Have Volkswagen been caught again?

wally79

Accusations in German media that they have added code for test detection which adjusts the amount of adBlue used.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/volkswagen-denies-fitting-defeat-devices-in-new-diesel-controversy-1.4015904?mode=amp

They haven’t finished paying for the last scandal. If this pans out it will be a big blow to their future

colm_mcm

You have to hand it to them. They’re sneaky.

Didn’t see that coming at all..

Toyotafanboi

I suppose it makes sense. Sure the EA288 was well into production and on the roads before the EA189 scandal came out, so why wouldn't it be cut from a similar cloth?

The only thing you have to wonder is, if the car was able to reduce it's emissions further by using more adblue in a given scenario, why would that be turned down for real world driving? Just to reduce adblue consumption?

mickdw

At this stage, it'd be inclined to say they should make the testing more real world to avoid this nonsense.

Toyotafanboi

I think that's what WLTP did?

listermint

And we all wonder why nox emissions around the M50 are 50 times the recommended safe limits.

Interslice

mickdw wrote: »

At this stage, it'd be inclined to say they should make the testing more real world to avoid this nonsense.

As in the application of actual randomised scientific testing exposing 20 years of bull****. I doubt it.

Miscreant

listermint wrote: »

And we all wonder why nox emissions around the M50 are 50 times the recommended safe limits.

Is there a source for this? So called "safe" limits for NO2 (according to the EPA) is 40 micrograms per cubic metre. Nowhere can I find that the M50 has been tested at 2000 micrograms per cubic metre at any time....

In any case, if VW are cheating again then they should be fined and made fix the problem like they were last time. Perhaps this is why they are pushing their EV future so hard now.

colm_mcm

To be fair, their fixing of the issue in Europe was a joke compared to what they had to do in the US.

The issue here is the stupid rules and regulations they are being forced to meet. Relax then back to what they should be and the need for all this would disappear along with getting rid of a lot of complicated systems from engines.

colm_mcm

Apt username

bazz26

listermint wrote: »

And we all wonder why nox emissions around the M50 are 50 times the recommended safe limits.

Maybe it's to do with all those fields full of PCP returned diesel cars that nobody can shift?

R.O.R

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

The only thing you have to wonder is, if the car was able to reduce it's emissions further by using more adblue in a given scenario, why would that be turned down for real world driving? Just to reduce adblue consumption?

I think the US has some regulation as to how much AdBlue can be used, or what distance you have to get from a tank of AdBlue.

Could probably cut emissions massively by dumping a huge amount of pig pi$$ in to the exhaust, but at the expense of having to fill up that tank every time you fill the fuel tank as well, rather than getting 8,000km + per tank of AdBlue.

Toyotafanboi

R.O.R wrote: »

I think the US has some regulation as to how much AdBlue can be used, or what distance you have to get from a tank of AdBlue.

Could probably cut emissions massively by dumping a huge amount of pig pi$$ in to the exhaust, but at the expense of having to fill up that tank every time you fill the fuel tank as well, rather than getting 8,000km + per tank of AdBlue.

Makes sense, but that's absolutely nuts. Why would you insist on a low consumption requirement on something contributing to potentially better air quality. It's not like its pricey stuff.

jimgoose

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

Makes sense, but that's absolutely nuts. Why would you insist on a low consumption requirement on something contributing to potentially better air quality. It's not like its pricey stuff.

To minimise the number of people who find ways of running without it, I suppose.

HailSatan

Addyson Stocky Vocabulary wrote: »

The issue here is the stupid rules and regulations they are being forced to meet. Relax then back to what they should be and the need for all this would disappear along with getting rid of a lot of complicated systems from engines.

I was wondering where John Gormley had gotten to.

Atlantic Dawn

HailSatan wrote: »

I was wondering where John Gormley had gotten to.

They have moved on to telling people to spend €80k putting insulation and heat pumps in to their homes along with wood burning stoves to kill off their neighbours.

HailSatan

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

wood burning stoves to kill off their neighbours.

Are the greens still at that? I know it was briefly all the rage environmentally and I've heard some planning permission departments are still living in those days, but I thought the particulate matter would be widely recognised by now.

