id prefer good fuel economy over tax cost personally.Yep and people though will once again head for cars with cheaper emissions tax which wiedly is why so many people bought expensive German diesels in the first place
It's already on the way and starts in September 2017. http://www.airqualitynews.com/2015/05/20/eu-adopts-real-world-vehicle-emissions-testing-procedure/I can see calls for stricter testing and I wouldn't be surprised if the next wave of models simply carry higher emissions figures which the tax man will love
But the environment will still suffer :-(
That is not necessarily so. From what I have read today, the emissions (NOX) are reduced with the use of urea, the VW software injects this from a reservoir bottle when it recognises the car is under test conditions. To be effective all the time, the bottle would have to be quite large and constantly topped up, which can be expensive. So VW cheated by having the software use it under test conditions only. The cars will only be producing the higher emissions when it needs the power, at other times like idling, slowing down or cruising, the exhaust gas recirculation system will allow a certain percentage of the exhaust gas to enter the combustion chamber and be burnt off a second time reducing the NOX. Engine manufacturers are constantly finding more ways to reduce emissions and make the engines smoother and more efficient all the time, through use of lower friction materials and auxiliary components.
Up until it changes in September 2017 when the emissions and economy tests change to Real World Figures, all manufacturers perform their tests under laboratory conditions, all at the exact same temperature, and each vehicle is put through the exact same test. Unless you are capable of reproducing those conditions in your journeys then you will never reproduce the results. Even under the 2017 tests, they will be more extensive but no one will be able to reproduce the same conditions on the journeys so results will still differ.To be honest I've never made a car choice based on emissions BUT I have made car choices based on economy (MPG)
HOWEVER, I've always doubted their honesty and assumed they're all "economical with the truth" when it comes to anything that can influence sales
Just checked mine on there, only two submissions, one was 7mpg under what I get the other was 4mpg under. If I was to drive more economically and over longer distances I could probably beat the lower one by 10mpg and I'd be pretty much be spot on with the manufacturers figure by 1mpg. Like I said, no two journeys will ever be identical and no two people will drive the same either so there will always be a difference. My previous car could easily surpass the manufacturers figures and I didn't even have to try.
Like I said, the wrong road.
Most car manufacturers had lean burn engines back in the 80's it was only the likes of Volvo that had catalytic convertors. Even lean burn engines alone wouldn't meet current emission regulations and certainly not on diesel.
But we turned to diesel and to catalytic converters to 'solve' the problem of CO emissions.
The latter still won't meet emission regulations so it has to be a combination of both. Diesel engines are more efficient than petrol engines and produce more power and torque than the equivalent sized petrol engines, in some cases they provide more than larger petrol engines. As diesel engines became better, more people took up the use of diesel engines. America has only in recent years started to look at diesel cars even pick up trucks which are the biggest selling vehicles have always and still are petrol powered. The reason that petrol engines are now catching up with diesel engines in terms of economy is because they are using technology from the development of diesel engines over the last 15-20 yrs and incorporating it into the petrol engines. If we hadn't seen the proliferation of diesel engines, there is a good chance we wouldn't have petrol engines as economical or efficient as we have do today.
So what exactly did you have to replace. I find it hard to believe that nothing on a cars suspension will not require replacing before 140k or 200k.
Springs can be a combination of poor roads and temperatures. My mate had a spring failure on his Mondeo at around 10yrs old but the car had done 140k, some people have spring failures at an earlier mileage. But as Paul (Mr Bump) has said everything on a cars suspension are the most hammered components, they don't only have to move up and down, they have to withstand forces from every direction, it will wear and things may well break. They are consumables. At the end of the day if you don't like the cost of having to replace consumables, then don't own a car.
Newsnight last night showed footage from last year highlighting this problem. The car they were testing was a Mercedes so my money is on them. The US tested a BMW at the same time as the VW which passed so it is possible to pass the tests.
When this first hit the news, I saw a claim that the cars were 40% over the limit. The cars are capable of being below the limit if constantly injected with urea as an after treatment for the NOX emissions, but as I said earlier, the reservoir would need to be larger and need refilling more often. What VW has done means they can keep the weight down on the vehicle and enhance emissions, performance and economy figures as a result.
As I said all consumables and normal wear and tear on any car and what should be expected to be replaced except for the steering rack, The SEAT Toledo will use the same parts suppliers as VW as it is the same group. Did you have the SEAT from new? You aren't obligated to use a dealership for repairs, but I would always take my car to somewhere that fits reputable parts. Most reputable garages will be aware of who makes the OEM parts and will soucre those parts to fit or will buy direct from the dealerships at trade prices anyway.
In America they can fine a company so much for each car sold, that is why the figure of a possible $18bn fine is being mentioned. That doesn't include the cost of rectifying the cars or any implications in other countries too.
little bit harsh. same core components as VW/Audi/Skoda at the end of the day just a slightly cheaper cosmetic set.Yes and aren't they also considered complete rubbish
I remember the old Seat jokes overpowering the Skoda jokes years ago.
Years ago they weren't, they were like a cheap Spanish version of cheap Fiats. They did bring out one model that was partially developed by Porsche iirc. Then VAG bought the company.
sorry i thought mr bump was saying despite being part of VAG they were complete rubbish.
well the same "supposedly" crappy suspension as the rest of the VAG range.yep sorted that for you
You don't have to earn anything like that to afford a new car. When ever you partake in threads about cars, I really do wonder whether you are genuinely that naive, or just trolling.
Regardless of age, I still don't want dings and dents in my cars. I'll take care of it and even when they have been old still be prepared to spend money on it when the need arises. Repairs and maintenance aren't something to be scrimped on, it usually ends up as a false economy anyway. I buy a car for what I want out of it, and I like the way it looks. Previous car was a Mondeo ST TDCi, I bought it because of the size, the way it looked, economy of the diesel suited me at the time and it didn't hang about neither. Now I have a 2yr old Focus ST that I bought at 1yr old, didn't need the size any more, nor diesel economy, but I like the performance, seriously tempted by the new Focus RS as a replacement though. Brand snobbery in cars holds no interest for me, about the same as watches to be honest, which would be sweet FA.I earn about 85k a year and drive a 3k citroen so I am not sure if earnings are linked to cars?
I do like my Rolex watches though
Cars just cost way to much money now to play catch up with the Jones's it used to be the average family car was a ford escort or similar at reasonable cost, cheapish to service and repair. Now everyone has to have a Brand on there drive to show there success like BMW, AUDI of VW. I opted out of that about 15 years ago and I quite like the fact I can leave our car anywhere without worrying about dings, dents or stone chips etc.
