[prakhar1998]

A very clear and concise explanation from the Verge clarifies most of the doubts about the VW fiasco. Essentially, VW did this to enhance the fuel efficiency of their vehicles, however emitting moore than 40 times the pollutants. This means that if there occurs a recall, be ready to get fewer kilometres per litre from your punchy VW diesels.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ4irwe3ZDk

[graaja]

Originally Posted by krsna777

Hello everyone,
I have already booked a polo gt tsi . Now I'm really worried how my ownership experience would be like given that VW has to cough up so much money. What would you do if you were in my situation?

I am in the same situation as yours. In my case, the car is reaching the dealer today, and I have to decide by this week end.

I too was worried about future support in case VW sank completely, and was of two minds about canceling the order. After following all the news the past couple of days this is what I think: Though the maximum penalty can be as high as $18billion (the final penalty would be way less than this amount), VW has a cash reserve of $24billion. Because of this, though VW will be heavily hit financially, it will eventually recover. Also, as the German (and EU) economy greatly depends on VW, there will be Government backing as well.

Yes, there is a risk of cost of ownership going high if VW transfers some of this financial burden to the owners, but only to some extent, as they also have to stay cost competitive if they have to gain back market share. Considering all this, and also considering the fact that I could not find any other car with the same performance in this price range, I have decided to go ahead with the purchase.

I sincerely hope that this does not become a financial disaster!

Originally Posted by gthang

Why are all our righteous members not out with their sticks and spades to call out on the lying cheats at Volkswagen, now that enough and more technical clarifications have been provided?
Cheers

This will happen when environment becomes a priority in car buying process. At this point of time though, the priorities in no particular order are fuel economy, safety and ownership costs, which I have seen getting discussed widely in the forum. But I have not seen any discussion on pollusion as priority. Also we as a country are still following Euro IV spec which is about 10 years behind EU and US. Considering these facts, it is not practical to just ignore VW cars. Their deception notwithstanding, they still make some of the best cars that are fun to drive and also safe. My recent decision to cancel my Celerio order and book a Polo TSi was mainly on safety concerns.

[Thad E Ginathom]

udi r&d boss Ulrich Hackenberg and Porsche's engine chief, Wolfgang Hatz, will be dismissed at the supervisory board meeting on Friday.

Hackenberg?

Porsche's engine chief? And yet the Porsche guy is the the new CEO? He didn't know what his engine chief was doing?

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Not so sure what a righteous member looks like. I'm really not that bothered as I have never ever bought a car in my life for fuel economy or emission levels.

Honestly, I don't think the environment is number one of the list of a lot of motor fans. If it was, our driving styles would alter fundamentally. Heavy acceleration/braking would be outlawed for starters. The roads would be a better place, but yes... less fun.

When all is said and done, you will most likely find VW makes, by and large, stonking good cars at a reasonable price for the masses. If you don't want to buy VW cars because of this, that's one's choice one is free to make.

When I last looked (which is a decade or more ago) VW in UK sold moderately good cars (had seen better days) at comparatively high prices. I think they are cheaper in mainland Europe, but, a folks' wagon?

[hothatchaway]

Did the anchor mean Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) when he said 'NOx traps' in the above video? Diesel mills produce less greenhouse gases like CO, HC as they have better fuel burning efficiency than petrol engines while releasing greater nitrogen oxides/soot due to the extremely high pressure inside the combustion chambers. Hence diesel mills release greater particulate matter in the atmosphere.

Enter the DPF which is mandatory since 2009 to meet Euro 5 norms and which, in order to 'regenerate' or to get rid of the accumulated soot, needs for the engine to inject more diesel post combustion to raise the temperature of the exhaust gases and allow the DPF to fry its accumulated gunk.

If the above is correct then that is what the anchor meant when he said in order for the NOx 'traps' to work under normal driving conditions, fuel efficiency would drop given that additional fuel is needed to raise the temperature of the exhaust gases.

DPFs have been an Achilles heel for many diesel engine manufacturers since its inception given the issues with 'regeneration' With stricter fuel emission norms coming in, it will be harder for smaller capacity oil burners to remain compliant and still be a good value proposition at the same time.

As an aside, I wonder what the US authorities have done about taxing large capacity gasoline engines which continue to emit greenhouse gases, notwithstanding catalytic converters. The US car market is 97% gasoline or petrol powered and given their penchant for large SUVs, they are still guzzling a lot of petrol in comparison to what more fuel efficient diesel engines would, especially for SUVs and trucks. What is the tradeoff point between continuing to burn huge amounts of petrol and allowing for a healthy mix of gas + oil burners, especially where the latter is better suited?

