Breaking VW Emissions Scandal -Mk I

[Sad555]

So VAG appear to be still working on a solution,still no sign of moving forward and owners still don't have a clue what to do next and stuck with vehicles that no other dealers will touch even if you take a big hit on px,I suppose I'm quite lucky in the respect my car is still under warranty for another 18 months and don't need to px at the moment but that should have been my choice in a normal market and not down to VAG by corrupting my car and the world wide market and must have put a lot of customers needing to change in a difficult and costly position and the thought of a VAG salesman offering you a discount on a car that they are marking down the price they offer you is giving you nothing just another con where they know the figures ,you don't and they are all going to make shabby offers because that's how they make there living.

Edited 20 November, 2015 by Sad555

[fuzzybunny]

Mine is three years old in January and would normally change then but agree with Sad555, whatever extra VW discount I get would be creamed off by a poor deal from the dealer.So I will probably have to hang on for another year and see what happens. Mind you I still enjoy driving the Yeti so no great chore to keep it.

[mjh69]

Just had an email off slater and gordon. Vw are saying 2.0l will be "fixed" in jan/feb. And in the email it says that vw are saying compensation will be unlikely. Not like in the us. But still nothing on what the fix will do to the cars altho the 2.0l will only be software

Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk

[thedinger]

Evening, all,

Just a thought concerning the emissions problems affecting the VAG group diesels (so far, only those, but who knows?)

If the official figures have been so skewed to pass the tests & we've been paying road tax here in the UK based on the official figures, if they're proven to be false, will we be liable to pay more from now on?  If so, when will that apply?

Another thought, as we've been paying tax based on false figures, will we be asked to pay the difference between the declared figures & the real numbers for the time we've owned the cars?

Any more ideas on that anyone?

Cheers the noo,

Starting to snow in the Scottish Borders, time to fit the winter boots I think.

thedinger

 

[33q]

I think the issue of road fund licence has been covered before. I'm sure it concluded that the amount will not change no matter what the outcome.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[paulfjr]

I believe the road tax figure was based on the CO2 emission figures which are correct for the test, but the "cheat" software system was designed to lower the NOx figures during the tests and hence is not taken into account in the road tax figures. I have had a reply to a letter I wrote to Skoda about this issue, and they state ".. the technical solution which is being developed is being designed to have no adverse effect on the performance of the vehicle....". It will be interesting to see what solution they come up with that does not effect the performance of the vehicle. 

[Ryeman]

VW indicated no increase in CO2/economy as a priority.

They said nothing about power however.

[Tony R]

Just had an email off slater and gordon. Vw are saying 2.0l will be "fixed" in jan/feb. And in the email it says that vw are saying compensation will be unlikely. Not like in the us. But still nothing on what the fix will do to the cars altho the 2.0l will only be software

Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk

 

     It will not be up to V A G  as to whether there will be compensation, they will resist of course but the courts will decide. I do not suppose , or hope, for one moment  the solicitors will accept  that comment by  V A G.  And if the action  for 2 ltr engines is software only, the performance will change or the deceit aspect of the current software be negated, in which case, will the vehicle get through the M o T and if so, at much higher emissions. What effect will that have on the R F Licence, which if increased, = one head at least for damages . And of course, being sold a pup, so  V A G better start saving up?.

[Ryeman]

My prediction

Not MOT impact

Performance penalty for the owner but not admitted.

Declared CO2 no change.......(EPA tick)

Economy therefore (theoretically) the same .......in practice (?)

VW's legal advice to management -

Don't admit owner loss of power/economy or resale value.

[lol-lol]

My prediction

Not MOT impact

Performance penalty for the owner but not admitted.

Declared CO2 no change.......(EPA tick)

Economy therefore (theoretically) the same .......in practice (?)

VW's legal advice to management -

Don't admit owner loss of power/economy or resale value.

 

I agree this is how it well could be.

 

Unless you take two cars off the production line, do the tweak on one and not the other, compare those two cars at the same time for fuel consumption and power and acceleration etc VAG can say all sorts of things which are true but only half the truth like with the emissions scandal. Yes it can get under the NO limits (but only with the defeat lines of code active etc).

 

Power and torque might be the same (whole truth- at a slight higher revs so BMEP is lower and Nitrogen Oxides are produced less).  Fuel consumption is the same or better (but area under the power and torque curves compared to the previous are somewhat less).  That said if, and it looks like they have to, go down the route of large Cats then if will just be the extra weight etc but VW will again try and scrimp this as it costs compared to engine hardware and software changes.  An unholy mess but again everyone should think of the pollution aspect not just their dissatisfaction with their amend and now compliant car and VW must take the full hit on that via trade-ins to diesels with SCR etc or equivalent TSIs I believe. 

[Ryeman]

I think VW's attitude is one of - it's a free recall and all will be 'fixed' free of charge.

And

What is there to complain about?.

The vast majority will simply accept that as being reasonable.

[lol-lol]

I think VW's attitude is one of - it's a free recall and all will be 'fixed' free of charge.

And

What is there to complain about?.

The vast majority will simply accept that as being reasonable.

 

Until the press, hopefully, do some Rolling Road tests and expose what it actually means.

 

Producing power at slightly higher revs will help the emission but it is the Torque, related to BMEP and NO production, that is the difficult thing to fix and therefore the car may feel less torquey unless VAG really lay out on the CAT cost.  Using the EGR more will just clip the torque too.

 

No substitute for cubes or revs when it comes to lower NO unless you go down the road of expensive exhaust gases processing systems. 

[Smokeyjoe]

Manufacturers published figures include power, torque, 0-62mph, top speed,and  economy. Surely VAG will have to be able to match all the published figures with any changes they make or litigation will follow from disgruntled owners.

