First bankers, now cars makers Options

[Berkshirelad]

But it's nothing new.

In the '70s when California had stricter emission controls on petrol engines than other states, US manufacturers added a belt-driven air pump to dilute the exhaust emissions and reduce the percentages measured. This was standard practice.

I don't see the furore. Like our MoT test, the US emissions test is only valid at the time of the test. VW-Audi group would appear to have been quite clever in a technological sense producing software to manage this.

Unlike our MOT, diesels in the US are tested for emissions.

How is this really any different from the technology applied to obtaining the best mpg figures for 'standardised' testing?

[Turin Machine]

The biggest (practical) problem for now is misinformation caused by, and whipped up by, the media. This could lead to a review of ved bands for ALL diesel vehicles, lower residuals and higher tax rates on diesel fuel. All unfounded of course but when did the government EVER fail to spot a taxable bandwagon they could jump on?

[Turin Machine]

."If only everything in life was as reliable as an emissions test."

[Andy Capp]

But it's nothing new.

In the '70s when California had stricter emission controls on petrol engines than other states, US manufacturers added a belt-driven air pump to dilute the exhaust emissions and reduce the percentages measured. This was standard practice.

I don't see the furore. Like our MoT test, the US emissions test is only valid at the time of the test. VW-Audi group would appear to have been quite clever in a technological sense producing software to manage this.

Unlike our MOT, diesels in the US are tested for emissions.

How is this really any different from the technology applied to obtaining the best mpg figures for 'standardised' testing?

The manufacture was making false claims!!!

Had they published figures that said: we know how to make the emissions better, but at a cost to consumption (as say, a customer option), then fine, but that wasn't the case.

THEY WILFULLY LIED and being nothing new is irrelevant.

[Andy Capp]

DP error.

[Andy Capp]

The biggest (practical) problem for now is misinformation caused by, and whipped up by, the media. This could lead to a review of ved bands for ALL diesel vehicles, lower residuals and higher tax rates on diesel fuel. All unfounded of course but when did the government EVER fail to spot a taxable bandwagon they could jump on?

It was caused by a lying manufacturer who deliberately cheated a test.

[motormad]

Before anyone ****** about car tax going up our taxation system is based on co2 not nox.

[je suis Charlie]

It was caused by a lying manufacture who deliberately cheated a test.

Jeez guys, sounds like you need more cowbell!

[Turin Machine]

Before anyone ****** about car tax going up our taxation system is based on co2 not nox.

For now that is, public pressure can be a powerful lobbyist, even if the public is a misinformed ****.

[Berkshirelad]

The manufacture was making false claims!!!

Had they published figures that said: we know how to make the emissions better, but at a cost to consumption (as say, a customer option), then fine, but that wasn't the case.

THEY WILFULLY LIED and being nothing new is irrelevant.

Nobody has wilfully lied.

They have merely installed technology that allows them to pass the US emissions tests and the time the car is being tested.

Only a difference in degree with a change of fuel or additive or an "Italian tune up" prior top an MoT test

The scaremongering in the press is not really relevant in the UK - the only emissions test in the MoT for a diesel is a smoke test (ie can you still see the other side of the garage after revving it).

Again, I don't see it as a major issue. The relevant government has set a standard and the manufacturers then come up with ways to ensure the standard has been met - which it is if the vehicle is under test.

An engine ECU is not a dumb peice of electronic - it is a sophisticated computer. ECUs switch engine maps constantly to achieve the best engine output etc. depending on a large number of factors acting on the vehicle, VW just has an additional map that responds to the vehicle being on test in US

[On the edge]

Frankly, the testers haven't been particularly intelligent either - apparently this has been going on for a good time. Surely, the consistent good results must have aroused suspision a lot earlier.

Yes, the manufacturer seems to have knowingly mislead, but why the shocked surprise? After all, even our Tesco has been at it. Then look at the rest of our establishment.

Crocodile tears; we now have what we voted for. When money is King, integrity goes out of the window. If anyone is to blame, it's the audit/testers, who should have been expecting this type of thing.

[Andy Capp]

Nobody has wilfully lied.

They have merely installed technology that allows them to pass the US emissions tests and the time the car is being tested.

Only a difference in degree with a change of fuel or additive or an "Italian tune up" prior top an MoT test

The scaremongering in the press is not really relevant in the UK - the only emissions test in the MoT for a diesel is a smoke test (ie can you still see the other side of the garage after revving it).

Again, I don't see it as a major issue. The relevant government has set a standard and the manufacturers then come up with ways to ensure the standard has been met - which it is if the vehicle is under test.

An engine ECU is not a dumb peice of electronic - it is a sophisticated computer. ECUs switch engine maps constantly to achieve the best engine output etc. depending on a large number of factors acting on the vehicle, VW just has an additional map that responds to the vehicle being on test in US

This is akin to a car dealer selling a car with an MOT but temporarily installed a cat for the test.

