.

 

Andy

It appears it is a common prob with VAG then,not speculation then.

It doesn't!!

(as has also been said elsewhere)

How do you know?

Does the UK never follow any EU (or UN) directives on emissions etc?

Have you quickly gone through every section of documentation relating to light vehicles in the UK specifically relating to emission related matters an diesels in particular, which are the problem?

Edited 17 October, 201510 yr by Ryeman

It appears it is a common prob with VAG then,not speculation then.

We just don't know HOW common

But

London to a brick

Once 'fixed' by the recall

The EGR will have to do much more work.......that to me is the worry

The EGR will have to do much more work.......that to me is the worry

 

Or the other way round, as it may have been in use full time in cheat mode?

Or the other way round, as it may have been in use full time in cheat mode?

It was certainly used to lower combustion temperatures during the test (thus lowering NOx) but not on the road when it would have done v little thus keeping it cleaner and more reliable for longer.

Picture  in workshop of all the bits removed

It appears it is a common prob with VAG then,not speculation then.

Presumably the same engine as a mk 6 golf?

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4849816

Edited 19 October, 201510 yr by jonbenj

Picture  in workshop of all the bits removed

Bloody hell.

Subframe, exhaust/DPF, steering rack and transfer box all out.

 

If the EGR isn't actually leaking coolant or exhaust gas, then inserting a blanking plate and getting it mapped out is looking like a very favourable option if you're out of warranty!

 

Am led to believe that disabling EGR will lower soot production - which will mean longer intervals between DPF regeneration and consequently less fuel used. The downside obviously would be increased NOx emissions, but if blanking was best part of £1k cheaper than fitting a new EGR then sod it!

 

Thanks for the photos.

Just shows that VW and it's designers don't give a damn for owners further down the line. Absolute disgrace really.

Just shows that VW and it's designers don't give a damn for owners further down the line. Absolute disgrace really.

VW's move toward hybrid/plugins is a message......at the risk of "speculating", I think you can work it out.

Long shot, but if you could get your hands on the old one, I'd love to see what's inside them. I'll pay you postage if you want to send it to me!

 

I am trying to get my hands on my one that failed ... will let you know if I get it !

I am trying to get my hands on my one that failed ... will let you know if I get it !

Yes please !

It was certainly used to lower combustion temperatures during the test (thus lowering NOx) but not on the road when it would have done v little thus keeping it cleaner and more reliable for longer.

 

Having read a bit more about it (and as a diesel calibration engineer) I think the issue was that for the US market the aftertreatment system was in an open-loop state to avoid slipping ammonia through the SCR system. It only went into closed loop NOx control when on test in the lab through some odd combination of sensors and calibration settings. This would not have changed the EGR operation in any way only the SCR dosing.

 

I think the issue that people are becoming victim to is that the engine is designed to be common across a multitude of platforms and derivatives. I assume that when developing the 4WD derivatives they were unable to package everything to be able to access the EGR valve, a component that would not be expected to fail in the warranty period.

Having read a bit more about it (and as a diesel calibration engineer) I think the issue was that for the US market the aftertreatment system was in an open-loop state to avoid slipping ammonia through the SCR system. It only went into closed loop NOx control when on test in the lab through some odd combination of sensors and calibration settings. This would not have changed the EGR operation in any way only the SCR dosing.

 

I think the issue that people are becoming victim to is that the engine is designed to be common across a multitude of platforms and derivatives. I assume that when developing the 4WD derivatives they were unable to package everything to be able to access the EGR valve, a component that would not be expected to fail in the warranty period.

What in your opinion is the best option if the EGR fails or the car goes to limp mode.....

Having read a bit more about it (and as a diesel calibration engineer) I think the issue was that for the US market the aftertreatment system was in an open-loop state to avoid slipping ammonia through the SCR system. It only went into closed loop NOx control when on test in the lab through some odd combination of sensors and calibration settings. This would not have changed the EGR operation in any way only the SCR dosing.

 

I think the issue that people are becoming victim to is that the engine is designed to be common across a multitude of platforms and derivatives. I assume that when developing the 4WD derivatives they were unable to package everything to be able to access the EGR valve, a component that would not be expected to fail in the warranty period.

From what I understand the problematic ones didn't have SCR.

SCR retrofitting was considered too expensive so likely to be the subject of a buyback programme.

The EGR valve's location was seen to be acceptable due to it getting out of the warranty period before failing says it all and is the reason the warranty won't be extended beyond 3 years.

How cynical!