VW emissions software update - disaster

benny79 · 09-02-2017 01:12PM

Buffman wrote: »

Have a read of the comments below this article and see what you think then.

Well over 100 recent comments there with various detrimental consequences across most VAG models. I know some VAG fanboys here will demand empirical evidence of any issue, but the fact remains that VAG are proven liars regarding these emission issues. So what makes anyone think they'll be honest about any 'fix' related issues now?

I think this chap summed it up nicely.[/QUOT

Cheers Buffman, God thats unbelievable stuff! how is this not making the news!! and how are VW getting away with it! They can sing for my car cause I won't be going near them..

Wonda-Boy · 09-02-2017 02:02PM

Was due to get my 2012 Highline done in the morning, but I think I will have an extra hour in bed now after reading this stuff.

[URL="[url=https://imgflip.com/i/1jacpn][img]https://i.imgflip.com/1jacpn.jpg[/img][/url][url=https://imgflip.com/memegenerator]via Imgflip Meme Generator[/url]"][/url]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

Buffman · 09-02-2017 02:53PM

Wonda-Boy wrote: »

Was due to get my 2012 Highline done in the morning, but I think I will have an extra hour in bed now after reading this stuff.

An extra hour in bed sounds a lot more desirable than playing russian roulette with your engine performance alright. Good decision.

Cee-Jay-Cee · 09-02-2017 04:18PM

George Dalton wrote: »

Or maybe just realise that you've done something a bit stupid and take the steps needed to reverse the outcome.

If people just used their brain for 10 seconds they would realise this is a no win scenario.

Consider the following proposal:
You give me €50.

The very best outcome you can expect from this transaction is that I give you back €50

But there is no guarantee that I will give you back €50, it might be €49, it might be €45, but I won't tell you in advance, you'll just have to wait and see.

Who in their right mind would accept that deal? Nobody. And yet people are going to VW dealers in their droves to have this "fix" carried out.

I just can't get my head around it.....

That's actually a quite complicated way of looking at it. It's much simpler, if this 'fix' does nothing to effect performance or economy and merely brings emissions in line with EU regulations then it would have been done at the factory from the start but it does effect performance and economy and people are now finding that out.

A friend of mine asked for my opinion on getting his Passat done and I asked him if he was happy with the way the car currently drives and performs and he said yes so I asked why would you do anything that will most likely change that?

VW cannot possibly claim that a completely different ECU map which changes emissions is not going to effect anything else i.e. Performance or economy...yet they do.

Wonda-Boy · 09-02-2017 05:35PM

Buffman wrote: »

An extra hour in bed sounds a lot more desirable than playing russian roulette with your engine performance alright. Good decision.

Yeah, absolutely. And mine is the higher 180BHP or whatever, so I am happy currently with performance.

Golfgorfield · 09-02-2017 05:54PM

So the latest update.

VW claim my car was "chipped" when i brought it into them thats why i feel its slow now.
Even though when i bought the car it felt just like the other GTDs i test drove, i would certainly have noticed if it was chipped. I spoke to the previous owner, he assured me it was standard.

I accepted their explanation as i am planning on remapping myself now anyway.
However when i asked them for the technical report they did, they told me they dont give out that information.

So they updated my software, then had a VW technician come down to do a further inspection, all of which was sent to VW HQ which they have ruled the car is performing up top manufacturer guidelines.
And as the owner of the car im not entitled to have a report on their investigations and findings.

It angers me they are now refusing to provide me with a report of what they did/investigated/results.
Im literally to take their word for it.

Im done with them now, my car is heading to Daltons asap for some actual genuine VW care.

This has ended my dealings with any VW dealers or their company, its my last ever VW and thats for sure.

ANYONE THAT GETS THE LETTER PUT IT IN THE BIN AND DONT RISK THE DROP IN PERFORMANCE.

bazz26 · 09-02-2017 06:20PM

It's gas that they claim the car was remapped prior to the fix yet will not produce proof of their findings to make the claim.