[KreativeGeek]

They may have to pull this campaign off in the wake of current scenario

https://youtu.be/xbNdU4bWj0E

[krsna777]

Originally Posted by graaja

I am in the same situation as yours. In my case, the car is reaching the dealer today, and I have to decide by this week end.

I too was worried about future support in case VW sank completely, and was of two minds about canceling the order. After following all the news the past couple of days this is what I think: Though the maximum penalty can be as high as $18billion (the final penalty would be way less than this amount), VW has a cash reserve of $24billion. Because of this, though VW will be heavily hit financially, it will eventually recover. Also, as the German (and EU) economy greatly depends on VW, there will be Government backing as well.

The penalty amount might be less. But according to the report VW sold 50000 odd cars in U.S market out of 11 million cars sold worldwide. If the fines were $18 billion for U.S markets alone, what about UK, Australia and China. Apart from these, there would be class action law suits, definitely from U.S. Already Australia (both Govt and ppl) are pissed off with how VW dealt with the DSG gearbox issues etc. So this time I don't think they would let off easily. VW's stupid arrogance adds to their woes. Correct me If I'm wrong.


Just as an example, How much Australia are serious about environment protection. Adani's $12 billion project is stopped

Originally Posted by graaja

Yes, there is a risk of cost of ownership going high if VW transfers some of this financial burden to the owners, but only to some extent, as they also have to stay cost competitive if they have to gain back market share. Considering all this, and also considering the fact that I could not find any other car with the same performance in this price range, I have decided to go ahead with the purchase.

I sincerely hope that this does not become a financial disaster!

In my case I atleast have 6 weeks to the delivery of the vehicle. I advise you to postpone the purchase for a month. In a months time lot more information will be available regarding further fines and lawsuits.
I totally agree that at this price, this is the best (in my opinion). The only car I'm considering now is Figo Titanium plus 1.5. I have not driven the vehicle. It has got power, torque, but according to the official review for Aspire, Ford is not Ford anymore with a different suspension, steering wheel setup . Also the build quality is poor. Otherwise I would have paid for this car already due to the VW scandal.

[Steeroid]

Very valid article about the responsibility of media (VW won the 'Green Car of the Year' award for the Jetta with the same offending 2.0 TDI engine, and the World Car of the Year in 2013):

Volkswagen's Lies Highlight Car Journalism's Failures

The moot point is whether VW is the only offender - Common Rail diesel injection is, well, common these days. Most manufacturers source their diesel injection technology from either Bosch or Delphi (and some others making up a minority). How different can those engines be?

VW cheated with a clever map to avoid the urea-injection system required in the US to reduce NOX emissions, while most others complied with the urea-injection requirement. The question now is whether this urea can be replenished later on in the car's life - if it cannot, then those cars are emitting the same pollutants perhaps a year after their testing and certification. Apparently nobody is aware of whether urea-replenishment is part of any service schedule - it probably is never replaced at all. In which case, ALL manufacturers are cheating with a temporary fix for certification purposes - VW were just clever enough to do the same without putting in that injection system.

[sridhu]

Now, this is how you make a competitor eat his words!!

Honda wipes the floor with GM's words


Excerpt:


"Clearly interested in "one of our GM car engines," Soichiro bought a 1973 Chevy Impala with a big-ass 5.7L V8 and had it air-freighted to Japan. I think you can see where this is heading. Honda instructed his engineers to design and build a CVCC system for the GM V8, and that's exactly what they did: they replaced the intake manifold, cylinder heads, and carburetor of the engine so that it used Honda's CVCC technology. He then had it flown back to Ann Arbor, where it was tested by the EPA.

And you know what? It worked. The system Gerstenberg had derided as only suitable for "some little toy" engine allowed the big, thirsty V8 to pass the new EPA emissions requirements without a catalytic converter. Horsepower remained at 160 HP, and some tests even showed a slight fuel economy improvement. "

VW are cheating, pure & simple. While this might seem like them taking the consumer's side & fighting the government, the ultimate price for all this pollution is paid by all of us, the common people.

[SLK]

This has blown into an issue bigger than I'd have anticipated.

