Regardless of his tax affairs it's a show that acts as a platform for people to debate subjects. Jeremy Vine is impartial to the debate other than the spark to get argument started then referee it.

Edited 11 January, 20179 yr by CWARD

well I think hes bit of a buffoon who asks stupid questions at times and he was quick enough yesterday to cut off somebody who considered it ok for immigrants who worked in this country and paid their taxes to receive nhs care and not like those who try to deceive the revenue of tax.so not that impartial.

For me I have to ask why was this defeat device developed? What was its function? Why did it exist? From what I can see the purpose of this was to misinform or mislead customers and regulators, and to give the company a competitive edge over other manufacturers so it could sell more cars and make more money.

 

Whilst yes I can't say that I considered in detail the NOx levels produced by the vehicle, nor would I have necessarily chosen this car producing 138mg/km over another vehicle producing 140mg/km, I was aware that the vehicle met the EU5 standard for emissions before I purchased, and therefore I can make fair comparisons against other vehicles which meet the same standard. This should be a level playing field for all manufacturers, and allow the consumer to compare other factors, such as performance, economy, load capacity, finance deals, reliability reports, etc. Would I have bought this vehicle had I been told it only met EU4 standard? No.

 

I don't feel that Skoda UK/VW handling of the scandal has been acceptable, more than a year on I don't know when my car will be fixed, I get sporadic letters from the company to tell me everything is fine. Transparency about the fix is low. From what I can tell even once the fix is applied the vehicle will not meet the original spec, will it just scrape into the EU5 standard. But who knows??

 

And if it's really that easy for them to fix through a software update, why did they continue to install this software in so many later vehicles? My car is a 2014 model. I can't believe they just forgot it was there...

 

For a whole range of other issues I have not been treated well by Skoda UK and VWFS. Skoda/Volkswagen are not really interested in what their customers have to say about the whole issue, and for that reason I will be joining the group action.

For me I have to ask why was this defeat device developed? What was its function? Why did it exist? From what I can see the purpose of this was to misinform or mislead customers and regulators, and to give the company a competitive edge over other manufacturers so it could sell more cars and make more money.

 

The defeat device allowed the engine to operate in compliance with EU5 under the specific conditions of the type approval test while not meeting the standard in most normal driving conditions. The way VAG achieved this was by configuring the vehicle to detect when it was under test and change the engine to a different operating map. Basically it was a deliberate measure designed to subvert the test. This meant better economy and performance, with less expensive emissions control hardware on the car. It is possible to drive in the emissions compliant mode on the road, but the level of concentration required to do it is probably unsafe.

 

Other manufacturers are also subverting the test but doing so openly by exploiting loopholes in the rules to disable/limit emissions control under certain climatic conditions. The loopholes they use allow for emissions control to be suspended under certain conditions if it might damage the vehicle.

Just spoken to Skoda, they won't reverse the update. 

 

Will have to see how the case proceeds. Pretty sure I won't buy another VW group car now though. 

Not had the update but still got rid of the car, too many other build problems to deal with now enjoying motoring again.

Received today. looks like £3000 is a start figure

 

Edited 13 February, 20179 yr by Sad555

Received today. looks like £3000 is a start figure

......as an ambit claim , but at least someone has quantified the damage

I think a higher figure would have been a better starting point and then be prepared to drop if necessary

I think a higher figure would have been a better starting point and then be prepared to drop if necessary

I have also registered for the same reasons `For a whole range of other issues I have not been treated well by Skoda UK and VWFS. Skoda/Volkswagen are not really interested in what their customers have to say about the whole issue, and for that reason I will be joining the group action`.

 

My last 3 cars have been VAG product, retail value £65k - Purchased because they best met my criteria.Comfort + drive ability + space

 

2007 Seat Leon Stylance 140 tdi dsg new - 2 new turbo`s in first 6 months + egr valve failed at 40k - refurbished under warranty,dealer told me looked like was from a car with 100k on clock. Car never performed as well as it should have done in 4 years but at the time could not afford to change it + did not know about these issues then.

