Thread: VW caught by the Yanks for breaking emission laws

Originally Posted by frantic

So far none, not one, of "the other makers" have been found to have a dual map ecu purposefully designed to defeat emissions laws in every country.
In the original test that started vws scandal the bmw met all its requirements except for hilly climbs when it did 2-3 times the nox limit. Over the same section the vw was pumping out 38 times Nox limits can you see the difference?
Over highway and suburban driving the bmw met its lab results, the vw didn't. It has a specific program to recognise an emissions test and adjust it's engine map to suit.
Now the supposed fix is a airflow restricted mesh and a flashing of the ecu, which will mean much more egr with all the issues associated.

You are correct,no other maker has been ''caught'' dudding the system,only VW,but no other maker has passed the emissions test either,you even admitted this in your reply,the BMW passes as long as it doesn't go up hills,3 times or 38 it's a fail,you can't have your cake and eat it too. Pat

Originally Posted by PAT303

You are correct,no other maker has been ''caught'' dudding the system,only VW,but no other maker has passed the emissions test either,you even admitted this in your reply,the BMW passes as long as it doesn't go up hills,3 times or 38 it's a fail,you can't have your cake and eat it too. Pat

The emission test does not involve going up hills. To suggest that because the item being tested should conform to the test results outside the test parameters means it does not pass the test is simply twisting the meaning.

Whether an item passes a test, and whether the test applies to real life are two separate matters, and saying that they are the same is simply wrong.

John

Originally Posted by JDNSW

The emission test does not involve going up hills. To suggest that because the item being tested should conform to the test results outside the test parameters means it does not pass the test is simply twisting the meaning.

Whether an item passes a test, and whether the test applies to real life are two separate matters, and saying that they are the same is simply wrong.

John

Well if you are going that technically to the letter. VW will pass if driven in the exact same way as the test. So they would then pass.

Happy Days

Originally Posted by JDNSW

The emission test does not involve going up hills. To suggest that because the item being tested should conform to the test results outside the test parameters means it does not pass the test is simply twisting the meaning.

Whether an item passes a test, and whether the test applies to real life are two separate matters, and saying that they are the same is simply wrong.

John

John,frantic has put huge amounts of vigor into letting everyone know VW vehicles have spewed 38 times the allowable amount of emissions while driving up hills in real world driving tests,real world testing involves driving up hills and he,like all the other critics have pushed it as their main point,that is not twisting the meaning and yes both are separate matters.You and I and every other person with common sense knows trying to get accurate real world results in a lab is idiotic but that is how they do emission tests,crash tests and economy tests as examples. Pat

Originally Posted by joel0407

Well if you are going that technically to the letter. VW will pass if driven in the exact same way as the test. So they would then pass.

Happy Days

Yep, I agree. The vehicles have to comply with that test, not real world conditions. Its the same as fuel consumption etc - nobody gets consumption as advertised in real world use. VW have done that, they've just designed a motor that passes the test, much the same as the other manufacturers. The issue is the US testing protocol. I have no doubt that the other diesel engines when under the load while being tested are also mapped and timed in fueling and ancillaries to come in under emissions, because it seems that when you put your foot down they are all doing their own thing.

Originally Posted by PAT303

John,frantic has put huge amounts of vigor into letting everyone know VW vehicles have spewed 38 times the allowable amount of emissions while driving up hills in real world driving tests,real world testing involves driving up hills and he,like all the other critics have pushed it as their main point,that is not twisting the meaning and yes both are separate matters.You and I and every other person with common sense knows trying to get accurate real world results in a lab is idiotic but that is how they do emission tests,crash tests and economy tests as examples. Pat

Pat, do city environments consist entirely of uphill driving? No? Perhaps, just perhaps, testing was designed to have some relevance to average city driving so you could roughly estimate the total emissions of NOx a typical city driven diesel put out in a day, without crippling its performance too much.

Point is why have an emissions test at all if the only time that it (VW in this case) complies with emission laws is in the Laboratory tests.
The tests are only relevant if the emissions standard put down by Clean Air legislation can be met in Real World situations, you know, where we all live and Breathe, Regards Frank.

Originally Posted by bee utey

Pat, do city environments consist entirely of uphill driving? No? Perhaps, just perhaps, testing was designed to have some relevance to average city driving so you could roughly estimate the total emissions of NOx a typical city driven diesel put out in a day, without crippling its performance too much.

the older generation keep telling me when they were younger they had to walk to school and it was uphill both ways!

i do agree testing should represent typical driving and i think it should include hills driving (both up n down) as a component.

as you know with the south eastern freeway, it's a bit of a climb. i can tell if a car is diesel or not just by sitting 100m behind the car and watching the exhaust.