Emissions scandals thread

Robin.
Welp you can kiss Mitsubishi goodbye then... View attachment 541112

TBH manufacturer stated fuel efficiency and emissions figures have always been nonsense. They are only now confirming what most consumers already knew, that the figures are usually unobtainable in the real world.
Click to expand...
Usually. My Forte Koup actually gets better mileage than the EPA ratings.
 
Fiat has also been using cheat software in their 500X models. The German organisation KBA has found out that the cars swap settings after 22 minutes, and the average test lasts about 20 minutes.
 
Dennisch
Fiat has also been using cheat software in their 500X models. The German organisation KBA has found out that the cars swap settings after 22 minutes, and the average test lasts about 20 minutes.
Click to expand...
Isn't Fiat partnered with Chrysler?
 
bremics
What vehicles other than trucks with diesels haven't been caught cheating?
Click to expand...

Mitsubishi's cheat was for gasoline Kei Cars.

-

While they do admit to not following standards since 1991, this only applies to the Japanese market. So far, the cars pass the sniffer at the EPA.

-

Still... goodbye independence.

-

Very noble of Nissan to report the Mitsubishi cheat.

Right before buying up a third of Mitsubishi's crashing stocks.

:D
 
R1600Turbo
Usually. My Forte Koup actually gets better mileage than the EPA ratings.
Click to expand...
EPA figures are much closer to reality than NEDC or Japanese ones, so I'm not surprised you're beating the official numbers. My old colleagues in the States regularly matched or beat EPA numbers (though there were always a few cars that were nowhere near) whereas I know very few of my UK colleagues who match NEDC ones.

It's a lot to do with speeds. Cars in EPA tests have to accelerate harder, reach higher overall and average speeds, and spent less time at a standstill (when cars in Euro tests with stop-start spend a lot of time with the engine off entirely).

The Japanese test is even sillier. Maybe it matches Japanese inner-city traffic, but I believe the average speeds are comically low and there's a lot of time spent standing still.
 
In the US people can receive a decent payment or a buy back for their VW diesel.

In Europe people can forget such a deal!


?
 
Dennisch
In the US people can receive a decent payment or a buy back for their VW diesel.

In Europe people can forget such a deal!

?
Click to expand...
Unless I've misunderstood, it's because the "defeat device" wasn't specifically designed to cheat NEDC emissions tests, it was to cheat EPA ones. VWs (and others) do produce greater emissions than NEDC tests suggest, but that's simply a byproduct of them being less efficient in standard day-to-day use than they are in very specific lab conditions with low revs etc.

Or to put it another way, if you drove on the road exactly as you would in an NEDC test, you would produce no more emissions than the official figures. If you drove on the road exactly as you would in an EPA one, you'd still be massively over the limits because there was a deliberate workaround to cheat that particular test.

The long and short of it is that in Europe VW hasn't actually broken any rules, whereas in the US they have. Hence compensation in the States and sod-all here. Personally, I think driving a diesel VW is punishment enough for most.
 
Had to be done
AC335AE3-E68D-4039-9837-B124B89DED07_zpswya3gks1.jpg


Also told my local dealer not to put the update on my car as I'm happy with the way it is.
 
A group of 10000 UK motorists has launched a class action law suit against VW, claiming £3000 each - which, if applied to the UK's 1.2 million VW owners affected by the emissions scandal, would cost VW £3.6 billion... that's quite a bit less than VW has agreed to pay in the US, where affected car owners can either have their cars fixed and receive a payment of up to $10000, or sell their cars back to VW.

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ate-volkswagen-uk-motorists-class-action-suit
 
I what proportion of that 10,000 people are doing it because they dearly care about the unexpected environmental impact of their cars*, and what proportion have just figured out a great way of making an extra three grand?

Also, facepalming over the comment by Sadiq Kahn at the bottom of that article. Not sure if he really understands that the "unpaid congestion charge" is irrelevant to the matter at hand, given that the congestion charge is based on CO2, which is not one of the emissions in contention with the Dieselgate issue.

If VW should be charged for its cars emitting more CO2 than is claimed then so should basically everybody else, since any vehicle forced to sit in London's traffic will be burning more fuel (and therefore producing more CO2) than is quoted by the manufacturer.


* I mean genuinely care, rather than the VW owners who talk out of their arse on the internet about how much "cleaner" and "more economical" their cars are than the hybrid equivalent despite that never having been the case.
 
Last edited:
homeforsummer
I what proportion of that 10,000 people are doing it because they dearly care about the unexpected environmental impact of their cars*, and what proportion have just figured out a great way of making an extra three grand?

Also, facepalming over the comment by Sadiq Kahn at the bottom of that article. Not sure if he really understands that the "unpaid congestion charge" is irrelevant to the matter at hand, given that the congestion charge is based on CO2, which is not one of the emissions in contention with the Dieselgate issue.

If VW should be charged for its cars emitting more CO2 than is claimed then so should basically everybody else, since any vehicle forced to sit in London's traffic will be burning more fuel (and therefore producing more CO2) than is quoted by the manufacturer.


* I mean genuinely care, rather than the VW owners who talk out of their arse on the internet about how much "cleaner" and "more economical" their cars are than the hybrid equivalent despite that never having been the case.
Click to expand...
I presume that most people are aware of the fact that quoted emissions have certain caveats such that there will always be instances where emissions are higher than those stated - though the fact that most published emissions data come from unrealistic test conditions is a much wider issue. VWs problem, however, is that they went a step further than merely gaming the system (as everyone else has done) and has installed hardware that actively produces falsely low readings, and that they have gone on to exploit that facet of their products as a selling point. So, other manufacturers have stayed within the letter of the law (if not the spirit of it), while VW have clearly not.

If I had bought an affected VW car, I'd be more concerned about the fact that I'd been purposefully misled rather than simply concerned about the additional environmental impact of the car, and hence I'd not feel too guilty about seeking compensation that I thought was appropriate, up to and including a full refund and a bit extra for my inconvenience.
 
Through all of this I keep thinking: are the metrics expected by the EPA in any way realistic or achievable at all with a reasonably priced internal combustion engine? Seems to me like they're asking the impossible from manufacturers and, in turn, manufacturers answer in the most cost-efficient way possible even if it's unethical by cheating.
 

Latest Posts

Back