# VW Audi emissions test fraud



## Pale Rider

I assume that the current problems that VW Audi are having in the USA probably also apply to diesel engines used in UK Audi cars - where they use software to lower the NO2 emissions when under test. If so it means that current TT diesels have got artificially low emissions ratings, which could be a problem in the future with usage restrictions/congestion pricing etc. Does anybody have any info about this? Anyone thinking of a diesel now must think carefully.

It's obviously going to be absolutely massively expensive for VW-Audi but it also might lead to criminal prosecutions - it's reckoned that NO2 is killing over 50,000 people in the UK every year. When I got my 2012 TT TDi the first thing I noticed was the smell of NO2 from the exhaust.


----------



## Dash

I suspect that, in terms of tax etc., they won't change the rating of existing cars, but have to update their model information for new registrations.

Diesel is toxic stuff. But on the other hand, petrol is killing the planet and will ultimately kill a lot more through CO2 emissions.


----------



## sherry13

Everything has changed for VW. It is up to their PR teams and senior management to make the right calls globally, to protect the brand's reputation. Call it US protectionism at its most cynical or a clear case of busted - whatever your thoughts, this could be the beginning of the end for VW.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## BumBum_BumBum

The emissions requirements in the U.S. are significantly more restrictive than those of the EU (though the EU is catching up) and a lot of that is down to lobbying by the gasoline car manufactures over there. These same guys will no doubt lobby for the maximum penalty for VW (though it won't come close to the $18M that is being suggested). This also only affects a sub-set of their models sold in the U.S. (and, in terms of Audis, only the A3). Whether that's down to the EPA only getting as far as that with their testing before going to print or whether the rest of the range is in the clear is hard to say but, regardless, the notice of violation only refers to the Jetta, Golf, Beetle, Passat and A3. The EPA is now extending its testing to other manufactures so no doubt it'll be found to be an industry-wide issue.

It's just not possible to produce a diesel engine with emissions within the EPA regs and still have a car with mpg efficiency in the ranges people expect. The ridiculous exhaust treatment systems that the likes of VW have had to build into their diesels has only reduced the reliability and efficiency of their cars and added significant cost to the consumer. Regardless, VW group diesels are still some of the most efficient and 'clean' around - while the EPA report suggests that they discovered that actual NOx levels were up to 40 times higher than VW claimed, 40 times a tiny number is still a tiny number.

It'll cost them a bit, no doubt (up to $37500 per car), I can't see there much in the way of criminal charges - hell, GM killed people and no one there went to prison.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BumBum_BumBum

If yee want to read it...

http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/cert/documents ... -18-15.pdf

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## drjam

11 million vehicles worldwide that had this software cheat fitted, apparently. So I guess this is only going to spread.
The discrepancy between test mode and real world emissions was first put to VW last year, so why on earth they didn't deal with it then rather than let it get to what it has now, gawd only knows. Idiots.


----------



## BumBum_BumBum

They actually issued a recall in the US last year for an 'Exhaust system issue' and patched the ECU to run the car all the time under the 'cheat' algorithm and people got their cars back with worse mpg.

There'll probably be a class-action suit as well but it'll likely only line the pockets of the lead legal heads. $50 fuel voucher for everyone else!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dash

To be fair, I'd imagine that's how VW will spin it. There is an ECU bug meaning that under some driving conditions NO2 levels are higher than tested. A recall will ensure that it always runs like that.


----------



## TortToise

BumBum_BumBum said:


> It'll cost them a bit, no doubt (up to $37500 per car), I can't see there much in the way of criminal charges - hell, GM killed people and no one there went to prison.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Aaah - but GM are a *politically well connected* American company (bailed out by the US taxpayer at great expense) whereas VW are a foreign competitor - expect punitive fines unless VW can quietly buy off some US politicians at short notice, extremely unlikely.

This puts it into perspective:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-2 ... 174-people


> When bailout-darling GM 'fessed up to an intentional ignition-switch defect, tied to at least 174 deaths, The Justice Department fined them $900 million (and no employees faced criminal charges). So, in this consequence-less world in which we live, when Volkswagen admits to literally cheating emissions-standards tests, it faces up to $18 billion in fines from The EPA, one has to wonder whether "we" have our priorities right?


----------



## sherry13

Exactly right Tortoise - as I said, this can easily be seen as US protectionism - their car industry went through the floor, was bailed out via the taxpayer, is reviving and this is timely great news for GM etc. The irony of American manufacturers, governments, regulators and consumers not giving a jack about emissions for decades and then calling out VW... It's reeks of the 'British' Petroleum (that's BP to you and me) stuff. But VW have been caught and they shouldn't have been doing it because it calls into question the authenticity of the brand - and their entire brand campaigning over decades has been based around being the authentic brand that others replicate. They could be totally f*cked by this!

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## Mr R

I wonder if it might see some good deals coming up on VW's any time soon...?


----------



## NoelTTS

I wonder how all of this will affect their plans to enter F1. A few billion in fines will certainly put a dent in the finances.


----------



## BumBum_BumBum

I can't see it. Perhaps the VW main line takes a hit in the US but I can't really see it having a drastic effect on EU sales. Ok, their emissions figures are going to be revised upwards but other manufactures are going to be hit the same way - the rest of them haven't got some magic diesel tech. The VW group -

Audi
Bentley Motors
Bugatti Automobiles
Ducati
Ducati Corse
Lamborghini
MAN SE
Porsche
Scania
SEAT
Skoda
Suzuki

- isn't going anywhere. They could remask under any one of those brands if worst case came to pass and your average EU Joe-public decided to suddenly start buying cars based solely on NOx emissions.

Talking about politics, yes, GM et al have an abundance of political lobby power but don't think for a second that the US will happily throw the German motor industry under a bus and risk obvious international political frosting.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Critter10

Dash said:


> I suspect that, in terms of tax etc., they won't change the rating of existing cars, but have to update their model information for new registrations.
> 
> Diesel is toxic stuff. But on the other hand, petrol is killing the planet and will ultimately kill a lot more through CO2 emissions.


The thing for me is that this finally buries the myth that diesel cars are better for the environment. We learnt recently that, contrary to what we had always been told, they whack out pretty much the same amount of CO2 as petrol cars. Add to that the noxious nitrates and petrol cars suddenly look a whole lot better option. It will be interesting to see if the government's tax policy changes now - I doubt it.


----------



## drjam

Dash said:


> To be fair, I'd imagine that's how VW will spin it. There is an ECU bug meaning that under some driving conditions NO2 levels are higher than tested. A recall will ensure that it always runs like that.


It's way, way too late to spin it like that. 
(Besides, I think they've already admitted it was a deliberate system, not some "bug"?)


----------



## drjam

BumBum_BumBum said:


> don't think for a second that the US will happily throw the German motor industry under a bus and risk obvious international political frosting.


Hmm... don't think for a second that the US won't come down as hard as they can on this.
They're well into the campaigning process for next year's Presidential race. I imagine every candidate is currently queuing up to demand VW have the book thrown at them "for deceiving hard-working Americans" (or such like). 
In the US, domestic politics generally trumps international diplomacy, especially come election time.


----------



## BumBum_BumBum

They do that and Lufthansa starts filling 747s with migrants and delivering them into JFK. 

Whatever happens, it'll be interesting to watch!

All this could give a much needed boost to the EV industry over there. I'd imagine Mr Musk is rubbing his hands right now.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sherry13

Drjam, spot on. This is hugely political and the U.S. will be all over this like a rash. Never underestimate America's ruthlessness. Meanwhile, VW's highly ambitious US and global strategy is in complete tatters. It's shares are all over the place. Its CEO will resign this week. Those other brands are meaningless compared to the might of global politics, PR and the economic impact of this. They can be offloaded in seconds if they need to be. And they may well need to be. Half will prob be owned by GM within the next few years! Classic USA imperialism.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## leopard

Does make you wonder what's going to happen with prices.

They could increase prices across the board (remembering that VW is the parent company and have the final say)to make up for the shortfall in profits or introduce some kind of incentive to generate more sales to make up for the shortfall.

If Winterkorn refuses to step down who knows...He could salvage something out of this or take the ship down with him [smiley=toilet.gif]

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... s-involved


----------



## ZephyR2

Whilst I would not defend VW's deliberate deceit for one minute it does seem a bit hypocritical that the nation that makes and drives the biggest number of high emission, gas guzzling cars is the one that's getting upset about emission standards. :roll: 
So, anyone in the market for a cheap diesel shortly?


----------



## sherry13

Spot-on.

I am still obsessed by this thread:

viewtopic.php?t=1015354

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## Pale Rider

I reckon this could be the end of the diesel, unless the manufacturers can find some way round the NO2 problems. They're an example of the government getting obsessed with CO2 emissions and forgetting that CO2 is a naturally occurring gas and doesn't kill people - unlike NO2. I wouldn't be buying a new diesel now.

I also reckon that this might be the end for VW-Audi too - or it might expose them to take-over. They're running massive debts at the moment (£90 billion I believe) and the fines and the costs of the various criminal actions for this fraud will be huge. GM got off lightly with the ignition switch problems which killed a few hundred people, but that was a mistake by GM. This software feature is a deliberate cheat and the consequences of diesel NO2 pollution are extremely serious - it's reckoned to kill 50,000 people in the UK every year.


----------



## Dash

Unfortunately CO2 does kill people, just not in the UK & USA, and the effects are far longer term.

Doesn't mean we should be pumping in NO2 either.

Hurry up hydrogen!


----------



## Toshiba

It's over population that's causing global warming but no political party will address or tackle that issue.
Reducing the world population is the only way to go, everything else is a short term half arsed effort.

The fines are going to be massive, I see a potential sell off of some of the family's brands to fund this as a real possibility.
(Which wouldn't be a bad thing longer term)


----------



## SpudZ

Yeah, we need a good world war or a re occurrence of the plague in order to put the stoppers on the population growth.

I recall a stat somewhere that stated we would reach the tipping point of being unable to feed ourselves by 2120 or something if the population growth continued at the current pace.....

Scary!


----------



## sherry13

CEO has just resigned. More to come methinks, before the feds lock them up. What a disaster.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## leopard

SpudZ said:


> Yeah, we need a good world war or a re occurrence of the plague in order to put the stoppers on the population growth.


You might get your hopes granted as it's not the end of the 23-09-15 yet,according to the nutcases and doomongers around the net :mrgreen:

http://beforeitsnews.com/prophecy/2015/ ... 71454.html


----------



## SpudZ

Yikes!

Best put the Kraut wagon in the bunker sharpish - Guess the Quattro might just come in handy after all..


----------



## ZephyR2

leopard said:


> SpudZ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, we need a good world war or a re occurrence of the plague in order to put the stoppers on the population growth.
> 
> 
> 
> You might get your hopes granted as it's not the end of the 23-09-15 yet,according to the nutcases and doomongers around the net :mrgreen:
> 
> http://beforeitsnews.com/prophecy/2015/ ... 71454.html
Click to expand...

Ah that explains why Coronation St is live tonight. There's always something big going on when they do a live version of Corrie. :roll:


----------



## Samoa

So when shall we expect queues at the dealerships asking for money back?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## TT-driver

Pale Rider said:


> I reckon this could be the end of the diesel, unless the manufacturers can find some way round the NO2 problems.


Toyota's D-CAT technology might be the answer. It's been around for years. But VW is often late at the party. Up until a few years ago they were very anti hybrid and plug-in technology. And finally they're catching up.


----------



## TT-driver

Samoa said:


> So when shall we expect queues at the dealerships asking for money back?


Looking at the potential fine per car, giving the customer his money back and putting his car into shredder might be the cheaper option. How's that for the environment?


----------



## Shug750S

Samoa said:


> So when shall we expect queues at the dealerships asking for money back?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Yank lawyers already started with class actions over loss of value and missales...

But ironic really when they make such a great deal about fuel efficient / class leading SUVs getting 15 mpg or similar


----------



## deeve

Not to mention the best selling vehicle in the US is a pick up truck because it doesn't attract sales tax. Very efficient monster.


----------



## ZephyR2

TT-driver said:


> Samoa said:
> 
> 
> 
> So when shall we expect queues at the dealerships asking for money back?
> 
> 
> 
> Looking at the potential fine per car, giving the customer his money back and putting his car into shredder might be the cheaper option. How's that for the environment?
Click to expand...

Don't think that will help as a fine will be for the offense committed by each car. Scrapping them doesn't get round that, the offense has still been committed and the rogue NOX emitted.

What I can't understand is were VW senior management and technicians that naive that they thought this day would never come. Did they really believe they could pull the wool over everyone's eyes .... for EVER ? Did they think that they would never be found out?


