PDA

View Full Version : VW caught by the Yanks for breaking emission laws



Pages : [1] 2 3

TerryO
19th September 2015, 11:55 AM
I wonder if this will prove to be the case here in Oz and in other country's with strict emission restrictions?

VW has been caught with its pants down in the USA for selling new vehicles since 2009 with emission defeat software that allows their diesel vehicles to not meet emission standards unless they are being checked.


VW facing massive US recall over emissions test cheating (http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/vw-facing-massive-us-recall-over-emissions-test-cheating-20150919-gjqbsz.html)

3toes
19th September 2015, 03:27 PM
Not the first to be caught doing this. Am surprised how long they have got away with it for though.

Ausfree
19th September 2015, 03:34 PM
How does software like that work??? Does anybody know!!

Toxic_Avenger
19th September 2015, 04:06 PM
It's usually tested on a dyno with a sensor up its :whistling:

Not sure how software can anticipate that, but I too would be interested to know.

On the other hand, brand new exotics wouldn't meet noise pollution standards, nor would I think that all the flames an unburnt fuel pouring out the exhaust meet emissions standards either...

scarry
19th September 2015, 05:50 PM
Once rectified, they may be down on power,that would be a headache for the manufacturer.

I recon the fuel usage on many new vehicles is also fudged.

rangieman
19th September 2015, 06:59 PM
It's usually tested on a dyno with a sensor up its :whistling:

Not sure how software can anticipate that, but I too would be interested to know.

On the other hand, brand new exotics wouldn't meet noise pollution standards, nor would I think that all the flames an unburnt fuel pouring out the exhaust meet emissions standards either...

That i Dont think is the fact in oz well not holden any way ;)
When we did emmission Testing it was all real life driving on test tracks that was simulated to open road and city driving :cool: Oh and the bonnets had a paddalocked bar that only the shift manager had the key for. This was the case even after the test the car sat parked for up to 10 years still locked and not moved for any reason except if the car was requested to be checked
by the Goverment;)

BigJon
19th September 2015, 08:07 PM
Not sure how software can anticipate that, but I too would be interested to know.



The emissions testing is done to strict parameters. Engine coolant temp just so, etc. They just put in an algorythm that made them very emission friendly if they were started under those conditions.

ADMIRAL
19th September 2015, 09:02 PM
Just watching the F1 in Singapore and they commented on it. They are talking of an $18 billion dollar fine. Defies belief !!

Slunnie
19th September 2015, 09:10 PM
Just watching the F1 in Singapore and they commented on it. They are talking of an $18 billion dollar fine. Defies belief !!
$18b, you'd just pull out of the country and say see ya!

TerryO
19th September 2015, 09:46 PM
I bet if they are doing in the US then they are also doing in in Europe which I think has stricter emission laws. Oh well, this could get real expensive for VW. The Yanks were happy to skin BP for billions for the pollution after that Well head ruptured in the Gulf of Mexico so why not VW?

Eevo
19th September 2015, 09:55 PM
the real world pollution is minimal given that VW's are always on the side on the road broken down.

3toes
20th September 2015, 03:22 AM
US has much more strict emissions laws than Europe. Had been the case for the last 30 years. Europe had only introduced emissions rules in last 10 years and then only on limited number of pollutants. Only now talking about particles and NO which were ignored before as they made diesels difficult to do.

AndyG
20th September 2015, 05:04 AM
Looks like they were dicking around with the EGR valve, maybe only active when Obdii port in use.
Who would disable EGR :angel: :twisted:

500,000 * $37,500 = ouch, maybe go to jail do not collect $200

And then a class action by owners no doubt

Davehoos
20th September 2015, 08:35 AM
some of the early fly by wire Toyota Van have a end of assembly test method. If you remove the cabin light fuse the air conditioning turns off after it has got down to thermostat temp. It also does some other things as part of the test. this was modified in latter models.


Australian emission test is a bag test done in a dyno. part of the emission requirement I was told when doing warranty work for a holden dealer was that the emission level had to pass after 80 000Km of normal service. so a car would have to be driven without modification before type testing.


Friends that worked building engines for emission test have told me the test engines had to be 20% better than the standard to cover production variability. When my mates bag tested P76 V8 it passed ULP levels easy.My 1984 skyline passed new car 2002 level with 160 000Km.

wardy1
20th September 2015, 03:42 PM
the real world pollution is minimal given that VW's are always on the side on the road broken down.

What a load of bull****! I've owned a Passat, my son had a Polo Tdi and my partner has a Polo Tsi. He's also owned other VW's. NONE of these have EVER broken down....... EVER.

Ill informed comments are just inflammatory rubbish.

Eevo
20th September 2015, 04:27 PM
What a load of bull****! I've owned a Passat, my son had a Polo Tdi and my partner has a Polo Tsi. He's also owned other VW's. NONE of these have EVER broken down....... EVER.

Ill informed comments are just inflammatory rubbish.

got one!

3toes
20th September 2015, 05:13 PM
Is UK based however think it would apply. Worked for a national dealer group that sold Vw, Ford and Vauxhall. When was looking over some numbers noticed that the warranty claim work for VW was much higher for VW than the other Two. Questioned the numbers as VW are more reliable. Was informed that if I cared to look back would see this was normal. Kept an eye on it and it never changed.

Was explained to me as being like this. VW came out with the Mk1 golf and it astounded the buying public as it was the only European car of the time that would start reliably each morning. They then worked off this reputation with consistent advertising ever since to say a VW was reliable. Media and public wee told the story so many times it became urban truth.

Ford or Vauxhall customer came in ranting that product was rubbish and demanding it be fixed. VW customer came in saying not sure if it was an issue or not but could you look at this for me. Did not tell the VW customer we had 10 more with same problem out the back which no one had any idea how to fix.

A further example was that the VW brand in the US sits somewhere below the Korean in the public perceptions. This also being due to Golfs regularly winning the lemon of the year award. US market has much higher expectations on reliability than Europe where this is called character. Dealers who will take on the brand tends to be the poorer ones who do nothing to help the brand position.

That said I currently have a VW that has done 185k miles.

AndyG
21st September 2015, 05:05 AM
got one!

About 90 kg, fighting strongly :D

benji
21st September 2015, 06:42 AM
Maybe when they're plugged into an obd reader it changes the map slightly.

I strongly suspect that is happening on the new 3.2 Rangers. Each time the egr valve opens there's a puff of smoke, and likewise if the throttle is stabbed also. I've seen this on quite a few Rangers now.

Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

JDNSW
21st September 2015, 07:03 AM
My brother, who lives in the USA, has recently got his fourth VW in a row, all except one being diesel, starting with a Rabbit in 1978?. He has found them to be reliable, certainly more so than his wife's series of US-made vans (currently a Ford, I believe). He has, however, found that they are expensive to repair, especially for non-current models - last one was replaced due to the ridiculous cost of a fairly simple repair (can't remember what it was).

As far as detecting test conditions - not too long ago a refrigerator manufacturer in Australia was found to have software that detected test conditions and allowed a wider temperature swing (and hence lower power consumption), so this is nothing new.

John

spudboy
21st September 2015, 08:11 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXEVuXLwMcs

Ferret
22nd September 2015, 12:25 AM
WV halts all sales of diesels in the US. Korea is now testing for the VW deception and the German govt has launched an investigation into it. Meanwhile CEO of VW has released a statement (http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/info_center/en/news/2015/09/statement_ceo_of_volkswagen_ag.html)


Statement of Prof. Dr. Martin Winterkorn, CEO of Volkswagen AG:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board (EPA and CARB) revealed their findings that while testing diesel cars of the Volkswagen Group they have detected manipulations that violate American environmental standards.

The Board of Management at Volkswagen AG takes these findings very seriously. I personally am deeply sorry that we have broken the trust of our customers and the public. We will cooperate fully with the responsible agencies, with transparency and urgency, to clearly, openly, and completely establish all of the facts of this case. Volkswagen has ordered an external investigation of this matter.

We do not and will not tolerate violations of any kind of our internal rules or of the law.

The trust of our customers and the public is and continues to be our most important asset. We at Volkswagen will do everything that must be done in order to re-establish the trust that so many people have placed in us, and we will do everything necessary in order to reverse the damage this has caused. This matter has first priority for me, personally, and for our entire Board of Management.


VW must now be facing the equivalent of an airline plane crash.

3toes
22nd September 2015, 01:21 AM
Looks serious share price down 17%.

Be interesting to see if this was just US cars or global?
Has VW set up a corporate structure which ring fences it's US operations to protect themselves from US courts?

They are at least protected from take over by the corporate ownership structure in Germany so that us one worry the management will not have to concern themselves with.

DiscoMick
22nd September 2015, 06:29 AM
Be surprised if it didn't also apply to VWs and Audis sold here. Is the testing method different here? I thought we followed European standards.
This raises the question about people blocking the EGR here. Does that mean the vehicle would fail an emissions test and so is actually unroadworthy? Would that be grounds for an insurance company to reject a claim? I don't know the answer, but its interesting.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

Slunnie
22nd September 2015, 07:08 AM
Not sure if it will make much difference to consumers here, but the uk will be interesting where it affects rego cost.

gusthedog
22nd September 2015, 12:00 PM
American emissions testing is based (incorrectly) on particulate emission. Diesels therefore have a harder time passing their tests than petrols even though diesel particulates aren't that dangerous. That's why there are relatively few Diesels in the states compared to all other markets. You can drive a 6 litre v8 petrol there but not a 1.3 diesel. It's completely crap way of emissions testing IMHO

Our testing is based on the European standard which is totally different than the American style of testing. The ruling will have no legal impact here or in Europe . It might affect sales but it really shouldn't. But that's the rumour mill for you. If they used European tests on all the so called illegal cars in the US, they'd all pass.


Pricey

bsperka
22nd September 2015, 04:07 PM
An opinion on reddit was that the rules for diesels is deliberately set too high / difficult by the EPA. Slanted more towards petrol (errr gasoline).

Eevo
22nd September 2015, 04:22 PM
even though diesel particulates aren't that dangerous.



so when research says diesel exhaust is carcinogenic, if not the particulate part, what part are they referring to?

bob10
23rd September 2015, 06:26 AM
Volkswagen Sets Aside $7.2 Billion to Pay for Emissions Cheating Scandal - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/volkswagen-11-million-vehicles-could-have-suspect-software-emissions-scandal-n431456?cid=eml_nbn_20150922)

bsperka
23rd September 2015, 06:37 AM
VW have now declared up to 11 million diesels are affected. Worldwide.

TerryO
23rd September 2015, 06:49 AM
Yes the problems for VW just keep getting bigger.

Volkswagen says 11 million cars hit by emissions scandal, probes multiply (http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/volkswagen-says-11-million-cars-hit-by-emissions-scandal-probes-multiply-20150922-gjsptg.html)

DiscoMick
23rd September 2015, 07:52 AM
Obviously, this raises the question of whether BAS remaps for Defenders, which appear to act in a similar way by closing the EGR, are actually illegal. And of whether Land Rover is also doing this software trick with its other vehicles. It seems there will be an investigation of all vehicle manufacturers over this. How will JLR come out of this?

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

Grumbles
23rd September 2015, 08:29 AM
I always thought that altering emissions including by deleting or blocking the EGR made the vehicle unroadworthy. The same as a non functioning muffler which will get you a yellow canary on the side of the road.

AndyG
23rd September 2015, 08:29 AM
Meanwhile,

Kill the environment buy a Prius
Toyota's Prius is Less Efficient and Environmentally Friendly than a Hummer? (The Torque Report) (http://www.thetorquereport.com/2007/03/toyotas_prius_is_less_efficien.html)

Funny how electric cars never compare burning coal to make electricity vs burning petrol or diesel.

Save the planet, buy a Defender and keep it for 50 years :D

Pedro_The_Swift
23rd September 2015, 08:47 AM
California has driven automotive emission laws for probably 30 years

gusthedog
23rd September 2015, 08:57 AM
so when research says diesel exhaust is carcinogenic, if not the particulate part, what part are they referring to?

Well they will give you cancer but produce less co2 and CO. 😊

And of course engine remaps are illegal from an emissions point of view.

bee utey
23rd September 2015, 09:00 AM
Meanwhile,

Kill the environment buy a Prius
Toyota's Prius is Less Efficient and Environmentally Friendly than a Hummer? (The Torque Report) (http://www.thetorquereport.com/2007/03/toyotas_prius_is_less_efficien.html)

Funny how electric cars never compare burning coal to make electricity vs burning petrol or diesel.

Save the planet, buy a Defender and keep it for 50 years :D
Of course that article is nearly a decade old and technology has improved by huge amounts since then. The original myth was about nickel mining causing environmental degradation and is based on one mining incident. Anyway there were heaps of responses to that false claim, here's one from 2006

Oh, so a Hummer is NOT greener than a Prius (http://www.autoblog.com/2006/10/05/oh-so-a-hummer-is-not-greener-a-prius/)

AndyG
23rd September 2015, 10:00 AM
Sprung,

then there is

How Green Is a Tesla, Really? | Mother Jones (http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/09/green-tesla-electrical-grid)
Lies, damned lies and statistics, what answer do you want? ;)
And im an econometrician by qualification, a long long time ago.

My point was some of these cars are promoted as clean / no impact and the downstream effects are ignored.
Maybe the answer is an electric step thru scooter with solar panels on the roof to power it.

I think there is general disbelief that VW could be so dishonest, stupid, arrogant?, words fail.

Eevo
23rd September 2015, 10:02 AM
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/09/286.jpg

AndyG
23rd September 2015, 10:02 AM
Well they will give you cancer but produce less co2 and CO. 😊

And of course engine remaps are illegal from an emissions point of view.

And you read the history books talking about the horse emissions causing grief in London :D

Slunnie
23rd September 2015, 10:09 AM
Meanwhile,

Kill the environment buy a Prius
Toyota's Prius is Less Efficient and Environmentally Friendly than a Hummer? (The Torque Report) (http://www.thetorquereport.com/2007/03/toyotas_prius_is_less_efficien.html)

Funny how electric cars never compare burning coal to make electricity vs burning petrol or diesel.

Save the planet, buy a Defender and keep it for 50 years :D
I remember seeing years ago that after a cradle to the grave analysis, I think it was the Jeep Wrangler or similar that came out best because of their manufacturing processes and the hybrid vehicles were nowhere in sight.

That said, I'm still impressed by the consumption figures of the new Volvo XC90 of 2.1litres/100km! Not bad for 2t.:o

Slunnie
23rd September 2015, 10:13 AM
Well they will give you cancer but produce less co2 and CO. 😊

And of course engine remaps are illegal from an emissions point of view.
Thats the same as unleaded fuel.

