Never buying another VAG product again.

[thewalrus]

The clean diesel's seemed a little too good be true, I suppose.

Fucking assholes.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/news/a26745/epa-vw-violation/

[Talon]

Wow.

[Talon]

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/volkswagen- ... 26737.html

[JaysonAych]

Such chrome-plated balls. They had to know this would be caught eventually.

[thewalrus]

Such chrome-plated balls. They had to know this would be caught eventually.

Holy fuck. I'm so mad. For the amount this bullshit is polluting, I may as well have bought a V8 Mustang or some other fun car.

I suppose there's no confirmation that the same thing is happening in Canada. But two things strike my mind.

a) They use the same engine, so I have a hard time believing there's any difference. Hell, it may even be worse here. And they certainly did claim that the engine in my car was a 'clean diesel'… approved by the EPA and CARB when I bought it.

b) Even if it IS cleaner in Canada, which is incredibly doubtful, it's still an incredibly unethical thing to do. I can't support that bullshit.

[tut]

i see a lot of sandy VAG in this thread


also, i hate to say i told you so, but i told you so that even modern diesels are polluting menaces to societys health

[thewalrus]

i see a lot of sandy VAG in this thread


also, i hate to say i told you so, but i told you so that even modern diesels are polluting menaces to societys health

You couldn't have known a thing about this. This was deliberate misrepresentation on the part of VW USA. They FAKED environmental assessments to allow their cars to pass strict emissions laws.

Now - yeah - in retrospect I suppose it was all too good to be true. A diesel engine with superb mileage and plenty of torque, and similar NOx emissions to regular gasoline powered cars. But while hindsight says this is too good to be true, I don't think it was unreasonable to rely on VW's representations when I purchased the car. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that a company as large, and as invested in the US as VW, is going to intentionally mislead the federal government in order to get their product to market.


Yeah. That sounds naive.

[Talon]

I like how they've just flat out admitted it. Like, "Yep, we did that. It was wrong. We're ready to pay for it." Last I saw they have $7,300,000,000 set aside to pay fees/fines/etc.

So does that mean any individual who bought one of those cars, new or used, is going to get a check? That's how it should be!

[thewalrus]

I like how they've just flat out admitted it. Like, "Yep, we did that. It was wrong. We're ready to pay for it." Last I saw they have $7,300,000,000 set aside to pay fees/fines/etc.

So does that mean any individual who bought one of those cars, new or used, is going to get a check? That's how it should be!

It better. The way I see it, a few things have to happen (none of which would lead to me buying a VW again).

1. They'll have to fix the cars (if possible and feasible).
2. They'll have to pay the fine.
3. At a minimum they'll have to compensate owners for decreases in re-sale value. I imagine this'll mean a buy back at some agreed number that represents fair market value prior to this news release. For my car that'd probably be around $15000.

On that last point, people may agree to this, or they may not. My guess is if you agree, you'll sign a document that removes your right to sue VW. If you don't sign, and you you do sue, it'll probably be a class action - something that's actually already started in both the US and Canada. Frankly I'd be tempted to do it on material misrepresentation - there was no contract made because VW lied about a material element which induced people to sign. The proper remedy is rescission of the contract, and VW pays back buyers the full purchase price plus interest plus maintenance costs. That'd probably amount to $40 000+ (CND) in damages per car. If that's a good ground for a lawsuit, it's likely also why VW will be anxious to settle with purchasers, sooner rather than later. Give them a nice 5 figure check and get rid of the potential liability of shelling out 2 or 3 times as much after an adverse finding at court.

[1300zuk]

Damn Wally, you really took this personal.

Maybe I'm immune to this kind of thing working in powertrain at car companies. I also survived the fuel economy woes of KIA.

Well I guess this opens the door up for Sergio to possibly merge with VW once they get their ass handed to them.

[tut]

now would be the time to buy a cheap vw....

[Honor]

Ceo just resigned

[thewalrus]

Damn Wally, you really took this personal.

Maybe I'm immune to this kind of thing working in powertrain at car companies. I also survived the fuel economy woes of KIA.

Well I guess this opens the door up for Sergio to possibly merge with VW once they get their ass handed to them.

Yeah, I really do take it personally. This isn't just an exaggeration of a car's benefits. It isn't Hyundai claiming better mileage than a car gets. It isn't a company skimping on a part that causes issues. This is a company that deliberately misled the government. That took action to deceive. And they actively lied to me, my friends and my family and convinced us all - on the basis of that blatant, outright, and active deception to spend tens of thousands of dollars on a car.

And now that the deception is revealed - it comes out that the consequences for that deception are pretty horrible. 10 - 40 X the promised emissions limits of NOx - not Carbon. Not 2 - 3 % reductions in mileage. But NOx. Smog. The stuff that demonstrably leads to pretty significant air pollution issues - asthma and other respirator ailments in people. It's disgusting stuff and VW was hiding how much - by a significant margin - the car they sold me was producing.

I don't think it's possible to take this too personally.

[Talon]

now would be the time to buy a cheap vw....

Was thinking that, too.

[Talon]

[Arthur Dent]

[1300zuk]

Please keep in mind that all these cars meet 2008 emissions regulations, it's not like they are raw diesel burners with no after treatment like the diesel freight ships that deliver the fuel across the sea. Also, the VW diesels meet emissions standards for almost the entire globe.

The VWs still use fuel efficiency, which in turn results in lower emissions because they don't consume as much energy to operate. And fewer off-road unregulated emission vehicle work is needed. I've heard a rumor that there are about 15 freight ships that account for half the NOx emitted into the atmosphere per year.

I haven't seen any data of how much the emissions are actually. The news says 10-40 times higher, but those were tested on the road, and on road fuel economy is always worse. The drive cycle is very specific, hence how you can find ways to defeat it.

Yes VW lied and is in trouble, but if anything comes out of this will be reasonable emission testing and hopefully close some loopholes. But vehicles are not the sole polluters they are just a common polluter. It's hard to place the blame entirely on VW when there are thousands of unregulated diesels being used off-road that likey emit more ozone pollutants in a day than a tiny VW will in its whole life.

[thewalrus]

Please keep in mind that all these cars meet 2008 emissions regulations, it's not like they are raw diesel burners with no after treatment like the diesel freight ships that deliver the fuel across the sea. Also, the VW diesels meet emissions standards for almost the entire globe.

The VWs still use fuel efficiency, which in turn results in lower emissions because they don't consume as much energy to operate. And fewer off-road unregulated emission vehicle work is needed. I've heard a rumor that there are about 15 freight ships that account for half the NOx emitted into the atmosphere per year.

I haven't seen any data of how much the emissions are actually. The news says 10-40 times higher, but those were tested on the road, and on road fuel economy is always worse. The drive cycle is very specific, hence how you can find ways to defeat it.

Yes VW lied and is in trouble, but if anything comes out of this will be reasonable emission testing and hopefully close some loopholes. But vehicles are not the sole polluters they are just a common polluter. It's hard to place the blame entirely on VW when there are thousands of unregulated diesels being used off-road that likey emit more ozone pollutants in a day than a tiny VW will in its whole life.

Couple of points on this.

1. That they met 2008 standards doesn't mean much to me. They claimed that these cars got cleaner in 2009 - which is why they were able to import and sell them in North America more easily. They lied about that.

2. New reports are saying that these cars rigged emissions tests around the world - including in Germany and elsewhere around Europe. I haven't heard how much they exceeded their limits by. But that's beside the point - the fact that Europe has less restrictive tests than the US and Canada is worse than useless information to me. The EPA and CARB may not get everything right - but anyone who's lived in LA in the 70s, and 80s and revisted the 90s and 00s (like my parents) can attest to how much improved the air is. How less smoggy the city is. That's progress and it's important. And it's necessary. Similarly, acid rain - something so important and environmentally devistating in the 80s and 90s has largely been mitigated thanks to improved emissions controls in North America.

3. Increased fuel efficiency in the 10 - 30 % range is pointless when you're polluting between 10 - 40 times the amount of NOx into the air.

4. Yes - the car was tested on the road. And the in-lab testing that VW faked was intended to mimic what the VW did on the road. TO ascertain what real world pollution would be. I'm not sure where you're going with this. Cars are used in the real world, and emissions testing is suppose to tell us something about what that's going to look like.

5. The fact that these cars aren't the only source of pollution is hardly the issue. We're talking about 11 million cars that were faked. Over half a million cars in North America alone. Many of these have been on the road, driving, every day for years. If you think that's unimportant because there are a couple freighters out there polluting far more or because some offroaders pollute more - then you're missing the point. I don't, frankly, care about offroaders. They're a minuscule part of the population who engage in a niche hobby. Not something I'd do, but their net impact is small. VW's impact with the TDI lie is far from small or insignificant.

6. Finally, far more better come of this than "reasonable emission testing" (I would say more thorough and more restrictive) and closed loopholes. There better be significant fines that discourage other companies from trying this kind of stunt. I'm not naive enough to believe that VW will be hammered with the full $18 B fine that the EPA could levy (though they deserve it). But they, in my opinion, ought not reduce it by too much. This needs to hurt VW's bottom line - and hurt it bad.

[1300zuk]

Hey fuckface I wasn't talking about rednecks in diesel trucks I was talking about large ass freight ships.

http://www.gizmag.com/shipping-pollution/11526/

But continue on with your over reaction lawyer bullshit with no knowledge of vehicle emissions systems and lack of understanding on how much total impact there is associated with certain products.

[thewalrus]

Hey fuckface I wasn't talking about rednecks in diesel trucks I was talking about large ass freight ships.

http://www.gizmag.com/shipping-pollution/11526/

But continue on with your over reaction lawyer bullshit with no knowledge of vehicle emissions systems and lack of understanding on how much total impact there is associated with certain products.

Wow dude. Chill out. You want to ride to the defence of VW, then go right ahead. But calling me a fuckface, assuming I have no knowledge of the issue, and failing to respond to even a single of my - I think - legitimate concerns makes you a giant dick. I have a right to be unhappy about VW. I didn't take anything out on you, personally. But, whatever, if you want to be an asshole about this, that's your call. It's usually a pretty standard conclusion that the person who gets angry and flustered and resorts to personal attacks really doesn't have much of substance to contribute. I'm guessing that's the case with you.

I do understand a few things - and the impact of NOx on the environment is one of them. You forget that (a) I actually do have a science background at the University level - in chemistry and biology. Despite the fact that I majored in philosophy. (b) I do work in environmental law - surrounded by engineers who know this stuff, talk to me about this stuff, and expect me to understand it well enough to argue about it and finally (c ) I'm convinced because of (a) and (b) that a multitude of small sources of noxious pollution can cause a big threat. The shit people used to breath in in LA in the 80s wasn't caused by a small number of freighters. And the reason it cleared up wasn't because they stopped sailing those vessels into Long beach Harbor.

Also you did say this: "when there are thousands of unregulated diesels being used off-road that likey emit more ozone pollutants in a day than a tiny VW will in its whole life".

I assumed you were talking about off road vehicles. Obviously you weren't.