This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

VW diesel emission scam

Jump to new
sptrawler said:
Just another nail in the internal combustion coffin.
Click to expand...

We've spent 90 years trying to make internal combustion engines do "unnatural" things and in most cases we've just swapped one problem for another.

First they suffered from a major problem with knock, thus limiting the power and efficiency of the engine.

So we decided to put tetraethyl lead (TEL) in the petrol to overcome the knock problem, enabling higher compression and efficiency. Trouble is, it's damn toxic stuff and in more recent times has been implicated in the high rates of murder in polluted cities in the past. They called it "loony gas" when it first came out, due to the health effects on those producing it, but we went ahead and used it anyway.

With the need to get rid of lead we looked around for something else and came up with MTBE. Brilliant, no lead and it even helps the fuel burn cleaner. Just a couple of problems - firstly it's carcinogenic, secondly any spill tends to end up in ground water. Damn.

Which brings us to ethanol. Another idea that works as such but it suffers from the problem that it doesn't sensibly scale beyond the use of agricultural wastes which are a limited resource. It's one thing to turn waste into fuel, that's a good idea, but intensive farming to grow crops for the sole purpose of burning them borders on insanity from a sustainability perspective.

OK then, if petrol's no good then let's go diesel. Another good idea in principle, but there's a limit to how cleanly you can run something that by its very nature produces soot. We're at the point now where gains in emission reduction are coming at the expense of higher fuel consumption. Take it too far and we're back to square one, might as well just use petrol if we make diesel too inefficient.

Then there's all the hassles we've had getting oil in the first place. Wars, production accidents, tanker accidents. Human misery via the funding of dictators and so on. Nasty stuff.

Internal combustion engines have certainly been one of the most important technologies ever deployed but they do have some very real downsides that's for sure. At some point, we'll either have to accept that there's a limit to how far we can reduce emissions etc or we'll go to a completely different technology (eg electric).
 
Smurf1976 said:
some point, we'll either have to accept that there's a limit to how far we can reduce emissions etc or we'll go to a completely different technology (eg electric).
Click to expand...

So can we take it that hydrogen fuels cells are not a going proposition ?
 
SirRumpole said:
So can we take it that hydrogen fuels cells are not a going proposition ?
Click to expand...

Heard that in Sweden or those smarter countries Bombardier [?] is trialing one of those rail overhead power thingy on trucks along the freeway to the main port. So along freeways trucks are plugged into the grid and will only use diesel as they get off the freeway to make short trips to warehouses.

Much more lighter than batteries, more efficient and cleaner and much cheaper too.

Could conceivably be applied to cars one day... just have a few KMs with overhead cable to charge and run the cars here and there on freeways. Or at busy intersections and after a few stops you're fully charged.

Then have a couple nuclear power station somewhere and bob's your uncle.

That or have better public transports.
 
SirRumpole said:
So can we take it that hydrogen fuels cells are not a going proposition ?
Click to expand...

When we can come up with a cheap, clean way to make bulk Hydrogen, we're on a winner.

I've actually got several Government replies, to my suggestions, that we install hydrogen production plants next to wind farms.

Obviously it isn't that important, at this point of our fuel evolution.
 

"When we can come up with a cheap, clean way to make bulk Hydrogen, we're on a winner"

Check out Eden Energy, EDE. Their hydrogen will be a byproduct looking for a market
 
Audi and Skoda say 3.3m cars have 'cheat' emissions software​



 
Not surprised really....

Add Porsche To The List Of Cars Involved In VW’s Massive Emissions Cheating Scandal​



 
I wonder how Porsche/QATAR QIA are feeling about their investment in VW.
 
Smurf1976 said:
It just gets worse. Now there's more engines, another pollutant and petrol too, not just diesel.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/techn...596865132?sv=974494bc5dd90ec199c540fa93a2e6d5
Click to expand...

My opinion, and I have knowledge on automotive technology.

*The engines cannot economically be made compliant for the strictest Euro 6 codes, and (the cars) will have to be scrapped...that means much of US market too

*In countries with less strict codes, such as Australia, they 'MAY" be able to conform, but imo, MILLIONS of lines of computer code need re-writing and full testing...all vehicles modified in this way WILL lose performance AND fuel economy.

* A "not right" (ie fully tested) Engine map will make any engine much more prone to catastrophic internal failure

* resale value on most VW dashed

* false and misleading conduct laws apply in many countries

* Brand/buyer loyalty very broken

The foolishness takes my breath away, literally hundreds of engineers and managers must have known
 
awg said:
*The engines cannot economically be made compliant for the strictest Euro 6 codes, and (the cars) will have to be scrapped...that means much of US market too
Click to expand...

Just as a separate post to indicate how impossible things might be.

In Engine design theory, a motor with shorter stroke than bore diameter is more efficient.

There are only 2 major reasons to make a engine with longer stroke than bore width

1) Moves torque down the RPM band (by mathematical equation)
2) pollution control is easier (this is also accompanied by different camshaft/valve timing)

Therefore, I doubt if an engine map can be developed that will work well
I believe these VW diesels are high-revving (ie relatively short stroke)

Other makers decided they could not make this type of engine work without dedicated urea injection
(and other design differences)
 
That's pretty xxxxxxxx serious AWG.

So do we want to look for a silver lining here ? Do you think we should start shorting VW shares as this unfolds? Looking clearly at what you suggest I can only see a total company failure if they have to recompense 11 million customers plus fines ...
 

The only silver lining I can see is it is in no-ones interest for the company to fail.

How (or whether) that objective is achieved would need to involve;

1) some leniency from regulators
2) serious re-jigging of the corporate financial structure
3) Win back disaffected customers, which might be hard

hugely bad for share price I would think

I should point out that I have not done a detailed analysis of the issue, but what I have read, and my understanding of fundamental engine physics, and electronics, means they cannot make these engines pass the strictest tests IMO....unless they spend a LOT of money on each car ie 10-20k

Example: set engine to run in testing mode = loss of power and economy, BUT, because engine computer maps are SO precise on such a "high tech" engine, such a setting will very likely lead to improper combustion under some circumstance, that may lead to increased wear, or even piston failure..ie early nissan 2.8 diesel

Interestingly, as far as I know, they pass Oz regs, BUT false and misleading advertising (claimed emission)
AND damaged resale (try trading one in atm!)

Also interesting how LITTLE is written on the topic of can they fix them for California and Euro6

A brief examination of emission "scandals" shows they are surprisingly common...remember the leniency from regulators? Plenty of corpses in the Automaking World though!

I would sack every engineer and manager responsible for signing off on that situation, unless they could prove they did so under written objection
 

I am not a car person, so I may be way off base here.

Is the issue that they cannot attain the emissions targets while at the same time deliver the performance expected by modern day motorists without spending an astronomical amount of money? In which case, might the answer be to lower the performance expectations. After all, for the majority of city dwellers commuting to and from work, which is probably 90+% of their driving, the performance capabilities of their cars are rarely if ever tested.

Surely environmental factors are now significantly more important than the pleasure some petrol heads can only achieve driving on NT roads or German autobahns.
 


yes on all fronts basically

other small diesel vehicles can pass the test legit now, use different technology, but more expensive!

petrol and hybrid technology is generally/arguably considered less polluting in small engine cars

VW must have known for a long time.

What they did is deliberately lie because their engine obviously cannot meet the criteria required at manafacture time, and they found out too late, engine development has a significant lead time, and stricter emission standards are difficult to attain.

For very technical reasons, it is difficult to control pollution on a small diesel, and still make it rev

Engine maps can be changed on many cars, mainly to gain more power.
There is always a compromise between power, fuel consumption, emissions, and other factors in any engine design

As I mentioned, apparently the car is legal in Oz, so no change required here?

In places, where they cannot make it pass regulations, like California, maybe they could buy back all the vehicles and sell them in third world markets
 
bellenuit said:
Surely environmental factors are now significantly more important than the pleasure some petrol heads can only achieve driving on NT roads or German autobahns.
Click to expand...

One issue is that it's one environmental pollutant versus another.

Various reports suggest that a fix for the NOx issue will likely come at the price of higher CO2 emissions unless they add an alternative exhaust gas treatment system to the vehicles (not just a software change). So one exhaust gas goes down and another one goes up, there's no easy way out it seems.

As for VW generally, something I noticed yesterday is a new advertising billboard. It shows the vehicle and has the model name prominently displayed but there's no mention of it being a VW apart from a tiny VW logo right at the bottom of the billboard. The brand is damaged and they've decided not to mention it too much it seems.
 
As a diesel driver (Hyundai ix35) the main benefit for me is ease of driving with lots of torque at low speeds which is what driving in Australia is mainly about, rather than revving the guts out of an engine trying to attain high speeds.

Good fuel economy is the result of this.

The diesel in my vehicle is well up to keeping up with traffic and cruise at the legal limits or above without trouble plus AWD ability is good in the country areas with dirt and gravel roads where I live( AWD is obviously not exclusive to diesel I just think that it suits the low torque ability of diesels better).

Diesel- electric hybrids are probably the way to go in city areas, with the advantage of clean running plus the advantage of longer range and avoidance of the hassle of having to plug the car in overnight.
 
How many motorists would want to take in their VW to be 'fixed' when:

a) There's nothing actually wrong with the cars fuel economy or performance and
b) It will have worse fuel economy and performance once 'fixed' or rather 'neutered' so that it passes emmissions laws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Iran Is not Iraq
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
12K
Dona Ferentes
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...