I recall my university chemistry lecturer going on a spiel about how the lead in leaded vehicles after combustion falls out onto the road and there is sits. Unleaded vehicles however produce a carcinogenic gas that sits in the air and gravitates towards lower laying areas where it can collect. He said, don't live in valleys!

Davehoos
23rd September 2015, 10:43 AM
The news media overseas is more interested in the green credit tax payed out than the pollution.

cuppabillytea
23rd September 2015, 11:23 AM
I freely admit that I haven't done the Science on this, but indications are that the BAS remap has made my Defender more fuel efficient, at least on the Highway. So my question would be: Which gasses and how much of them are reduced by the EGR? Do they actually reduce emissions if they make vehicles less fuel efficient?
The Defender should also be given credit for it's longevity, given that, as I once read, more emissions are caused in the production of a vehicle than it will produce in it's life time.(On average).

Tombie
23rd September 2015, 11:47 AM
Thats the same as unleaded fuel.

I recall my university chemistry lecturer going on a spiel about how the lead in leaded vehicles after combustion falls out onto the road and there is sits. Unleaded vehicles however produce a carcinogenic gas that sits in the air and gravitates towards lower laying areas where it can collect. He said, don't live in valleys!

Correct... In Adelaide they fitted Air Quality units on a few primary roads to test Lead levels pre and post Unleaded roll out.

The statistics are available online.

Interestingly, in Adelaide, as Lead levels dropped post unleaded intrduction, there is a notable increase in cancer levels in another report...

It continues to rise...

When I was working for CAMS as a Scrutineer we had to inspect vehicles inside their garages at the tracks.. The big team bosses would often close the roller doors and start the vehicles - in an effort to encourage us to hurry up and leave... That stuff burns (and is highly carcinogenic)

Slunnie
23rd September 2015, 12:08 PM
When I was working for CAMS as a Scrutineer we had to inspect vehicles inside their garages at the tracks.. The big team bosses would often close the roller doors and start the vehicles - in an effort to encourage us to hurry up and leave... That stuff burns (and is highly carcinogenic)
Its the sweetest smelling and most addictive fume also! The sugar of exhausts! :D

Interestingly also, when racing fuels were brought back to either 98 or 100 octane they started using gloves etc and handling it properly.

AndyG
23rd September 2015, 12:28 PM
What was that Castrol oil, Corse,(?) in the 70's that smelled oh so good, a rally car favorite. I wonder if you can get it in 5W30, i would buy it tomorrow.

Lead has also been linked to violet crime, mainly via brain damage to the young

Forbes Welcome (http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2013/01/03/how-lead-caused-americas-violent-crime-epidemic/)

Now, who did more damage to the environment than any other individual, invented leaded fuel and fluorocarbons i believe. (No its not the CEO of VW :wasntme: )

Are we off topic yet :D

vnx205
23rd September 2015, 12:46 PM
What was that Castrol oil, Corse,(?) in the 70's that smelled oh so good, a rally car favorite. I wonder if you can get it in 5W30, i would buy it tomorrow.
... ... ...


Back in the 60s, a friend of mine had a side valve Hillman. He used to pour a bottle of castor oil in the tank and remove a small plug screwed into the exhaust manifold.

The smell of the fumes that leaked back into the cab made him feel as if he was driving a racing car.:D

DiscoMick
23rd September 2015, 01:01 PM
The story in the Christian Science Monitor said the software detected the vehicle was being operated in the mode used for emissions testing (steady speed, stable revs, wheels straight ahead etc) and cut the fuel flow. Once the mode of operation changed it reverted to full fuelling, which increased emissions of nitrous oxides by up to 35 times depending on the model. Fuel economy might improve, but emssions results would breach the latest American rules. In other words, the cars were poisoning the atmosphere and people.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

Tombie
23rd September 2015, 01:28 PM
The story in the Christian Science Monitor said the software detected the vehicle was being operated in the mode used for emissions testing (steady speed, stable revs, wheels straight ahead etc) and cut the fuel flow. Once the mode of operation changed it reverted to full fuelling, which increased emissions of nitrous oxides by up to 35 times depending on the model. Fuel economy might improve, but emssions results would breach the latest American rules. In other words, the cars were poisoning the atmosphere and people.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

Oxymoron? ;)

And yes, of course the emissions are entering the atmosphere / people...
The challenge is what we will accept, and which poison we will accept...
Benzine, NOx, CO, CO2, BPA, Toluene.. the list is endless...

Then we could go on about Radiation, Phones, Screens...

Avion8
23rd September 2015, 01:49 PM
What was that Castrol oil, Corse,(?) in the 70's that smelled oh so good, a rally car favorite. I wonder if you can get it in 5W30, i would buy it tomorrow.

Lead has also been linked to violet crime, mainly via brain damage to the young

Forbes Welcome (http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2013/01/03/how-lead-caused-americas-violent-crime-epidemic/)

Now, who did more damage to the environment than any other individual, invented leaded fuel and fluorocarbons i believe. (No its not the CEO of VW :wasntme: )

Are we off topic yet :D

It was Castrol R Racing Motor Oil, it smelled fantastic & I remember it well from watching races at Brands Hatch & Lydden Hill back in the 60's.

V8Ian
23rd September 2015, 01:55 PM
It was Castrol R Racing Motor Oil, it smelled fantastic & I remember it well from watching races at Brands Hatch & Lydden Hill back in the 60's.
And if you'd gone to Mt Coot-tha Hill Climb, a couple of weeks back, you'd have smelt it there too. :cool:

AndyG
23rd September 2015, 02:00 PM
Glad to advise my Gardner 6LX engines meet all original emissions specs 100%.

There's a niche market, fragrant engine oils, hate to think what was spewing out.

bee utey
23rd September 2015, 02:07 PM
The story in the Christian Science Monitor said the software detected the vehicle was being operated in the mode used for emissions testing (steady speed, stable revs, wheels straight ahead etc) and cut the fuel flow. Once the mode of operation changed it reverted to full fuelling, which increased emissions of nitrous oxides by up to 35 times depending on the model. Fuel economy might improve, but emssions results would breach the latest American rules. In other words, the cars were poisoning the atmosphere and people.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app
That's mostly wrong, the problem is that these vehicles burn too little fuel to keep the catalytic converter hot and functioning. They are supposed to do this by reducing oxygen with exhaust gas recirculation. Therefore the vehicles EGT is higher, power is down and economy is poorer than in the cheating VWs. The catalytic converter is supposed to break down the nitrous oxides and carbon monoxide into nitrogen and CO2 and this requires the heat from rich mixtures in the exhaust stream.

Slunnie
23rd September 2015, 02:25 PM
It was Castrol R Racing Motor Oil, it smelled fantastic & I remember it well from watching races at Brands Hatch & Lydden Hill back in the 60's.
Castrol R30, a castor oil in with the fuel was a winner also. Shame it had so much lint in it which meant everything had to be rebuilt after each event.

Toxic_Avenger
23rd September 2015, 04:10 PM
I freely admit that I haven't done the Science on this, but indications are that the BAS remap has made my Defender more fuel efficient, at least on the Highway. So my question would be: Which gasses and how much of them are reduced by the EGR? Do they actually reduce emissions if they make vehicles less fuel efficient?
The Defender should also be given credit for it's longevity, given that, as I once read, more emissions are caused in the production of a vehicle than it will produce in it's life time.(On average).

Nitric / Nitrous oxides, collectively known as NOx which are affected mostly by combustion temperatures within the combustion chamber.
The EGR lowers the combustion temps by introducing an inert atmosphere into the combustion chamber (ie exhaust gases) to reduce NOx.

That's the long and the short of it at least... plenty more reading is out there if you need the full version.

cuppabillytea
23rd September 2015, 07:41 PM
Thanks Mitch. It's time I did the Science. Nitrous Oxide isn't scary though. There must be something more evil lurking at the tail pipe.
Cheers, Billy.

Toxic_Avenger
23rd September 2015, 07:46 PM
Thanks Mitch. It's time I did the Science. Nitrous Oxide isn't scary though. There must be something more evil lurking at the tail pipe.
Cheers, Billy.

NOx are the components which cause smog and acid rain. Which have various environmental concerns.

cuppabillytea
23rd September 2015, 07:53 PM
It was Castrol R Racing Motor Oil, it smelled fantastic & I remember it well from watching races at Brands Hatch & Lydden Hill back in the 60's.
I used to run that in my Ducati and Moto Guzzi. Loved it. Gun oil is nice too.

PAT303
23rd September 2015, 08:16 PM
So VW fudged the test and going by the response of joe public you'd swear they've been clubbing baby seals.I find it strange that an American 6.0ltre V8 petrol,sorry,gasoline engine that burns 20ltres per 100 can pass yet a 2.0ltre T/D that uses 5-6 fails?,I also find it funny how joe public again has been lighting up the interweb voicing their anger over the death of all those baby seals from VW's death traps all the while haul trucks pump pollution straight into the sky 24/7 supplying power stations with coal so they can get busy on their keyboards voicing their disgust at the deaths of all those baby seals from some poor bastard who just wants to get home from work.Personally I think the world would be better off if we all drove Prius's and followed the Paleo diet,and didn't breast feed or vaccinate our kids,I know thats bad because some celebrity person said so. Pat

Slunnie
23rd September 2015, 08:23 PM
Storm in a tea cup as far as I'm concerned.

But, the implications may be pretty significant for VW and for diesel engines in cars in general.

I agree that its incredible as to what passes and what fails, especially with the big diesel and petrol engines that operate over there.

cuppabillytea
23rd September 2015, 08:27 PM
Nice rant Pat and not untimely.

bob10
24th September 2015, 08:05 AM
The end of diesel?


Volkswagen scandal may spell the end for diesel | The New Daily (http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/09/23/vw-scandal-may-spell-end-diesel/)

DiscoMick
24th September 2015, 08:40 AM
So VW fudged the test and going by the response of joe public you'd swear they've been clubbing baby seals.I find it strange that an American 6.0ltre V8 petrol,sorry,gasoline engine that burns 20ltres per 100 can pass yet a 2.0ltre T/D that uses 5-6 fails?,I also find it funny how joe public again has been lighting up the interweb voicing their anger over the death of all those baby seals from VW's death traps all the while haul trucks pump pollution straight into the sky 24/7 supplying power stations with coal so they can get busy on their keyboards voicing their disgust at the deaths of all those baby seals from some poor bastard who just wants to get home from work.Personally I think the world would be better off if we all drove Prius's and followed the Paleo diet,and didn't breast feed or vaccinate our kids,I know thats bad because some celebrity person said so. Pat

Its not about fuel consumption, its about dangerous emissions - very different things. Large engines can have low emissions.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

superquag
24th September 2015, 09:03 AM
Not stirring the pot, but, it may be Instructive to see 'who' benefits from an adverse result from VW being 'exposed'.

Wonder how, and who did the noble deed of blowing the whistle on them ?

Anyway, the Motoring Industry needs to take a leaf out of the (US) Food & Drug Administration's 'Hiring Handbook'. Seems they have a Good Thing going with the Pharmaceutical, Bio-Tech and "Food" Manufacturers companies that they're supposed (?) to be overseeing/regulating., Too many persons are found on both sides of the fence, invariably on generous financial terms... :wasntme:

http://www.psrast.org/ecologmons.htm

PhilipA
24th September 2015, 09:19 AM
When I see how a d3/4 throws out a great plume of smoke when accelerating hard say on sand, I wonder how they meet emission standards.

Maybe it's a case of glass houses when we criticise VW.
Time will tell I guess, as there will certainly be inv.estigation into all makes.

When people say " storm in teacup" I wonder how VW customers will react if and probably when their cars are recalled and they lose X percent of power and economy, from a remap that meets emission laws.

Regards Philip A

Slunnie
24th September 2015, 11:22 AM
Nobody knows what effects the correction will be yet, it may not necessarily be power loss or a change in economy.

bsperka
24th September 2015, 04:33 PM
Some are predicting a huge impact on the German economy due to VWs manufacturing plants slowing down.

PAT303
24th September 2015, 05:19 PM
Its not about fuel consumption, its about dangerous emissions - very different things. Large engines can have low emissions.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

Yank V8's burn anything up to 5 times the amount of fuel a VW diesel does,thats a lot more pollution. Pat

PAT303
24th September 2015, 05:23 PM
Not stirring the pot, but, it may be Instructive to see 'who' benefits from an adverse result from VW being 'exposed'.

Wonder how, and who did the noble deed of blowing the whistle on them ?

Anyway, the Motoring Industry needs to take a leaf out of the (US) Food & Drug Administration's 'Hiring Handbook'. Seems they have a Good Thing going with the Pharmaceutical, Bio-Tech and "Food" Manufacturers companies that they're supposed (?) to be overseeing/regulating., Too many persons are found on both sides of the fence, invariably on generous financial terms... :wasntme:

http://www.psrast.org/ecologmons.htm

First thing I thought,VW's aren't made in America,maybe someone who makes POS American vehicles spoke to someone who's stay in office depends on finding employment for American voters who are employed by said maker to make POS American vehicles ;). Pat

PAT303
24th September 2015, 05:28 PM
When I see how a d3/4 throws out a great plume of smoke when accelerating hard say on sand, I wonder how they meet emission standards.

Maybe it's a case of glass houses when we criticise VW.
Time will tell I guess, as there will certainly be inv.estigation into all makes.

When people say " storm in teacup" I wonder how VW customers will react if and probably when their cars are recalled and they lose X percent of power and economy, from a remap that meets emission laws.

Regards Philip A

How is that any different from people who buy Japanese POS that can't carry or tow their rated capacities without GVM/Suspension upgrades?.Engines make power by burning fuel,more power=more fuel,more fuel=more emissions. Pat

NobbyTD5
24th September 2015, 05:32 PM
Well quite literally today I went to take delivery of a new Golf ( 103TSi petrol)
I took one look at the sales guy when he said I had to sign the contract to finalise the deal - and said not sure I should sign this given the recent VW behaviour/ news - then said bugg*er it and signed. (He was a little concerned! )
Its a very nice car - bit like a go cart vs the D2 with a 7 speed DSG gearbox
a really nice drive - fun
has 49Km on it at moment!

lets wait and see who else has had the same idea..time will tell

Cheers
Nobby

loneranger
24th September 2015, 07:10 PM
Have there been any statements yet by any other vehicle manufacturers stating they haven't been doing the same thing or are they all staying quiet?

Ferret
24th September 2015, 07:43 PM
Hyundai and Kia have been caught out previously with something similar ~US$100m fines.

Hyundai and Kia Clean Air Act Settlement (http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/hyundai-and-kia-clean-air-act-settlement#civil)

bee utey
24th September 2015, 07:52 PM
Yank V8's burn anything up to 5 times the amount of fuel a VW diesel does,thats a lot more pollution. Pat
There are a number of different pollutants in question here, they don't all act the same. Nitrous oxide emissions are a huge thing in America as they create choking smogs. A well tuned monster V8 may indeed churn out loads less NO than a small illegally tuned diesel engine.

