|
Good report from Watchdod. I was pleased their car expert so openly advised people not to get the update done.
|
|
|
It's not a "mandatory" update - in the UK, owners are perfectly entitled NOT to have the modifications applied.
If so, why on earth is VAG doing this over here? Either its a pollution issue, in which case it SHOULD be manditory, or isn't, in which case, why all the polather? It seems that most of the problems occur because of other components not directly related to the fix cannot cope with the extra soot etc produced because they have either been neglected by the car owners (in which case, the cost of replacement being the responsibility of the current owner) or the components are just plain 'old' (in relative terms), in which case, the cost of replacement should be shared between car owner and VAG, assuming the part wouldn't have been replaced at that age anyway.
Essentially all those people complaining about 'loss of performance' don't, in my view, have a leg to stand on as their cars enjoyed a performance advantage beforehand over over makes precisely because VAG cheated on the software. Its up to them whether this fix and loss of performance consitutes a broken contract and going to court.
|
It's not a "mandatory" update - in the UK, owners are perfectly entitled NOT to have the modifications applied.
If so, why on earth is VAG doing this over here? Either its a pollution issue, in which case it SHOULD be manditory, or isn't, in which case, why all the polather? It seems that most of the problems occur because of other components not directly related to the fix cannot cope with the extra soot etc produced because they have either been neglected by the car owners (in which case, the cost of replacement being the responsibility of the current owner) or the components are just plain 'old' (in relative terms), in which case, the cost of replacement should be shared between car owner and VAG, assuming the part wouldn't have been replaced at that age anyway.
Essentially all those people complaining about 'loss of performance' don't, in my view, have a leg to stand on as their cars enjoyed a performance advantage beforehand over over makes precisely because VAG cheated on the software. Its up to them whether this fix and loss of performance consitutes a broken contract and going to court.
VW is obliged to make the fix available, or risk huge fines - UK law implements EU Directives and regulations in a way that only applies to vehicles at point of sale - which is why the MoT test regulations had to be amended to catch EGR/DPF removal.
|
It's not a "mandatory" update - in the UK, owners are perfectly entitled NOT to have the modifications applied.
If so, why on earth is VAG doing this over here? Either its a pollution issue, in which case it SHOULD be manditory, or isn't, in which case, why all the polather? It seems that most of the problems occur because of other components not directly related to the fix cannot cope with the extra soot etc produced because they have either been neglected by the car owners (in which case, the cost of replacement being the responsibility of the current owner) or the components are just plain 'old' (in relative terms), in which case, the cost of replacement should be shared between car owner and VAG, assuming the part wouldn't have been replaced at that age anyway.
Essentially all those people complaining about 'loss of performance' don't, in my view, have a leg to stand on as their cars enjoyed a performance advantage beforehand over over makes precisely because VAG cheated on the software. Its up to them whether this fix and loss of performance consitutes a broken contract and going to court.
VW is obliged to make the fix available, or risk huge fines - UK law implements EU Directives and regulations in a way that only applies to vehicles at point of sale - which is why the MoT test regulations had to be amended to catch EGR/DPF removal.
Am I correct in interpreting your comments that the MOT has been ammended so that cars that haven't been fixed by a certain date will fail the MOT period, or is there some 'test' in the MOT that can catch vehicles that haven't anyway? Unless not having the fix results in a 'fail' (whichever way its done), I don't see the point any any VAG vehicle owner affected bothering to get the 'fix' done, given the problems on many cars and/or the loss in performance/mpg. Again, if this was the case, vehicles without the fix would go for higher prices when resold as they perform better (except, perhaps, emissions).
This whole situation stinks and is typical of a political fudge. For once, the Americans got it right as at least they seem to have the environmental impact in mind, even if the financial penalties appear to be designed to punish Germany and help domestic manufacturers' sales.
|
It's not a "mandatory" update - in the UK, owners are perfectly entitled NOT to have the modifications applied.
If so, why on earth is VAG doing this over here? Either its a pollution issue, in which case it SHOULD be manditory, or isn't, in which case, why all the polather? It seems that most of the problems occur because of other components not directly related to the fix cannot cope with the extra soot etc produced because they have either been neglected by the car owners (in which case, the cost of replacement being the responsibility of the current owner) or the components are just plain 'old' (in relative terms), in which case, the cost of replacement should be shared between car owner and VAG, assuming the part wouldn't have been replaced at that age anyway.
Essentially all those people complaining about 'loss of performance' don't, in my view, have a leg to stand on as their cars enjoyed a performance advantage beforehand over over makes precisely because VAG cheated on the software. Its up to them whether this fix and loss of performance consitutes a broken contract and going to court.
VW is obliged to make the fix available, or risk huge fines - UK law implements EU Directives and regulations in a way that only applies to vehicles at point of sale - which is why the MoT test regulations had to be amended to catch EGR/DPF removal.
Am I correct in interpreting your comments that the MOT has been ammended so that cars that haven't been fixed by a certain date will fail the MOT period, or is there some 'test' in the MOT that can catch vehicles that haven't anyway? Unless not having the fix results in a 'fail' (whichever way its done), I don't see the point any any VAG vehicle owner affected bothering to get the 'fix' done, given the problems on many cars and/or the loss in performance/mpg. Again, if this was the case, vehicles without the fix would go for higher prices when resold as they perform better (except, perhaps, emissions).
This whole situation stinks and is typical of a political fudge. For once, the Americans got it right as at least they seem to have the environmental impact in mind, even if the financial penalties appear to be designed to punish Germany and help domestic manufacturers' sales.
No - you're not correct - outside the original manufacturer, the ability to check if a particular recall has been done just doesn't exist. The MoT test was amended to physically check for the presence of original emissions equipment - it's rudimentary but all there is.
The Americans have their own issues - Chrysler is in trouble over diesel emissions - but are are delighting in hammering the german brands!
|
No - you're not correct - outside the original manufacturer, the ability to check if a particular recall has been done just doesn't exist. The MoT test was amended to physically check for the presence of original emissions equipment - it's rudimentary but all there is.
The Americans have their own issues - Chrysler is in trouble over diesel emissions - but are are delighting in hammering the german brands!
I'm not sure what you mean by your first comment - does the MOT test check for the software cheat or physical equipment required to remove nasties from exhausts? If its the second, then what's the point in getting the 'fix' done, as a) no MOT test can fail a non-fixed vehicle if the cheat software is still working, and b) the vehicle works better (or at least no difference on newer models) without it.
Again, I just don't see the point in having a manufacturer legally-bound to offer a fix that at best does nothing for the vehicle and at worst costs performance, mpg and the owner's money for new parts not covered in the fix. If it really was all about the environment, the fix should've been manditory for all affected vehicles.
It isn't, so its politics - VAG have effectively wasted several tens of billions of Euros doing something the nobody wants, doesn't really fix the environmental problems and may well affect future investment in clean engine technology. Surely it would've been far better to have been forced to make sure this sort of thing never re-occurs and just pay a big fine in each country proportionate to the number of affected vehicles, which would then go (say) to local health services.
|
|
The EU emissions limits only apply during the EU-mandated test - it's widely recognised that NOx levels during normal driving are higher - the test is a simulated specified route and the limits represent the AVERAGE emissions during that time - the average on any other journey will be different.
The whole issue of EU emissions limits is politics, that's why they're so ineffective at reducing real world emissions.
|
|
|
|
It's not a "mandatory" update - in the UK, owners are perfectly entitled NOT to have the modifications applied.
If so, why on earth is VAG doing this over here? Either its a pollution issue, in which case it SHOULD be manditory, or isn't, in which case, why all the polather?
Essentially all those people complaining about 'loss of performance' don't, in my view, have a leg to stand on as their cars enjoyed a performance advantage beforehand over over makes precisely because VAG cheated on the software. Its up to them whether this fix and loss of performance consitutes a broken contract and going to court.
Its a srange complicated mix this update. There is not and has never been a test to measure NOx on the road only during the very narrow and limited confines of the test. The fix makes cars comply with the lab test without the cheat device but does nothing to reduce NOx outwith the test conditions. Several independant testers have found that there is no reduction in real world NOx and in some cases its worse. In real driving the engine produces a lot more soot and the extra regens needed use more fuel so CO2 is increased and mpg down. VWs objective is to get itself off the hook not to improve anything for anyone.
If you bought a car because it had good performance and did a lot of mpg and VW came along and degraded it to a point where you hated driving it and did not trust it Im sure you would be complaining as well particularly when there is no evidence there are any benifits to the environment. There ar nearly 1000 different fixes for different engines and models, some seem OK with the fix and some are ruined by it. Sadly VW are no worse then other makes and better than many, they were all at it and this story still has a long way to run. Dont be thinking petrol is the angel in this its not, NOx is the bad boy at the moment but if attention turns to cheating particulate emissions or carcinogenic hydrocarbons ther will be another stink. The only good news is that things are on the mend and new cars are are getting a lot better, real world testing for new models starts in September.
|
www.autoexpress.co.uk/mercedes/95287/mercedes-pare...s
We've known for some time that VW Group aren't the only culprit in Europe.
|
|
|
|
It's not a "mandatory" update - in the UK, owners are perfectly entitled NOT to have the modifications applied.
If so, why on earth is VAG doing this over here? Either its a pollution issue, in which case it SHOULD be manditory, or isn't, in which case, why all the polather?
According to reports, VW has not fitted the "defeat device" to any cars in the UK and is only offering a "fix" to "remove doubt" for owners. This makes so little sense that I can only think they are lying/hiding something. They would do less damage to themselves if they just told the full story.
From www.autoexpress.co.uk/volkswagen/92893/vw-emission...s
Volkswagen has been accused of telling "blatant lies" to UK car buyers, after the company's UK boss, Paul Willis, told MPs that the company had not misled buyers nor had it fitted defeat devices to its cars.
Appearing before the Transport Select Committee, Willis argued that VW "had not misled customers in any way" and that it had not fitted a defeat device to cars sold in Europe. He said: "There is nothing wrong with any of [the cars] at all." Willis argued the only reason the 1.2 million vehicle recall in the UK was being carried out was to "remove any doubt" from owners.
|
|
I'd forgotten he said that, Manatee - thanks for the reminder.
Surely in view of that, and the sundry problems being experienced with cars that have had the 'fix', the advice has got to be 'don't have it done'.
The fix has become so discredited that it'll be the cars that have had it that risk being difficult to sell, rather than the other way round.
|
|
|
|
|
|
