Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?
--
Jim S

On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

Seems unlikely - which I'm sure VW will be hoping will be the case!

Would be a better solution IMO to estimate the environmental impact of
leaving cars as they are over their combined lifetime and force VW to
plough the required amount of cash into other green initiatives. This
could essentially mean VW spending the money they would have on recalls
on an environmental project with a longer legacy.

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:14:01 +0100, Richard Conway wrote:

On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

Seems unlikely - which I'm sure VW will be hoping will be the case!

Would be a better solution IMO to estimate the environmental impact of
leaving cars as they are over their combined lifetime and force VW to
plough the required amount of cash into other green initiatives. This
could essentially mean VW spending the money they would have on recalls
on an environmental project with a longer legacy.

Even better ignore the stupid treehuggers and get on with life.

--
Every day more money is printed for Monopoly than the US Treasury.

On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

"The government has announced today, 2 October 2015, that UK taxpayers
will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) if their existing
vehicles are found to be fitted with illegal software that manipulates
emissions tests."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-confirms-consumers-who-bought-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs

In article , nemo
writes
On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

"The government has announced today, 2 October 2015, that UK taxpayers
will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) if their existing
vehicles are found to be fitted with illegal software that manipulates
emissions tests."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g...nsumers-who-bo
ught-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs
My manufacturer did not cheat (or if they did they made a total mess of
it) and as a result I pay the top whack for a 2.4 TD. If someone else is
driving a car with higher emissions than declared then they should pay
the appropriate rate of VED. They can then take action under Sale of
Goods Act and recoup the extra cost from the dealer who sold them the
car. This country is supposed to be short of cash. Why are we letting
these people of the hook?
--
bert

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 22:01:26 +0100, bert wrote:

In article , nemo
writes
On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

"The government has announced today, 2 October 2015, that UK taxpayers
will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) if their existing
vehicles are found to be fitted with illegal software that manipulates
emissions tests."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g...nsumers-who-bo
ught-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs
My manufacturer did not cheat (or if they did they made a total mess of
it) and as a result I pay the top whack for a 2.4 TD. If someone else is
driving a car with higher emissions than declared then they should pay
the appropriate rate of VED. They can then take action under Sale of
Goods Act and recoup the extra cost from the dealer who sold them the
car. This country is supposed to be short of cash. Why are we letting
these people of the hook?

Because they didn't purposefully buy a car with higher emissions.

--
A DC-10 had come in a little hot and thus had an exceedingly long roll out after touching down.
San Jose Tower Noted: "American 751, make a hard right turn at the end of the runway, if you are able.
If you are not able, take the Guadalupe exit off Highway 101, make a right at the lights, and return to the airport."

In article , Tough Guy no. 1265
writes
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 22:01:26 +0100, bert wrote:

In article , nemo
writes
On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

"The government has announced today, 2 October 2015, that UK taxpayers
will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) if their existing
vehicles are found to be fitted with illegal software that manipulates
emissions tests."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g...nsumers-who-bo
ught-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs
My manufacturer did not cheat (or if they did they made a total mess of
it) and as a result I pay the top whack for a 2.4 TD. If someone else is
driving a car with higher emissions than declared then they should pay
the appropriate rate of VED. They can then take action under Sale of
Goods Act and recoup the extra cost from the dealer who sold them the
car. This country is supposed to be short of cash. Why are we letting
these people of the hook?

Because they didn't purposefully buy a car with higher emissions.

So their redress under SOGA is with the people who sold them it just as
if I bought a washing machine that turned out to be rubbish. (The
"people" I was referring to are the dealers not the purchasers)
--
bert

On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 14:38:54 +0100, bert wrote:

In article , Tough Guy no. 1265
writes
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 22:01:26 +0100, bert wrote:

In article , nemo
writes
On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

"The government has announced today, 2 October 2015, that UK taxpayers
will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) if their existing
vehicles are found to be fitted with illegal software that manipulates
emissions tests."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g...nsumers-who-bo
ught-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs
My manufacturer did not cheat (or if they did they made a total mess of
it) and as a result I pay the top whack for a 2.4 TD. If someone else is
driving a car with higher emissions than declared then they should pay
the appropriate rate of VED. They can then take action under Sale of
Goods Act and recoup the extra cost from the dealer who sold them the
car. This country is supposed to be short of cash. Why are we letting
these people of the hook?