I know what you mean by being done with them and moving on but I'd still put it to them on their social media outlets such as facebook and twitter so at least it might alert other owners who were thinking of bringing their car into be "fixed". Social Media perception is normally important to these companies.

zilog_jones · 09-02-2017 06:25PM

I bet they did no real technical examination - they're not going to gain anything out of it by doing so. Unfortunately, with no hard evidence to back up your claims, it's your word against theirs and it will be difficult to prove anything. VW just want to tick some boxes to claim they made their best efforts to make their vehicles legal by EU type approval standards - they clearly don't give a shít about customers.

CalamariFritti · 09-02-2017 06:30PM

Common sense will tell you that you cannot expect to have this fix applied and the car to be the exact same after. If that was possible then they wouldn't have to cheat in the first place. Something's got to give.

So as an owner of an affected car you will have to make a decision. Screw the emissions and have nothing done to the car or be 'compliant' with something nobody will ever pull you over for and live with reduced performance/efficiency/whatever.

I know what I'd do.

Are VW actually claiming the fix will neither affect performance nor efficiency?

bear1 · 09-02-2017 07:50PM

I wonder, could you have cause for legal challenges?

Pkiernan · 09-02-2017 08:01PM

Should owners who now are fully aware that their cars emit more CO2 than represented be forced to pay higher Road Tax if they refuse to have their cars fixed?
I think that they should. Claim it back off VW if you want but polluter should be paying.

bazz26 · 09-02-2017 08:04PM

Problem is that you would have limited funds to pay one solicitor while they have a whole law firm with way more money. Then there is your time trying to prove before and after.

colm_mcm · 09-02-2017 08:10PM

I wonder if anyone with a standard non fixed version has any dyno figures? Would be interesting to do a side by side. Or even if you could fit a standard non fixed ecu and do two dyno runs?

bear1 · 09-02-2017 08:40PM

Pkiernan wrote: »

Should owners who now are fully aware that their cars emit more CO2 than represented be forced to pay higher Road Tax if they refuse to have their cars fixed?
I think that they should. Claim it back off VW if you want but polluter should be paying.

No.

Golfgorfield · 09-02-2017 08:48PM

colm_mcm wrote: »

I wonder if anyone with a standard non fixed version has any dyno figures? Would be interesting to do a side by side. Or even if you could fit a standard non fixed ecu and do two dyno runs?

There is a post in here with a graph of an A5 dyno before and after. Startling results that mirror exactly what ive experienced.

Golfgorfield · 09-02-2017 08:48PM

Pkiernan wrote: »

Should owners who now are fully aware that their cars emit more CO2 than represented be forced to pay higher Road Tax if they refuse to have their cars fixed?
I think that they should. Claim it back off VW if you want but polluter should be paying.

No.

mags1962 · 09-02-2017 08:49PM

I've had at least 3 letters and a phone call, from a customer service company employed by VAG, and ever time I've told them I won't be getting it done.
Mine's a 2012 2.0 TDI 170 bhp Audi and as has been said "If it ain't broke ....".
It's out of warrantee now so I'll be getting an Independant to do any work needed from now on without having to worry that they will do the fix.
This is purely a money making exercise for the VAG dealers as the cost of the work will be reimbursed to them by VAG central and the more fixes they do the more they can claim back.

Toyotafanboi · 09-02-2017 09:29PM

mags1962 wrote: »

This is purely a money making exercise for the VAG dealers as the cost of the work will be reimbursed to them by VAG central and the more fixes they do the more they can claim back.

Warranty/ recall work is rarely lucrative. If anything dealers would probably much rather a good run of servicing than be inundated by a recall that they struggle to break even on.

colm_mcm · 09-02-2017 09:38PM

True that. The time allotted is rarely enough and the rates are quite low. I'd imagine it's not a pleasant campaign.

zilog_jones · 10-02-2017 11:26AM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

So as an owner of an affected car you will have to make a decision. Screw the emissions and have nothing done to the car or be 'compliant'...

Even from an emissions point of view it apparently makes no difference in the real world - that German magazine test of the Amarok before and after (see my post here a few days ago) showed it still produced 8.5 times over the legal limit of NOx during actual driving. The software update only needed to make the car legal during the NEDC test cycle, which is some rolling road bullshít.

Basically, it's a complete waste of time and doesn't fix the real problem.

