Half a million VWs recalled, sneaky emissions software.
Discussion
Alucidnation said:
Ok, please explain.
it's an average. more specifically a mean average (thats a maths term, not a horrible one)averages work by adding up all the data and dividing by how many pieces of data you have. In this case you work out the reliability for every vehicle, and divide it by the number of vehicles.
lets try an example...
If bobs car breaks down once per year, and Doris' breaks down three times per year.
we add 1+3 together, then divide by the number of people, which is 2.
so 1+3 =4
4/2 =2
so the average is 2 breakdowns per year.
You can have as many cars in this calculation as you like. Averages scale up, thats the point of them.
So it doesn't matter how many cars you have, and average will work it out for you.
brenflys777 said:
xjay1337 said:
Has it financially effected you in any way?
What do you want recompense for???????
Yes, it has financially affected me. Yes I think Audi should be held morally and legally to compensate customers for a deliberate fraud they committed. What do you want recompense for???????
Before I'd explain why, you said earlier in the post that:
xjay1337 said:
Yes when it goes into "limp" mode it is slow, painfully slow, turbo goes to wastegate pressure (7psi in my case) so it's very lethargic,. but it does drive and you can do 70mph on the flat if you need to. If you were pulling onto a motorway and had limp mode and it was the near death experience that it was made out to be then maybe Brenflys did not pull out in a safe manner to begin with.
I'm not sure if you're trolling, so can you explain how when a vehicle is painfully slow in this mode, enters the mode with no warning and does so for a fault that is not immediately dangerous, you consider questioning my judgement on pulling out onto a road, but not the judgement Audi made in choosing to deliberately render a vehicles performance inadequate immediately for a fault they told me was not inherently dangerous or damaging? I've been a Police driver, a civilian Advanced Driver and I don't think a driver can be reasonably expected to assume their Audi might lose 3/5ths of its rev range every time they consider pulling out. Incidentally my incident was exactly as I described and occurred pulling out onto a single carriageway section of the A5, traffic in both directions and no escape route. The truck that nearly hit me should have been unaffected by me pulling out if I'd only had the performance of an Austin 1100 let alone a 2.0Tdi....
I have explained to you before. The car does not know EXACTLY what is wrong. It just notices that some parameters are outside expected range so to protect itself it enters into a limp home mode.
Funnily enough when a fault occurs it can happen unexpectedly.
Nearly every single car with OBD2 (so the last 15+ years) has got parameters written into the car which cause limp mode in certain situations. This is across nearly every single brand of vehicle Mercedes, VAG, Ford, Vauxhall, Toyota, etc. So to act like Audi are being bad-bad-bullies is pathetic. You had a fault with your car which went into limp mode and just so happened to go into limp mode at a bad moment. You'd soon moan if the car didn't go into limp mode and then grenaded itself.
As I have explained before you (or the average user) is not mechanically knowledgeable enough to know whether a fault is bad enough to cause limp home mode. So get over it. It happens. And you aren't getting compensation. It has not financially effected you at all.
On the topic of emissions fixes it turns out that the "fix" software actually improves power. A tuner in the USA did a test.
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?p=5262621
Thread linked above said:
efore dieselgate update:
139 hp, 258 ft-lb
After dieselgate reflash:
146 hp, 271 ft-lb
net approx gain:
+7hp, +13ft-lb
these are NOT tuned files, 100% stock to stock comparo. everything about the car is 100% stock.
4500 ft altitude and SAE correction, sea level curve will be a slightly different shape.
139 hp, 258 ft-lb
After dieselgate reflash:
146 hp, 271 ft-lb
net approx gain:
+7hp, +13ft-lb
these are NOT tuned files, 100% stock to stock comparo. everything about the car is 100% stock.
4500 ft altitude and SAE correction, sea level curve will be a slightly different shape.
Someone posted this on the other thread which shows a pretty shocking loss of torque/power right in the "normal" range but peak being unaffected (indeed slightly higher than before).
https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AII8a0cFXX1v...
https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AII8a0cFXX1v...
xjay1337 said:
SpeckledJim said:
What does it do at 1500 - 2500 rpm, where everyone actually drives?
