Diesel emissions? I don’t see any emissions. (Martin Winterkorn photo by Marijan Murat)
I don’t usually do this, but if anyone feels like they don’t yet have a very comprehensive picture of the VW scandal, and what fueled it, the NYT has an excellent article on the subject this morning.
And in another bit of obnoxious “I told you so” hindsight, I remembered a short post I did at TTAC when the new 2009 TDI Jetta came out, the first of the VW “clean” diesels. Its EPA numbers were very disappointing, but then that all makes sense now:
On May 21, 2008, VW released the EPA mileage numbers for the new 2009 Jetta TDI. My headline was: “VW’s TDI Prius Killer DOA”. (ttac.com)
Expectations for VW’s 60 mpg TDI “Prius killer” were high. And VW threw plenty of (diesel) fuel on the heated passions of oil burner fans. Press materials just a few weeks ago predicted EPA city mileage numbers “in the 40’s” and highway mileage “as high as 60mpg.” The EPA has released the numbers and they…suck. We’re talking 29/40 for the DSG version; 30/40 for the stick. Combined mileage: 34 mpg. The Prius’ 46mpg combined mileage is a whopping 35 percent higher. Diesel fuel is running 20 percent higher than unleaded. Annual fuel costs for the two (15k miles): Jetta TDI: $2010; Prius: $1,240. Don’t say I didn’t tell you so. But I’ll repeat the key part: to comply with US emissions regs, diesels lose five percentage points off their efficiency advantage over gas engines. (emphasis added by me. Of course diesel engine don’t lose that extra 5% efficiency when the emission system is disabled. ) Throw in a global diesel fuel shortage, and its diesel RIP. No word yet on how much VW will charge for the TDI option.
Those very modest EPA number of course make sense now, inasmuch as the diesels were actually running clean during the testing cycle. For years, VW TDI fans brushed off the low EPA numbers by saying that these cars did much better in the real world than on the EPA tests. Of course, those were anecdotal accounts; in objective tests, the VW TDIs generally matched their EPA numbers failry closely. But even that’s unusual, as every other car sol in the US gets worse mileage in objective real-world tests than the EPA numbers. That alone should have been a tip-off.
I was idly Googlestreeting last week and came across this beautiful image.
Proud horse pulling his lady through downtown Versailles.
Looking more closely, we see the proud horse is emitting great clouds of Evil Carbon from his carburetor, and he’s DEFEATING the exhaust pollution-control device with his tail!
Nothing new about cheating.
Well it is a Brougham lol
are you sure?
The other emission from the horses “tailpipe” were once referred to as a “road apple”:
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/road-apples.html
That is a hybrid. It’ll run on oats, barley, or hay, among other fuels.
It should have a ULEV sticker on the hind flank, though….
VW had the perfect chance in 2014 to turn off the program when they were caught in the California tests. They would have had unhappy customers because of reduced mileage (and performance), and more then likely more emission control failures that would have to be fixed under emission warranties. Would have been a lot cheaper and less embarrassing than the fluster cluck they are in now. So they had a chance to make good, and blew it. So I’ll just keep my 30 year old Mk2 Jetta (gas) in good shape and enjoy living in the past in the “good old day’s”. When I had to do emission testing (25 year old exempt in my state), it was always way below the maximum allowed and never once failed.
Increasing the exhaust gas recirculation during a carefully controlled emissions test may work. Full recirculation may seriously reduce power, perhaps to the point of not keeping up with traffic.
Yes this is why I doubt they will be able to use reprograming to fix the TDIs, they just won’t run right.
To the extent that’s possible, though, the new MPG figures may be close to label since it appears those measures were taken previously with the emission equipment switched on.
Until Wednesday I thought well at least VW didn’t cheat on the fuel economy figures too, or promote better than EPA label in its marketing of clean diesel. But I have found out that they made a huge deal of the excellent real world MPG. Rotten to the core.
will this have an impact on engine life/engine components? seems like you have to increase the exhaust re circulation to such an extent that it will raise engine operating temps….causing increased wear/tear of engine components?
I did not fully understand how the 2 L VW diesel emissions system was supposed to work. There is a smoke trap which is supposed to burn off periodically. The NOx system is the problem. They have a trap that captures the NOx, and then the engine is supposed to run rich(?) to clean out the trap by “burning” the NOx. Since a diesel is a lean burn engine I don’t see how this can possibly work. The theory is that the NOx is accumulated for about 1 minute, and then the engine runs rich for a very few seconds to produce an exhaust that cleans the NOx out of the trap.
Exhaust gas recirculation is supposed to reduce the combustion temperature, which reduces the production of NOx.
My guess is that the software turned off the rich burn, and maybe reduced exhaust gas recirculation.
I read that the 2.0L engine doesn’t have EGR. For managing NOx, the older ones (2012 and prior I think) have a Lean NOx Trap (LNT) only, and the newer ones have SCR (DEF injection). I believe the engine also needs to run rich to heat-up the SCR catalyst for it to work also. I presume they don’t run the rich cycle to burn out the catalyst often enough. That would help to explain the high real-world fuel economy.
Also, modern diesels retard the injection event relative to engine timing to reduce NOx formation. You get more power and better fuel economy if the injection timing is advanced. That could be another thing that the software cheat alters, which would improve real-world fuel economy.
While the article does not say what the software does exactly, my guess has been that the exhaust gas recirculation is adjusted, perhaps to zero. From compact cars highway ratings with gas engines, not hybrid, are around 30 MPG. Diesels can get 40 MPG or more.
This was a disappointment to me for VW to do this in many ways, but I would argue that the EPA mileage ratings now are accurate to what people should expect. The rated economy of my car (2015 Hyundai Elantra, 1.8, 6MT) has been easy to surpass. It’s rated 27 city, 37 highway, and 31 combined. This is the car that brought about the lawsuit over it’s original 29/40/33 rating. I have not averaged below 35 on a single tank since I got in in June, and I usually average 37 in my regular mixed driving. I drove it out of town on thursday, and averaged 40.6 on that trip with some city driving while there. With the revisions made to the ratings a few years ago, I would generally expect vehicles to get their ratings today. If VW’s mileage ratings are based on what it did during the emissions clean mode, then I’m sure that the car probably does better than its rating most of the time.
Now that I aired that out, what I’m still waiting for is the full meat and potatoes take on what happened at VW. That might be a couple of years away.
Of all the road test reports I read most do not meat the advertised fuel economy. When a vehicle does meet or exceed those goals it is usually rewarded by a bump in sales. My new to me 15 chrysler 200 v6 limited is rated to get 36mpg and it does fall short at 31 mpg. It’s a big ish car that just a few years ago would have been lucky to get 26mpg.
Will, these are road testers with their foot to the floor. They’re going to beat these things to their maximum and that will take it’s toll on fuel economy.
The EPA ratings are just a guide. That’s all they’ve been since the 70s. They’re not promise or guarantee.
Congratulations on your new 200. It’s a beautiful car.
The highway rating is based on a particular test. Your actual fuel consumption depends on how fast you are driving, and whether you have a head wind or tail wind. My 1998 Aurora would generally average around 27 to 28 when I drove the speed limits (75). On a trip to the West Coast, I realized that I had plenty of time and speed limits were going to vary from 55 to 75. So I limited my speed to 70 or less. I averaged 29 on that trip. Speed limits vary quite a bit, and I find loafing along at 70 gets me as far as I want to go in a day usually, so I generally do cruise at 70 on long trips. I think that the manufacturers could rate their fuel consumption at say 50 MPH, 65 MPH and 80 MPH. This would accomplish two things: 1) you would have some idea of long trip consumption; 2) you can see what effect high speed has on consumption.
I have reason to believe that EPA figures are a lot more realistic now than those silly fantasy figures back in the ’70s & ’80s. My wife’s new Prius measures [tank average, not instruments] within its EPA city/hwy ratings for mixed boulevard driving with A/C, as does my ’10 Civic. In fact I got the hwy rating on my 1st tank, because I was babying it for break-in.
But still, Your Mileage May Vary.
Nothing wrong with wanting to be #1 but how delusional for a company like VW to think that with their horrible quality and self-destructive strategies for America (most recently cheap + big for the cars, expensive + small for the crossovers).
The Jetta and Passat were supposed to sell 300K+ / year at normal-for-the-segment pricing and fleet. How anyone could think that is astounding. When it was clear that wasn’t going to happen they decided to double-down on the diesel volume and marketing. Those three sisters from New Jersey must feel like marinated camel crap now.