Carbon dioxide is a less immediate concern, you can't see it on a daily basis hovering over their cities. Carbon monoxide is trivially easy to regulate in a modern engine.

AllTerr
24th September 2015, 08:40 PM
Not stirring the pot, but, it may be Instructive to see 'who' benefits from an adverse result from VW being 'exposed'.



Wonder how, and who did the noble deed of blowing the whistle on them ?


Was a couple of Uni students and their professor....

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/23/meet-the-man-who-uncovered-volkswagens-lie.html

Eevo
24th September 2015, 09:25 PM
https://scontent-hkg3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfl1/v/t1.0-9/12039331_10153250562323823_7403663988572912840_n.j pg?oh=31a7d7eb9a91a0173aad98283cf86ca0&oe=56A6D37B

cuppabillytea
24th September 2015, 11:16 PM
Cruel but fair.:angel:

spudfan
25th September 2015, 01:00 AM
Was'nt the Iveco Daily 4x4 withdrawn from the European market as it couldn't meet the emissions regulation?

AndyG
25th September 2015, 05:11 AM
Was a couple of Uni students and their professor....

Meet the man who uncovered Volkswagen's lie (http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/23/meet-the-man-who-uncovered-volkswagens-lie.html)

I wonder what mark they got for the assignment :D
I would have given VW first rights to purchase the research :angel:

JDNSW
25th September 2015, 05:15 AM
The difference perhaps in this case is that unlike other cases, where cars have perhaps not met emissions standards due to incorrect testing, problems were swept under the carpet, etc, in this case the car's software was deliberately designed to circumvent the testing. It cannot be explained by carelessness or failure to follow procedures or anything like that. It can only have happened by deliberate intent to evade the law in an ongoing manner. And it is exacerbated because it was done by the largest car manufacturer in the world, and the largest company in Germany.

It has to be a reflection of the company culture, perhaps already exposed by the company response to other problems of their cars.

One has to wonder how many other manufacturers are up to similar tricks.

John

AndyG
25th September 2015, 05:22 AM
Self regulation does not work. Various government and the VW board were remiss in not doing independent tests,
We subscribe to a voluntary Code RSPO, for the environment, and apart from our internal staff, we get audited twice a year by an external organisation who reports to the board.

And then there are building materials.

87County
25th September 2015, 05:28 AM
Not in any way excusing VW's actions, but it seems to me that the latest euro emission standards have been set at a level that is very difficult (impossible?) to meet. A case of bureaucracy gone mad ?

The car and fuel manufacturers need to come to a solution with the bureaucrats.

There are add-on technologies that assist.

vnx205
25th September 2015, 05:42 AM
Was a couple of Uni students and their professor....

Meet the man who uncovered Volkswagen's lie (http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/23/meet-the-man-who-uncovered-volkswagens-lie.html)

I wonder why it took so long for anything to happen.
From that article:

Carder said he's surprised to see such a hullabaloo now, because his team's findings were made public nearly a year and a half ago.

"We actually presented this data in a public forum and were actually questioned by Volkswagen," said Carder.

bsperka
25th September 2015, 06:54 AM
I've read that in the EU they want to remove internal combustion engines from private transport, especially diesel, so set the bar high.
California started the emissions control requirement in the 1970s due to LA geography and bad smog issues.

Eevo
25th September 2015, 07:16 AM
Report: BMW X3 Diesel Also Emits More Than Legal Limit (http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a17475/report-bmw-x3-diesel-also-dirty/)

Eevo
25th September 2015, 07:26 AM
I've read that in the EU they want to remove internal combustion engines from private transport, especially diesel, so set the bar high..

i think france was looking at removing diesel as it was so polluting

DiscoMick
25th September 2015, 08:03 AM
I'm no software expert, but won't VW just have to rewrite its software to alter the fuel injection programming? I guess its a case of whether to prioritise power, fuel economy or clean emissions. VW set its to favour power and economy and downgrade clean emissions. Its obviously not an accident, but was done deliberately. Rewriting it to improve the quality of emissions shouldn't be too hard - after all the defeat software was already able to make the engine run cleaner during emissions testing, so they already know what settings to use.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

Slunnie
25th September 2015, 08:34 AM
Report: BMW X3 Diesel Also Emits More Than Legal Limit (http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a17475/report-bmw-x3-diesel-also-dirty/)

I have no doubt that more will follow.

Interestingly, for VAG, that was the motor that ran Adblue also, which others don't.

scarry
25th September 2015, 02:41 PM
I'm no software expert, but won't VW just have to rewrite its software to alter the fuel injection programming? I guess its a case of whether to prioritise power, fuel economy or clean emissions. VW set its to favour power and economy and downgrade clean emissions. Its obviously not an accident, but was done deliberately. Rewriting it to improve the quality of emissions shouldn't be too hard - after all the defeat software was already able to make the engine run cleaner during emissions testing, so they already know what settings to use.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

But rewriting may reduce power,which then causes another major issue for the manufacturer.And the vehicle may use more fuel.

grey_ghost
25th September 2015, 03:15 PM
I will be following this news topic with interest - mainly because I own/drive a 2011 VW Tiguan Diesel... Don't shoot me!!! :(

Worst case - I assume VW issue a re-call, and my car will have less power and possibly use a bit more fuel, but I can't see it being drastically different (gosh - I hope not)

Best case - the emissions for Australia aren't as strict, and for Ozzie cars nothing changes..

I wonder what the legal ramifications are for VW? Eg - Can I sue them because they sold me a car under false pretences?

Anyway - I am keeping an eye on this story. I am very happy with the car - 143,000km in 4 years and no problems to speak of (one recall on the fuse box, but that's it)...

Eevo
25th September 2015, 03:51 PM
I wonder what the legal ramifications are for VW? Eg - Can I sue them because they sold me a car under false pretences?


pretty sure they have committed fraud.

false emission standards
false power power/torque
false fuel economy

JDNSW
25th September 2015, 07:30 PM
I agree with Eevo - I think that they have probably committed fraud as well as there being specific emissions legislation they have probably breached. I expect the company will face massive fines and that some employees can expect gaol time, possibly for long periods, the only problem being to trace who knew (or ought to have) about it and who actually decided to follow this path.

As far as Australia goes, I suspect that the less strict Nitrogen oxides emissions here will mean that it is really a non-issue, although if the Australian certification was based on fudged tests from USA or EU, as is likely, then there would probably be penalties and requirements for new testing, although compared to their situation in USA it would be trivial.

John

loneranger
25th September 2015, 09:28 PM
What about false advertising? If the engine has to be reconfigured and as a result has less power they haven't sold what they advertised.

Sent from my SM-G920I using AULRO mobile app

p38arover
25th September 2015, 09:34 PM
Download the Map, then load it back after the recall.

Or disregard the recall.

Homestar
26th September 2015, 06:29 AM
Agreed, disregard the recall or can they force you to take it back...?

3toes
26th September 2015, 06:41 AM
Interesting point here is that we have yet to hear that the cars pass the EU emission standards. To confirm this they will have to run the test with different software. If you just run the test on another car will have same results. Makes me think they do not yet have this software.


EU standards were intentionally designed to be kind to diesel. EU put in place separate petrol and diesel standards while US has one standard for all fuels, combined with a requirement to meet average fleet average fuel consumption levels by brand. Reflects political reality of Europe where energy has to be imported. Diesel beats petrol from an economic point of view when this is the case. Paying for it now though with most European capitals suffering poor air quality which is driven by diesel pollutant count that has gone way up over last 10 years.


VW was the first car company caught in US for defeat devise fitment back in 1975. Believe the term was introduced to US law based on the name given to their devise. Others have been caught since however none since the new legislation in 2010. The caught since 2010 only optomised the test they did not actually break the rules. This gives big powers to fine and investigate / jail people that was not there before 2010.


What makes the VW position very difficult is the time line of events.
1/ European report about VW cars polluting too much compared to tests.
2/ CAFE in US then did on study prompted by this research. They tested Golf and Passat with a BMW X5 as a control car. BMW came in as expected the VW;s both failed. Results were between 5 and 35% over max allowed.
3/ California then took this up with VW who said they could offer a software fix and had it installed.
4/US national certification body watched all this and when did 2016 year testing they paid particular attention to the VW diesel engines which failed despite them being fixed. Then refused to certify the VW diesels.
5/Not long after this VW admitted what they had been up to.


Big problem for VW is that they promised to fix and did not and were caught. Others before when caught before have fixed the problem first time. It is this and the new regulations from 2010 that will cost them big time as regulators and lawyers have no reason to not throw the book at them.


Engineering is done in Germany with US an assembly and retail operation. Under German law cannot extradite a national to any country outside the EU. So US will not be able to grab the top bods unless they find a way to make them come to them. Local US staff will have no such protection.

bee utey
26th September 2015, 06:56 AM
I'm assuming that emissions testing stations will soon be able to determine if the "cheat software" has been fixed so that any unrecalled VW coming through will be defected until the software is updated.

Homestar
26th September 2015, 07:48 AM
But when do cars ever go through emissions testing stations? I've never had to.

AndyG
26th September 2015, 08:30 AM
Testing & Measuring Emissions | US EPA (http://www3.epa.gov/nvfel/testing/)

A non trivial exercise, only 1 government lab in the USA

loneranger
26th September 2015, 08:57 AM
Download the Map, then load it back after the recall.

Or disregard the recall.

My response is in reference to the law. VW can potentially be done for false advertising as the product is not as described.

I'm watching with interest to see the fallout. I don't have or have never owned a VW.

Sent from my SM-G920I using AULRO mobile app

AndyG
26th September 2015, 09:01 AM
Having a 2009 Passat, I am presumably affected. I have not found anyone like Bas who does a Ecu remap, as opposed to an add on chip type solution.

BMKal
26th September 2015, 11:10 AM
Agreed, disregard the recall or can they force you to take it back...?

Have been wondering about the same questions, as there is a new Amarok diesel parked out in the back yard at the moment (young bloke's new wheels).

He also mentioned disregarding the recall - but I questioned whether they would just do whatever update was required next time it goes in for a service anyway. His is still under warranty and he has it serviced at the dealer he purchased it from.

I would assume that VW keep track of what recalls / updates have been completed on all vehicles similarly to what Land Rover and others do. So I would imagine that if there was an outstanding recall / update and the vehicle came in for a routine service, they would do it then, probably whether the vehicle's owner wanted it done or not.

We're hoping that the less stringent emissions regulations in Australia mean that it's a non-issue here, and that no change will be required. Bloody brilliant vehicle just as it is. ;)

woko
26th September 2015, 12:27 PM
Have been wondering about the same questions, as there is a new Amarok diesel parked out in the back yard at the moment (young bloke's new wheels).

He also mentioned disregarding the recall - but I questioned whether they would just do whatever update was required next time it goes in for a service anyway. His is still under warranty and he has it serviced at the dealer he purchased it from.

I didn't see that the commercial range was listed. The US may have lower emission standard as we do for commercial vehicles.


Sent from my GT-I9295 using AULRO mobile app

Mick_Marsh
26th September 2015, 05:56 PM
Volkswagen emissions scam: Australia could become dumping ground for dirty vehicles, Choice says - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-25/australia-risks-becoming-dirty-vehicles-dumping-ground-choice/6806148)

BMKal
26th September 2015, 06:54 PM
Volkswagen emissions scam: Australia could become dumping ground for dirty vehicles, Choice says - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-25/australia-risks-becoming-dirty-vehicles-dumping-ground-choice/6806148)

I thought Australia already was the dumping ground for dirty vehicles. I see dirty old Toyotas and Nissans every day of the week fumigating the neighbourhood. https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/01/93.jpg

cuppabillytea
26th September 2015, 07:40 PM
If It's only the map that's the problem, then they're probably cleaner anyway.

Mick_Marsh
28th September 2015, 11:51 AM
Volkswagen staff warned about emissions cheating software 'years ago', German media reports - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-28/vw-staff-warned-about-emissions-cheating-software-reports/6808500)

bsperka
29th September 2015, 06:05 AM
3.3 M Audi and Skoda are affected.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34377443

BMKal
30th September 2015, 01:19 AM
I read a comment somewhere today -

"It is not the first time that the Germans have been a bit naughty with gases." :eek:

Probably not quite PC though................. :wasntme:

AndyG
30th September 2015, 04:22 AM
They do seem very expert in putting refugees in camps:wasntme:
If this gets deleted, it deserves it.

Interestingly, my in laws met in Dachau, Polish resistance fighters and lived into their 80,s just to annoy me.

Pedro_The_Swift
30th September 2015, 06:33 AM
Volkswagen Diesel Information | Volkswagen Diesel Information (http://www.vwdieselinfo.com/)

Blknight.aus
30th September 2015, 10:15 AM
so when research says diesel exhaust is carcinogenic, if not the particulate part, what part are they referring to?

the oxides of nitrogen are a concern but generally its the particulate matter that are the primary concern as being a potential carcinogenic, they don't hang around in the air long unless you have a micro climate area like they do in america where you get smog hanging around for ages because the air is trapped and just going in small circles.

The exhaust soot has been a known lung irritant for a while because its small particles in much the same way as bull dust and paint dust and anything else thats fine particle is a known lung irritant. I wouldn't mind betting that the biggest issue with diesel exhaust soot is working around the actual shape and texture of the soot. looked at under a microscope its got the same sort of construction as a charcoal filter so who knows what its picked up before its gotten into your lungs and once its there its not going to go away. It could also be providing a simple nucleation site for cancer cells, what might have just been eliminated out of the body by a natural process now finds a place to set up shop and viola you have cancer that, had you not breathed in that particle of diesel soot you wouldnt have had.


it'll be interesting to see if they manage to wrangle out of the mess by claiming that the requirement was to pass under test conditions, and thats what it does, it passes the tests under test conditions.

I cant wait to see a truely, global, across the board emissions control standard, your vehicle must only produce X amount of Y per HP per ton of GVM type stuff. and not the rubbish they have now that you can skirt around by clever lawyering.

BMKal
30th September 2015, 10:50 AM
Interestingly, my in laws met in Dachau, Polish resistance fighters and lived into their 80,s just to annoy me.

My father in law was from same origin. Great bloke, only fairly recently passed. He worked at GMH in Woodville and then Elizabeth plants for 35 years - would be very saddened to see what is happening there today.

AndyG
1st October 2015, 11:45 AM
My father in law was from same origin. Great bloke, only fairly recently passed. He worked at GMH in Woodville and then Elizabeth plants for 35 years - would be very saddened to see what is happening there today.