2010 Skoda Octavia Vrs Tdi dsg hatch new - Kept for 3 years, no issues with engine.

2012 Skoda Octavia Vrs Tdi dsg Hatch  x demo - Had for 3 years now only covered 20,800 miles

EDIT. Sat 14th Jan 2017

 2 post above this one by 'TheSea' have been removed,

they did look like Spam and included a link to a Group going for legal action.

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

 

Is there some Internet / Urban Myth or have Actual Skoda vehicle Owners received 'Cash Money', above or below 5,000 euro giving an average of 5,000 euro?

?

Awarded the money or reached a settlement and had it paid into bank accounts because they owned a Euro 5 Emissions 1.2, 1.6 or 2.0TDI with a defeat device?

 

PS

TheSea, are you an interested Skoda Superb owner?  & are you anything to do with the Solicitors that show in the link?

Edited 14 January, 20179 yr by Offski

Although I own one of the affected cars I think that I will bide my time and see what transpires. If the class action does go ahead I will then have to make a decision whether to join in and give a percentage of any monies received to the legel eagles or wait until a precedent has been made in the courts and then apply to Skoda/VW myself (a bit like PPI claims).

 

Also will any money from VW only be given if you have  the 'fix' done?

I was on the verge yesterday of joining the HS class action group but something made me pull out at the last moment.

A little cash compo coming my way sounds like a good idea but I think I will wait and see how it all goes.

I have been extremely pleased with my Yeti and will probaly get the fix done if it is ever offered. Must admit I can't get

too worked up over this emmissions issue as green factors were never a consideration when I bought it. Coming after

a VW R32 getting double the mpg was more important!

I keep reading this thread and do wonder whether many of the posts from those registering and joining the litigation group are really being honest when they say they feel hard done by or 'damaged' by the VW Dieselgate scandal,  or whether they are simply seeing an opportunity to 'get something back' or express some form of phony outrage.

 

I'm sorry if that seems harsh but, personally, I find it very hard to believe anyone would buy one car over another equal one simply on the basis of its NOx emissions and whether it fell into one category or another (which is largely what many people are suggesting) and that they feel compensation is due as a result.  Car buying involves far more than that in terms of a decision making process and, to me drive, build quality, value, MPG, performance, comfort, longevity etc. all count massively more than a change from 0.25 to 0.18 NOx between Euro 4 and Euro 5.

 

There is a question over things like the value of a vehicle but, lets face it, you lose 50% of the value in the first two or three years anyway and about 25% as soon as you drive a new vehicle off the forecourt of the supplying dealer.  Any loss in value from Dieselgate pales into insignificance in that respect and, if the car had not had the software it did then chances are you would have been paying more in fuel costs than you have been...

 

Right - I've got that off my chest now so will disappear off and await the flaming that I'm no doubt going to get...   ;-)

It's not compulsory to have the fix or make a claim,it's everybody's choice to what they want to do ,personally if there is a chance of reconpence I'm all for it,some manufacturers are quite happy to avoid being fair once they have sold you the product and as I've said before if DPF/EGR start to fail at a high rate after the fix do you think VAG will admit there is a problem that's down to them and will replace FOC on a car over 3 years old.if VAG can afford to pay billions in the USA they can show some reconpence in Europe if they want to treat customers fair.Also if VAG had published in their shiny brochures that THIS MODEL DOES NOT MEET EURO 5 SPEC like other cars do will you have still purchased one,?

Edited 13 January, 20179 yr by Sad555

AFAIK owners are never made aware of the claimed NOx emissions nor exactly what they are now, other than the mention of around 35 times greater on-road than test certification results.

Other manufacturers are around the 7 - 15 figure from what I've read.

For those on a strict budget I'd be going onto the legal list but for those who have the financial option I'd be using this period to dump the EGR equipped one for the much better SCR (AdBlue) one.........or the new one, obviously.

