Save up to 15% with Adrian Flux insurance!

Volkswagen emissions scandal

Currently reading:
Volkswagen emissions scandal

JimbbobW1977 said:
Whilst I appreciate you probably love your Golf Cab and it cost you a lot of money to buy how it would be fair that if your car was not in the right RFL bracket that you pay the same as a car from company that has not manipulated or cheated the system? As a customer you can make that choice and surely faith must be lost in that manufacturer?

We have two cars in our house, the other is an Audi A3 Cab 2.0tsi the one your Golf is based on, now if it's found that it's in the wrong RFL bracket, then I will have to pay for the correct one as it would only be fair to do so and yes I would be disgruntled at VAG for this.
Click to expand...

I didn't buy my car based on its CO2 output and to be honest I'd have bought it what ever, the choice was an Audi A3 cab or the golf and I got a lot more for my money in the golf otherwise the cars are essentially the same..... Roof golf is quicker though ;)

If the tax went up I would simply pay it because there are far worse things in the world, however I'm not stupid either and if the tax banding did change then I'd be claiming those costs back from VW. I'm sure there is a whole world of mis-selling solicitors just waiting to jump on this whole situation.

However my point time and time again has been "if the government aren't going to charge extra for defeat device fitted cars, then why will they charge for the cars involved in this latest issue" while reading the above replies they discussed this on the radio which I had on in the background and the expert they had on there suggested that if it changed co2 emissions and tax banding the uk government would simply have a big claim against vw to cover any losses involved.
 
StevenRB45 said:
The only cars that have been anywhere near their numbers have been naturally aspirated none downsized petrols as they are and have been the hardest cars to fabricate figures for.
Click to expand...

And IMO that is the best choice for anyone wanting a car with the lowest possible long term running costs.
 
AndyRKett said:
I didn't buy my car based on its CO2 output and to be honest I'd have bought it what ever, the choice was an Audi A3 cab or the golf and I got a lot more for my money in the golf otherwise the cars are essentially the same..... Roof golf is quicker though ;)



If the tax went up I would simply pay it because there are far worse things in the world, however I'm not stupid either and if the tax banding did change then I'd be claiming those costs back from VW. I'm sure there is a whole world of mis-selling solicitors just waiting to jump on this whole situation.



However my point time and time again has been "if the government aren't going to charge extra for defeat device fitted cars, then why will they charge for the cars involved in this latest issue" while reading the above replies they discussed this on the radio which I had on in the background and the expert they had on there suggested that if it changed co2 emissions and tax banding the uk government would simply have a big claim against vw to cover any losses involved.
Click to expand...


Your roof my maybe quicker but I know which is quicker in a straight line.........

Interestingly though it isn't to bad on fuel on a decent run it will do about 37mpg.

I think I have only ever driven one car that matched its or bettered its average mpg this being a Suburu Outback legacy 2.0 boxer diesel that I had for a few weeks whilst the crummy Grande had its box repaired - the Suburu did 46mpg
 
AndyRKett said:
Modifications should not effect the performance or economy as vw have already stated 2.0litre cars just need the software updated and the 1.6 diesels get an update and a new set of injectors. My 65 plate 2.0litre golf has the engine In the middle of the controversy but being a euro 6 is not effected and has higher economy figures and power than the older engine which shows that these fixes will not overall effect the function or performance of the cars.
Click to expand...

That's the bit I've yet to be convinced about. Perhaps time will tell once the modified cars hit the road in volume.

If the car produces more CO2 in the real world after the modifications, then for certain it's going to burn more fuel; CO2 & mpg are closely linked. This is still an if; we don't know what the real world difference in CO2 will be.

The official figures for the Euro6 engine may be better but IMO that is a red herring; we already know that the official figures can't be trusted.

I've no experience of the diesels, but despite what the official figures may say, five years experience has shown that, in steady state cruise at modest speed, the 1.2 FIRE is measurably more economical in Euro 4 form than in Euro 5; I suspect (though without any direct evidence) that the latest Euro 6 1.2 is worse again.

All the manufacturers have employed a great deal of smoke & mirrors to get to the current published figures; where all this will end is, right now, anyone's guess.
 
Last edited:
I also can't really can't complain about my Focus's MPG for a 161bhp car it quite happily returns 50mpg and recently was doing an indicated 70mpg on a roads not bad for a car rated at 56mpg
 
JimbbobW1977 said:
Your roof my maybe quicker but I know which is quicker in a straight line.........

Interestingly though it isn't to bad on fuel on a decent run it will do about 37mpg.
Click to expand...


Mine is a diesel speed was never my priority ;) but for the cost of the A3 you can buy a top of the range golf R-design with 70 more hp. Hence why I stuck with the vw, better value for money.

My 2.0 golf is currently returning just under 60mpg which isn't bad at all
 
Last edited:
jrkitching said:
And IMO that is the best choice for anyone wanting a car with the lowest possible long term running costs.
Click to expand...

I agree..I bought one for that reason

Unfortunately they are a dying breed so when my car needs a replacement I'll pretty much have to get another Mazda, or a Honda it a Toyota. The trend may be reversed with Euro 7 but it's probably gone too far the other way.
 
AndyRKett said:
If the tax went up I would simply pay it because there are far worse things in the world, however I'm not stupid either and if the tax banding did change then I'd be claiming those costs back from VW. I'm sure there is a whole world of mis-selling solicitors just waiting to jump on this whole situation.
Click to expand...

There is: I saw an advert for 1 on facebook, and I had to laugh!




JimbbobW1977 said:
I think I have only ever driven one car that matched its or bettered its average mpg this being a Suburu Outback legacy 2.0 boxer diesel that I had for a few weeks whilst the crummy Grande had its box repaired - the Suburu did 46mpg
Click to expand...

In my personal opinion, I think it's only really a major issue on newer cars. On older models, there wasn't so much incentive to cheat on the emissions test, thus the mpg figures were far more achievable.

Some examples: I used to get 50mpg out of my old mk2b 1.2 8v, (49.6mpg claimed) my dad reckons he can get around 50 out of their mk2 Corsa 1.2, (48.9mpg claimed) and I get 45-50mpg out of my Grande 1.4 8v. (47.9mpg claimed) I believe AndyRKett used to get around 48mpg out of his Grande too?
 
puntofan01 said:
I believe AndyRKett used to get around 48mpg out of his Grande too?
Click to expand...


That was absolute best, somewhere around that figure, usually averaged about 42mpg which isn't bad.

My mk2b multijet was quoted at 62.5mpg and I got for the last 2 years of ownership exactly 62mpg week in week out based on fill ups over 30k miles it was starting to tail off a bit over the last 8 months.

That said I've own a lot of cars in the past and they rarely got anything like the quoted figures.
 
AndyRKett said:
That was absolute best, somewhere around that figure, usually averaged about 42mpg which isn't bad.

My mk2b multijet was quoted at 62.5mpg and I got for the last 2 years of ownership exactly 62mpg week in week out based on fill ups over 30k miles it was starting to tail off a bit over the last 8 months.

That said I've own a lot of cars in the past and they rarely got anything like the quoted figures.
Click to expand...


The worst for mpg we had was a Mito 1.3 m-jet 90 early to mid 40's it wasn't good.
 
Just to mix the thread up a bit (unless it's already been covered that is) I'm hearing on the good old BBC that the men in black are now looking into petrol VAG engines too. Not sure why but they obviously smell a rat. Also Porsche maybe getting tonked as well but then is that any surprise as they use more or less the same engines.......

So just to recap the news in the last four weeks, VW have been naughty, the top mans down the job centre and sales are up because let's face it no one really cares :p
 
JimbbobW1977 said:
The worst for mpg we had was a Mito 1.3 m-jet 90 early to mid 40's it wasn't good.
Click to expand...


The multijet 1.3 is an excellent little engine which has been used in everything from ford to Vauxhall, starter motor on huge plant machinery and generators all over the world, the main reason being just how amazingly frugal it is....

Which raises the question on how you only managed 40mpg !!??
 
AndyRKett said:
The multijet 1.3 is an excellent little engine which has been used in everything from ford to Vauxhall, starter motor on huge plant machinery and generators all over the world, the main reason being just how amazingly frugal it is....

Which raises the question on how you only managed 40mpg !!??
Click to expand...

I've had the dubious pleasure of using 2 of them on in a panda one in a swift neither bettered 43mpg. I know why though...it was slow so you drove everywhere with the throttle nailed to the floorboards.
 
AndyRKett said:
That was absolute best, somewhere around that figure, usually averaged about 42mpg which isn't bad.

My mk2b multijet was quoted at 62.5mpg and I got for the last 2 years of ownership exactly 62mpg week in week out based on fill ups over 30k miles it was starting to tail off a bit over the last 8 months.
Click to expand...

Out of interest, when you had the Grande, how much did you use 5th gear?

With your mk2b, do you reckon the tail off was due to age and mileage?
 
AndyRKett said:
The multijet 1.3 is an excellent little engine which has been used in everything from ford to Vauxhall, starter motor on huge plant machinery and generators all over the world, the main reason being just how amazingly frugal it is....

Which raises the question on how you only managed 40mpg !!??
Click to expand...


The Mito did a fair bit of town work in comparison a courtesy Panda 1.3 m-jet (still one of the most fun things I've driven) was easily doing 56mpg.

I'm still of the notion that smaller engines don't always equal better MPG - family sized cars like Astros, focus, golf etc need 2.0l diesels for best and superminis around 1.6 etc..
 
Last edited:
puntofan01 said:
Out of interest, when you had the Grande, how much did you use 5th gear?

With your mk2b, do you reckon the tail off was due to age and mileage?
Click to expand...


I live 25 miles from the nearest town so I spent about 90% of the time on 50mph roads in 5th gear.

Mk2b was on 118k and huge heavy winter tyres for that period which may have also had a hand in the problems
 
AndyRKett said:
I live 25 miles from the nearest town so I spent about 90% of the time on 50mph roads in 5th gear.

Mk2b was on 118k and huge heavy winter tyres for that period which may have also had a hand in the problems
Click to expand...

I find my Grande is perfectly comfortable at 30mph in 5th, and i frequently accelerate in 5th, which probably helps my economy.

Yeah, those tyres probably aren't the best for economical driving, lol! How much did the mpg go down, out of interest?
 
puntofan01 said:
I find my Grande is perfectly comfortable at 30mph in 5th, and i frequently accelerate in 5th, which probably helps my economy.

Yeah, those tyres probably aren't the best for economical driving, lol! How much did the mpg go down, out of interest?
Click to expand...


Accelerating in 5th is not going to help your economy as the car is going to be labouring at that crank rate and you have to accelerate harder, also in your heavy old grande Punto it's a danger as well if your doing it to join dual carriageways or motorways as their will simply be absolutely no power to accelerate out of danger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

s130
A New Internal Combustion Engine Produces Nearly Zero Harmful Emissions
Replies
3
Views
488
DaveMcT
D
V
BBC article - Emissions testing =good info.
Replies
2
Views
639
varesecrazy
V
JCarp16
Kobe steel scandal
Replies
1
Views
9K
glenn2602
glenn2602
allanhelen
World cup drug scandal
Replies
2
Views
978
volxstu
volxstu
D
Volkswagen ECU Scan?
Replies
1
Views
2K
karbineftw
karbineftw
Back
Top