----------



## Samoa

Believe most VW employees would be 100% in the dark over this - even most garage technicians as they would simply be interpreting the output.

It's the same as the Financial Services crisis, a few rogue elements Frack up everyone's jobs & lives & the world goes on a witch hunt & blames the whole lot.

This is purposeful deception on a massive scale - by resigning the chief obvious they knew right at the top of the organisation. Rather than resign, they should be made to stay, face the music & sort things out professionally, rather than get a BIG BUNG PENSION BACK HANDER, SLAP ON THE WRIST. & FLY OFF TO SOUTH AMERICA TO HIDE.

I really do feel for 99% of the hard working VW / AUDI employees who weren't responsible for this & are now on the front line to face the music... when each of us deal with them, remember they are people like u & me

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Critter10

Samoa said:


> Believe most VW employees would be 100% in the dark over this - even most garage technicians as they would simply be interpreting the output.
> 
> It's the same as the Financial Services crisis, a few rogue elements Frack up everyone's jobs & lives & the world goes on a witch hunt & blames the whole lot.
> 
> This is purposeful deception on a massive scale - by resigning the chief obvious they knew right at the top of the organisation. Rather than resign, they should be made to stay, face the music & sort things out professionally, rather than get a BIG BUNG PENSION BACK HANDER, SLAP ON THE WRIST. & FLY OFF TO SOUTH AMERICA TO HIDE.
> 
> I really do feel for 99% of the hard working VW / AUDI employees who weren't responsible for this & are now on the front line to face the music... when each of us deal with them, remember they are people like u & me
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I think it highly unlikely the board new about this - at least not to the extent that they were complicit in a deliberate illegal deception. Remember, German listed companies have two boards, one of which includes worker and union representatives. In my opinion, to have kept this under wraps for so long, a very small number of people would have known - probably senior technical management. I doubt the precise detail as to how emissions were being so efficiently managed ever reached the chairman's ears. But he was the chairman and the responsibility lies with him and resigning was his only option, in my view. I expect we'll find out in due course, but as with the LIBOR scandal it was people lower down the food chain who were guilty and board members were in the dark. I'm not saying they're all angels, but neither generally speaking are they all crooks. However, your sentiment about the VW workers is spot on - they must all be very worried and are wholly innocent but may ultimately pay the price for someone else's crime.


----------



## Pale Rider

Dash said:


> Unfortunately CO2 does kill people, just not in the UK & USA, and the effects are far longer term.


No it doesn't. And there's no correlation between CO2 levels and global temperature - if that's what you're alluding to. And even if there were a correlation - which there isn't - it wouldn't prove causation.

Anyway that's a different debate. But CO2 is not a pollutant - without CO2 we would be fucked.


----------



## leopard

I'm not so sure that the board wouldn't have known anything.

Alot of these people are highly qualified engineers in their own wright,often with a Doctorate in the name and have been with the company for decades often overlooking technical progress and changes,after all its their job to do so.

Whatever I'm sure all will be revealed in the next few months as the Americans won't leave any stone unturned and with the rest of the world also expressing discontent ie.Australia and South America things can only tighten up some more.


----------



## Pale Rider

I assume that VAG were pulling the same trick in Europe as in the USA because they've said that there may be a recall involving 11 million cars and only about half a million are in the USA.

The thing that worries me, being a TT TDi owner, is the possibility that these diesels will fail MOT emissions tests if the ECU "test mode" code is removed. So the only way that they could make the car legal is if they amend the ECU code to run in test mode all the time, I suppose. Which would mess up fuel consumption and lose power apparently. This is a big mess.


----------



## leopard

It is a mess.

Residuals for diesels will only go one way for the moment.Anybody thinking of changing would best sell sooner than later.


----------



## SpudZ

leopard said:


> It is a mess.
> 
> Residuals for diesels will only go one way for the moment.Anybody thinking of changing would best sell sooner than later.


Agreed. If you think it's bad now, just wait for the sh!tfest a short distance down the road.. :?

I'll lay a pound to a penny that it ain't just VW either...


----------



## Samoa

So, the sensible approach is for AUDI to propose a like for like spec swap to a 2.0 petrol model for those vehicles still in warranty given not fit for purpose.

Outside warranty / over 3 years becomes questionable.

Given I'm in warranty, yup, I'd put up with a petrol MK3 in Samoa in same spec...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Dash

Pale Rider said:


> No it doesn't. And there's no correlation between CO2 levels and global temperature - if that's what you're alluding to. And even if there were a correlation - which there isn't - it wouldn't prove causation.
> 
> Anyway that's a different debate. But CO2 is not a pollutant - without CO2 we would be fucked.


  Wow. Are you an American per chance?


----------



## SpudZ

Samoa said:


> So, the sensible approach is for AUDI to propose a like for like spec swap to a 2.0 petrol model for those vehicles still in warranty given not fit for purpose.
> 
> Outside warranty / over 3 years becomes questionable.
> 
> Given I'm in warranty, yup, I'd put up with a petrol MK3 in Samoa in same spec...
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Unlikely! Even if it was, you'd be more likely offered a MK2 TSFI,same age, same mileage..


----------



## Dano28

Interested in this as the mrs has a 2014 A3 TDI which I understand may or may not be part of this emission scandal thing...

What I don't understand is if any, what implications there would be ie if the car is affected would it just be recalled re programmed and a case of here's your car back? Type scenario

Anyone shed any light?


----------



## drjam

Hard to know what the solution is for diesels already in circulation. 
Customers bought them in good faith, so harsh for them to lose out either by being left with a car that isn't legal or - more likely - one that is, but has its driveability impacted by whatever fix. They obviously will lose anyway in terms of the value of their asset, if demand for diesels more widely drops - which it probably will. 
I imagine everyone at VW must be shitting themselves about where this might end up. Sad for those who had nothing to do with it.

On a wider note, I guess we're about reaching the point, maybe for diesels already but probably for petrol later as regulations tighten, where although it's _technically _possible to clean up the emissions they produce, it just isn't _economic _any more. So it'll certainly speed up the introduction of hybrid and all-electric drivetrains.


----------



## Mr R

VW/Audi are not completely out of line with other manufacturers (on paper) with their CO2 and mpg figures. Here's what BMW are claiming for the 220d M Sport Coupe...










ECU's might need reprogrammed, but its not as if the mpg figure is going to half or CO2 output will double... they just need to get on and identify the scale of the issue, work out a proper fix and get customers sorted. People will judge on how VW react and respond to this.

Stay calm people.


----------



## ZephyR2

That's right. VW's diesel figures for emissions, MPG and performance are similar to most other manufacturers so unless VW have missed a trick then most other manufacturers will also have been pulling the same stunt. 
Was a boffin on Radio 5 earlier saying this has been known about for ages and more or less acknowledged that it was widespread. 
If you are thinking of getting a petrol car then do it quick as discounts will vanish as buyers turn away from diesels and demand for petrol goes up.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## leopard

Mr R said:


> Stay calm people.


Stay calm ! .......People are worried Mr R and VAG Almighty is going the loo [smiley=toilet.gif],shares are down and the world as we know it is going to end...stay calm indeed !
:lol: :lol:


----------



## Mr R

leopard said:


> Stay calm ! .......People are worried Mr R and VAG Almighty is going the loo [smiley=toilet.gif],shares are down and the world as we know it is going to end...stay calm indeed !
> :lol: :lol:


Ok, this situation clearly requires tea.


----------



## Mr R

ZephyR2 said:


> That's right. VW's diesel figures for emissions, MPG and performance are similar to most other manufacturers so unless VW have missed a trick then most other manufacturers will also have been pulling the same stunt.
> Was a boffin on Radio 5 earlier saying this has been known about for ages and more or less acknowledged that it was widespread.
> If you are thinking of getting a petrol car then do it quick as discounts will vanish as buyers turn away from diesels and demand for petrol goes up.
> 
> Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


Is this not one of the reasons that stop/start was introduced, so that "at idle" i.e. switched off, no harmful pollutants are entering the atmosphere during the emissions tests...?

As you say, either they are all at it, or a small bit of reprogramming will solve the issue and the customer probably won't notice the difference.

Wonder what will also happen to fuel prices?


----------



## Dash

ZephyR2 said:


> If you are thinking of getting a petrol car then do it quick as discounts will vanish as buyers turn away from diesels and demand for petrol goes up.


To be honest, it sounds like the perfect time to buy a diesel VW. My old man has a Golf Bluemotion and is chuffed to bits with it - especially mileage. I can't imagine the NO2 emissions being different from spec is going to dent that much.

But if people do start flocking, you should get some nice discounts and possibly lower prices at the pump!


----------



## Mr R

Dash said:


> ZephyR2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are thinking of getting a petrol car then do it quick as discounts will vanish as buyers turn away from diesels and demand for petrol goes up.
> 
> 
> 
> To be honest, it sounds like the perfect time to buy a diesel VW. My old man has a Golf Bluemotion and is chuffed to bits with it - especially mileage. I can't imagine the NO2 emissions being different from spec is going to dent that much.
> 
> But if people do start flocking, you should get some nice discounts and possibly lower prices at the pump!
Click to expand...

I like your thinking. :wink: [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## Delta4

I wonder how many brands use this programme to pass the test and who was it that came up with the idea :?:


----------



## ZephyR2

Dash said:


> ZephyR2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are thinking of getting a petrol car then do it quick as discounts will vanish as buyers turn away from diesels and demand for petrol goes up.
> 
> 
> 
> To be honest, it sounds like the perfect time to buy a diesel VW. My old man has a Golf Bluemotion and is chuffed to bits with it - especially mileage. I can't imagine the NO2 emissions being different from spec is going to dent that much.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be too sure about that. With real emissions being 40 times the test emissions there's either got to be some significant de-tuning of the engine or you will have to drive round a bucket full of urea in the boot all the time.
They wouldn't have risked all of this furore breaking out if it was just a question of tinkering with the odd couple of horse power or mpg.


----------



## Mr R

If Europe is affected by this, I can start to see the headlines and hear the phone calls...

"Have you been mis-sold a TDI, you could claim back thousands..." :? :lol:


----------



## ZephyR2

Mr R said:


> If Europe is affected by this, I can start to see the headlines and hear the phone calls...
> 
> "Have you been mis-sold a TDI, you could claim back thousands..." :? :lol:


 :lol: :lol: PMSL

BTW Europe does seem to be affected. 18 million diesels involved, only 1/2 million sold in US.


----------



## sherry13

Basically, the land of the gas guzzlers and incredulous climate change deniers has just shafted the European car industry on an issue of credibility linked to pollution. You couldn't make it up.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## Samoa

Mr R said:


> ZephyR2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's right. VW's diesel figures for emissions, MPG and performance are similar to most other manufacturers so unless VW have missed a trick then most other manufacturers will also have been pulling the same stunt.
> Was a boffin on Radio 5 earlier saying this has been known about for ages and more or less acknowledged that it was widespread.
> If you are thinking of getting a petrol car then do it quick as discounts will vanish as buyers turn away from diesels and demand for petrol goes up.
> 
> Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
> 
> 
> 
> Is this not one of the reasons that stop/start was introduced, so that "at idle" i.e. switched off, no harmful pollutants are entering the atmosphere during the emissions tests...?
> 
> As you say, either they are all at it, or a small bit of reprogramming will solve the issue and the customer probably won't notice the difference.
> 
> Wonder what will also happen to fuel prices?
Click to expand...

A small programming tweak & all will be ok - do you work for VW.?

The fundamental issue is running the engine at this Eco tune means
- MPG seriously deteriorates (see next comment)
- performance is heavily impacted: this Eco tune is designed just to keep engine ticking over without real load, not for road use
- engine wear increases:: diesel has lubricants which are designed to keep components (injectors & cylinders) running free

If you haven't already acted, you've missed the boat.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## drjam

ZephyR2 said:


> Dash said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ZephyR2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are thinking of getting a petrol car then do it quick as discounts will vanish as buyers turn away from diesels and demand for petrol goes up.
> 
> 
> 
> To be honest, it sounds like the perfect time to buy a diesel VW. My old man has a Golf Bluemotion and is chuffed to bits with it - especially mileage. I can't imagine the NO2 emissions being different from spec is going to dent that much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wouldn't be too sure about that. With real emissions being 40 times the test emissions there's either got to be some significant de-tuning of the engine or you will have to drive round a bucket full of urea in the boot all the time.
> They wouldn't have risked all of this furore breaking out if it was just a question of tinkering with the odd couple of horse power or mpg.
Click to expand...