Because they didn't purposefully buy a car with higher emissions.

So their redress under SOGA is with the people who sold them it just as
if I bought a washing machine that turned out to be rubbish.

No, they shouldn't have to bother with all that ****. It's just a different emissions level, nobody gives a damn.

(The "people" I was referring to are the dealers not the purchasers)

The dealers most likely didn't know.

--
How do you embarrass an archeologist?
Give him a used tampon and ask him which period it came from.

On 07/10/2015 22:01, bert wrote:
In article , nemo
writes
On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

"The government has announced today, 2 October 2015, that UK taxpayers
will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) if their existing
vehicles are found to be fitted with illegal software that manipulates
emissions tests."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g...nsumers-who-bo
ught-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs
My manufacturer did not cheat (or if they did they made a total mess of
it) and as a result I pay the top whack for a 2.4 TD. If someone else is
driving a car with higher emissions than declared then they should pay
the appropriate rate of VED. They can then take action under Sale of
Goods Act and recoup the extra cost from the dealer who sold them the
car. This country is supposed to be short of cash. Why are we letting
these people of the hook?

+1

....but then again, it is Big Business that runs this (and most other
developed) country(ies), not the politicians...

In article , JoeJoe
writes
On 07/10/2015 22:01, bert wrote:
In article , nemo
writes
On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

"The government has announced today, 2 October 2015, that UK taxpayers
will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) if their existing
vehicles are found to be fitted with illegal software that manipulates
emissions tests."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g...nsumers-who-bo
ught-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs
My manufacturer did not cheat (or if they did they made a total mess of
it) and as a result I pay the top whack for a 2.4 TD. If someone else is
driving a car with higher emissions than declared then they should pay
the appropriate rate of VED. They can then take action under Sale of
Goods Act and recoup the extra cost from the dealer who sold them the
car. This country is supposed to be short of cash. Why are we letting
these people of the hook?

+1

...but then again, it is Big Business that runs this (and most other
developed) country(ies), not the politicians...
Or in this case the EU.
--
bert

On Wednesday, October 7, 2015 at 10:22:49 AM UTC+1, nemo wrote:
On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

"The government has announced today, 2 October 2015, that UK taxpayers
will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) if their existing
vehicles are found to be fitted with illegal software that manipulates
emissions tests."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-confirms-consumers-who-bought-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs

Careful choice of words there, I think;
"UK taxpayers will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty if their existing vehicles....."

I read that as saying that, when you sell your existing VAG vehicle, the new owner will have to pay higher Vehicle Excise Duty appropriate to the emissions. That may make the vehicles unsellable, or reduce their resale value.

wrote:
On Wednesday, October 7, 2015 at 10:22:49 AM UTC+1, nemo wrote:
On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

"The government has announced today, 2 October 2015, that UK taxpayers
will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) if their existing
vehicles are found to be fitted with illegal software that manipulates
emissions tests."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-confirms-consumers-who-bought-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs

Careful choice of words there, I think;
"UK taxpayers will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty if their existing vehicles....."

I read that as saying that, when you sell your existing VAG vehicle,
the new owner will have to pay higher Vehicle Excise Duty appropriate to
the emissions. That may make the vehicles unsellable, or reduce their resale value.


Vehicles are taxed according to their CO2 output. VW have already stated
that economy will not be affected by any reprogramming.

As for performance...., who knows?

Tim

In article ,
Tim+ wrote:
Vehicles are taxed according to their CO2 output. VW have already stated
that economy will not be affected by any reprogramming.

As for performance...., who knows?

If both performance and economy are not effected, why this fraud in the
first place?

--
*Go the extra mile. It makes your boss look like an incompetent slacker *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

wrote:

"UK taxpayers will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty if their
existing vehicles....."

I read that as saying that, when you sell your existing VAG vehicle,
the new owner will have to pay higher Vehicle Excise Duty appropriate
to the emissions.

Paranoid much?

On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 10:35:14 PM UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
wrote:

"UK taxpayers will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty if their
existing vehicles....."

I read that as saying that, when you sell your existing VAG vehicle,
the new owner will have to pay higher Vehicle Excise Duty appropriate
to the emissions.

Paranoid much?

Not at all, it means what it says and what it said was "...their existing vehicles."

