10 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

VW will have done the maths to see if it lowers the emission figures they have to quote, that's all they care about.

 

Not just VW.

 

Many other manufacturers now have coast features on their autos.

 

BMW, Merc, Jaguar, Land Rover, PSA, Ford, Jeep and more

I like 'Coasting Function',  i am a Fan Boy. Great, like Autohold & Stop / Start IMO.

You are quoting what was said about VW and doing their Maths.  By a member.  I said much the same 5 hours ago.

Edited 8 September, 20187 yr by Offski

14 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

VW will have done the maths to see if it lowers the emission figures they have to quote, that's all they care about.

 

That's a fair point.  Although I could be wrong, but I thought one of those figures (CO2) is pretty closely related to fuel usage? 

And while CO2 apparently isn't the emission figure which people worry about so much these days, it was a few years ago.
I wouldn't be surprised if that was the key emission figure when coasting-in-ECO mode was first introduced and hence when they did the aforementioned maths? (Not sure how long that particular DSG function has been available?)

6 minutes ago, logiclee said:

Not just VW.

 

Many other manufacturers now have coast features on their autos.

 

BMW, Merc, Jaguar, Land Rover, PSA, Ford, Jeep and more

Any they all care about more than just the emissions figures?

 

I don't think so...

1 minute ago, DavidY said:

That's a fair point.  Although I could be wrong, but I thought one of those figures (CO2) is pretty closely related to fuel usage?

Yes they are related but it's not a direct relationship so 5% better fuel consumption does not imply 5% lower CO2 (or vice versa).

 

7 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

Any they all care about more than just the emissions figures?

 

I don't think so...

 

They care about sales. 

 

Lower emissions and higher economy sells cars.

 

I believe ZF were the first to announce Coast to their conventional autos.

 

Lee

 

 

Edited 8 September, 20187 yr by logiclee

45 minutes ago, logiclee said:

 

They care about sales. 

 

Lower emissions and higher economy sells cars.

So combine those two thoughts... lower emissions sells more cars and they care about sales - so they care about lower emissions figures as that is  root cause of more sales.

1 minute ago, SWBoy said:

So combine those two thoughts... lower emissions sells more cars and they care about sales - so they care about lower emissions figures as that is  root cause of more sales.

Emissions the root of all evil. Real fun killer CO2.

54 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

Yes they are related but it's not a direct relationship so 5% better fuel consumption does not imply 5% lower CO2 (or vice versa).

 

 

I think it's pretty damn close: e.g. http://wltpfacts.eu/link-between-co2-emissions-fuel-consumption/

 

VW, Audi & SEAT were caught with Implausible / Irregular Co2 g/km late 2015 into 2016 with Euro 6 Petrol & Diesels.

They had to increase Co g/km on some, withdraw from sale and even buy back, then discontinue some, 

then they were caught out again, then the WLTP / RDE shows just how far out the EU Test Results that were published for comparison were out.

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

 

Skoda were not caught with Implausible / irregular results on the early Euro 6's as VW, SEAT, Audi were because they maybe never made so many test facility errors / Cheats.  Fuddle not Fiddles.  Says VW Group...

(Skoda did have delays in deliveries of Euro 6 models after September 2015 & the Euro 5 Diesel Emissions / Defeat Device scandal though. and the Skoda CEO went to VW USA then left the VW Group before taking up the post.  No arrest warrants out for Skoda Employees are there, were any them Whistle Blowers?, or did any do the deals so that there were no Arrest Warrants?)

 

VW emissions scandal_ Audi and Seat deny CO2 cover-up _ Autocar.mhtml

Edited 8 September, 20187 yr by Offski

17 hours ago, Wino said:

I think it's pretty damn close: e.g. http://wltpfacts.eu/link-between-co2-emissions-fuel-consumption/

Explain this then:

 

On the B7 RS4 (4.2 V8 TSi BNS 420PS) the emissions were 324g/km and the fuel consumption 21mpg - but on the B8 RS4 (with a tweaked BNS producing 450PS) the emissions were 249g/km and the fuel consumption 26mpg.

 

That's 23% LOWER emissions but only 9% LOWER fuel consumption.

 

23% is significantly different from 9%...

As offski says, fiddling with the figures...

3 minutes ago, Wino said:

As offski says, fiddling with the figures...

Which many car manufacturers are doing under WLTP, but this time to INCREASE the emissions so that it's much easier for them to meet the next reduction of 15% in a few years time.

 

I think it's impossible to trust any data from the car manufacturers or measured using methods the car manufacturers have a significant say in (i.e. all emissions and fuel consumption measurements including WLTP).

If anyone has a slight interest in cars / transport then they should know.  If not then they maybe do not care.

Car salespeople seem not to know or care or pretend they do not.

 

You drive your vehicles, you should know what it costs you, you know if they make a stink or put out unacceptable to you emissions or if you are polluting.

Busses are often, taxi's are, Light Good Vehicles, Aircraft as well.

Michael Gove MP & Chris Grayling MP & Philip Hammond MP are doing jack sh!t about it really.  Maybe next year or next decade someone in Government will.

17 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

Explain this then:

 

On the B7 RS4 (4.2 V8 TSi BNS 420PS) the emissions were 324g/km and the fuel consumption 21mpg - but on the B8 RS4 (with a tweaked BNS producing 450PS) the emissions were 249g/km and the fuel consumption 26mpg.

 

That's 23% LOWER emissions but only 9% LOWER fuel consumption.

 

23% is significantly different from 9%...

That's interesting.

Where do the carbon atoms from the fuel go, if not to CO2? 
Is there much carbon monoxide ? Or unburnt fuel (seems unlikely engine designers would want much of that)?

13 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

Which many car manufacturers are doing under WLTP, but this time to INCREASE the emissions so that it's much easier for them to meet the next reduction of 15% in a few years time.

 

I think it's impossible to trust any data from the car manufacturers or measured using methods the car manufacturers have a significant say in (i.e. all emissions and fuel consumption measurements including WLTP).

Yep, crowd data like Fuelly and Spritmonitor is the way to judge. Expect the manufacturers will try to fiddle with that too though. :(

1 hour ago, Wino said:

Yep, crowd data like Fuelly and Spritmonitor is the way to judge. Expect the manufacturers will try to fiddle with that too though. :(

 

I have sympathy with the manufacturers on this. They're expected to produce near accurate fuel consumption figures but as everyone drives differently, under different environmental conditions and over different terrain, it's simply an impossible task.  From my own point of view, I don't care if they produce figures in apples per km or kindey beans per mile, all I ask for is that every manufacturer produces results under the exact same conditions, because my goal is to compare fuel figures between models. In that respect it's madness to allow manufacturers to conduct their own tests, tests should be carried out by a 3rd party. 

 

Fuelly and Spirtmonitor and websites like HonestJohn (Real MPG - which I consider the best of all) are of no use when it comes to a manufacturer introducing a new model or new /revised engine.

I really like the smoothness of the coasting function in Eco but the blunted throttle response is irritating. I wish my DSG 1.4TSi could have coasting in D mode.

 

Is this possible with a VCDS hack? If so I'd have it done tomorrow.

Edited 9 September, 20187 yr by Lingnoi

5 hours ago, SWBoy said:

Explain this then:

 

On the B7 RS4 (4.2 V8 TSi BNS 420PS) the emissions were 324g/km and the fuel consumption 21mpg - but on the B8 RS4 (with a tweaked BNS producing 450PS) the emissions were 249g/km and the fuel consumption 26mpg.

 

That's 23% LOWER emissions but only 9% LOWER fuel consumption.

 

23% is significantly different from 9%...

When I did my "A" level Maths and Economics at school, 21 plus 23% is 25.83MPG which is close enough to 26 so confirming CO2 levels are directly connected to fuel consumption.

Damn calculators 

Edited 9 September, 20187 yr by SWBoy

10 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

Damn calculators 

Just to confirm 21 plus 9% is 22.89MPG you never work backwards with percentages this is basic statistics.

7 hours ago, SWBoy said:

Which many car manufacturers are doing under WLTP, but this time to INCREASE the emissions so that it's much easier for them to meet the next reduction of 15% in a few years time.

 

Whats the source of this? Having worked in OEM Off Highway all my life I cannot see this ever happening, I think there’s a serious misunderstanding here.

 

 

15 hours ago, KevC_Derby said:

Whats the source of this? Having worked in OEM Off Highway all my life I cannot see this ever happening, I think there’s a serious misunderstanding here.

I've already posted the link on here, go find it.

9 hours ago, SWBoy said:

I've already posted the link on here, go find it.

 

Don't be such a crybaby, only asked!

On 09/09/2018 at 14:07, Lingnoi said:

I really like the smoothness of the coasting function in Eco but the blunted throttle response is irritating. I wish my DSG 1.4TSi could have coasting in D mode.

 

Is this possible with a VCDS hack? If so I'd have it done tomorrow.

My 1.0 DSG doesn't have coasting.  The 1.4 Superb Sportline the dealer lent us for our holiday in June did have coasting.  I quite got used to it and liked it.  I felt it did make a difference.

 

John