Yes , great folk, resilient, hard working, not a lot of time for politicians of any shade. Easter and XMAS was always a wipeout based on home made schnapps and other nasty liquors.
Comatose on the couch by 3 every time.

Mick_Marsh
1st October 2015, 11:58 AM
Texas county sues Volkswagen over air quality after diesel-emissions scandal - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-01/texas-county-sues-volkswagen-over-diesel-emissions-scandal/6818612)


ACCC investigates Volkswagen following emissions scandal - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-01/accc-turns-up-heat-on-volkswagen-following-emissions-scandal/6819196)

DiscoMick
8th October 2015, 12:29 PM
Volkswagen needs over a year to fix all faulty cars, chief says - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-08/volkswagen-needs-over-a-year-to-fix-all-faulty-cars-chief-says/6836170)

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/08/volkswagen-broke-australian-law-says-major-projects-minister-paul-fletcher


I see 91,000 VWs sold in Australia are affected by the emissions scandal, including Golfs, Polos, 4WDs, Audis and Skodas.


We nearly bought a Polo, before deciding on a Mazda 2. Confirms my opinion we made the right choice, as the 2 is excellent in every way.

PAT303
8th October 2015, 01:29 PM
Volkswagen needs over a year to fix all faulty cars, chief says - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-08/volkswagen-needs-over-a-year-to-fix-all-faulty-cars-chief-says/6836170)

Volkswagen broke Australian law, says major projects minister Paul Fletcher | Business | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/08/volkswagen-broke-australian-law-says-major-projects-minister-paul-fletcher)


I see 91,000 VWs sold in Australia are affected by the emissions scandal, including Golfs, Polos, 4WDs, Audis and Skodas.


We nearly bought a Polo, before deciding on a Mazda 2. Confirms my opinion we made the right choice, as the 2 is excellent in every way.

Really?,so Mazda has never had this trouble?,funny because a friend of mine sold his because the EGR and especially the DPF was a constant warranty repair and constantly put the vehicle into limp mode,just what his wife needed driving between Perth and Kalgoorlie. Pat

DiscoMick
8th October 2015, 03:39 PM
Really?,so Mazda has never had this trouble?,funny because a friend of mine sold his because the EGR and especially the DPF was a constant warranty repair and constantly put the vehicle into limp mode,just what his wife needed driving between Perth and Kalgoorlie. Pat

Interesting. Ours is the new model and so far hasn't put a foot wrong in 10,000 ks, so that's something to watch. Thanks for the heads-up.

PAT303
8th October 2015, 06:55 PM
Mick,online forums are your friend,Mazda have had some serious issue's,no different to VW,LR etc,the DPF burn off was the biggest issue,the heat generated was unbelievable. Pat

Eevo
8th October 2015, 09:17 PM
Mick,online forums are your friend,Mazda have had some serious issue's,no different to VW,LR etc,the DPF burn off was the biggest issue,the heat generated was unbelievable. Pat

our firetruck has one.
when we go to a grassfire, first thing we do is put out the one the DPF just started

joel0407
9th October 2015, 05:48 AM
I don't see what the big problem is. As far as I know there only a few states in the US where the they don't meet the standards required for emissions.

The rest of the world just got the same program but it wasn't needed to meet the emissions in the other countries.

What about Holden. They use a Bi-Model exhaust to meet noise emissions on the test but drive it out the door and give it a boot full and the exhaust opens up and ups the noise. Doesn't this cheat the tests as well?

I'm sure all manufactures do it. Maybe VW just upset the wrong media agent.

Happy Days.

Toxic_Avenger
9th October 2015, 06:05 AM
What about Holden. They use a Bi-Model exhaust to meet noise emissions on the test but drive it out the door and give it a boot full and the exhaust opens up and ups the noise. Doesn't this cheat the tests as well?

I'm sure all manufactures do it. Maybe VW just upset the wrong media agent.

Happy Days.

This has always confused me too.
The ADR's say (paraphrased, off memory) that you can't have any device that restricts or diverts the flow of exhaust.
Things like the 'varex' sports mufflers that allow you to divert exhaust gases with a butterfly valve to make the car louder / sportier at the push of a button are expressly prohibited. Not sure how GMH got away with it...

AndyG
9th October 2015, 07:25 AM
Only to be used off the public highway. i.e track day , :angel:

Tombie
9th October 2015, 09:18 AM
I really start to get annoyed with the media spin on this - "selling people faulty vehicles".

They're not "faulty" - they work just fine.. And no one that owns one is any the wiser..

They're "non compliant" that's all....

DiscoMick
9th October 2015, 09:45 AM
I really start to get annoyed with the media spin on this - "selling people faulty vehicles".

They're not "faulty" - they work just fine.. And no one that owns one is any the wiser..

They're "non compliant" that's all....



If they don't meet the emissions standards then they're faulty. The fact that the engine runs OK doesn't make them roadworthy. Technically, they are unroadworthy.


I suspect many of the vehicles running around with engine chip upgrades would also fail an emissions test and be declared unroadworthy. What implications would a vehicle being unroadworthy have for insurance? Could insurers refuse to pay out on them?


In this case it seems all VW has to do is reprogram the software to reduce emissions, which could mean reducing power output I expect. I assume that right now their software engineers are trying to figure out how to have the best of both - meet the emissions standards without causing a significant power loss. That would be why VW is saying it could take up to a year to reprogram all the vehicles.
I see 2011-2012 Amaroks sold in Oz are listed as being among those that have the defeat software.

Beery
9th October 2015, 10:01 AM
The numbskull journalists have blown it out of proportion in my opinion.
I'll presume the EGR valve is a big part of the emissions cheating method.
If so, the customer should be thankful for an engine that is more fuel efficient, reliable and long lasting.

The higher fuel consumption and the early onset of engine oil consumption caused by cylinder wear from oil contaminated by soot and fuel dilution from EGR and DPF would give a very poor net result for the emissions control systems.

Tombie
9th October 2015, 10:07 AM
Almost any vehicle over about 5 years old with a Cat, and on a petrol, with a Charcoal Canister will fail its emissions test...

With regards to remaps - all BAS maps will pass an MOT test for emissions - so are compliant in that regard... Most Piggy Back chips will not.

I still regard them (VW with Defeat) as non-compliant rather than faulty... The vehicle functions for the user as intended..

Roverlord off road spares
9th October 2015, 10:15 AM
German prosecutors are looking into VW now

PAT303
9th October 2015, 12:31 PM
So if the affected VW's have to be taken off the road because they are non compliant that means all the Tanaka air bag equipped vehicles have to be removed also because they are now non compliant under the same law?. Pat

PAT303
9th October 2015, 12:44 PM
If they don't meet the emissions standards then they're faulty. The fact that the engine runs OK doesn't make them roadworthy. Technically, they are unroadworthy.


I suspect many of the vehicles running around with engine chip upgrades would also fail an emissions test and be declared unroadworthy. What implications would a vehicle being unroadworthy have for insurance? Could insurers refuse to pay out on them?


In this case it seems all VW has to do is reprogram the software to reduce emissions, which could mean reducing power output I expect. I assume that right now their software engineers are trying to figure out how to have the best of both - meet the emissions standards without causing a significant power loss. That would be why VW is saying it could take up to a year to reprogram all the vehicles.
I see 2011-2012 Amaroks sold in Oz are listed as being among those that have the defeat software.

The effect the software has on emissions means the motors are in lay mans terms Euro 4 instead of Euro 5,they aren't pollution spewing baby seal killers as made out by the media,the bimbo's that are complaining about being duped because their vehicles are killing baby seals should get off their lazy arse's and ride a bike. Pat

JDNSW
9th October 2015, 12:48 PM
As I understand it, the emissions that the software fudges the testing for are only at that low a level for the USA and possibly Europe. Certainly not Australia.

The situation in Australia is that the type approval for the engine was given on the basis of it passing a complete set of tests, which it now appears, has been only managed by software to modify the vehicle performance during testing.

This probably means that the whole set of tests is invalid, and will need to be repeated without this coding, and probably will require modifications to pass the tests (with reduced performance and fuel economy, and increased CO2 emissions). For Australia, I expect the only change required will be new software. My brother, owner of a diesel Passat in the USA, thinks the cost for his car will exceed $4,000 and involve a lot of new hardware, and result in much higher urea consumption.

But the other side of things is that VW Australia has for several years been selling cars, ostensibly meeting certain emission standards, knowing that they deliberately do not meet these standards.

I suspect that lying in your statements about the standard of the cars you are applying for approval for carries very severe penalties, and is almost certainly a serious criminal offence. There are virtually certain to be significant financial penalties, as well as the cost of recalling a lot of cars, and if the individuals responsible can be identified, then they will face significant gaol time. Quite possibly after serving time in Germany and the USA! Some courts may follow the idea that the directors are responsible and try and lock them up. Saves trying to track down just who was responsible.

John

DiscoMick
9th October 2015, 12:56 PM
Yeah, lying to get approval for a vehicle is going to attract significant penalties and goal time, I expect. Governments don't accept that - nor should they.

PAT303
9th October 2015, 02:50 PM
Both GM and Toybota lied about their faulty fuel systems and accelerators and both these faults caused the injury and deaths of many many people and both received fines much lower than what VW are facing,the only difference is they both manufacture vehicles in America were's VW's are imported. Pat

PAT303
9th October 2015, 03:02 PM
Yeah, lying to get approval for a vehicle is going to attract significant penalties and goal time, I expect. Governments don't accept that - nor should they.

And how is that different to Toybota lowering the average weight of passengers in regard to the 200 series to keep it under it's GVM or Mazda lying about the BT50's payload and towing ability that takes it over it's combined total mass as two examples?.Shouldn't they also suffer the same fate?. Pat

JDNSW
9th October 2015, 03:26 PM
I suspect both governments and courts are likely to see deliberate circumvention of tests as something more serious than denying that faults were inadvertently incorporated in vehicles, or even being misleading about weights, towing capability etc.

John

DiscoMick
9th October 2015, 03:52 PM
And how is that different to Toybota lowering the average weight of passengers in regard to the 200 series to keep it under it's GVM or Mazda lying about the BT50's payload and towing ability that takes it over it's combined total mass as two examples?.Shouldn't they also suffer the same fate?. Pat
I wouldn't argue with you about the other issues you mentioned, but I don't think they are as clear as deliberate lying.
Saying that your vehicle meets an emissions standard, and then admitting it doesn't, is very clear-cut.

Don't forget its not just the government they've lied to, they've also lied to their 91,000 customers too by selling them something which we now know didn't meet the required standards for being roadworthy. We almost bought a Polo (before deciding on the Mazda 2) - we assumed the Polo met all required standards in Australia. Now we know it wouldn't have, so VW lied to us.

Blknight.aus
9th October 2015, 04:32 PM
I really start to get annoyed with the media spin on this - "selling people faulty vehicles".

They're not "faulty" - they work just fine.. And no one that owns one is any the wiser..

They're "non compliant" that's all....
Agree

If they don't meet the emissions standards then they're faulty.
No, if its functioning as designed its not faulty. the problem is that it was never designed to meet the required standard.



I still regard them (VW with Defeat) as non-compliant rather than faulty... The vehicle functions for the user as intended..
yep it works exactly as designed its just the design is non compliant with the regs.



If it was a case of a "fault" then VW would be able to get out of it by claiming that it wasnt something they did deliberately but something that was out of their control therefore there was no willing deceit. Its pretty hard to wriggle out of it when it dozens of lines of code in a computer that all have to be written just right so that an exact set of conditions produces an exact set of results

Tombie
9th October 2015, 04:40 PM
Fix the second quote - it wasn't me :)

AndyG
9th October 2015, 05:06 PM
It would appear VW defence is it was done by rogue employees, without authorisation, think certain bank and financial advisers.

So they will claim VW corporate is a victim too.

Probably some nice bonuses at stake for meeting the emissions targets

AndyG
9th October 2015, 05:09 PM
Yeah, lying to get approval for a vehicle is going to attract significant penalties and goal time, I expect. Governments don't accept that - nor should they.

Be nice if governments couldbejailed for false promises, oh that's right they are exempt :mad:

Blknight.aus
9th October 2015, 05:46 PM
Fix the second quote - it wasn't me :)

very observant, the second quote wasnt you, it was discomick no need to fix it.

PAT303
9th October 2015, 06:32 PM
I wouldn't argue with you about the other issues you mentioned, but I don't think they are as clear as deliberate lying.
Saying that your vehicle meets an emissions standard, and then admitting it doesn't, is very clear-cut.

Don't forget its not just the government they've lied to, they've also lied to their 91,000 customers too by selling them something which we now know didn't meet the required standards for being roadworthy. We almost bought a Polo (before deciding on the Mazda 2) - we assumed the Polo met all required standards in Australia. Now we know it wouldn't have, so VW lied to us.

How many Japanese vehicles do you see WITHOUT suspension upgrades?,the manufacturers say the vehicles can carry X load or tow X amount but they know the vehicles can't,that is very clear-cut and is no different to what VW did.Lastly the Oz vehicles do meet Oz standards,they don't meet Californian standards which are only relevant in California. Pat

AndyG
10th October 2015, 03:29 AM
Is part of the problem that manufacturer claims, and not only vehicles are accepted on face value and not tested, even randomly. For example dodgy electrical cable and fascia material.

It would be interesting to see some double cabs loaded to the max pass the same tests a modified vehicle goes through.

PhilipA
10th October 2015, 10:04 AM
How many Japanese vehicles do you see WITHOUT suspension upgrades?,
I think maybe this could have the words "privately owned" added.

I would think that 100% of company vehicles and rental vehicles are stock, and they usually do the job they are designed for. And that is probably the majority of them on the road.

Altered suspension is often a fashion accessory .

I will be interested to see when the first car magazine or journalist tests a reprogrammed VW against a fiddled one to see what the effect of the changes are.
Will it be slower? Will it use more fuel?

If the US figures of 40 TIMES the allowed NOx are true then it is hard to see how the engines could meet Euro 4 Vs 5.

It seems this all stems from VW arrogance and unwillingness to buy the Mercedes technology.

All the journos should be embarrassed by all their adoration of VW performance and criticism of the "low outputs " of Japanese diesels. He who laughs last laughs longest.
Regards Philip A

Blknight.aus
10th October 2015, 10:41 AM
it doesnt take much to blow the Oxides of Nitrogen figures around.

just as an exmple dropping the total amount of fuel but injecting it earlier will change it but doing that costs HP and torque (there are other things that you can play with as well like the EGR settings). Excusing oversimplification, Dropping power to favor emissions in a test environment that doesn't factor an "X amount of Y per HP Per Z of GVM" just a "must only produce X amount of Y per Liter of engine displacement" while operating under operating condition set G isnt going to be noticed. It'd be a stretch but I reckon you could just about tweak and aftercare a tdi300 or isuzu 4bd1 to pass the static tests the yanks use But I wouldn't want to be driving it in that configuration.