Look at the thread.The power and torque curves are higher across the whole range. Sorry the picture didn't seem to embed nicely in my post.
Indeed, if (2) were actually possible, it follows that VAG were ridiculously incompetent in the design phase when they decided to fit the Bluemotion cheat systems instead of just flashing a slightly altered map onto the ECU.
Mr GrimNasty said:
Probably because they've ignored some other design specification parameter in the fix - CO2 levels perhaps!
CO2 levels are not regulated by the emissions testing in Europe. They need to be measured but there are not any limits. Your VED band though would have been affected (though I don't think there are any plans to re-asses at all).I suspect the fix is merely to remove the "defeat device" so it doesn't change the power curve under test conditions any more - as long as the MOT levels are not surpassed the car should be legal to operate in its new state..... no idea what the NOx and HC emissions levels are going to be like now though.
youngsyr said:
xjay1337 said:
SpeckledJim said:
What does it do at 1500 - 2500 rpm, where everyone actually drives?
Look at the thread.The power and torque curves are higher across the whole range. Sorry the picture didn't seem to embed nicely in my post.
Indeed, if (2) were actually possible, it follows that VAG were ridiculously incompetent in the design phase when they decided to fit the Bluemotion cheat systems instead of just flashing a slightly altered map onto the ECU.
While dyno figures can have some variances it's still a good test.
You also fail to account for 2) that the dyno is ran under full throttle conditions not under the controlled condition found in the emissions test.
to be fair to brenfly's in relation to limp mode in modern cars, i personally think they can be dangerous,and actually would prefer the engine grenaded itself, usually you get some warning of that. i had my wife's 307 hdi go into limp mode a good few years back when overtaking on the a917. not a pleasant experience for me at all.
yes 70 can be achieved on the flat/downhill if you have a couple of miles of clear road, going uphill on a motorway it will drop to 50mph,sometimes less depending on the gradient, not clever at all. before the car was fixed there were a couple of times i would have gladly booted the person responsible for the limp mode concept square in the balls
yes 70 can be achieved on the flat/downhill if you have a couple of miles of clear road, going uphill on a motorway it will drop to 50mph,sometimes less depending on the gradient, not clever at all. before the car was fixed there were a couple of times i would have gladly booted the person responsible for the limp mode concept square in the balls
xjay1337 said:
youngsyr said:
xjay1337 said:
SpeckledJim said:
What does it do at 1500 - 2500 rpm, where everyone actually drives?
Look at the thread.The power and torque curves are higher across the whole range. Sorry the picture didn't seem to embed nicely in my post.
Indeed, if (2) were actually possible, it follows that VAG were ridiculously incompetent in the design phase when they decided to fit the Bluemotion cheat systems instead of just flashing a slightly altered map onto the ECU.
While dyno figures can have some variances it's still a good test.
You also fail to account for 2) that the dyno is ran under full throttle conditions not under the controlled condition found in the emissions test.
Even with the best intentions, a rolling road can produce significantly different numbers with seemingly irrelevant changes to the car - something as simple as a change in the tyre pressure can have a significant impact on the graphs.
It's also worth mentioning that we're only viewing 2 runs here too (a before and after), car engines won't produce identical power runs even on back to back WOT runs, these differences are well within the "margin of error" of a typical set of runs. We can't be sure from the graphs presented whether the tuner simply got lucky on those runs or is even cherry picking the runs to show the worst before and the best after run.
And of course, we don't know for sure that there is no connection to VAG with this tuner, it's possible that a family relation or friend works at a dealership, so a seeminly independent test isn't as independent as it is claimed to be.
That is why I say some random tuner's rolling road figures can't just be taken as read, especially when the results fly in the face of common sense.
Edited by youngsyr on Tuesday 11th April 15:14
Okay. I get questioning things but there is nothing sinister here - It's like Revo doing the test, they have nothing to gain and nothing to lose.
