VW in UK?

Do they have the same, or is it just in the US?

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/18/epa-california-investigate-volkswagen-clean-air-violations

Dodgy software to spoof emissions testing…

I suspect this software was developed specifically for the very stringent Californian emissions tests. That being said all the auto manufacturers cheat on these tests especially fuel economy.

VW is in a lot of trouble as this isn’t just fudging mpg this is putting “polluting cars” onto Californian roads which should not be allowed.

I used to work in software development back in the 1980’s, my firm had a complier which could recognise the standard benchmark tests and call optimised code. We were always top of the benchmark tests. This is hardly new.

Regulators have known about this issue of “defeat devices” for a while, I’m a little cynical that’s it’s a non-US company that has been singled out but I am sure a lot of companies are worried. It’s time for these tests to be independtly carried out via real world actual driving.

It’s software so hacking is a matter of time. 😛

Then they do as they like …

I’m sure the same SW is running in the UK, lets them have high performance diesel engines with very low ‘official’ emissions. Probably not the only company doing it e.g. BMW diesel engines are remarkably clean on paper for their power output……

Given low emissions gets the car into a lower VED bracket, there must be huge pressure to cheat in the UK as well.

VW aren’t the first, and I doubt they’ll be the last.

The truck manufacturers got hammered years ago in the US for falsifying tests, so rather than fine anybody, the government just brought the planned emissions limits forward by about 18 months IIRC, which cost the manufacturers far more.

Ford in Europe got pulled up for their software not picking up on emission faults when it should of been.

Harley Davidson admitted they tuned a flat spot into some of their bikes, as the emissions requirement at the time only called for the levels to be tested at a certain RPM.

If the test regimes were realistic then these software developments would be a benefit to owners. I’d be very happy if a software update could cut emissions (and my fuel costs)

As it is I’m about 9mpg (20%) short of the manufacturer’s claims which is quite a chunk, and I don’t hoof it around

My volvo with 180hp and only 99g co2 apparently does 75mpg!

I have never got close 60 and normally under 50. They all lie/cheat the tests and VW have just got caught imho

We all know they tell lies about mpg. Which Mag publicised it, they said independent testing is the logical outcome. This is telling lies about NOx, which is far more serious. IIUR, it’s a problem that might see diesels banned from certain cities at bad times of the year.

Call me naive but I’m pretty surprised by this, surely it was bound to come to light eventually (how much are they paying their software engineers for starters?), I guess maybe they didn’t think the US would come down so hard on them but seems a massive gamble for a global premium brand company to take.

It won’t affect the european cars, we already know that all diesels without SCR have wildly higher NOx emissions in the real world than on the test cycle.

I imagine what they have done is to reduce the amount of Adblue urea dosing when on the road to reduce the service interval.

Surely its not CO2 fuel consumption

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-19/vw-clean-diesel-scheme-exposed-as-u-s-weighs-criminal-charges

Volkswagen admitted it sold 2009-2015 diesel Volkswagen and Audi cars with software that turns on full pollution controls only when the car is undergoing official emissions testing, the EPA said, calling the algorithm a “defeat device.” During normal driving, the cars pollute 10 times to 40 times the legal limits, the agency estimated.

Surely you can’t fake 10 to 40 times better CO2 or mpg. That would be 500 mpg. This is about particulates? Particulates is why people have previously been unable to sell diesel cars in the US? I wondered if some how a filter temporarily held a higher proportion of the particulates and then released them later.

Or can the car store CO2? In which case how come no one noticed the mpg didn’t match? Or does the engine “cache” fuel for the test?

Paulwf

sounds you might understand this

It won’t affect the european cars, we already know that all diesels without SCR have wildly higher NOx emissions in the real world than on the test cycle.

I imagine what they have done is to reduce the amount of Adblue urea dosing when on the road to reduce the service interval

what is SCR

db – Member

My volvo with 180hp and only 99g co2 apparently does 75mpg!

I have never got close 60 and normally under 50. They all lie/cheat the tests and VW have just got caught imho

That might be true, but it’s also because the EU test cycles are absolute rubbish.

SCR is Selective Catalyst Reduction. It’s the process of injecting urea into the exhaust ahead of a catalyst to trigger a reduction in emmisions.

