Half a million VWs recalled, sneaky emissions software.
Discussion
Jimboka said:
...lots actually prefer the way diesels drive!...
No. Immediately go to the nearest mirror you can find and give yourself a slap. And another for good measure.Better now?
Jimboka said:
I guess the depreciate by £1 a mile proves its a joke post though so apologies for biting
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 12th October 15:48
Scuffers said:
1990's. :-) In traffic it would set off from the lights at the same speed as pretty much everyone else would, and join the back of the next queue in well under a minute like everyone else. The traffic's got slower since.A few more details about the fix revealed today:
"About 400,000 Volkwagen cars in the UK will need fuel injectors altered as well as a software fix, its UK boss said.
Paul Willis, UK managing director, said that cars fitted with the 1.6L diesel engine would need the physical remedy.
Those with the larger 2L engine would only need a software fix, he told the Commons Transport select committee."
From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34505593
"About 400,000 Volkwagen cars in the UK will need fuel injectors altered as well as a software fix, its UK boss said.
Paul Willis, UK managing director, said that cars fitted with the 1.6L diesel engine would need the physical remedy.
Those with the larger 2L engine would only need a software fix, he told the Commons Transport select committee."
From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34505593
just watched the TV of the committee hearing...
I do hate the way the politicians use it for point scoring rather than asking the relevant questions.
No real world customer is going to give 2 sh*ts if the cars NOx is a little high or not, they care about how much fuel it's going to use and what it;s tax bill is, so to claim they feel cheated is just laughable.
Also, the stupid chairwoman asked the same question 6 times about the published fuel and CO2 figures, to be told 6 times they are legally all that the makers are allowed to publish and the test is legally mandated, not made up for the sake of it.
You would think they might just have got a proper briefing on the subject before making themselves look even more stupid than they usually do!
I do hate the way the politicians use it for point scoring rather than asking the relevant questions.
No real world customer is going to give 2 sh*ts if the cars NOx is a little high or not, they care about how much fuel it's going to use and what it;s tax bill is, so to claim they feel cheated is just laughable.
Also, the stupid chairwoman asked the same question 6 times about the published fuel and CO2 figures, to be told 6 times they are legally all that the makers are allowed to publish and the test is legally mandated, not made up for the sake of it.
You would think they might just have got a proper briefing on the subject before making themselves look even more stupid than they usually do!
Scuffers said:
just watched the TV of the committee hearing...
I do hate the way the politicians use it for point scoring rather than asking the relevant questions.
No real world customer is going to give 2 sh*ts if the cars NOx is a little high or not, they care about how much fuel it's going to use and what it;s tax bill is, so to claim they feel cheated is just laughable.
People will be saying that though I guarantee it. There were people on this forum saying how cheated they were by the Libor scandal they couldn't even tell you what Libor was! Some people are just born victims.I do hate the way the politicians use it for point scoring rather than asking the relevant questions.
No real world customer is going to give 2 sh*ts if the cars NOx is a little high or not, they care about how much fuel it's going to use and what it;s tax bill is, so to claim they feel cheated is just laughable.
FiF said:
Really quite amusing to read these latest comments, particularly in light of a discussion on the merits of EVs over in GG. Over there people got all precious when their hyperbole regarding anything slower than 10seconds to 60 being glacially slow and a hindrance to making normal progress. Anyone who questioned this alleged truism was just accused of being prepared to argue with a brick wall for fun.
My previous car was a Mondeo 2.0i estate. 0-60 in a smidge under 10s. It would absolutely annihilate 99% of all cars in the TLGP if required because almost no one accelerates. Now personally I see 10s as the limit for "acceptable" acceleration but I've driven plenty slower (not that I'd want to long term) and had no issues, maybe on a fast but very twisty road but certainly not round town.
