14 minutes ago, chimaera said:

I don't think you're understanding this: ADAC's figures indicate no change to real world performance as a result of the update.

In that case it DOESN'T mirror the PistonHeads torque graph........which showed max torque not happening until ~ 2600 rpm (which, on my calculation equates to 130 Kph, eg - cruising on a German motorway) ..as opposed to the original 1750 rpm.....around 80 kph.

The PistonHeads graph was fundamentally different, as I recall it......but it was the EA189 2.0

Edited 3 July, 20178 yr by Ryeman

I never said ADAC's curve was like Pistonhead's one. ADAC (in conjunction with a few other groups) ran tests on 4 2.0 TDIs, and at least 1 1.2 and 1 1.6 that I'm aware of. All of the 2.0 cars showed no notable change in power and torque.

Just now, chimaera said:

I never said ADAC's curve was like Pistonhead's one. ADAC (in conjunction with a few other groups) ran tests on 4 2.0 TDIs, and at least 1 1.2 and 1 1.6 that I'm aware of. All of the 2.0 cars showed no notable change in power and torque.

Ok but it's where it first maxes that really matters to most non performance owners I suspect, not the max figure.

What part of "there's no change throughout the rev range" are you missing here?

Is it 'Fake News' that the Bavarian Police would not have 'The Fix' carried out on 500 Police Vehicles.

Is the repairs that The VW Group are having to cover the cost pof and compensation they are paying for damaged vehicles repairs an Intenet Myth.

 

It is all good an well being a VW Group fanboy or girl, but as for being an Emu, that is like being a VW 3 Monkeys groupie.

Head in the sand or up their ar53!

The Volkswagen Group is systematically refunding owners for EGR failures after the emissions “fix” _ Hypermiling _ Fuel saving Tips _ Industry News _ Forum.mhtml

Edited 3 July, 20178 yr by Awayoffski

Hi

Awayoffski

The VCA approval was ongoing as at the Transport Select Committee on 20 Feb. Last week the VCA top technical man for certification confirmed to me that all variants had been "cleared". I think the 1.2 was the last size to be completed and I got my invite letter on the same day. I used the opportunity of public confusion to ask the question. The variants tested appear to be different versions of same size engines for the different tuning types. The VCA said in February that a report would be made on the results.

 

Three Bosch employees were arrested in relation to the investigation of VW in Germany last week. In US Bosch paid compensation to avoid prosecution, so I guess information leaked out from there. This one has a long way to run.

 

I supposed I should note my other cars too to show I  am not a noddy.

 

 

Edited 3 July, 20178 yr by WestWalesAndy

In late 2016 VW Group announced that all 9 million vehicles with the various engine variants had received approval.

That was 1.2 Million in the UK.

There is so much duff gen being put in media and social networks and lost in translation.

 

Skoda are just behind the curve as usual as VW Group got tore into the VW Finance owned vehicles from VW, Audi & SEAT first, and Skoda UK 

was slow as usual and disorganised but for once that is good for 'Owners / Keepers',  a bit of a PITA though that Skoda UK Main Dealership employees seem to be as lacking in trustworthy information as usual.  Mushrooms. (Kept in the dark and shovelled with sharn.

VW are clever at using words to deceive. The VW brand was approved by KBA of Germany for the VW and Audi brands Europe-wide (and Australia). Certification responsibility is split across European member states depending on brand and member states capability. For Skoda brand throughout Europe it is UK's VCA - reading between the lines, they have been doing more than the strict lab certification tests. There is parallel real-world driving stuff going on. I expect that they are working out the new test methodologies. Notably KBA who were so quick to approve VW brand engines will not be doing the certification tests in future. I wonder why.

I'm not sure which ACDC and pistonhead graphs @chimaera and @Ryeman are discussing, but I'm assuming it's the following:

- ACDC: https://www.adac.de/infotestrat/tests/eco-test/diesel_messung/default.aspx?ComponentId=266205&SourcePageId=31832)

- Pistonheads: https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=!AII8a0cFXX1v3Qs&cid=B6B727C7F19316F7&id=B6B727C7F19316F7!2722&parId=B6B727C7F19316F7!104&o=OneUp

 

Teknikens Varld posted similar graphs for a range to VAG vehicles, all of which showed differences in torque delivery post fix http://teknikensvarld.se/dieselgate-volkswagen-cars-loses-power-after-fix-456111/

 

Looking at all three data sets, the pistonheads graph seems to agree with the Teknikens Varld article that peak torque may be higher but it's generally at high RPM. This backs up another forum member experience as show in this post: https://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/412053-diesel-engines-fix-recall/?do=findComment&comment=4779044

 

Only ACDC seem to be showing no change.

If it's a German auto club I'm not surprised it's happy with the fix, particularly if they're into 'performance' rather than an old man's love of lugging ability.....which I doubt you'll be experiencing on their autobahns.

'If everyone in the world was as honest and trustworthy as a German Auto Club or Manufacturer then what a wonderful world it would be for Germany', but crap for many others.

http://independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/germany-motoring-club-adac-reveals-car-of-the-year-fraud-9073136.html 

Some comments on the ADAC work: they didn't do it on their own.

There were 4 organisations involved, 3 motor clubs:

ADAC from Germany
OAMTC from Austria

TCS from Switzerland

And the Vienna University of Technology (TUW)

 

One thing you can be sure of is a university will be very unlikely to falsify data: it's career suicide for an academic to falsify published data. All the measurements published by this consortium were taken at labs in TUW by their staff. The protocol for the experiment is also outlined in the report: in a nutshell, they replaced the air filter and did a forced regen on the DPF for each car that was tested before it went for the update. They also ran a battery of emissions and economy tests before and after, using a number of test protocols. The main limit to their work is that they have only tested a limited number of cars/engines: the 1.2 TDI in the VW Polo, the 1.6 TDI in the VW Passat, the 2.0 TDI 140 in the VW Golf and the 2.0 TDI in the Audi A4 (I think this is a 140 too). At €30k per car for testing it's easy to see why they haven't tested more cars. The annoying thing about this work is that there's no single source for all of it - the results are scattered around between press releases and articles by the different partners.

 

The Pistonheads graph is simply not credible. For a start the source is unknown, probably an owner who paid for a before/after dyno but it's not clear who. No experimental protocol: no idea what prep work (if any) was done; nothing on how the test was conducted; etc. For those of you shouting about possible bias from ADAC, there's an equal if not greater likelihood of bias here given the negative attitude among a lot of owners towards the update. For anyone who's ever had a dyno test done, you'll know there will be several runs done with some variation between each as the test is dialed in: who's to say this owner didn't pick the best pre-update curve and the worst post-update curve?

 

The TeknikensVarld work is new to me and quite interesting since it's the only source I've seen where the 170 TDI has been tested. From what they've written, their protocol seems to be simply running a before and after dyno with no additional prep. They've done no verification of the emissions output or economy changes, relying on owner reports for the latter. This piece of work is significant if the results hold true: particularly for the 170 engine, though it is an early version. The major thing that strikes me here is the variation between vehicles with supposedly the same engine. They have also incorrectly interpreted the results on one of the cars in their test: on the Golf 1.6 at the bottom of the article posted by langers2k they write that the rpm for 150 Nm is later after than before when it should be the other way around; the difference at 200 Nm is marginal also. The torque curve for the Passat Alltrak before looks extremely strange too - jumping all over the place through the rev range. Has this engine been tuned before? Is there a fault with it?

 

The biggest problem in this whole discussion is the large range of engines affected. A rough count suggests at least 7 engine codes for the 2.0 140 and 4 engine codes for the 2.0 170 for EA189. Variations in turbos, injectors, EGR, DPF, etc mean it's difficult to draw comparisons. It also makes it difficult to collect meaningful data: ideally you need to be testing several examples of a single engine code to average out the influence of age and usage history on performance (think back to science class in school when you'd do a test 3 or 4 times and average the data). We're getting single tests from different testers with different agendas.

 

Another major problem is we don't know what changes the update has made to engine functionality. Interpretation of the data we have is difficult without knowing what might be driving the observed changes. It would also help owners who are having issues post update if they knew what systems have changed. VAG's development work has most likely been completed on engines that are in excellent condition, while owners' vehicles on the road may not be through wear and tear, variations in servicing, etc. This lack of information is fueling fears over component longevity too, especially EGR and DPF. It would be in VAG's interest to release a lot more detail in this regard. It does surprise me a bit that tuners haven't commented on this yet - there are enough updated cars out there by now for someone with the right tools and knowledge to have had a poke around to see what's changed.

 

Human psychology is playing its part too. There's been a lot of negative coverage of the update in the press and on owners' forums like this one. People are primed to believe that the update will be bad irrespective of what's actually going on. (Any of you who watch the TV show "Eat Well for Less" will see this effect where people have different perceptions of a product when certain information is omitted) People are more likely to put effort into complaining about a problem too.

So bottom line is are owners liable to have a car that runs OK one week and then let VW Group do the business that they are doing because that is what they are being allowed to do and then land with a crap running vehicle?

 

Is it going to be only 1% of the 'Owners' in the UK, or a higher percentage maybe 10%

 not of 1.2million owners because VW Group / Finance & other related companies owned many of the vehicles,

but actual Owner / Drivers of vehicles

A couple of observations from the Facebook emissions group: 1, many affected cars seem to be notably those doing low mileage and short urban journeys, 2, only numerical evidence is from one dealer who said 7 cars out of 200 had been returned with  problems (so far), so looks like more than VW UK's claim of less than 1%. A worrying development is that Audi has recalled several cars for further software updates, apparently emissions-related and not part of the ABS recall. I expect there will be further feedback from customers after the radio and TV broadcasts next week. Also some variant(s) of the software update are resulting in cars cutting out completely and autos stalling, without warning lights or going into limp mode. I cannot imagine why anybody would want to have the software update applied - it makes little difference to NOx emissions and has no benefit to the owner.

Show us the updated VW torque graph post fix.

Edited 7 July, 20178 yr by Ryeman

-----^----^-^----

That do you?