Diesel emissions claim

[figbat]

I don't think in NET terms one is any better than the other as regards pollution.

Diesel creates less CO2, but petrol less particulates.

I agree that it's swings and roundabouts, but direct injection petrol engines do create significant particulates - arguably more harmful particulates as they are smaller and therefore able to penetrate deeper into the lungs, hence the deployment now of Otto/gasoline particulate filters. The measures used in testing are size-driven, so a gasoline may have a lower particulate emissions result, but that's because it doesn't emit particulates in the size range that is measured.

 

[mustang1]

This is more about officially-claimed emissions than the MOT - the MOT emissions requirements for diesels are pretty easy to pass and nothing like as tough as the EURO emissions standards.
_stuff deleted_

So the car realises it's on test and has to be on its best behaviour. It puts in a good performance in terms of emissions at the expense of drivability, but on the chassis dyno test drivability is not tested and the acceleration curves are very undemanding. _stuff deleted_

That was a good explanation but I change one thing in bold below:

So the car realises it's on an unrealistic test and has to be on its unrealistic best behaviour. It puts in a good performance in terms of emissions at the expense of drivability, but on the chassis dyno test drivability is not tested and the acceleration curves are very undemanding.

If the test itself is unrealistic, then VW could argue it's not exactly cheating?

 

[figbat]

That was a good explanation but I change one thing in bold below:

So the car realises it's on an unrealistic test and has to be on its unrealistic best behaviour. It puts in a good performance in terms of emissions at the expense of drivability, but on the chassis dyno test drivability is not tested and the acceleration curves are very undemanding.

If the test itself is unrealistic, then VW could argue it's not exactly cheating?

It’s not up to VW to decide what is reasonable though. Everyone knows the rules and the tests and they are baked into type approval and legislation. I agree that NEDC was highly unrealistic - WLTP has gone some way to address this but is still not real life. However there is no ‘real life’ protocol as everyone’s life is different.

Do I get to choose which laws are reasonable and then simply side-step the ones I don’t like or that cost me money? I guess as long as I don’t get caught then I’m golden, but one day someone catches a whiff of impropriety and the whole thing comes out.

 

[keithmac]

As far as I can remember it was a parts supplier or sub contractor who blew the whistle on VW, a deal gone sour maybe?.

 

[Richard A Thackeray]

Read ALL the small print VERY carefully. My wife had a VW that was supposedly eligible. If for some reason the claim failed the lawyers would charge you their exorbitant hourly rate for the time they spent on the case.

I had a look at the companies/etc... that were advertising for claimants

If you backed out/didn't keep up to their mails/correspondance, yes, they could claim from you

 

[Richard A Thackeray]

As aforementioned by myself, I found my 2.4 litre, 5 cylinder diesel to actually be cleaner than my 0.7 litre Smart car, yet how many people drive around in small cars basking in their own piety use it as a subliminal excuse to avoid using alternative transport? The correlation isn't as fixed and many folk would believe, so the only foolproof way around it is to drive less. A lot less.

LIkewise, my Octavia estate (1.6Tdi) had a lower VED than my wifes Toyota C-HR hybrid
Hers was free for first year, now I think (from memory), it's about £160/year

Mine was £30, at renewal in March

 

[Chislenko]

I love my 180 bhp turbo diesel at £30 a year.

Can't knock the system!

 

[DRM]

I had a look at the companies/etc... that were advertising for claimants

If you backed out/didn't keep up to their mails/correspondance, yes, they could claim from you

They must have run out of ambulances to chase, it’s more of a scam than the actual vehicle emissions, I fail to see how anyone has been inconvenienced, the car works, passes the mot, is useable, what on earth is there to claim for

 

[TheDoctor]

That. I bought a used car eight years ago, used it for four years then sold it. I can't see how I all of a sudden deserve some compensation.

 

[DRM]

That. I bought a used car eight years ago, used it for four years then sold it. I can't see how I all of a sudden deserve some compensation.

I reckon they think get loads of greedy former diesel owners to file a claim, then with the percentage taken from the win, kerching, their in the money, more scummy then the average car sales person that sold the thing in the first place

 

[Scottish Scrutineer]

I think emissions based vehicle tax should be based on actual emissions recorded at an MOT. That'd separate the bullpois from the reality.

On an MOT the diesel test consists of the tester giving it full throttle for a number of seconds, and thats it. That couldn't trip any cheat modes, otherwise we'd all have problems every time we tread down hard to overtake.

Ona petrol car its an idle and fast idle test. Ditto, that couldn't trip any cheat modes, else people would have problems stopped at the lights or trickling in traffic along at low RPMs.

When it comes to testing individual cars for an MOT it would not be possible to cheat the test in the same manner manufacturers cheated the official testing cycle.

You've obviously not seen a "modern" VW diesel on a MOT emissions test 🙄.
I've used the same family run garage for years and when my 2011 Caravelle was tested, I was initially puzzled when we did the smoke test. When you apply full throttle when stationary, the maximum revs are about 2k rpm. They simply won't rev any higher. However what is noticeable is the engine sound and response when you press the accelerator pedal; it sounds like the injection timing is altered and possibly even the turbo boost, certainly the throttle response is subdued. Emissions are well within the required range

 

[Profpointy]

Surely if you’re that worried about thr damage to health caused by cars, don’t drive one? Or certainly not a stinky diesel

clearly there’s been dodgy behaviour from certain manufacturers

Back in the day I chose a diesel because I thought I was doing the right thing. I got free fuel as part of my remuneration so it wasn't saving me money personally, but reduced the CO2 footprint a little.
It's perhaps arguable whether reduced soot pollution is worse than more CO2 and extra fuel

 

[Beebo]

Seriously though, this is the vehicle (the claims) chosen by the authorities to punish wrongdoing. If no-one claimed, manufacturers wouldnt fear anything and do as they pleased.

No. VW have been fined already by the EU. A huge hundred million Euro fine.
The individual claims are civil actions being brought by the owners for some perceived wrong doing that has affected the owner. When frankly there hasn’t been any damage to the owner.

 

[gbb]

No. VW have been fined already by the EU. A huge hundred million Euro fine.
The individual claims are civil actions being brought by the owners for some perceived wrong doing that has affected the owner. When frankly there hasn’t been any damage to the owner.

Yeah, I get that, i guess youd (well I would anyway) then liken it to the PPI claims. By definition, the people that could claim never theoretically knew they were paying for a service they could therefore never receive. In the same way, you could argue car drivers never knew they were not getting the specified product.

I'm mentioned in the bullying post how we live in a tick box world, just say the right thing, then to hell with doing it....its a cancer on our world, its everywhere. If big manufacturers are deliberately saying one thing and doing another...its fraud and deserves every / any punishment to make them think about never doing it again.
I have zilch sympathy for them.

 

[Richard A Thackeray]

You've obviously not seen a "modern" VW diesel on a MOT emissions test 🙄.
I've used the same family run garage for years and when my 2011 Caravelle was tested, I was initially puzzled when we did the smoke test. When you apply full throttle when stationary, the maximum revs are about 2k rpm. They simply won't rev any higher. However what is noticeable is the engine sound and response when you press the accelerator pedal; it sounds like the injection timing is altered and possibly even the turbo boost, certainly the throttle response is subdued. Emissions are well within the required range

Our old XKR had a similar trick
It wouldn't rev past 3,000 in park!!

No idea why, certainly not emissions linked