VW. Some news at last!

[Chris Bartram]

I'd guess all of them would need more regen, and of course, yet more fuel used to do that.

[cl]

I don't really understand why they're recalling the cars at all. After the software change they won't be one iota more economical or different to drive.

What difference will it make to anything?

[Chris Bartram]

The 2.0 does for sure, and I'd imagine the 1.6 does too.

[Hanny Z]

There isn't all that much difference in the NOx levels allowed in the US and EU, so its likely it will fail the Euro5 certification without the cheat given that the independent US testing showed it grossly exceeded the US standards when tested in the real world without the cheat.

[Chris Bartram]

I can't see insurers insisting on that- thousands of cars serviced outside the dealer network will already be running old engine maps- my car would be had I not paid an independent to update it after i had an intermittent running problem.

I thought it was already common knowledge?

[Tim Streater]

Yes, they'll pass the NOx test (were they to take it)

They'll consume more fuel and be more sluggish to drive.

[sm_jamieson]

New injectors ? Changing the spray pattern and/or number of injections per cycle ?

Simon.

[Tim Watts]

They produce less NOX and they *might* well be deficient in power or mpg... No one knows for sure.

[cl]

Do we know that? I.e. is the change going to try and make them 'really' conform to the requirements all the time or are they just going to remove the cheat?

[Hanny Z]

We do know for sure that they will be, otherwise there wouldn?t have been any point in the cheat.

[Tim Streater]

If they "just removed the cheat" then presumably there'd be some risk that the govt might say that these vehicles would no longer be able to pass their type-approval emission test or whatever it's called. If they did that the vehicle could not, presumably, be legally driven.

So instead they'll alter the "normal mode" to match "cheat mode" with the consequences I listed above.

[Dave Liquorice]

No the cheat was there purely to pass the emmisions tests. What impact running in cheat mode has is unknown to us.

[damduck-egg]

I was more leaning to an insurer thinking why hasn't he had the official update done is the owner hiding an after market performance chip which we would class as a modification and charge more for or use as a reason to invalidate a claim.

Amongst the people who read things like usenet, the car pages in newspapers etc it could be. But I reckon that many purchasers of cars like VW and similar cars purchase one and just use it ,it is only when it fails that how it works may come into consideration. Many do not even read the owners manual fully to get the best use out of features they may have, like the new manager where my other half works. Same model of car as the missus more or less, when it was hot a while back the missus opened the windows and sunroof from the fob via the office window to let the car cool off, Manager "That's useful" Missus "Yours should be the same try it " Manager " Ooo so it does" She has had the car for four years.

G.Harman

[Dave Liquorice]

If HMG or the EU did that the noise we've heard so far over this would be a but and ants whisper. HMG have already stated that any affected vehicles will not change VED band, full stop.

How do you know that "cheat mode" is much different to "normal mode"? We don't know if talking 140 bhp/43 mpg (normal) to 137 bhp/41mpg (cheat) or to 90 bhp/28mpg. The first cheat difference would be lost in the noise of normal variations due to journey type, short round town stop start, v 200 miles at 70 mph motorway. The second is significant...

[Hanny Z]

Yes, but we do know that they wouldn't have taken the hell of a risk to have the cheat if running in that mode all the time didn't have real downsides performance wise.

That's not right either. It's well known what has to be done to meet the most stringent emission standards and what that does to the car's performance with both power and fuel economy.

[NY]

Which means that the cars are then not as described in the sales literature and not as they performed on a test drive. I wonder what the Sale of Goods Act says about the validity of the sale in that circumstance...

[The Natural Philosopher]

Any manufacturer that wasn't designing to meet the regulations by more, or less, cheating, is in breach of their obligations to shareholders.

A LOT of pensions funds have big holdings in VAG....

VW just took it to new heights - that's all.

[charles]

did their UK sales literature say anything about NO2 emissions? The one for my car only mentions CO2 emissions - which doesn't seem to be in question.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Actually no, that's not true.

NOx is a function of just how lean the burn is, and how the actual injection process and combustion chamber interact.

It's possible that other engines are better without tweaking.

there are at least tow parameters I can think of - possibly three - that would dictate the leanness of the burn

- combustion chamber design shapewise

- whether single or multiple injection pulses per detonation are used, and their timing

- how much boost is put into the engine under less than full power conditions

The last is a two edged word. If you throw in more air, the exhaust of course has a lower percentage, for a given amount of NOx, but the total NOx may increase.

What you really want of course is to ru(i)n them, off liquid oxygen with no nitrogen.

It is rocket science!

[The Natural Philosopher]

Thi9s is nothing to do with DPF or particulates. Its all about NOx