- Joined
- Apr 8, 2004
- Messages
- 25,219
- Points
- 3,671
No it's funny 
.
.
Volkswagen emissions scandal
- Thread starter gadge
- Start date
Currently reading:
Volkswagen emissions scandal
I'm still on the fence with that one, trolling does imply an element of intellect which overall appears to be somewhat absent.
Clearly they aren't "getting away with it" otherwise VW wouldn't be facing multi-billion dollar bill to fix their problems and governments wouldn't be tightening testing and procedures as we speak
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
If this scandal does improve testing and procedures, then about bl00dy time!! Whilst it won't change the fact that a lot of people have been sold cars that don't return the mpg that is claimed, at least it should reduce the problem for a while.
They were already dealing with this situation long before this VW news broke.
Real world testing for all new cars was to be brought in, in 2017 along with the new car taxation system.
Basically if you bothered to read about and understand a situation rather than ranting and raving about how things should be then you'd know all this stuff. These things don't change over night but the cogs were turning on this over a year ago.
I've just read some more sheer audacity from VW that's makes me dislike them even more --
The Volkswagen Group has admitted its cars could "theoretically" have cheated European emissions tests - and is trying to establish whether doing so would be illegal.
I don't care whether or not the device installed would be illegal in the EU testing - it's still in the flaming cars in the first place!!!!! The very fact it was designed and put in the first place is unforgivable, then to try and worn out of the EU tests by researching for legal loop holes is appalling.
The Volkswagen Group has admitted its cars could "theoretically" have cheated European emissions tests - and is trying to establish whether doing so would be illegal.
I don't care whether or not the device installed would be illegal in the EU testing - it's still in the flaming cars in the first place!!!!! The very fact it was designed and put in the first place is unforgivable, then to try and worn out of the EU tests by researching for legal loop holes is appalling.
Further to this they also said
The spokesman also raised the possibility that, even if VW Group cars are found to have employed the defeat device in European tests, it may not breach regulations. "It is not certain whether this function can be catagorised as a defeat device under European standards," he said.
The spokesman also raised the possibility that, even if VW Group cars are found to have employed the defeat device in European tests, it may not breach regulations. "It is not certain whether this function can be catagorised as a defeat device under European standards," he said.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
I do think it is pretty disgraceful, but before we start completely condemning VW, I do think we're best off waiting to find out if any other makes have included defeat devices or test modes in their cars.
Well we know Ford haven't - they have sent out e-mails to customers specifically saying they have not fitted such devices.
They would be incredibly stupid to send the e-mail and of done it
They would be incredibly stupid to send the e-mail and of done it
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
Fair play, but that still leaves a lot of other manufacturers yet to be found not guilty.
Last edited:
how do you think they get around to all the oaps to feed wash and dress them then.
now you are getting there it cant be and until it is people shouldn't be getting taxed by environment impact on cars. Either everyone (inc older cars) pays per road use and money goes towards roads or no one pays. that makes it fair and people like puntofan01 wont feel they are being ripped off and get picked on for not coming up with a better system.
Car makers have already been told they have to meet set environmental standards so no incentives to buy them is needed they will be all that's for sale one day.
Lets tax flights more and use the money raised to regenerate our own costal towns.
Ah yes, coastal towns, that'll sort it out!
you cant see how much co2 will be reduced if people took electric trains to go on uk holidays instead of flights to other places :doh:
By push bike (thats the way many do it locally before you accuse me of taking the ****) its common to see care workers in uniform on bikes here its quicker for them too
ahh yes the Green electric debate... mid 2014 we was a whole 15% renewable ..
the other 85% came from great places like this...
factor in a big High pressure system over the uk be it mid winter or a scorching summers day and these are as about as much use as a paper fire guard
as for getting a electric train what is this witch craft you speak of?
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...pennine-sheffield-mainline-upgrades-cancelled
Last edited:
The elephant in the room is NOx, not CO2.
Recent research has shown that, in real-world driving, the typical Euro6 diesel passenger car produces about seven times the certified NOx emission limit.
