The Great Car Con - Channel 4 now
Discussion
Laurel Green said:
So, taping up panel gaps is not cheating?
A question. What makes more difference between the real world mpg figure and the manufacturers, taping the panel gaps, or conducting the government defined test inside where the is no air resistance?Here's a clue, a roll of tape won't make a lot of difference.
Very interesting indeed, although I'd guess that this is nothing new to a lot of us on here...
I'm wondering if there will be any comment regarding the increased volume of diesel engined public transport in the high pollution areas, of if they are just going to focus on the increase in diesel passenger cars?
I'm wondering if there will be any comment regarding the increased volume of diesel engined public transport in the high pollution areas, of if they are just going to focus on the increase in diesel passenger cars?
I'm no scientist but I fekin knew this would bite us in the arse since the late 80s.
I also thought that future generations would laugh at how we taxed cars on their CO2 emissions. Didn't think they'd admit it so quickly.
I'm glad I run a V8 petrol and have just ordered another more powerful one
I also thought that future generations would laugh at how we taxed cars on their CO2 emissions. Didn't think they'd admit it so quickly.
I'm glad I run a V8 petrol and have just ordered another more powerful one
Megaflow said:
Laurel Green said:
So, taping up panel gaps is not cheating?
A question. What makes more difference between the real world mpg figure and the manufacturers, taping the panel gaps, or conducting the government defined test inside where the is no air resistance?Here's a clue, a roll of tape won't make a lot of difference.
When they started talking about taping up panel gaps and removing door mirrors I had to chuckle. Surely air resistance in a lab is irrelevant -
I like the way they had a dig at the manufacturers for using a test that was unrealistic, when all they're doing is following a regulation created by the EU
Unfortunately 99% of this program is total rubbish.
The facts say:
1) Year on year, average air pollution levels across the UK have FALLEN.
2) Local pollution has, in certain circumstances exceeded the EU limits for "safe" air quality. Limits which were halved in 2012 (funny how that bit hasn't been mentioned)
3) Even with a massive increase in traffic volumes, and in particular, road based heavy haulage, local air quality is better than it has even been, particularly in cities, as old tech buses, coaches and trucks a have been phased out.
4) Diesels emit more NOx & Particulates under heavy load, than Petrol cars. Yes, but note the "Under heavy load bits" A typical passenger car is not under heavy load when sat in a traffic jam (unlike that 20ton, 15 year old bus in front of you with 2 people on it...)
5) This program is focusing on tailpipe pollutants, because they are "easy to measure the effects" but in the long term, it IS CO2 that will be mans greatest global issue.
6) Manufacturers do not "tape up gaps, or remove the rear seats" on homologation tests. No actual "hard" evidence has every been gathered, it's all just rumor and hearsay.
7) A modern EU6 diesel car with a DPF and now increasingly a SCR will be "cleaning up" after all the buses and trucks on the road!
8) Cars are not Green. Never have been, never will be. if you want to be "environmentally friendly" your choice of fuel is practically irrelevant.
9) If we really wanted to improve local air quality and reduce fuel consumption, we would force drivers to take "economy driving" courses and immediate ban all heavy goods vehicles / buses from our towns - The woman on this program was "shocked" by her car emitting 3x the claimed cycle emissions, and yet, has she be trained to drive the car??
10) Direct injection petrol engines have similar particulate emissions to diesels. Perhaps we should ban those too?
11) In the real world, the average driver of a diesel car, WILL be using less fuel than if they were driving a petrol engine of the same performance. For the first time in the history of the private automobile, the average user can now get fuel economies in the region 50mpg without trying too hard.
12) Measuring tailpipe NOx/particulate concentration in the real world is fraught with issue. Typical NOx analysers get enormously "skewed" by NO and Ammonia in the exhaust, and the results of such tests, which have an "unheated" exhaust line (not to mention the effects of particle trapping in the exhaust etc) should be taken in extreme caution
And finally to say "wow these cars are so polluting i can't believe they are allowed" and then go outside, jump into your car and go pick up the kids from school is so hypercritical is absurd.
In effect, this is just the latest bandwagon for faux greenies and politicians.......
