2 minutes ago, OldBoyScout said:

I understand NOx is a more recent issue.

NOx was the whole issue. 

6 minutes ago, Wino said:

NOx was the whole issue. 

 

I stand corrected. Not sure how I got the idea they were cheating with CO2.

 

Euro 6 is tougher but required the deployment of additional emissions control systems (SCR).  In a way this can actually help with engine tuning, because if you can deal with NOx in the exhaust through the use of a catalyst and AdBlue then you can tune the engine to run hotter and with better thermal efficiency.  The problem they had with Euro 5 was trying to control NOx in-cylinder, which is tricky when NOx and CO2/fuel economy sit on opposite ends of a see-saw.  There’s no way the defeat device was a last minute cheat - it takes a while to develop and hide a system like that.  I don’t doubt they tried to conform through good engineering and I also don’t doubt that the limits being mandated were difficult to achieve in the timescale given.

Nothing physical to hide and the lines of code were hiding in plain sight waiting to be found when the authorities eventually twigged what was going on.

 

I doubt that it would have taken a lot of time to write the new code, remember this was done in a deniable manner with the very minimum of people involved, no months of commitees and reporting etc.

@OldBoyScout

In the UK VW Group vehicles started getting retested as they were imported from 2016 and right up to now.

VW Group did cheat with C02. 

Some deliveries were cancelled, some cars were bought back. some were withdrawn from sale and some got new C02 g/km figures.

They were at it still and because of people not paying attention it kind of went under the radar.

  https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/vw-emissions-scandal-nine-vw-vehicles-have-false-co2-ratings

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/vw-emissions-scandal-audi-and-seat-deny-co2-cover

 

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/volkswagen-updates-carbon-dioxide-emissions-ratings

Cheating,

Only they claimed it was errors, and then it was just VW, Audi & SEAT,  as Skoda managed to correctly have their tests carried out.

It was Petrols & Diesels and Euro 6 after the Euro 5 Defeat Device meant that tests were done.

VW Group never knew how many to admit to so they picked a high number and then went all vague.

After VW revealed which they 'cheated' then Audi and SEAT did it individually.

Then Audi got caught again after this with bigger Diesel Engines, and actually Defeat Devices and DSGs.

 

@J.R.

Dr. Martin Winterkorn was and is an Engineers Engineer along with his yes men / women, finger on the pulse and even down to getting the tape measure out at a motor show to see what Hyundai had done.

So VW's Software provider gave them what they wanted but told them this could not be used, but supplied it anyway and then paid the fines.

So many Whistle Blowers are allowed to walk away or pay a penalty and carry on as they were.

 

 

 

 

Edited 21 June, 20205 yr by Roottootemblowinootsoot

 

https://www.money.cnn.com/2018/05/08/investing/audi-diesel-emissions-investigation/index.html

 

 

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/audi-hit-£700-million-fine-diesel-emissions-scandal

 

The Defeat Device in the USA involved TDI's with SCR because they were ensuring that bigger tanks were not required for AdBlue.

It goes right back to when Stefan Jacoby was the Head of VW USA and introduction Green Diesels.

He was at first with VW, then where he was before going back to VW, then huffing off to Geely / Volvo to head it before going to GM 

and now being 'Independent' as a Industry Consultant.  

How the web is spun.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 21 June, 20205 yr by Roottootemblowinootsoot

 

Wholly Canaloni.  the amount of crap on this thread is unbelievable.  The following can be summed up in four words - Show Me The Evidence.

 

OK lets make an assumption ( none of which I agree with by the way, but for demo purposes... )  The owner says they lost out in trade-in value,  lost out in their environmental expectation, lost out on fuel consumption,  lost out on this and that and everything under the sun.

 

I'm a judge. I've agreed that VW cheated and I wish to award compensation. Now how much should I award the owner?  I need to know how much he/she has lost?  I'm not asking for words, I'm asking for any evidence on how much the owner lost in order that I can award appropriate compensation.  To say something like " I believe I received a lesser trade in value " is quite frankly insulting. Give me some figures that show there was a loss.

 

And there lies the problem. I've read everything people have said thus far on this thread and not a single person has been able to say what they've lost.  All those who say they've lost out are nothing more than ambulance chasers, they're crooks, they're part of the compensation culture.

 

And to be honest, if they're complaining they lost out on environmental grounds because your car produced less emissions, then it follows they may well have benefitted from paying less VED. Are they prepared to compensate the rest of us taxpayers and pay what you should have? I suspect the answer is no - that's one form of compensation they'd prefer to ignore.

 

Of course if they did buy a car on environmental grounds, the obvious question is why did they buy diesel? Presumably they bought diesel because of the lower C02 output. Well the revised output ( if there was a revised output ) would still have been lower than petrol so whats their problem?

 

And from a personal point of view, I'd like to know what environmental grounds we're talking of because the cheat device was falsifying Nitrous Oxide output and to the best of my knowledge, the Nox value was never published here in the UK. Moreover, I'm willing to bet that like the rest of us, those UK owners seeking compensation had never heard of Nox levels before the scandal broke - we only heard of NOx because it was part of the stringent Californian tests.

 

Those UK owners seeking compensation might be able to fool themselves, they may well be able to fool others, but when they say they've lost out?   Don't expect come to a petrolhead website and get away with talking b0ll0cks.

 

 

Edited 21 June, 20205 yr by Guest

20 hours ago, OldBoyScout said:

 

Not sure about that. i believe compensation can be applied in relation to any kind of loss or damage that can be proved in court, not just financial.

 

 

Ah yes - the 'mental anguish' of an owner driving a car that performs differently on the road to under static test conditions - something that most owners wouldn't have cared less about, or would have been oblivious to, if there wasn't a bunch of lawyers involved telling them they might be able to get some compensation for it!

 

Sorry but in my book that doesn't count.

1 hour ago, skomaz said:

 

Ah yes - the 'mental anguish' of an owner driving a car that performs differently on the road to under static test conditions - something that most owners wouldn't have cared less about, or would have been oblivious to, if there wasn't a bunch of lawyers involved telling them they might be able to get some compensation for it!

 

Sorry but in my book that doesn't count.

I'm told that I can expect broadband speeds upto 60Mb, but in reality I never get anywhere near that figure. Also, my mobile phone apparently will work in most areas surrounding my address because the maps & graphics on Vodafones website say so, but again in reality I have to stand on one leg and wave my phone in the air while facing east to get a signal.

Who do I see about my cheque?

11 hours ago, Scot5 said:

 

 All those who say they've lost out are nothing more than ambulance chasers, they're crooks, they're part of the compensation culture.

 

Those UK owners seeking compensation might be able to fool themselves, they may well be able to fool others, but when they say they've lost out?   Don't expect come to a petrolhead website and get away with talking b0ll0cks.

 

 

I didn't talk *******s, I never said that I had lost out, just that if there is free money to be had I want to be at the front of the queue.

 

I say this at a time when all around me are being paid to remain closed, employees on furlough, the business recieving the fonds de solidarité, no taxes, charges, rates or interest payments to make and for 3 months I get nothing, have nothing coming in and €1000 going out before I can even buy food.

I had the "fix" done. 

I received a very nice umbrella (which i have since lost - D'Oh), a pen and a travel mug.

I saw a reduction in fuel economy of about 10% afterwards.

 

I traded the car in to a dealer last year. I reckon the other condition of the car after 6 years (body/wheel scratches, tires near the limit, due a service etc etc) did more to reduce the trade in price I got than whether or not it had been "fixed". Were the dealers not under obligation to "fix" any cars they received as trade-ins before passing them on anyway?

Edited 22 June, 20205 yr by Wet Kipper

VW Group Main Dealers and Approved Repairers are required to apply The Fix to vehicles they get through there hands in the way of trade in's.

Not as some have done and carry it out on cars other people own without asking them or even when told not to.

Funnily there are customers that ask about 'The Fix' for some 1.2 TDI's and 1.6TDI's that are ones that VW say should have or could have are told there is nothing required.

21 hours ago, skomaz said:

Ah yes - the 'mental anguish' of an owner driving a car that performs differently on the road to under static test conditions - something that most owners wouldn't have cared less about, or would have been oblivious to, if there wasn't a bunch of lawyers involved telling them they might be able to get some compensation for it!

 

Sorry but in my book that doesn't count.

 

It is not about mental anguish, it is about the cars being miss-sold. I can see where you are coming from, but if you ever get involved in litigation it won't be your "book" that decides the outcome in court.

 

Unfortunately even if the judge agrees that you've been 'orribly traumatised by your experience and awards you a nice wedge the class action lawyers are going to take most of it.

Class actions seem to result in very small payouts to the actual victims. Like <£100.

Do if you in this my advice would be to exepect nothing and be very happy if a cheque comes your way for any amount.

3 hours ago, OldBoyScout said:

 

It is not about mental anguish, it is about the cars being miss-sold. I can see where you are coming from, but if you ever get involved in litigation it won't be your "book" that decides the outcome in court.

 

 

I know - I was being cynical and faecetious.

 

As to mis-sold - you can't seriously expect us to believe that the ONLY reason you bought a car was its low on-paper emissions?  You have a Scout DSG according to your profile so if you were choosing on emissions only there would have been much better options to choose - it is therefore unlikely you would have chosen differently if you had known the emissions were slightly different in real life compared to a test bed and that your real reasons for the purchase of the Scout lay elsewhere (lifestyle / towing / 4x4 ability / raised ground clearance / looks / equipment / price etc.).

 

And yes I know all about litigation and the courts - it's part of my job to be aware of contract terms and the legal implications etc. and I have family members who are solicitors.  It doesn't stop me holding an opinion though and not does it affect my opinion that society is becoming too litigious and claims centric.

 

Hopefully the courts will see sense.

 

Cheers!

9 hours ago, skomaz said:

As to mis-sold - you can't seriously expect us to believe that the ONLY reason you bought a car was its low on-paper emissions?  You have a Scout DSG according to your profile so if you were choosing on emissions only there would have been much better options to choose - it is therefore unlikely you would have chosen differently if you had known the emissions were slightly different in real life compared to a test bed and that your real reasons for the purchase of the Scout lay elsewhere (lifestyle / towing / 4x4 ability / raised ground clearance / looks / equipment / price etc.).

 

I wasn't saying my car was miss-sold, I was just speaking generally. I was fortunate enough to get an early Euro 6, so I am not personally affected. I feel very relieved that I didn't buy one of the affected cars, as I so easily could have done if I had purchased a bit earlier, although you seem to be saying that I wouldn't have been greatly disadvantaged if I had. For emissions and economy the Scout DSG is actually pretty good for a car with 4x4 ability, DSG and the same engine power as the VRS diesel, and I don't regret my choice one bit.

 

9 hours ago, skomaz said:

Hopefully the courts will see sense.

 

Maybe but I wouldn't count on it. Cheers!