Smouldering ruins: PH Blog
Why the end of the diesel dream might be the best thing that's happened to the car industry in decades
And now look.
But who's to blame for this whole thing - car makers like VW or the legislators whose rules they were bending? Attempts by governments to force manufacturers into making cleaner engines have a proven record of unintended consequences. Take America's Clean Air Act of the 70s and the strangling effect of smog filtration that saw huge V8s wheezing out barely more than 100hp while guzzling huge amounts of fuel.
Same as today. Well-intentioned rules to try and reduce the harmful emissions actually end up being counter-productive. The generous view is the car makers simply create engines to the letter of the law, meaning our cars are currently built to achieve lab tested CO2 and mpg figures with actual real-world performance a secondary concern. It's not quite as bad as the smog strangled Yank tanks of the 70s but the over-geared, rev-strangled, over-boosted engines we're now stuck with are built with these targets in mind, not drivers. VW was simply employing ruthless logic by engineering its diesel motors to pass the tests off the road while delivering the performance customers demanded on it.
At the same time the fixation with CO2 means we as drivers can kid ourselves a two-tonne luxury SUV with a big diesel engine is as virtuous as a family hatchback because the bottom line g/km figure is the same. Or, in performance terms, a BMW M3 can go from 263g/km to 194g/km in a generation without any compromise in performance and claim itself a tree hugger as well as a tyre shredder. This is nonsense.
Actual mpg on the road isn't improved by the same proportion and the engines haven't suddenly got that more efficient. They have got more complicated and better at hitting the targets set down by legislators. But that's not quite the same thing. The C63 S I was driving last week has CO2 of 192g/km and official mpg of 34.4mpg compared with 285g/km and 23.1mpg of my old 6.2-litre 507 long termer. But according to the trip in comparable driving I was getting maybe two or three mpg more. On paper the new engine is 'better' but for the sake of a few mpg I'd be happy with the old 6.2 V8, ta.
There are exceptions, notably when the engineers take the lead and attempt to actually solve a problem rather than just achieve the required numbers by the simplest method possible. As in 70s California when Honda took a different approach with its lean-burn CVCC-engined Civic, the idea being to burn the fuel more efficiently rather than just chuck it through a big engine and let the smog gear mop up the mess.
See also Mazda today with its Skyactiv engines. Both units go against the accepted grain by keeping generous cubic capacity, the petrol sticking with normal aspiration and a high compression ratio while the diesel is lower than usual permitting a lighter engine and increasing refinement. Combine the former with lightweight engineering and you've got a new MX-5 weighing just 50kg or so more than its equivalent of 25 years ago but with all the advances in safety made in that time.
Proving what? If you tell the engineers to build engines that hit emissions targets they'll do it, by fair means or foul. But if they're given free rein to use their skill and actually make engines more efficient the results are often more creative, interesting and effective. Make better use of a given amount of fuel and we're all winners, whether we're out to go faster or just pump less nasty stuff out in our wake.
Here's a plan then. Let's leave the engine building to the engineers, eh?
Dan
[Sources: Honda]
I suspect, however, that the swing will not be back towards petrol, but towards electric...
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=220...
9 Nov 2005
"According to the motoring press modern diesels are clean and efficient but I've been behind more stinkers recently than you can count. Every make of car seems to be guilty with Audis, Peugeots, Fords, and the rest either belching clouds of black smoke under acceleration or just stinking like filth when they're in front of you. There should be an agreed sign that can be waved to diesel drivers when their cars smoke/stink so they have to get to the dealer for a new car."
I wonder how long VAG apologists will be saying this for?
That won`t work. The Green Blob will see to that even though their obsession with CO2 and neglect of NOx has contributed to the current distortion of the market. And if the Green Blob does not distort the market, then you can be sure that the tax man will, as he has always done.
The VW engineers who came up with their "fix" were utterly stupid as were those others in the management/marketing hierarchy who were privy to and complicit in the fraud. It is going to hit VW very hard indeed, in reputation and in the VW wallet.
I am looking at a future purchase and am now very wary about the idea of buying a diesel powered car - too much uncertainty about possible future tax regimes to drive diesels off the road. I would not be surprised if the structure of the car market looks very different in five years time.
Legislation is a good thing. But it's human nature to get everything you can out if it. Every so often there will be a tightening, or a change in the legislation to close loopholes, but it's not the first or last time something like this will happen. Thankfully, what's learnt along the way generally progresses the march of human understanding!
It's gotta be one of the two. It really can't be anything else. Either everybody else can pass emissions tests, whilst VAG are the only lazy, feckless, cheating no-good incompetents in the entire global motor industry who can't get within a country mile, or VAG are just the only ones who've been caught so far.
Read the article. Think for a minute. Emissions figures - VERY closely related to fuel consumption - are plummeting wildly, yet real-world fuel consumption's staying fairly static. Does this make any sense to you if there aren't shenanigans afoot? Why is the VAG 2.0TDi not a million miles distant from everything else in terms of performance and consumption, if it's the only one which is so much less clean and efficient than the others?
TL,DR: Engage brain, instead of knee-jerking.
BTW this WAS an engineers solution.
My diesel Disco 300 Tdi is 248 gm/km but it has great torque for fuel used, have you seen the amount of petrol a big SUV needs? , 20 mpg feels good, ridiculous.
The silence from the other manufacturers has been deafening.
More to come on this I fear. Same as another poster I was actually considering buying a diesel for the first time ever (though I did have a loathsome Astra diesel as a company car many moons ago) I may just stick with petrol for now.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff