Breaking VW Emissions Scandal -Mk I

[vxh26]

<SNIP> everyone has been over inflating tyres, taping up door shuts, removing nearside wing mirrors, to give fake MPG and emission data. <SNIP>

I thought that MPG data was calculated based on rolling road tests, how would taping up door shuts and removing nearside wing mirrors give fake data?

 

As to the argument that cows, buses, trucks, trains, boats and planes produce more pollution than diesel engined cars, I guess you would also argue that flinging a fag packet, McDonalds container or Red Bull can out of the window is OK on the basis that "Everyone else does it so what difference does my rubbish make?"

[Lady Elanore]

Termites are worse.

I bet they make a really high pitched noise when they fart

[FrankieKitt]

What is this saying about how trustworthy VAG are?  It is clearly apparent that there is a dishonest culture within the company that has a total disregard to ethical standards or for laws that protect the public.  Consumers who made a concious decision to buy a VAG vehicle based upon the data supplied have been criminally deceived.  Some of you may know that I have documented the fact that VAG and in particular Skoda UK flagrantly break consumer laws by stonewalling consumers through their unfair terms and conditions within their warranty to deny proper consumer entitlements.  Interestly enough it seems VAG attempted to deny these recent allegations until they were presented with the undeniable evidence.

 

This culture goes towards the very centre of the company where principles of due dilligence are clearly absent.  Today CEO Martin Winterkorn fell on his sword in an attempt to appease the public disgust, yet he claims he was unaware of this criminal conduct.  That raises the question who was sufficiently empowered to approve it AND that there was no-one within VAG management with sufficient honesty empowered enough to steer the company along the straight and narrow.   

[Ootohere]

Martin Winterkorn famously the Engineers Engineer, hands on and not some some Bean Counter.  

Or stupid.  He knew what VW needed to meet the United States of Americas Emission Standards in cars he knew how much Emissions were 

in other World Regions, is anyone going to pretend he did not ask how they were doing it.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Winterkorn

 

http://jalopnik.com/5844809/watch-volkswagen-ceo-complain-about-hyundais-superior-interior

[vxh26]

I do have asthma sufferers in my family and they are not bothered by this vw issue in the slightest.

I believe that the incidence of people suffering from Asthma is increasing dramatically. However, don't let that threaten your love affair with diesel, it is almost certainly a result of flatulent cattle wandering the streets where you live.

[vxh26]

<SNIP> is anyone going to pretend he did not ask how they were doing it. <SNIP>

 

Reminds me of Coulson, Brooks and The late unlamented NotW - Not guilty, just incompetent

[bob corb]

I thought that MPG data was calculated based on rolling road tests, how would taping up door shuts and removing nearside wing mirrors give fake data?

 

 

 

The car has to do a measured coast down in order to determine the rolling resistance figures which are then dialled into the rolling road. Polished smooth cars on bald tyres, taped up, one windscreen wiper, probably no interior etc etc will coast much further

[Ootohere]

http://bloomberg.com/bw/stories/1997-03-09/volkswagen-is-back-in-the-suppe-intl-edition

[Lady Elanore]

I believe that the incidence of people suffering from Asthma is increasing dramatically. However, don't let that threaten your love affair with diesel, it is almost certainly a result of flatulent cattle wandering the streets where you live.

 

 

I have created a thread so we can tidy this serious matter up once and for all

 

 

Deadly cows try to kill puny humans here

[skippy41]

Don't they use diesel fuel as it was originally intended ,IE straight out of the ground thinned down a bit and poured in, with nothing removed or added,, unlike ours with artificial additives

[Micky 32]

I think you will find a petrol TSI with ACT cylinder deactivation will be very similar to the a TDI.  You do not need as many HP in a petrol to be better performance than a diesel.  The 1.8TSI is a far better engine than the 2 Common rail TSI, better acceleration, new one combines direct and indirect injection.   1.4 TSI ACT or 1,88 TSI, especially using the 7 speed DSG which they can use and the diesel cannot in a fantastic combination for economy and performance.

