But then they are making a good quality product which they stand by, their warranty confirms this.
You get what you pay for at the end of the day - Toyota are another which this can be applied to.
Volkswagen emissions scandal
- Thread starter gadge
- Start date
Currently reading:
Volkswagen emissions scandal
But then they are making a good quality product which they stand by, their warranty confirms this.
You get what you pay for at the end of the day - Toyota are another which this can be applied to.
20 years ago Hyundai and KIA were building cars from off cuts of old Japanese cars out of cheap materials in a place where labour costs were lower than other car building nations. Rather like Dacia now if anything, Korean wages have risen as have the development costs (costs more to design your own good car than cobble one together out of the Mitsubishi parts bin shocker).
Skoda is on the other hand benefiting from the huge economies of scale VW enjoys, every generation cheaper to build than the last...price really doesn't reflect that.
Although Tbf I feel as VAG is a window into a dystopian future where you enter a dealer showing "brand new cars for 3995" then upon entering find that's just for a bodyshell and running gear , doors and trim falls under "special order items" to allow you to benefit from full customisation obviously not so they can gouge you for every penny.
Last edited:
If you go and have a look at new prices for the up/mii/citigo which are all the same car you'll see that the price difference between them at the bottom end is next to nothing, just a few hundred pounds (8300 - £8800 starting price) and there is a good reason for this, they're the same car. Why would vag produce the same car with a different badge and then charge wildly different prices?
They know their are people out their who thinks buying a skoda will get them a good deal and tell the world they don't car about brand names. Then there are those people who will buy the VW because having the badge is more important than the cost, essentially what VW are doing is catering for a broad spectrum of customers with just one car, but putting a different badge on accordingly.
Basically VW would be stupid to charge less for one car than another when they are the same car. If people who are more astute spot there isn't a difference they kit think "we might as well buy the VW" which again plays into their hands because it's marketing psychology that makes people think the vw is the better car, there are more of them on the road so people in general think the vw must be the better car, and that psychology sneaks into other aspects of society and people favour the vw over seat or skoda, yet they don't give a penny away.
Audi works in a different circle, they make sure all their cars get into every major film they can. A prime example would be marvels avengers age of ultron where they feature a huge number of audis including the new R8 which hadn't even been released when the film was being made.
Above Audi you have Bentley and Bugatti which aim to highlight the best of Volkswagen engineering.
It's a massive marketing machine which has been meticulously organised to tap into people's bank accounts and give them what they want......
"Oh yet is a skoda citigo way cheaper than the vw up! but the same car and engineered by the same company that brought you the Bugati veyron and the R8 that tony stark drives. I'm just not stupid enough to waste all that money."
If you understand this then you'll understand how vw has become so powerful.
This is more how BMW do business, VW still sells cars by a model type, so for the UP! They have the take up and the club up and a number of other different models with different features similar to fiats lounge and pop.
They know their are people out their who thinks buying a skoda will get them a good deal and tell the world they don't car about brand names. Then there are those people who will buy the VW because having the badge is more important than the cost, essentially what VW are doing is catering for a broad spectrum of customers with just one car, but putting a different badge on accordingly.
Basically VW would be stupid to charge less for one car than another when they are the same car. If people who are more astute spot there isn't a difference they kit think "we might as well buy the VW" which again plays into their hands because it's marketing psychology that makes people think the vw is the better car, there are more of them on the road so people in general think the vw must be the better car, and that psychology sneaks into other aspects of society and people favour the vw over seat or skoda, yet they don't give a penny away.
Audi works in a different circle, they make sure all their cars get into every major film they can. A prime example would be marvels avengers age of ultron where they feature a huge number of audis including the new R8 which hadn't even been released when the film was being made.
Above Audi you have Bentley and Bugatti which aim to highlight the best of Volkswagen engineering.
It's a massive marketing machine which has been meticulously organised to tap into people's bank accounts and give them what they want......
"Oh yet is a skoda citigo way cheaper than the vw up! but the same car and engineered by the same company that brought you the Bugati veyron and the R8 that tony stark drives. I'm just not stupid enough to waste all that money."
If you understand this then you'll understand how vw has become so powerful.
This is more how BMW do business, VW still sells cars by a model type, so for the UP! They have the take up and the club up and a number of other different models with different features similar to fiats lounge and pop.
If VAG turn out to be the only one of the major manufacturers who has chosen to fit software that deliberately manipulates the emissions in test situations (whether it is Co2, Nox it doesn't matter) then they are going to need all their PR skills to turn things round .
Politicians and the press are mobilising against diesel cars in general so it looks like the whole thing may eclipse even VW's problems.