ABC101 · 10-02-2017 11:45AM

Well 8.5 times the Legal NOx limit is still better than 40 times the NOx limit.
If the engine cannot be altered to produce NOx at or below the limit then after engine mods are required, like urea injection etc, addblue or whatever.
If they are not going to install that then what is the point?
Some people won't be bothered too much about NOx / particulate emissions and so on. However if you lived in a bigger city like London, Paris etc, you would care. Even if your own health was perfect it would be disheartening to see other people suffer from respiratory illness etc.

Cee-Jay-Cee · 10-02-2017 11:46AM

Pkiernan wrote: »

Should owners who now are fully aware that their cars emit more CO2 than represented be forced to pay higher Road Tax if they refuse to have their cars fixed?
I think that they should. Claim it back off VW if you want but polluter should be paying.

They bought the cars in good faith. Why should they now be penalised for not wanting to change the way their cars perform. This is VW's problem and any loss of motor tax should be taken from them, in fact the gorvernmeht could make a pretty penny by working out the additional cost per car and back dating it to when ever each car had was new and landing the bill on VW. there would be massive support for it by everyone!

zilog_jones · 10-02-2017 12:20PM

ABC101 wrote: »

Well 8.5 times the Legal NOx limit is still better than 40 times the NOx limit.
If the engine cannot be altered to produce NOx at or below the limit then after engine mods are required, like urea injection etc, addblue or whatever.
If they are not going to install that then what is the point?

The 8.5 times was measured both before and after in the case of this Amarok - this is based on Euro 6 limits which are more lenient than the US EPA stuff. Of course we don't know the full story as no one has independently tested all the other VW diesels before and after the update.

VW don't care about reducing limits during real world driving as they're legally not required to.

ABC101 · 10-02-2017 12:27PM

Innocent buyers were sold a pig in a poke etc, won't be the first time or the last, VW may have lied / cheated but other manufacturers frequently lie too.

Irish Dept of the Environment would never go to Germany and demand back taxes for polluting engines.

But then again the Irish system is CO2 based, not NOx or particulates.

I blame the Green Party who rammed this system down the publics throat, incentives to switch from petrol to diesel etc

Diesel begins with a D, that's because it's Dirty!

SBPhoto · 10-02-2017 12:49PM

ABC101 wrote: »

Innocent buyers were sold a pig in a poke etc, won't be the first time or the last, VW may have lied / cheated but other manufacturers frequently lie too.

Irish Dept of the Environment would never go to Germany and demand back taxes for polluting engines.

But then again the Irish system is CO2 based, not NOx or particulates.

I blame the Green Party who rammed this system down the publics throat, incentives to switch from petrol to diesel etc

Diesel begins with a D, that's because it's Dirty!

All fuels are dirty

Special Circumstances · 10-02-2017 12:57PM

SBPhoto wrote: »

All fuels are dirty

So... we should incentivise the dirtiest?
Not sure what you're getting at tbh.

ABC101 · 10-02-2017 01:04PM

SBPhoto wrote: »

ABC101 wrote: »

Innocent buyers were sold a pig in a poke etc, won't be the first time or the last, VW may have lied / cheated but other manufacturers frequently lie too.

Irish Dept of the Environment would never go to Germany and demand back taxes for polluting engines.

But then again the Irish system is CO2 based, not NOx or particulates.

I blame the Green Party who rammed this system down the publics throat, incentives to switch from petrol to diesel etc

Diesel begins with a D, that's because it's Dirty!

All fuels are dirty

It was a "pun" on the letter "D", not all fuels begin with D.
It could be argued that Hydrogen (if produced environmentally) is a clean fuel etc.

X6.430macman · 10-02-2017 08:29PM

ABC101 wrote:

Diesel begins with a D, that's because it's Dirty!

Diesel has come an awful long way. A modern complient diesel is now very clean.

dar83 · 10-02-2017 09:14PM

X6.430macman wrote: »

Diesel has come an awful long way. A modern complient diesel is now very clean.

Cancer giving clean.

Special Circumstances · 10-02-2017 09:30PM

X6.430macman wrote: »

Diesel has come an awful long way. A modern complient diesel is now very clean.

So clean they don't even have to test it at NCT except for a token joke test ;-)

VW emissions software update - disaster

Comments