saxavordian
Well-Known Member
Thought a few German car manufacturers, had their hands slapped because of false emissions figure reading.
My TD4 Auto would still struggle to meet the smoke limits for EU6 even with the engine turned off.....
rob_bell
Well-Known Member
From my understanding, anyone using the engine management ECU from a certain tier one supplier had this capacity - and there are currently mass-action law suits being filed by "no win no fee" lawyers against all manufacturers (including Volvo and JLR) that used that ECU...
Dar ran Dar ran
Well-Known Member
Someone as opened a can of worms with this
Something similar has been done in the past with taxis, but there has to be a pretty big market to get the development costs of the conversion back.I had been working on that via a link who had contacts with MIRA - the idea being for a more affordable test that would then be filed to the DVLA.
Unfortunately, COVID somewhat killed the momentum on this project
Might be worth re-investigating soon, if the whole of greater London starts being impacted by ULEZ charging, as there will be a greater market for those wanting to get their cars compliant with the regulations.
VW got slapped - not so much because of false readings, but because the cars didn't meet the emissions requirements on the road. They were mapped in such a way that when the car detected it was on a rolling road (i.e. having its emissions checked, it behaved itself impeccably, but once back on the real road, it would run a different engine management map and reduce the amount of AdBlue it was injecting.
But then it gets very murky... Some cars, for example, had "adaptive mapping". The emissions test drive cycle is (was) very precise and not especially representative of real world driving. As a result (either on a rolling road or a real road), the cars could be programmed to spot when they were being driven according to the drive cycle, and would behave differently. But is that actually cheating? The regulations say (in effect), "the emissions shall not exceed limits of x, y and z, when tested on the following drive cycle". So that's exactly what the cars were doing! Another manufacturer, would "optimise" his emissions performance, in the operating envelope that was part of the standard drive cycle, but wouldn't bother too much, outside of that. So is that manufacturer "cheating"? It's like almost every target-based assessment regime known to man. The people being assessed, focus on the things that are going to be checked! It happens with the police and crime statistics, the NHS and waiting times, the teachers and GCSE results...
Since then, of course, the EU Commission has massively overhauled and tightened its emissions testing processes. The new WLTP drive cycle is more representative of real life, and crucially, the test now includes a "Real Driving Emissions" test, where they use a portable gas analyser in the car, and they take it out on real roads to make sure it still behaves like it did on the rolling road (which would stop VW-style cheat).
saxavordian
Well-Known Member
Sounds like we've reached a finite point for piston engine emissions development. The more you have to clean it up to en'th degree, in effect cleaner than air, you still fall foul.
My guess is it not the emissions, but the sight of a car or any road vehicle that offends.
If the hanky lifting strugglers, are so offended by the sight an smells of the city towns villages, then what is their vision of the future.
Bicycle sorry rubber metal oil.
Ev vehicles sorry rubber metal oil.
Walking fine now but who made the roads pavement slaves!
I could add food not transported by carrier pigeon.
Indeed - and there are certainly plenty of people out there, who just hate cars. However, if we step out of the emotive arena and just take a cold, clinical look at the science, there's no doubt that transport emissions don't do us any good - particularly in cities. We kill about 10x more people each year by simply driving our cars (and other transport and NOx / particulate emitting activities) than we do by crashing into them or running them over. Put like that, it's a situation that demands we do something about it!
Sadly, however tough current "Euro 6" emissions regulations are, remember that they're already working on "Euro 7" - which will be even tougher...
And yes, as you mention, EVs (whilst a definite improvement) are not the final solution. The next big story that will dawn on the regulators' minds, is that tyre particulate emissions are almost 2000 times worse than tailpipe particulate emissions now...
Sadly, however tough current "Euro 6" emissions regulations are, remember that they're already working on "Euro 7" - which will be even tougher...
And yes, as you mention, EVs (whilst a definite improvement) are not the final solution. The next big story that will dawn on the regulators' minds, is that tyre particulate emissions are almost 2000 times worse than tailpipe particulate emissions now...
GrumpyGel
Well-Known Member
Yes, we should all strive to live longer, clinical, boring, less rewarding lives.
rob_bell
Well-Known Member
Not too much of a development cost for petrol K-series as from Euro 3 (2001) they were already Euro 4 compliant by NOx, and later Chinese era TFs were homologated to Euro 5 standards, so to be compliant you’d need the injectors, ECU map and the catalytic converters from those later cars to make them equivalent. It’s an off-the-shelf solution of bits potentially…
No, I have a piece installed that improves the combustion process of the fuel and with that reduces the emissions. I had talked to DVLA years ago, but that would need to go via MP, which is a bit ridiculous, but recently found that there might be upgrades to improve emissions 'officially'. If the smoke emissions shows that is in, then it's in. It reduces also co2 and due to more power it should have less NOx if I understand it correctly, but will check on that.
Ian M in France
Well-Known Member
All going to move to New Zealand
Ian M in France
Well-Known Member
If you believe the fact that a euro 6 emission diesel exhaust gasses are cleaner than the air going in the air filter in large cities you could say they are cleaning the dirty air which came from there and other (maybe electric cars) tyres ? better for cities than a electric car?
If you read a bit deeper than mainstream you might find out what it really was. An author said in an interview it was an attack on Germany.
Here is something from the manufacturer. It shows NOx as NO2 as mentioned on the bottom of the page. Shall be only outside as I was told. The reduction measured was about 50%.
Is it that MIRA Technology Park you're talking about? Yes, ULEZ would be the reason for me as well. I was in in touch with Emission Analytics some years ago to get my car tested, but they wanted about 8k for that. They have a tester the manufacturer in Austria used. In Germany you could rent directly as but here I only found that superexpensive company so far.I had been working on that via a link who had contacts with MIRA - the idea being for a more affordable test that would then be filed to the DVLA.
Unfortunately, COVID somewhat killed the momentum on this project
Might be worth re-investigating soon, if the whole of greater London starts being impacted by ULEZ charging, as there will be a greater market for those wanting to get their cars compliant with the regulations.
Yes, maybe setting up a website, where people could register if interested. How many cars did they say would be affected? 100,000?
PS Had a talk with someone from at the garage yesterday and he said there might also be people need changing jobs that can't afford to get another car, bur working in London. Maybe that's why they introduced the Elisabeth-Line to Reading.
Last edited:
Nodge68
Well-Known Member
I saw him on the news this morning, promoting his absolutely stupid scrappage scheme.
I can't see there being many takers of it TBH.