I bet my VW is one of these; it’s lovely and powerful (184hp) yet it is allegedly more efficient on fuel than my old Peugeot diesel which had half the power, whilst also being so clean in emissions that baby sparrows can live in the exhaust pipe. Seems to regen an awful lot though, and the cost in baby sparrows is quite high…

what is SCR

Selective Catalytic Reduction

Diesels unlike petrol ‘burn’ all their fuel in the engine (although some/a lot doesn’t burn completely and comes out as PM, particulate matter, aka soot). Which means there’s less fuel in the exhaust to keep a normal catalyst like those used on petrol engines hot.

The other half of the cat’s job is to reduce (the opposite of oxidise) NOx (NO2, NO3, etc) to N2. In SCR you do this by vaporising urea solution (ad-blue amongst other brands) and reacting it with the NOx.

NOx + NH3 -> N2 + H2O

Very useful thanks

So it might be the NOx that was to high in US tests?

In the US, their test for NOx is closer to the real world that the European tests we have, therefore the diesels there all have the SCR systems I mentioned.

In Europe, in the real world diesels produce far more NOx.

Here is a study comparing real world emissions of petrols and diesels against the Euro 3,4,5 limits

http://www.theicct.org/blogs/staff/laboratory-versus-real-world-discrepancies-nox-emissions-eu

yet it is allegedly more efficient on fuel than my old Peugeot diesel which had half the power

That is not a dichotomy, in diesel. To drive at 60mph it needs a certain amount of horsepower, and that needs a certain amount of fuel and a certain amount of air. If you want more power when you boot it, you put in more air and more fuel. So you make the cylinders bigger, put on a bigger turbo, and put more fuel in, and off you go. But at 60mph you are burning more or less the same amount of fuel as the old Peugot, cos you are requesting more or less power. In other words, a bigger engine or a higher MAX power doens’t affect cruising fuel consumption.

In petrol engines that’s not true though, because you can’t keep adding fuel and air to the cylinder – it’ll get too hot and predetonate. You can make the cylinder larger though, but that means at cruising speed you’re wasting more fuel because you still have to fill the cylinder with combustible mixture and then use the throttle to reduce generated power – which is wasteful.

The reason diesels produce lots of NOx is that there is lots of excess air in the cylinder, which gets very hot when the fuel is burned. Getting the nitrogen and oxygen in the air hot is what makes NOx.

Very interesting stuff.
My 3 litre turbo v6 is a beast when it comes to delivering power and to the eye seems very clean. It’s also cheap to run brimming the tank now costs me under £70 where as last year it was costing £90.
As its clocked mileage , I’ve had it from new and have clocked 42k , it seems to have become more efficient.
All together you’d think great, it ticks all the boxes.
Clean,lean on fuel,bags of grunt etc
But the thing must regen at least every 300 miles,sometimes all it seems to do is regen ! I’ll drive home Regenning get up and drive to work Regenning all the way in again, 70 miles.
I never see any dirty clouds let out the back end but when you drive it in the damp or rain you can scrape the soot off the back with a spoon !
It looks clean but it’s just a dirty engine hidden by bags of clever technology.
My next car will be a petrol, 14 yrs driving just diesels is making me feel guilty.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/in_use_compliance_letter.htm

Here is a study comparing real world emissions of petrols and diesels against the Euro 3,4,5 limits

I’m borrowing that next time someone trots out the line “but petrol engines belch out lots of nasty stuff you can’t see”.

VW shares down 20% and company has suspended the sale of all diesels in the US. Wow.

It’s my understanding diesels are much less popular in the US than in Europe, not least as petrol is much cheaper there. I’ve always found it bizarre how manufacturers push diesel so hard, my guess has always been it’s as the margin on the cars and the revenue from servicing is higher.

I’ve always found it bizarre how manufacturers push diesel so hard, my guess has always been it’s as the margin on the cars and the revenue from servicing is higher

Hmm. At first, probably because there were more gains to make since early diesels were so bad, they could keep them improving. They had to push them to get people to overcome early bad experiences. Then later, they probably had to have higher sales to justify the higher cost of R&D.

Then you’ve got EU CO2 reduction commitments too. And also because Toyota put their money in hybrids and gained such a huge headstart, manufacturers who were already heavily into diesel had to make it compete with hybrid in CO2/MPG terms (PSA, VAG)

jambalaya – Member
I’ve always found it bizarre how manufacturers push diesel so hard, my guess has always been it’s as the margin on the cars and the revenue from servicing is higher.

I believe history shows OEMs develop in a direction given by the markets, which are guided by the Gov and legislation of the day.
Currently we see OEMs developing electric vehicles, at the behest of poorly informed governments such as the UK. UK Gov says electric cars are good, so OEMs develop electric cars.