If VW didn't lie then they have nothing to worry about, do they.

[Andy Capp]

Frankly, the testers haven't been particularly intelligent either - apparently this has been going on for a good time. Surely, the consistent good results must have aroused suspision a lot earlier.

Yes, the manufacturer seems to have knowingly mislead, but why the shocked surprise? After all, even our Tesco has been at it. Then look at the rest of our establishment.

Crocodile tears; we now have what we voted for. When money is King, integrity goes out of the window. If anyone is to blame, it's the audit/testers, who should have been expecting this type of thing.

Of course it is buyer beware, but what this is down to is corporate fraud, that is why it is big news.

[je suis Charlie]

Of course it is buyer beware, but what this is down to is corporate fraud, that is why it is big news.

Sounds like someone needs a cuddle.

[On the edge]

Funny old life. Get an election count wrong, just shrug shoulders. Bankrupt your bank, just retire on a massive pension. Completely reverse what you said to get elected and become a coalition partner, just grin and sing a daft song.

Manipulate a not particularly relevant technical test on a car.......

[Andy Capp]

Funny old life. Get an election count wrong, just shrug shoulders. Bankrupt your bank, just retire on a massive pension. Completely reverse what you said to get elected and become a coalition partner, just grin and sing a daft song.

Manipulate a not particularly relevant technical test on a car.......

A point of order: "Completely reverse what you said to get elected and become a coalition partner" is an exaggeration of the fact. "Compromise on a manifesto pledge and become a coalition partner" is fairer I think.

The surprise is the idea that a reputable car manufacturer is prepared to defraud the consumer. The good thing about this event, news worthy or not, is that the public have a choice and power to punish the miscreants.

Surely this is a time to celebrate an exposure of corporate greed? And we can also see how apparent 'quality' can be just a load old guff.


I like Dubs mind, but never really put them above other marques.

[Simon Kirby]

How is this really any different from the technology applied to obtaining the best mpg figures for 'standardised' testing?

I may have misunderstood this, but I believe the difference is that when technology is applied to obtaining the best mpg figures for 'standardized' testing then the car you buy and take home has exactly those same efficiency characteristics as it had when it was tested. The test may not represent real-world driving and so in your everyday driving you may not necessarily get the efficiency that's quoted in the test, but the real-world efficiency you get will be broadly comparable with the real-world efficiency of any other car that scored the same in the standardized test.

What VW have done is cheated the test, and so the real-world efficiency of a VW is going to be worse than the real-world efficiency of another car that got a comparable standardized tests.

It's like employing a job applicant who got a double first in mathematics and Russian from Magdalen. Their real-world skills may not be everything you expect, but all things being equal they will be comparable with any other applicant with the same qualification. What VW have done is sold you a Sociology graduate with a Desmond from Essex.

[Simon Kirby]

Before anyone ****** about car tax going up our taxation system is based on co2 not nox.

I haven't read the details so I may be wrong, but I believe that the software switch configures the engine for optimum efficiency, so that minimizes CO2, so although NOx might also change it's the CO2 which is the significant issue here.

[Simon Kirby]

Before anyone ****** about car tax going up our taxation system is based on co2 not nox.

No, you were right.

As a result the German company tricked the Environmental Protection Agency into believing its cars met legal standards on the emission of nitrogen oxides when in fact they did not. When used on the road, rather than in the manipulated tests, the cars could give out emissions of as much as 40 times the level set by the standard.

Mind you, I'm pretty sure that the CO2 emissions would increase too or else there'd be no reason for the subterfuge, you'd just leave the "defeat device" enabled and everyone would be happy.

[On the edge]

A point of order: "Completely reverse what you said to get elected and become a coalition partner" is an exaggeration of the fact. "Compromise on a manifesto pledge and become a coalition partner" is fairer I think.

The surprise is the idea that a reputable car manufacturer is prepared to defraud the consumer. The good thing about this event, news worthy or not, is that the public have a choice and power to punish the miscreants.

Surely this is a time to celebrate an exposure of corporate greed? And we can also see how apparent 'quality' can be just a load old guff.


I like Dubs mind, but never really put them above other marques.

No such thing as reputable these days as paragraph one demonstrates! Adam Smith raw makes life much easier, no surprises. As paragraph one demonstrates. Sure there was a coalition, but they gave up the policy, could have voted with but kept policy for later, that would have been the honourable thing. VW were and are still just as reputable as any of the others. Only thing I'm surprised about is that after our past experiences anyone thinks they are.

What's to celebrate? We find examples and incompetences every day of the week - yet apart from 'being shocked' in reality, all we do is follow the example ourselves more and more. Lovely society we have.