For info:

http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/cert/documents/vw-nov-caa-09-18-15.pdf

http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/in_use_compliance_letter.pdf

I can't even say I'm mildly surprised by these revelations.

Put tests in place and people will game the system. There can't be many people who believe that they'll get anything like the mpg claimed by the manufacturer. Having caught VW in the act one assumes that all cars petrol or diesel from all manufacturers will now be tested and found wanting. The mpg data giving the hint as lower mpg = higher emissions.

The interesting thing for me is just what the difference between real life and testing actually is.

I disagree Sandy. In the same way that I'm disgusted by recent corruption and hypocrisy in politics and in banking, I'm disgusted by the clear, wilful and systemic deceit of VW. Have you read the documents above?

not banned yet
I wasn't condoning it. Just that it wasn't surprised for the following reasons:
1. When you set targets which cost money and impact sales and profits then people/companies/accountants will look for ways to pass the targets at least expense.
2. If that cannot be done within the rules then it shouldn't be a shock that software is written in such a way as to pass tests. Is it so much different for parents paying for professional coaching for children to pass exams?*
3 There had been evidence that mpg performance was nothing like real life. Excuses that tests were guidelines didn't really explain it. If mpg was lower, in some cases by a large margin, CO2 would be greater as would all other emissions
4 There is a small proportion of the population who wouldn't regard this as cheating, if they are in a position to exploit the loopholes then they will.
5 The fact that disappointing mpg has been a complaint by motorist since day 1 of testing only makes you wonder why this sort of testing hasn't been done before.

I did catch something on BBC news saying that some BMW models had been tested in the same way and found to be OK.

I want VW and anyone else who has cheated to suffer the consequences. I am confident that the motor industry will move on and any manufacturers that go to the wall will be replaced by others with "better" products, again shouldn't surprise anyone.

* I don't condone, in fact the reverse, Socialist MPs who send their children to private schools whilst complaining about Tories supporting Academies, but I'm not surprised by it.

Much of this deception is the result of companies preferring to jump on green bandwagons rather than seem like the bad guy for questioning them. Governments end up with a false idea of what is achievable or not.

From looking at cars for sale for some time I continually found that Audi / VW fuel and emission figures for cars over 5 years old were considerably worse than competitors. Now that is anecdotal as opposed to researched but it did lead me to conclude that Audi / VW (VAG Group which also include SEAT and Skoda) were probably not as advanced in terms of engine development and efficiency as their competitors.

I wonder if there was a decision, as a 'quick fix', to use engine management software to 'overcome' a deficiency in advanced engine design technology. Whatever the reasons behind it this seems to me to have been a deliberate fraud perpetrated not just on the people who buy VW / Audi but also on the regulators. Criminal prosecutions must be forthcoming now that senior VAG personnel have admitted to it.

So far the focus has been on Audi / VW and I wonder when it will turn to SEAT and Skoda which are built on VW platforms using VW / Audi engines etc ?

CO2 is innocent JamesP

and carbon capture, and storage, is imprisonment without trial, or testing, or evaluation, or evidence.

We must credit VW with bringing global warming to a halt. No climate science theory can explain it, so it must be the people's car. Quite a result for an idea born before WW2, as a consequence of the failures of the Third Reich.

Diesels

The great Green advantage of diesels has been their ability to burn biofuels, ie fuel grown as a crop. Getting people to accept noisy smelly diesels encouraged a huge amount of investment to produce equivalent performane to petrol, but better economy, and reduced noise and smell.

Electronic chips are now used to control engine performance, and produce the required optimums for performance, power, economy, and emissions as deemed required, by the consumers in any political environment.

Diesels show greatest benefits, when matched with turbochargers, and diesels require fuel to be injected anyway. As the GTi badge became fashionable in the 80's, so DTi (Diesel Turbo injection) is the way to go faster, more economically and with reduced emissions when required

DTi requires an electronic chip, and electronic chips are easy to modify, and control. If an engine was designed for modification, by manufacturers or users, it would be a DTi.

VW were the first to get caught, but I doubt any of their customers have complained, until now.

Google dti chip tuning. You do not have to have any knowledge of computing, or know one end of a con rod, from a con trick.

we need to remember this issue is about NOx not CO2

also the group that tested VW's also tested at least one BMW (a x5) which passed. no NOx defeat software.

Barry Woods,

The International Council on Clean Transportation put out a statement that included a link to their May 2014 report. I can't claim to understand much of it but the X5 seems to have come out of it looking quite good.

Through various routes it was only rural hilly ones where the average NOx emissions were a problem for it. And this despite the X5 weighing more and being 4wd compared to the Jetta and Passat being 2wd.

The results for the Passat are the ones that intrigue me. It had a urea injection system just like the X5 did but produced far more NOx.

Greensand, the "drive it on the bypass" advice, is good advice, if a little defeating in terms of time and economy. It is also known as an Italian tune-up, ie rev the hell out of the engine to get it hot, to burn out any accumulated deposits.

I first drove farm tractors before I had a driving licence 35ish years ago. Stamping on the throttle would produce a cloud of black exhaust smoke (mainly unburnt diesel) until the engine was revving fast enough to burn the amount of diesel being injected.

Travelling in and out of London on the M4, a regular sight in the 80's would be London taxis driving as fast as possible to/from Heathrow, belching clouds of black smoke. They may have been delivering late fares, but more likely, was the Italian tune-up, for vehicles not used to revving high. Modern electronics were supposed to have ended this problem, but the advice to you for an Italian tune up, suggests otherwise.

I acknowledge the comments above about NOx not CO/CO2.

Greens preferred diesel over petrol for economy, AND because they could burn old chip oil etc which is the future apparently

Diesels (especially turbo's) can be exploited by electrickery, to the advantage of whoever is paying. It is that simple. No spanners required.

I would happily buy a turbo diesel VW, to replace my petrol one. VW have conned the system. Their reputation is damaged. Other manufacturers have lost competitiveness. Customer consciences have been damaged.

Lawyers will now be looking for proof of damage caused by excess NOx, a subject I have no knowledge of. But US lawyers are all experts now.... Do the sums, and think of the legal fees ....

I am not an engine designer, or connected with the motor trade, however through yotting, I have some experience of diesel engines (all without electronics, the beauty of MARINE diesel engines, based on engines designed in the 1970's)

M Courtney 7:44 crash safety tests are carried out independently of the manufacturers, and consist of smashing concrete etc into cars or vice versa. This is used to establish crash safety for the occupants. The ease of repairing a car is then a major factor in determining the Insurance Group rating.

The notable exception was the Mercedes A Class in 1997?, which passed all the tests, but a Swedish? Motoring magazine had its own "elk test" to establish what happened when you swerved at speed. The Mercedes did an impression of the Reliant Robin. Mercedes withdrew the car, and hastily re-engineered the front suspension.

golf charlie
I reckon you'll be able to pick up a heavily discounted VW diesel fairly soon.

Yes the NOx question is interesting, I'm not certain whether we're talking N2O or NO2 or both, or even some of the other more complex variants. When I was at school, the reaction N2-> 2N ; 2N+ 202-> 2NO2 caused by lightening was good because it fixed nitrogen which this was used by plants as part of the growth process.

SandyS, in the context of emissions removed by the addition of urea, it won't be N2O as this is chemically rather unreactive (it also being used as an anaesthetic). The other oxides are more reactive and toxic.

So if we have a cold winter and they need to bring on-line those emergency diesel generators to avoid power cuts when the wind doesn't blow, who is going to be measuring the diesel emissions?