Actually electric cars are shyte, but that’s probably another thread.

As for diesel, way back in the day, CO2 was the bad guy and Diesel was seen to be superior for obvious reasons. So OEMs seeing the writing on the wall from Gov who would move to tax/disincentivize petrol use. Decided to race ahead with diesel engine development. This was brought to the attention of one Gordon Brown, who moved to increase diesel duty.

Fast forward a decade or two and we’re all racing around in diesel cars because of the advice of the time and now we’re all wrong and ought to be driving petrol or electric cars, whatever.

Bio-fuel was/is the answer, but that’s probably another thread…

😉

Biofuel only works if it’s something like algae based diesel or cellulosic ethanol. We can’t be using food crops for fuel.

Given the trend for “Rolling Coal” in the US and the fact that no ones seems to do anything about it, I do wonder why they’re so bothered about VW…

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/07/rolling_coal_conservatives_who_show_their_annoyance_with_liberals_obama.html

We pick up a new Octavia on Friday – pleasantly surprised that the emissions were low enough to get zero VED

Now we know why….. 😳

Bump for airtragic

I’m sure the same SW is running in the UK, lets them have high performance diesel engines with very low ‘official’ emissions.

This is true. I’m not sure exactly what models this applies to but there is an undocumented electrical connection between the bonnet open switch and the main engine ECU.

All the EU emissions testing for the official fuel/emissions figures is done with the bonnet open and this implements the ‘cheat’ software allegedly.

Marko

It might not be exactly the same as the US one was rigged to reduce NOx, whereas we need to reduce CO2.

However the electrical connection with the bonnet is a bit of a giveaway. I’m amazed such a big company even attempted such a blatant cheat tbh. It’s long annoyed me that they don’t publish anything about how their engine ecus work, I guess this is why. I wish you could get open source engine software….

molgrips – Member
I wish you could get open source engine software.

When you wrote that ^^ had you given any thought to the chaos which would occur if Joe Public could mess with their ECU?

Notwithstanding developments an OEM has funded in R and D being reviewed and possibly used by other OEMs who hadn’t collaborated via resource or funding.

This is a perfect example of how dangerous unregulated and uncontrolled capitalism is, as long as we make a profit we can destroy the planet and give horrible cancers to people but we will have won a big pile of money.

When you wrote that ^^ had you given any thought to the chaos which would occur if Joe Public could mess with their ECU?

Your car, your software, your problem 🙂

Ok so it would need a fair bit of independent testing…

Your car, your software, your problem 

Possibly, although that may likely result in people immobilising their cars at best and destroying their engines at worst, subsequently giving rise to addition services provided by the incumbent break down/recovery sector. Where an ECU is reset or the car is returned to the stealership.

In such a scenario I dread to think what Audi would charge me. As obviously, an ECU reset = new ECU…….easy money!
😯

On more serious note, there would be no blanket standard for emissions (notwithstanding current events related to VW), it would be a “free for all” as if it isn’t bad enough now, with the number of smokey, obviously non-compliant cars puttering around.

Personally I’d like a more stringent visual smoke test enforced. I see too many old cars chugging around, releasing a continuous trail of black smoke.

I think we’ll see more manufactures either being found out or holding their hands-up in the next few months.

Compliance with regulation for any industry is a challenging act for any industry. Ask the banking industry.

Will VW get a a harder time because of higher emissions causing ill health when compared to bankers?

withersea

Will VW get a a harder time because of higher emissions causing ill health when compared to bankers?

Hard to quantify. But I think because it’s an easier story to sell and explain they will be crucified, made an example of. A foreign company used trickery to circumvent federal government regulations. Joe public ‘murica won’t like them Germans goin’ over there, fixin’ their computers to lie, and po’ lootin’ that there USA. They’ll be outraged.

Hopefully this might force governments and car manufacturers to really look at the way they test emissions, if nothing else it might stop holier than thou, eco-monious diesel whingers chastising people for buying petrol cars since they chose the “green” option and believe everyone else should be like them.

Interesting to see a few other car companies share prices plummeting, Porsche (obv linked to VAG tho), BMW, Peugeot etc.. though Toyota and General Motors seem not to be affected. People in the know?

The USofA loves sticking it to a European company don’t they?

Remember when BP was renamed British Petroleum by all US politician? Even though loads of US companies should have been implicated in Deepwater Horizon, they were never mentioned.

Toyota aren’t pushing diesels in the US, are they even selling them? Toyota don’t seem to be into them, investing in hybrids instead.