Auto Express reveals the truth ! ! ! !

[verytalldave]

An article in todays Daily Mail reports that a forthcoming article in the weekly UK car magazine "Auto Express" reveals the true facts and figures behind the so-called 'ECO CARS' and that they are not as green as their makers claim.
Makes for very interesting reading..............

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=567174&in_page_id=1770

Also, unrelated, I heard last week that both Mitsubishi and Subaru fit "performance packs" to their performance cars AFTER registration to get into lower emission zones.
Apparently the packs are fitted to cars after registration automatically to by-pass emission regulations.
I can see this loophole being closed soon and the MOT being used to measure the cars TRUE CO2 emissions to calculate VED.

 

[recycled]

I can see the mot being used to calculate mileage to pay for last years miles. Kind of like back tax end of year declaration. if you sell in between, you have to pay up till that period and the fine for clocked dashboards will be £2k or 10years in jail

 

[Dieselman]

You might as well have the proper article instead of the rubbish from the cesspit of spin.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/grouptests/221616/the_clean_machines.html


I'm surprised they haven't siezed on this one in their quest to depress.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/221658/biofuel_bacteria_wrecks_engines.html

 

[BTB 500]

Also, unrelated, I heard last week that both Mitsubishi and Subaru fit "performance packs" to their performance cars AFTER registration to get into lower emission zones.

I heard VW dealers do something similar with the Polo Bluetec (fitting aircon?).

 

[CiaranMcKeown]

The worst offender in the checks by Auto Express magazine was Honda's Civic Hybrid. It was found to emit 171g/km compared to the 109g/km claimed - 56 per cent more.

Very very naughty.

Surely there are legal implecations for things like this, that proposterous!

 

[Carrotchomper]

This tripe all goes to prove one thing- That taxing on CO2 emissions is deeply flawed. Most of the new "Eco" ranges are based on, to some part, minor subterfuge and have little relation to real world figures.

Like the BMW diesels that stop the engine at traffic lights, or indeed the VWs with retro-fit aircon!

What we are creating is a massive and unwieldy system which will be exploited by major manufacturers in ever-more devious ways. And which feeds the "envy tax" enthusiasm in our glorious leaders.

I still think we've already got a perfectly good road tax, which is based on a complex equation depending on how much you use your car, how thirsty it is, and how much time you spend sitting in stop-start traffic. If you use your car more, it costs more.

Oh, that's called fuel duty. It's a bit easier to administrate than RFL!

 

[recycled]

carrying a single passenger, or a spare wheel in your blue motion will knock up the co2

 

[jrggino]

Eco Cars

I have been monitoring 2 cars , old cars one was a citroen zx 1.9td which i have sold now, and when i took this car to my MOT Station I was very intrested in the smoke test. The car was old 145k the year before i had trouble getting it through the smoke test. This year after some miles on 50-50 veg oil it passed on the first pump of the accelerator. so the first test was .54 so there was no need for the normal 5 pumps to get the average. I sold this car and now i run an astra 1.7td izzue engine. I needed the mot and again .80 on the first pump. The chaps at the garage have said all the cars they have had in running on veg oil have passed with flying colours even passing better than newer cars which come in.
Sorry i go on to much, i was going to say i should pay road tax on how clean my car is not the age or year it was produced.
My car is much kinder to the enviorment, infact better than the new cars out there today. Some thing should be done like chargeing us on how well maintanied and clean our cars are to wha we pay on road tax. and the goverment should introduce zero tax on cooking oil.

 

[st4]

You might as well have the proper article instead of the rubbish from the cesspit of spin.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/grouptests/221616/the_clean_machines.html


I'm surprised they haven't siezed on this one in their quest to depress.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/221658/biofuel_bacteria_wrecks_engines.html

I assume if it came from the Gaurdian you'd call it Shakespearian excellence I think words like rubbish and cesspit are a tad strong....

 

[Rory]

This tripe all goes to prove one thing- That taxing on CO2 emissions is deeply flawed. Most of the new "Eco" ranges are based on, to some part, minor subterfuge and have little relation to real world figures.

Like the BMW diesels that stop the engine at traffic lights, or indeed the VWs with retro-fit aircon!

What we are creating is a massive and unwieldy system which will be exploited by major manufacturers in ever-more devious ways.

Indeed - there was quite heated discussion on here about this some time ago with me saying that some manufactuers, especially BMW with stop / start and M Power switches, were verging on fiddling the system and another poster saying that couldn't possibly be true, as it wouldn't be allowed!

One common area to be aware of is that fitting bigger wheels can bump up the tax band. This has been an issue in London for Mercedes S Class when it looked like the £25 congestion charge was coming. Factory fit 18" wheels and the car goes into the top band, fit the wheels at the dealer after registration and it stays in the band below.

 

[st4]

Fuel duty, as horrific as it is can discrimate between all these wee mods one does to a car to evade VED. The more you use the more you pay. Simple. VED should be a flat rate band, £100 for all cars. End of.

Fuel duty carries out the governments sick desires of penalising the motorists. Personally they should bring back VAT bands and do away with fuel duty. i.e. VAT band of 20% and thats it for fuel.