Back on the topic, I had a diesel 1.6 golf last year as a hire car for a few days, acceleration was perfectly acceptable (outside of the usual diesel boost threshold lag gutlessness and lack of revs), it was actually one of the better diesels I've driven and almost nearly acceptable.
ukaskew said:
My Citigo does 0-60 in 13.9 seconds, I still comfortably out-accelerate 98% of cars on my daily commute, even up the 15% gradient hill, and have never needed/wanted more power/speed on the commute.
that's tragically slow!Hell, my old Navara Pickup manages it in 10.8 and that's a 2 tonne truck!
I suppose that the discussion about power and acceleration depends upon how you use your car. Occasionally I like to load the car up with luggage and take the family down to the South of France, I wouldn't fancy doing that in a car with just the 103bhp the VW 1.6 TDi produces (pre-fix). If I was just pottering around town, on my own, away from any hills, or using the car solo for long slow motorway drives, then I guess it would matter less.
ks.Scuffers said:
that's tragically slow!
Hell, my old Navara Pickup manages it in 10.8 and that's a 2 tonne truck!
It doesn't feel tragically slow, particularly not to 30/40 which is more likely 99% of the time (although out in the sticks, there is no NSL on my commute).Hell, my old Navara Pickup manages it in 10.8 and that's a 2 tonne truck!
My point being, even with that 0-60 it's still perfectly usable and I don't think I've ever had anyone even remotely up my backside whilst driving to/from work. On the commute pretty much nobody I ever come across accelerates with any sort of urgency as there is simply no point, there are no overtaking spots and the nature of the - popular - countryside route between two big towns means you are never, ever going to end up anywhere but behind exactly the same car you started behind even if you've got 700bhp at your disposal.
Edited by ukaskew on Tuesday 13th October 14:26
(and appearing on t'other thread)
KTF said:
A few more details about the fix revealed today:
"About 400,000 Volkwagen cars in the UK will need fuel injectors altered as well as a software fix, its UK boss said.
Paul Willis, UK managing director, said that cars fitted with the 1.6L diesel engine would need the physical remedy.
Those with the larger 2L engine would only need a software fix, he told the Commons Transport select committee."
From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34505593
I received a letter today about a 2.0 TDI Touran. It said that there will be a fix and I will get another letter at a later date about bringing it in."About 400,000 Volkwagen cars in the UK will need fuel injectors altered as well as a software fix, its UK boss said.
Paul Willis, UK managing director, said that cars fitted with the 1.6L diesel engine would need the physical remedy.
Those with the larger 2L engine would only need a software fix, he told the Commons Transport select committee."
From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34505593
If it's a software fix, is it a remap? I will not be bringing the car in if they're going to make it slower.
Scuffers said:
My own experience of this is going from an S5 V8 with a CO2 figure of 298g/km to an A5 2.0 TFSi with a CO2 figure of 155g/km, ie. almost half.
the reality is the V8 averaged 26/27Mpg over it's life, the A5 is at 30Mpg, ie. it's some 15% better, not the 100% the test implies.
so, the moral of this story?
governments should not be setting targets based on stupidly simplistic thinking.
But you didn't really think the A5 would be twice as economical as the S5 did you?the reality is the V8 averaged 26/27Mpg over it's life, the A5 is at 30Mpg, ie. it's some 15% better, not the 100% the test implies.
so, the moral of this story?
governments should not be setting targets based on stupidly simplistic thinking.
Esseesse said:
KTF said:
A few more details about the fix revealed today:
"About 400,000 Volkwagen cars in the UK will need fuel injectors altered as well as a software fix, its UK boss said.
Paul Willis, UK managing director, said that cars fitted with the 1.6L diesel engine would need the physical remedy.
Those with the larger 2L engine would only need a software fix, he told the Commons Transport select committee."
From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34505593
I received a letter today about a 2.0 TDI Touran. It said that there will be a fix and I will get another letter at a later date about bringing it in."About 400,000 Volkwagen cars in the UK will need fuel injectors altered as well as a software fix, its UK boss said.
Paul Willis, UK managing director, said that cars fitted with the 1.6L diesel engine would need the physical remedy.
Those with the larger 2L engine would only need a software fix, he told the Commons Transport select committee."
From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34505593
If it's a software fix, is it a remap? I will not be bringing the car in if they're going to make it slower.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff