I use a US-based VW model-specific forum - over there owners seem evenly split between having VW "buy-back" their car to make a PROFIT and those wanting VW to put the TDI version back on sale so they can buy another one.

As well as the big difference in blame culture, the other big difference between US and EU is that the US are insisting that all affected cars comply properly with their regulations - while in the EU, VW itself will get hammered but owners are permitted to continue using their cars.

Residual values are always influenced by all sorts of external events, so trying to sue for loss of value in the UK is likely to fail - especially as many of the cars are leased so it would be the leasing company taking the hit, not the users.

Edited by RT on 09/01/2017 at 08:57

I bought this car for its combination of economy (which has never got close to claims) and the extra torque compared to the 1.2/1.4 petrol versions.

You being from the motor trade should know that the official figures are not manufacturer claims but are obtained on a rolling road purely for emission and comparison purposes. it clearly states this in all manufacturer literature and on their websites. By law they are the only figures they can quote. I have never obtained close the these figures in the real world but being a realistic sort I never expected to. Provided I get close to my personal expectations I am happy.

On the last VW we owned the odometer was so inacurate it was a joke, it over read by 5% approx. Thus if you used the displayed mileage to calculate your mpg it would appear 5% better than it really was. One way to keep the customers happy.

Just look at the Real MPG section on this site for a rough indication. In most instances the figures quoted have been close to those I have obtained but 2 notable exception have been both on Fords. Real MPG says 2002 Mondeo TDCI does 48.8, over 3 years we averaged 39 mpg. It says a 2004 C-Max 1.6 TDCi does 52 mpg, over 5 years we averaged 44 mpg. To show real mpg can be worthwhile our Kia Ceed 1.6 CRDi averaged 51 mpg over 5 years in exactly the same type of use, real mpg suggests 50.1 mpg. Our Seat Leon 1.4 TSI has averged about 45 mpg against the 44.4 mpg on real mpgs.

For the Polo 1.2 TDI the real mpg figure is 56.8 mpg, are you getting close to that?

Going off topic I suggest if you plan to buy a Ford ignore Real MPG's since I have concluded that Ford encorages their employees to submit ficticious figures to make their cars appear way better than they really are.

Previous VW's I've run have came far closer to their official test results (Caddy van was outstanding) and the way they're calculated hadn't changed in that time as far as I'm aware. I wasn't too upset by the true economy though, it's the loss of performance on a motor that sees a lot of use that bugs me. VW have again been dishonest, surprise.

The methodology might not have changed but the tricks employed by all manufacturers to "massage" the figures have improved.

And I am not talking about the nonsense put about by some posters such as spare wheels removed, mirrors removed, door gaps and radiators taped up etc etc none of which would make any difference in a lab on a rolling road.

I am refering to features such as stop/start that make little difference in the real world have a huge impact on the official test results.

Take the Volvo V50 as an example. We had 2 in the office, identical cars in every respect except one came fitted with stop/start. The CO figures on that car were 99 (74 mpg), the non stop start was 114 (66 mpg). Over the 3 years we had them the users logged every gallon bought (as required by company policy) and the mpg for the 2 cars was near enough identical at 53 mpg. The main difference was the extra company car tax paid by the user of the non stop/start car.

Good to have evidence ... that start/stop is little more than a gimmick.

A gimmick yes ... but one which saves me £120 VED every 12 months!

The owner of the car at 4/5 years old when it needs a turbo, new battery made of unobtanium and filled with angel tears or other assorted electrical issues due to these things might not be so pleased, though i don't blame you one bit enjoying the savings, i would too.

It's almost certain i shall never own a car with this fitment (it joins quite a few others in my not on your nelly list) , and if such a nightmare ever came to pass i would have the thing permanently programmed out

t's even more annoying on an automatic as unless you disable it at the start of every trip, it will stop the engine even while you're waiting momentarily at a road junction. On a manual you would as SLO says keep the clutch down.

Don't know if it applies to other models - but the stop-start on my VW Touareg (automatic) can be "managed" using variable pressure on the brake pedal once stationary - normal pressure and stop-start activates if not overridden at start of journey - light pressure deactivates stop-start.

Normal pressure is needed to come to a standstill, but by easing the pressure a little the engine restarts when I want, not when it wants - with enough brake pressure to remain stationary.

I can beat the red/amber phase of traffic lights if/when I try and can avoid delays at Give Ways.

I prefer not to have to think about such things whilst driving and concentrate on the traffic..After all, is that the claim of modern technology ? To make driving easier and safer.

Wondering how to beat a silly contrivance must lose concentration on key things...like cyclists..