Interesting is that if VW couldn't fix it, I doubt any others selling cars in this price range can! (This episode does cast a doubt on VWs intentions/ means but not on its engineering capabilities!). That goes to say, I'd be skeptical of any fuel economical yet powerful diesel engines, hinting towards, Hyundai, Ford, Toyota etc. . . . they might not be on the wrong side of the law in US, but are their engines actually clean?

[navin_v8]

The issue has trickled into India as well. See the report, "(Indian)Government asks ARAI to submit Volkswagen probe report by September 30."

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/49103363.cms

http://www.newindianexpress.com/busi...cle3047154.ece

http://www.domain-b.com/companies/co...car_maker.html

From now on it should be more like "Caveat Emptor" for VW Diesel cars.

[nijelj]

Originally Posted by Steeroid

The question now is whether this urea can be replenished later on in the car's life - if it cannot, then those cars are emitting the same pollutants perhaps a year after their testing and certification. Apparently nobody is aware of whether urea-replenishment is part of any service schedule - it probably is never replaced at all. In which case, ALL manufacturers are cheating with a temporary fix for certification purposes - VW were just clever enough to do the same without putting in that injection system.

Urea replenishment is a requirement by legislation itself. The earlier laws mentioned that a urea level sensor must detect the quantity left and if empty then the vehicle should have limited number of restarts left. Then it matured into more laws saying that consumption should be monitored, quality of urea should be monitored and so on. Passenger car manufacturers usually design their urea storage volumes to run out coinciding with the service schedules, so that it may be refilled during service itself

[rrsteer]

Not to defend VW, Indian Government's attempts are hollow. First, they should initiate steps to control the pollutants emitted by all the three wheelers, buses and trucks

Originally Posted by navin_v8

The issue has trickled into India as well. See the report, "(Indian)Government asks ARAI to submit Volkswagen probe report by September 30."

[RavenAvi]

As I have been suspecting ever since the "Dieselgate" scandal came out in the open that this was just the beginning, a new report on Transport & Environment drops an absolute bombshell!

They allege that Volkswagen are not the only carmaker group who have cheated on emission norms to sell their diesel-powered cars - this extends to BMW, Mercedes, Opel & PSA (Peugeot, Citroen, etc.) diesel cars as well!

For example, carmakers charge the car’s battery before a test, deduct 4% from each test result, and use incorrect laboratory settings for the inertia of the vehicle. The companies admit these tricks but claim they are “legitimate flexibilities” in the obsolete test used in Europe.

Governments and the European Commission have been unwilling to challenge the industry and close the loopholes, instead focusing on introducing new testing systems that are scheduled to begin in three years’ time for all new vehicles.

Through trickery, the gap between official fuel economy figures and those achieved by an average driver have grown to 40%. For new diesel cars nitrogen oxide emissions are typically five times higher on the road than the allowed limit and just one in 10 cars meets the required level on the road. But for some models the gap is so large T&E suspects that the car is able to detect when it is tested using a “defeat device” and artificially lowers emissions during the test.

For example [*]: a diesel Audi A8 tested in Europe produced nitrogen oxide emissions 21.9 times over the legal limit on the road; a BMW X3 diesel was 9.9 times over the limit on the road; an Opal Zafira Tourer, 9.5 times; Citroen C4 Picasso 5.1 times.

All these vehicles passed the laboratory test.

In CO2 tests, on average almost every Mercedes model achieves levels on the road over 50% higher than the laboratory tests; the BMW 5 series and Peugeot 308 achieve just shy of 50% higher than in the lab. For virtually every new model that comes onto the market the gap between test and real-world performance leaps. With the launch of the VW Golf Mark VII the gap between test and real-world CO2 emissions jumped from 22% to 41%. The gap for the new Mercedes C Class rose from 37% to 53%; for the Renault Clio IV the gap almost doubled from 19% to 34%.

These changes are unlikely to be caused solely by the increased use of test flexibilities – the more sinister and illegal defeat devices may also be in use and T&E has initiated a testing programme to demonstrate this as the US authorities have done to expose VW.

Transport & Environment (via CarScoops)

[johannskaria]

And the story unfolds!

[Rahul Bhalgat]

Originally Posted by GTO

I certainly don't agree with the CEO's head rolling in this, but then, it's politics which I have little understanding of.

Is there a possibility that this whole matter was out because of some internal politics within the group?

http://www.team-bhp.com/news/ferdina...ns-vw-chairman