- Joined
- Mar 14, 2021
- Messages
- 817
- Reaction score
- 646
- Location
- Australia
- VCDS Serial number
- C?ID=433612
I dont think I want to try that theory out
EXTRA EXTRA READ ALL ABOUT IT GENERAL NEWS THREAD ANYTHING GOES!
- Thread starter Jack@European_Parts
- Start date
The cops are NOT shooting first and asking questions later. That's false allegations by the lying media. We see this criminal behavior by evil media frequently - especially when it comes to guns. It's disgusting.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 3,640
- Reaction score
- 3,127
- Location
- Nottingham, England
- VCDS Serial number
- C?ID=21420
Not at all, four percent (4%) are licenced to carry guns, but not all do, and when they do, they are in specialist armed response units. "There were 4 incidents in which police firearms were discharged (fired) at persons in the year ending 31 March 2025. This number was 2 in the year ending 31 March 2024"
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2015
- Messages
- 4,381
- Reaction score
- 3,204
- Location
- Milwaukee, Wisconsin USA
- VCDS Serial number
- C?ID=174556
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 3,640
- Reaction score
- 3,127
- Location
- Nottingham, England
- VCDS Serial number
- C?ID=21420
The car design industry needs to push a fucking big reset button...
Ugh, even Audi is doing the "squinty" split headlight garbage now. 
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 3,640
- Reaction score
- 3,127
- Location
- Nottingham, England
- VCDS Serial number
- C?ID=21420
Give me a pair of big round ones...
They'll figure it out eventually after more citizens and cops are killed. We live in a much different world than 50 years ago. The crims know they have the upper hand with guns.Not at all, four percent (4%) are licenced to carry guns, but not all do, and when they do, they are in specialist armed response units. "There were 4 incidents in which police firearms were discharged (fired) at persons in the year ending 31 March 2025. This number was 2 in the year ending 31 March 2024"
Many car companies are desperate to come up with some new gimmick to get customers to buy the latest products. It often backfires when consumers just say "NO".Ugh, even Audi is doing the "squinty" split headlight garbage now.
I'm already saying "NO" to any vehicle with SFD or SFD2 on it. The squinty headlights are entirely irrelevant unless/until they completely reverse course on this anti-consumer dealer-profit-protection bullshit.
Unfortunately in VAG's case (as well as all the other European manufacturers) this SFD crap is required by European regulations, specifically UNECE R 155 and/or UNECE R 156.
Now the reality is, they could sell cars in our market without it, as evidenced by some models that are still sold here, but aren't for sale in Europe anymore because they don't comply with those regulations.
So in principle, VAG could make its entire lineup more consumer friendly in our market by turning that SFD crap off, but they don't really have much of an incentive to do that. Even if some of us go on a buyer's strike and the sales fall, they won't understand why, and the chances of many people doing it are low. I mean, we get long time VCDS users turning up on a regular basis who just bought a brand-new car, who had no idea that the newer ones are as locked down as they are.
-Uwe-
I think it's far simpler than that. VAG only really makes money from two sources: new vehicle sales and their cut from dealer after-sales support. They are monetarily incentivized to ensure that everything routes through dealerships rather than 3rd party service centers. This is evidenced by how hostile VAG has always been towards retrofits - they want you to buy the car pre-equipped with all the options rather than adding them yourself after the fact because they make more money on the vehicle sale that way.
I think your original definition tooltip for SFD is exactly right: there may be specific legal pressures in certain regions, but applying those concepts wholesale is beneficial to their bottom line because they get to charge more and force people to use dealer services.
I can't speak to VW's "motivation" regarding SFD but I know that after they got persecuted in the U.S. for Dieselgate, replacement parts prices in the U.S. dramatically increased - presumably to pay the $2.8 billion U.S. fine. With many of the German car makers eventually getting caught manipulating Diesel emissions, VW probably got the most abuse from the EPA because the EPA has zero accountability to anyone - which is rather strange IMO.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2022
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 8
- Location
- Michigan, USA
- VCDS Serial number
- C?ID=506336
Mfgs get caught violating the EPA rules all the time. They either satisfactorily explain why whatever it is doesn't break the rules or accept the violation, take any punishment and move on. Maybe VW's punishment was influenced by VW management's decision to outright lie and then to stick with the lie even after there was indisputable proof they used defeat device software?
What on earth was VW thinking??
What on earth was VW thinking??
I'm 100% opposed to violating law. To this day it's unclear how many people were actually involved in the scandal. AFAIK it was a small group and they should all be held accountable IMO.