 

On the European continent where diesel has been 20% cheaper than petrol (hopefully that will change now) but in the UK diesel do not make sense where the pump price is similar.

 

After being forced to have 4 cylinder diesels for a decade as a company car just loving the choice of picking my own superior three cylinder petrols, virtual no road tax, 55 mpg, cheap to buy and not adding to another 75 deaths a day in the UK.

Lol, after owning a 324bhp 2.0TFSI in various states of tune from 200bhp and now owning a 200bhp diesel it is untrue to say you need less Hp in the petrol to be a better performer. Like for like Hp they are comparable. Personally I have found the 1.8 TSI dog slow.

[lol-lol]

Lol, after owning a 324bhp 2.0TFSI in various states of tune from 200bhp and now owning a 200bhp diesel it is untrue to say you need less Hp in the petrol to be a better performer. Like for like Hp they are comparable. Personally I have found the 1.8 TSI dog slow.

 

The figures speak for themselves.  Wiesel VRS (185hp), as standard,  8.2 seconds 0-100 kph,  1.8TSI (180hp) 0-100 kph 7.3 seconds 0-100 kph.  Hmmmm.

 

So 1.8 TSI is nearly a second quicker to 100 kph, similar figures reflected by Audi, SEAT and VW. https://tools.skoda.co.uk/content/brochure/brochure_octavia.pdf

 

The diesel VRS is a styling exercise.  If you like the VRS styling and not particularly bother about performance, or live in mainland Europe where diesel fuel is cheaper, some logic in the wiesel VRS.

 

I agree even the petrol VRS at not exactly quick at 6.8 seconds to 100 kph, or even a highly tuned 320 hp 2 litre TSI which might do it in 5-5.5 seconds.

 

Front wheel drive cars struggle to get below 5 seconds to 100 kph, rear wheel drive can get down to 3 seconds, 4 wheel drive 2.5 seconds to 100 kph.  If you fancy quick acceleration you need to spend about twice the average national salary on a car (Nissan GTR would be my choice) or half a year salary on a bike.  £12K for a R1, ZZR1400, 0-100 in 2.5 seconds, 0-170 in 15 seconds.

 

With the petrol VRS I just found it ran out of revs at 6.5K, same EA888 engine in the 1.8 TSI but the shorter stroke means it can rev another 500 rpm higher.  Linked with the 7 speed DSG a delight.

 

But I would not buy one now for several reasons.  Firstly SUK do not do good deals any more, No "we pay the VAT" etc, and secondly Skoda treat their dealer with the same contempt they treat law makers and their customers.  Shame becuase the Czech people who make Skoda are great people now ruining the brand so it would be Nissan, Renault or Dacia for me depending on buying parameter as the Nissan-Renault Alliance do what VAG use to do ie give value and produce exciting cars ie hot hatchs, value cars, super cars. 

 

Oh and VAG are lying, cheating b*st*rds over our health issue.

[moley]

Just love the way I'm murdering thousands of people every year when I drive my diesel car on the roads of Great Britain and Mrs Moley is causing climate change when she drives her petrol car.

Nitrogen Oxide levels in the UK have reduced by 62% since the 1970's when there were very few diesel cars on the roads. We must have murdered millions of people back then. The street with the poorest air quality in the UK is reported to be Oxford street in London, where cars are banned and only buses and taxi's are allowed :think:  

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/388195/Emissions_of_air_pollutants_statistical_release_2014.pdf

 

Anyway, I must rush out and sell my two Skoda's at the weekend and buy a couple of Dacia's to save the planet.

Edited 24 September, 2015 by moley

[lol-lol]

Just love the way I'm murdering thousands of people every year when I drive my diesel car on the roads of Great Britain and Mrs Moley is causing climate change when she drives her petrol car.

Nitrogen Oxide levels in the UK have reduced by 62% since the 1970's when there were very few diesel cars on the roads. We must have murdered millions of people back then. The street with the poorest air quality in the UK is reported to be Oxford street in London, where cars are banned and only buses and taxi's are allowed :think:  

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/388195/Emissions_of_air_pollutants_statistical_release_2014.pdf

 

Anyway, I must rush out and sell my two Skoda's at the weekend and buy a couple of Dacia's to save the planet.

 

Don't think you have too much to worry about with 1.6 CR as it does not produce much of anything, emission etc.

 

I have a HTP Fabia in the fleet and it bugs the hell out of me paying £11 a month road tax (130 gm/km?) when the petrol Chevy and Dacia (both about 116 gm/km) are only £2 a month, really gets my goat.

 

So yes if you want to improve that terrible air quality in the SE of England which is claiming almost 10K premature deaths a year, then TCE Dacia (or other Renaults at 10 or Leaf/ Zoe at zero) at 10 mg/km of NO is clearly a way to go. And you only have to pay £10K for a fully loaded car and save the city, country and planet, now there is a bargain. 

[Jevpls]

I somehow don't understand why so many are (or at least they pretend to be) worried about those emissions. Nowadays cars produce much cleaner exhaust gases than before. It doesn't matter if they are bit worse than expected to be.

If you are so worried about that then maybe it's time take a quick look at your other habits? What about reducing electricity use because it's created in powerplants where coal/oil/whatever is burnt? Lets not be hypocritical and pretend that it bothers us much.

[gadgetman]

The car has to do a measured coast down in order to determine the rolling resistance figures which are then dialled into the rolling road. Polished smooth cars on bald tyres, taped up, one windscreen wiper, probably no interior etc etc will coast much further

A representative from the smmt said this was an urban myth on the news the other day.

All tests are witnessed by 3rd party representatives, and anything found like this voids a test. Cars are apparently selected at random by testers and checked that they are to manufactures spec.

That doesn't stop a cheeky ecu remap though

[Ootohere]

If the person you mean is that spokesman Mr Hawkes or who ever,  he must be the worst spokesperson i have ever seen put out be anyone.

He must be the least convincing person,

other than the woman that used to talk for the Power Industry and now talks for the Banks.

 

As to this EU Fuel Consumption & Co2 Emissions testing, we know how this has nothing to do with real world.

http://skoda.co.uk/pages/fuel-consumption-statement.aspx

 

[Stuart_J]

I somehow don't understand why so many are (or at least they pretend to be) worried about those emissions. Nowadays cars produce much cleaner exhaust gases than before. It doesn't matter if they are bit worse than expected to be.

If you are so worried about that then maybe it's time take a quick look at your other habits? What about reducing electricity use because it's created in powerplants where coal/oil/whatever is burnt? Lets not be hypocritical and pretend that it bothers us much.

 

 

That's a great post !!!!!!!!!!!

[lol-lol]

I somehow don't understand why so many are (or at least they pretend to be) worried about those emissions. Nowadays cars produce much cleaner exhaust gases than before. It doesn't matter if they are bit worse than expected to be.

If you are so worried about that then maybe it's time take a quick look at your other habits? What about reducing electricity use because it's created in powerplants where coal/oil/whatever is burnt? Lets not be hypocritical and pretend that it bothers us much.

 

Whilst individual cars generally are producing less (My 12 year Jaaag meets the diesel NO EUR6 target that is how low the standards are in the UK/EU) it is the increased number of cars and the number of miles traveled that is the key fact.

 

I spent a year with DtP before starting with HMRC and both bodies get stats in these things. The number of miles has been fairly consistent at around 10K a year but the number of cars now exceeds 30M and is growing by about half a million a year.  UK population expected to be the largest in Europe in the next couple of decades.

 

And it is not a bit worse.  The defeat device, when not fooling the test allows the 2 litre TDI engine to hit levels more than 10 times the allowable limits.  There have been spikes where the emission of NO is hitting 500 or even 1000 mg/km when the limit is 40/80 mg/km depending which legal jurisdiction you are in.

 

I think we all need to review our NO and CO2 output.   My company records such things with almost religious fervor.  We video conference rather than travel as much as possible as top many of the world's largest firms even though our business is logistics.   The UK Cons party stopping the Heathrow expansion not only cost 50K jobs but meant we could not bring in the A380s planes for more slots and that use over 10% less fuel per kilo of cargo.  Our latest ships, a proper place for a diesel engine, now carry up to 20,000 TEU containers and have incredible CO2 per kilo carried.    

 

I love nuclear power (just not Chinese nuclear) and electric cars which are almost there in terms of useability so hopefully this will be the last decade we have to worry about internal combustion vehicles.  

[Jevpls]

 electric cars which are almost there in terms of useability so hopefully this will be the last decade we have to worry about internal combustion vehicles.  

What? Hey, it reminds me "lets save the cows and buy the beef in supermarket!"

May I ask you - how do you get that electric power for those cars? Do you find it in the closet? Not really. It comes from powerplant. Now lets read this:

 

Most of the UK’s electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels, mainly natural gas (47% in 2010) and coal (28%). A very small amount is produced from oil (under 1%).

 

Where is the difference between burning fossil fuel in your petrol/diesel car or doing it in the larger powerplant? There is none. The second way allows you to think that you are green...that's ridiculous.

By the way, burning coal is worse than burning petrol/diesel. Those electric cars may be even worse than ones with internal combustion engines. I'm not talking about disposal of their used batteries etc.

[Huskoda]

What? Hey, it reminds me "lets save the cows and buy the beef in supermarket!"

May I ask you - how do you get that electric power for those cars? Do you find it in the closet? Not really. It comes from powerplant. Now lets read this:

 

Most of the UK’s electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels, mainly natural gas (47% in 2010) and coal (28%). A very small amount is produced from oil (under 1%).

 

Where is the difference between burning fossil fuel in your petrol/diesel car or doing it in the larger powerplant? There is none. The second way allows you to think that you are green...that's ridiculous.

By the way, burning coal is worse than burning petrol/diesel. Those electric cars may be even worse than ones with internal combustion engines. I'm not talking about disposal of their used batteries etc.

Not sure if trolling.

 

The difference is using a power station you don't produce the fumes in the middle of dense population centres where they're immediately breathed in. I'd have thought that somewhat obvious.

[Stuart_J]

Whilst individual cars generally are producing less (My 12 year Jaaag meets the diesel NO EUR6 target that is how low the standards are in the UK/EU) it is the increased number of cars and the number of miles traveled that is the key fact.

 

I spent a year with DtP before starting with HMRC and both bodies get stats in these things. The number of miles has been fairly consistent at around 10K a year but the number of cars now exceeds 30M and is growing by about half a million a year.  UK population expected to be the largest in Europe in the next couple of decades.

 

And it is not a bit worse.  The defeat device, when not fooling the test allows the 2 litre TDI engine to hit levels more than 10 times the allowable limits.  There have been spikes where the emission of NO is hitting 500 or even 1000 mg/km when the limit is 40/80 mg/km depending which legal jurisdiction you are in.

 

I think we all need to review our NO and CO2 output.   My company records such things with almost religious fervor.  We video conference rather than travel as much as possible as top many of the world's largest firms even though our business is logistics.   The UK Cons party stopping the Heathrow expansion not only cost 50K jobs but meant we could not bring in the A380s planes for more slots and that use over 10% less fuel per kilo of cargo.  Our latest ships, a proper place for a diesel engine, now carry up to 20,000 TEU containers and have incredible CO2 per kilo carried.    

 

I love nuclear power (just not Chinese nuclear) and electric cars which are almost there in terms of useability so hopefully this will be the last decade we have to worry about internal combustion vehicles.  

 

 

And its well known how jets directly inject pollutants into the atmosphere, logistics companies consistently try & find ways of dragging products all around the world & doing it as quickly as they can by air so massively increasing pollution.

 

OK "Relax" that's a controversial comment & not meant as that but just to illustrate that whoever we are & whatever business we work for we all polute & try to justify it to suit us.

 

I often wonder if we all kept cars for 20-30 years how much better the planet would be, OK direct pollutants might be higher but how much pollution is created building &  scrapping millions of cars & older cars like the Pug 205 Diesel did 50-60 to the Gallon so less fuel needed

 

Like most things in life what we want & what business wants always bends arguments & statistics to suit itself, remember all those Tobacco companies who insisted smoking was safe, all those innocent bankers, all those innocent governments, sadly as humans we all sit in our Ivory towers arguing points in the way that either suits us or sticks others in the medias eyes to distract from what we want

[vxh26]

Whilst individual cars generally are producing less (My 12 year Jaaag meets the diesel NO EUR6 target that is how low the standards are in the UK/EU) it is the increased number of cars and the number of miles traveled that is the key fact.

 

I spent a year with DtP before starting with HMRC and both bodies get stats in these things. The number of miles has been fairly consistent at around 10K a year but the number of cars now exceeds 30M and is growing by about half a million a year.  UK population expected to be the largest in Europe in the next couple of decades.

 

And it is not a bit worse.  The defeat device, when not fooling the test allows the 2 litre TDI engine to hit levels more than 10 times the allowable limits.  There have been spikes where the emission of NO is hitting 500 or even 1000 mg/km when the limit is 40/80 mg/km depending which legal jurisdiction you are in.

 

I think we all need to review our NO and CO2 output.   My company records such things with almost religious fervor.  We video conference rather than travel as much as possible as top many of the world's largest firms even though our business is logistics.   The UK Cons party stopping the Heathrow expansion not only cost 50K jobs but meant we could not bring in the A380s planes for more slots and that use over 10% less fuel per kilo of cargo.  Our latest ships, a proper place for a diesel engine, now carry up to 20,000 TEU containers and have incredible CO2 per kilo carried.    

 

I love nuclear power (just not Chinese nuclear) and electric cars which are almost there in terms of useability so hopefully this will be the last decade we have to worry about internal combustion vehicles.  

 

Now that IS a great post.

 

The assumption above that people who care about pollution from cars must be hypocrites and can't possibly care about wasting electricity or any other pollutant or finite resource is incredibly arrogant.

[lol-lol]

What? Hey, it reminds me "lets save the cows and buy the beef in supermarket!"

May I ask you - how do you get that electric power for those cars? Do you find it in the closet? Not really. It comes from powerplant. Now lets read this:

 

Most of the UK’s electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels, mainly natural gas (47% in 2010) and coal (28%). A very small amount is produced from oil (under 1%).

 

Where is the difference between burning fossil fuel in your petrol/diesel car or doing it in the larger powerplant? There is none. The second way allows you to think that you are green...that's ridiculous.

By the way, burning coal is worse than burning petrol/diesel. Those electric cars may be even worse than ones with internal combustion engines. I'm not talking about disposal of their used batteries etc.

 

So nuclear and renewables make up about a third currently and will be almost half in the next 5 years http://www.energy-uk.org.uk/energy-industry/electricity-generation.html  so your next car could be being getting half its charge from nuclear and wind.  Sounds good to me.

 

Gas is the cleanest of the Hydrocarbons of course, and oil and coal power stations have exhaust scrubbers to remove much of the harmful gases unlike vehicles, particularly 2 litre VAG ones, cheat the test and are not measured when running on the road.     

[vxh26]

The car has to do a measured coast down in order to determine the rolling resistance figures which are then dialled into the rolling road. Polished smooth cars on bald tyres, taped up, one windscreen wiper, probably no interior etc etc will coast much further

WHAT?