This.
If it was just some minor software tweak with limited minor other impact, it should never have got this far, bar massive incompetence. It's not like this came out of the blue for VW: the issue was first raised with them in 2014 but they failed to sort it. 
Also worth bearing in mind this is unrelated to CO2 testing that's been concentrated on over here, it's NOx, for which the US has much stricter standards than we do. (Arguably they're right, as NOx is more immediately hazardous, but that's another debate).
What would be interesting to know is how other manufacturers strip NOx from the exhaust gases. If they use basically the same method, then it's hard to see how they aren't all in the same boat. However if VW do it in a different way (i.e. bet on a different technology and got it wrong) it is possible they could be alone in having had to take such drastic, illegal measures to meet the regulations.


----------



## melauditt

glad I bought a petrol.


----------



## Samoa

I see the jokes have started.... did make me giggle even if I have an oil burner










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## TRTT

Critter10 said:


> Samoa said:
> 
> 
> 
> Believe most VW employees would be 100% in the dark over this - even most garage technicians as they would simply be interpreting the output.
> 
> It's the same as the Financial Services crisis, a few rogue elements Frack up everyone's jobs & lives & the world goes on a witch hunt & blames the whole lot.
> 
> This is purposeful deception on a massive scale - by resigning the chief obvious they knew right at the top of the organisation. Rather than resign, they should be made to stay, face the music & sort things out professionally, rather than get a BIG BUNG PENSION BACK HANDER, SLAP ON THE WRIST. & FLY OFF TO SOUTH AMERICA TO HIDE.
> 
> I really do feel for 99% of the hard working VW / AUDI employees who weren't responsible for this & are now on the front line to face the music... when each of us deal with them, remember they are people like u & me
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> I think it highly unlikely the board new about this - at least not to the extent that they were complicit in a deliberate illegal deception. Remember, German listed companies have two boards, one of which includes worker and union representatives. In my opinion, to have kept this under wraps for so long, a very small number of people would have known - probably senior technical management. I doubt the precise detail as to how emissions were being so efficiently managed ever reached the chairman's ears. But he was the chairman and the responsibility lies with him and resigning was his only option, in my view. I expect we'll find out in due course, but as with the LIBOR scandal it was people lower down the food chain who were guilty and board members were in the dark. I'm not saying they're all angels, but neither generally speaking are they all crooks. However, your sentiment about the VW workers is spot on - they must all be very worried and are wholly innocent but may ultimately pay the price for someone else's crime.
Click to expand...

+1. Very well said.


----------



## sherry13

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## mplgaus

LOL! Too funny.


----------



## Toshiba

I only bought an Audi diesel due to the low emissions and good mpg.
I feel completely cheated and will be asking Audi to purchase back the car and pay compensation for misleading me.

U.K. Government - could pay for the refugees...
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/vw ... ?li=AA59G2


----------



## Pale Rider

Dash said:


> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it doesn't. And there's no correlation between CO2 levels and global temperature - if that's what you're alluding to. And even if there were a correlation - which there isn't - it wouldn't prove causation.
> 
> Anyway that's a different debate. But CO2 is not a pollutant - without CO2 we would be fucked.
> 
> 
> 
> Wow. Are you an American per chance?
Click to expand...

No, I'm a scientist. The Earth is a massively complex buffered system that responds to attempts to push it by pushing back - that's why it hasn't burnt up or frozen millennia ago. If you put CO2 in the air it initially causes warming, but the warming causes more water vapour to enter the atmosphere. Water vapour is also a greenhouse gas of course - more so than CO2 - but it's very much lighter than the constituent elements of the atmosphere so it rises in the atmosphere and cools, turning into water and forming clouds. The clouds block out the Sun during the day, lowering temperature (and also retain heat at night). The extra CO2 also causes more plant growth which cools the planet. Et cetera.

All the processes involved are so complex that they can't be modelled because they're not understood - and in fact some of the driver processes are stochastic rather than deterministic and therefore can't be modelled full stop. The concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere have been rising for decades but are not matched by similar increases in global temperature - except on graphs where the data was fiddled. In fact the Antarctic is the colder now than it has been for years. Climate change is predominantly driven by natural effects. It's just that a massive industry has been built on carbon credits and other such nonsense.


----------



## Samoa

Nice to see a scientist sitting on the fence for once to acknowledge it's too complex to really know what will happen.

There's a fantastic story about wolves being reintroduced to Yellowstone NP after years of absence - Google it as their return has had knock on effects on the ecosystem no one ever imagined

Back to my TDi.... yesterday I asked my supplying dealer to provide a like for like swap of my TT with its 2.0 petrol variant equivalent given it's still in warranty.

Am sure they're inundated at present....

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Pale Rider

sherry13 said:


> Basically, the land of the gas guzzlers and incredulous climate change deniers has just shafted the European car industry on an issue of credibility linked to pollution. You couldn't make it up.


As usual the Yanks have got this right - and no one is "denying" climate change. The climate has been changing since the Earth was formed and it will continue to do so until the Earth spirals into the Sun.

The thing that strikes me is that VW (and probably other manufacturers) were bloody stupid to mess with the Americans. If they'd just cheated the emissions in Europe they'd have got away with it. Apparently the German govt (and our own) have been aware of this fraud for some time but were keeping quiet about it and hoping it would go away when the EU finally comes up with a better test in 2018. The EU probably also knew about it but, of course, Germany has a fair amount of influence in the EU (i.e. it basically controls it) and the German govt has a 20% share in VAG, so they were turning a blind eye to the fact that this fraud was killing thousands of people.

This scandal is going to touch considerably more than the motor industry. There's criminal fraud in governments too.


----------



## Samoa

Pale Rider said:


> This scandal is going to touch considerably more than the motor industry. There's criminal fraud in governments too.


Like that's going to happen...

There were specific controls in place in the 90's to stop certain key (but not all) the factors that caused the Financial crisis.... & had been removed. by the time the beast went crazy.

The witch hunt went for the easy target as they will do again

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## drjam

Pale Rider said:


> No, I'm a scientist...
> 
> All the processes involved are so complex that they can't be modelled because they're not understood


For a scientist, that's a very, very odd position to take.


----------



## ZephyR2

An interesting quote in the Daily Mail this morning ....

".... This could be just the tip of the iceberg. And if one manufacturer is cheating, what about the others? The silence has been deafening. You would expect other car makers to be making hay at the expense of a rival. But they are not."


----------



## Dash

Pale Rider said:


> No, I'm a scientist. The Earth is a massively complex buffered system that responds to attempts to push it by pushing back - that's why it hasn't burnt up or frozen millennia ago. If you put CO2 in the air it initially causes warming, but the warming causes more water vapour to enter the atmosphere. Water vapour is also a greenhouse gas of course - more so than CO2 - but it's very much lighter than the constituent elements of the atmosphere so it rises in the atmosphere and cools, turning into water and forming clouds. The clouds block out the Sun during the day, lowering temperature (and also retain heat at night). The extra CO2 also causes more plant growth which cools the planet. Et cetera.
> 
> All the processes involved are so complex that they can't be modelled because they're not understood - and in fact some of the driver processes are stochastic rather than deterministic and therefore can't be modelled full stop. The concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere have been rising for decades but are not matched by similar increases in global temperature - except on graphs where the data was fiddled. In fact the Antarctic is the colder now than it has been for years. Climate change is predominantly driven by natural effects. It's just that a massive industry has been built on carbon credits and other such nonsense.


It doesn't take scientist to recognise an arm-chair scientist. Your claim in your initial message about proof shows you fundamentally misunderstand what science is. I hate the idea of ad hominem arguments but your position is so massively flawed and far from the stacks of empirical evidence supporting the theory, there is little else left to explain your position.

You are quite simply a climate-change denier.

If you _genuinely_ believe your have a scientific mind open to the acceptance of evidence to challenge your hypothesis then there are plenty of neutral scientific journals that you can read (although you'll probably have to look back a few issues as the basics were put to bed a long time ago).


----------



## Shug750S

ZephyR2 said:


> An interesting quote in the Daily Mail this morning ....
> 
> ".... This could be just the tip of the iceberg. And if one manufacturer is cheating, what about the others? The silence has been deafening. You would expect other car makers to be making hay at the expense of a rival. But they are not."


Probably because although they are different companies, a lot of the sub assemblies and electrical components, such as fuel injection systems, ECUs, etc are designed, manufactured and supplied by common 3rd party suppliers?


----------



## Mr R

Shug750S said:


> Probably because although they are different companies, a lot of the sub assemblies and electrical components, such as fuel injection systems, ECUs, etc are designed, manufactured and supplied by common 3rd party suppliers?


Yes, we were talking about that in the office this morning... like Bosch?


----------



## Pale Rider

drjam said:


> 000
> 
> 
> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> All the processes involved are so complex that they can't be modelled because they're not understood
> 
> 
> 
> For a scientist, that's a very, very odd position to take.
Click to expand...

No. That's the normal position. You won't find any actual scientist who claims they understand what's going on in the climate. The people you are listening to are politicians and people with vested interests. Scientists don't make claims they can't support.



Dash said:


> Your claim in your initial message about proof shows you fundamentally misunderstand what science is. I hate the idea of ad hominem arguments but your position is so massively flawed and far from the stacks of empirical evidence supporting the theory, there is little else left to explain your position.
> 
> You are quite simply a climate-change denier.


No. As I said, I'm fully aware that the climate is changing. But there isn't any empirical evidence supporting the claim that the current climate change is caused by CO2. And the point I was making about the political attempts to show that increasing CO2 causes global warming was a fairly fundamental scientific fact that "correlation does not imply causation". And, unfortunately for the politicians, there isn't even any correlation, unless you fiddle the data.


----------



## Toshiba

Climate change is a great way for governments to raise tax for the good of us all.
The ONLY way to control or limited change is to reduce population anything else is just pointless...


----------



## Dash

Pale Rider said:


> a fairly fundamental scientific fact that "correlation does not imply causation".


You are of course correct, but it is equally fallacious to suggest that all correlation should be ignored. Science, as you seemed to have missed this bit, is making a hypothesis and then testing and gathering evidence to _disprove_ it. You cannot prove anything in science, just weigh enough evidence to have a high probability that this is the cause. You are making a fundamental misunderstanding of many arm-chair scientists and hack journalists. Proof is for maths and alcohol. Edit: The blanket argument that correlation is not causation was the battle-cry of the Tobacco industry, it's exactly the same thing going on here.

The weighing of the evidence, strongly supports the hypothesis that man-made CO2 is the leading cause of current climate change. There is a minority of _real_ scientists not agreeing to some extent with the hypothesis and this is good for science - but it should be left to the scientists to disprove through peer-reviewed scientific method.

Hanging on to some distant justification of your life-style is not a reason to deny it.

I do fear that Toshiba could be right. The last time I checked in on the subject, the population is sustainable but not with our selfish western life-styles. Although I suppose on the positive side for humanity, we only need to cull the 'developed' nations population to restore balance - probably starting with all of us with our frankly not-so-environmental Volkswagens.


----------



## Karcsi

What the US call cheating is what the EU call playing the game.

The EU emissions test is a crock and everyone has known it since it's introduction - ironically, as a test to better represent real life driving.

MPG is rarely close to reality, and my A5 3.0tdi is the first car the family has owned where I cannot come close to the official figures. Audi then introduced an updated 3.0tdi in 2012, I think, which has MPG figures about 20% higher than the old model. I believe it is only marginally better performing in real lifes than mine, which is more on par with the minor tweaks the engine has had (e.g. start stop) than the technical revolution that the figure suggest. So I don't believe that the 2.0tdi is the only Audi engine effected.

I feel VW have been losing the race for more efficient and powerful diesel engines to BMW (whose mpg figures seem to be be much closer to reality going by What Car and others) and so VW have had to resort to this to keep up on paper. I suppose it is still Vorsprung durch technik of a kind.


----------



## Dash

This is the inherent problem with targets, people will work to the target at the cost of all else.

I'm dubious about start-stop technology. I'm sure it does help new cars and their consumption, but I've been through enough batteries to be fearful. I can't imagine what damage is being done to the crankshaft over the lifetime of a car.


----------



## drjam

Pale Rider said:


> drjam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 000
> 
> 
> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> All the processes involved are so complex that they can't be modelled because they're not understood
> 
> 
> 
> For a scientist, that's a very, very odd position to take.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No. That's the normal position. You won't find any actual scientist who claims they understand what's going on in the climate. The people you are listening to are politicians and people with vested interests. Scientists don't make claims they can't support.
Click to expand...

