UKC

All,

We all know about the VW emissions scandal, and after a number of letters telling me my car was part of the recall, I've just had a letter from my dealer saying that my car is due a software update to fix the emissions problem and to ask me to book it in.

Given the prevelance of UKC VW-stable cars I was wondering if anyone else had their car "fixed" and what their experience was of the car after the fix. I've got a 2.0TDI, by the way.

There's a lot of bad publicity out there - including people who have had dyno tests before and after which show a big drop in low end torque after the "fix".

I am hoping that these are the minority and the majority are fine, but I'll admit that this is not the vibe I'm getting from the internet right now.

At present I'm not booking it in, but am marginally concerned about the service due in a few months. Considering an independent garage and specifying not applying the "fix".

In reply to John_Hat:
Had my Yeti done 3 weeks ago, 2.0 TDI. Haven't noticed any drop in power but personally think the engine sounds more coarse under hard acceleration at higher revs.

Not heard any stories about BHP/Torque being affected although i haven't been on the forums for a while.

I'll check out http://www.yetiownersclub.co.uk/forum/ later and see.

In reply to John_Hat:

Had my 2012, 2 litre Passat done earlier this year and I haven't noticed any difference. The dealer did give me some goodies for the inconvenience which I suppose is cheaper for them than a multi-million dollar law suit.

Al

In reply to John_Hat:

There must have been some reason why the vehicles were produced with the original software which must have been considered beneficial in some way at the time so whatever the software update does it must have some negative effect on some aspect of the vehicle.

In reply to John_Hat:

Search for your query on "Honest John", there have been a few stories of reduced torque and other problems.

In reply to John_Hat:

my 2010 skoda octavia 2.0 tdi estate has had the "fix" - I have not noticed any difference at all in the engine performance or characteristics

In reply to John_Hat:

As far as I know all the update does is delete the software routines that change the combustion settings when it detects a test scenario...there is no logical reason why it would affect the performance of the cars...the update doesn't lower the emissions back to where they were claimed to be at time of sale

In reply to John_Hat:

Last letter I received for the van informed me that they were still looking for a solution .

I am changing for a 17 plate ,so it will become VW's problem

In reply to John_Hat:

I had it done couldn't tell any difference in performance or MPG.
Now wish I hadn't booked it in as taking it around to the garage and waiting for 2 hours to do the update for no benefit to myself, it's just a number for VW and a money maker for the garage

In reply to Alpenglow:


Yes, that was one of the internet sites that worried me...

In reply to John_Hat:

I have the VW Passat with 1.6TDI engine – the man on the desk at the dealership suggested I should not rush to get the fix as there would be performance issues - but he was very vague and not very helpful on further questioning. It is a moot point however, as this hasn't been offered yet and will apparently involve more that just software so I wait for more information. If they are slow enough the car will be too old and be replaced.

In reply to balmybaldwin:


If this is the case then surely the vehicle would fail the euro6 emissions test and therefore change the tax band and the cities it will soon be banned from entering when the rules change. Or will drivers of other cars that are paying tax for all their emissions be subsidising VW drivers? I wonder.

They should chase this to the very top of the chain that decided to fiddle the numbers and prosecute them for fraud.

In reply to John_Hat:

My brother-in-law was about to book in his 2.0 litre Audi, but asked for an independent report on performance, economy and emissions after the 'fix' but VW refused to do so. He spoke with someone quite senior at VW and was quoted legal stuff about why they don't have to do that. It's on-going. I have a Skoda and haven't booked it in yet. Beats me how people in the US get a better deal out of this scandal than the UK.

In reply to balmybaldwin:


The update removes the software routine that turns the test mode off, that is the car now runs permanently in the condition it was originally tested. The unanswered question is the lifespan of the exhaust filter system (and the engine in general) which has to cope with vastly increased exhaust recycling.

The independent tests here in Germany show an increase in fuel consumption of varying amounts.

In reply to jimtitt:
I think it's slightly more complex in that the "fix" tries to get the emissions down to the original figures in-test, but not just by using the original software settings.

The impression I get is that VW have juggled the mapping so that when the engine is warm, and running at mid-high revs, there's no difference, but that at low revs (say up to 3000) and especially from cold the performance is knackered. Hence the amount of difference you notice will be related to driving style.

One person dynoed his car before and after - result below.

http://1drv.ms/b/s!AvcWk_HHJ7e2lSKCPGtHBV19b90L

VW are, naturally, ignoring the evidence.

I'll admit to being disappointed with VW. I thought they would be doing a better job of this.

Also, as far as I know, all this is about NOx emissions which are not part of the UK test. Hence an unfixed car will pass the UK MOT fine. That's not the same in the states, where I think they do test for NOx hence the difference in treatment.

As far as I know apart from pressure from the EU there was no legal reason for VW to fix European cars.

The story I heard was that the Environmental pressure groups in the US sucessfully lobbied for a reduction in NOx to a level that was not achieveable in the timescale without an entire engine redesign. Companies that were in the process of designing/releasing new engines were fine - they could incorporate the changes, but VW had just released their new engines - and were not scheduled to update them for several years.

VW were then in a fix. They could either recall hundreds of thousands of cars and replace the engines with engines that didn't exist, and hadn't been designed (bearing in mind an engine design can take a few years from drawing board to car) or fiddle the test for the recently released engines and rapidly start work on a design that would pass the test legit for release in cars in a few years.

All was fine unless someone noticed, and as emissions tests were not a hot topic and no-one really cared (a bit like the "official mpg") there was a good chance that as long as they could keep it quiet for a few years it would all blow over.

So to a certain extent there is a blame to the legislators who pushed NOx emissions into law in a timescale that was not achieveable by the auto industry without a huge hike to car prices.

Incidentally, I know that this is open house on VW bashing, but as most other manufacturers were doing very similar (Mercs simply turned off most of the emission controls after a time period slightly longer than the standard emission test), I think they are mostly as bad as eachother.

In reply to poppydog:

Drivers in the USA get a better deal because Americans are more litigious. My brother in Michigan drove a Jetta diesel and VW gave him a $1000 bung to dissuade him from joining one of the two class actions that were going on.

The fix doesn't make any difference to performance. I took Mrs RR's Seat Ibiza to be done and the service manager admitted to me that they just remove the software dodge.

In reply to John_Hat:

Well I was keeping it simple, the current fix for Europe is reputedly a) to remove the test detction software b) remap the engine so it conforms without the changes that the test mode introduced.
In the US the problem is more difficult due to the more stringent standards so a large number of cars are having to be bought back. Higher standards were prevented in Europe after intensive lobbing by the diesel manufacturers. A move to temporarily raise the standards to save VW and others asses has been vetoed in the EU.
VW were warned in writing that using the test defeating software was illegal in 2007, that they persisted shows the arrogance and stupidity of those running the company. They had plenty of time to redesign their engines about five times over. The race for even more power from over-developed engines using an unsuitabe fuel has cost them a fortune and their reputation. Petrol engines have been required to meet the requirements of Euro 6 since Euro 4 and do so with ease.
The EU introduced NOx standards for passenger cars in January 2000 (Euro Norm 3), it has never been measured as part of the MoT test, it´ s read out from the cars diagnostic system which rightly nobody believes is true. The issue is not the MoT test but that the cars failed to conform to the regulations at the time of sale and should never have been permitted on the market in the first place. VW dispute this was illegal, saying the law only says it has to pass the test, what happens the rest of the time is of no interest.
That car taxation in many countries is based on CO2 emissions which the software also reduced by hundreds of percent is of considerable interest to many, all VW diesel (and other) drivers have been enjoying a tax benefit at the cost of other road users illegally.
All the other defeat modes used by the various manufacturers are of a similar dubious basis.

In reply to John_Hat:



Another person dynoed his Yeti before and after:

http://www.yetiownersclub.co.uk/forum/power-yeti-140ps-before-after-softwar...

Not the same story by any means.

"Honest" John does seem to specialise in horror stories - you almost never read good news on his site (and remember that the forums on the HJ site are just the same as UKC ie random internet wibbling, HJ himself is not involved).

A number of people on the Yeti forum on Briskoda have reported no detectable change in behaviour having had the 'fix' applied. IIRC only one forum poster there has reported a problem.

If you don't want the fix, you don't have to have it, although dealerships will ask you to sign a disclaimer stating that you don't want it. It doesn't make the car illegal to operate and - as others have stated here (and contrary to what some others seem to be suugesting) - NOx emissions form no part of the MOT test at all.

(FWIW, I haven't had the fix applied to my Yeti yet[i] - it hasn't been near a dealer since the fix came out, and I'm not going to make a special trip to get it done. I'll take a view on it when the next service is due, based on what's being said on the forums and elsewhere by then.)

In reply to gethin_allen:


The engines with the cheat were EURO5. The later EURO6 engines are OK. You can't go around imposing regulation retrospectively - that would likely make every manufacturer's EURO5 engines illegal overnight. The world doesn't work like that.


VED and congestion charging is (currently) based on CO2 emissions, not NOx. (From April 2017 VED on new cars will no longer be based on CO2 emissions after the first year - from the second year following purchase it will be a fixed rate regardless of emissions.)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vehicle-excise-duty

In reply to robert-hutton:


What about the environment/people's health?

In reply to Timmd:

The fix doesn't change the amount of emissions just when it discharges them.

In reply to Martin W:

Wow. As I understand that it will become substantially cheaper to run a high performance, high CO2 emitting car (in terms of VED anyway) so long as one refrains from buying new? So it would cost the same to tax a 4 litre v8 jag as a 1 litre micra after year 1?