Some of you guys will probably laugh at this, but back in the early 80's the UK was out of step with Europe - particularly France who bought a lot more diesels than we did, and pressure started on our manufacturers and Government to follow their lead, but many in the industry said that it was the wrong way to go, as although they could be made more economical, they would struggle to make them "clean".
Also at that time there was a strong movement to introduce catalytic convertors on all cars which may or may not have been the answer (I don't know).
There was a relatively small lobby in favour of further development of "lean-burn " petrol engines. As a research chemist, that person's opinion did matter because they fully understood the climate implications. My recall may not be 100% Wikipedia accurate (in case I get reprimanded...) but it might surprise some people to learn that the advocate of lean burn petrol technology was Mrs Thatcher.
Just thought I'd mention that, only in the contect of this matter. Diesel engines have been a massive achievement for the motor industry, but it does feel like the later politicians in the 2000's made such attractive tax breaks for diesels that the technology had to be made to fit the rhetoric, not the other way round.
Also at that time there was a strong movement to introduce catalytic convertors on all cars which may or may not have been the answer (I don't know).
There was a relatively small lobby in favour of further development of "lean-burn " petrol engines. As a research chemist, that person's opinion did matter because they fully understood the climate implications. My recall may not be 100% Wikipedia accurate (in case I get reprimanded...) but it might surprise some people to learn that the advocate of lean burn petrol technology was Mrs Thatcher.
Just thought I'd mention that, only in the contect of this matter. Diesel engines have been a massive achievement for the motor industry, but it does feel like the later politicians in the 2000's made such attractive tax breaks for diesels that the technology had to be made to fit the rhetoric, not the other way round.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
I'm surprised no manufacturer does this anymore. I know ford did it in the 60s with the mustang, but to my knowledge, no manufacturer sells you the basic bodyshell, and then lets you specify what engine you want, what trim you want, and then only the specific equipment you want?
A piston engine is a fairly simple device, but with nearly infinite detail adjustments. Piston bowl, flat topped, or domed, shape of combustion chamber, number, size and angle of valves, etc. However, for best power or efficiency it is all about burning the fuel at the right time, the right speed and cleanly. Manufacturers have been playing with air volumes, intake speeds and swirl for years to get the fuel/air mix right, and more recently variable injection pulses. With both petrol and diesel, companies like Bosch play a large part, as they manufacture the injection equipment. I think it is unlikely that every other manufacturer has found a way to make their diesel engines clean, and the might of VAG have not. I'd guess that the 'defeat' system is known to the software supplier (Bosch?), not just a VAG secret, so could well be across many manufacturers. Could be tip of the iceberg.
Reprogramming will affect performance and fuel consumption, detrimentally. Otherwise there would have been no need for the device! As an owner, you may have a choice, or not. Accept a poorer performance, or ignore the 'update', but soon government will decide that as it does not meet emissions regs applicable when new, it might have to be scrapped, or suffer a significantly higher annual tax. Either way, VAG will have some compensation to pay.
I seem to remember that Honda were very good at lean burn, but cancelled development when they fell foul of the legislation. Catalytic converters were mandated to achieve cleaner emissions. Sadly the legislation mandated that catalytic converters MUST be fitted to petrol engines and the lean burn did not need it, and would not run properly with one. If the legislation had just demanded exhaust output levels, Honda could have achieved this with lean burn.
They know how to make clean diesel engines, Volkswagen just chose NOT to do it and make more money.
Just Volkswagen? Let's wait and see.
I do rather love this whole trial by forum thing. No evidence needed, just a hunch 
OP
OP
Time will give us the right answers - it would be intresting to come back to page 1 in three years time after all the lawsuits, inquireres and new legislations happen and see if anyone was right?
My recollection matches yours; in any event, Margaret Thatcher had a degree in Chemistry and her career began with a stint as a research chemist, investigating the structure of gramicidin B under Dorothy Hodgkin.
IIRC lean burn engines at that time could almost, but not quite, match the emissions performance of a cat equipped car; but their economy (and hence CO2 levels) was around 20% better. The decision was made by the EU to set the levels at a point which effectively made cats mandatory, largely because Ford & Honda were light years ahead of the rest of the pack on lean burn technology and they wanted to protect the rest of the EU car makers.
Not really relevant to the current issue, but IMO one of the great 'lost opportunities' of late 20th century automotive research.
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.
I do rather love this whole trial by forum thing. No evidence needed, just a hunch
Do hunches only work one way?
Thanks for that. I am glad that I have not completely lost the plot yet.
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....
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.