If they'd meant that existing vehicles will not be charged a higher rate of Vehicle Excise Duty in the event of the g CO2/km being revised, then they'd probably have said that.

wrote:
On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 10:35:14 PM UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
wrote:

"UK taxpayers will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty if their
existing vehicles....."

I read that as saying that, when you sell your existing VAG vehicle,
the new owner will have to pay higher Vehicle Excise Duty appropriate
to the emissions.

Paranoid much?

Not at all, it means what it says and what it said was "...their existing vehicles."

If they'd meant that existing vehicles will not be charged a higher rate
of Vehicle Excise Duty in the event of the g CO2/km being revised, then
they'd probably have said that.


Except as pointed out earlier, VW have said that consumption will not
increase.

Tim

wrote in message
...
On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 10:35:14 PM UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
wrote:

"UK taxpayers will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty if their
existing vehicles....."

I read that as saying that, when you sell your existing VAG vehicle,
the new owner will have to pay higher Vehicle Excise Duty appropriate
to the emissions.

Paranoid much?

Not at all, it means what it says and what it said was "...their existing
vehicles."

If they'd meant that existing vehicles will not be charged a higher rate
of Vehicle Excise Duty in the event of the g CO2/km being revised, then
they'd probably have said that.

No they wouldn't

the idea that they might re-band these vehicles with the re-banding only
becoming active on a sale would be a nightmare to police.

When they say "existing vehicles", they mean "all existing vehicles"

tim

wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, October 7, 2015 at 10:22:49 AM UTC+1, nemo wrote:
On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

"The government has announced today, 2 October 2015, that UK taxpayers
will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) if their existing
vehicles are found to be fitted with illegal software that manipulates
emissions tests."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-confirms-consumers-who-bought-vehicles-in-good-faith-will-not-incur-additional-tax-costs

Careful choice of words there, I think;
"UK taxpayers will not incur higher Vehicle Excise Duty if their existing
vehicles....."

I read that as saying that, when you sell your existing VAG vehicle, the
new owner will have to pay higher Vehicle Excise Duty appropriate to the
emissions.

you read it wrong

the weasel words mean "we are still thinking about whether we will ask VW to
pay"

(but the probably wont)

Jim S wrote

Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed
so you have a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

You don't know that they will pay more Road Tax.

On 07/10/15 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?


Because you may be uninsured if you don't ?

On 07/10/2015 10:38, Tim Watts wrote:
On 07/10/15 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?


Because you may be uninsured if you don't ?

Surely the performance will drop, so unlikely to worry an insurer?
Besides, it is a manufacturer's update, not some arbitrary modification.

On 07/10/15 12:53, newshound wrote:
On 07/10/2015 10:38, Tim Watts wrote:
On 07/10/15 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?


Because you may be uninsured if you don't ?

Surely the performance will drop, so unlikely to worry an insurer?
Besides, it is a manufacturer's update, not some arbitrary modification.

It's the not doing it I was claiming may invalidate the insurance (due
to not responding to a recall).

On 07/10/2015 14:27, Tim Watts wrote:
On 07/10/15 12:53, newshound wrote:
On 07/10/2015 10:38, Tim Watts wrote:
On 07/10/15 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?


Because you may be uninsured if you don't ?

Surely the performance will drop, so unlikely to worry an insurer?
Besides, it is a manufacturer's update, not some arbitrary modification.

It's the not doing it I was claiming may invalidate the insurance (due
to not responding to a recall).

It is not a vehicle safety issue, like a problem with the brakes.

--
Michael Chare

On 07/10/15 14:43, Michael Chare wrote:
On 07/10/2015 14:27, Tim Watts wrote:
On 07/10/15 12:53, newshound wrote:
On 07/10/2015 10:38, Tim Watts wrote:
On 07/10/15 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?


Because you may be uninsured if you don't ?

Surely the performance will drop, so unlikely to worry an insurer?
Besides, it is a manufacturer's update, not some arbitrary modification.

It's the not doing it I was claiming may invalidate the insurance (due
to not responding to a recall).

It is not a vehicle safety issue, like a problem with the brakes.


Neither is changing the colour of the paintwork, but the DVLA and the
insurers both want to know!

Insurers will also definitely want to know if the ECU is remapped, which
seems to be a possibility here.

In article ,
Tim Watts writes:
On 07/10/15 12:53, newshound wrote:
On 07/10/2015 10:38, Tim Watts wrote:
On 07/10/15 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?


Because you may be uninsured if you don't ?

Surely the performance will drop, so unlikely to worry an insurer?
Besides, it is a manufacturer's update, not some arbitrary modification.

It's the not doing it I was claiming may invalidate the insurance (due
to not responding to a recall).

It's not an insurance issue, but the government will have to have a
sanction for those who don't do the recall. This sanction is likely
to be that you will have to pay for the excess emission in the future
once the fix is available, or could be future MoT failure.

They probably haven't given this much thought yet, but as the first
few people take theirs in to be fixed and report noticable power
reduction as a result, other people will choose not to get theirs
corrected unless there's a sanction in place.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:38:58 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

On 07/10/15 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?


Because you may be uninsured if you don't ?

What a longwinded idea.

--
Q. What's hairy on the outside, wet on the inside, begins with a "C" and ends with a "T"?
A. A coconut.

The insurance angle isn't clear get and I guess the Assoc British Insures or
the FSA should make a public statement soon.

Meanwhile, it's worth looking at the section on Good Industry Practice
headed 'ICOB Rule 7.3.6.'

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/faq/insurance-disclosure/

On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?


So do you think the DVLA might have something to say on that.

Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

It won't affect the rating of existing cars. Do keep up.

Tim

On 07/10/2015 10:08, Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you have
a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

The government has already ruled that out.

What no-one seems to know is what will be done in the recall.
AIUI there is currently a difference between emission test results and
real life emissions due to the 'cheatware'.

Seems to me that there are two ways of bringing the two sets of results
into line - run the car all the time as though it were being tested -
with a detriment to performance and fuel economy - or disable the
cheatware so that 'true' values show up in tests.

I wonder which they'll do?!
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

Roger Mills wrote
Jim S wrote

Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software
changed so you have a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

The government has already ruled that out.

What no-one seems to know is what will be done in the recall.

Presumably we will soon find out whether anything is added
at all when the first of those recalled say what happened to
their car and how well it performs after that has been done.

AIUI there is currently a difference between emission test
results and real life emissions due to the 'cheatware'.

Seems to me that there are two ways of bringing the two sets of
results into line - run the car all the time as though it were being
tested - with a detriment to performance and fuel economy - or
disable the cheatware so that 'true' values show up in tests.

There isn't any point in doing the second because none of the
cars that have been sold will be involved in type approval tests.

And the third possibility is to add something like AdBlue that produces
better emissions in normal driving than the car currently does.

I wonder which they'll do?!

On 07/10/2015 19:46, Rod Speed wrote:
Roger Mills wrote
Jim S wrote

Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

The government has already ruled that out.

What no-one seems to know is what will be done in the recall.

Presumably we will soon find out whether anything is added at all when
the first of those recalled say what happened to their car and how well
it performs after that has been done.
AIUI there is currently a difference between emission test results and
real life emissions due to the 'cheatware'.

Seems to me that there are two ways of bringing the two sets of
results into line - run the car all the time as though it were being
tested - with a detriment to performance and fuel economy - or disable
the cheatware so that 'true' values show up in tests.

There isn't any point in doing the second because none of the
cars that have been sold will be involved in type approval tests.

I would have thought that that constituted a very good reason *for*
doing the second - leaving the performance as is, and accepting that
tests will produce a high (true!) NoX figure. As you say, no-one is
going to do a type approval test on them.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
On 07/10/2015 19:46, Rod Speed wrote:
Roger Mills wrote
Jim S wrote

Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

The government has already ruled that out.

What no-one seems to know is what will be done in the recall.

Presumably we will soon find out whether anything is added at all when
the first of those recalled say what happened to their car and how well
it performs after that has been done.
AIUI there is currently a difference between emission test results and
real life emissions due to the 'cheatware'.

Seems to me that there are two ways of bringing the two sets of
results into line - run the car all the time as though it were being
tested - with a detriment to performance and fuel economy - or disable
the cheatware so that 'true' values show up in tests.

There isn't any point in doing the second because none of the
cars that have been sold will be involved in type approval tests.

I would have thought that that constituted a very good reason *for* doing
the second - leaving the performance as is, and accepting that tests will
produce a high (true!) NoX figure. As you say, no-one is going to do a
type approval test on them.

So it doesn't matter what they do in a test,
because they will never be in a test.