Atlantic Dawn

HailSatan wrote: »

Are the greens still at that? I know it was briefly all the rage environmentally and I've heard some planning permission departments are still living in those days, but I thought the particulate matter would be widely recognised by now.

Yes recently watched Eco Eye, it was not only promoted as great but the home got 50% or so grant to approve it. The house was located in a densly populated area of Dublin 13.

colm_mcm

It’s well documented in London that the rise in popularity of wood burning stoves has effectively cancelled out the benefits of the LEZ in some areas.

Cee-Jay-Cee

wally79 wrote: »

They haven’t finished paying for the last scandal. If this pans out it will be a big blow to their future

Somehow I don't think it will...99% of people simply don't care so long as their cars drive as they're supposed to and don't break down.

HailSatan

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Yes recently watched Eco Eye, it was not only promoted as great but the home got 50% or so grant to approve it. The house was located in a densly populated area of Dublin 13.

Eco eye was Duncan Stewart about 20 years ago right? Or is there an up to date version?

ednwireland

colm_mcm wrote: »

To be fair, their fixing of the issue in Europe was a joke compared to what they had to do in the US.

isnt that because they were within the euro nox limits without the fix ?
the fix was to meet californias more stringent requirements

or did i dream that (quite possible !)

Old diesel

Could end up being a non issue as no one has YET appeared to have produced real world emissions info on the cars.

Imo if they are messing again - then this should be reflected in real world Nox levels that are out of line point

HailSatan

Old diesel wrote: »

Could end up being a non issue as no one has YET appeared to have produced real world emissions info on the cars.

The whole diesel gate thing was a conspiracy?

Nonoperational

TBH it's all a load of ****e. People want to drive. Engines are broadly the same. People like to make drama to discuss. Rinse and repeat.

HailSatan

Nonoperational wrote: »

TBH it's all a load of ****e. People want to drive. Engines are broadly the same. People like to make drama to discuss. Rinse and repeat.

Wait, if they're all so similar why was diesel so glorious in 2008 Mr Ryan? Do you mind if I call you Eamonn?

colm_mcm

ednwireland wrote: »

isnt that because they were within the euro nox limits without the fix ?
the fix was to meet californias more stringent requirements

or did i dream that (quite possible !)

More like the Germans have huge influence in Europe.

bazz26

The Germans are Europe!

grogi

Addyson Stocky Vocabulary wrote: »

The issue here is the stupid rules and regulations they are being forced to meet. Relax then back to what they should be and the need for all this would disappear along with getting rid of a lot of complicated systems from engines.

Rules are to protect environment and humans. If they cannot meet them, they should not try to work around them.

Nonoperational

HailSatan wrote: »

Wait, if they're all so similar why was diesel so glorious in 2008 Mr Ryan? Do you mind if I call you Eamonn?

Hilarious.

colm_mcm

grogi wrote: »

Rules are to protect environment and humans. If they cannot meet them, they should not try to work around them.

You can’t say they didn’t do that

grogi

grogi wrote: »

Rules are to protect environment and humans. If they cannot meet them, they should not try to work around them.

The rules are made up bull to extract money from people! Nothing else.

HailSatan

Nonoperational wrote: »

Hilarious.

Danke:D

HailSatan

Addyson Stocky Vocabulary wrote: »

The rules are made up bull to extract money from people! Nothing else.

I love hearing green party supporter still peddling the oul "NOx and PM and SO2 aren't even really emissions, therefore diesel is low emissions" story.

listermint

bazz26 wrote: »

Maybe it's to do with all those fields full of PCP returned diesel cars that nobody can shift?

This is true. I'm not going to divulge the manufacturer to some randomer on the internet. Millions in stock being funneled off presently through auctions.

I suspect you don't know how PCP and the UK car influx has impacted the industry. And that's ok. But it doesn't give you the right to attack me on the net. Cheers though.

As for the nox gases the origin of it started here

https://www.newstalk.com/news/areas-dublin-exceeding-eu-limits-nitrogen-dioxide-880330

And the EPA have been measuring the results. Newstalk had an EPA representative on during the week. So I don't have be link as of yet perhaps it's not fully published your welcome to look for it or contact them yourself.

Frankly I'm actually amazed for someone who frequents the motors forum like yourself to not think that the levels on and around the m50 are over acceptable norms. You only have to look at the liked of VW scandal not alone amongst manufacturers and the ****e advice dished out in here about removing DPFs all the time to understand we have a problem.

Im a motorcyclist aswell as a car owner and travel the m50 frequently. The fumes are ridiculous



So bazz over to you ...

Miscreant

listermint wrote: »

As for the nox gases the origin of it started here

https://www.newstalk.com/news/areas-dublin-exceeding-eu-limits-nitrogen-dioxide-880330

And the EPA have been measuring the results. Newstalk had an EPA representative on during the week. So I don't have be link as of yet perhaps it's not fully published your welcome to look for it or contact them yourself.

Frankly I'm actually amazed for someone who frequents the motors forum like yourself to not think that the levels on and around the m50 are over acceptable norms. You only have to look at the liked of VW scandal not alone amongst manufacturers and the ****e advice dished out in here about removing DPFs all the time to understand we have a problem.

Im a motorcyclist aswell as a car owner and travel the m50 frequently. The fumes are ridiculous

Thanks for the clarification. My only issue was with the 50 times higher than limits part of your original statement, which, if true, would have meant that it was worse than pollution in some cities in China which are a much bigger threat to life. I am fully aware of how noxious the M50 can be, I live right beside it and also ride a motorcycle on it almost every day.
For the record, the EPA did publish figures for NO2 emissions in Dublin that are up to twice as high as the recommended limits, so that in itself is bad enough.
In any case, Volkswagen need to be investigated again but as others have said, nothing will happen here in Europe as the last response was lackluster at best. The Americans had the right idea, fine them almost in to oblivion and make them fix the issue for all customers for free too.

Toyotafanboi

listermint wrote: »

This is true. I'm not going to divulge the manufacturer to some randomer on the internet. Millions in stock being funneled off presently through auctions.

I suspect you don't know how PCP and the UK car influx has impacted the industry. And that's ok. But it doesn't give you the right to attack me on the net. Cheers though.

Why would you not divulge the manufacturer, are you worried that they'll know it was you that outed them? Come on now! Surely someone somewhere would have spotted "millions" of 3 year old diesels going through an auction house or whatever. I know you're not saying much but I call bs on whatever point you are trying to make here.

Sure, UK imports are hurting the local trade but dealers are getting by. Deals are tough and the industry is changing daily but nobody un the country is stuck with heaps of 3 year old PCP return diesels they cant shift. Although there is a clear shift on towards petrol, diesel stock is still desirable anywhere down the country, a bit less so in Dublin but it's still the go to choice in larger cars, whether that be right or wrong.

HailSatan

Miscreant wrote: »

Thanks for the clarification. My only issue was with the 50 times higher than limits part of your original statement, which, if true, would have meant that it was worse than pollution in some cities in China which are a much bigger threat to life.

How could an individual car emit more than the allowed limit for an urban area.

Do you think you were not thinking of the right limits?

Miscreant

HailSatan wrote: »

How could an individual car emit more than the allowed limit for an urban area.

Do you think you were not thinking of the right limits?

The limits originally being stated (on post #6, if you would like to look back) were for atmospheric concentrations of NO2 as measured by the EPA and not for individual vehicles.

bazz26

listermint wrote: »

This is true. I'm not going to divulge the manufacturer to some randomer on the internet. Millions in stock being funneled off presently through auctions.

I suspect you don't know how PCP and the UK car influx has impacted the industry. And that's ok. But it doesn't give you the right to attack me on the net. Cheers though.

As for the nox gases the origin of it started here

https://www.newstalk.com/news/areas-dublin-exceeding-eu-limits-nitrogen-dioxide-880330

And the EPA have been measuring the results. Newstalk had an EPA representative on during the week. So I don't have be link as of yet perhaps it's not fully published your welcome to look for it or contact them yourself.

Frankly I'm actually amazed for someone who frequents the motors forum like yourself to not think that the levels on and around the m50 are over acceptable norms. You only have to look at the liked of VW scandal not alone amongst manufacturers and the ****e advice dished out in here about removing DPFs all the time to understand we have a problem.

Im a motorcyclist aswell as a car owner and travel the m50 frequently. The fumes are ridiculous



So bazz over to you ...