 

[Dragon]

I have been monitoring 2 cars , old cars one was a citroen zx 1.9td which i have sold now, and when i took this car to my MOT Station I was very intrested in the smoke test. The car was old 145k the year before i had trouble getting it through the smoke test. This year after some miles on 50-50 veg oil it passed on the first pump of the accelerator. so the first test was .54 so there was no need for the normal 5 pumps to get the average. I sold this car and now i run an astra 1.7td izzue engine. I needed the mot and again .80 on the first pump. The chaps at the garage have said all the cars they have had in running on veg oil have passed with flying colours even passing better than newer cars which come in.
Sorry i go on to much, i was going to say i should pay road tax on how clean my car is not the age or year it was produced.
My car is much kinder to the enviorment, infact better than the new cars out there today. Some thing should be done like chargeing us on how well maintanied and clean our cars are to wha we pay on road tax. and the goverment should introduce zero tax on cooking oil.

Where can you buy veg oil to fuel car? You meant those veg oil in plastic bottles from supermarket? I only noted veg oil being used in buses that shuttle between Reading rail station and Green Park. Don't know where they got it.

 

[verytalldave]

Friends of mine mention Costco as a possible source.
Ask your local Fish'n'chip shop where he buys his. He may even give/sell you his old oil.

 

[wemorgan]

This tripe all goes to prove one thing- That taxing on CO2 emissions is deeply flawed. Most of the new "Eco" ranges are based on, to some part, minor subterfuge and have little relation to real world figures.

It's not just limited to 'eco' cars. I've been told many VAG petrol engines use a secondary air pump for the exhaust emissions on cold start-up, thus fooling the emission sensors, but in practicality increase fuel consumption.

 

[st4]

Ah yes, Euro 4 engines allegedly use more fuel than euro 3. Where is the progress in that...

 

[hawk20]

You might as well have the proper article instead of the rubbish from the cesspit of spin.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/grouptests/221616/the_clean_machines.html


I'm surprised they haven't siezed on this one in their quest to depress.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/221658/biofuel_bacteria_wrecks_engines.html

Odd you say that. It looked a very fair report to me. As so many of their reports often are. Good to have some sources who don't just print govt spin.

 

[Dieselman]

I assume if it came from the Gaurdian you'd call it Shakespearian excellence

Nope, Never read it but I'm sure that's biased as well, just the other way.

I think words like rubbish and cesspit are a tad strong....

Really.?? I was being polite..

The problem with the Daily Mail is that it's a political opinion paper masquerading as a newspaper.

If they stuck to fact it would command a lot more respect.

This piece highlights this. They took a news article from another journal and applied their spin with NO RESEARCH of their own. (fairly common trait which shows no journalistic will or flair)

Low emission 'eco cars' release up to one and a half times as much carbon dioxide as their makers claim, according to road tests.
Three 'environmentally friendly' models performed so poorly that they were branded gimmicks that cash in on growing concern about global warming.


The bald fact is that ALL cars fail miserably against their rated Co2 outputs, so why should 'Eco' cars be different.
It's only a comparison.

But we have no indication of how these cars were driven during their tenure with Autoexpress so have nothing to base these results on.

If you took one of our typical cars with a Co2 rating of 200g/km I'd be surprised if it was any better in percentage terms compared to the ones tested.
That would mean it was really outputting 280g/km.

I've attached a document to show the amount these cars underperformed against the published data.
Some while ago we had a poster with a BMW540, which oddly enough the model designation exactly matched it's Co2 output.

Puts the Eco cars into perspective.

Anyone can work out their actual Co2 output if they know their real mpg.

 

[st4]

Nope, Never read it but I'm sure that's biased as well, just the other way.


Really.?? I was being polite..

The problem with the Daily Mail is that it's a political opinion paper masquerading as a newspaper.

If they stuck to fact it would command a lot more respect.

This piece highlights this. They took a news article from another journal and applied their spin with NO RESEARCH of their own. (fairly common trait which shows no journalistic will or flair)

Low emission 'eco cars' release up to one and a half times as much carbon dioxide as their makers claim, according to road tests.
Three 'environmentally friendly' models performed so poorly that they were branded gimmicks that cash in on growing concern about global warming.


The bald fact is that ALL cars fail miserably against their rated Co2 outputs, so why should 'Eco' cars be different.
It's only a comparison.

But we have no indication of how these cars were driven during their tenure with Autoexpress so have nothing to base these results on.

If you took one of our typical cars with a Co2 rating of 200g/km I'd be surprised if it was any better in percentage terms compared to the ones tested.
That would mean it was really outputting 280g/km.

I've attached a document to show the amount these cars underperformed against the published data.
Some while ago we had a poster with a BMW540, which oddly enough the model designation exactly matched it's Co2 output.

Puts the Eco cars into perspective.

Anyone can work out their actual Co2 output if they know their real mpg.

So that explains why the Prius is the worst performer relative to its claimed MPG than any other car

You rightly point out that CO2 output can be worked out from MPG so the manufacturer derived figure, and whats attainable in the real world may be very different just how claimed MPG vs. real world MPG.

Eco cars are marketed purely on their CO2 out put, thats why the DM did its "expose" on them, to illustrate that they are a marketing sham. 2 of the top 3 offenders (by deviaton from manufactuers CO2) are hybrids...now how are they marketed again?

 

[verytalldave]

The problem with the Daily Mail is that it's a political opinion paper masquerading as a newspaper.........

You name me one UK newspaper that isnt.

 

[hawk20]

You name me one UK newspaper that isnt.

Or TV channel. Watch the BBC childrens' programmes. Loads of time they are pressing the 'save the planet', 'global warming' green meesage with no qualifications and no sense that a huge number of scientists do not accept the flimsy evidence so far.

Thank goodness for the wide variety of media and that we do hear a range of views.