Slunnie
10th October 2015, 10:50 AM
With the cheat device, the VW's met the emissions target claims didn't they? But these are just not achieved on the road?

Most manufacturers have fuel consumption claims that seem to be unachievable except in test conditions don't they?

VW are not so different.

At least they are one of the few companies that publish performance figures that can be matched by anybody on any day in any of their cars which is unlike most. I've seen numerous tests where even on a cool day with a rubbered up track numerous manufacturers cant get cars anywhere near claimed 0-100's and 400m times.

simmo
10th October 2015, 11:32 AM
The thing is VWs still give fantastic fuel consumption don't they? My daughters Polo gets about 5.5 i think, over 40 mpg.

That's the real world benefit, less fuel consumption means less pollution.
Look at the "combined cycle" urban and highway fuel consumption for most of the modern diesel cars. Its between 5-7.5 l /100 kms. ( 38 to 56 miles per gallon).
Twenty years ago that type of fuel economy was motorcycle country. My estimation is we probably getting 50-60% more miles for every gallon than 20 years ago, a remarkable achievement.

The Americans are indignant but they often drive big pick up trucks with V8 & even V10 engines . If they were really serious about it they would tax cars according to their emmisions. ( guaranteed vote looser)

On the mater of the Australian design rules , its a racket to protect the Australian motor importers and dealers. Are we so arrogant that we think motor maker need to make cars to our rules? There's something special about us? A RHD Mercedes, VW, Pugoet, Toyota needs to be specially modified for us? It's an artificial barrier to free trade in vehicles, that makes our vehicles more expensive.

I had to laugh when i wanted to import my 2001 Vespa PX 200, from Singapore "no can do" doesn't comply with the ADRs.

Like yeh, Piaggio made 5 million of them and sold them in every country in the world, for 40 years, but mine doesn't comply to the ADR.
Same with a RHD Defender, sure landrover make special ones just for Australia. :)

My Moto guzzi V7 classic astounded the Americans for value, it was in the dealerships for sale at less than 9000 USD. In Australia 14,000 $A, at the time when the aussie dollar was worth more than the USD. How come?

The sooner we adopt a common emission and design rules with other big RHD markets like the UK, Singapore, India, this monopoly can be broken. there'll be no obstical to importing our own vehicles and applying the 10 % GST. Rant over, :) simmo

PAT303
10th October 2015, 05:32 PM
I think maybe this could have the words "privately owned" added.

I would think that 100% of company vehicles and rental vehicles are stock, and they usually do the job they are designed for. And that is probably the majority of them on the road.

Altered suspension is often a fashion accessory .

I will be interested to see when the first car magazine or journalist tests a reprogrammed VW against a fiddled one to see what the effect of the changes are.
Will it be slower? Will it use more fuel?

If the US figures of 40 TIMES the allowed NOx are true then it is hard to see how the engines could meet Euro 4 Vs 5.

It seems this all stems from VW arrogance and unwillingness to buy the Mercedes technology.

All the journos should be embarrassed by all their adoration of VW performance and criticism of the "low outputs " of Japanese diesels. He who laughs last laughs longest.
Regards Philip A

All mine vehicles have the suspension replaced,I've never had one that didn't.Have you got any independently sourced emission figures from ''low output'' Japanese diesels?. Pat

PAT303
10th October 2015, 05:39 PM
With the cheat device, the VW's met the emissions target claims didn't they? But these are just not achieved on the road?

Most manufacturers have fuel consumption claims that seem to be unachievable except in test conditions don't they?

VW are not so different.

At least they are one of the few companies that publish performance figures that can be matched by anybody on any day in any of their cars which is unlike most. I've seen numerous tests where even on a cool day with a rubbered up track numerous manufacturers cant get cars anywhere near claimed 0-100's and 400m times.

Eggxacly,No vehicle will meet the emission standards,fuel economy standards or performance standards simply because you can put 5 different people in the very same car and get 5 different results,the fact the cars aren't tested on the road,they are tested on a track or on a rolling dyno just makes the results more bogus. Pat

PAT303
10th October 2015, 05:42 PM
The thing is VWs still give fantastic fuel consumption don't they? My daughters Polo gets about 5.5 i think, over 40 mpg.

That's the real world benefit, less fuel consumption means less pollution.
Look at the "combined cycle" urban and highway fuel consumption for most of the modern diesel cars. Its between 5-7.5 l /100 kms. ( 38 to 56 miles per gallon).
Twenty years ago that type of fuel economy was motorcycle country. My estimation is we probably getting 50-60% more miles for every gallon than 20 years ago, a remarkable achievement.

The Americans are indignant but they often drive big pick up trucks with V8 & even V10 engines . If they were really serious about it they would tax cars according to their emmisions. ( guaranteed vote looser)

On the mater of the Australian design rules , its a racket to protect the Australian motor importers and dealers. Are we so arrogant that we think motor maker need to make cars to our rules? There's something special about us? A RHD Mercedes, VW, Pugoet, Toyota needs to be specially modified for us? It's an artificial barrier to free trade in vehicles, that makes our vehicles more expensive.

I had to laugh when i wanted to import my 2001 Vespa PX 200, from Singapore "no can do" doesn't comply with the ADRs.

Like yeh, Piaggio made 5 million of them and sold them in every country in the world, for 40 years, but mine doesn't comply to the ADR.
Same with a RHD Defender, sure landrover make special ones just for Australia. :)

My Moto guzzi V7 classic astounded the Americans for value, it was in the dealerships for sale at less than 9000 USD. In Australia 14,000 $A, at the time when the aussie dollar was worth more than the USD. How come?

The sooner we adopt a common emission and design rules with other big RHD markets like the UK, Singapore, India, this monopoly can be broken. there'll be no obstical to importing our own vehicles and applying the 10 % GST. Rant over, :) simmo

Simmo,VW only failed the Californian emissions test,they pass everywhere else.Like I posted earlier,how can a VW that uses 5-6ltres per 100 fail when a Yank motor burning 20+ passes?,makes no sense to me. Pat

scarry
10th October 2015, 06:06 PM
Simmo,VW only failed the Californian emissions test,they pass everywhere else.Like I posted earlier,how can a VW that uses 5-6ltres per 100 fail when a Yank motor burning 20+ passes?,makes no sense to me. Pat

Then why do they say 100,000 vehicles are affected here?

Did the vehicles not fail any tests here,but they admit the emissions figures supplied are incorrect?

So they have supplied the wrong figures for all these vehicles?

Maybe many VW owners and their legal representatives are hoping for some $$.

VW seem to be taking things pretty seriously,admitting they are in the wrong,and are saying they have budgeted $10B for rectification to the effected vehicles.

Slunnie
10th October 2015, 06:16 PM
Then why do they say 100,000 vehicles are affected here?

Did the vehicles not fail any tests here,but they admit the emissions figures supplied are incorrect?

So they have supplied the wrong figures for all these vehicles?

Maybe many VW owners and their legal representatives are hoping for some $$.

VW seem to be taking things pretty seriously,admitting they are in the wrong,and are saying they have budgeted $10B for rectification to the effected vehicles.
As I understand it, all of the affected vehicles have that software, although in Australia it is inactive. I understand the recall is to remove the cheat part of the program.

ozscott
11th October 2015, 07:22 AM
Getting them back to compliant vehicles will have an adverse effect on economy and performance. The owners will then be driving quite different vehciles to the ones they signed up for/test drove. And i suspect used VW values will drop generally given the scandal .....i can see why class actions are kicking off all over the world. I heard that German prosecutors raided VW headquarters yesterday.

Cheers

DiscoMick
11th October 2015, 08:00 AM
Australia is on Euro 4 and progressively moving to Euro 5/6 by 2018. I'm not sure of all the details of what that means, but I believe it sets limits of emissions per km or parts per million for various types of emissions. There are different standards for light and heavy duty diesel engines, so a truck and a car have different standards to meet.
Maybe someone who understands it better can explain more.
As I understood it, the vehicles were sold after being tested and meeting certain standards under test conditions, but once on the road the software reverted to dirtier settings. VW Australia says on its Facebook site that the 1.6 and 2.0 Tdi engines may not meet the required emissions standards when driven on the road and it will recall 97,000 vehicles, once the software fix is available from VW HQ. So, if VW Australia says its vehicles may not meet the required standard, then that's a clear admission the problem is real here in this market. If the vehicles actually met the Australian standard, then I'm sure they would be saying that loudly and clearly, but they're not - they're saying there is a problem here.
As a buyer of a new vehicle, I expect the vehicle I buy to meet the standards that are legally required in that market and which the company claims it meets. If it actually doesn't meet the standard it is claimed to meet, then that's fraud, I think. Its like any consumer product - the manufacturer says it will do X, but if it actually won't do X, then that's false marketing and the consumer is entitled to a refund.
I can understand why VW buyers are joining class actions. As a consumer they've apparently been dudded. Also, as humans on Planet Earth, they've been denied the chance to buy a vehicle which contributes to cleaner air. I don't want to sound all environmental, but clean air is important, both to the people suffering lung diseases and to the future of humanity.
VW has been exposed as a bad corporate citizen and its reputation has taken a BIG hit.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

JDNSW
11th October 2015, 08:15 AM
......
VW has been exposed as a bad corporate citizen and its reputation has taken a BIG hit.

.....


I think that as far as Australia is concerned, this hits the nail on the head. While they are likely to be hit by fines here, and possibly see some people arrested, the major effect here will be their reputation. (Although, to be honest, it was already a bit shaky for other reasons.)

Owners are likely to try and sue them in class actions, but I am not sure how successful this will be. The USA is where they are in most trouble. In Australia they are a niche market product - in the USA they have manufacturing facilities in Tennessee with a design capacity of over half a million cars a year, and a significant market share plus exports.

John

PAT303
11th October 2015, 10:19 AM
Getting them back to compliant vehicles will have an adverse effect on economy and performance. The owners will then be driving quite different vehciles to the ones they signed up for/test drove. And i suspect used VW values will drop generally given the scandal .....i can see why class actions are kicking off all over the world. I heard that German prosecutors raided VW headquarters yesterday.

Cheers

Do you have proof of that?. Pat

crackers
11th October 2015, 10:32 AM
Chance of some cheap V Dubs on the second hand market soon?

PAT303
11th October 2015, 10:33 AM
Australia is on Euro 4 and progressively moving to Euro 5/6 by 2018. I'm not sure of all the details of what that means, but I believe it sets limits of emissions per km or parts per million for various types of emissions. There are different standards for light and heavy duty diesel engines, so a truck and a car have different standards to meet.
Maybe someone who understands it better can explain more.
As I understood it, the vehicles were sold after being tested and meeting certain standards under test conditions, but once on the road the software reverted to dirtier settings. VW Australia says on its Facebook site that the 1.6 and 2.0 Tdi engines may not meet the required emissions standards when driven on the road and it will recall 97,000 vehicles, once the software fix is available from VW HQ. So, if VW Australia says its vehicles may not meet the required standard, then that's a clear admission the problem is real here in this market. If the vehicles actually met the Australian standard, then I'm sure they would be saying that loudly and clearly, but they're not - they're saying there is a problem here.
As a buyer of a new vehicle, I expect the vehicle I buy to meet the standards that are legally required in that market and which the company claims it meets. If it actually doesn't meet the standard it is claimed to meet, then that's fraud, I think. Its like any consumer product - the manufacturer says it will do X, but if it actually won't do X, then that's false marketing and the consumer is entitled to a refund.
I can understand why VW buyers are joining class actions. As a consumer they've apparently been dudded. Also, as humans on Planet Earth, they've been denied the chance to buy a vehicle which contributes to cleaner air. I don't want to sound all environmental, but clean air is important, both to the people suffering lung diseases and to the future of humanity.
VW has been exposed as a bad corporate citizen and its reputation has taken a BIG hit.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

You have posted the same thing numerous times Mick,every Asian built 4wd would fall under ''not fit for purpose'' and the owner could demand their money back.VW should grow a pair and accept the fault and repay all the owners,then take legal action themselves and take all the others makers down with them,I bet the matter would go away very quickly. Pat

ozscott
11th October 2015, 10:39 AM
Do you have proof of that?. Pat

Assuming you mean the raid - see Volkswagen: German prosecutors raid VW headquarters over emissions cheating scandal - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-09/german-prosecutors-raid-volkswagen-offices/6839542)

As to reduction in power and economy - well VW were not removing/reducing emission control off for road use in a fraudulent way for the fun of it...polution control throttles power and economy.

Cheers

Tombie
11th October 2015, 10:40 AM
Capitalist delusion - I can buy more new stuff and be environmentally friendly.

Best example I observed recently...
A sporting company who manufacturer their shoes using a "green" process.
Yet their shoes rarely last beyond 9-12 months of average use...
Want to be green? Use green processes which produce a long lasting product.

But that won't happen because sales and margins will fall...


Government emissions targets are driving engine complexity to ridiculous lengths while "consumer power" demand is driving ever increasing power outputs.

The reality is so unpalatable to the public that few will embrace what is required to be truly green....

cuppabillytea
11th October 2015, 10:45 AM
Capitalist delusion - I can buy more new stuff and be environmentally friendly.

Best example I observed recently...
A sporting company who manufacturer their shoes using a "green" process.

Yet their shoes rarely last beyond 9-12 months of average use...

Want to be green? Use green processes which produce a long lasting product.

But that won't happen because sales and margins will fall...
Once again. spot on.

PAT303
11th October 2015, 11:02 AM
Assuming you mean the raid - see Volkswagen: German prosecutors raid VW headquarters over emissions cheating scandal - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-09/german-prosecutors-raid-volkswagen-offices/6839542)

As to reduction in power and economy - well VW were not removing/reducing emission control off for road use in a fraudulent way for the fun of it...polution control throttles power and economy.

Cheers

So you can drive along in your vehicle and tell when the pollution gear is doing it's thing and when it isn't?,how much performance is lost?,how much extra fuel will the motor use?.I haven't as yet seen one piece of evidence to back up any claims made,just a lot of BS.As for the raid,nothing but the authorities showboating. Pat

PAT303
11th October 2015, 11:06 AM
Capitalist delusion - I can buy more new stuff and be environmentally friendly.

Best example I observed recently...
A sporting company who manufacturer their shoes using a "green" process.
Yet their shoes rarely last beyond 9-12 months of average use...
Want to be green? Use green processes which produce a long lasting product.

But that won't happen because sales and margins will fall...


Government emissions targets are driving engine complexity to ridiculous lengths while "consumer power" demand is driving ever increasing power outputs.

The reality is so unpalatable to the public that few will embrace what is required to be truly green....

Steady up Tombie,this is the internet age,you can't contaminate a discussion with facts :p. Pat

joel0407
11th October 2015, 02:12 PM
Then why do they say 100,000 vehicles are affected here?

Did the vehicles not fail any tests here,but they admit the emissions figures supplied are incorrect?

So they have supplied the wrong figures for all these vehicles?

Maybe many VW owners and their legal representatives are hoping for some $$.

VW seem to be taking things pretty seriously,admitting they are in the wrong,and are saying they have budgeted $10B for rectification to the effected vehicles.

It's not that they don't pass the emission requirements of the rest of the world. It's just that they lied. Even the lie is dubious. They say it passes. Does it really matter if they lie how much it passes by?

PAT303
11th October 2015, 03:36 PM
Last week a number of vehicles were rigged up with emission monitoring equipment and driven around London streets,a motorway and in the country,these were normal road cars driven on normal roads by normal people,guess which make gave the lowest levels of emissions?,no prize for guessing the correct answer;). Pat

crackers
11th October 2015, 03:38 PM
Last week a number of vehicles were rigged up with emission monitoring equipment and driven around London streets,a motorway and in the country,these were normal road cars driven on normal roads by normal people,guess which make gave the lowest levels of emissions?,no prize for guessing the correct answer;). Pat

Lada diesel truck? :D

joel0407
11th October 2015, 03:48 PM
Last week a number of vehicles were rigged up with emission monitoring equipment and driven around London streets,a motorway and in the country,these were normal road cars driven on normal roads by normal people,guess which make gave the lowest levels of emissions?,no prize for guessing the correct answer;). Pat

Keen to read the story. Do you have a link?

Blknight.aus
11th October 2015, 04:02 PM
So you can drive along in your vehicle and tell when the pollution gear is doing it's thing and when it isn't?,how much performance is lost?,how much extra fuel will the motor use?.I haven't as yet seen one piece of evidence to back up any claims made,just a lot of BS.As for the raid,nothing but the authorities showboating. Pat

if you've ever driven the early toyota coasters yes you can. I've been told but never personally driven one, that it was similar with the early patrols with the same kind of tech on them once the engines were up to operating temperature the power cut back and when they were doing a DPF burn it was even worse. And if it didnt think it did the DPF burn correctly then it stuck into limp home mode and you had, to quote one owner, "About as much power as fozzy."

The logic I was quoted was that while the engine was in warm up there was no requirement for it to pass emissions as the emissions tests were specified for the engine at normal operating temperature.

ozscott
11th October 2015, 04:29 PM
Tombie I agree. I have saved more trees by keeping my 95 D1 and 02 D2 (so 33 years of motoring between them) on the road than buying multiple clean cars in the meantime.

Cheers

ozscott
11th October 2015, 04:33 PM
Pat, in the 80's lots of motors suffered terribly when pollution gear was applied for the next year model. Again why would VW go to such (nefarious) lengths to turn it off or reduce its application when the vehicle is not on the test bed,...it is a bit naive to think it would make no difference.

See for example the discussion here about torque

http://www.wired.com/2015/09/vw-owners-arent-going-like-fixes-diesels/

Cheers

PAT303
11th October 2015, 05:26 PM
if you've ever driven the early toyota coasters yes you can. I've been told but never personally driven one, that it was similar with the early patrols with the same kind of tech on them once the engines were up to operating temperature the power cut back and when they were doing a DPF burn it was even worse. And if it didnt think it did the DPF burn correctly then it stuck into limp home mode and you had, to quote one owner, "About as much power as fozzy."

The logic I was quoted was that while the engine was in warm up there was no requirement for it to pass emissions as the emissions tests were specified for the engine at normal operating temperature.

We are talking about brand new modern vehicles that actually go,not some heap of **** coaster,and yes I have unfortunately spent many hours behind the wheel of Toyota's mighty Coaster van,and many more swearing at the heaps of **** when the boat anchor 1HZ's and 3B's or what ever they were called overheated,It took Hino repowering before coasters got enough welly to safely overtake mobility scooters or a kid on a BMX. Pat

PAT303
11th October 2015, 05:27 PM
Pat, in the 80's lots of motors suffered terribly when pollution gear was applied for the next year model. Again why would VW go to such (nefarious) lengths to turn it off or reduce its application when the vehicle is not on the test bed,...it is a bit naive to think it would make no difference.

See for example the discussion here about torque

VW Owners Aren't Going to Like the Fixes for Their Diesels | WIRED (http://www.wired.com/2015/09/vw-owners-arent-going-like-fixes-diesels/)

Cheers

The 80's were 35 years ago. :D. Pat

PAT303
11th October 2015, 05:33 PM
Keen to read the story. Do you have a link?

I found it researching a totally different topic,the Audi and VW were 4 times over the allowed level,BMW-Merc etc were 5 times give or take and the Mazda was 14 times,thats one four times over the allowed limit,where's MIck :o. I would love to see it done here,I would pay to see Nissan and Toyota's results as well as Land Rovers. Pat

roverrescue
11th October 2015, 06:42 PM
Sooooooo Pat
You are saying that no-one can keep to a mandated limit
Soooooo either the limits are shiite or the vehicle manufacturers are having a lend saying that they "meet limits"

I can guarantee you that the money will be that the manufacturers will have to change not the limits

VW will be up to their necks in it but only just next to the other makers

Who exactly was it that let the manufacturers tell the regulators they meet the limits?

I can see all emission control will be up for an overview in the next 12-24 months

s

Blknight.aus
11th October 2015, 06:51 PM
We are talking about brand new modern vehicles that actually go,not some heap of **** coaster,and yes I have unfortunately spent many hours behind the wheel of Toyota's mighty Coaster van,and many more swearing at the heaps of **** when the boat anchor 1HZ's and 3B's or what ever they were called overheated,It took Hino repowering before coasters got enough welly to safely overtake mobility scooters or a kid on a BMX. Pat

I was actually talking about 2010-11 models which, if I recall correctly, also covers the same year group as some of the VW vehicles that are suspect, but if thats not modern enough for you, would a G wagon be modern enough for you?

same thing, try holding one of those up just under the limiter with a full load on when it decides that it needs to clear the DPF.

PAT303
11th October 2015, 08:19 PM
I was actually talking about 2010-11 models which, if I recall correctly, also covers the same year group as some of the VW vehicles that are suspect, but if thats not modern enough for you, would a G wagon be modern enough for you?

same thing, try holding one of those up just under the limiter with a full load on when it decides that it needs to clear the DPF.

The last one I drove was a late model,I can't remember feeling the loss of power,even the Isuzu's which had chronic DPF and EGR problems still drove normally until they dropped into limp mode,I'd say there was bigger issue's at hand. Pat

PAT303
11th October 2015, 08:24 PM
Sooooooo Pat
You are saying that no-one can keep to a mandated limit
Soooooo either the limits are shiite or the vehicle manufacturers are having a lend saying that they "meet limits"

I can guarantee you that the money will be that the manufacturers will have to change not the limits

VW will be up to their necks in it but only just next to the other makers

Who exactly was it that let the manufacturers tell the regulators they meet the limits?

I can see all emission control will be up for an overview in the next 12-24 months

s

You need to remember that emissions tests like economy tests are done under controlled conditions,not under real world conditions,the fact that VAG,Ford,Merc,BMW,Mazda etc all failed means that yes when driven on the road in real world conditions all the cars failed the emission tests.A bit more digging and Euro 6 vehicles like the Ford Focus have also failed the real world test. Pat

PAT303
11th October 2015, 08:41 PM
I was actually talking about 2010-11 models which, if I recall correctly, also covers the same year group as some of the VW vehicles that are suspect, but if thats not modern enough for you, would a G wagon be modern enough for you?

same thing, try holding one of those up just under the limiter with a full load on when it decides that it needs to clear the DPF.

Rereading this,your talking about a separate thing all together,if the DPF needs to burn off it will reduce power,thats because the filter itself is choked up and needs to clear itself,the motor actually pumps raw diesel down the exhaust to the DPF to burn off the particulates,all of that will happen to any vehicle if it's driven short distances,normally a light comes on telling you to drive for another 20 minutes or so. Pat

roverrescue
11th October 2015, 08:54 PM
I understand this Pat - but all you are doing is emphasising the stupidity of the current setup

Lets say Mr Surgeon just has to tell Medicare that they "CAN" do the right operation under controlled conditions but then doesnt actually do the correct operation the rest of the time - I think patients might have problem with that...

Either the mandated limits need changing or the testing needs changing

And my guess is the status will not continue.

Manufacturers will be held to account.

S

PAT303
11th October 2015, 10:50 PM
Yes the limits need to be lifted or we'll be driving vehicles with 900cc engines. Pat

joel0407
12th October 2015, 08:05 AM
Yes the limits need to be lifted or we'll be driving vehicles with 900cc engines. Pat

No. Just the limits need to change. They have lower limits for 900cc engines.

That was part of the reason Subaru went to 2.5L motors in the WRX and a few other of their vehicles. The 2.5L engine was allowed to produce more pollution. Even though it generated more than the 2L motor the extra 0.5L put it up a level on the allowable limit and it passed. The 2L was still considered to be the better motor that would handle more boost.

Happy Days

Eevo
12th October 2015, 08:08 AM
No. Just the limits need to change. They have lower limits for 900cc engines.

That was part of the reason Subaru went to 2.5L motors in the WRX and a few other of their vehicles. The 2.5L engine was allowed to produce more pollution. Even though it generated more than the 2L motor the extra 0.5L put it up a level on the allowable limit and it passed. The 2L was still considered to be the better motor that would handle more boost.

Happy Days

ah, is that why.
the 2l is a great engine

joel0407
12th October 2015, 08:46 AM
Yep. And the 2l was still sold in country's with such dumb standards

Tombie
12th October 2015, 08:51 AM
I think you'll find the limits are arbitrary limits set by some shiny bum sitting in an office with absolutely no idea about the engineering required or the detriment to engine longevity..

Bureaucratic idiocy is rife at all levels...

Another example is Shipping.. Our Cape Vessels are allowed to run bunker fuel until a certain parallel, upon which they must switch to clean diesel to reduce emissions... Aren't we all on the same planet here?

roverrescue
12th October 2015, 02:30 PM
But Tombie bureaucratic idiocy accounts for probably 30% of Australias' GDP!!!
If we got rid of all the people who "do" bureaucracy what else would they do?

Steve

cuppabillytea
12th October 2015, 03:31 PM
But Tombie bureaucratic idiocy accounts for probably 30% of Australias' GDP!!!
If we got rid of all the people who "do" bureaucracy what else would they do?

Steve
I'm told the Sharks need a good feed. :wasntme:

cripesamighty
12th October 2015, 03:46 PM
Sharks probably won't eat them out of professional courtesy.....

DiscoMick
15th October 2015, 12:03 PM
So apparently VW has admitted to a second device, apart from the defeat cheat, on some of its vehicles to get around emission control laws, but it's not clear yet if it is illegal.
Also interesting that the Americans have actually frozen VW imports on the docks until they get to the bottom of this. Imagine how that is killing VW dealers. Have any VW imports been stopped into Australia? I haven't read that.


Volkswagen: secret emissions tool in 2016 cars is separate from 'defeat' cheat | Business | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/15/volkswagen-secret-emissions-tool-in-2016-cars-is-separate-from-defeat)

TerryO
20th October 2015, 06:17 AM
VW has removed from sale several of their more popular diesel models here in Australia because of this scam. If this goes on for much longer then it's hard to see how they can come out if this intact without serious amounts of German government money to keep them afloat.

superquag
20th October 2015, 12:28 PM
OdD that no-one has picked up on those elephants wandering about in the room... such as perceived corporate honesty..- Anyone here want to buy a second-hand VW fitted with a DSG transmission ? Or a certain brand of oriental vehicle that is "suspected" of having a dodgy 'fly-by-wire' accelerator ?

Or - hypocritally for the Americans, one product of GM and FORD respectively, being 'Unsafe and any speed' / prone to accident-induced fuel-fed fire... The Pinto Fire Controversy - HowStuffWorks (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/1971-1980-ford-pinto12.htm)

That reference is educational, as it puts numbers onto what a human life may be (legally-speaking) worth, as against the co$t required to mitigate the problem, maybe even solving it totally.

On the other hand, Big Business is responding to outside pressures... One might wonder how realistic - or fair- are the continually stricter pollution rules on cars... Pollution during a TEST is one thing, Real Life is another.
- The VW passed the TEST... :angel: :wasntme:

DiscoMick
20th October 2015, 02:02 PM
Yes, there are definitely big questions here about the corporate culture within VW. If some people in a company think its OK to deliberately cheat government laws designed to keep the air we breathe clean, then something is seriously wrong with the corporate culture.
I've been on boards of directors. My role was to test the status quo, ask hard questions and ensure the company's executives were leading it in ways which would ensure its future.
Corporate culture starts at the top and works its way down so, even if the 20 VW board members didn't know about the cheat software, they are still ultimately responsible for overseeing a corporate culture in which some people thought cheating was OK.
As board members it was their role to prevent actions being taken which, as we now know, are going to cost VW dearly, both in cash and, more importantly, in damage to its global reputation. VW could lose its position as the world's largest automaker because of this controversy. Over at Toyota, they must be quietly gleeful.
I bet all around the world now the directors of other vehicle manufacturers are interrogating their executives to make damm sure no-one else is using emissions cheating software. If I was one of those directors, that's exactly what I would be doing.
I thought this was a good opinion piece from a respected person:
BBC - Capital - The people who could (http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20151019-the-people-who-couldve-saved-vw-and-why-they-didnt)

Eevo
20th October 2015, 02:14 PM
then something is seriously wrong with the corporate culture.


they have the correct corporate culture.

shareholders first
everyone else second

BMKal
20th October 2015, 02:45 PM
they have the correct corporate culture.

shareholders first
everyone else second

I doubt the shareholders are going to thank them if the company goes under and the shareholders lose their investments. ;)

Ferret
20th October 2015, 02:46 PM
they have the correct corporate culture.

shareholders first
everyone else second

If what you say is true, how has the board put shareholder interest above everything else - by circumventing the law, trashing the reputation of the company, exposing the company to crippling law suits and ultimately destroying shareholder wealth?

I think they have actually failed shareholders, certainly not put them first.

Eevo
20th October 2015, 02:54 PM
I doubt the shareholders are going to thank them if the company goes under and the shareholders lose their investments. ;)
that wont happen.

1) they have punched the numbers.
the increased sales is more than the fine and lawsuits.

2) if not, the govt will bail them out

3) VW will be able to promote themselves as coming clean. mistakes were made, etc etc. and increase sales in the long run.

Tombie
20th October 2015, 02:56 PM
I think a few in here live in fantasy land... :angel::cool:

Eevo spelt it out.. Shareholders first, All else second...
Thats where most peoples super comes from.

Tombie
20th October 2015, 02:58 PM
Wont happen....

VW will quickly bounce back from this - offer up a patsy, become a good corporate citizen for a while...

And if they decide to play the game - will out all the other manufactures..

cuppabillytea
20th October 2015, 02:58 PM
True.................again.:)

Eevo
20th October 2015, 03:02 PM
lets tak this piece by piece.


- by circumventing the law,

the fine is small in comparison to the money made.
lots of big companies do it. including most of the top ten australian companies.



trashing the reputation of the company

with correct PR, VM will come out of this with a better reputation



exposing the company to crippling law suits and ultimately destroying shareholder wealth?


crippling, lol. the payout will be a drop in the ocean.




people are not rioting in the streets over this.
the govt has not taken existing cars off the road or banned the bad VW's from being driven.

BMKal
20th October 2015, 03:24 PM
I'm the first to agree that VW won't go under over this - though they will suffer some pretty serious financial impact in some markets, at least in the short term.

I also couldn't really give two hoots about "the issue" that a loud minority are all up in arms about. There's a new VW Amarok diesel out in the back yard at the moment, and I'd have no hesitation in buying one tomorrow if I needed a ute. ;)

But the point that I'm making is that, if the directors of the company knew that this practice was going on and were willing to take the risk of being caught out, with the subsequent financial / reputation losses that would occur - then they most definitely were not acting in the best interests of their shareholders. The head honcho has already been given the flick, and I'd say that more are likely to follow him.

DiscoMick
20th October 2015, 04:30 PM
they have the correct corporate culture.

shareholders first
everyone else second
I read that VW shares are down about 40%, so the shareholders won't be thankful for being made 40% poorer. If I was a VW shareholder I'd be breathing fire and demanding that heads roll.
Then there's a the huge hit to sales from all those affected vehicles not being able to be sold and being left sitting on the docks around the world, including Oz.
The company's reputation has also been trashed.
How many staff will be laid off because sales go down?
This will be a huge hit to VW.

Eevo
20th October 2015, 05:12 PM
I read that VW shares are down about 40%,

need to look at the long term value.
the drop is only to 2012 value
will recover quickly

DiscoMick
20th October 2015, 06:07 PM
need to look at the long term value.
the drop is only to 2012 value
will recover quickly

That depends on how VW handles this crisis. If they try to cover up they will be crucified by public opinion.

Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

Eevo
20th October 2015, 06:13 PM
That depends on how VW handles this crisis. If they try to cover up they will be crucified by public opinion.

i think they already came out n apologised.

AndyG
20th October 2015, 06:15 PM
Did people stop buying BP products after Horizon spill?

cuppabillytea
20th October 2015, 08:15 PM
Did people stop buying BP products after Horizon spill?

Good point Andy. VW have handled this pretty well I think. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, but with the right P R and some sacrificial head lopping, you can mitigate the damage.
VW shares might just be worth the punt.

joel0407
20th October 2015, 09:03 PM
I just bought 12 shares. I'm calling them The Dirty Dozen. It was just under $2500 worth. I don't need the money for a couple of years and I really think this has been blown way out of proportion. I just wish I could have got them the Tuesday after the news cam out, I would have made 30% gain already.

They've been hit hard in the media and that's been hard on share prices but it'll blow over soon enough. It'll help that the boss man stood down and the boss man from Porsche has come over to straighten things out. Porsche SE hold over 51% control over VW AG.

Happy Days

JDNSW
21st October 2015, 05:21 AM
Did people stop buying BP products after Horizon spill?

Not really relevant - oil does not carry trade marks from production to the pump - and downstream is one of the least profitable areas of the oil business.

The motor industry is the opposite - it is all about brand, and VW cannot simply sell their product as a commodity at wholesale level. And simply changing the label is rarely very successful, although this episode may see some of the labels which VW owns gain in popularity compared to the VW label.

The whole episode is almost certainly driven by a corporate culture that places far more value on this quarter's financials than it does in long term results, unfortunately very common today.

John

AndyG
21st October 2015, 05:59 AM
It's relevant in the context of Corporate Image and whether the typical consumer actually cares about Corporate image / ethics or do they just but the product with gives the best bang for buck.

If i was to buy a vehicle tomorrow VW would be on my short list,
Would i cross off GM and Toyota due to their appalling history in managing recalls, probably not, if i believed the product I wanted was ok.

Would i drive past BP and go to Caltex because of the Gulf disaster, no.

Would i fly certain low cost Asian Airlines, no way.

85 county
21st October 2015, 06:13 AM
and the other side of the coin is that.

VW come pre installed with an after market ecu, cool

10 years time the pre Cought you cars. will be worth more than the post cars

DiscoMick
21st October 2015, 06:16 AM
VW should survive and come back, but some of the mud will stick. Coporate image is important and they'll be known for cheating.
Buying their shares now should make money long term. You know what they say: buy when people are selling and sell when they're buying.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

AndyG
21st October 2015, 06:18 AM
But then reading this,
VW says rogue engineers, not executives, responsible for emissions scandal | Ars Technica (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/10/volkswagen-pulls-2016-diesel-lineup-from-us-market/)

VW has form, back in 1973 , so maybe their Corporate culture is sick, or the corporate memory failed,

Is there ANY manufacturer that can claim their vehicle emissions are ok in real world conditions, apart from Tesla.

AndyG
21st October 2015, 06:42 AM
and the other side of the coin is that.

VW come pre installed with an after market ecu, cool

10 years time the pre Cought you cars. will be worth more than the post cars

https://www.goapr.com/products/ecu_upgrade_20tdi.html

Got me thinking now

V8Ian
21st October 2015, 10:54 AM
Perhaps Mr Breech's valuation was accurate but premature. I would think that one should be able to salvage more than ten US cents though. ;)

DiscoMick
3rd November 2015, 11:56 AM
So, now the Americans are investigating Porsches and Audis fitted with a 3.0 litre TD to see if it also breached the emissions regulations. VW denies it.
How far will this scandal go?


Volkswagen emissions scandal widens to include larger, more expensive Porsche, Audi brands - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-03/vw-emissions-scadals-include-porches-audis/6907390)


I know some people play down the importance of breaching environmental laws, but its clear that governments and many people will not tolerate vehicles which spew out cancer-causing nitrous oxides and other pollutants, killing thousands of people every year - and why should they?


How long will it be before some government decides to subject vehicles to annual emissions tests as part of re-registration? Sounds far-fetched I know, but is it really? And that would be the end for at least some re-chipping/remapping companies, if vehicles fitted with their software failed emissions testing, I expect.

isuzurover
3rd November 2015, 12:33 PM
...
I know some people play down the importance of breaching environmental laws, but its clear that governments and many people will not tolerate vehicles which spew out cancer-causing nitrous oxides and other pollutants, killing thousands of people every year - and why should they?


How long will it be before some government decides to subject vehicles to annual emissions tests as part of re-registration? Sounds far-fetched I know, but is it really? And that would be the end for at least some re-chipping/remapping companies, if vehicles fitted with their software failed emissions testing, I expect.

You raise some important points. However to correct one part, NOx is not classified as a carcinogen. Diesel particulate is a group 1 carcinogen along with uranium, bacon, beer and everything on this list ( https://firstdogonthemoon.com.au/cartoons/2015/10/30/an-extensive-and-definitely-correct-list-of-everything-that-will-give-you-cancer/ ). NOx (NO + NO2) causes a range of acute and chronic (but non-cancer) health effects, and even at low levels has been linked to things as far ranging as diabetes and pre-eclampsia in pregnant women. It is also a serious atmospheric pollutant.

I think the first point is, than everyone with a remap and/or EGR deactivated will be emitting hundreds to thousands of times more NOx than emissions limits, and likely be over on other pollutants as well. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themself.

However the cost of a drive cycle emissions test is prohibitive, as it needs to be done on a dyno, and the equipment needed to accurately measure emissions to test against legislation (to the standard required for certification) is prohibitive. e.g. AFAIK only my lab and Orbital have such equipment in Western Australia. We are talking ~$300k in equipment, the most expensive being for (nano)particle counting as required under EURO 6.

Even in the UK/Europe, emissions testing during roadworthy inspections is usually limited to idle "sniff" testing and visible smoke. These tests usually only pick up sick or badly tuned engines.

Roadworthy inspectors are required to check that all emissions control equipment is fitted and (appears) to be in operable condition.

What would be cheaper and easier for regulators would be for them to mandate access to the software (maps/log files/tables, etc...). That way they could see evidence of changes and who performed them.

2015 model Teslas have wifi connections that allow the manufacturers to install updates remotely. I imagine this may be a feature of all cars in the future. Which opens a whole new realm of possibilities for regulation as well.

cuppabillytea
3rd November 2015, 03:20 PM
Perhaps Governments would be better off legislating to phase out the manufacture of Fossil Fuel powered vehicles all together and leave the remaining Fossilised Hydrocarbons in reserve for Plastics Production.
Testla have shown that an Electric Vehicle with the range and performance of a Petrol or Diesel is Just around the corner.
An Off Road Vehicle with 2, 4, or 6 Electric Motors would out perform any Oil Burner.
Cheers, Billy.

isuzurover
3rd November 2015, 03:33 PM
Perhaps Governments would be better off legislating to phase out the manufacture of Fossil Fuel powered vehicles all together and leave the remaining Fossilised Hydrocarbons in reserve for Plastics Production.
Testla have shown that an Electric Vehicle with the range and performance of a Petrol or Diesel is Just around the corner.
An Off Road Vehicle with 2, 4, or 6 Electric Motors would out perform any Oil Burner.
Cheers, Billy.

All council buses and other urban-only vehicles should already be electric, and probably will be soon(ish).

Unfortunately we are a long way off electric vehicles for any travel in rural areas. The UK already has an extensive network of charging stations but still they are not enough: https://transportevolved.com/2015/02/26/staff-car-report-at-70000-miles-2011-nissan-leaf-still-going-strong-gets-new-brake-pads/
We would need vehicles to start using standardised batteries, so service stations can have "swap and go" stations.

Diesel-electric military offroad vehicles have been around for a long time and work well. You automatically have the capability for 4 wheel diff locks and skid steer if needed. The advantage of a setup like this is the engine can operate across a much smaller range where it is more efficient.

cuppabillytea
3rd November 2015, 04:36 PM
All council buses and other urban-only vehicles should already be electric, and probably will be soon(ish).

Unfortunately we are a long way off electric vehicles for any travel in rural areas. The UK already has an extensive network of charging stations but still they are not enough: https://transportevolved.com/2015/02/26/staff-car-report-at-70000-miles-2011-nissan-leaf-still-going-strong-gets-new-brake-pads/
We would need vehicles to start using standardised batteries, so service stations can have "swap and go" stations.

Diesel-electric military offroad vehicles have been around for a long time and work well. You automatically have the capability for 4 wheel diff locks and skid steer if needed. The advantage of a setup like this is the engine can operate across a much smaller range where it is more efficient.
Yes. Swap and go would be the logical way to go. I suspect that if we are still a long way off it has as much to do with a lack of political will as it as it has within technological deficit. That's why I get peeved with all the regulation and policing of emissions. It's a bit like Paddy eating his prize Pig, limb by limb, because he doesn't want to eat it all at once. :o

Homestar
3rd November 2015, 05:40 PM
Other players in the electric vehicle market are coming - even Australian companies see this is the way forward. Been talking to a new company based in Melbourne that are looking at setting up a network of charging stations soon. Their technology is apparently world beating and they have been keeping a lid on what they do while patents, etc are sorted. They just ran a fully loaded bus from Melbourne to Sydney on one charge. I will be interested where they, and others go in the next few years.

Gerokent
3rd November 2015, 05:55 PM
101417

It's been happening for a long time :D

ozscott
3rd November 2015, 06:52 PM
Shockers

The Yak
5th November 2015, 05:33 AM
As you know, the emissions scandal started with certain VW diesel engines.


I don't know if you have heard yet that VW have now admitted that some of their petrol engines are also at fault.


Bob.
The Yak.

DiscoMick
5th November 2015, 09:10 AM
Yep, now its been claimed that some of their vehicles also breach CO2 regulations. They got big tax breaks because the vehicles were claimed to meet low CO2 regulations, but it now appears they didn't comply and VW may have to repay billions to certain governments, including Germany's. It just gets worse for VW, whose share value has fallen 40% because of these scandals. Some models have now been withdrawn from sale. Just shows that cheating companies can come unstuck in a very big way. Did they seriously think no-one would ever notice?
VW could face billions in car tax repayments over latest CO2 scandal | Business | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/nov/04/vw-volkswagen-shares-slide-10-carbon-dioxide-revelations)

DiscoMick
20th November 2015, 01:51 PM
I see there's a class action against VW Australia which could cost it $100 million.


Volkswagen emissions scandal: Class action lawsuit filed on behalf of Australian owners - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-19/class-action-lawsuit-filed-against-volkswagen-in-australia/6956034)

frantic
30th November 2015, 02:21 PM
It sounds like they will get a few more heads rather than just a few rouge engineers who VW are trying to blame for 11million ECU's and the defeat code.
US authorities investigating Bosch’s role in Volkswagen “dieselgate” scandal – report (http://www.caradvice.com.au/398052/us-authorities-investigating-boschs-role-in-volkswagen-dieselgate-scandal-report/)

See when the scandal first broke Bosch said they told VW specifically not to use that feature of the ECU outside prototype testing as it would be illegal on the road.
VW Dieselgate Deepens - Reports Bosch Warning Ignored (http://www.themotorreport.com.au/62305/vw-dieselgate-deepens-bosch-warning-ignored)

bsperka
30th November 2015, 05:49 PM
Why are people more upset about this than the deaths from faulty GM ignition switches, Toyota's TPS fault or Takata air bags?
Yes, VW cheated on the emissions test and it will cause deaths indirectly from climate warming, but the issues directly causing death aren't a big issue?
These companies denied for years that they were at fault, same as VW. Is there a double standard here or did I miss something?
Or is it just the size of the cheating?

isuzurover
30th November 2015, 06:09 PM
Why are people more upset about this than the deaths from faulty GM ignition switches, Toyota's TPS fault or Takata air bags?
Yes, VW cheated on the emissions test and it will cause deaths indirectly from climate warming, but the issues directly causing death aren't a big issue?
These companies denied for years that they were at fault, same as VW. Is there a double standard here or did I miss something?
Or is it just the size of the cheating?

It depends who you are:

I think the average VW owner is worried their vehicle will be devalued.
Regulators are annoyed their (largely honesty based) system has been proven ineffective.
Scientists now understand why their urban NOx models were underpredicting NOx levels in cities by a factor of 3.
However the direct health cost may be higher than the sum of the incidents you quote.

bsperka
30th November 2015, 08:10 PM
That's most probably it. People worried about losing more money on the car. After paying a premium for low emissions vehicle.
Btw: Over 150 deaths due to the other manufacturers and about 70 million cars affected.

stuee
30th November 2015, 10:49 PM
Why are people more upset about this than the deaths from faulty GM ignition switches, Toyota's TPS fault or Takata air bags?
Yes, VW cheated on the emissions test and it will cause deaths indirectly from climate warming, but the issues directly causing death aren't a big issue?
These companies denied for years that they were at fault, same as VW. Is there a double standard here or did I miss something?
Or is it just the size of the cheating?

My view is it comes down to intent.

While I'm not 100% sure, I don't think GM purposely fitted faulty ign switches, Toyota dodgy floor mats or Takata shrapnel airbags with the intention of killing or causing harm.

VW appear to have purposely gone out of their way to cheat the system from the get go and gain from it.

frantic
30th November 2015, 10:51 PM
The major difference to most is, this was done on purpose.
The airbase or ignition keys weren't designed to kill people on purpose to save $$$$ the vw diesel scam was done on purpose to avoid tax with the other result of causing more nox related health issues that will accelerate their deaths.
The adblue would have cost about $330euro per car or 3.3 billion(11million cars), but the supposed fix now is a restricted mesh that is supposed to "guide the airflow" and a 30min-1hr software update. Now if that is all it takes why not do it 4 years ago when an internal engineers raised the issue, or 12 months ago when the uni report was first made.
To a lot of peoples thinking the fix will potentially cause other issues such as power loss, increased fuel use or more wear on other bits, like the egr.

bsperka
1st December 2015, 07:15 AM
No - All of those companies knew for years of the problem. GM specifically knew of the issue and yet put the switch in to save $.

bsperka
1st December 2015, 07:45 AM
The irony is that the person who alerted EPA was trying to show Americans that diesel was clean, low poluting etc

frantic
1st December 2015, 01:36 PM
No - All of those companies knew for years of the problem. GM specifically knew of the issue and yet put the switch in to save $.

You missed my point, whilst all knew for years afterwards, only vw designed the problem in before production began on purpose!
Gm didn't say to their engineers "design a ignition switch that will fail if you have more than 5 other keys on the ring, "nor did Toyota say "design the airbag to blow crop into a drivers face and make the carpet stick behind the brakes for tax reductions ". Vw did exactly that.
They said meet emissions level x to get tax break y, but don't spend anything so we can maximise profit. Ohh look the Bosch ecu costs $2 extra with dual programs whereas the adblue system Costs $330 plus customers have to refill every xz,000 km and it will increase fuel consumption by 2-5% reducing our tax breaks.

isuzurover
1st December 2015, 02:45 PM
...whereas the adblue system Costs $330 plus customers have to refill every xz,000 km and it will increase fuel consumption by 2-5% reducing our tax breaks.

I agree with the rest but AFAIK many of the vehicles in question have SCR (adblue) systems fitted.

DiscoMick
1st December 2015, 03:02 PM
Personally I agree that VWs actions were deliberate cheating and so are worse. Millions of people have respiratory problems worsened by vehicle emissions plus there's the added impact on climate change, which is also a big deal.

Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

JDNSW
1st December 2015, 04:16 PM
Personally I agree that VWs actions were deliberate cheating and so are worse. Millions of people have respiratory problems worsened by vehicle emissions plus there's the added impact on climate change, which is also a big deal.

Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

It perhaps should be pointed out that NOx emissions, which is what we are talking about, have no impact on human health except in large cities with specific climatic conditions conducive to smog, and in ultra large cities. NOx emissions have no impact on climate change, but the measures taken to reduce NOx emissions, by decreasing maximum combustion temperatures, almost invariably increase CO2 emissions, which do impact on climate change.

But the whole point about VW's actions is not that their vehicles were emitting higher NOx levels than allowed, but that the software was designed to allow this while adjusting to meet emission standards when actually being tested. In other words, it was a premeditated evasion of the standards.

John

bsperka
1st December 2015, 06:32 PM
Fair enough point.

isuzurover
1st December 2015, 10:00 PM
It perhaps should be pointed out that NOx emissions, which is what we are talking about, have no impact on human health except in large cities with specific climatic conditions conducive to smog, and in ultra large cities. NOx emissions have no impact on climate change, but the measures taken to reduce NOx emissions, by decreasing maximum combustion temperatures, almost invariably increase CO2 emissions, which do impact on climate change.

But the whole point about VW's actions is not that their vehicles were emitting higher NOx levels than allowed, but that the software was designed to allow this while adjusting to meet emission standards when actually being tested. In other words, it was a premeditated evasion of the standards.

John

Sorry John you are completely incorrect. NOx has significant health impacts regardless of any secondary reactions.

e.g. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15945273

PAT303
1st December 2015, 10:04 PM
And VW are the only company in history that has deliberately misled the public and has falsified records etc,for those of you who think cheating an emission test is worse than selling vehicles that are known to be dangerous and then not accepting responsibility for the deaths of people directly caused by selling them dangerous vehicles,you people,I don't know what to say to you.The most disapointing thing is I bet a lot of you have removed or disabled the EGR's or removed cats or wound the fueling up on your own vehicles,deliberately in the same sense as VW to get the performance you want regardless of emissions. Pat

JDNSW
2nd December 2015, 05:36 AM
Sorry John you are completely incorrect. NOx has significant health impacts regardless of any secondary reactions.
...

Perhaps I should have worded it differently. It is only in a relatively few large cities that vehicle generated NOx emissions are a significant health problem, bearing in mind that they are also generated in nature, and are a significant factor in soil fertility.

And I am well aware of the human effects, which are not necessarily all negative - my wife died from a rare lung disorder that was treated in some cases (but not in Australia, mainly because of the third party risk) by NOx inhalation. So I took the effort to investigate the effects. Nitric oxide acts to expand the air passages in the lungs, and, if I remember correctly, is actually generated in the body as part of normal processes.

John

frantic
2nd December 2015, 06:41 AM
I agree with the rest but AFAIK many of the vehicles in question have SCR (adblue) systems fitted.

No.
Vast majority have no adblue system.

JD you may have your nitros mixed up , this article explains better than I could.

VW scandal caused nearly 1m tonnes of extra pollution, analysis shows | Environment | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/22/vw-scandal-caused-nearly-1m-tonnes-of-extra-pollution-analysis-shows)

DiscoMick
2nd December 2015, 06:57 AM
So, 9 out of 10 new diesel vehicles sold in the EU are believed to breach the emissions standards by up to 7 times. NO2 does cause respiratory problems. My father had emphysema, although in his case it was caused by smoking, so I know about how it affects people.
Current EU testing does not test real world driving conditions. Obviously VW is not the only company at fault here.
Pretty clear that VW's 11 million vehicles worldwide and who knows how many other diesel vehicles were sold by companies which claimed that they met emissions standards, but they don't meet those standards in real world conditions. Sounds like a very clear case of false advertising to me.
It's hard to believe this was only a case of a 'few bad eggs' - there would have to have been widespread knowledge of this for it to happen.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

JDNSW
2nd December 2015, 08:07 AM
No.
.......

JD you may have your nitros mixed up , this article explains better than I could.

VW scandal caused nearly 1m tonnes of extra pollution, analysis shows | Environment | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/22/vw-scandal-caused-nearly-1m-tonnes-of-extra-pollution-analysis-shows)

I do not have my oxides mixed up, I am talking about NO2.

You're right, the article does explain it better -

"High concentrations of nitrogen dioxide are harmful because they cause inflammation of the airways. But it can also react to form other secondary pollutants, such as ozone, which create their own health problems."

In low concentrations they are part of the system controlling the expansion and contraction of the airways in the lungs.

And the article does give this information, but after a couple of pages which tacitly assume that vehicle emissions will result in these high concentrations everywhere. In fact, as I originally stated, this can only occur where there are high concentrations of traffic over large areas, or where weather conditions keep the air in one place for prolonged periods (or both as in California). Diesel passenger cars will only be a significant contributor where they are present as a large proportion of the vehicles, which may be in Europe, but certainly not in the USA and probably not in Australia. And in Australia, it is doubtful that there are enough VWs to impact any of the few places where it could conceivably be a problem.

The article as a whole does not actually seem to have any false statements, but is misleading in that it implies that there is a problem everywhere with NOx, and that the VW action has made a major difference (for example by giving the amount produced by them without comparing this to the total produced by both other diesels and natural processes).

The major problem in this country, apart from any government action, is that VWs are likely to have dropped markedly in value. Owners and potential buyers are unlikely to be happy about this!

John

isuzurover
2nd December 2015, 08:47 AM
Perhaps I should have worded it differently. It is only in a relatively few large cities that vehicle generated NOx emissions are a significant health problem, bearing in mind that they are also generated in nature, and are a significant factor in soil fertility.

And I am well aware of the human effects, which are not necessarily all negative - my wife died from a rare lung disorder that was treated in some cases (but not in Australia, mainly because of the third party risk) by NOx inhalation. So I took the effort to investigate the effects. Nitric oxide acts to expand the air passages in the lungs, and, if I remember correctly, is actually generated in the body as part of normal processes.

John

Hi John,
your info is out of date. There are a large numbers of papers coming out now linking low levels of anthropogenic NOx to a range of health problems - systemic inflammatory and perinatal conditions. In many cases these are below ambient NOx limits. There are demonstrable health effects even in Australian cities.

joel0407
2nd December 2015, 09:18 AM
Sorry John you are completely incorrect. NOx has significant health impacts regardless of any secondary reactions.

e.g. NO2-induced airway inflammation is associated with progressive airflow limitation and development of emphysema-like lesions in C57bl/6 mice. - PubMed - NCBI (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15945273)

Thanks for the link Mate. As I read it, if you were the size of a mouse and breath air containing NOx at the same dilution as it comes out of a VW exhaust then it will be a problem.

While I agree it's bad. It's not as bad as people have made out for it to be.

I believe the authorities continue to raise the bar on all emissions. With NOx a point was met where manufactures could go no lower so one cheated then the rest followed suit and the authorities raised the bar further.

This is not just a VW problem. Others have been found to not meet the requirements either but VW just got slammed by the media because someone worked out how they cheated.

joel0407
2nd December 2015, 09:26 AM
It perhaps should be pointed out that NOx emissions, which is what we are talking about, have no impact on human health except in large cities with specific climatic conditions conducive to smog, and in ultra large cities. NOx emissions have no impact on climate change, but the measures taken to reduce NOx emissions, by decreasing maximum combustion temperatures, almost invariably increase CO2 emissions, which do impact on climate change.

But the whole point about VW's actions is not that their vehicles were emitting higher NOx levels than allowed, but that the software was designed to allow this while adjusting to meet emission standards when actually being tested. In other words, it was a premeditated evasion of the standards.

John

I disagree on a couple of points.

NOx does not cause exactly no health problems but I suspect you are right in they would be immeasurable.

And reducing NOx requires higher combustion temps or exposing the exhaust to high temps. Not lower as you say. But you are right it requires more fuel to create those higher temps and something that can't be avoided is "X" amount of fuel in relates to "X" amount of CO2 out and that ratio or fuel in and CO2 out is set in stone. So more fuel in to reduce NOx will equal more CO2 out.

Now I believe CO2 is worse than NOx. So why don't the authorities have a scale. If a manufacturer can get CO2 under "X" then higher NOx is allowed.

I'm also not convinced adblue is a solution (well it is a solution like liquid but not a solution like a fix). Adding more in has to mean more out but is it in a better form or is it just in a form that is not measured as part of emissions?

Happy Days

joel0407
2nd December 2015, 09:31 AM
It's hard to believe this was only a case of a 'few bad eggs' - there would have to have been widespread knowledge of this for it to happen.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

I have to agree there. There are plenty of aftermarket tuners that would have played extensively with this ECU and knew what it did and how it worked.

isuzurover
2nd December 2015, 09:35 AM
I disagree on a couple of points.

NOx does not cause exactly no health problems but I suspect you are right in they would be immeasurable.

And reducing NOx requires higher combustion temps or exposing the exhaust to high temps. Not lower as you say. But you are right it requires more fuel to create those higher temps and something that can't be avoided is "X" amount of fuel in relates to "X" amount of CO2 out and that ratio or fuel in and CO2 out is set in stone. So more fuel in to reduce NOx will equal more CO2 out.

Now I believe CO2 is worse than NOx. So why don't the authorities have a scale. If a manufacturer can get CO2 under "X" then higher NOx is allowed.

I'm also not convinced adblue is a solution (well it is a solution like liquid but not a solution like a fix). Adding more in has to mean more out but is it in a better form or is it just in a form that is not measured as part of emissions?

Happy Days

Sorry but everything in your post is incorrect.
In the range of air-fuel ratios diesels operate more fuel means higher combustion temperatures and more NOx.
see here:
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/12/998.jpg
http://users.actrix.co.nz/dougal.ellen/forums/Diesel%20A-F%20Ratios.jpg

Health effects have been significantly associated with NOx levels below ambient environmental guideline/limit values.




Gestational Diabetes and Preeclampsia in Association with Air Pollution at Levels below Current Air Quality Guidelines.
Malmqvist, Ebba LU ; Jakobsson, Kristina LU ; Tinnerberg, H?kan LU ; Rignell-Hydbom, Anna LU and Rylander, Lars LU (2013) In Environmental health perspectives 121(4). p.488-493

Mark

Abstract
Background: Several studies have estimated associations between air pollution and birth outcomes, but few have evaluated potential effects on pregnancy complications.Objective: We investigated whether low-level exposure to air pollution is associated with gestational diabetes and preeclampsia.Methods: High-quality registry information on 81,110 singleton pregnancy outcomes in southern Sweden during 1999-2005 was linked to individual-level exposure estimates with high spatial resolution. Modeled exposure to nitrogen oxides (NOx), expressed as mean concentrations per trimester, and proximity to roads of different traffic densities were used as proxy indicators of exposure to combustion-related air pollution. The data were analyzed by logistic regression, with and without adjusting for potential confounders.Results: The prevalence of gestational diabetes increased with each NOx quartile, with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 1.69 (95% CI: 1.41, 2.03) for the highest (> 22.7 ?g/m3) compared with the lowest quartile (2.5-8.9 ?g/m3) of exposure during the second trimester. The adjusted OR for acquiring preeclampsia after exposure during the third trimester was 1.51 (1.32, 1.73) in the highest quartile of NOx compared with the lowest. Both outcomes were associated with high traffic density, but ORs were significant for gestational diabetes only.Conclusion: NOx exposure during pregnancy was associated with gestational diabetes and preeclampsia in an area with air pollution levels below current air quality guidelines.