Nobody wants to talk about the VW debacle?
Who's to say it's restricted to VW? There's every chance none of 'em are as squeaky clean (boom boom) as you'd like to think.
Agree completely. But it's focused on VW at the moment.
My own perspective on this, if proven, is that if VAG have deliberately mislead or cheated their way around emissions regs then they've shot themselves in the foot because, as ingenious as the alleged workaround is, it was always going to come out somehow in the end, and it's going to cost them a huge chunk of credibility.
But to keep some reality on it, I wonder how many older diesels with a few miles under their belt on the road in the UK no longer meet the emissions regs they were designed to simply because their (for example) EGR systems are all coked up and not working as intended? I bet it's a lot! At the moment the MOT emissions test for diesels only measures smoke density, not the quantity of actual pollutants, so once the vehicle has left the production line, as long as it's not belching out so much black smoke to get itself pulled over, it can pretty much do as it likes.
Has is been proven yet? The yanks are always happy to have a pop at any non american company so I wouldn't be 100% convinced yet, even if it is proved VW will almost certainly contest it so the issue is going to drag on for many a year.
My personal thoughts are that VW wouldn't have been that stupid and that either the american legislation is wishy-washy and they thought they had complied or that it's been incorrectly identified
Er, no. VW admitted almost immediately that it had deliberately tried (and succeeded) to disguise the pollution levels of their vehicles in the USA. Now other markets are looking very closely at their testing scenarios.
I don't have a particular axe to grind with VW but this was stupidity of the first order - and I'm not sure other companies aren't guilty of it as well. Big, biiiiggg jar of worms opened here. And heads will roll.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34332452
BTW, this is not about annual health checks - it's about construction compliance with environmental regulations.
Quote from: mike wilson on September 23, 2015, 03:33:12 PM
BTW, this is not about annual health checks - it's about construction compliance with environmental regulations.
Ok, fair enough, and I re-iterate what I said earlier.
But my point was, that it's all well and good designing vehicles to meet these regulations at the construction stage. But in the case of EGR systems particularly, these systems frequently do not operate trouble free and as intended for the service life of the vehicle without requiring attention, which is something that is currently unchecked by vehicle testing in this country once any vehicle has left the construction plant- and being that this all (supposedly) boils down to environmental concerns and reducing pollution, it would seem that this to
some degree defeats the whole point of implementing it in the first place.
Someone made an interesting point on t'wireless today, regarding whether or not its just VW or not
Point was that a BMW (forget the model) an Insignia and Passat all emiting around the same . Now if Bmw and Gm can achieve this without cheating and VW cant, surely VW would have bought one of each and pulled them apart to see how they do it.
Or everyone is cheating
Quote from: bigdave982 on September 23, 2015, 05:32:46 PM
Or everyone is cheating
The $64,000 question. Certainly, everyone must now be under suspicion and may be required to demonstrate compliance. It might mean making manufacturers release their code.
Quote from: insanitybeard on September 23, 2015, 04:12:46 PM
Ok, fair enough, and I re-iterate what I said earlier.
But my point was, that it's all well and good designing vehicles to meet these regulations at the construction stage. But in the case of EGR systems particularly, these systems frequently do not operate trouble free and as intended for the service life of the vehicle without requiring attention, which is something that is currently unchecked by vehicle testing in this country once any vehicle has left the construction plant- and being that this all (supposedly) boils down to environmental concerns and reducing pollution, it would seem that this to some degree defeats the whole point of implementing it in the first place.
I'm very much of the mind that (almost) whatever emissions a vehicle makes in its lifetime, they are insignificant compared to the emissions of making it. The problem is that it is easier to deal with emissions from a concentrated source like a factory than it is to deal with those of millions of individual, comparatively microscopic, units. The problems of emissions after construction have never been properly dealt with except in situations such as southern California, where there was an extreme risk to life because of them. There are plenty of places on earth that are just as bad as L.A. - probably worse - but there is little government will to deal with them in the locality.
Ahh I didn't realise they had admitted it humm that's a fairly strange move from one of the largest manufacturers, you gotta think this is going to effect a lot more then just vw.
I see the wording on the provisional recall notice "owners may see a dramatic drop in performance".... uh-oh.
I would think this will affect most manufacturers, as a matter of course they all buy any new car and take it apart to see what the opposition are up to :-\
It is quite surprising how quickly the top brass appear to be falling on their swords, perhaps there are other things yet to come out!!!
Been going on a lot longer than I thought.
http://jalopnik.com/your-guide-to-dieselgate-volkswagens-diesel-cheating-c-1731857018
"While the VWs passed the lab tests performed by the California Air Resources Board, they failed the real-world tests, which measured tailpipe emissions.
Bloomberg reports VW engineers struggled to explain these results to the EPA and CARB after an investigation began. Regulators werenââ,¬â,,¢t satisfied with that explanation, so they threatened to withhold certifications and effectively halt sales.
Only then did VW concede the cars had a cheat device. The EPA didnââ,¬â,,¢t know about this before because they depend on automakers to self-certify their cars.
During the course of the EPA and CARB investigations, VW agreed to a voluntary recall of nearly 500,000 TDI cars last December to implement a software patch they claimed would fix the issue."
Presumably, that's December 2014.
The other point, of course, is that UK vehicle excise (or whatever they call it this year) brackets are based on engine pollution output figures that are garnered from the testing regime that has been found to be rigged. People who don't go to the vets may find their Polo in the same bracket as one of the larger Mercedes vehicles.
All the other manufacturers have been suspiciously quiet over this. If I was Ford (or anyone else who made diesels) I would be trumpeting form the rooftops how mine were all above board.
And, finally, I'd happily trade 10% power if my mileage figures were what are advertised. I bet they come from the testing regime, also.
Ford response:
Does Ford have any vulnerability similar to VWââ,¬â,,¢s emissions issues?
No. Our vehicles and engines meet all applicable emissions standards, and they are designed to perform consistently both in the lab and on the road.
Does Ford have ââ,¬Å"defeat devicesââ,¬Â in any vehicles?
No.
Is Ford worried about its own vehicle emissions transparency?
No. We have designed emissions control systems that perform consistently both in the lab and on the road.
In which vehicles does Ford offer diesel powertrains in the U.S.?
Ford diesel offerings in the U.S. are limited to heavy-duty vehicles: The Transit 3.2-liter Power Stroke and F-Series Super Duty F250-450 pickup trucks and F-350-750 chassis cab products equipped with the 6.7-liter Power Stroke."