Read this recent paper.
Also read the attached report.
If you can't be bothered to go into this much detail, the extract below gives the gist of the problem:
"In real, urban driving conditions the EA189 2.0-litre Euro 5 diesel engine was emitting approximately 35% LESS NOX per kilometre of driving than from 2.0-litre Euro 5 diesel cars from other manufacturers. If other manufacturers are not fitting ‘defeat devices’, they are still manufacturing and setting up cars to emit high amounts of the air quality pollutant NOX in real urban driving conditions.
The latest generation of Euro VI diesel cars do emit ~50% less NOX per kilometre of driving than their predecessors (Euro I, II, III, IV, V) but still on average 5 times that permitted by the Euro VI standard (0.08g.km-1 in the laboratory, over the NEDC drive cycle). NOX emissions from Euro VI petrol cars (ALL manufacturers) were measured to be low and at a level close to their Euro VI emission standards (0.06g.km-1)."
This is properly-accredited scientific research from a respected academic institution, not headline-grabbing distorted media reporting.
It seems that, although VW are the only company to have admitted to deliberately cheating the system, the real world emissions performance of diesel passenger cars (including current Euro6 ones) from most other manufacturers is even worse.
Recent research has shown that, in real-world driving, the typical Euro6 diesel passenger car produces about seven times the certified NOx emission limit.
Read this recent paper.
Also read the attached report.
If you can't be bothered to go into this much detail, the extract below gives the gist of the problem:
"In real, urban driving conditions the EA189 2.0-litre Euro 5 diesel engine was emitting approximately 35% LESS NOX per kilometre of driving than from 2.0-litre Euro 5 diesel cars from other manufacturers. If other manufacturers are not fitting ‘defeat devices’, they are still manufacturing and setting up cars to emit high amounts of the air quality pollutant NOX in real urban driving conditions.
The latest generation of Euro VI diesel cars do emit ~50% less NOX per kilometre of driving than their predecessors (Euro I, II, III, IV, V) but still on average 5 times that permitted by the Euro VI standard (0.08g.km-1 in the laboratory, over the NEDC drive cycle). NOX emissions from Euro VI petrol cars (ALL manufacturers) were measured to be low and at a level close to their Euro VI emission standards (0.06g.km-1)."
This is properly-accredited scientific research from a respected academic institution, not headline-grabbing distorted media reporting.
It seems that, although VW are the only company to have admitted to deliberately cheating the system, the real world emissions performance of diesel passenger cars (including current Euro6 ones) from most other manufacturers is even worse.
Last edited:
Indeed real world may be worse than testing but, leaving defeat devices out, you can't blme the manufacturers for setting the cars up to pass the test, they could hardly set up for best real world if it then failed the test. The problem with real world is the human is the control loop. Once knew a young lady at work who compalined about the fuel consumption on her sub 1l small car. She wanted a sports car but was worried about fuel costs. A bit of analysis showed she was doing 40 miles a day on the motorway driving like it was a sports car. Sehe bought a 1.8 sports car and her fuel bitt dropped 20%.
I vote for fast neutron nuclear power supporting electric and hyrogen IC cars
Robert G8RPI.
I vote for fast neutron nuclear power supporting electric and hyrogen IC cars
Robert G8RPI.
If we want to improve real world air quality, we need real world emissions limits, and manufacturers must set up vehicles to meet them. If necessary, suitable limiters must be installed to prevent the driver from driving in such a way that these limits can be exceeded.
The planet is not a laboratory, nor a test bed - it's the only place humans have to live.
Last edited:
they are probably working in a care home not community, same uniform.
hmm I’m sure people was using electric cars like meps to to say electric was good and shouldn’t be taxed earlier in the thread
best they put electric cars tax up to £400 then
If the electricity used to recharge electric cars were to be taxed at the same rate as motor fuel, the electric car project would be dead for decades.
well Andy Monty just said electric is bad so maybe we shouldn't have electric cars until the chinese have built all our new nuclear power stations, because we all know how good stuff made by the chinese is
