Maybe they'll actually make the owners get a real etest instead of the visual and now ECU tests that have all just been a waste of time.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
|
|
|
VW deisel?? wtf...
- Thread starter crankcall
- Start date
without an update to the code on the cars computer the only way to get a real test is to drive the thing around. the code detects when it's just sitting on the rollers
Interesting article
http://www.greencarreports.com/news...mits-must-rise-for-real-world-emissions-tests
http://www.greencarreports.com/news...mits-must-rise-for-real-world-emissions-tests
I have a 2015 jetta tdi, that i asked Crosby volkswagen for a trade in for a GTi,
pretty much, they won't touch there own cars with a 10' pole
Hi Nick,
We do not have any incentives for new or pre-owned Volkswagen diesels at this time. Actually our sales of diesels is blocked until a resolution is in place. We are not doing trade estimates until we have a resolution.
I can offer you a $2000.00 discount off the purchase of a new gas Volkswagen as "Customer Appreciation". This Volkswagen discount offer is only for current owner's of TDI's. Discount can be applied when making a new purchase.
I am curious what will they do once it`s clear that barely any cars (other than electric or hybrid) comply with current unrealistic emissions in real life condition.
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...da-mitsubishi-diesel-emissions-row?CMP=twt_gu.
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...da-mitsubishi-diesel-emissions-row?CMP=twt_gu.
Of course the green guys would oppose rise in NOx emission allowance which would manufacturers be able to meet when cars are actually driven, because they would like to see electric cars all over the place. As unrealistic, as the current emissions limits are .... but how do you want to fairly compare that with emissions generated at the stack (to produce electricity) rather than at the pipe?? I`d still argue that the modern cars with defeat device installed or not, are not the biggest problem as far as emissions we have. it's rather the coal plants etc.
There is no test for emissions under real driving conditions, and all manufacturers except VW comply with the lab tests, so there's no such thing as unrealistic tests right now.
Also, the difference between lab tests and real life conditions isn't a surprise to anyone in the business. The lab tests are always more stringent because they are always easier to pass, since the very specific and controlled conditions that are required allow a more narrowly targetted design of emissions systems to pass those tests. It's called gaming and everyone knows everyone's doing it. What VW did wasn't gaming, it was cheating.
Actually, even VW complies with the laboratory test. It only runs in low-emissions mode in the laboratory ...
Other manufacturers may not have used that particular method of cheating, but there is no shortage of others. Call it cheating, call it gaming. Either way, the real world results won't match what the laboratory says.
Other manufacturers may not have used that particular method of cheating, but there is no shortage of others. Call it cheating, call it gaming. Either way, the real world results won't match what the laboratory says.
Red_Liner740
Well-known member
So it seems that the new stringent Emissions are simply becoming unattainable....so what happens next? You can demand unicorns and leprechauns, doesnt mean you're gonna get them....
People still have to drive.
Whats even funnier is how a few months ago EPA was all proud and boastful how NOx and other Emissions were trending down.....Even with a lot of vehicles emitting a lot more NOx than previously thought
People still have to drive.
Whats even funnier is how a few months ago EPA was all proud and boastful how NOx and other Emissions were trending down.....Even with a lot of vehicles emitting a lot more NOx than previously thought
What happens is that we, collectively, are regulating ourselves into a box that is getting ever smaller. Diesel engines in compact non-premium cars will no longer fit in that box after this shakes out. Gasoline engines will be next. Gasoline direct injection engines already are known to emit more particulate numbers than diesels - they're mostly smaller than the particulates diesels produce and are below the threshold of visibility, but smaller particulate matter is WORSE for human health!
Is it any wonder that the auto manufacturers have been moving towards hydrogen fuel cells and all-electric powertrains (despite the free market indicating that people don't want to buy them, at current price versus performance levels)? Those powertrains ARE NOT pollution-free ... but they cause the pollution to be "somebody else's problem" from the auto manufacturer's point of view. It gets the regulators off the backs of the auto manufacturers.
It is possible to calculate how much NOx an electric car emits from the "tailpipe" of the nearby coal-fired, or natural-gas-fired, power plant, and I have seen the calculation in back-of-notepad fashion. It is not an insignificant number. In areas where fossil fuels are a large part of the electrical supply (USA, for one) the NOx from an electric car is more than what the EPA regulations limit combustion-engine cars to emit. "But we can charge the electric cars from renewable sources" ... Go tour the countryside and take note of all those signs (falsely) blaming windmills for all manner of ailments. I've seen signs against installation of solar generating stations, too (Just north of Kingston along Perth Road 10, to be specific).
Our society seems unable to accept, or even recognize, that there is no free lunch.
The regulators have gotten accustomed to the auto manufacturers complaining about every tightening of a regulation - and then somehow coming up with a way to comply. Then the regulation tightens again - and the manufacturers comply again. So now the regulators get the impression that no matter how stringent a regulation is made, a way will be found to comply. Well, guess what ... There is no free lunch!
Is it any wonder that the auto manufacturers have been moving towards hydrogen fuel cells and all-electric powertrains (despite the free market indicating that people don't want to buy them, at current price versus performance levels)? Those powertrains ARE NOT pollution-free ... but they cause the pollution to be "somebody else's problem" from the auto manufacturer's point of view. It gets the regulators off the backs of the auto manufacturers.
