Volkswagen commits massive fraud, House introduces bill to make it harder to sue Volkswagen as a class

[dismal]

Is this being done to the drivers? I have not seen it reported.

Just trying out my dismal. Owners unknowingly broke the law driving cars that weren't road worthy according to current law. Lying is not a legitimate reason to take money from buyers. So, if those who shopped for cars had actual information about the cars 1. they wouldn't buy them or, 2. if they did buy them they would knowingly break laws. Either way a bad deal for the buying public.

This feels more like you're arguing for the existence of nonexistent problems than dismaling. It's not particularly controversial that pollution control devices cause an increase in cost and a loss of fuel economy and performance.

The best case you could make for the car buyers being victims is that when they bring the cars back for the recall they will suffer the loss of fuel economy and performance they have heretofore been enjoying at breathers expense. I imagine VW will eat the cost. So they're still probably better off than if they had bought a car paying the full cost of the required pollution controls themselves and been suffering the downgrade in performance the whole time.

 

[ksen]

guys, please

 

[Bronzeage]

The resale value of a car which fails an emission test is it's weight in scrap metal. The cheaper car comes at a price. I'm sure a VW owner who has 36 more notes to go and the payoff on the loan is $29k, and can't renew their license plate, will feel a little bit like a victim.

Have they confiscated all the cars? I was under the impression people were still driving them.

I have friend who is driving a 2001 Ford Focus on the streets of Baton Rouge, with a 201o California license plate, so a lot of things are possible. I don't know of any state that confiscates a car for failing an emission test, but they will impound a car if the license is expired.

My buddy with the Ford likes to live on the edge.

 

[Bronzeage]

Technically the cars can pass emissions tests. They just don't if they are measured while actually moving instead of the back tires standing still. It seems like a simple software fix to get them into compliance. However, you will take an hit in performance while moving. I'm not sure how you quantify that into monetary damages though. I'm sure they would figure that out in a class action lawsuit. My guess $50-100 per car tops.

VW could help people out with a software "switch" for economy/performance mode mounted under the dash.

The trick VW pulled was to create a parallel computer program which kicked in when the steering wheel is clamped in the straight ahead position. This is the test condition. When the steering wheel position varies, as it does when a human is driving, a different program controls fuel delivery. A VW on the street will produce tailpipe emissions which exceed the standards.

The fix which makes the car meet the emission standards may cost on $50, but the fix which gives the owner a satisfactory vehicle may not even be possible.

 

[arkirk]

VW engaged in crookedness. Congress is demonstrating the big banks and VW are linked at the shoulder and protecting both of them from rightfully angry VW owners. It is this same congress that has a lot of cheated college kids still owning a bankruptcy proof debt. This congress should be dumped in the next election, but its handlers will no doubt buy its way back into power. You can look at this thing and say "It's the fucking Repuglicans," but don't waste your breath the big D people are about as compromised.

 

[ksen]

My understanding was they fudged the number on the amount of pollution being controlled. This means lower cost and higher performance (power, gas mileage, etc) than what it would have taken to actually control the pollution.

Produce higher polluting cars for lower costs and sell them as less polluting cars at a higher price.

Sure, whatever could be wrong about that?

The drivers got better performance. Breathers got worse air. There is, however, some overlap between the two.

Well, the buyers got sold something that wasn't what was described to them.

But hey, caveat emptor amirite?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

What is the actual difference in emissions between the car in test mode and the car in drive mode?

 

[dismal]

Produce higher polluting cars for lower costs and sell them as less polluting cars at a higher price.

Sure, whatever could be wrong about that?

The drivers got better performance. Breathers got worse air. There is, however, some overlap between the two.

Well, the buyers got sold something that wasn't what was described to them.

But hey, caveat emptor amirite?

It was a better performance and cheaper car than it would have been had the controls been in there.

 

[ksen]

Produce higher polluting cars for lower costs and sell them as less polluting cars at a higher price.

Sure, whatever could be wrong about that?



Well, the buyers got sold something that wasn't what was described to them.

But hey, caveat emptor amirite?

It was a better performance and cheaper car than it would have been had the controls been in there.

not cheaper to the buyers

 

[Bronzeage]

What is the actual difference in emissions between the car in test mode and the car in drive mode?

It produces emissions far in excess of the legal limits in drive mode.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

What is the actual difference in emissions between the car in test mode and the car in drive mode?

It produces emissions far in excess of the legal limits in drive mode.

But what is the actual difference?

 

[Bronzeage]

It produces emissions far in excess of the legal limits in drive mode.

But what is the actual difference?

That depends on driving conditions, but I saw one report that said as much as 40% higher in some situations. The big problem with diesel emissions has always been particulates, which are mostly carbon.