 

It might be that emissions are the main dispute, but all the specs should be at least as good or the car will not be as described at point of sale

Edited 21 November, 2015 by Smokeyjoe

[Ryeman]

VW's attitude will be that it's 'just' a recall and certainly won't be referring to power variations.

As far as the company lawyers are concerned, they've done enough 'admitting' already.

[vxh26]

Manufacturers published figures include power, torque, 0-62mph, top speed,and  economy. Surely VAG will have to be able to match all the published figures with any changes they make or litigation will follow from disgruntled owners.

 

It might be that emissions are the main dispute, but all the specs should be at least as good or the car will not be as described at point of sale

 

It seems strange that so far as I am aware, very few disappointed buyers have ever been successful in suing any car manufacturer for claiming wholly unrealistic MPG figures . . . in fact, I doubt that anyone has ever even bothered to try.

 

I have no doubt that some opportunist lawyers will work very hard to persuade some greedy owners that they have bought a complete lemon and are absolutely entitled to massive compensation. . .  perhaps John Grisham should write a novel about it

[4 wheel driver]

FAO Paulfjr.

Affected owners would be very interested to see the reply you received from Skoda stating that the diesel cheat fix will not affect performance.

Any chance of posting it on this site?

If performance is affected the reply could potentially be used to pursue a compo claim.

We deserve to have the power we paid for!

Read that trade in values for affected vehicles have dropped significantly too.

That's a double whammy... To coin a phrase.

[Sad555]

I think you will find that Hyundai/Kia were fined in the USA in the last couple of years for giving misleading/ unachievable mpg figures and were fined over $130 million,but the consumer laws there appear to be more representable than here in the UK to protect the consumer.

[Ootohere]

vxh26/vxh28,

Google failing you?

Kia / Hyundai,  Class Actions, North America, Canada, Compensation, Pre-paid Fuel Cards issued.

http://kiafuelconsumption.ca

 

EDIT.

Sorry posting crossed.

Edited 21 November, 2015 by goneoffSKion1

[fuzzybunny]

Disappointing update from Slater and Gordon but not surprising.

Far more cars affected in Europe that in the US and looks like VW are claiming its 'just another recall',

They will go out of the way to minimise costs and argue against any compensation unless there is very clear evidence of a loss.

[weasley]

It is impossible to clean up the emissions and not affect performance. If it was possible, they would have done it that way to start with. What we need to understand is their interpretation of "performance" and "no adverse effect". It could be that peak power is maintained but a big hole in the power curve makes it less driveable.

I've said before... to reduce NOx you have to reduce combustion temperatures, which will inherently lead to lower engine efficiency. No matter their omnipotent self-belief, thermodynamics can't be rewritten by VAG.

[Ootohere]

If people had paid attention back when the ASA , had looked at Audi Adverts and Mis-leading claims of the Fuel Economy 

of the Audi A3 1.6TDI, they would have seen that it was said that the EU Tests were just as a Comparison of EU Test results, 

and not actual fuel consumption of the vehicles.

Fair enough.

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

....................

 

But now 'Internal Investigations' @ VW have found 'Irregularities' in their EU Testing and Co2 / MPG, 

so that is a whole new kettle of fish,

Audi / VW changed their Advertising to make clear they were EU test results, and failed to mention they might have 'Cheated the testing'.

ie , Mis-lead yet again.

 

So we know the Testing was not representative of Real World even when done fairly,

but having to cheat it and giving Official figures and Advertising them was taking the total pith.

 

Edited 21 November, 2015 by goneoffSKion1

[vxh26]

<SNIP>

[VAG] will go out of the way to minimise costs and argue against any compensation unless there is very clear evidence of a loss.

 

How VERY surprising? Quite remarkable and disappointing that a manufacturer should seek to minimise costs, especially as we approach the festive season :(

 

 

Interesting about Kia but being California and in view of the fact that Kia admitted that they had identified "some discrepancies in fuel efficiency test results that were traced to procedural errors made during the vehicle testing process" probably not altogether surprising.

 

Since VAG have confirmed that they too have identified "irregularities" in MPG measurements I have no doubt that they will be forced to compensate disappointed and gullible customers - in the USA.

[lol-lol]

Manufacturers published figures include power, torque, 0-62mph, top speed,and  economy. Surely VAG will have to be able to match all the published figures with any changes they make or litigation will follow from disgruntled owners.   It might be that emissions are the main dispute, but all the specs should be at least as good or the car will not be as described at point of sale

 

Don't think so.  A car's power and torque figures are at engine and when new.  A car might actually produce a few Nm and HP more after a few thousand miles when run in but declines as the miles rack up.   Most cars, after a few tens of thousand miles, produce 10% or thereabout less then new figures.  A car with 100-200K miles often will have lost about a third to even a half of its original power figures.

 

There are so many loop holes that VAG can use ie we tested it and HP and Torque figures were similar within test parameters (but both probably now higher up the rev range).   People will tell when the notice that they, or the DSG, needs to change gear at different points.

 

Again, think of others not just ones own issues.  Not having the fix done means belting out NO and PMs equivalent to a several times the current Euro6 limit and adding to the already high levels of these gases and particles which research now shows have devastating  consequences.

 

When am zooming round in my Dacia, even with it poultry 90 hp, best to keep the Eco button on which lowers boost pressure and helps economy by 3-4 mpg but also reduces emissions (still can do 100+ in eco mode).  Similarly on use Sport mode on Jaaag very occasionally ie join motorways etc, just socially responsible as well as cost saving.

 

Any road up, all warranty cars will fully or partial "given" the "fix" and I expect lots of pressure from official bodies to have it done and failure to comply will add to the pressure to introduce more Ultra Low Emission Zones in cities all the sooner.  

[ColinD]

Guess what, it made it back from the dead!

 

Amazing what some new database server allows