My car does repeatable figures, while dyno to dyno figures can vary, a decent dyno does not massively vary from run to run or from time to time, I have done enough dyno time courtesy of Charlie from SRR here to know that.
Also I have dyno charts months apart on the same dyno doing the same figures and tracing *near* identical power curves.
The point was simply to show that people claiming their cars are "slow" or "perform worse" is not actually true and that peak figures at least are not negatively impacted.
Of course this does not take into account partial throttle performance, and this was only the results on one car (CR140, US spec) not the UK spec CR140 or CR170 engines so isn't gospel. I just thought it was only fair to share.
If you want to argue it with KERMA then sign up on TDI Club and argue it with him there.
My car does repeatable figures, while dyno to dyno figures can vary, a decent dyno does not massively vary from run to run or from time to time, I have done enough dyno time courtesy of Charlie from SRR here to know that.
Also I have dyno charts months apart on the same dyno doing the same figures and tracing *near* identical power curves.
The point was simply to show that people claiming their cars are "slow" or "perform worse" is not actually true and that peak figures at least are not negatively impacted.
Of course this does not take into account partial throttle performance, and this was only the results on one car (CR140, US spec) not the UK spec CR140 or CR170 engines so isn't gospel. I just thought it was only fair to share.
If you want to argue it with KERMA then sign up on TDI Club and argue it with him there.
xjay1337 said:
Okay. I get questioning things but there is nothing sinister here - It's like Revo doing the test, they have nothing to gain and nothing to lose.
My car does repeatable figures, while dyno to dyno figures can vary, a decent dyno does not massively vary from run to run or from time to time, I have done enough dyno time courtesy of Charlie from SRR here to know that.
Also I have dyno charts months apart on the same dyno doing the same figures and tracing *near* identical power curves.
The point was simply to show that people claiming their cars are "slow" or "perform worse" is not actually true and that peak figures at least are not negatively impacted.
Of course this does not take into account partial throttle performance, and this was only the results on one car (CR140, US spec) not the UK spec CR140 or CR170 engines so isn't gospel. I just thought it was only fair to share.
If you want to argue it with KERMA then sign up on TDI Club and argue it with him there.
Well, it's one data point. Got any more dyno's showing a broad power increase? It makes no sense that the update would improve the car so I think a bit of scepticism is warranted. My car does repeatable figures, while dyno to dyno figures can vary, a decent dyno does not massively vary from run to run or from time to time, I have done enough dyno time courtesy of Charlie from SRR here to know that.
Also I have dyno charts months apart on the same dyno doing the same figures and tracing *near* identical power curves.
The point was simply to show that people claiming their cars are "slow" or "perform worse" is not actually true and that peak figures at least are not negatively impacted.
Of course this does not take into account partial throttle performance, and this was only the results on one car (CR140, US spec) not the UK spec CR140 or CR170 engines so isn't gospel. I just thought it was only fair to share.
If you want to argue it with KERMA then sign up on TDI Club and argue it with him there.
xjay1337 said:
You'd soon moan if the car didn't go into limp mode and then grenaded itself.
As I have explained before you (or the average user) is not mechanically knowledgeable enough to know whether a fault is bad enough to cause limp home mode. So get over it. It happens. And you aren't getting compensation. It has not financially effected you at all.
Ok, you've convinced me that you're not trolling, just assumptive and sometimes wrong. As I have explained before you (or the average user) is not mechanically knowledgeable enough to know whether a fault is bad enough to cause limp home mode. So get over it. It happens. And you aren't getting compensation. It has not financially effected you at all.
I wouldn't moan if the car 'grenaded' itself in preference to putting me at risk. I'd suggest anyone who would protect their cars engine over their survival would be no loss to the species.
The faults I had on the car are tangential to the fraud on emissions. Cars go wrong, thats life and as I said earlier I linked the two only by virtue of the irony of having an Audi whose emissions protection system was important enough to VAG to cut power instantly if in doubt, but simultaneously fraudulent.
The deliberate emissions fraud on Audi/VAGs part has financially affected me. I may or may not get compensation for that, you can have an opinion on that but its opinion not fact.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff