12 hours ago, Yety said:

 

I've never understood the "illegal" claims. The EU wrote the "tests" in conjunction with manufacturers, then let them self comply. As long as the vehicles complied with the mutually agreed "rules", everyone was happy. VAG, it seems, seem to have struggled with the EA 189 engine to comply early on, so some "technical measures" were introduced to make them "pass the test".

Not really illegal or devious, more the EU is guilty in allowing this sort of gaming to be established. As said before, everyone was at it with the EU turning a blind eye? I do know a major UK manufacturer was doing stuff to make their software more "compliant" with the EU "tests". Everyone must have been in the happy circle, but when the story broke in the US, people like Bosch distanced themselves rapidly and left VAG out in the cold. 

My take is the EU must take the major share of blame, VAG should have blabbed out the true facts of life straightaway - but didn't, and so became a scapegoat while all the other manufactures scrambled to sort their own affairs.

Just my opinion, so please don't start another debate  

 

Have to say I tend to agree.  The rules were in place and it was self-certification which is never a good idea (just look at the construction industry for evidence).  If there was a struggle to get the EA 189 engine to meet the rules someone will have looked at the rules and realised there was nothing in them that mandated the same engine parameters had to be used within the test as would have been used on the road...  Resulting in a modified set of engine settings also known as the cheat device.

 

Now you can argue the morals of that all you like but if the rules don't explicitly rule out alternative parameters within the test then someone will use that loophole and the rules have been badly written...

Cheating it’s called

When we are at school or university we are taught how to pass tests; often with hints as to which subjects to concentrate on.

 

The emmissions test is an arbitrary test which cars have to pass.

A clever software solution does not seem to be cheating or illegal to me. It is a clever solution to a real world problem, ie how to pass a test.

 

Isn't that the main reason for stop start technology? It makes virtually no difference to real world economy, but as the emmissions test has several long pauses to represent the car stationary at traffic lights etc, stop start significantly reduces the emissions.

 

 

Defeat Devices allowed the Euro 5 1.2, 1.6 and 2.0 TDI's and 3.0's to emit high emissions and even not use AdBlue when being driven, yet when certain Tests were carried out the Emissions Control / Reduction controls operated.

It was designed as it was by Bosch and VW chose to then have the Software / ECU's introduced onto vehicles.

It was a cheat, the Engineers Engineer Martin Winterkorn CEO knew it was a cheat.

Designed to cheat testing of vehicles.

Then as Euro6 came in there were Implausible / Irregular C02 test results with some Petrol & Diesel VW, Audi, SEAT & Porsche vehicles requiring new test figures and even buy backs and vehicles discontinued.

They were caught cheating in other words.

 

 

Edited 6 August, 20196 yr by Roottootemoot

14 hours ago, skomaz said:

 

Have to say I tend to agree.  The rules were in place and it was self-certification which is never a good idea (just look at the construction industry for evidence).  If there was a struggle to get the EA 189 engine to meet the rules someone will have looked at the rules and realised there was nothing in them that mandated the same engine parameters had to be used within the test as would have been used on the road...  Resulting in a modified set of engine settings also known as the cheat device.

 

Now you can argue the morals of that all you like but if the rules don't explicitly rule out alternative parameters within the test then someone will use that loophole and the rules have been badly written...

 

You can discuss/ argue until the cows come home, make conspiracy theories, get very agitated and bitter, etc, but we are where we are. No doubt the fines being imposed in Germany are not life threatening to the businesses, and takes some pressure off the EU as a PR exercise. Root cause analysis still leads me to "blame" the EU cozy arrangement

1 hour ago, kenfowler3966 said:

 

A clever software solution does not seem to be cheating or illegal to me. It is a clever solution to a real world problem, ie how to pass a test.

 

Isn't that the main reason for stop start technology? It makes virtually no difference to real world economy, but as the emmissions test has several long pauses to represent the car stationary at traffic lights etc, stop start significantly reduces the emissions.

 

 

 

Stop/start technology operates in real world conditions, whereas the software cheat only impacted emissions under test conditions.  

I also got fed up with our own Transport select committee (Liz Ullman & co) all piling in on the dieselgate wagon to tear strips off people from their high horses to look tough on tv.

 

As mentioned above, it should be interesting to see how the 'same people' gather the billions of revenue from fuel and road tax they've been used to in the ev age. 

 

If we are all driving neutral vehicles by 2040, surely the price of electricity will have to go up a LOT or they will tax solar panels ? 😎

14 minutes ago, Prezafab said:

I also got fed up with our own Transport select committee (Liz Ullman & co) all piling in on the dieselgate wagon to tear strips off people from their high horses to look tough on tv.

 

As mentioned above, it should be interesting to see how the 'same people' gather the billions of revenue from fuel and road tax they've been used to in the ev age. 

 

If we are all driving neutral vehicles by 2040, surely the price of electricity will have to go up a LOT or they will tax solar panels ? 😎

 

Quite simple: they will up some other indirect taxation or introduce road pricing.

None of us will be better off, that's for sure!

Yes. Pay as you Go via your spot hired and delivered to your door car / eMobility solution.

 

The more I think about it the more I want to still have my Impreza Turbo to take out at weekends if I get to my 70's & 80's in the 2040's and 2050's. Will they let me or will I have to join some underground OAPs cruise club for dirty fuels.

Plenty of nice vintage cars on the road still but mostly petrol!

I know!!

I always wanted one of those, not the Yeti - got that! Mind you a frog eyed Sprite would be welcome.

4 hours ago, Prezafab said:

I also got fed up with our own Transport select committee (Liz Ullman & co) all piling in on the dieselgate wagon to tear strips off people from their high horses to look tough on tv.

 

As mentioned above, it should be interesting to see how the 'same people' gather the billions of revenue from fuel and road tax they've been used to in the ev age. 

 

If we are all driving neutral vehicles by 2040, surely the price of electricity will have to go up a LOT or they will tax solar panels ? 😎

If the UK went "electric" we would be in deep do, do's ... why ... there is simply not enough capacity in the UK power system to sustain the demand as it stands at the moment.

While they beat their gums about Hinkley Point C and what it costs, and do we want nuclear while we hug another tree they would need plenty more stations to meet the projected demand of an all electric UK fleet ...

and Nuclear stations take 10 - 14 years to build and reach generating equilibrium (minimum) .... where is all the power going to come from? (excluding a charging network) ... interesting ideas from half wits that dont take the real world into consideration ... plus ... have they even thought where all the lithium is going to come from , and what they are going to do with all the serious pollution from battery manufacture .... half arsed thoughts .... We need to be working on a solution yes, but the total knee jerk reaction from politicians bowing to the tree huggers/ environmentalists, is just storing up trouble for the future..... goodness help us all.

 

Goodness I've got grumpy in my old age!

Edited 6 August, 20196 yr by TruckbusUK

Amen to people actually thinking things all the way through and not focusing on one aspect of the issue out of proportion to the bigger picture.

31 minutes ago, Prezafab said:

Amen to people actually thinking things all the way through and not focusing on one aspect of the issue out of proportion to the bigger picture.

Everyone comes home from work and plugs their cars into fast chargers - guess what not enough power available so they start rationing and preventing cars from recharging during “peak” periods, and to supplement total power needs they actually draw power from connected cars batteries, it’s the only way the electric generating and supply system could work - not enough capacity and certainly not robust enough distribution systems to cope with peak demands. So what happens if you need the car in the evening or in an emergency? If you live in an apartment or house without parking space and car is parked on road separated from house by pavements etc? How do you charge your car then? 

So many hurdles and the powers that be and nuts think this will all be solved by 2040 (or 2030)? Dream on. 

I wonder when we are going to get sensible answers rather than listening to the bleatings of a 16 year old girl with a mental condition. I am sure there are answers but not if the knee-jerk reaction of politicians is to pander to environmentalist lobbyists whose answer is to disrupt world trade and put millions of people out of work, food and housing. How will that go down with developing populations in Africa, China, Indian subcontinent, South America etc.? They won’t accept it any more than the populations of Europe or the USA.

Hopefully one day soon we can have a rational discussion and action plan on coping with a warmer planet rather than running around like headless chickens clucking “we’re doomed, we’re doomed” Don’t hold your breathe though!!

The Government is behind the roll out of Smart Meters. These can separate and ring fence the charging of your EV. This would then enable them to add a surcharge to your bill. Job done.

28 minutes ago, looby said:

The Government is behind the roll out of Smart Meters. These can separate and ring fence the charging of your EV.

 

Is that "can" theoretically, or are you saying they currently have functionality to do this?  Not quite sure how do they would "ring fence" EV charging?   

 

To be honest I though smart meters just sent your meter reading to the supplier without anyone physically reading the meter.  

22 hours ago, Prezafab said:

If we are all driving neutral vehicles by 2040, surely the price of electricity will have to go up a LOT or they will tax solar panels ? 😎

 

Isn't the plan to stop selling pure Petrol/Diesel cars by 2040? Unless everyone is going to be suddenly driving a brand new car in 2040 that's not the same as everyone driving electric cars.   

On ‎06‎/‎08‎/‎2019 at 12:29, kenfowler3966 said:

When we are at school or university we are taught how to pass tests; often with hints as to which subjects to concentrate on.

 

The emmissions test is an arbitrary test which cars have to pass.

A clever software solution does not seem to be cheating or illegal to me. It is a clever solution to a real world problem, ie how to pass a test.

 

Isn't that the main reason for stop start technology? It makes virtually no difference to real world economy, but as the emmissions test has several long pauses to represent the car stationary at traffic lights etc, stop start significantly reduces the emissions.

 

 

Hinting isn't cheating though is it Ken. After all the exams were based on the syllabus, hinting was just a bit more specific. Pedantics maybe, but If you were caught actually cheating in exams you failed, bit like what has happened to VW!

But they were set a test to pass, and they did so! If the test was so simple to fool by recognising when there were no steering inputs and hence being more agressibve than normal with the emmision measure, that is the fault of the test designers, and is no different to hinting what topics to swot up for in an exam. VW were caught, but I am sure a number of others would have been doing something similar.

 

Ok though, I do agree with you that they shouldn't have done this, and it would have been better to go down other routes, such as the adblu now used. I gather when they were considering how to fix affected cars they considered retrofitting with adblu at around £1500/car, but instead effectivelt turned off the fix leading to overuse of the egr etc and hence all the resulting issues, hoping that would be cheaper in the long run, even after extended warranty repairs. I supsect the fix entailed making the car work as if it is on the emmisions test all the time, even though the engine components are not suited to this setup.

This is where the government should have  make them retrofit adblue to the cars or fine them excess£ ££ per vehicle for not doing it and not get away with the fix/ fail DPf which caused even more trouble for customers,bit of an irony that many owners switched from diesel to the ill fated 1.5tsi petrol.