Oh dear, looks like more explanation needed...
If scientists didn't hypothesise about and model things we don't understand, human knowledge would never progress. 
Scientists take the best of their knowledge as it stands, apply this to theorise about the things they don't, then test these theories against observation. They never get there - there's always something more to know. 
Science is never a black and white case of "right" and "wrong", it's just different levels of certainty. 
Old theories and models get overtaken by new ones, the consensus of opinion changes, knowledge moves on.

Example: for all the genius of scientists from Newton to Einstein and beyond, physicists can't currently explain where about 80% of the universe's mass is. Your position would be that this must mean all current physics is rubbish and just the result of some global political conspiracy. 
In reality it means new models and theories need to be devised, some of which will eventually give a better fit with observation. We'll learn that some current theories _are _rubbish. Our understanding will improve, but there'll be something else we still can't explain.

You're right, you won't find any scientist arrogant enough to say they understand every aspect of what's going on with climate, any more than you'll find one claiming to understand every aspect of the universe, or earthquakes, or cancer. We'll never fully understand what's going on in any of them.
But using that to say we don't understand _anything _about the climate and can't produce models to try to better that understanding (or shouldn't try) is just nonsense.

The overwhelming consensus amongst climate scientists, based on current scientific knowledge, is that human emissions are and will impact the climate. And yes, I'm sure they're familiar with causation vs. correlation, temp vs CO2 graphs and so on :roll: (plus a gazillion things that you aren't).
There are others who disagree, as is the nature of scientific debate, but these are currently in the minority. 
As the science moves on and models improve (i.e. better predict observation), who knows, the latter may be proved right.

So no, I'm not listening to politicians and vested interests, I'm accepting the consensus of the majority of scientific knowledge on the topic. (The problem with politicians is that they do want black and white answers, so they can set laws - they don't generally understand science either).
I'm comfortable with the idea that it might not be 100% correct, and our understanding of the climate will change, because I understand how science works.

It's not ideal, but the alternative is to just ignore science when making policy and base it on something else... gut feel? God? 
Or at least to be honest about why scientific advice isn't being taken, rather than arguing that science that doesn't suit us is all rubbish (which I think is a very dangerous road to go down): "it's too expensive to change", "I'll be dead by the time it's a problem", "I like fast cars" or whatever. 
The latter two certainly apply to me, which is why I'm no eco-warrior.


----------



## Pale Rider

Dash said:


> You are of course correct, but it is equally fallacious to suggest that all correlation should be ignored.


Which is why I pointed out that there wasn't any correlation between CO2 and global warming.



Dash said:


> Science is making a hypothesis and then testing and gathering evidence to _disprove_ it. You cannot prove anything in science, just weigh enough evidence to have a high probability that this is the cause.


That's correct. All theories are ultimately wrong. They're just a convenient way for our simple minds to look at things for the time being. Einstein's theory of relativity is fundamentally wrong. However, it mainly works, which is why it's still used - except in cases where you need different theories, like quantum electrodynamics.

The test of a theory is what predictions it makes. If they're right then it's accepted. But if they're wrong the usual scientific approach is to move on. The problem with the CO2 theory of global warming is that the computer models built using it all lead to predictions that are completely wrong - and all wrong in the same direction. The Arctic ice cap was meant to have disappeared in 2013 etc etc. Yet the theory is still spouted by all the politicians, the BBVC and Emma Thompson.



Dash said:


> The weighing of the evidence, strongly supports the hypothesis that man-made CO2 is the leading cause of current climate change. There is a minority of _real_ scientists not agreeing to some extent with the hypothesis and this is good for science - but it should be left to the scientists to disprove through peer-reviewed scientific method.


No it doesn't. The weight of evidence shows that the current computer models don't work (and the scientists admit that) and that they have absolutely NO idea of how big the effect of natural climate change is. For example, there is a big El Nino coming this year, which is why the Atlantic is so cold and why the summer has been so crap, and it'll probably mean we have a really nasty winter. And, just like in 2010, it'll be the opposite of what the Met Office predicted and it'll result in all the politicians blaming CO2 global warming. Then the occasional scientist will point out that it's actually nothing to do with CO2 - and be drowned out by the left wing media.


----------



## Pale Rider

drjam said:


> But using that to say we don't understand _anything _about the climate and can't produce models to try to better that understanding (or shouldn't try) is just nonsense.


Which is why I did NOT say that scientists "don't understand anything about the climate".



drjam said:


> The overwhelming consensus amongst climate scientists, based on current scientific knowledge, is that human emissions are and will impact the climate.


Everything that happens on Earth affects the climate. The old cliché is that a butterfly flapping its wings can cause a tornado. It sounds rubbish but it's true. It's covered by quantum theory - which hasn't been proved wrong (yet).

However, the often quoted line that "95% of scientists believe that current global warming is mainly caused by man-made CO2" - which is the Green Party's favourite - is a plain lie. There is no such "consensus". You won't find a single serious scientists who would ever make that statement.


----------



## leopard

Pale Rider said:


> It's covered by quantum theory - which hasn't been proved wrong (yet).


What about Feynman's "Double slit experiment" ?


----------



## Dash

I started off thinking you were just being naive, now I think I'm leaning towards stubborn moron.

Still, there are enough proverbs warning of arguing with fools, so sure, whatever you say fella. [smiley=freak.gif]


----------



## ZephyR2

leopard said:


> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's covered by quantum theory - which hasn't been proved wrong (yet).
> 
> 
> 
> What about Feynman's "Double slit experiment" ?
Click to expand...

Is that the one where he tries to have sex with twins .... :lol:


----------



## ZephyR2

Toshiba said:


> The ONLY way to control or limited change is to reduce population anything else is just pointless...


So by poisoning the air and killing off a few thousand people VW have in effect been helping to reduce the world's population thereby doing us all a favour.


----------



## Mr R

Press release from BMW... http://t.co/bNXQb4kvba?ssr=true


----------



## Samoa

Mr R said:


> Press release from BMW... http://t.co/bNXQb4kvba?ssr=true


That's a very big nail & line in the sand...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## leopard

Good 'ol BMW


----------



## leopard

Just been listening to 9 o' clock news.

It looks like Switzerland have made the first move by banning sales of affected vehicles


----------



## Pale Rider

Dash said:


> I started off thinking you were just being naive, now I think I'm leaning towards stubborn moron.
> 
> Still, there are enough proverbs warning of arguing with fools, so sure, whatever you say fella. [smiley=freak.gif]


Two points:
1. Since when was science about "opinion"? Science is about data and theories. When the theories don't match the data (which they don't) they're wrong. If you go back through the history of science you can find hundreds of theories that were generally accepted at the time but proved to be fundamentally wrong - although, to be fair, most of them did work a lot better than the current CO2 theory of climate change.

2. You can find something to support almost any argument you like on the net, but you need to check the details before believing it - and it's also better if you have some understanding of the subject, which you don't. It should be obvious to anyone who's done basic maths that trying to calculate whether man-made CO2 or natural effects are the main drivers of climate change is impossible when we have very little understanding of natural effects - for example there are several theories about the Sun's many cycles but the data is not available to check them yet. It'll take decades to sort out which is correct, if any. You see there's only one Earth and the data has to be collected in real time. You can't simulate the Earth in a lab.

The other thing about your little graphic is that it's bollocks. For example, the idea that 98% (but many other numbers are quoted, mainly in the 90s, usually 97%) of scientists believe in man-made climate change was determined by a journalist (from the Guardian IIRC) who googled a selection of scientific papers and searched on "climate change". He then pulled out the papers and checked to see if they supported man-made climate change or not and arrived at his figure. Unfortunately what he failed to point out is that nearly all of the papers were dealing with the "consequences" of climate change - not the "causes". In other words, these scientists had simply written papers about what the consequences of climate change would be on the assumption that the current theories about global warming were correct. The scientists had made no judgement at all on whether they believed the theories or not - they couldn't because they've got one equation and two unknowns, so it's impossible. It's an interesting example of how these urban myths take root, but that's all.

Another example, which probably also relates to your graphic, is the statement that there's a "95% probability that the climate change between 1850 and now is predominantly man-made". It's also been mangled (by politicians) to say "95% of scientists believe that the climate change between 1850 and now is predominantly man-made", but this is a misinterpretation of the analysis. This figure was arrived at when a group of mathematicians did some statistical analysis on the data available by running it through the current computer models. By varying the data input (from the actual data) they calculated the probability of the warming being caused by CO2 - if you want to know how this works you need to know the maths involved pretty well. What they actually deduced was that there was a 100% probability that most of the warming was man-made, but they arbitrarily reduced this figure to 95% to allow for the inaccuracies of the computer models (!). I probably don't have to point out the obvious fact that, if the computer models are loaded to exaggerate man-made warming against natural effects (which don't feature very heavily in the models, because they're not understood well enough) then the result was a forgone conclusion. And also note that the people involved here were NOT scientists, but mathematicians who didn't claim any knowledge of climate change at all.

Et cetera. As always, the net is a dangerous place to find knowledge if you don't have any grasp of a subject.


----------



## SpudZ

Yawn. Can't you two take it orf board? It's becoming tedious and reminds me of my ex - Always wanting to have the last word... [smiley=argue.gif]


----------



## ZephyR2

SpudZ said:


> Yawn. Can't you two take it orf board? It's becoming tedious and reminds me of my ex - Always wanting to have the last word... [smiley=argue.gif]


+1 [smiley=argue.gif]


----------



## ptill1

Dinosaurs started the global warming. Fact!!!!!!


----------



## Pale Rider

I notice that the government has said that it "has no plans to ban sales of cars fitted with the defeat devices", as Switzerland has done. I wonder how long they'll be able to hold this line. They're basically saying that manufacturers can cheat the test system and be able to market cars that would otherwise be illegal. How on earth does this make any sense.

Maybe Cameron is unwilling to piss off Frau Merkel (whose canonisation can surely only be matter of time) when he needs her support in "renegotiating" our EU membership. I'm beginning to wonder if this scandal is confined to German manufacturers.

Interesting times. I think I'll trade in my TT Tdi for an R8 . I imagine they haven't bothered to fiddle the emission figures on that.


----------



## Samoa

Pale Rider said:


> I notice that the government has said that it "has no plans to ban sales of cars fitted with the defeat devices", as Switzerland has done. I wonder how long they'll be able to hold this line. They're basically saying that manufacturers can cheat the test system and be able to market cars that would otherwise be illegal. How on earth does this make any sense.
> 
> Maybe Cameron is unwilling to piss off Frau Merkel (whose canonisation can surely only be matter of time) when he needs her support in "renegotiating" our EU membership. I'm beginning to wonder if this scandal is confined to German manufacturers.
> 
> Interesting times. I think I'll trade in my TT Tdi for an R8 . I imagine they haven't bothered to fiddle the emission figures on that.


Why ban something when you can screw the UK consumer later down the line with a tax hike once they're locked in...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Toshiba

Pale Rider said:


> Interesting times. I think I'll trade in my TT Tdi for an R8 . I imagine they haven't bothered to fiddle the emission figures on that.


Wrong, they have. 
The R8 has an interesting 'characteristic' depending on the gear you are in if you decide to floor the car under 30mph, it will pause the revs when it hits 32 (if you are doing crazy stuff it feels like you have hit something and your pants turn brown) then the power returns and you get whiplash version 2 and it goes for it again. Doesn't happen in sport mode or if ESP is turned off.

It's due to "EU noise regs" and I had to get it removed on mine as it's right at the over take speed for normal people on normal roads. Pull out, engine pauses, <fill pants> go..

I'm looking forward to VW getting a real kicking with this crap they've been doing. 
Hopefully when they've been taken down a peg or two it will make them sort out how they treat their customers.


----------



## Mr R

Pale Rider said:


> Interesting times. I think I'll trade in my TT Tdi for an R8 . I imagine they haven't bothered to fiddle the emission figures on that.


 :lol: yeah, doesn't really matter since it sits in band M anyway (highest VED band)!


----------



## Pale Rider

Toshiba said:


> I'm looking forward to VW getting a real kicking with this crap they've been doing.


Don't worry, they will. But I see the Yanks are now looking at other manufacturers, so I guess the scandal will grow.

The thing is, though, that it's becoming fairly obvious that various governments were complicit in this. I see from the ST today that a Dutch report over a year ago had identified the "defeat" mechanism in VW cars and none of the authorities were interested in doing anything about it. Merkel also knew about it and put pressure on Cameron to ignore the problem until the EU came up with new tests. to protect the German car industry.