VW has just about ruined the image of diesel, which with SCR is fantastic and clean. DEF was starting to appear at fueling stations, diesel fuel prices were falling and everything was looking good. Now sales of stellar products like the RAM EcoDiesel will likely be hurt, because of VW’s cheating.
VW has caused its competitors to waste tens of thousands of hours trying to make LNT work. Mazda spent years on an LNT 2.0L (“like VW”) before giving up and going for SCR, which was never going to make sense coming out so late. Honda tried and failed too.
What’s going to happen with the SCR Mazda for America and the diesels Cadillac has been working on? If those get cancelled how much sunk cost will there be? How much lost resale value for Mercedes, BMW owners? What will happen to sales of the wonderful CX3 in Japan, which is 100% diesel? The damage is far greater than is being written about.
Companies like Honda knew LNT wouldn’t pass Euro 6 / T2B5, except for one thing — VW announced they could do it. Bob Lutz said they could never figure out how VW did it when he was at GM but they kept trying. There was no VW for VW to look at so plenty of people must have known, it wasn’t just the programing guys.
Everyone hates VW now. It’s like Don Sterling and the Clippers, there is no undoing it.
All I gotta say is GOOD F****** LUCK getting those TDIs to pass smog. This is going to be more fun than watching Donald Trump!
I too have been wondering where the fallout from this will end. As my wife said when the story broke, have other companies been cheating but not caught? Who knows? But I can certainly see the image of diesel as clean being pretty-much destroyed in the eyes of the average buyer. Enthusiasts know better of course, but…..
This is why I suspect that other companies such as Mazda must’ve known that VW was cheating. At some point they must’ve said, “Let’s get a VW in and hook it up to our test equipment to see how they’re doing it!”
I don’t think Mazda or anyone else knew. Mazda testing a VW TDI on rollers would have turned on the emission controls. Apparently measuring “on road” emissions is very difficult to do that’s why it took a special effort on the part of West Virginia University. That was the breakthrough in this case.
The EPA label vs. real world fuel economy gap wasn’t necessary a red flag. Gasoline cars have had overly optimistic EPA figures and numerous adjustments made over the years. It seemed to me the EPA was on the same learning curve for getting to a reliable test method for diesel. Plus everyone knew to ignore the EPA for VW diesel from press reports, and the efforts of VW. The only people who used it were the ones trying to make the diesel breakeven look bad.
Mazda probably thought TDIs in the field would be close to the limit and that spot checks would show dirty cars that could be dealt with at that time.
I don’t think anyone thought, naw it’s none of that, they must have a cheater map. Seems so plausible now of course, considering the current no way to check situation. No one expected the WTC to be blown up one morning but in retrospect we should have known letting people carry literally whatever on to a commercial airliner wasn’t going to end well. No one is blaming our national defense for not anticipating the style in which the attacks were done. It was unfathomable if for no other reason than the risk involved.
The Mazda Skyactiv diesel is terrible in the markets where it is available. Fuel makes it past the piston rings and dilutes the lubricating oil.
http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/backlash-over-mazda-cx5-diesel-oil-issues-20120821-24k6w.html
I had to chuckle at the Donald Sterling analogy. Different business, but you just had a hunch with both that there was something really unseemly beneath the surface, if anyone could ever find it and bring it to light.
I almost didn’t use it because on some level you could feel sorry for Don Sterling, he was after all a doddering old fool. No one feels sorry for VW and that’s a big difference.
However in terms of “the damage is done”, they are almost identical. I don’t see the VW thing fixing itself unless there is an ownership change (unlikely) or new leadership from the outside. The reason is that VW has not taken into account what can happen to your sales (and profits) when folks hate you. That’s different from people being leery of your products like with the Audi 5000.
Every reader in California should know by now the Haggen supermarket story. Six months ago they expanded from a small, regional chain of 18 stores in Oregon and Washington to 164 by buying 146 stores in CA, NV and AZ. For reasons I won’t get into shoppers took a disliking to the company and wouldn’t shop their stores. Haggen filed for bankruptcy last week.
From a nine fold expansion to BK in six months. Point is this stuff can happen fast.
