ballaughbiker Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) 1 litre is not the same for every vehicle, thus taxing just fuel removes any incentive for waste emission reduction. quilp likes this It is near enough unless you are comparing say 1970 cars with anything in the last 10 years. Emissions are directly related to and in fact proportional to the amount fuel burnt. Cats and DPFs modify this to a degree but don't change the basic rule. Manufacturers also employ some really dodgy tricks to appear to be cleaner whilst the overall damage to the planet is likely worse. Unfortunately we have been brainwashed (some more than others if you read all those posts on VED threads) by those with a vested interest to readily make us believe modern cars are cleaner. They are only by their increased efficiency which is hardly the same argument. Unfortunately the tricks employed to lower one particular taxable emission is now reducing the life of the engines and manufacturers have made it clear they have gone about just about as far as they can without costing the planet in other ways. This will be the case until we do away with the internal combustion engine. Taxing fuel even more is the only fair way to encourage a reduction in car use, make those who are really doing the damage pay and to encourage more efficient vehicle purchase for those who sell every time the ashtray is full or it needs new tyres. Those like me who do minimal mileage with old but looked after cars get hammered for doing comparatively little damage. My 'daily' car is 15 years old as is Mrs Biker's. They will both do another 10 years unless the equally brainwashed politicians force them off the road and make us buy something cleaner, ignoring the inconvenient pollution caused by its manufacture and shorter life. I haven't had a FFS need this last day or to but I think this qualifies! Edited September 24, 2015 by ballaughbiker 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) Apparently the car's engine management software knew if it was on a rolling road and adjusted itself accordingly. Very clever. If only the car people put as much thought into designing more efficient engines. The computer had to be put into rolling road mode to prevent the traction control kicking in so it's just computer programming, nothing particularly clever. You're right though, a majority of advances in car technology in recent years has been to do with the control system, innovative engine design has been neglected. there is only so much energy in a gallon of fuel and there will be a cost balance in there somewhere. no point in getting 1000mpg if the car costs 10 million quid. more efficient cars push up the price of fuel as the government needs the income it produces. if we use less fuel the tax on it goes up, just like manx gas did with their fuel prices. this does hit the ballaugh bikers of the world who use more fuel cos they have older cars. the choice is spend little on car and lots on fuel, or lots on car and little on fuel, you have to spend one way or another. as I've said before, when electric cars get mainstream they will be taxed more heavily and the cost of the electric to charge them will go up too. we then end up where granny with no car ends up with more expensive electric cos it is now taxed more because people run their cars on it. I don't see what vw did as cheating exactly, they produced a vehicle that passed the tests it had to pass. like we all drove properly to pass our driving tests, but once we have our licence we don't drive in test passing mode anymore we speed a little and park badly and forget about mirrors and stop signs and develop new hand signals for drivers that piss us off. I'd say the test wasn't up to the job. even those that pass the test genuinely , if any, put out way more emissions in real world driving with heavy right feet etc. if you want to test emissions strap your testing equipment onto the car and drive on the roads, then see what results you get. Edited September 24, 2015 by WTF 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forestboy Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 You can bet our lot are going to find this a good excuse to increase the car road tax bands. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Back-dated too, I'd say ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) You haven't been paying attention WTF. I said I only do a thousand or so a year in the highly taxed vehicle so I probably use considerably less fuel in my thirsty old car than many commuters in their shiny new cars. My beef is that the total envionmental damage is completely ignored for one single taxable criterion and I'm taxed to the hilt for NOT using my "work" car. It should be the other way around. Use more - pay more. I pay about twice as much in road tax than I do in total fuel costs. It's mad unless you are the gov collecting the road tax! Edited September 24, 2015 by ballaughbiker 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwell Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Apparently the car's engine management software knew if it was on a rolling road and adjusted itself accordingly. Very clever. If only the car people put as much thought into designing more efficient engines. Try a Volvo V40 D2 - yesterday I was doing 80MPH on the M5 and it was returning ~80mpg - quite amazing. This is a very economical car. not to fix it isn't. plus the horrific street cred issues 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 We had a VW at one stage, so would we be entitled to sue VW for being fraudulent as it was bought at the time for fuel economy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 We had a VW at one stage, so would we be entitled to sue VW for being fraudulent as it was bought at the time for fuel economy? Isn't this about gas out, rather than gas in ..? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 We had a VW at one stage, so would we be entitled to sue VW for being fraudulent as it was bought at the time for fuel economy? Yes you should try taking VW Group to court. Lol. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Can't wait for ads for the "National VW Scandal Helpline" asking you if you've bought a veedub in the last 10 years. If so you could be due compensation. Ring this 0800 number now to discuss your claim with one of our legal experts..... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Some analysts saying great time to buy VW shares at the low price. Don't think I'll bother! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwell Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 We had a VW at one stage, so would we be entitled to sue VW for being fraudulent as it was bought at the time for fuel economy? This is about emissions, not economy. Everyone knows the economy figures are bollocks anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotsAlan Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 This is a big big issue really. Governments agree to pollution limits, and set targets for vehicle emissions. If the car passes the test, they are allowed to sell the car. VW cheated the Government test. But not only that, they cheated the entire international community who are trying to control air pollution. Basically, it seems the cars are able to pass the test, but with reduced performance. VW knew they could not sell the reduced performance cars, so they cheated. Potentially, an extra million tons of NOX was released into the atmosphere (so far) because of this cheat. The Guardian says this is more than all UK power stations, industry and agriculture produced in a year. VW agreed to meet standards, which Government set for health reasons. VW cheated and we have been breathing more NOX for years because of it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 We had a VW at one stage, so would we be entitled to sue VW for being fraudulent as it was bought at the time for fuel economy? This is about emissions, not economy. Everyone knows the economy figures are bollocks anyway. This is a very good point. No doubt the defence lawyers could use this as a gambit in court. "You know the fuel economy figures are bollocks. Why would you assume that the emissions figures are any different?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 You can bet our lot are going to find this a good excuse to increase the car road tax bands. And insurance. Motoring is about to get a whole lot more expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.