It is possible to calculate how much NOx an electric car emits from the "tailpipe" of the nearby coal-fired, or natural-gas-fired, power plant, and I have seen the calculation in back-of-notepad fashion. It is not an insignificant number. In areas where fossil fuels are a large part of the electrical supply (USA, for one) the NOx from an electric car is more than what the EPA regulations limit combustion-engine cars to emit. "But we can charge the electric cars from renewable sources" ... Go tour the countryside and take note of all those signs (falsely) blaming windmills for all manner of ailments. I've seen signs against installation of solar generating stations, too (Just north of Kingston along Perth Road 10, to be specific).
Our society seems unable to accept, or even recognize, that there is no free lunch.
The regulators have gotten accustomed to the auto manufacturers complaining about every tightening of a regulation - and then somehow coming up with a way to comply. Then the regulation tightens again - and the manufacturers comply again. So now the regulators get the impression that no matter how stringent a regulation is made, a way will be found to comply. Well, guess what ... There is no free lunch!
Snobike Mike
Banned
Another article on testing and the related fudging:
http://driving.ca/volkswagen/jetta/...loopholes-breed-culture-of-fudging-dieselgate
http://driving.ca/volkswagen/jetta/...loopholes-breed-culture-of-fudging-dieselgate
They are not becoming unattainable just now .... They have been for years, but who will listen to the manufacturers when EPA and likes need to justify their existence by knowing better. It's been farce .... At least it looks that way. I think the car manufacturers should go on a bit of offensive, rather than keep their heads down like a five-year old who was caught smoking in the bathroom.
Automakers have been calling the standards too tough and expensive to meet even in the 70's. Yet they have still managed to meet those standards and in doing so greatly increase the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks. There's nothing like a mandatory target to force manufacturers to up their game.
They've admitted it several times in the past, the EPA making several efforts over the years to try and tune their fuel consumption test match real world figures, and doing so very transparently.
The thing that will never be admitted is that lab tests have never been and CAN NEVER BE reflective of real use scenarios. Regulatory agencies can try and get close to keep the general public less disturbed by their own unrealistic expectations, but real-world figures will only ever be known from real-world usage.
This has nothing to do with the VW scandal, which was plain old fashioned cheating.
A splendid example of exactly what I am talking about ... coming from a civil servant!
I hope a Toyota Prius will serve your needs as a police car, because that (and vehicles comparable to it) is the only thing that meets the upcoming US CAFE 54.5 mpg US requirement. No Chevy Tahoe SUV ... too thirsty. No Dodge Charger V8 ... too thirsty. No Chevy Impala ... too thirsty!
Tightening requirements is all well and good until a technological limit of some sort is reached. It's all well and good to implement, for example, the crash safety standards that we have today, because we know more-or-less how to do it. It would have been premature to have required that of a Ford Model T. It wouldn't have been possible back then.
The silly servants dish it out. The rest of us have to deal with it the best we can ... not always perfectly.
The VW emission scandal - and by no means do I agree with what they did and how! - is far from the only area where regulatory requirements have perhaps pushed beyond what we technologically know how to do (and before someone starts yelling " ... but the BMW passed the test ..." ... Go look at how real world emissions in Europe of Euro 6 compliant vehicles, including BMW, are comparing to their regulatory requirements ... They are ALL skirting the requirements in some fashion). There's another one in the business that I am in which we don't know how to comply with because the components that would be required to do it are not available in the marketplace.
Go to your local Home Depot. Take a look at a drill press, or a table saw, or a manual lathe, or a manual milling machine, or anything of the sort. Understand how this machine works. Explain how this is complies with the Regulation for Industrial Establishments, O.Reg. 851 made under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, s, 24.
It doesn't. And it never will, and no machine serving that machine's primary purpose ever will. (Actually, there is a device that is intended to protect people's fingers from table saws, called a Saw Stop. But ... It operates essentially self-destructively ... which means you cannot function test it periodically for proper operation as required elsewhere in OHSA without destroying it! And then when you replace it, you can't test whether the replacement functions properly without destroying it! Endless loop ...)
It also doesn't comply with the latest version of ANSI B11.6 or B11.8 that was issued around 2001 - 2002 (I've forgotten for the moment which one it is, and I'm not looking it up, because it's not a work day) which requires a risk assessment to be done ... and a machine like that will never pass any sort of properly done risk assessment ... I have customers ask about these machines from time to time, and my response is that I don't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. They are on their own. "Don't stick your arm in there."
I have a drill press in my own workshop. And a couple of saws. I burnt a finger on a soldering iron just last night ... If someone can figure out how to put a guard on a hammer so that I can't smack my thumb, I'm all in.
Lol, you should see how things are in construction with a dedicated safety man hiding in the bushes, so to speak. People like making unrealistic rules for other people to follow putting you in non-compliance and on your heels all day. Have a nice day, and please remember, three point contact at all times except lunch.
Don't you just love all these nanny laws & regulations?
To listen to the automakers, we have reached the emission "wall" several times already, yet they continue to find ways to climb that wall time and time again, most without having to cheat. They were doing it back in teh day when my old LTD with the 7.7 litre V8 was getting 12 mpg highway on a good day, and sometimes half that in City traffic. Good thing it had an auxilliary fuel tank factory-mounted in the truck.
CAFE allows for comparative gas guzzlers in the marketplace, hence the "corporate average fleet economy" in CAFE. They adjust pricing a bit to encourage more sales of high-efficiency models relative to the performance models, and that way there is room in the stable for all.
The upcoming standard for 2016 is 34.1 and the 54.5 mpg requirement won't come until 2025. Even then that 54.5 isn;t the same as the fuel economy number on the window sticker. http://www.forbes.com/sites/micheli...y-standards-arent-as-high-as-you-might-think/
|
|
|
|
|