Somewhere I saw a before/after power and torque graphs which showed that at the sub2000rpm area, a significant loss.

That's exactly the area the Euro5 test involves and probably why VW can claim a pass without the cheat (not illegal)......the test regime is one of tippy toeing around and slow incremental acceleration with NO substantial power applications.

Will VW produce their own graphs ?.

I doubt it as it would be an admission that there is, in fact, a significant real on-road loss.

The book figure for torque quoted the maximum occurred at/from just 1750......what is the rpm figure now?.

Edited 14 January, 20179 yr by Ryeman

Somewhere I saw a before/after power and torque graphs which showed that at the sub2000rpm area, a significant loss.

That's exactly the area the Euro5 test involves and probably why VW can claim a pass without the cheat (not illegal)......the test regime is one of tippy toeing around and slow incremental acceleration with NO substantial power applications.

Will VW produce their own graphs ?.

I doubt it as it would be an admission that there is, in fact, a significant real on-road loss.

I've seen two before/after dyno plots.

 

One is this one: http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/412053-diesel-engines-fix-recall/?p=4779044

 

It shows about 18 Nm loss in torque below 2400 rpm with a possible slight gain above that speed. Power seems to be unaffected. Interestingly, the remap that poster got was quite a bit lower again for power and torque below 2100 rpm. Wikipedia tells me this car used engine code CEGA. Not sure how it compares to the CFGB used in the Superb CR170.

 

The other one I saw was posted here: http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/421930-vw-emissions-fix-what-it-does/?p=4792607

 

Severely lacking in information on what engine was fitted, and what exhaust after-treatment system was being used (LNT or SCR). It shows a more marked effect on power and torque below 2400 rpm.

Bearing in mind how rarely people use full power on the road, and how easy it is to trick people by messing with the mapping of the accelerator position sensor, I'm not sure these reductions (if they're consistent across models and years) will be noticeable to most owners.

Being a sub 2000 driver I suspect I'd notice it very quickly because the difference in the sub 2000 region was substantial from my recollection.

Agree, performance drivers would probably not notice though

Pistonheads

https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AII8a0cFXX1v3Qs&cid=B6B727C7F19316F7&id=B6B727C7F19316F7%212722&parId=B6B727C7F19316F7%21104&o=OneUp

Ea189 I assume

Big difference at/below 2000 rpm in torque where most would be in a DSG driven normally and which would surely mean the DSG stays in a lower gear longer 'after'

The 'table' says it all

Edited 14 January, 20179 yr by Ryeman

ADAC in Germany tested a Golf CR140 and conclude the update slightly improves power and torque: https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.ie&sl=de&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://www.adac.de/infotestrat/tests/eco-test/diesel_messung/default.aspx%3FComponentId%3D266205%26SourcePageId%3D31832&usg=ALkJrhiZX1XoW0GjR_WPKMqECOAr3iOpFw

 

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

 

They report a modest increase in CO2 emissions while also finding that real world CO2 emissions pre-update were higher than those recorded in type approval testing. In a similar vein, they found higher fuel consumption pre-update compared to the type approval, and higher post-update.

NOx emissions increased slightly on the NEDC after the update, but given that pre-update values were using cheat mode, this has to be seen as an improvement. Two other drive cycles considered more representative of real-world driving reported substantial improvements in NOx emissions. https://www.adac.de/_mmm/jpg/Diagramm_03_758x649_266238.jpg

 

CO2 emissions on all three drive cycles went up slightly (a few percent at most). ADAC comment that there's a variability of +/- 2 % in the data due to experimental uncertainty in any case and conclude the variation is almost inconsequential. https://www.adac.de/_mmm/jpg/Diagramm_04_719x697_266240.jpg

If pistonheads is accurate those signed up need a motoring enthusiast legal representative; one who understands the mentality of the average drivers who bought for the claimed, much improved, diesel economy.