And basically the whole drive to get people to buy diesels was initiated by politicians - i.e. govt incentives on tax. They were hailed as the green alternative because they emitted slightly less CO2 than petrol cars. They all knew that the downside was that they emitted far more pollutants - unlike petrol engines with a catalytic convertor that emit no pollutants at all if they're working right. So they traded off millions of deaths, over the years, in Europe caused by NOx for the dubious advantage of small falls in CO2 emissions.

There was an amusing quote in the ST from the Tory environment secretary in 1996 that "_If carbon emissions are not reduced the Garden of England will move, by 2020, from Kent to Yorkshire as drought and desertification spread northwards throughout Europe_". After I had stopped laughing a couple of things came to mind. Firstly, if you're going to make a prediction about weather/climate it's best to make the prediction so far in the future that everybody's forgotten it by the time it proves to be bollocks - which it will. And secondly, as someone once said, there is no situation that is so bad that political intervention can't make it worse.

But politicians never learn.


----------



## ColinH

leopard said:


> Just been listening to 9 o' clock news.
> 
> It looks like Switzerland have made the first move by banning sales of affected vehicles


Yes, the media report that the Swiss have banned the sale of these diesels, so the demands start for us do the same.
As I understand it, the Swiss have only halted sales of new, unregistered VW-group four-cylinder diesels that are certified to the Euro5 standard. 
We are now onto the Euro6 standard and as I understand it, it is illegal to sell a new Euro5 car in the EU from the start of September this year. Therefore there is no point in any EU government introducing the same ban on sales as the Swiss, because the sale of those cars is already banned in the EU. 
I assume the Swiss are not bound by the same ban because they are not in the EU. They still have a load of new Euro5 cars unsold. Halting the sale of those cars is probably a reasonable thing for them to do.


----------



## F1_STAR

Governments around the world simply need to pull there finger out (I know easier said than done), and not to point the finger at just one car manufacture that has committed the fraud test and blame them for thousands of deaths around the world. They might not be alone in this...

After all, cars are only just one part of the equation, look at how many aircraft they are out there that produce relatively high amounts of nitrogen oxides, large trucks, and also large ships that burn heavy oil or diesel, which are not regulated to the same standards as land based vehicles and have much higher emissions. Something needs to be done collectively to tackle emissions in general. We need to use what has happened as a reminder and to help lower emissions throughout various modes of transport to help lower emissions therefore deaths for future generations to come.


----------



## Arne

Audi have now comfirmed that this test fraud also includes 2.1 million of their cars, and the models involved are:

A1, A3, A4, A5, A6,* TT*, Q3 and Q5


----------



## SpudZ

Arne said:


> Audi have now comfirmed that this test fraud also includes 2.1 million of their cars, and the models involved are:
> 
> A1, A3, A4, A5, A6,* TT*, Q3 and Q5


Not surprising really. The question is, if your car is affected & you receive the recall letter, would you really want to take it back, because basically all they are going to do is a detune which will make the vehicle less fuel efficient and slower...


----------



## ZephyR2

Arne said:


> Audi have now comfirmed that this test fraud also includes 2.1 million of their cars, and the models involved are:
> 
> A1, A3, A4, A5, A6,* TT*, Q3 and Q5


VAG light vans are also involved in the mash.


----------



## Pale Rider

SpudZ said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> 
> Audi have now comfirmed that this test fraud also includes 2.1 million of their cars, and the models involved are:
> 
> A1, A3, A4, A5, A6,* TT*, Q3 and Q5
> 
> 
> 
> Not surprising really. The question is, if your car is affected & you receive the recall letter, would you really want to take it back, because basically all they are going to do is a detune which will make the vehicle less fuel efficient and slower...
Click to expand...

I suppose the bottom line here is whether a TT Tdi 2.0 (from Euro5) will be accepted as passing the MOT emissions test when everybody knows it's fiddled.


----------



## Mr R

Just seen this news... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34377443

Has the mk3 TT Ultra not always been fitted with the EU6 engine...?

Edit... when I got home I checked, and posted the answer below.


----------



## Toshiba

This is like a comedy sketch.... you just couldn't make this up. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: 
Im guessing used TDi prices will be coming under pressure.

This is like when they had the over manufacturing issue with the MK2 and the markets turned. 
expect to see huge discounts coming to clear the stock.


----------



## Shug750S

Better start debadging the Ultras now...


----------



## SpudZ

This is real sh!tty for all Ultra owners....


----------



## ZephyR2

I wonder .... if you buy VAG diesel now, would you still be eligible for any compensation later or would it be held that as the shortcomings of those engines have now been made public you bought at your own risk. :? :?:


----------



## Mr R

TT Ultra engine is EU6 compliant. According to Sky News http://news.sky.com/story/1560147/2-1m- ... eat-device ... EU6 engines are not affected. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## SpudZ

Good news! I guess its the MK2 TDI guys we should feel sorry for then. At least they'll be eligible for the yet to be announced compo package..


----------



## Samoa

SpudZ said:


> Good news! I guess its the MK2 TDI guys we should feel sorry for then. At least they'll be eligible for the yet to be announced compo package..


... or a replacement brand new MK3 in same spec & colour... then I stopped dreaming. Likely to take years to sort & then likely to go into receivership & no ones gets anything

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Pale Rider

Mr R said:


> TT Ultra engine is EU6 compliant. According to Sky News http://news.sky.com/story/1560147/2-1m- ... eat-device ... EU6 engines are not affected. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


I wonder. According to Autoexpress VW says:
"New vehicles from the VW Group with EU 6 diesel engines currently available in the European Union comply with legal requirements and environmental standards."

Sounds a bit weasely to me. The EU5 engines also comply with legal requirements. VAG haven't yet stated that the EU6 engines don't have the trick software, which is the issue.


----------



## Toshiba

Samoa said:


> SpudZ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good news! I guess its the MK2 TDI guys we should feel sorry for then. At least they'll be eligible for the yet to be announced compo package..
> 
> 
> 
> ... or a replacement brand new MK3 in same spec & colour... then I stopped dreaming. Likely to take years to sort & then likely to go into receivership & no ones gets anything
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I'd be more than surprised if owners get anything.. other than a software fix.
The only way i can see a payout is if the government goes after people for re-banded cars based on new VED bands. (but i cant see them doing that either).

The other issue would be any cars bought seconds hand.. I doubt these owners would be offered anything.
Interesting times. I bet showrooms will be empty and hopefully this reduced the number of tractor TTs 

I'm betting they (Audi/VW) start to look at engine coding/mapping very closely and find any excuse to reduce the warranty or potential remediation costs for cars.


----------



## ZephyR2

Usually owners would be able to sue for compensation but they would be suing for their actual losses. Well what are their actual losses? Up to a week ago none.
Future possible losses may include devaluation of the car, reduced mpg / performance, increased excise duty, increased tax for company cars, more frequent / more costly maintenance.
However a good lawyer in a class action could add a whole string of potential losses to that list - assuming that VAG hasn't gone into receivership first.


----------



## Samoa

ZephyR2 said:


> Usually owners would be able to sue for compensation but they would be suing for their actual losses. Well what are their actual losses? Up to a week ago none.
> Future possible losses may include devaluation of the car, reduced mpg / performance, increased excise duty, increased tax for company cars, more frequent / more costly maintenance.
> However a good lawyer in a class action could add a whole string of potential losses to that list - assuming that VAG hasn't gone into receivership first.


Complete misrepresentation of goods & services for the purpose upon which they were supplied - fraud - remember VAG deliberately used "cheat" software to temporarily change the engine emissions results (specifically NOX) on some diesel engines when they were being tested for official purposes.

Actual losses are normally taken to be either an exchange for an item of the same merchantable quality or a refund.

The fraud has already been proven, which specific vehicles it applies to is on a case by case basis, as my local dealer presently cannot confirm or deny whether either or both of my cars are affected.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Toshiba

VW didn't sell you anything if you bought second hand.
It's going to be limited to fixing the Exhaust Gas system as a mandatory recall (IMO) and environmental fines in the billions.

A court would not be able to predict future or past prices/losses
AUK also told me an interesting number, "80% of new car sales are PCPs", so does that mean those people don't actually own the car anyway..? You have a GMFV...


----------



## Mr R

Interesting indeed.. Apparently 80% of Mercedes are on PCP and leases... according to this (from yesterday):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34383082


----------



## Pale Rider

Toshiba said:


> AUK also told me an interesting number, "80% of new car sales are PCPs"


I've read that the ECB (and several other banks) have withdrawn the funding for PCPs from VAG - basically, I believe, the car manufacturer takes out a loan from the bank for the PCP and the contract with the customer is the loan guarantee. Maybe the banks think that contract might not be legal if the car is not what it's claimed to be? I expect they'll still be able to get the money but it'll be more costly.


----------



## leopard

Looking good


----------



## Toshiba

This is better and gets more dramatic than Eastenders :lol:


----------



## Mr R

Pale Rider said:


> I've read that the ECB (and several other banks) have withdrawn the funding for PCPs from VAG - basically, I believe, the car manufacturer takes out a loan from the bank for the PCP and the contract with the customer is the loan guarantee. Maybe the banks think that contract might not be legal if the car is not what it's claimed to be? I expect they'll still be able to get the money but it'll be more costly.


... And according to the Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/s ... ffects-you

a recall may not definitely happen, since its not safety related and UK cars have been tested according to the stricter EU standards. Dealers are pretty much adopting a "business as usual" approach it would seem.


----------



## drjam

On the finance/loan side, here's a take from The Economist this week:

"The financial damage could go further. Hidden within the German firm is a big finance operation that makes loans to car buyers and dealers and also takes deposits, acting as a bank. Its assets have more than doubled in the past decade and make up 44% of the firm's total. And it may be vulnerable to a run. In previous crises "captive-finance" arms of industrial firms have proven fragile. After the Deepwater Horizon disaster BP's oil-derivative trading arm was cut off from long-term contracts by some counterparties. General Motors' former finance arm, GMAC, had to be bailed out in 2009.

With €164 billion of assets in June, VW's finance operation is as big as GMAC was six years ago, and it appears to be more dependent on short-term debts and deposits to fund itself. Together, VW's car and finance businesses had €67 billion of bonds, deposits and debt classified as "current" in June. This means-roughly speaking-that lenders can demand repayment of that sum over the next 12 months. The group also has a big book of derivatives which it uses to hedge currency and interest-rate risk and which represented over €200 billion of notional exposure at the end of 2014. It is impossible to know if these derivatives pose a further risk, but if counterparties begin to think VW could be done for they might try to wind down their exposure to the car firm or demand higher margin payments from it.

If depositors, lenders and counterparties were to refuse to roll over funds to VW, the company could hang on for a bit. It has €33 billion of cash and marketable securities on hand, as well as unused bank lines and the cashflow from the car business. The German government would lean on German banks to prop up their tarnished national champion, 20% of which is owned by the state of Lower Saxony. So far the cost of insuring VW's debt has risen, but not to distressed levels. Still, unless the company convinces the world that it can contain the cost of its dishonesty, it could yet face a debt and liquidity crisis."


----------



## Pale Rider

drjam said:


> The German government would lean on German banks to prop up their tarnished national champion, 20% of which is owned by the state of Lower Saxony. "


Yes. That's their lifeline. And it's also possibly why they got into this mess. Germany run the EU and VAG relied on favourable treatment - but made the fatal mistake of messing with the US, who are already pissed off with Europe lecturing them on "climate change" and pollution.

The BBC news is that about 1.2 million VAG cars in the UK are affected of which 400,000 are Audi diesels. It's not going to be a recall, because it's not safety-related - unless you breath the emissions - but Audi will be contacting owners to get a free software mod. But don't expect it to be in the near future because they don't yet know what to do. Apparently Frau Merkel wants a solution by Oct 7th. She's had years to ponder the problem (allegedly) and done nothing but VW have to put it right in a few days. It's nice to be a politician :lol:


----------



## Toshiba

Modified, recall - its the same thing.
Depends what the marketing dept want to call it..


----------



## Mr R

Audi's "Action Plan"... 

http://www.audi.co.uk/content/audi/owne ... sions.html

Actually sounds very reasonable.


----------



## Pale Rider

I suppose it depends on what mod they're going to make. I'd guess that it's probably impossible or uneconomic to upgrade the engine to EU6 spec or to add a urea tank and a diesel cat - so that just leaves remapping the ECU. They can plainly achieve the emissions reduction by making the "defeat" code permanent, but I suspect that would leave the engine running like a dog. I don't mind if it uses a bit more fuel but goes a bit faster, but if ends up slower I'll be wanting compensation.

I read that Samsung have been up to the same game with their TVs. They can apparently detect when they're under test and then switch into low power mode. :lol:


----------



## sherry13

And BMW with its indicator defeat software for their drivers.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## Shug750S

So, if you have one of the affected Diesel engines you may be asked to take it back for a software 'upgrade' that's likely to fix the emissions problem, but also will probably reduce performance.

Question is how much will they need to tweak to get emissions right, and what effect will that have on performance?

Glad I've never bought a diesel now


----------



## Mr R

I'm still puzzled by a lot of this.. Audi state on their website _"The software in question does not affect handling, consumption or emissions_", so the software upgrade, or product enhancement as I'm sure it will be called  will not actually do much. They don't mention anything about performance tho!


----------



## leopard

The whole point of the software is to reduce emissions as it's a nonsense to say otherwise.If its not compulsory to have these cars re-tweaked I wonder how many people will dip their toe in the water as I suspect once it's been done,then there's no going back for better or worse.


----------



## Pale Rider

leopard said:


> The whole point of the software is to reduce emissions as it's a nonsense to say otherwise.If its not compulsory to have these cars re-tweaked I wonder how many people will dip their toe in the water as I suspect once it's been done,then there's no going back for better or worse.


I suspect that the mods, when they've worked out what to do, will be mandatory. Otherwise it would mean that cars that had cheated the EU's legality tests could continue to cheat the MOT NOx test. It'll be interesting to see what happens.


----------



## Shug750S

If the mod is mandatory, I would expect the class action being suggested in the US would be taken up by lawyers here as well.

After all you bought the car in good faith, being told the emissions, performance, fuel economy, whatever, fell into a certain band / tax bracket, and now find they don't. If government now want to charge more for your tax etc can you sue VAG for the extra (and distress that the lawyers wil want a slice of)?

This is rapidly becoming a massive potential liability for VW


----------



## TortToise

Shug750S said:


> If the mod is mandatory, I would expect the class action being suggested in the US would be taken up by lawyers here as well.
> 
> After all you bought the car in good faith, being told the emissions, performance, fuel economy, whatever, fell into a certain band / tax bracket, and now find they don't. If government now want to charge more for your tax etc can you sue VAG for the extra (and distress that the lawyers wil want a slice of)?
> 
> This is rapidly becoming a massive potential liability for VW


If diesels are recalled and reprogrammed with an ECU map that gives worse performance/economy than before (which I would assume is a given if emissions were to be lowered) then I could see a thriving business in third party remaps. Although that would probably in turn attract legislation.


----------



## Mr R

Only safety recalls are mandatory, as I understand it. I think the government would have to be the ones that made it compulsory.

And again just to clarify for all those that love a drama, the mk3 TT Ultra with its EU6 compliant engine is *NOT* affected.


----------



## Pale Rider

Mr R said:


> And again just to clarify for all those that love a drama, the mk3 TT Ultra with its EU6 compliant engine is *NOT* affected.


That's certainly the impression that Audi/VW are trying to give, but remember that the reason that they're in so much sh!te is because some of their diesel engines have "cheat" software in them to fool the EU tests. It's not simply that their NOx emissions are higher in real life than they are under test - it's because there was a deliberate fraud to make them so. And VAG has NOT stated, to the best of my knowledge, that the EU6 engine doesn't have this software. They've just said that the EU6 engine is fully legal - but so is the EU5, so it's an evasion.

The fact is that ALL diesel cars emit far more NOx in real life than they do under test - but that's probably because the test is crap, but I suppose it's also possible that other manufacturers have cheat software too. The BBC recently did a test with a VW Passat (EU5) and a Ford Focus (EU6), both of which pass the EU tests and are therefore legal. The Passat emitted 5 times more NOx in real life than permitted by EU5 and the Ford Focus emitted 6 times more NOx than permitted by EU6 (although still less than the Passat, as EU6 max emissions are about half those of EU5).

So either the VW cheat software doesn't work very well, or Ford also has a similar device? Who knows. VW only admitted the device in EU5 engines when the American EPA confronted them with the evidence, so I doubt that they're going to voluntarily 'fess up unless there's no alternative.


----------



## Samoa

As of last Thursday (my A3 went for a MOT Friday) they can confirm whether the vehicle you have has the cheat software... & both the A3 & TT have it

I specifically stated I did not want to be a lab rat & made it very clear under no circumstance was any revision to the ECU software to be made - to be fair, they confirmed this would never be done without an owners approval & also clearly wrote on the job card this must not be done.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr R

Pale Rider said:


> Mr R said:
> 
> 
> 
> And again just to clarify for all those that love a drama, the mk3 TT Ultra with its EU6 compliant engine is *NOT* affected.
> 
> 
> 
> That's certainly the impression that Audi/VW are trying to give, but remember that the reason that they're in so much sh!te is because some of their diesel engines have "cheat" software in them to fool the EU tests.
Click to expand...

I don't think Audi would be stupid enough to shoot themselves in the foot twice, by putting out false info on their website, given the bad publicity that's been generated so far.


----------



## Pale Rider

Mr R said:


> I don't think Audi would be stupid enough to shoot themselves in the foot twice, by putting out false info on their website, given the bad publicity that's been generated so far.


There isn't any false info on their website. The Euro6 diesels are "not affected" insofar as the USA EPA has made no complaint against them - not yet anyway. VAG's current problem is that the EPA has made a complaint about their Euro5 diesel engines. I wouldn't expect VAG to then immediately admit that it affects all their diesel engines - that would halve their sales.

As I said VAG have NOT said that Euro6 diesels don't have the "defeat" software - which is the basic issue. We all know that every diesel on the market breaches the real-life emissions regulations, but that's the fault of the EU's daft test mechanism - which also allows hybrid cars to run more than half the test on electric power, and supercars to record about 30mpg because they only have to accelerate from 0-30mph in 15 seconds - et cetera. Only VAG Euro5 engines are KNOWN to be cheating.

According to the ST today, VAG are NOT allowing people who have ordered cars with the defeat mechanism to cancel their orders. It's worth a try, I suppose - but only as an exercise in pissing off customers and destroying your brand's credibility. I wonder how many consumer and criminal laws that breaches.


----------



## Samoa

It's this bit on the AUDI action plan I'm not clear about

'Under the action plan, the Volkswagen Group brands whose vehicles are affected will present the technical solutions and measures to relevant responsible authorities in October'

We should look to find out who these responsible authorities are & canvass them to insist any modification must still provide
- the same MPG
- the same performance
- no increased internal engine component wear & tear

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr R

So just to wrap this one up, entering my VIN number here...http://microsites.audi.com/servicecampa ... index.html comes back with the following message.


----------



## Pale Rider

But the fact remains that tests of diesel cars on the road (EU5 and EU6) show that they both average about 4 times the maximum NOx allowed by the respective standards. The EU5 standard is 180mg/km and the EU6 standard is 80mg/km - so, in real life, an EU6 engine doesn't even meet the EU5 standard.

At some point the "authorities" are going to notice this and restrictions that now apply to EU5 diesels may be extended to EU6. And there have already been calls for the diesel standards to be tightened, so it's only a matter of time before the EU6 engines are penalised. The other problem, of course, is that the measures taken to cut NOx emissions usually result in an increase in particulate emissions - which are also deadly (and not all eliminated by the DPF).


----------



## CWM3

Only time will tell if this issue has a major impact on diesel sales and residuals, not just dirty VAG cars, but diesels in general.

Regulators in many countries are talking tough about diesels, and I find it amazing that its as if a light bulb has just gone on, its been known for a long time that whilst diesels are low on CO2, they emit dangerous particulates linked to serious health problems. But governments bought into the whole charade often in support of domestic car manufacturers, just as France did for Peugeot.

I think VAGs stupidity will just accelerate general legislation against diesels, and mean the end of a number of financial advantages they are currently given, and with petrol engines major advances over the last few years in both economy and emissions the arguments for a diesel purchase are getting harder and harder to justify for the average motorist.

At the end of the day the main losers in this will be peoples health and owners that bought into 'diesels are better for the environment lies' perpetuated by cynical auto makers and gullible governments.


----------



## Mr R

I think you are both right. This could be the start of a "slow end" process for diesels, but we need proper real alternatives. Are BMW going the right way with the i3 and i8...?


----------



## CWM3

Mr R said:


> I think you are both right. This could be the start of a "slow end" process for diesels, but we need proper real alternatives. Are BMW going the right way with the i3 and i8...?


Personally I think it will focus a lot of engineering/marketing minds on hybrid and full electric( the laughably named zero emission) cars.

We are seeing a see change in petrol engine design with 3 and 4 cylinder twin turbo high output units with ever improving economy and, if to be believed, lower emissions, again can anyone have any trust in car manufactures claims at this point in time?

The days of 6/8/10/12 cylinder cars are drawing to an end in mass produced cars.

As we have seen over the last 20 years or so, when the manufcaturers are hit with a big legislation stick, they appear to be able to produce something that meets regulations, it just that now the spot light is on them and the regulators to prove what they claim is honest.


----------



## leopard

CWM3 said:


> Mr R said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are both right. This could be the start of a "slow end" process for diesels, but we need proper real alternatives. Are BMW going the right way with the i3 and i8...?
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I think it will focus a lot of engineering/marketing minds on hybrid and full electric( the laughably named zero emission) cars.
> 
> We are seeing a see change in petrol engine design with 3 and 4 cylinder twin turbo high output units with ever improving economy and, if to be believed, lower emissions, again can anyone have any trust in car manufactures claims at this point in time?
> 
> The days of 6/8/10/12 cylinder cars are drawing to an end in mass produced cars.
> 
> As we have seen over the last 20 years or so, when the manufcaturers are hit with a big legislation stick, they appear to be able to produce something that meets regulations, it just that now the spot light is on them and the regulators to prove what they claim is honest.
Click to expand...

I don't think that the electric hybrid/electric is the long term answer to preserve the planet,firstly the pollution from manufacturing batteries and the associated contamination resulting from this would probably make it more toxic than refining crude oil.Also with all electric vehicles, the logistics of having power chargers and the generation of electric to power the battery in the first place would make that untenable.

The answer has to lie in Hydrogen and the sooner that is made by economic means the better.Ideally the sooner water can be "split" into it's basic elements of Hydrogen and Oxygen without putting more energy in than is taken out the the better our planet will be.

The notion of being able to fill your tank up from the kitchen tap at some time in the future is quite thought provoking.


----------



## ZephyR2

leopard said:


> The answer has to lie in Hydrogen and the sooner that is made by economic means the better.Ideally the sooner water can be "split" into it's basic elements of Hydrogen and Oxygen without putting more energy in than is taken out the the better our planet will be.


Got to agree with you there. Hydrogen fuel cells seems the way to go. 
However if you can crack the issue of not "putting more energy in than is taken out" then you will make yourself millions.


----------



## Mr R

ZephyR2 said:


> leopard said:
> 
> 
> 
> The answer has to lie in Hydrogen and the sooner that is made by economic means the better.Ideally the sooner water can be "split" into it's basic elements of Hydrogen and Oxygen without putting more energy in than is taken out the the better our planet will be.
> 
> 
> 
> Got to agree with you there. Hydrogen fuel cells seems the way to go.
> However if you can crack the issue of not "putting more energy in than is taken out" then you will make yourself millions.
Click to expand...

Perpetual motion...?


----------



## Toshiba

And the punches keep on rolling..

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/inside-t ... ?li=AA4Zjn


----------



## visuar

Toshiba said:


> And the punches keep on rolling..
> 
> http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/inside-t ... ?li=AA4Zjn


Typical knee jerk panic reaction from the public and the news. Let's see how it is a year from now when everyone has moved on to a hundred other scares and panics. :?


----------



## Samoa

visuar said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the punches keep on rolling..
> 
> http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/inside-t ... ?li=AA4Zjn
> 
> 
> 
> Typical knee jerk panic reaction from the public and the news. Let's see how it is a year from now when everyone has moved on to a hundred other scares and panics. :?
Click to expand...

Sounds like you have a petrol TT, so aren't affected by seeing your hard earned cash depreciate even quicker than normal, nor having your car modified so it uses more fuel for the same distance, its performance reduced, engine wear increased & the prospect of the government changing its emission rating so costing you more.

I suggest it's more to draw a line in the sand to make it clear to the people times are changing to corporate accountability, even if as some have muted it's politically motivated

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Dash

Mr R said:


> ZephyR2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Got to agree with you there. Hydrogen fuel cells seems the way to go.
> However if you can crack the issue of not "putting more energy in than is taken out" then you will make yourself millions.
> 
> 
> 
> Perpetual motion...?
Click to expand...

Perpetual motion is reusing energy without any losses. Hydrogen fuel cells aren't about generating free energy, it's about an affective method of storing energy for easy use later on.

