Catalytic Selective Reduction.   (SCR) With the Vehicles using AdBlue.

Remember how we were told that AdBlue would last almost the entire service interval?

Was that because they didn't programme it for constant use but, instead, just to get a certification tick.....and in the real world, after this saga, the consumption will, in fact, be substantially higher?

I have no problem if it's the former (as a fix for mine) but not the latter scenario.

To recap, were the 'blue motion' ones operating only on the detected test cycle?

Injectors I can understand to bring back power/mpg post update on some engines...

or to put down emission... less fuel = less emissions on top revs...

 

Maybe worth waiting to find out rather than guessing.

If the answers were easy, they would announce what is to get done to which vehicles in which countries.

 

Or you can look at what actions and inactions have gone before..

http://honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/?t=93563

To put it more simply

We're AdBlue consumption rates fake also?

I feel quite sure that the executives at VW will use something along the lines of King Henry II's "Who will rid me of this troublesome NOx?" excuse and claim that some naive spotty faced Geek took their musings too literally and added a "back door cheat" to the software

I was brought up in my career that if one part of an organisation knows something legally the whole organisation is regarded as knowing it , whatever. So as far as I am concerned, the V A G Group knew what was going on, they set out to deceive, did so by the multi million and now it is payback time. Lawyers on TV today said compensation is due for buyers not getting what they were led to believe and thus will sue for compensation under various headings. V A G have put aside 6 billion euros but there are those who feel the overall cost could well be over 10 times that amount. Wait till the Yanks get their teeth into it, as they did with B P, and watch V A G get hard hit, and what the Americans do, should well be a yardstick to owners in other countries.

^^^^absolutely.....it's not an American company.

The yanks have a 'superiority' complex.

Edited 7 October, 201510 yr by Ryeman

or to put down emission... less fuel = less emissions on top revs...

 

 

No, it doesn't.

 

If only life (and engine development and manufacture) were that simple, none of this would have arisen.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/07/vw-president-ceo-congress-knew-emissions-rigging-early-2014-michael-horn

 

Head of VW in US will tell Congress he knew of emissions rigging in early 2014

 

Michael Horn, president and CEO of Volkswagen (VW) Group of America, will confirm he knew of the company’s emission rigging issues as early as spring 2014, according to a statement released ahead of a congressional inquiry on Thursday.  

 

In prepared remarks before what looks set to be an intense public hearing, Horn will apologize once again for VW’s use of software to “defeat the regular emissions testing regime”.   “In the spring of 2014 … I was told that there was a possible emissions non-compliance that could be remedied,” he will tell the House committee on energy and commerce before questioning begins.  “I was informed that EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] regulations included various penalties for non-compliance with the emissions standards and that the agencies can conduct engineering tests which could include ‘defeat device’ testing or analysis. I was also informed that the company engineers would work with the agencies to resolve the issue.”

 

This invariably makes the penalties higher as it is not just reckless but knowingly cheating the regs but he said he told the EPA! 

Remember how we were told that AdBlue would last almost the entire service interval?

Was that because they didn't programme it for constant use but, instead, just to get a certification tick.....and in the real world, after this saga, the consumption will, in fact, be substantially higher?

I have no problem if it's the former (as a fix for mine) but not the latter scenario.

To recap, were the 'blue motion' ones operating only on the detected test cycle?

Assume that you don't have adblue?

Usage is consistent with other makes using it, unless they're also cooking their figures.

Usage depends how many journeys, how many stop starts. Urban low mileage high stop starts will use more than motorway driving.

VW claims were 14500 max range on 10 litres, but I regularly get 16k+.

Assume that you don't have adblue?

Usage is consistent with other makes using it, unless they're also cooking their figures.

Usage depends how many journeys, how many stop starts. Urban low mileage high stop starts will use more than motorway driving.

VW claims were 14500 max range on 10 litres, but I regularly get 16k+.

 

 

For European diesel vehicles built to Euro 6 the vast majority put out 4 to 6 times the legal limit of NOx on the road.

 

The SMMT have already stated that if the limit stays at 0.08g/km NOx for the forthcoming Euro 6b (Road Simulation) tests then the size of the SCR's and the usage of adblue will need to increase significantly. They are calling for a higher limit to start with in 2017. The emission equipment needed will push most diesels to over £2000 more than a similar powered petrol and with increased ongoing costs of higher adblue usage.

 

But I do not think the legislators or public opinion will allow that as it's now clear that the manufacturers have been designing engines to pass the tests and not be clean where it is needed in urban areas.

 

Lee

Assume that you don't have adblue?

Usage is consistent with other makes using it, unless they're also cooking their figures.

