Bangers chat

[Chz]

Pretty much every manufacturer was at it.

Not every manufacturer had code in the computer to detect standardised tests and disable emissions controls for it, no. They were all tuning for the tests, such that Real World had literally nothing to do with test results, but the actually cheating part was fairly isolated.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Not every manufacturer had code in the computer to detect standardised tests and disable emissions controls for it, no. They were all tuning for the tests, such that Real World had literally nothing to do with test results, but the actually cheating part was fairly isolated.

If the stated emissions only apply to testing, and bear no relevance to the real world, is that not cheating?

 

[Chz]

If the stated emissions only apply to testing, and bear no relevance to the real world, is that not cheating?

If you don't perceive a difference between engineering specifically for a test and actively having the computer disable emissions controls then there's not a lot more I can say. Though I would point out that only two companies had to cough up fines for cheating - VAG and Cummins. BMW had a related fine for collusion, but not for actually defeating emissions devices.

 

[Saul Goodman]

If you don't perceive a difference between engineering specifically for a test and actively having the computer disable emissions controls then there's not a lot more I can say. Though I would point out that only two companies had to cough up fines for cheating - VAG and Cummins. BMW had a related fine for collusion, but not for actually defeating emissions devices.

I think quite a few more were at it.

Diesel emissions scandal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Chz]

I think quite a few more were at it.

Diesel emissions scandal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I'm just going to leave it at there being a line between "gaming" and "cheating". Neither are a good thing, though the EU tests pretty much encouraged it, but I still feel there's a difference between "our engines work best at a speed and temperature that just happens to be the same as the EU rolling test" and "fuck it, turn it all off when you detect a test running". Which only a handful of manufacturers were ever found to be doing.

I think we can all just be happy that they've made it harder to game the tests now (though I've actually got better mileage on a country A road than the official rating!). Yes, Real World is still not equal to test results, but they're a lot closer now and it's probably impossible to stop them from gaming a test that's published publicly. They still drive like a first timer who's terrified of everything, which is the main problem with it. The time for acceleration to 30mph is something ridiculous that would get angry drivers overtaking you on city roads.

 

[Saul Goodman]

I'm just going to leave it at there being a line between "gaming" and "cheating". Neither are a good thing, though the EU tests pretty much encouraged it, but I still feel there's a difference between "our engines work best at a speed and temperature that just happens to be the same as the EU rolling test" and "fuck it, turn it all off when you detect a test running". Which only a handful of manufacturers were ever found to be doing.

I think we can all just be happy that they've made it harder to game the tests now (though I've actually got better mileage on a country A road than the official rating!). Yes, Real World is still not equal to test results, but they're a lot closer now and it's probably impossible to stop them from gaming a test that's published publicly. They still drive like a first timer who's terrified of everything, which is the main problem with it. The time for acceleration to 30mph is something ridiculous that would get angry drivers overtaking you on city roads.

Did you even click on the link?

Example:

Opel/Vauxhall (General Motors)​

Opel, a German brand then-owned by General Motors, was caught using a defeat device in Europe in 2015.

The engine software changed the engine behavior based on whether two or four wheels were rotating. In an Opel Zafira front-wheel-drive vehicle, the NO<em>x</em> emissions were within the 80 mg/km legal limit – but only when the vehicle was on a test stand, with the front wheels rotating and the rear wheels being stationary. When the rear, unpowered wheels were made to rotate too (which is how a front-wheel-drive vehicle behaves on the road), the NO<em>x</em> emission were twice the limit (cold engine) or three to four times the limit (warmed-up engine).

If you don't consider that cheating then you must work for one of the manufacturers caught cheating.

 

[Chz]

Did you even click on the link?

Example:

If you don't consider that cheating then you must work for one of the manufacturers caught cheating.

I did, and that's a cheat for sure. But your assertion that "pretty much every" one of them were up to it is demonstrably false, even using your own data source.
(Fair enough, I'd certainly never buy a Vauxhall either. They're on The List with VAG.)

ETA: The current bending of the rules is the itty-bitty 1-1.4L turbo engines that when you drive like a granny in the tests return great mileage and start drinking the stuff the moment you want to actually start moving the car. They can only sip petrol under the very lightest use. Fiat had a 0.9L that under Real World scenarios drank more than the 1.5L it replaced. But it did great in the tests.