The real trick is to make harvesting of water cost-effective. I think the solution to all our energy problems is nuclear fusion - as that _can_ output more energy than the input - because the energy is bundled up as matter and you're releasing it. It's not sustainable, but it is effectively unlimited.

Once you've got an effectively unlimited fuel source then it's just the time and cost to build enough of these reactors to meet demand.

Alas, 2050 is the earliest date we'll be looking at this becoming commercial viable. I suspect the younger people on this board will start to see the end of the energy crisis as they get to the end of their lives.


----------



## Pale Rider

Dash said:


> Hydrogen fuel cells aren't about generating free energy, it's about an effective method of storing energy for easy use later on.


Yes, it just a replacement for the battery. Instead of using the electricity to charge up a very expensive battery you use the electricity to split water and then get most of the energy you put in back when you turn the hydrogen back to water. It makes more sense than batteries - unless they can make them much quicker to charge, more efficient and cleaner to produce.



visuar said:


> Typical knee jerk panic reaction from the public and the news. Let's see how it is a year from now when everyone has moved on to a hundred other scares and panics. :?


On the contrary it's a very reasonable reaction. VW-Audi are obviously in deep shit because they deliberately tried to fool the emissions tests but the fact is that ALL current diesels (from any manufacturer) churn out way more NOx than is legal under national standards. There's going to be a big backlash against all diesels - it's just that VW-Audi will find themselves facing additional penalties for fraud and corporate manslaughter/homicide.

It's a bit reminiscent of the Ford Pinto scandal when the positioning of the petrol tank made it liable to catch on fire in collisions. The scandal wasn't that they'd made a mistake in the design but that they knew they'd made a mistake. Documents were found showing that they'd worked out what the costs of changing the design would be and what the costs of probable lawsuits would be and decided it was cheaper to leave the design as it was. VW-Audi have looked at the costs of actually making a clean diesel engine and decided it's cheaper to fool the tests. BIG mistake - especially in the USA.


----------



## Mr R

visuar said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the punches keep on rolling..
> 
> http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/inside-t ... ?li=AA4Zjn
> 
> 
> 
> Typical knee jerk panic reaction from the public and the news. Let's see how it is a year from now when everyone has moved on to a hundred other scares and panics. :?
Click to expand...

You are right. The media love to report bad news, doom and gloom, "it's all terrible, we're all going to die from swine flu..." A few people on here seem to thrive on it as well. If VW/Audi say there's an issue, I will wait to hear from them what the issue is and what action needs to be taken. At the moment we know that software fixes will start from January. We don't know how they will affect cars, it could be poorer performance, lower mpg... but they haven't specifically said yet.

Audi have confirmed that the EU6 engine is not affected, something I said early on when I read it on the VW/Audi site. Audi have said I don't need to take the car in for any sort of repair, that's good enough for me.


----------



## Pale Rider

Mr R said:


> You are right. The media love to report bad news, doom and gloom, "it's all terrible, we're all going to die from swine flu..." A few people on here seem to thrive on it as well.


And some people prefer to ignore problems, of course.

There was an interesting discussion of the VW diesel debacle on R4 yesterday, with various people from the automotive business giving their views. The general agreement was that "defeat mechanism" to trick the emission tests was unique to VAG and that the VW "management" could not possibly have been unaware of the software - their claim that it was something cooked by the technical department was laughed at. The facts seem to be that VAG diesel engines deliver high bhp and good mpg without having any of the sophisticated and expensive exhaust technology (CATs etc) that manufacturers like BMW have. Even at board level, there would have been questions about how this had been achieved - if it's too good to be true, it probably ain't true.

VAG's approach seems to be to remove the defeat software from those diesels that have it, so that at least they aren't deliberately illegal. Then, in order to make the car pass the EU emissions test, they will have to adjust the ECU - it's too expensive to do anything else. The general consensus was that this would significantly reduce bhp and torque - that's a consequence of cutting NOx. They reckoned that the mpg would be less affected - mainly because of the power reduction.

But none of the diesels conform to EU or EPA standards as they are and I would guess that VAG's minimalist approach won't satisfy anyone. It won't satisfy the regulatory bodies who are trying to obey EU pollution standards and it won't satisfy the owners who are handed back a car that has lost performance.


----------



## leopard

Pale Rider said:


> You are right. The media love to report bad news, doom and gloom, "it's all terrible, we're
> There was an interesting discussion of the VW diesel debacle on R4 yesterday, with various people from the automotive business giving their views. The general agreement was that "defeat mechanism" to trick the emission tests was unique to VAG and that the VW "management" could not possibly have been unaware of the software - their claim that it was something cooked by the technical department was laughed at. The facts seem to be that VAG diesel engines deliver high bhp and good mpg without having any of the sophisticated and expensive exhaust technology (CATs etc) that manufacturers like BMW have. Even at board level, there would have been questions about how this had been achieved - if it's too good to be true, it probably ain't true.


Update:

It was on R4 today that at least one of the board members had known about this for the last 18 months,it seems yesterday's news is just that


----------



## Arbalest

This is a very interesting thread with some strong opinions from both sides of the debate. Most if not all the comments are from existing Audi owners; but I am coming at this from a different angle as a prospective TT purchaser (not the Ultra diesel version). My dilemma is on the one hand being v. keen to place an order for a new mk3 TT, which from my point of view is a very desirable car; but against that I am pretty disgusted with the behaviour of VAG in building 'cheat' software into their cars. Should I really be giving this company around £35k of my hard earned money and thus almost endorsing their nasty fraudulent behaviour?
Or am I being too 'precious' and should I ignore the morals of VAG and order the car that I want?
All thoughts welcome.


----------



## visuar

Pale Rider said:


> On the contrary it's a very reasonable reaction. VW-Audi are obviously in deep shit because they deliberately tried to fool the emissions tests but the fact is that ALL current diesels (from any manufacturer) churn out way more NOx than is legal under national standards. There's going to be a big backlash against all diesels - it's just that VW-Audi will find themselves facing additional penalties for fraud and corporate manslaughter/homicide.


I was talking about the prices of used cars and people buying new cars will probably be back to pre dieselgate in a year or so, especially here in the USA where there's not many diesels being sold anyway.

Of course they did something wrong, and that should be fully acknowledge, investigated, fixed and fined.

But the media doing sensationalist stories like used car prices are falling is just going to make them fall more. What good does that do?

Anyway. I'm betting in a year this will be mostly forgotten. We'll see


----------



## ZephyR2

Arbalest said:


> This is a very interesting thread with some strong opinions from both sides of the debate. Most if not all the comments are from existing Audi owners; but I am coming at this from a different angle as a prospective TT purchaser (not the Ultra diesel version). My dilemma is on the one hand being v. keen to place an order for a new mk3 TT, which from my point of view is a very desirable car; but against that I am pretty disgusted with the behaviour of VAG in building 'cheat' software into their cars. Should I really be giving this company around £35k of my hard earned money and thus almost endorsing their nasty fraudulent behaviour?
> Or am I being too 'precious' and should I ignore the morals of VAG and order the car that I want?
> All thoughts welcome.


A fair question and really one that only you can answer. How far do your moral scrubbles go? Would they stop you buying a car you really desire in favour of one you don't really like but is "cleaner", in more ways than one.
Another thing to consider if buying a new Audi is will the company still be around in a couple of years time to honour your warranty and if it is, how far will it be to your nearest main dealer by then. Might not happen but who knows.


----------



## Toshiba

VW on BBC Rogue Traders tonight for those interested.


----------



## Ikon66

if this goes OT again then it's getting locked

If you 3 cant get on then add each other to your foe list then you wont see each other's posts. There's been more reports from 3 members in the mk3 forum than the rest put together :roll:


----------



## Mr R

Toshiba said:


> VW on BBC Rogue Traders tonight for those interested.


Pretty short report!

UK government have said road tax cost won't go up for affected cars and also unclear right now whether mpg affected after software update. Did I miss anything else...?


----------



## Toshiba

i think that was about it... some positive news i guess for TDi owners.


----------



## visuar

Arbalest said:


> This is a very interesting thread with some strong opinions from both sides of the debate. Most if not all the comments are from existing Audi owners; but I am coming at this from a different angle as a prospective TT purchaser (not the Ultra diesel version). My dilemma is on the one hand being v. keen to place an order for a new mk3 TT, which from my point of view is a very desirable car; but against that I am pretty disgusted with the behaviour of VAG in building 'cheat' software into their cars. Should I really be giving this company around £35k of my hard earned money and thus almost endorsing their nasty fraudulent behaviour?
> Or am I being too 'precious' and should I ignore the morals of VAG and order the car that I want?
> All thoughts welcome.


Totally understand your line of thinking and definitely something to consider.

Having said that, I would be shocked if all the other car manufacturers are not doing as much dirty stuff as they can get away with as well. And then there's all the extremely bad stuff behind oil.... Maybe they'll hurry along with a TT e-tron version now? 8)


----------



## Pale Rider

leopard said:


> t was on R4 today that at least one of the board members had known about this for the last 18 months,it seems yesterday's news is just that


That was Michael Horn, one of the VW board members in the USA. But he didn't say that he knew about the "defeat mechanism" - he said he was aware of emissions problems with VW diesels, which is no big deal because ALL diesels have problems with emissions. He actually claimed that the board knew nothing about the defeat mechanism and that it was put in without their knowledge by two people in the software division. :lol: I suspect any time soon people will be swooping on VW offices and taking computers away.



Arbalest said:


> Or am I being too 'precious' and should I ignore the morals of VAG and order the car that I want?
> All thoughts welcome.


I wouldn't worry too much about morals or it all gets too complicated. If you're buying a petrol Mk3 TT I'd go ahead - I just wouldn't buy a diesel of any make now because I think they're going to be subject to further restrictions in the near future.

One thing to bear in mind is that VAG is, nowadays, as much of a finance company as it is a car manufacturer. It has debts of about £100 billion, a large part of which is invested in PCP contracts that contain resale price guarantees. If there's a significant fall in the resale price of VW-Audi diesels they might find that they get lumbered with a lot of "negative equity" when people hand them back. But you can bet your life that the German govt won't let them go under - I know state aid is illegal under EU rules, but ......


----------



## Pale Rider

Ikon66 said:


> if this goes OT again then it's getting locked
> 
> If you 3 cant get on then add each other to your foe list then you wont see each other's posts. There's been more reports from 3 members in the mk3 forum than the rest put together :roll:


This is a very strange forum. I haven't seen any OT posts. And who are the "3" who are foes?

This is just an exchange of views about what will probably be (probably already is) the biggest scandal ever to hit the car industry. Before it's finished it's entirely possible that it will eclipse the $40 billion cost for BP's infamous oil spillage - it'll also probably cause a collapse in the sales of diesel cars with people moving back to either petrol or on to petrol-hybrids.

In the light of this VW-Audi is going to come in for some very justified criticism. If some of the delicate flowers on this forum don't like it I suggest that they don't read this thread - rather than bleating to the moderators. Pathetic stuff.


----------



## Mr R

Pale Rider said:


> Ikon66 said:
> 
> 
> 
> if this goes OT again then it's getting locked
> 
> If you 3 cant get on then add each other to your foe list then you wont see each other's posts. There's been more reports from 3 members in the mk3 forum than the rest put together :roll:
> 
> 
> 
> This is a very strange forum. I haven't seen any OT posts. And who are the "3" who are foes?
> 
> This is just an exchange of views about what will probably be (probably already is) the biggest scandal ever to hit the car industry. Before it's finished it's entirely possible that it will eclipse the $40 billion cost for BP's infamous oil spillage - it'll also probably cause a collapse in the sales of diesel cars with people moving back to either petrol or on to petrol-hybrids.
> 
> In the light of this VW-Audi is going to come in for some very justified criticism. If some of the delicate flowers on this forum don't like it I suggest that they don't read this thread - rather than bleating to the moderators. Pathetic stuff.
Click to expand...

Several posts were deleted last night on this thread which is perhaps why this post of Ikon's doesn't link-in with posts before it. Clearly you are not aware of what was said, but the moderators obviously felt the need to intervene.

However, what you are saying is all purely speculative. We don't know what the future will hold other than what VW/Audi have said so far. I will personally judge how VW/Audi react to this, and so far they have communicated pretty well with consumers. Yes its a messy and unfortunate situation but they seem to be handling it and facing up to their responsibilities now. What more do we want them to do?

It almost sounds like you want VW/Audi to go bust or for every diesel car to be instantly made illegal, and yes I agree... this can be a strange forum at times... (perhaps "interesting" is a better word).