In article ,
Jim S wrote:
Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

You have inside information on how much CO2 these cars will produce on
test after the mods have been done?

If so, please share it.

--
*Where there's a will, I want to be in it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 07/10/2015 13:22, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Jim S wrote:

Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

You have inside information on how much CO2 these cars will produce on
test after the mods have been done?

If so, please share it.

It is likely that to get NOx down they will have to lose a bit of
efficiency. The curious thing is that a tweak to fool a rolling road
test will not make a jot of difference in normal driving so I can't
really see what all the consumer fuss is about.

It will mean worse mpg after the tweak in all probability - the big
question is by how much. Or whether some engines can ever meet the
official targets without being specially pre-tweaked for the test.

I don't find it at all surprising that manufacturers "game" benchmarks
wherever possible only the extremes to which VW have taken it.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:
On 07/10/2015 13:22, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Jim S wrote:

Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

You have inside information on how much CO2 these cars will produce on
test after the mods have been done?

If so, please share it.

It is likely that to get NOx down they will have to lose a bit of
efficiency.

CO2 output isn't necessarily about efficiency, though.

The curious thing is that a tweak to fool a rolling road
test will not make a jot of difference in normal driving so I can't
really see what all the consumer fuss is about.

It could make a considerable difference to the maximum power and or torque
output of the engine, though. That may not matter to a gentle driver - but
might annoy the hell out of a faster one.

It will mean worse mpg after the tweak in all probability - the big
question is by how much. Or whether some engines can ever meet the
official targets without being specially pre-tweaked for the test.

My guess is the MPG in normal use will be largely unchanged.

I don't find it at all surprising that manufacturers "game" benchmarks
wherever possible only the extremes to which VW have taken it.

Think we all know that diesels exceed their test emissions under normal
use. As the tests don't take into account normal use.

The difference here was actually switching the engine mapping between test
and driving. Where the 'driving' map would cause it to fail the tests.

--
*Women like silent men; they think they're listening.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 07/10/2015 14:13, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:


The difference here was actually switching the engine mapping between test
and driving. Where the 'driving' map would cause it to fail the tests.


Yup, there's "gaming" and there's fraud. It will be interesting to see
how far up that was known in the VW management.

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 14:55:05 +0000, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 14:13:05 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

My guess is the MPG in normal use will be largely unchanged.

Years ago, I used to smile inwardly when most people claimed they
wouldn't own an automatic "because of the poor fuel economy".

I'd wonder what the **** they knew about fuel economy, having seen their
driving - almost permanently in the wrong gear. Roaring starts. And (the
best) a customer who owned a car for 3 years without realising it had a
5th gear.

I'm currently getting 44.7 mpg from a 1.6 turbo diesel, with a 50/50
mway/
urban mileage split. FiL is lucky to get 30mpg from their similar
behaviour (although it is a 2.4 litre diesel)

My manual diesel (S-Max) is currently doing about 41.5mpg, on a 25/75
mway/urban split).....! Ands that's a 2.0.

On 07/10/2015 17:12, Jethro_uk wrote:


The biggest single factor in mpg is speed. I once experienced a 25%
decrease in fuel consumption when I drove at 55 on a motorway, as opposed
to 85. (Again) if any government was serious about the environment,
they'd change speed limits, rather than **** around with windmills.


I generally get a better fuel consumption driving at say 60 mph on
motorways and main roads than driving locally where it is impractical
and maybe illegal to reach such a speed.


--
Michael Chare

On 07/10/15 13:41, Martin Brown wrote:
On 07/10/2015 13:22, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Jim S wrote:

Why would anyone take their VW in to have the software changed so you
have a higher rating and so pay more Road Tax?

You have inside information on how much CO2 these cars will produce on
test after the mods have been done?

If so, please share it.

It is likely that to get NOx down they will have to lose a bit of
efficiency. The curious thing is that a tweak to fool a rolling road
test will not make a jot of difference in normal driving so I can't
really see what all the consumer fuss is about.

The fuss is the engine would not have been allowed onto the road in the
first place.

It will mean worse mpg after the tweak in all probability - the big
question is by how much. Or whether some engines can ever meet the
official targets without being specially pre-tweaked for the test.

I don't find it at all surprising that manufacturers "game" benchmarks
wherever possible only the extremes to which VW have taken it.