our firetruck has one.Quote:
Originally Posted by PAT303
when we go to a grassfire, first thing we do is put out the one the DPF just started
Printable View
our firetruck has one.Quote:
Originally Posted by PAT303
when we go to a grassfire, first thing we do is put out the one the DPF just started
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.
This has always confused me too.Quote:
Originally Posted by joel0407
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...
Only to be used off the public highway. i.e track day , :angel:
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....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombie
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 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.
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..
German prosecutors are looking into VW now
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