I'm not attacking you so don't be trying to play the victim here. I'm attacking the claims you are making. You made the same claim about all these PCP diesel cars sitting in fields around Dublin because they couldn't be sold in another thread. You still haven't provided proof of any of this and now claiming confidentiality which is very convenient don't you think?

Back over to yourself...

bazz26

bazz26 wrote: »

I'm not attacking you so don't be trying to play the victim here. I'm attacking the claims you are making. You made the same claim about all these PCP diesel cars sitting in fields around Dublin because they couldn't be sold in another thread. You still haven't provided proof of any of this and now claiming confidentiality which is very convenient don't you think?

Back over to yourself...

There will be no evidence as it’s total fiction he is peddling.

Nonoperational

bazz26 wrote: »

I'm not attacking you so don't be trying to play the victim here. I'm attacking the claims you are making. You made the same claim about all these PCP diesel cars sitting in fields around Dublin because they couldn't be sold in another thread. You still haven't provided proof of any of this and now claiming confidentiality which is very convenient don't you think?

Back over to yourself...

Because it's absolute nonsense.... but don't let that get in the way of a good argument.

LillySV

So I want to buy 3 litre car...2013 onwards... should I be looking at petrols or diesels... want to get one before brexit as reckon the prices go up after that .... and worried about what then Fianna Gail ***** do in next budget

Atlantic Dawn

LillySV wrote: »

So I want to buy 3 litre car...2013 onwards... should I be looking at petrols or diesels... want to get one before brexit as reckon the prices go up after that .... and worried about what then Fianna Gail ***** do in next budget

3 litre pure petrol will be €2350 a year motor tax, hybrid or diesel perhaps €300odd.

listermint

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

Why would you not divulge the manufacturer, are you worried that they'll know it was you that outed them? Come on now! Surely someone somewhere would have spotted "millions" of 3 year old diesels going through an auction house or whatever. I know you're not saying much but I call bs on whatever point you are trying to make here.

Sure, UK imports are hurting the local trade but dealers are getting by. Deals are tough and the industry is changing daily but nobody un the country is stuck with heaps of 3 year old PCP return diesels they cant shift. Although there is a clear shift on towards petrol, diesel stock is still desirable anywhere down the country, a bit less so in Dublin but it's still the go to choice in larger cars, whether that be right or wrong.

Millions worth. Who said millions. Don't attempt to twist my words.

At this point i couldn't give a fiddler's if I'm believed or not. I'm not outting the manufacturer here. Cheers though.

It's what occurs when you are pushing your staff to push finance deals and not selling the trade ins or second hand stock over years. They'll do just that.

Anyway onwards. Because I won't be filling anyone in.

LillySV

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

3 litre pure petrol will be €2350 a year motor tax, hybrid or diesel perhaps €300odd.

Is that about to change or can they change tax bands for older vehicles .ie if I buy a 2016 car with 390 tax ... can they come along in 2019 budget and make that car 1500!? I know they can make the brand new version of that car 1500 if they want but could they do it to the 16 car ?

listermint

LillySV wrote: »

Is that about to change or can they change tax bands for older vehicles .ie if I buy a 2016 car with 390 tax ... can they come along in 2019 budget and make that car 1500!? I know they can make the brand new version of that car 1500 if they want but could they do it to the 16 car ?

Ya. Wait 30 years

I doubt we will ever see a change in that Bracket.

Nonoperational

HailSatan wrote: »

Hmmmmm

Dont change what I said and represent it as a quote. Rotten and pathetic. What a sad low life.

Miscreant

LillySV wrote: »

Is that about to change or can they change tax bands for older vehicles .ie if I buy a 2016 car with 390 tax ... can they come along in 2019 budget and make that car 1500!? I know they can make the brand new version of that car 1500 if they want but could they do it to the 16 car ?

Of course they can change the tax rate, they're the Government.

listermint

Nonoperational wrote: »

Dont change what I said and represent it as a quote. Rotten and pathetic. What a sad low life.

Calling people low life's on the internet.

So much win.

Did you wake up this morning saying to yourself. It feels like an abuse day I need to dish out some proper slurs today. Then I'll feel awesome.