Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Have Volkswagen been caught again?

Options
«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    colm_mcm
    Registered Users Posts: 73,382 ✭✭✭✭colm_mcm


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

    Didn’t see that coming at all..


  • Options
    #3
    Toyotafanboi
    Registered Users Posts: 12,917 ✭✭✭✭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?


  • Options
    #4
    mickdw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,260 ✭✭✭✭mickdw


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


  • Options
    #5
    Toyotafanboi
    Registered Users Posts: 12,917 ✭✭✭✭Toyotafanboi


    I think that's what WLTP did?


  • Options
    #6
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,615 ✭✭✭✭listermint


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


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Interslice
    Registered Users Posts: 3,506 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #8
    Miscreant
    Registered Users Posts: 2,197 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #9
    colm_mcm
    Registered Users Posts: 73,382 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #10
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    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.


  • Options
    #11
    colm_mcm
    Registered Users Posts: 73,382 ✭✭✭✭colm_mcm


    Apt username :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    bazz26
    Registered Users Posts: 51,113 ✭✭✭✭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? ;)


  • Options
    #13
    R.O.R
    Registered Users Posts: 12,672 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #14
    Toyotafanboi
    Registered Users Posts: 12,917 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #15
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,174 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #16
    HailSatan
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 328 ✭✭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.


  • Options
    #17
    Atlantic Dawn
    Registered Users Posts: 81,153 ✭✭✭✭Atlantic Dawn
    M


    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.


  • Options
    #18
    HailSatan
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 328 ✭✭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.


  • Options
    #19
    Atlantic Dawn
    Registered Users Posts: 81,153 ✭✭✭✭Atlantic Dawn
    M


    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.


  • Options
    #20
    colm_mcm
    Registered Users Posts: 73,382 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #21
    Cee-Jay-Cee
    Registered Users Posts: 12,235 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    HailSatan
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 328 ✭✭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?


  • Options
    #23
    ednwireland
    Registered Users Posts: 14,289 ✭✭✭✭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 !)

    My weather

    https://www.ecowitt.net/home/share?authorize=96CT1F



  • Options
    #24
    Old diesel
    Registered Users Posts: 5,786 ✭✭✭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


  • Options
    #25
    HailSatan
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 328 ✭✭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?


  • Options
    #26
    Nonoperational
    Registered Users Posts: 7,401 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #27
    HailSatan
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 328 ✭✭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?


  • Options
    #28
    colm_mcm
    Registered Users Posts: 73,382 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #29
    bazz26
    Registered Users Posts: 51,113 ✭✭✭✭bazz26


    The Germans are Europe!


  • Options
    #30
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Nonoperational
    Registered Users Posts: 7,401 ✭✭✭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.


Advertisement