VW in big trouble

T`was a rather stoopid thing to do.
Although I guess at the time it seemed very clever.
Suppose Ronnie Biggs thought along those lines too at one stage of his career.
 
Yeah, I have difficulty wrapping my mind around this. I bet there is some relevant info we do not yet know. It is not like we are talking cheating on a single-unit spacecraft or something where they might get away with it. Did they really think no one will ever find out if millions of vehicles are involved?

Apparently, Europeans were concerned with discrepancies already a few years ago, which makes it look like it was a matter of time before the truth came out. Yet, VW does not seem to have bothered worrying enough to do anything about it. It took 10 (TEN) meetings with California engineers for the VW engineers to run out of explanations and finally acknowledge the trick.

Did they really think NO ONE can figure it out? Seriously?
 
Whoops - not just VW, Skoda and Audi, but I'd forgotten about SEAT !!
 
^ All VW Group brands are affected - VW, Audi, SEAT, Skoda. Not sure if Porsche makes a diesel ...

Share price dropped another 7% yesterday.

It is starting to look as if a German Government bail out might be the only hope left for the company.

At least one class action is based on the issue of re-sale value of a car that will no longer give the fuel economy and performance that was originally promised, after it has been rectified.

It appears that Bosch originally supplied the software. Apparently for testing purposes, with warnings that it should never be incorporated into production/sales vehicles. However, Bosch could still conceivably be dragged into this mess as well.

It seems that none of the VW web sites I have visited have even acknowledged that this has occurred!

As I have said before, it is very sad to see such a company brought down by this kind of dishonest and fraudulent behaviour.
 
Yep, Porsche makes diesel SUVs - the Cayenne... Touareg twin... Also the smaller Macan, which is pretty cool if you'd ask me!!

But I don't think Lambo, Bentley or Bugatti make them... So they'd be ok to keep on purchasing, lol!!

I'm gonna get myself some shares and help the German government out...
 
Only the 2.0 TDI is affected. Brand does not matter.

Speaking of brands, selling the non-German prestige brands and maybe one of the entry-level brands is a fairly straightforward way to raise cash, no? Although I wonder who actually needs Lamborghini, would FCA be interested? They have Ferrari anyway.

Re-focusing the long term goal from becoming the largest to being as profitable as possible would probably help with investor confidence.

Just some random thoughts...
 
Gidday MAS

I'm waiting for the inevitable fall-out that comes from this. Very much increased scrutiny of the pollution/fuel economy of all brands, both diesel and petrol, but particularly diesel engined cars.

This cannot but be a good thing.

When is the last time anyone got anything like the advertised figures for fuel economy?

I recall a recent test of a very fancy car here in Oz. The testers managed to slightly exceed the advertised fuel consumption by driving it at a steady 80 km/h on a dead straight, dead flat Northern Territory road with all the windows up and the air conditioning off. It was 45C ambient temperature ...

One has to question the sanity of this - specially on a road with no speed limit!
 
Hi Ratbag,

In the US, the EPA revised the method employed to determine mpg nearly a decade ago. Whereas stated mpg used to be too optimistic by about 2 mpg in the case of Subarus, the current EPA estimates have generally been found to be spot on by many users of many cars. So, yes, they are quite realistic and not long ago someone (Hyundai/Kia?) was fined for overstating theirs.

I have no questions about the estimates of our two Subarus. I can go -2 to +2 mpg of estimated in-town average, depending on conditions and -4 to +4 out of town, also depending on conditions. So, it all levels out nicely. Now, my mpg in rocky or muddy terrain is a whole different story:poke:
 
Ratbag said:
...I recall a recent test of a very fancy car here in Oz. The testers managed to slightly exceed the advertised fuel consumption by driving it at a steady 80 km/h on a dead straight, dead flat Northern Territory road with all the windows up and the air conditioning off. It was 45C ambient temperature ...

One has to question the sanity of this - specially on a road with no speed limit!
Click to expand...

Apologies for the detail nitpicking but there is a speed limit on the Stuart Highway of 130km/hr for all but (as of September '14, anyway) two sections which were open/unlimited as a trial. My personal view is that 130 is plenty.
 
^ no apology needed, GC :cool:.

Even if it were "only" 130 km/h, who would be doing 80 km/h with the windows up and the air-conditioning off in >45C?

As I said, one has to question the sanity of this kind of "test"!

BTW, the trial has now ended about a week ago, and the open speed limit has been made permanent, with howls of anguish from the usual quarters ...
 
There's only so far you can push an internal combustion engine for low emissions...

Have we met that point already while legislation asks for further improvements??

This could be the straw that breaks the camels back for VW.

Cheers

Bennie
 
Ratbag said:
^ no apology needed, GC :cool:.
... BTW, the trial has now ended about a week ago, and the open speed limit has been made permanent, with howls of anguish from the usual quarters ...
Click to expand...