In reply to Siward:
I think it only applies to cars bought from april 17, ie all cars on the road now will remain subject to the current rates.
So you are right, BUT, in order for the high emitting car to get on the road in the first place, someone has to pay the premium for it in the first year. So there is still a disincentive.
At least that's my memory from when it was first announced - I haven't rechecked.

In reply to Siward:


Not the way I read it. Current cars will retain their VED rate for life so your Jag will always be more expensive in terms of VED rate. After 1st April, a car list price over £40k new will have a higher VED from 1yr old until 6 years old than the cheaper car, irrespective if you buy secondhand . First year rate will be based on CO2 emissions. So this will include your Jag 4 litre V8 will it not and the Jag will be taxed more than the Micra until after 6yrs when they will be the same?

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables/overview shows fuller details.

That's my reading anyway.

In reply to raincloud:


I can't see why there would be any; the fix just changes the way the car operates under certain test conditions.

Just look at it as a penalty for people who choose to buy diesel cars.

In reply to Kipper:

I know what the fix does - I was just answering the OP`` s original question and I could do without your preaching thanks. 10 or so years ago we were told diesel was the way forward!

In reply to Climbing Pieman:

Page 2 of your link though says, after listing the year 1 VED:

The amount you pay each year after that depends on the type of fuel the vehicle uses.
Electric vehicle Alternative fuel Petrol or diesel
£0 £130 £140


So, ignoring the £40,000 or more cars, it's £140 per year, which is less than half what I currently pay.

In reply to Siward:
Yes, but I don't think you then are really talking about a Jaguar 4L V8 though costing under £40k list price are you which is what I was essentially replying to? There may well be some sub £40k list price cars that will be higher polluting yet drop their VED to £140 after year one.

In reply to robert-hutton:

Ah, so it would be a health benefit for urban areas rather than an environmental one (in a global sense).

In reply to John_Hat:

More than 20,000 rigged diesels in Sheffield alone...

http://www.thestar.co.uk/business/over-20-000-rigged-vws-polluting-sheffiel...

In reply to Climbing Pieman:

I think my idea of the price of Jaguars probably lags behind reality quite bit!

Still though, a 5 year old Jag is hardly a bad car and would currently cost £515 to tax:

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/advice/road-tax-guide/jaguar/xk/convertible-2...

In reply to rubbercrumb:

Thanks VW :-|

In reply to John_Hat:

No detectable change in my Golf 1.6TDI.

If you've got to stick it on a machine to detect the difference in performance I'd suggest no one can tell the difference and some petrol heads have got far too much time on their hands.

In reply to DancingOnRock:

They're f*cking idiots at VW.

We've got a Motability Caddy.
Last year, MoT time it got taken away to be dealt with. It was sat in garage somewhere in the NorthWest for some repairs for about five, turned out they couldn't do them, off it goes somewhere else. About two weeks without in the end.
This year, MoT, wheel's knackered, need a new one. Apparently, there wasn't a black one in the whole country, we'll have to get one from Germany. They put a silver one in the end. Another week without it.

Emmissions, had the notification years ago, I'm not bothering. This vehicle gets traded in this year. It'll be something other than VW this time.

In reply to Lusk:

I've had worse issues with GM and Ford.

Usually it was the dealer though not the car.

In reply to Martin W:




Not sure how that yeti owner has concluded the before and after lines are the same when there's clearly something very dubious looking in the lower rev range. Which brings us to another point of the tested rev range, the Audi test above shows the most variation in the low rev range <2000 RPM, the Yeti test only starts around 2k RPM.

In reply to Martin W:


I thought the engines in question were sold as Euro6 (I'll believe you that I'm wrong). I wasn't suggesting that the newer standard should be imposed on older engines only that if these vehicles no longer meet the regs that they should have on the day they were first sold once the dodge is removed then they shouldn't be on the road.

Regarding the CO2 output, if the software changes result in changes in fuel economy then surely they are making more CO2/km and they should be taxed accordingly.

In reply to John_Hat:

Go for it, my 1.2 TDI now hits 0-60 in 3 secs and achieves 102mpg. Oops sorry the trip computer is lying again.

In reply to John_Hat:

Had my Audi A3 2.0 done recently - needed and MOT and they did that at the same time.

Not done enough miles in it to notice any difference in fuel consumption, but, to me, it does seem a bit quicker and more responsive than it did. Not that that's hard - I've been completely underwhelmed with it generally.

Got it done as I'm seriously thinking about selling it - shortly after I bought it, my company annouced we were moving premises and I've gone from doing ~180 miles a week commuting to about 45. It's done 10k miles in 3 years, as we use my wife's company car as the family car, so I'd be better off with a petrol car (not VAG).