As far as what VW was thinking... They were trying to meet extrordinary/absurd EPA mandated emissions requirements because the EPA wanted to kill Diesel sales in the U.S. No other country in the world at the time had such stringent, arbitrary, unilateral Diesel emissions requirements. Later Urrup would adopt the impossible to meet U.S. regs (at the time). IMO it was a conspiracy by the EPA/administration to eliminate consumer choice in the U.S. market because Big Brother decided that Diesels were the root cause of all climate issues.
That being said, the individuals at VW who perpetuated the fraud were stupid, criminal and irresponsible for trying to violate the regulations. Had the U.S. required similar emissions to Urrup and the rest of the world none of the car makers would have needed/wanted to violate law to sell their vehicles in the U.S.
As far as what VW was thinking... They were trying to meet extrordinary/absurd EPA mandated emissions requirements because the EPA wanted to kill Diesel sales in the U.S. No other country in the world at the time had such stringent, arbitrary, unilateral Diesel emissions requirements. Later Urrup would adopt the impossible to meet U.S. regs (at the time). IMO it was a conspiracy by the EPA/administration to eliminate consumer choice in the U.S. market because Big Brother decided that Diesels were the root cause of all climate issues.
That being said, the individuals at VW who perpetuated the fraud were stupid, criminal and irresponsible for trying to violate the regulations. Had the U.S. required similar emissions to Urrup and the rest of the world none of the car makers would have needed/wanted to violate law to sell their vehicles in the U.S.
The European regulations may not have been quite a strict as ours at the time, but the same generation of cars were also found to exceed the NOx limits in Europe. Ask the Brits about the "fix fail" updates their cars got as a result.
-Uwe-
For comparison... when VW was exposed for Dieselgate, General Motors was discovered to have had a defective ignition switch that GM knew about (for over 10 years), that had resulted in 120+ deaths at the time. The EPA fined GM $900 million (vs. VW's $2.8 BILLION fine for no deaths), and allowed GM to settle lawsuits privately. This was pure politics and negligence by the EPA, IMO.
And that wasn't the whole story. The EPA forced VW to buy back all of the non-compliant vehicles and retrofit emissions equipment or destroy them. But wait, there is more... the EPA also forced VW to buy back prior generation Diesel models that 100% complied with all emissions requirements at the time of sale. That's right the EPA forced VW to buy back an entire generation of Diesels that met all federal and state emissions laws at the time of sale.
EDIT: And we should not forget that the EPA fined Audi/Porsche and forced them to stop selling the fully emission compliant V6 Diesel because the rocket scientists at the EPA did not understand what a heated cleaning cycle was on the emissions equipment - which actually produced LOWER emissions. Most auto makers selling Diesels adopted this useful tech.
That's how unscrupulous the EPA was.
And that wasn't the whole story. The EPA forced VW to buy back all of the non-compliant vehicles and retrofit emissions equipment or destroy them. But wait, there is more... the EPA also forced VW to buy back prior generation Diesel models that 100% complied with all emissions requirements at the time of sale. That's right the EPA forced VW to buy back an entire generation of Diesels that met all federal and state emissions laws at the time of sale.
EDIT: And we should not forget that the EPA fined Audi/Porsche and forced them to stop selling the fully emission compliant V6 Diesel because the rocket scientists at the EPA did not understand what a heated cleaning cycle was on the emissions equipment - which actually produced LOWER emissions. Most auto makers selling Diesels adopted this useful tech.
That's how unscrupulous the EPA was.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 3,640
- Reaction score
- 3,127
- Location
- Nottingham, England
- VCDS Serial number
- C?ID=21420
Diesel gate was caused by unelected European enviromentalists [sic] and their crazy obsession with reducing road transport Co2 emissions which started with the knee jerk reaction of pushing Diesel only to find the crap out the back was actually killing people now, not making the tide get a bit higher in a hundred years or so, maybe. So they panicked and forced Band Aid fix solutions that used immature and unreliable technologies. Then the EPA cranked it up a notch for cars that are what proportion of US sales? 5%? So that 5% markets software was stored in the rest of the worlds EA189 engine ECU’s but it wasn’t really needed here, only the CAY series EA189 benefited from it. The whole palaver was a pointless shit show, the number of cars running around now with all that crap removed must be far worse; the only beneficiaries of the sketch were ambulance chasing lawyers.
Last edited:
This just in... More stupidity from the climate extremists that tax payers are paying for.
As if this insanity wasn't already known before pissing away the money! Perhaps climate extremists aren't allowed to live in VT or elsewhere where winter temps drop below 41 F.
Last edited: