jrkitching said:

I don't think things are that simple.

It's most likely not just about cash - I suspect a large part of the motivation was to meet emissions AND deliver class-leading performance & economy.

That's a combination I suspect will never sit comfortably together.



Evidence for that statement? Right now nobody is saying publicly how deep this rabbit hole goes...

Personally I'm astounded that the biggest car manufacturer in the world would do something like this, when so much is at stake. It must have made it difficult, if not impossible, for the rest to compete effectively without cheating or bending the rules in some way.

Click to expand...

The evidence that so far no one else has been caught out. There will always be a whistleblower or someone willing to out a company when this sort of climate exists.

The fact that VW was doing so well in the USA is proof that the others couldn't compete.

306maxi said:

What I mean is the "everyone is doing it!" Sort of comments. It IS possible to meet emissions, but VW chose to take shortcuts and save themselves a bit of cash. Simple as that really.

Only the biggest car manufacturer in the world would be arrogant/stupid enough to do that when the consequences are so high....

Click to expand...

I hope it is only VW as I don't want to see the motor industry wrecked.
But let's see what news comes out in future. Whatever is there to be found (if anything) you can bet that every other manufacturer will be having internal meetings by the dozen discussing the situation and if they either have to take any action themselves, or how they can turn it to their advantage.

pooroldcodger said:

I hope it is only VW as I don't want to see the motor industry wrecked.

Click to expand...

Will it be though, if hypothetically they're all at it then these green do gooders need to have a rethink and wonder if its because they may be wanting the impossible

Doesn't work like that MEP. The targets are worked out based on what is achievable. So lets say if a company developed an additive that you could add post combustion to reduce emissions of molecule x, then they see what is achievable and set targets based on that.

If people don't see a problem with diesels, they should have a look out of the window at my house. A good 30 miles from Liverpool yet we have a lovely layer of smog with a nice brown tinge

Jeepers you're closer than I thought!

306maxi said:

If people don't see a problem with diesels, they should have a look out of the window at my house. A good 30 miles from Liverpool yet we have a lovely layer of smog with a nice brown tinge

Click to expand...

All joking and laughing at VW's discomfort aside, the matter is serious as your picture highlights. If you look in the Far East it's much worse of course.
As somebody who drives a diesel (for economy) and a petrol, and indeed a car that I think will be embroiled in this scandal, I have a close interest.
I have an even closer interest because I have had chest problems in the past which leave me very sensitive to cigarette smoke and to diesels. If I am in my car travelling behind an older, or out of tune diesel, if it is feasible to do so I will drop well back or even stop to let it get away as I can feel the effects immediately.
So I really hope this matter is sorted out for the good of all of us.

I also have chest problems too, when I moved from Australia (with sod all diesels) to the UK (with loads) my asthma suddenly became 10x the problem it was before.

306maxi said:

If people don't see a problem with diesels, they should have a look out of the window at my house. A good 30 miles from Liverpool yet we have a lovely layer of smog with a nice brown tinge

Click to expand...

And that is the indirect evidence that it may not just be VAG.

Noone has yet explained why, in spite of ever tightening emissions standards, there's been very little improvement in measured city air quality. That suggests to me (and is being commented upon by folks much closer to the research) that the problem is more widespread than has been reported thus far.

Of course, there's more than one way of bending the rules; thus far, VAG are the only manufacturer to admit actually breaking them.

The problem is that whilst diesels may be cleaner, they're more common than they were 10 years ago and defeating emissions controls (blanking off EGR's, removing DPF's) and the like is far far more common.

Tbh my chest is better than it used to be.

g8rpi said:

I agree learn urn was better, but my take on the CAT decision was political lobbying by financial institutions and groups like johnson matthey who stood to make a lot of money on investments in precious metals used in cats. I'm sure the oil industry didn't want lean burn either.

As VAG's defeat device is on Euro 4 engines, so not an AD Blue system, my bet is that they were reducing or closing the EGR valve when a test wasn't detected.

Robert G8RPI.

Click to expand...

My recollection was lean-burn was all set for 4-star fuel,
the advent of unleaded finished that..,

pretty sure the US VAG lawsuits are Californian where it's TOUGHER than EURO 6.... but maybe it's a lower spec engine trying to pass it..,


on a side note;
I was reliably told a KIA / Hyundai warranty can ONLY be transferred if the car is sold through an Authorised scheme dealer ..,
the Koreans getting their money 1 way or another

Most Easterly Pandas said:

It wouldn't be allowed now due to type approvals etc I'd have thought

Click to expand...

You're misunderstanding me. Using the VW Golf as an example, say you bought a 1.2 TSI: the basic car would literally only have the bare minimum to pass type approval/legislation, so you'd have all the airbags, the ABS, the thiefproof locks, and the immobiliser as standard, everything else would be optional: alloys, central/remote locking, aircon, electric windows etc, even upto the power steering. Essentially, what I mean is that a Golf 1.2 TSI would just be a Golf 1.2 TSI: there wouldn't be the S, SE, SE-L models, or option packs, you literally just pay for the things you want.

Given the current craze of manufacturers trying to sniff out every conceivable niche, I'm surprised no one has thought of offering that: potentially, it could be a great success!

that's the daftest idea ever.

Surely any "niche" market they managed to attract would be out weighed by the massive loss of economies of scale that they would suffer. Each car would be almost hand - built wouldn't it?

Interesting article on BBC news

"Two cars road tested - how clean are they?"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34427291

They pitched a vw against a Ford Focus to see what the NOx differences were compared to the lab results.

The government has now also stated that if VW cars are found to have a higher CO2 emissions following any software or ecu updates they will not have to pay any additional road tax.


There are lots of interesting theories coming out of this thread, one I've picked up is people talking about air quality and respiratory problems. The world health organisation likes to cite huge numbers of deaths as a result of diesels but finding the actual medical data on this is impossible. The U.K. Already has high air pollutants from plants and agriculture which can easily account for people's respiratory problems. You will never see someone in hospital with respiratory problems due to diesel fumes, because of the way these things are categorised. Basically if you have ever smoked then all respiratory diseases will be blamed on your smoking, if you came from a family of smokers, worked in smoky environments like pubs or bars, it's still smoke that will be blamed.
Everything else is asthma (more or less) it's very difficult to say that any one person has a lung disease from vehicle emissions.

People who used to kill them self with the exhaust pipe through the window would die of carbon monoxide poisoning, try this these days and you'll get a bit of a head ache and a cough because their isn't the nasty gasses anyone that cause immediate serious harm. Petrol or diesel.

In the 80s SAAB used to pride themselves on having such clean cars the exhaust had less pollutants than what was detected at the engine air intake.

Back to the VAG situation the more information that comes out the more it suggests that the so called defeat device (or software) is specifically to circumvent the California emissions standards and though other cars all over the world may have this software, it doesn't seem to have been used for Euro 5 or euro 6 standards. Essentially most European cars will get a software update to remove the rouge software and the rest of the car's performance will be completely unaffected.

306maxi said:

that's the daftest idea ever.

Click to expand...

Why's that a daft idea?

pooroldcodger said:

Surely any "niche" market they managed to attract would be out weighed by the massive loss of economies of scale that they would suffer. Each car would be almost hand - built wouldn't it?

Click to expand...

Not necessarily, like I say, ford managed it in the 60s with the original mustang.

Because you'll end up with almost all of your cars being more expensive than the competition. Plus every car will end up being unique and it will cost you more to manufacture. I work in the manufacturing industry and we manufacture tooling for the automotive industry, pretty much each of the tools is bespoke and chuffing expensive due to the amount of design and the cost of manufacturing stuff which is all different to everything else.

Going back to lean burn...while it may be dead. A similar principle would be ACT/cylinder on demand as VW offer in the polo/Ibiza/some golfs IIRC.

Not seen any real-world results and obviously if you drive hard it has no benefits at all but if you waft around should work well in theory. Was debating getting an Ibiza FR fitted with it but then given VAGs record with new things and expensive failures (hi dsg and the suspiciously short lived twin charger engine among others) thought better of it.

It does seem like a good idea though, 1.4 turbo when you're on it 0.7 when you aren't, would depend on how often it shuts the pots down as to if it would be effective though.

g8rpi said:

As VAG's defeat device is on Euro 4 engines

Click to expand...

Is that correct? The problem involves cars from 2009 to 2015. Euro 5 seems more logical then.

306maxi said:

Because you'll end up with almost all of your cars being more expensive than the competition. Plus every car will end up being unique and it will cost you more to manufacture. I work in the manufacturing industry and we manufacture tooling for the automotive industry, pretty much each of the tools is bespoke and chuffing expensive due to the amount of design and the cost of manufacturing stuff which is all different to everything else.

Click to expand...

Not if the base car is the right price, and the options are cheap. In fact, potentially, if the prices are kept sensible, people could be more likely to opt for extras they don't necessarily need. As I've mentioned, it has happened in the past, with immense success!