Usage depends how many journeys, how many stop starts. Urban low mileage high stop starts will use more than motorway driving.

VW claims were 14500 max range on 10 litres, but I regularly get 16k+.

I accept what you say, but if iretro testing of AdBlue fitted cars goes ahead, checking the on road (real world) emissions, compared to test rig ones, as is being suggested by authorities globally now, will your consumption rates remain the same or will it rise to an unacceptable rate.

I now don't trust the manufacturers of any make to be able to satisfy us once they start retro testing on road.

I want to know if THAT has been a 'fiddle' also, but not to be confused with the 'defeat device' limited to VW.

If I'm asked to sign off as accepting the 'fix' I want to know I haven't signed off my rights to object to a subsequent nasty 'discovery'.

ALL manufacturers, for me at least, are under suspicion in the light of threatened real world retesting.

I said before the VW scandal that this would probably be my last diesel (and I really wanted one for my Yeti) due to my feeling, like others, that the days were numbered for diesels in cars, particularly small and medium sized.

 

The increasing complexity and therefore cost and the physical room required for larger Adblue tanks (unless alternative technology quickly comes along) will make them untenable.

 

Remember in this country it was mainly the very high tax on fuel that turned us from a country of mainly petrol users  to diesel users because of the much better fuel consumption of the latter. During that time diesels transformed from noisy, smelly, underpowered and unrefined things into virtually completely the opposite (though diesel haters will still disagree) with power plants like 3.0 litre plus V6's etc. used to power some very desirable and powerful cars like the A6 bi-turbo etc. And even highly successful race cars! 

 

But I think the pinnacle of car diesel engines has now been reached, in fact it has been passed, as the latest existing emissions regulations are taking a toll on the economics and the performance i.e. low down torque when compared to the old PD engines. Same is true for petrol engines, though to a lesser extent, and there seems to be more room for developing those. On paper modern petrol engines might have greater power but I remember driving cars years ago that had much less power but seemed to go and drive better as they weren't hamstrung by emissions regulations.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for better air quality etc. but I'm glad that I've lived through an age of some of the best petrol and diesel engines ever made before being strangled by regulations.

 

Perhaps we will return to diesels being mainly used in commercial vehicles and vans (they need slowing down a bit!) where they are better able to accommodate the extra equipment and larger Adblue tanks etc. required to meet  the real world emissions tests. In cities they could maybe have a setting that allows the emissions controls to work at full capacity!

 

Interesting times ahead I think, seeing how designers and manufacturers will meet the new challenges of real world testing and the legislators will be in the spotlight much more now and will have to show that real improvements will be being made rather than the sham that has been the case.  

I said before the VW scandal that this would probably be my last diesel (and I really wanted one for my Yeti) due to my feeling, like others, that the days were numbered for diesels in cars, particularly small and medium sized.

 

The increasing complexity and therefore cost and the physical room required for larger Adblue tanks (unless alternative technology quickly comes along) will make them untenable.

 

Remember in this country it was mainly the very high tax on fuel that turned us from a country of mainly petrol users  to diesel users because of the much better fuel consumption of the latter. During that time diesels transformed from noisy, smelly, underpowered and unrefined things into virtually completely the opposite (though diesel haters will still disagree) with power plants like 3.0 litre plus V6's etc. used to power some very desirable and powerful cars like the A6 bi-turbo etc. And even highly successful race cars! 

 

But I think the pinnacle of car diesel engines has now been reached, in fact it has been passed, as the latest existing emissions regulations are taking a toll on the economics and the performance i.e. low down torque when compared to the old PD engines. Same is true for petrol engines, though to a lesser extent, and there seems to be more room for developing those. On paper modern petrol engines might have greater power but I remember driving cars years ago that had much less power but seemed to go and drive better as they weren't hamstrung by emissions regulations.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for better air quality etc. but I'm glad that I've lived through an age of some of the best petrol and diesel engines ever made before being strangled by regulations.

 

Perhaps we will return to diesels being mainly used in commercial vehicles and vans (they need slowing down a bit!) where they are better able to accommodate the extra equipment and larger Adblue tanks etc. required to meet  the real world emissions tests. In cities they could maybe have a setting that allows the emissions controls to work at full capacity!

 

Interesting times ahead I think, seeing how designers and manufacturers will meet the new challenges of real world testing and the legislators will be in the spotlight much more now and will have to show that real improvements will be being made rather than the sham that has been the case.

I take it you are/were a VAGCarFan?.

I agree, the vulnerable complexity doesn't add up financially any more.....and that's a great pity.

'The Car Connection' a U.S. online mag has an interesting breakdown of costs to VAG in the U.S. alone....$US25B +

They have withdrawn all 2016 diesels from sale in the U.S. also.........not a lot of faith there!