 

[bilby]

But what is the actual difference?

That depends on driving conditions, but I saw one report that said as much as 40% higher in some situations. The big problem with diesel emissions has always been particulates, which are mostly carbon.

Or truckbon. And in England, Lorrybon.

 

[Bronzeage]

That depends on driving conditions, but I saw one report that said as much as 40% higher in some situations. The big problem with diesel emissions has always been particulates, which are mostly carbon.

Or truckbon. And in England, Lorrybon.

That's true. Late model trucks have a ceramic filter in the exhaust which traps carbon particles. When exhaust back pressure gets to a certain level, it triggers a burn cycle which heats the filter and turns the carbon into fairy dust.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

But what is the actual difference?

That depends on driving conditions, but I saw one report that said as much as 40% higher in some situations. The big problem with diesel emissions has always been particulates, which are mostly carbon.

Now you're getting closer to the answer.

The emissions standard is a number that is less than 1%. VW's vehicle has a 40% difference in emissions. The actual emissions is also less than 1%, but 40% higher than government dictat.

So either way, emissions are less than 1%. VW is such a horrible polluter with this vehicle.

 

[dismal]

It was a better performance and cheaper car than it would have been had the controls been in there.

not cheaper to the buyers

Cite?

In a competitive market (like cars) some of share of any cost savings are invariably passed on to buyers.

 

[dismal]

Here is some info on the issue including an attempt at a quantification of the benefits the drivers have been receiving in terms of performance and fuel economy:

On 10 October 2015, Consumer Reports tested a 2015 Jetta TDI and a 2011 Jetta Sportwagen TDI in what they presumed was the special emissions testing, or cheat, mode. The 0 to 60 mph (0 to 97 km/h) acceleration time of the 2011 Jetta increased from 9.9 to 10.5 seconds, and the 2015 car's time went from 9.1 to 9.2 seconds. The fuel economy of the 2011 car decreased from 50 to 46 mpg-US (4.7 to 5.1 L/100 km; 60 to 55 mpg-imp) and the 2015 car's fuel economy decreased from 53 to 50 mpg-US (4.4 to 4.7 L/100 km; 64 to 60 mpg-imp).

So, yes, the drivers did get more power and better fuel economy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal

 

[ksen]

Here is some info on the issue including an attempt at a quantification of the benefits the drivers have been receiving in terms of performance and fuel economy:

On 10 October 2015, Consumer Reports tested a 2015 Jetta TDI and a 2011 Jetta Sportwagen TDI in what they presumed was the special emissions testing, or cheat, mode. The 0 to 60 mph (0 to 97 km/h) acceleration time of the 2011 Jetta increased from 9.9 to 10.5 seconds, and the 2015 car's time went from 9.1 to 9.2 seconds. The fuel economy of the 2011 car decreased from 50 to 46 mpg-US (4.7 to 5.1 L/100 km; 60 to 55 mpg-imp) and the 2015 car's fuel economy decreased from 53 to 50 mpg-US (4.4 to 4.7 L/100 km; 64 to 60 mpg-imp).

So, yes, the drivers did get more power and better fuel economy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal

Cool, and they also got cars that couldn't pass state emission standards and thus illegal to drive.

 

[dismal]

Here is some info on the issue including an attempt at a quantification of the benefits the drivers have been receiving in terms of performance and fuel economy:



So, yes, the drivers did get more power and better fuel economy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal

Cool, and they also got cars that couldn't pass state emission standards and thus illegal to drive.

Do you have any evidence of people being told they can't drive them?

I think this is the third time I've asked.

 

[thebeave]

Here is some info on the issue including an attempt at a quantification of the benefits the drivers have been receiving in terms of performance and fuel economy:

On 10 October 2015, Consumer Reports tested a 2015 Jetta TDI and a 2011 Jetta Sportwagen TDI in what they presumed was the special emissions testing, or cheat, mode. The 0 to 60 mph (0 to 97 km/h) acceleration time of the 2011 Jetta increased from 9.9 to 10.5 seconds, and the 2015 car's time went from 9.1 to 9.2 seconds. The fuel economy of the 2011 car decreased from 50 to 46 mpg-US (4.7 to 5.1 L/100 km; 60 to 55 mpg-imp) and the 2015 car's fuel economy decreased from 53 to 50 mpg-US (4.4 to 4.7 L/100 km; 64 to 60 mpg-imp).

So, yes, the drivers did get more power and better fuel economy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal

With better fuel economy, you use less gas, which generally means less pollution. I wonder how the actual total amount of emissions between the two models compares, for the same trip. That is, is it possible the one with better mileage actually pollutes less overall, even though its tested emissions are higher? Perhaps we should be considering mpg also in the emissions test criteria.