VW cheat emissions test with "defeat device"

[Tim.Wright]

Personally I cringe when I hear expensive Merc's and BMW's clatter by me and wonder why someone would waste their money on a luxury vehicle only to power it with a glorified tractor motor!

Mmm, Tractor motors that happened to win Le Mans from 2006 to 2011, inclusive.....

In my opinion though this was due to the rules being changed to favour diesels for commercial reasons. Back in the days when there was only really Audi and Peugeot, both with diesel road cars to sell, the governing body had to keep them happy or be faced with zero manufacturer participation.

Its the same reason that we now have hybrids winning LeMans now. And the same reason we have 1.6L turbo hybrids in F1 now.

Not because they are the better technology, but because the manufacturers pressured the governing body into writing the rules to suit their commercial interests.

[machin]

Exactly... You don't see Diesel engined cars winning "open" series like Sprint/Hillclimb events.... But it is interesting to see Electric Cars getting better and better in those circumstances (slightly off topic I know)...

[DaveW]

Not because they are the better technology, but because the manufacturers pressured the governing body into writing the rules to suit their commercial interests.

Sorry Tim, I have to disagree. I'm not the only one who thinks so: a quote from an article in Popular Mechanics.

It was one manufacturer's recognition of the importance of fuel economy that changed everything. Audi decided to look at how to improve their vehicles' average speed at endurance events, and deduced that fewer fuel stops would be an integral key. Among the solutions was efficient diesel power. There was one big hurdle to overcome, however: Would the rules allow oil burners on the famed circuit in Sarthe, France?
To answer this question, ... Audi looked at the rules for Le Mans and saw caps on displacement but open rules regarding combustion cycles.
"Diesels could always run at Le Mans," says Scot Elkins, Vice President of Operations at the American Le Mans Series. "One of the great things about their rules package is that it allows for creative solutions," he says. "It's not at all like spec engine series. Audi was simply the first to realize what the rules allowed."

Exactly... You don't see Diesel engined cars winning "open" series like Sprint/Hillclimb events....

I think that the above quotation also addresses your comment...

But I made my post mainly to place the "Tractor Motor" remark into context....

[Tommy Cookers]

today's TV company-funded emissions tests show Eu5 and Eu6 cars emitting in-use NOx at about 4x statutory test limits
ie diesels are much less dirty than before, so city NOx levels are falling (as the motor trade body SMMT has said)
so where's the problem ? .... or the solution ?
(an official 2013 DEFRA study shows in-use emissions high and has suppressed data showing VW group's outstandingly emissions)

but Zac Goldsmith wants to be London Mayor, so says London should go EV (subsidised no doubt) 'to save thousands'
he says any expansion of London (Heathrow) airport will negate this

and all politicians still seem surprised that in-use emissions can be greater than emissions in statutory tests

[djos]

Personally I cringe when I hear expensive Merc's and BMW's clatter by me and wonder why someone would waste their money on a luxury vehicle only to power it with a glorified tractor motor!

Mmm, Tractor motors that happened to win Le Mans from 2006 to 2011, inclusive.....

Just because the rules favored them.

[Cold Fussion]

Not because they are the better technology, but because the manufacturers pressured the governing body into writing the rules to suit their commercial interests.

Sorry Tim, I have to disagree. I'm not the only one who thinks so: a quote from an article in Popular Mechanics.

It was one manufacturer's recognition of the importance of fuel economy that changed everything. Audi decided to look at how to improve their vehicles' average speed at endurance events, and deduced that fewer fuel stops would be an integral key. Among the solutions was efficient diesel power. There was one big hurdle to overcome, however: Would the rules allow oil burners on the famed circuit in Sarthe, France?
To answer this question, ... Audi looked at the rules for Le Mans and saw caps on displacement but open rules regarding combustion cycles.
"Diesels could always run at Le Mans," says Scot Elkins, Vice President of Operations at the American Le Mans Series. "One of the great things about their rules package is that it allows for creative solutions," he says. "It's not at all like spec engine series. Audi was simply the first to realize what the rules allowed."

Exactly... You don't see Diesel engined cars winning "open" series like Sprint/Hillclimb events....

I think that the above quotation also addresses your comment...

But I made my post mainly to place the "Tractor Motor" remark into context....

From memory there was no discrepancy in fuel tank size whether you ran a diesel or petrol engine in those early years of the R10 so by running a diesel engine you had an automatic gain of ~14% more fuel, before any combustion efficiency gains you might see. I think we also have to keep in mind that Audi was competing against privateers like Pescarolo, so they are likely to have won regardless of what engine technology they went for.

[strad]

Diesel is nasty dirty stuff that we shouldn't be using at all.
http://s22.photobucket.com/user/STRAD2/ ... 0.jpg.html

Why does that diesel burn locomotive have steam coming out of the bottom of it ?

etc....
You guys have no sense of humor.

[bdr529]

You guys have no sense of humor.

You clearly missed my last post

It's a coal burner,I was just having a little fun, this is a VW train
1954 Escher VW-Porsche Kleinbahn Prototype
http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h217/ ... ahdrc9.jpg

[DaveW]

Personally I cringe when I hear expensive Merc's and BMW's clatter by me and wonder why someone would waste their money on a luxury vehicle only to power it with a glorified tractor motor!

Mmm, Tractor motors that happened to win Le Mans from 2006 to 2011, inclusive.....

Just because the rules favored them.

Perhaps, or they favoured the rules, or (to quote:) "The impossible often has a kind of integrity which the merely improbable lacks."

Either which way, the result was unexpected at first, and routine (boring) at the end. I suspect the project has resulted in a step gain in fueling technology and exhaust treatments that has had, and will continue to have, benefits to all internal combustion engines.

[bdr529]

I can never understand it when people say this

Just because the rules favored them.

Anyone could have used a diesel engine, there was nothing in the rule book to stop them.
and if i recall they made the diesel carry less fuel the next year after Audi won

I first started to say a diesel could win the 24 hour back in 1983 after a trip to the 83 F1 race in Montreal.
While driving from the other side of Toronto to Montreal I got passed and then re-passed by the same Nissan Maximum twice,
and each time I caught back up to him, he was getting gas, while my 81 VW golf diesel just kept going, TO-MTL on one tank of fuel was no problem for me,
Whatever gain he got from driving faster, was lost the 2 times he had to stop and get gas.
And yes people thought I was crazy, they said a diesel was to slow, and not enough horsepower,
I always said you could make up the difference with less fuel stops.
granted I had to wait till 2004 for someone to at lest try it.

[Tommy Cookers]

presumably you were using about 50% of that car's quite low power, and so this was around best engine efficiency

these days most cars have so much power and low drag that (except in Germany) they are only using say 15% of it at legal speeds
not helpful even to diesel efficiency

emissions devices (without relief via economy/CO2) now add so much to first cost of small engined cars it makes them unpopular

[bdr529]

I'd say less then 50%, I was going about 110km/h, and from TO to MTL, it's pretty straight by North American standards and no real hills to mention of, That was the killer for the little 1.6L engine, a couple of passengers and a hill, or a little breeze
some years latter we (3 other guys) made it there and almost all the way back on one tank of fuel, (85 Golf diesel)
we weren't in a rush, middle of the night (they were having some beers) so I just sat behind a transport for the the whole trip there and back
VW actually used the Toronto to Montreal and Back on one tank as their TDI Clean Diesel ad campaign a few years back
Maybe not as clean as the said it was, but it did cover the 1100km on 1 tank
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCIrB1CpYmg

[djos]

I'd say less then 50%, I was going about 110km/h, and from TO to MTL, it's pretty straight by North American standards and no real hills to mention of, That was the killer for the little 1.6L engine, a couple of passengers and a hill, or a little breeze
some years latter we (3 other guys) made it there and almost all the way back on one tank of fuel, (85 Golf diesel)
we weren't in a rush, middle of the night (they were having some beers) so I just sat behind a transport for the the whole trip there and back
VW actually used the Toronto to Montreal and Back on one tank as their TDI Clean Diesel ad campaign a few years back
Maybe not as clean as the said it was, but it did cover the 1100km on 1 tank
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCIrB1CpYmg

I'd rather fill up my Mazda 3 every 700 kms and actually enjoy the drive! (That's 7 ltrs per 100 kms)

[Just_a_fan]

I'd rather fill up my Mazda 3 every 700 kms and actually enjoy the drive! (That's 7 ltrs per 100 kms)

There is no "enjoy the drive" when you're sat on a road that is straight for miles at a time...on something twisty then yes, the petrol might be more fun. Although I've driven diesels that are just as fun as petrols in the twisties. You just need to drive them the correct way and they're fun.

My current disel is most fun when the going gets lumpy and bumpy. But the excellent four wheel drive system helps there... On tarmac it's a big comfy cruiser.

Horses for courses, as the saying goes.

[bdr529]

I'd rather fill up my Mazda 3 every 700 kms and actually enjoy the drive! (That's 7 ltrs per 100 kms)

I was still racing motorcycles back then and that is all I could afford at the time.
Plus I don't recall a Mazda 3 back in the 80's or for that matter cars that could get 7 ltrs per 100 kms