Maybe sometime we'll get a chance to talk vis à vis and I'll give an account of why I don't see the need for any Richard Cranium to travel at 200+ km/hr on a road open to "normal" (alias the usual quarters) people. (Me?)
I say this after my experience travelling the Stuart Highway last year. Won't take up space here on it, and after any amount of discussion there'll always be the "who needs any speed limits at all" brigade. To them I suggest they get themselves a competition licence and do it on a race track.
 
I'm all for higher speed limits on good roads. 3 decades ago, when cars had horrible handling & woeful brakes, the limit was 100kph. Now, with better roads, better handling, better brakes, driver aids like ESC, brake assist, fewer rust buckets, etc, the limit is still 100kph or 110 on some roads. Doesn't make a lot of sense....

Not sure about the US, but here economy, whether L/110km or mpg, is determined by removing the AC belt, using ultra low viscosity engine oil that will destroy the engine in very short time, and other "cheats" to get a very unrealistic figure. And going by how corrupt the US EPA is, I believe they do the same. I believe all agencies should test the car in the same format as it is sold.
 
NachaLuva said:
...I'm all for higher speed limits on good roads...
Click to expand...
Me too, Matt ... allowable speeds should be appropriate. There are plenty of anomalies out there and I drove yesterday on one posted 80 which "should" be 100, yet immediately after came a section posted 100 which "should" be 80 (go figure!) but when you're retired, on an NT holiday and in no particular hurry & travelling at 100k's by choice and are suddenly - and I do mean suddenly - "passed" by (& that doesn't adequately describe the experience) a vehicle travelling at more than 200km/hr it makes to my mind a case against unlimited speed.
The Stuart Highway is merely two lanes, not a 6 lane Autobahn or AutoRoute.
Most of us will recall the tragic outcome of the Cannonball Run.

Maybe we should get back to VW's diesel issues (and yes, I do have one, though it's seeing less daylight since we bought the Forester!) :bananatoast:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gidday GC & NL

GeeCee said:
Maybe sometime we'll get a chance to talk vis à vis and I'll give an account of why I don't see the need for any Richard Cranium to travel at 200+ km/hr on a road open to "normal" (alias the usual quarters) people. (Me?)
I say this after my experience travelling the Stuart Highway last year. Won't take up space here on it, and after any amount of discussion there'll always be the "who needs any speed limits at all" brigade. To them I suggest they get themselves a competition licence and do it on a race track.
Click to expand...

I am not particularly in favour of open speed limits, however our existing open road speed limits are mostly a farce, and appear to be used for nothing other than yet more revenue raising from the poor, long-suffering motorists.

An example from my youth in Queensland about 50 years ago.

Driving an almost, but not quite, defective FJ Holden with not quite defective tyres at 60 mph was 'driving safely'; but driving an E-Type Jaguar in excellent condition and tyres at 61 mph was 'driving dangerously' in accordance with the then Road Traffic Act - " ... speed, of itself, can constitute dangerous driving ... ".

So the Police always charged one with BOTH exceeding the speed limit and dangerous driving, of course. The all but impossible onus being on the driver to prove that they were not driving dangerously. This would also be all but impossible to prove if driving at 10 mph below the posted speed limit ...

NachaLuva said:
I'm all for higher speed limits on good roads. 3 decades ago, when cars had horrible handling & woeful brakes, the limit was 100kph. Now, with better roads, better handling, better brakes, driver aids like ESC, brake assist, fewer rust buckets, etc, the limit is still 100kph or 110 on some roads. Doesn't make a lot of sense....
Click to expand...

Agreed. But be fair. When metric came in, the speed limits were lifted from 60 mph to ~62.18 mph, with screams of anguish from the usual quarters ... South Australia has always had a 65 mph (about 105 kmh) then 110 kmh speed limit with the introduction of the metric system. I lived there at the time and there were screams of anguish from the usual quarters.

If it is safe to do 100 kmh on some suburban roads, how come it suddenly becomes dangerous to do (say) 120-130 kmh on a decent country road where one might see another car every hour or so ... Even my dear old Impreza was giving optimal performance, pollution and economy at around this speed. The Forester even more so at 3200-3500 rpm in fifth/HR.

Not sure about the US, but here economy, whether L/110km or mpg, is determined by removing the AC belt, using ultra low viscosity engine oil that will destroy the engine in very short time, and other "cheats" to get a very unrealistic figure. And going by how corrupt the US EPA is, I believe they do the same. I believe all agencies should test the car in the same format as it is sold.
Click to expand...

In the US, it is governed by the SAFE Act, IIRC. Probably others as well.
We can all see how well this worked for VW diesels ...

And, I agree with the bolded bit, adding that additional extended on road testing should be mandatory (e.g. something like 1000 kms of normal road test, half city/suburban at peak hour and half open road), with a normal load of fuel, 20 kgs of junk and two normal-sized adult people ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top