That won’t happen to that extent here in Europe but I can see your point in the US where the brand never had any loyal following.
I have only owned one VW product in all my years, a 68 beetle when I was in high school. I have not had one shred of love for VW since the late 70s, when those cheap valve guide seals made legions of Rabbits, Dashers and Audi Foxes smoke up a storm.
Recently we were looking for a wagon, not a SUV, to use to haul our dog around and do general beater duty. I looked at a couple of Passat wagons and just could not pull the trigger. I remember all too well the troubles my friend had with his Audi. So I opted for a Volvo, it was the devil that I knew.
Being a lifelong CA resident, I am guilty of disabling many an emissions device in the dark days of the 70s and 80s, so it does not bother me a lot that this happened, but if it had to happen to someone, VW is probably a good candidate.
At least VW did have a recall on those seals, (MQ campaign) and the replacement (green) seals did last. It covered the fuel injection models, but for some reason the early carburetor models were not included, although they also had the brown seals that would harden over time and leak.
Actually I still think this is the best article I’ve seen on the VW emissions scandal:
http://ericpetersautos.com/2015/09/23/crucified-by-uncle/
I don’t think so. Anyone who says we don’t really need the EPA regs as a very slanted POV.
Paul,
With respect, that is not what he was getting at but (as I read the article) that the regulator is now getting to the point in which stadards are about to become not realistically attainable. Elsewhere I have made the point that a lot of what happened with the US car industry was driven by the imposition of emission standards which – in light of the technology available at the time – were not really attainable without (i) reducing driveability/reliability to unacceptable levels and (ii) costing manufacturers enormeous amounts of money. There were no “grandfathering”, no measured and reasonable deadlines and no co-opearion with the industry, and the malaise cars were the result. He also makes another very good point, i.e. what in practice “40 times more polluting” means (not a lot) and that – a point I have been stressing to anybody who wants to hear for years – regulations have effectively killed simple, light cars which ultimately damage the environment less due to lower fuel consumption (if you wish: the big American sedan/station wagon too, potentially more fuel efficient than any of the pick ups which replaced it by virtue of not being regarded as cars). None of the above changes the fact that VW has been very, very stupid.
as I read the article) that the regulator is now getting to the point in which standards are about to become not realistically attainable.
The industry has been saying that about every coming/proposed emission/economy and safety regulation since 1966 or so. What’s interesting is that the industry is saying it less now than in the past. The new CAFE fuel economy regulations are very aggressive, yet the industry did not push back very hard at all. And they’ve not really pushed back against emission standards either.
Why? Because they’re all attainable, given the technology available. Yes, they may cost a bit more initially, yet cars today are cheaper than they were in the 1960s.
The industry cried wolf way to many times, and they’ve finally realized that it’s a bad strategy, from a public perception point of view. If Toyota ca meet them, so can the others; and saying they couldn’t would make them look reactionary.
The simple reality is this: the public, today more than ever, wants their cars to be clean, efficient and safe. And the fact that the cars are quite clean, efficient and safe is 100% due to the government regulations. The industry has had to be dragged to this point, with some exceptions.
Has there been some collateral damage along the way, like poor driveability? Undoubtedly, but it was well worth it to get to this point. And we need to get even further down the road.
This whole VW diesel thing was not a technology issue; they had it, but purely for profit motive, they chose to use a cheaper technology and cheat. That’s utterly inexcusable
Cars will get cleaner, more efficient and safer yet, and I’m all for that, as is the buying public. And regulations are going to get us there, along with companies like Tesla and such..
100%? Come on, I’ll accept large percentage, but one freaking hundred? Nearly every single technology used to make cars as clean as they are today were conceived before the clean air act or CAFE went into effect, even catalytic converters. I won’t dispute that the full scale adoption of these technologies are owed to regulations but regulation certainly didn’t push their conception, and that should most definitely be factored into that percentage, even if it’s a disingenuous 1%.
Personally I think we’re approaching(or are already in) a period of diminishing returns. Yes the public wants cars to be clean, efficient and safe, and they most definitely are, but don’t overlook the fact that the public is buying massive amounts of trucks, CUVs less efficient than their car platform mates, and standard 2-300 horsepower engines. These are very conflicting desires, and advances in technology have narrowed that gap significantly, but it’s still there.
Automakers aren’t going to push back simply because they don’t have the power or leverage they used to, if just one other of the several major auto manufacturers in America, like Toyota, said “yeah, we can do it” to the new regs, in a sea of “no we can’t”, they’ll be at a disadvantage from both a competitive and PR standpoint – This whole VW debacle is analogous to that scenario, everyone (rightly) said “no we cant” to non urea diesel, and until they got caught cheating VW owned the diesel powered market. That and imports, like Toyota, while not necessarily cleaner, were at a significant advantage with their lineup regarding the original CAFE standards compared to American automakers, with fleets of 400 cube battleships. Today to meet standards, everyone has to change, no one is at an unfair advantage or disadvantage. Cars could be downsized or made significantly lighter, power outputs could reduced, hybrids could span further through lineups, all of which likely would meet the upcoming standards with current technology.
Coming from TTAC I just wanted to say, thank you for limiting this to just one article. It really doesnt matter to me what happens to VW as much as I’m tired of EVERY WEBSITE making dozens of redundant articles on the matter.
Plus, in the end it means cheaper cars for us if VW gets smart, if less resale perhaps.
That’s a big reason why I own a used Audi. Resale value for VAG products was already in the tank. I expect them to fall even farther.
I do agree, though. TTAC has gone way overboard on VW coverage. An article or two is fine, but enough is enough!
I have to disagree. With VW battling/aiming to be the #1 auto manufacturer in the world, this is not just a stumble. These events are seismic and going to strongly impact not only the market but culpability of the executive suite.
Living in Houston, I was also highly fascinated with the hour-by-hour Enron meltdown as well.
I doubt that VW would have taken down Toyota. Now, I think those ambitions have almost no chance of coming true for a long, long time, if they ever do.
I enjoy new news, but it just seems to be rehashed content for the most part….
They did overtake Toyota for the first 6 months of this year. No doubt they will not hold that lead after this.
I guess if you want to be #1, you have to cope with the responsabilities who came with it. As Spider-man said “with great powers, come great responsabilities”. 😉
I will be honest, i don’t feel one bit sorry for VW. Their stuff is over priced and unreliable. In every vehicle size slot(i.e. compact etc) that VW offers a vehicle, theirs is the highest costing out of the whole class.
I also think Diesel may be on its way out (or at least restricted to commercial vehicles or pickup trucks) with gas engines getting so efficient and hybrid engines, there is no need for diesel cars.
Then there is CARB (California’s pollution regulators) I wish Congress would pass some laws to outlaw CARB. There should not be two air quality regulators allowed to dictate laws in the USA. EPA is the Federal agency that should be tasked with everything and not a state that has always been holier then thou.
“I wish Congress would pass some laws to outlaw CARB.”
Congress did pass a law many years ago to limit the proliferation of state emission regualations. However, since the Federal Government regulations arrived after Californias, they had to grandfather in the exisiting CARB standards.
In a compromise, all states were offered a choice of two regulations- The Federal limits, or the exisiting California option. Initially, all states picked the 49 state option, but in the last fifteen or twenty years, many states with big cites or denser populations have embraced the CA regs.
All, in all, I think it was a fine compromise- States aren’t limited to a single emission standard when fighting air quality issues, and car manufacturers do not have to design fifty different emission control packages.
I don’t see what the big deal is. It’s not like we see clouds of black smoke coming out of the newer VW diesels. The emission standards for diesels are too strict. And I bet they’re not as high for semi trucks and buses. I drive a 2007 Sprinter diesel van at work , and it doesn’t produce visible smoke at all. It probably doesn’t burn any cleaner than VWs .
“Visible” smoke is not the issue, it is oxides of nitogen, which are largely inviisible to the naked eye.
A very tiny detail in this whole situation is that Winterkorn had been through at least 2 boardroom fights to retain his position at the top of VW-Audi Group, the most recent one just 2 or 3 months ago. Though I doubt it seriously, I’ll bet he’s thinking: “…why didn’t I just let that guy take over, after all”? (Sorry, I can’t remember if it was Piesch or Pieschrider (sic) who most recently tried to topple Winterkorn.)