ADAC in Germany tested a Golf CR140 and conclude the update slightly improves power and torque: https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.ie&sl=de&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://www.adac.de/infotestrat/tests/eco-test/diesel_messung/default.aspx%3FComponentId%3D266205%26SourcePageId%3D31832&usg=ALkJrhiZX1XoW0GjR_WPKMqECOAr3iOpFw

 

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

 

They report a modest increase in CO2 emissions while also finding that real world CO2 emissions pre-update were higher than those recorded in type approval testing. In a similar vein, they found higher fuel consumption pre-update compared to the type approval, and higher post-update.

NOx emissions increased slightly on the NEDC after the update, but given that pre-update values were using cheat mode, this has to be seen as an improvement. Two other drive cycles considered more representative of real-world driving reported substantial improvements in NOx emissions. https://www.adac.de/_mmm/jpg/Diagramm_03_758x649_266238.jpg

 

CO2 emissions on all three drive cycles went up slightly (a few percent at most). ADAC comment that there's a variability of +/- 2 % in the data due to experimental uncertainty in any case and conclude the variation is almost inconsequential. https://www.adac.de/_mmm/jpg/Diagramm_04_719x697_266240.jpg

It would be instructive to know just how much involved 70 mph motorway driving after the fix because that's the point at which the crossover occurs; 2200 rpm.

Do Germans drive below 70 ? )))

Being a sub 2000 driver I suspect I'd notice it very quickly because the difference in the sub 2000 region was substantial from my recollection.

Agree, performance drivers would probably not notice though

Pistonheads

https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AII8a0cFXX1v3Qs&cid=B6B727C7F19316F7&id=B6B727C7F19316F7%212722&parId=B6B727C7F19316F7%21104&o=OneUp

Ea189 I assume

Big difference at/below 2000 rpm in torque where most would be in a DSG driven normally and which would surely mean the DSG stays in a lower gear longer 'after'

The 'table' says it all

 

It's not as simple as looking at engine speed. At any engine speed, the engine power can vary from minimal to whatever the maximum value for that engine speed is. The power/torque curves show the maximum possible values that can be expected for that engine speed if the accelerator pedal is at 100 %.

 

If the pedal is pressed down less than 100 %, then the engine will deliver less power.

 

By tweaking the pedal mapping, the manufacturer can disguise a loss of peak power by increasing the amount of power requested at a given pedal application e.g. 50 % of the pedal now gives 60 % of the peak power instead of say 50 %.

 

In other words, if you're not driving around the whole time with the pedal mashed into the carpet, it's very likely you wouldn't feel any difference in performance unless the change was huge.

 

EA189 is a whole family of engines based around the same block/head architecture: there are specific differences between engine codes that are going to be relevant to this discussion.

It would be instructive to know just how much involved 70 mph motorway driving after the fix because that's the point at which the crossover occurs; 2200 rpm.

Do Germans drive below 70 ? )))

This is the BAB cycle: https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/adac_bab.php

 

Max speed used is 130 km/h (about 83 mph).

It's not as simple as looking at engine speed. At any engine speed, the engine power can vary from minimal to whatever the maximum value for that engine speed is. The power/torque curves show the maximum possible values that can be expected for that engine speed if the accelerator pedal is at 100 %.

 

If the pedal is pressed down less than 100 %, then the engine will deliver less power.

 

By tweaking the pedal mapping, the manufacturer can disguise a loss of peak power by increasing the amount of power requested at a given pedal application e.g. 50 % of the pedal now gives 60 % of the peak power instead of say 50 %.

 

In other words, if you're not driving around the whole time with the pedal mashed into the carpet, it's very likely you wouldn't feel any difference in performance unless the change was huge.

 

EA189 is a whole family of engines based around the same block/head architecture: there are specific differences between engine codes that are going to be relevant to this discussion.

VW can clarify this easily if they haven't got anything to hide.

What was the loading applied during the pistonheads test ?.

Was it a manual or DSG or DSG in manual mode?.

Lugging ability must be maintained in any case.