Should VW's dirty-diesel-debacle concern GM diesel owners?

[SnakeEyeSS]

Wow, VW admitted there are 10 million more vehicles outside the US that have the same software.

 

How many countries will follow the leader and fine?

 

VW said 7.8 Billion Will be set aside to deal it it.....uh, what about the other 11 billion for the US alone?

 

Imagine if France, Spain, the UK, Russia, Italy, etc join and hop on the dogpile? Bankrupt?

[Nargg]

My father owns a Cruze diesel. The emissions in that car are killing it! He has to take it for service due to a check engine light every few thousand miles because the emissions are getting constantly clogged up. Hat off to VW for taking a stance against this stupidity! Diesel engines are far less polluting that gas engines long term. And the EPA has gone overboard on them.

[Formulabruce]

1. In Germany, you can rent a Passat Diesel that will get you 80 mpg with 4 people in it< FACT> Same car in US ( different engine parts, NOT available in US) and you get 44-45 mpg. The Govt wants TAX MONEY from fuel MORE than any emissions reduction by fuel economy.

2. GM Diesels ( the Duramax, thanks Isuzu) Is typically ONLY installed in 2500HD and UP trucks which are exempt from cafe standards ( Note no MPG on the window sticker on these trucks) and are usually exempt from anything other than a check engine light at inspection, IF your state has inspections.

Hats off to VW , they had to make an engine Underperform to sell it here... sad

[MikeNH]

Fact: The imperial gallon and US gallon are quite different. Take off the foil hat.

[j-ten-ner]

Fact: in Germany, the fuel consumption is calculated in L / 100km.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

[Victor Ferreira]

You won't get 80 US mpg out of it, and it's important to note that the EU spec Passat is smaller than the US / China spec one.

 

What I don't get is why would VW risk so much for something that didn't give them that much back.

 

Oh, and as much as I hate the EPA, the guys bashing it are making no sense. EPA regulations are WAY lighter than Euro V and Euro VI norms.

 

In many european countries, cars have an emissions tax over their CO2 per km rating.

 

So no, in no way was this the EPA's fault (as much as I hate them).

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[j-ten-ner]

You won't get 80 US mpg out of it, and it's important to note that the EU spec Passat is smaller than the US / China spec one.

...

 

80 mpg ... unlikely but not impossible.

The Passat 1.6 TDI is rated at 3.3 L/100km (~71mpg) highway (or better: Autobahn... ). (EDIT: and manual transmission)

I don't know if the Passat in the US is available with the small diesel engine.

 

I didn't know it, so I had to look it up. Indeed, the US version is 10cm (~4") longer.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

[Chris]

Not only that but imperial gallon is a larger volume than a US gallon. Under proper conditions i can see 80 miles per imperial gallon.

[MikeNH]

 

80 mpg ... unlikely but not impossible.

The Passat 1.6 TDI is rated at 3.3 L/100km (~71mpg) highway (or better: Autobahn... ). (EDIT: and manual transmission)

I don't know if the Passat in the US is available with the small diesel engine.

 

I didn't know it, so I had to look it up. Indeed, the US version is 10cm (~4") longer.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

 

That 1.6 was an impressive little motor. Last year when I was there I ended up being the driver for our group in a Gulf wagon with the 1.6. And 5 of us crammed inside. I figured it'd be horrible but it drove ok.

 

As for units of measure, I figure those came from the VW UK site or similar as they'll measure MPG with the imperial gallon.

 

 

My point was there is no big conspiracy to give us in North America inefficient cars. Haha

[Nargg]

Just as a side note, I'm not against the EPA. But their approach to emissions control on diesels in the US makes no sense. It doesn't work. VW knew that. GM does to but they still sell it and it doesn't work. The EU methods have been in place a lot longer and work a lot better. Why did the EPA re-invent the wheel on this one and go with a stupid non-working solution?

[Formulabruce]

 

Fact: The imperial gallon and US gallon are quite different. Take off the foil hat.

 

I just checked with a friend who just got back. When re calculated for Gallons it was 69.7 MPG , and You CANNOT get that engine in the US, for reasons I stated about Fuel taxes.

[Formulabruce]

 

Just as a side note, I'm not against the EPA. But their approach to emissions control on diesels in the US makes no sense. It doesn't work. VW knew that. GM does to but they still sell it and it doesn't work. The EU methods have been in place a lot longer and work a lot better. Why did the EPA re-invent the wheel on this one and go with a stupid non-working solution?

 

YUP on OTR trucks tier 4 Diesels give off about 6 times the HEAT, require Blue DEF and much more maintenance. The HEAT ( much of which they say is "trapped" )seems to be of no concern in their utopian world.

[MikeNH]

  

I just checked with a friend who just got back. When re calculated for Gallons it was 69.7 MPG , and You CANNOT get that engine in the US, for reasons I stated about Fuel taxes.

 

It's probably not sold here cause it makes like no power.

[Victor Ferreira]

It's probably not sold here cause it makes like no power.

And bingo.

 

Automakers could easily offer those cars here, but most Americans simply would not give a Passat with 105hp any thought.

 

Again, reasons why we don't get Mercedes C180s, BMW 316s, and so forth.

 

It's not so much a regulations or legal issue as much as it is a marketability one.

 

Would we all like cars that get 70 mpg highway? Sure. Would we be ok with those cars taking 14 seconds to get to 70 mph? Probably not.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[j-ten-ner]

...Sure. Would we be ok with those cars taking 14 seconds to get to 70 mph? Probably not.

 

lol...you're funny

 

so long

j-ten-ner