Not a single evaluation of the VW scandal includes any mention of Dr. Ferdinand Piech, the long term VW Chairman, and grandson of Heir Porsche, who was forced out just last April. Piech is the father of the Phaeton, and known as the kind of leader who would not allow dissent. He is a technical expert, and this episode, whose birth was almost a decade ago, seems like something only the most arrogant son of a bitch could engineer…and VW’s own Piech is just such a man. I am very curious to observe the investigation unfold, and to learn if the scheme originated in the person of Chairman Piech.
If Piech was around when the EPA made VW give up there air cooled motors (in the USA). I wonder if this was a way of getting back at them…
The EPA did not “make Volkswagen give up air cooled engines.” EPA regulations do not dictate or ban technologies, they just establish the tailpipe standard for a given year.
Porsche continued to sell air cooled 911s in the USA until 1998, so clearly the EPA allowed air cooled engines in the US market, as long as they met emissions standards.
Low emissions depend on tight tolerances. Air-cooled engines tend to run hotter, which means more expansion and contraction and therefore more emissions. I would agree emission regs hastened the demise of the air-cooled engine. These regs are why there are very few AC motorcycle engines left.
I agree. This has Piech kind of arrogance written all over it. It is the result of a very insular “Too big to fail” mentality combined with “not invented here” and “we knows best anyways”. Not unlike GM, actually. This is what happens when a dictatorial patriarch manages by fear and arrogance. I have no doubt in my mind this was instigated at the very top. And there’s no doubt in my mind this could not have happened on a lower level without Piech actively suggesting this action. The repurcussions would’ve been too severe, there’s just noone that would’ve dared makes this move on their own. It seems the action was instigated in 2009, and it seems to have been a very deliberate move. If Winterkorn says he didn’t know anything about it, it may be true that he didn’t. But then he must’ve been sidestepped in that decision. Piech is an engineer first and foremost, all his decisions are truly grounded in an engineering standpoint. And he probably thought VW was too big to get away with it. “They would never dare, and what do the EPA know anyway? Just roll with it.” This is what happens when the active management insulates themselves so far from the reality it actually affects their judgment.
Had a VW Jetta once. No love for VW here. Was the worst car I’ve ever owned, overly engineered, fragile and very expensive to fix. That, plus the incredibly arrogant dealer service did it for me. How do you say “good riddance” in German?
Good Riddance translates to : EPA
If anything, the EPA needs more resources and enforcement powers to run the sort of testing in-house that led to the VW cheat being discovered, rather than relying on manufacturers to self-certify and hoping some third party will have the interest and means to follow up.
This case demonstrates how the free market can’t possibly regulate everything. Here we have a product that was sold, successfully for a long time, in part on its’ purported environmental friendliness while spewing out excessive amounts of a pollutant that is colorless, odorless and undetectable without expensive special equipment.
This is not a free market issue- If these diesels were tested on an EPA dyno, they still would have passed. Because of that, increasing the EPA lab’s test capacity would have made no difference.
Several different articles have indicated that the researchers who discovered this did not expect to find a problem, based on initial dyno test results. But they worked outside traditional emissions testing protocols and exposed the issue.
I imagine VW counted on limitations to on the road emissions testing to help hide their deceit- I base this on my experience working at an emissions testing facility at Colorado State University back in 2002.
At the time, measuring on road emissions was very difficult, since equipment could measure percent of pollutant, but could not measure exhaust volume. Without a volume measurement, they could not calculate emissions in grams per mile, the figure used in EPA standards.
Based on the articles I’ve read on this issue, the University of West Virginia found a way to calculate grams per mile during on the road testing, which exposed the TDI’s high NOx emissions.
It’s serendipitous that the UVW developed this technology, but until they did, there was no mechanism to catch VW’s cheating.
farfegnugen ;P
Google translates that to the same as in English! Perhaps it’s another borrowing, like “Oldtimer.”
Carbonphobic emissions regulators play the tune, & carmakers must dance to it. No wonder Toyota now has a possible trump card, the Mirai; they see the Writing on the Wall.
No, it’s just spelt incorrectly. it is fahrvergnügen and it means “Driving Pleasure”.
KJ in Oz
No the proper translation is I got screwed and it is more true to today that it was when they first started using that term.
I own a 2001 Audi A6, and absolutely love it. I’ve put over 70k miles on it, and the only major repairs were to replace the timing belt (Preventative maintanance) and the front suspension (A VAG weakness). Everything else has been minor stuff, or wear items, like front brake pads.
I’m happy with the Audi, and I’d buy another one used. Value for money, they’re not a bad choice as the used purchase prices are lower than the competition (Ever price a Lexus?), but I wouldn’t buy a new one.
I think that VAG products will even more become the choice for people like me- those that don’t care about what others think of our cars, and want to get decent value for money.
For new cars, that amounts to a lot of cash on the hoods. A lot of cash.
There are plenty of people who are both into cars and enjoy driving, and also care about the environment. VW cultivated them as a customer base with their “Clean” Diesel.
Turns out when you lie to it-getters they get seriously pissed off when they find out they’ve been played for fools. Oops.
They could’ve so easily built cars that sold to people who buy the deal not the car. Now that’ll be their only option to stay afloat.
This is such an incredibly crazy story, but it all makes so much sense. When you think about how much effort goes into software development these days and how many people must have known about this – on top of the NYT article’s reminder that VW had originally planned on licensing Daimler’s BlueTec for the 4-cyl TDI cars, and that it went on for so long, and that they basically knew they were screwed over a year ago and so on and so forth…
I thought Germans were supposed to be pragmatic?
I always just figured the people reporting 50MPG+ in TDI Jettas and Golfs were full of hypermiled bullshit, and it turns out that may not be the case. How many of those people are feeling mega-burned right now knowing that their awesome Fuelly.com rating came at the cost of dirty exhaust? Probably quite a few. Those were the most ardent cheerleaders VW had in the US, many of them college students, hippies and/or engineers who definitely won’t be cool with this. That’s really gonna hurt long after Dieselgate exits the news cycle.
I bet VW can probably do a software patch that will leave the cars with “acceptable” performance and driveability (less power, less efficiency) but since there’s going to be class action lawsuits left and right, maybe the best thing to do would be offer the patch + a refund OR installation of SCR/DPF at a hugely discounted cost – so low that’s it’s basically just covering the labor cost on VW’s end. That will cost a not-so-small fortune, but I think it’d be worth it. Up until a week ago, these cars had one of the biggest cult followings in the country. Fix them the right way, even if it absolutely murders the bottom line, come out with a new model that’s proven to pass the test with flying colors, and I think that’d go a long way towards maintaining loyalty among TDIstas and making this whole mess disappear (as much as it can).
Two other things I find really unfortunate about this whole situation:
1) People probably still would have bought these cars if they had to fill up an AdBlue tank. Maybe not quite as many, and perhaps they wouldn’t have gotten quite the mileage they did with the “cheat code” but I believe they still would have sold. At most points from 2009-now, diesel’s greater efficiency was totally meaningless in terms of $$ savings (in North America) considering the higher cost for the fuel, so there’s some other appeal for most people buying them; some combination of efficiency + interesting technology + unique driving characteristics + just having something that’s different.
2) One of the points made in most articles on Dieselgate is that VW eschewed hybrid and EV technology for diesels, and although that does have some truth to it – they were definitely late to the party – it wasn’t the case in recent years at all. On the same day that the Dieselgate story broke last week, I saw the first commercial for the A3 e-tron plug-in hybrid, which joins the Jetta Hybrid, e-Golf, Q5 Hybrid, Touareg Hybrid, Cayenne e-Hybrid and Panamera e-Hybrid. That’s quite a few cars powered by electricity. No one seems to know these cars exist, however… which can only be blamed on VW itself by proxy, since they made their TDI cars defy physics illegally, and opened up models like the Jetta Hybrid to “mad slutshaming” from TDIstas who were wholly unimpressed by it’s mere low 40s MPG returns. Had the TDI cars been set up to meet emissions targets under all conditions, with the added requisite cost and/or mileage/power penalty, there would have been far more parity between the two and it would have eased the transition to hybrid power considerably. But really my point here is that they actually have done a bunch of good work in this area, which is basically all for naught now… and that’s a shame.
Maybe the only way to make the owners whole is a buyback for the money they paid, followed by a trip to the crusher. Of course that would probably cripple Volkswagen financially, when added in with the hefty fines they will have to pay. But my feeling is, SO WHAT? They made their bed, now they should lie in it.
Which is why it’s not going to happen. A greased palm here, a free lunch there, and they will have gotten away with just a black eye. Volkswagen is “too big to fail.”
Make the owners whole?
If VW comes up with a “patch” that solves the problem, they may have trouble getting owners to accept it. Imagine the pitch for the patch: “You need to let us download this software patch to fix a recently discovered issue with the programming your car left the factory with. Your fuel economy will decrease, and your car will not perform as well, but it will pull our fat out of the legal fire so you need to let us do it.”
VW owners have been laughing all the way to bank because of VW’s cheating, though I’m sure they thought it was because they were smarter than everyone and had bought a brilliantly engineered car.
VW may be forced to buy all those cars back, and if they are, then the owners may have to be forced to sell.
There are, of course, other possible outcomes. What happens if this is just the tip of the “cheating” iceberg? What if many other companies are doing it? What if some of them have figured out a way to cheat on gasoline engine emissions as well? What if a lot of them have?
The possibilities are almost endless.
I can’t wait to see the pitch for the SCR system if it is needed. “You need to let us take your car apart and install some parts. Your mileage and performance will not change but you will need to add some blue fluid every now and then. The reservoir will be conveniently located under the driver’s seat.”
I’ve never owned a VW but I’ve noticed that owners seem to hate VW dealers because of terrible customer service. VW didn’t stand behind their cars even BEFORE this nightmare so it’s going to be a real legal shit show. After reading about that 1.8T oil sludge fiasco I swore I’d never own one so I wouldn’t be left to twist in the wind after a castastrophy like that.
It’s a shame that VW has such a shoddy reputation for dealer service now. The opposite was true in the 1960s. If they stood behind their product, made it fun to drive and cultivated a fan base, they’d make money by being able to charge just a little more for the security of it. Does anyone think the present owner’s of VW diesels are going to buy their next car there? They just did a GM-at-their-biggest screwing of 11 million customers in one fell swoop.
I’d sell my VW stock right now if I had any.
LOL, I’m seeing ‘TDI Lawyer’ ads here. Who says Google doesn’t pay attention!!
It’s ironic. Attorneys bringing class-action lawsuits against Volkswagen will have an easier time getting clients than “normal,”, because their own social class…the cool, the upscale, the “let’s do good for the planet”…many of them lawyers…were in a big way, Volkswagen’s target market. When your own “friends” are the “class,” you’ve got ’em.
Volkswagen has set aside something like $7 1/2 billion for future costs associated with this scandal. I’m thinking it’s not going to be enough.
Thing is, in a lot of European countries like Holland where I live there is a progressive tax for polluting cars, so an Impreza WRX STi which is a polluter costs a fortune.
Apart from screwing consumers, they also screwed their collegues, let’s face it : the EU is Germany and Germany alone.
Gone are the days where there was a balance between France,Germany and the BeNeLux countries (Belgium Netherlands and Luxemburg) or the UK
German industry rules because and thanks to the fact they are in the Eurozone, which is kept low thanks to weaker countries like Greece, Portugal, Spain but also France (which should need a Thatcher not a weak guy like Hollande) and Italy are weak with ancient communist labor agreements and an economy which is paralysed an dominated by workers like Great Britain in the seventies.
Only Germany aka Volkswagen have had economical dvantages and other car manufacturers have played more by the rules then Volkswagen.
My Alfa 1.9 JTDm 16 valve Diesel is slower then a comparible Passat, now we know why, but I must pay relatively more taxes because the Passat is said to be less poluting
We are all quite cross at Volkswagen, for taking such stupid riscs in a concern where there are only in Germany 600000 employees !
Well, big companies being big companies I have a hard time believing that VW is the only one cheating, although maybe not to the same extent, as Paul mentioned everyone else has a tough time matching the EPA numbers in the real world.
I was in a course once where the instructor spoke at length about how wonderful pharmaceutical companies were for altruisticly trying to cure diseases, had to bite my tongue to keep from laughing.
Corporations exist to make money, and they will do what it takes to make as much as possible. VW’s plan might have temporarily netted it the #1 crown, but ultimately I don’t think it will prove a good money making strategy.
Another good review of ther current sitaution is this one
http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21667918-systematic-fraud-worlds-biggest-carmaker-threatens-engulf-entire-industry-and?frsc=dg%7Ca