Edited 8 October, 201510 yr by Ryeman

Ryeman - Have had other makes in the family but yes have been (and still are - see avatar) a big fan of VW group cars over the years.

 

First was an Audi 80 Sport (lovely car) followed by my first diesel, a Vento 1.9 TDI and then a Passat estate - those PD engines were great, hence my comment. In the Vento you could change up through the five gears without touching the accelerator! Later diesels I've stalled when pulling away in first, which shocked me when it happened.

 

Three Passat estates in all and various Audis. No plans on changing cars any time soon but hopefully can stick with the marque.

Ryeman - Have had other makes in the family but yes have been (and still are - see avatar) a big fan of VW group cars over the years.

 

First was an Audi 80 Sport (lovely car) followed by my first diesel, a Vento 1.9 TDI and then a Passat estate - those PD engines were great, hence my comment. In the Vento you could change up through the five gears without touching the accelerator! Later diesels I've stalled when pulling away in first, which shocked me when it happened.

 

Three Passat estates in all and various Audis. No plans on changing cars any time soon but hopefully can stick with the marque.

I don't want to be seen as a salesman for Peugeot but our petrol Pug is a better diesel in every respect.

The 'story' that the U.S. CEO "knew" of the cheat in 2014 is not, apparently true.......seems it was a journalistic prediction.

'The Conversation' today has another angle worth a read

"Volkswagen Fallout Shows How Not To Manage a Crisis"

Possible global recall cost €100B .

It'd be cheaper to buy back and scrap each affected car surely?

It'd be cheaper to buy back and scrap each affected car surely?

Agree, but only if he owners are fully informed about what they are likely to end up with after the 'fix'(?) ......because if they are I can see a blizzard of legal action.

There can be no fix without AdBlue that I can see.....ie if both sides are to be satisfied with the outcome.

I'm not going to be duped.

Reading through these threads its still not clear if the "defeat" software was or was not active during the EU5 tests. Some folks have said it would not be required to pass the EU5, but does the activation of this software make the difference between a strong pass and a scrape-through-by-the-skin-of-your-teeth pass? VAG and particularly the VW marque charged a premium for vehicles which were "clean". Emissions are important and should be important to all of us, and if simply removing the software means that the car meets the EU5 standards, but would never meet the advertised "lab" results is that ethically right?

 

Then there is the question of trust. I bought a new factory-order Superb last November and have had appalling service from the main dealer and just as bad from Skoda UK "customer care" in Sheffield. There are still minor faults reported within days of delivery still outstanding. As an example of the first 130 days of ownership of the car it spent 23 days sat at the dealers. They have done nothing to build any brand loyalty in me.

 

So my question is if the manufacturer say "this fix will have no impact on your performance or fuel efficiency" then how do they intend to support that? "Well you'll just have to believe what we say..."

?..

 

So my question is if the manufacturer say "this fix will have no impact on your performance or fuel efficiency" then how do they intend to support that? "Well you'll just have to believe what we say..."

There will have,to be a certified emmissions and consumption statement .......as in the original windscreen placard.

Hopefully motoring journalists will do their job and demand the power and torque data for the modified cars be published.

VAG can't afford to look slippery anymore .

 

Then there is the question of trust. I bought a new factory-order Superb last November and have had appalling service from the main dealer and just as bad from Skoda UK "customer care" in Sheffield.

 

If you bought from the Sheffield dealer that doesn't surprise me - I've had Skoda's for 15 years and, whilst the parts dept there are very good (and the service guys used to be good - not used them for years since a good service manager left) the sales dept. are dire.  I've ended up buying from Chesterfield and Liverpool instead.

Roll up, roll up!

 

Mercedes-Benz, Honda, Mazda and Mitsubishi’s cars are shown to emit significantly more NOx pollution on the road than in regulatory tests (LINK)

 

“The issue is a systemic one” across the industry, said Nick Molden, whose company Emissions Analytics tested the cars. The Guardian revealed last week that diesel cars from Renault, Nissan, Hyundai, Citroen, Fiat, Volvo and Jeep all pumped out significantly more NOx in more realistic driving conditions. NOx pollution is at illegal levels in many parts of the UK and is believed to have caused many thousands of premature deaths and billions of pounds in health costs.

 

 

ps - one of the finest Albums of all time

Edited 9 October, 201510 yr by vxh26

is vw 1.2tdi 3 cylinders affected by the scandal? 

 

my friend is looking at seat ibiza 1.2tdi ecomotive. i advised him to not till find out if this engine is affected by the scandal. i cant be bothered to sign up vw or seat forums. thought id ask here as same engine in fabia and roomster

 

cheers 

 bump