----------



## Samoa

Mr R said:


> Several posts were deleted last night on this thread which is perhaps why this post of Ikon's doesn't link-in with posts before it. Clearly you are not aware of what was said, but the moderators obviously felt the need to intervene.


Difficult to comment without seeing what was said, though believe it's important for all views to be aired.

If this is simply swept under the carpet, it gives the message to motor manufacturers they can also do what they like to petrol emissions.

I'm not an engineer & purchased the products because I needed what they advertised, so respectfully ask this thread is never closed as am interested to learn of the opinions from both sides of the table

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Pale Rider

Mr R said:


> t almost sounds like you want VW/Audi to go bust or for every diesel car to be instantly made illegal, and yes I agree... this can be a strange forum at times... (perhaps "interesting" is a better word).


Like I said VAG won't be allowed go bust - Germany pulls the strings in the EU, so it won't happen. At least, I would be very surprised if it happened. If it did there'd be plenty of takers in the market to buy it.

And no govt would ever make diesels illegal. When they refine crude oil they get petrol and diesel - and they can't just throw the diesel away, so I guess we're stuck with them until they find other uses for the left-overs. The govt have already said that they're not going to change the VED rating for diesels, but the problem they've got is that the EU has mandatory max pollution levels and cities that breach them get fined, and diesel is most of the problem. So there will be more restrictions coming down the line - I think we can be sure of that. I also don't like the idea that when I drive my car is spewing out dangerous chemicals. I'm quite happy to spew out CO2 (no what Charlotte Church or Emma Thompson say :lol: ) but I draw the line at NO2.


----------



## Ikon66

It was nothing to do with the discussion just people getting touchy about others' views and the threads just descending into pettiness


----------



## Dash

Arbalest said:


> Should I really be giving this company around £35k of my hard earned money and thus almost endorsing their nasty fraudulent behaviour?
> Or am I being too 'precious' and should I ignore the morals of VAG and order the car that I want?


Short answer, no. If you feel a company is not acting with social responsibility and in a moral manner then it's your obligation as a consuming member of society to take your business elsewhere.

On the flip side, I would warn against knee-jerk reactions. I can easily see this being something that slowly escalated until it got to the point of the software is now. I think your answer will be how VW respond to the situation. Showing remorse and putting in safe-guards against this happening in the future will probably give you more assurances that VW is a brand that is safer to buy from going forward.

If you're looking to buy right now, then I'd say you're in an unfortunate position - if it is cause for concern; then your safe bet would be to choose another marque this time round and re-evaluation VW in the future.


----------



## Mr R

Speaking as someone who has a background in software development, (in the earlier stages of my career!), I find it quite interesting what the software developers have done. As a proof-of-concept I would certainly have had a go at writing code to "defeat" the emissions testing environment. I would also expect any good software developer with a curious mind to do the same. Of course, it should never have made it into production and that was a serious error, but good technical / scientific people are always looking for innovative solutions to problems and in the case of VW/Audi the developers have done exactly that.


----------



## ZephyR2

But VW can't have been so naive as to believe that they could get away with the cheat for ever. They must have realised that one day they would be found out and the fraud would be exposed. What did they think would happen when that day came?
I cannot understand how a massive company like VW could make such a huge misjudgement.


----------



## Pale Rider

ZephyR2 said:


> But VW can't have been so naive as to believe that they could get away with the cheat for ever. They must have realised that one day they would be found out and the fraud would be exposed. What did they think would happen when that day came?


That's the right question. I suspect the answer is that they thought nothing very much would happen when/if they were/are caught. Corporate criminality in Europe and the UK has been punished (if at all) with light sentences. In fact the laws of Corporate Manslaughter and Homicide were only brought in fairly recently (2008 I believe) and don't seem to have been used very much. When the VW-Audi case was brought up by various MEPs at the European "Parliament" there was a marked reluctance to talk about it - Juncker basically shut it down.

It's different in the USA where these laws have been on the statutes for longer and where corporate crime is punished by big sentences. My guess is that the VW "family" board have very little idea what they've walked into.

It's a bit like what happened to FIFA. FIFA have been taking the p!ss for years and we've been whingeing about them for even longer - while doing SFA about it. But when a few of the FIFA directors made the mistake of stepping on American soil they were arrested by the FBI on charges of racketeering, extortion and corruption. The FBI then used the minnows that they caught to dish the dirt on the main players - their usual tactic, but one that works. They now have enough to proceed against the whole organisation.

The lesson is don't mess with the Yanks.


----------



## BumBum_BumBum

As expected...

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... ssions-row

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## leopard

"However, in a letter seen by Reuters to EU officials, the ACEA chairman and Renault chief executive, Carlos Ghosn, said that no significant progress on NOx was possible before 2019. Reuters said that ACEA, which lobbies for Europe's carmakers in Brussels, told the officials on 1 October that the NOx limit for a new, more realistic test should be 70% higher than today's limit. An ACEA spokeswoman said it was "too early in the process to confirm or comment on hypothetical figures."

This excerpt(paragraph) from the Guardian beggars belief,wanting a more realistic test of 70% higher than today's limit!


----------



## BumBum_BumBum

Armchair environmentalists have a new stick to swing around. If we all want to drive our diesels than we're just going to have to accept that the technology just isn't where we all thought it was. The limits were set based on what everyone thought cars were capable of. Revised real emissions mean revised achievable limits.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr R

How to activate cheat mode:


----------



## leopard

Mr R said:


> How to activate cheat mode:


With yours,it'll be hazards on,accelerator down 5 times,passenger window fully down and drivers half way up followed by two beeps on the horn, a flash of the lights and the wink of an eye :lol:


----------



## Dash

I can easily imagine this happened the other way round to people are thinking.

They could have started in the position of having the ECU configured to meet requirements but over time they realised they could eek out better economy and performance with day-to-day driving by making some adjustments to the base-line.

We know that none of these tests really represent how people actually drive, so why not improve things for customers in their normal usage.

Have a few iterations of this over the years and you have what appears to be a deliberate hack to dodge regulations.


----------



## Mr R

leopard said:


> Mr R said:
> 
> 
> 
> How to activate cheat mode:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With yours,it'll be hazards on,accelerator down 5 times,passenger window fully down and drivers half way up followed by two beeps on the horn, a flash of the lights and the wink of an eye :lol:
Click to expand...

That actually sounds like something else you're describing...!  (car park, late at night, lights flashing...)


----------



## Shug750S

Sky news (sorry can't work out how to paste link on iPad)

_Volkswagen says 2016 diesel models have suspect software that could help exhaust systems run cleaner during government tests.

Europe's largest car manufacturer said the issue involved the "auxiliary emissions control device" on the vehicles.
_

Looks like this is involving more vehicles now


----------



## leopard

It's also gone from 2 engineers knowing about the software to over 30 allegedly.

At the moment Volkswagen have refused to comment :lol:


----------



## ZephyR2

leopard said:


> It's also gone from 2 engineers knowing about the software to over 30 allegedly.
> 
> At the moment Volkswagen have refused to comment :lol:


If 30 engineers "officially" knew you can guarantee that many more also knew, unofficially. :roll:


----------



## Pale Rider

I see VW have now said that the later E288 engine may also have the "defeat software" - so it may not only be the E189.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34601593

There's never just one cockroach. :?


----------



## ZephyR2

Which is more corrupt .... VW or FIFA? VW or FIFA. There's only one way to find out .... FIGHT !


----------



## ColinH

Pale Rider said:


> I see VW have now said that the later E288 engine may also have the "defeat software" - so it may not only be the E189.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34601593
> 
> There's never just one cockroach. :?


Now VW say that EA288 engines in the EU are not affected:

http://fourtitude.com/news/Audi_News_1/ ... -affected/


----------



## bobclive22

Gets worse,

Volkswagen accused of funding pro-diesel research that downplayed the health impact of emissions

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars ... z3phvCxNut


----------



## Sweetz

ZephyR2 said:


> Which is more corrupt .... VW or FIFA? VW or FIFA. There's only one way to find out .... FIGHT !


----------



## Pale Rider

There was talk in the ST that the costs for VW would be between 20 and 60 billion euros and that VW might have to spin off their prestige brands Porsche and Audi to pay them. Either that or get state aid.


----------



## leopard

There's only one economy that would have the economic wherewithal to finance a buyout and I reckon that would be the Chinese,unless they get funding from the Fatherland.They'd love to get their mits on either Audi or Porsche.

The brands would be reversed engineered to death and everybody and his dog will be driving around in lookalikes. 

Brand dilution would then take on a very new meaning.


----------



## Sweetz

leopard said:


> There's only one economy that would have the economic wherewithal to finance a buyout and I reckon that would be the Chinese,unless they get funding from the Fatherland.They'd love to get their mits on either Audi or Porsche.
> 
> The brands would be reversed engineered to death and everybody and his dog will be driving around in lookalikes.
> 
> Brand dilution would then take on a very new meaning.


That's like a bad dream!


----------



## Samoa

I trust you know Porsche own VW, hence why one of their own was put at the helm... here's a good story from 2008 how they creamed the hedge funds at their own game...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... custs.html

Recent court rulings about it have also gone in their favour

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Pale Rider

Samoa said:


> I trust you know Porsche own VW, hence why one of their own was put at the helm


No, they never quite managed to buy VW. And a few years later VW bought Porsche.

I see that the USA EPA now say that they've found the defeat device in Audi and Porsche 3 litre 6 cylinder diesels.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34705604


----------



## Spandex

Pale Rider said:


> No, they never quite managed to buy VW. And a few years later VW bought Porsche.


Actually, Porsche SE own (a controlling share of) Volkswagen AG who in turn own Porsche AG. Confusingly.


----------



## ZephyR2

Spandex said:


> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, they never quite managed to buy VW. And a few years later VW bought Porsche.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, Porsche SE own (a controlling share of) Volkswagen AG who in turn own Porsche AG. Confusingly.
Click to expand...

Errrr [smiley=huh2.gif] So how does that work? Sounds like a tax fiddle


----------



## drjam

ZephyR2 said:


> Spandex said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, they never quite managed to buy VW. And a few years later VW bought Porsche.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, Porsche SE own (a controlling share of) Volkswagen AG who in turn own Porsche AG. Confusingly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Errrr [smiley=huh2.gif] So how does that work? Sounds like a tax fiddle
Click to expand...

Porsche SE is just a holding company, i.e it only owns shares, it doesn't make anything (other than money). 
It, along with some other shareholders, owns VW. 
Porsche AG is the actual car making company, which VW own (no other shareholders).

But yes, get into the detail and I'd be surprised if there weren't tax fiddles everywhere!


----------



## leopard

On the 10 o' clock news tonight it has been said that a further 800,000 vehicles may be involved and petrol engines haven't been ruled out!! although it is thought that they may be the smaller petrol engines (1.2 + 1.4 ltr etc)

This is on top of the recent announcement that the V6 diesels may be affected as well in Audi and Porsche


----------



## Pale Rider

leopard said:


> On the 10 o' clock news tonight it has been said that a further 800,000 vehicles may be involved and petrol engines haven't been ruled out!! although it is thought that they may be the smaller petrol engines (1.2 + 1.4 ltr etc)


This is strange because it involves CO2 - not NOx - and VW have pointed it out themselves. Since CO2 is directly correlated to mpg (in diesel and petrol cars) they're basically saying that the manufacturer's quoted mpg figures are wrong. But we already know that - and the reason that the figures are wrong is because the EU's test cycle is not very well thought out.

I'm not quite sure what VW is saying. Are they saying they've got defeat software to cut CO2 during the test cycle? If so it doesn't work very well because VW cars are no worse on fuel, relative to the quoted figures, than most other manufacturers. Also, I thought the defeat software increased fuel consumption. Like a lot of what VW has said about this debacle it doesn't seem to make sense.


----------



## ZephyR2

Looks like VW don't know the full details at the moment but are flagging up an early warning. Defeat software is not necessarily involved in these additional cases .... yet.


----------



## ZephyR2

Apparently the Volkswagen scandal deepens as VW admits reversing sensors were really kittens tied to the rear bumper. :lol:


----------



## Samoa

This announces that VW may potentially offer to buy back affected cars...

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/volk ... spartandhp


----------



## Samoa

So... what's the latest?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ZephyR2

Read yesterday that VW are sending out notices to Amarok owners in Australia offering a modification. It apparently involves removing 4 lines of code and will not affect engine performance, torque, mpg, CO2, or engine acoustics.
http://www.motoring.com.au/amarok-first-dieselgate-fix-101481/
Interesting that they say engine performance and not power output. :?


----------