The facts say:
1) Year on year, average air pollution levels across the UK have FALLEN.
2) Local pollution has, in certain circumstances exceeded the EU limits for "safe" air quality. Limits which were halved in 2012 (funny how that bit hasn't been mentioned)
3) Even with a massive increase in traffic volumes, and in particular, road based heavy haulage, local air quality is better than it has even been, particularly in cities, as old tech buses, coaches and trucks a have been phased out.
4) Diesels emit more NOx & Particulates under heavy load, than Petrol cars. Yes, but note the "Under heavy load bits" A typical passenger car is not under heavy load when sat in a traffic jam (unlike that 20ton, 15 year old bus in front of you with 2 people on it...)
5) This program is focusing on tailpipe pollutants, because they are "easy to measure the effects" but in the long term, it IS CO2 that will be mans greatest global issue.
6) Manufacturers do not "tape up gaps, or remove the rear seats" on homologation tests. No actual "hard" evidence has every been gathered, it's all just rumor and hearsay.
7) A modern EU6 diesel car with a DPF and now increasingly a SCR will be "cleaning up" after all the buses and trucks on the road!
8) Cars are not Green. Never have been, never will be. if you want to be "environmentally friendly" your choice of fuel is practically irrelevant.
9) If we really wanted to improve local air quality and reduce fuel consumption, we would force drivers to take "economy driving" courses and immediate ban all heavy goods vehicles / buses from our towns - The woman on this program was "shocked" by her car emitting 3x the claimed cycle emissions, and yet, has she be trained to drive the car??
10) Direct injection petrol engines have similar particulate emissions to diesels. Perhaps we should ban those too?
11) In the real world, the average driver of a diesel car, WILL be using less fuel than if they were driving a petrol engine of the same performance. For the first time in the history of the private automobile, the average user can now get fuel economies in the region 50mpg without trying too hard.
12) Measuring tailpipe NOx/particulate concentration in the real world is fraught with issue. Typical NOx analysers get enormously "skewed" by NO and Ammonia in the exhaust, and the results of such tests, which have an "unheated" exhaust line (not to mention the effects of particle trapping in the exhaust etc) should be taken in extreme caution
And finally to say "wow these cars are so polluting i can't believe they are allowed" and then go outside, jump into your car and go pick up the kids from school is so hypercritical is absurd.
In effect, this is just the latest bandwagon for faux greenies and politicians.......
Cylinder 8 said:
So a few years ago we had a group of people shouting about CO2, "Buy a diesel car! Petrol is evil!"
And now we have another group of people (or is it the same one?) shouting about nitrogen oxides, "Buy a petrol car! Diesel is evil!"
What exactly are we actually supposed to do?
Ignore the bloody lot and buy what we want.And now we have another group of people (or is it the same one?) shouting about nitrogen oxides, "Buy a petrol car! Diesel is evil!"
What exactly are we actually supposed to do?
Superhoop said:
This^^^^
When they started talking about taping up panel gaps and removing door mirrors I had to chuckle. Surely air resistance in a lab is irrelevant -
I like the way they had a dig at the manufacturers for using a test that was unrealistic, when all they're doing is following a regulation created by the EU
And proving that where complicated science like this is involved the average or even above average "man on the street" has no idea what they are talking about. When chassis rolls are used to test vehicles, the inertia, rolling drag, and, OF COURSE, air resistance is simulated by the chassis rollers power system to create a test "Road Load" which matches that of the real car.When they started talking about taping up panel gaps and removing door mirrors I had to chuckle. Surely air resistance in a lab is irrelevant -
I like the way they had a dig at the manufacturers for using a test that was unrealistic, when all they're doing is following a regulation created by the EU
In order to establish what that load should be, the manufacturer, under supervision by the homologation authorities (The Vehicle Certification Authority (VCA) in the UK) carry out "coast down" testing, in order to establish a "statistically significant" road load. The conditions are closely controlled and no, you can't tape up panel gaps, take the back seats out etc. (If you did, then the VCA inspectors would i think notice (or are we saying they are being bribed to ignore this sort of thing?)
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff