Club Touareg Forum banner

41 - 60 of 84 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
Discussion Starter #41
Why did you even buy a TDI with a cr*ppy short commute like that? And people say you're smart? Whole drive train never even gets warmed up to correct operating temps with that distance. Let alone trying to complete a DPF regeneration.

Should have bought anything but a TDI for that kind of drive. SMH.
Coolant and oil get to operating temperature very quickly. I don't have a DPF so I don't have to worry about regeneration :) On the weekends it gets taken for long hard drives.

This is a modern diesel engine, not something from the '50s. It will be fine. I'm a heavy duty equipment technician and deal with diesel engines all day, mostly with 15+ litre displacement that idle all day. I'm not ignorant to what I'm doing lol.

Some of y'all need to chill.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
I guess it gets lost on enthusiasts here that driving is a privilege, not a right.

Kind of means you get regulated and need to follow rules for having the privilege, by the folks that provide the infrastructure for you to use that privilege, your government, and the roads you drive on, or the privilege gets removed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
Because at the point in time when I bough it I had no clue about diesel technology, at all? Not that MY car would actually emit more pollutants and carcinogens than necessary - because, you know, it still has it's DPF, EGR, etc. in place and working, which in turn do their job, and filter out most of the bad stuff. And I actually just fixed some minor problem with these recently, which caused no practical problems for me, but because I was just bothered by the fact that in some cases it emitted a little more stuff, than it should have under optimal conditions.

I go out of my way to do everything to keep my car's emission at the minimum possible. A person who deletes his car's DPF does the exact opposite of that, and puts his extra effort into making it even higher than it would be anyway (regardless of this likely not being his primary goal). So, don't even try to somehow draw a parallel between us, because we're actually at the opposite, very far ends of the same scale.


Would that lower the emission of this particular car, or that of humanity as a whole? Obviously it wouldn't, not even a single microgram. Because this very car would still be driven by someone else, and would keep emitting the same amount of stuff. Or possibly even more, if that person would delete the DPF, or would not take as good care of the car as I do.

Or should I scrap it, and buy a new one instead of it? What do you think how much pollution manufacturing all the components, building, transporting that car to me, etc. does create? Do you really think the net emission saving between the emissions created by my "old" car and a new, possibly more efficient one would be more, than how much extra emission building and delivering that new car to me would generate? Because it wouldn't be not even close.

So, then why would I do that - even if I'd have the funds for that? Or what did you mean to say or imply there?


This thread wasn't about judgement until someone tried to defend an illegal act by trying to poke fun of those who pointed out the act to be illegal. So, is your problem being judgemental? Because then you're definitely complaining at the wrong point of time and to the wrong person. Even now I'm not arguing based on moral grounds, but based on hard facts and logic. Or is your actual problem more that there have been valid and pretty much irrefutable points brought up against DPF delete, both on legal, health, and also on environmental grounds?

Most of my questions are obviously rhetoric.

Dude take your rhetoric and shove it. All these emissions standards are only for one reason and one reason only- MONEY. Until humans find a way around using fossil fuels, mining toxic metals like lithium, figuring out how to dispose of all this waste we create without dumping it into the ocean or landfills, all these emissions requirements are a FU$$ING joke. ALL OF THEM. Want to eliminate most of of the worlds polluters, wipe India and China off the map. And thats a fact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
Good morning all! I love this thread..... best derailment ever!

Everyone has some point of view, but unless you all feed on carrots only (yes, I'm suggesting every contributor to this thread is a donkey), you cannot possibly stand behind all the limited perspective comments you are making (myself included).

It's true, we all play an important role. Pollution, cancer, and killing the planet are all very complex subjects and not really a topic for this forum, but perhaps we can start a "save the planet thread" and go nuts. There is so much BAD stuff we all do, we all use, we all consume, etc. in our daily lives that we are hurting the environment and future of the planet. I'd love to argue with you all about all these points until all our DPFs clog up and we all scrap our Touaregs, but we would still never see eye-to-eye.

I will now refrain from going on, as the simple action of me participating in internet activity is actually contributing to hurting the environment. In order to have a server to host this board, there's dirty electricity being consumed, which is more likely than not being created by burning coal or other fossil fuels, and thus creating harmful emissions. Not to mention that I'm also supporting Google and their server farms, and if we were to even consider the COOLING required by any data center of that magnitude, we would realize that all the cost of just storing our exponentially expanding data is another massive contributor to all the stuff we are all bitching about in this thread.

Everyone calm your tits and realize that you're all polluters no matter what you think the rest of us are doing.

Group buy on Teslas anyone? Speaking of Teslas, why doesn't our government follow Norway's example and provide massive incentives for driving electric cars? Those guys really have their crap together when it comes to their carbon footprint!

Yea because lithium is such an eco friendly metal to mine. lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
Dude take your rhetoric and shove it.
Translation: I don't have a counterargument, but I don't want to admit you're right either, because then I'd have to admit I'm doing the wrong thing. I get it.

All these emissions standards are only for one reason and one reason only- MONEY.
Your theory would only make sense if emission standards couldn't have been possibly met. But with things like DPF they are. So, nobody's getting money from this. In reality the opposite is true what you're implying. Money is the reason why are NOT having even stricter emission standards. Because that would mean companies would have to spend a lot more on R&D, they could make and sell less products (or only cars with smaller engines, for obviously less money), big oil's sales would plummet, etc.

Until humans find a way around using fossil fuels
We already did. Have you been living under a rock for the past century? The problem is not that we have not found other ways, but that people refuse to adopt those technologies. Like by saying stuff that "all these emissions requirements are a FU$$ING joke".

mining toxic metals like lithium
Did you know that lithium is actually used also as a medication for humans?

figuring out how to dispose of all this waste we create without dumping it into the ocean or landfills
We've already figured out that one too: recycling, and not creating that much waste in the first place. But even if we wouldn't have, that would be just one more reason to cut emissions and waste the more where we can, like with DPFs and similar stuff.

all these emissions requirements are a FU$$ING joke.
They're essential steps to reach a goal gradually. Which is mostly hindered by naysayers asserting that if we can't change things gradually or every one of us do his little part that adds up, then we shouldn't even try in the first place.

ALL OF THEM. Want to eliminate most of of the worlds polluters, wipe India and China off the map. And thats a fact.
It's not. For ex. the US emits twice as much CO2 than India, even in absolute terms. And per capita the US emits 2x as much as does China, and 9x as much as India. These are the actual facts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
It is amazing that occasionally somebody will chime in about how wrong it is to do a delete and tune, and continue the argument in post after post. The attempt to raise everyone’s social conscious is commendable- only to a point. I don’t think the point of this thread or even this forum is right vs. wrong. It’s about what is.... People will continue to do what they do.
So perhaps a different thread, section or even forum can be a place for that kind of discussion. Time to get back to the OP?




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
It is amazing that occasionally somebody will chime in about how wrong it is to do a delete and tune, and continue the argument in post after post.
It's amazing how somebody will not comprehend that this is not about some abstract morality, even after that has been explicitly pointed out. It's about facts, regarding legality, health and environmental impacts, and basics of mathematics. It's also amazing how the very same person who has obviously no problems with the pro-delete, pro-pollution comments continuing the argument (let alone starting it in the first place), is irritated over comments pointing out the flawed logic and factually false data in the former.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
Discussion Starter #50
Thank you, next.

Back to our regularly scheduled programming.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,007 Posts
That's it, I'm installing another DPF...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
Discussion Starter #53
We’ve got a ‘72 Hyster forklift with a Perkins diesel in it, I bet it pollutes more than half the TDIs on here combined. I should probably put a DPF on it as well. :lol:

I should put one on my Onan generator as well. That should balance out any “extra” emissions from my Touareg. :grin2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
Some valid arguments, but WOW what a crazy Ivan turn off the tracks we have taken here. Apparently hackles are up and for further entertainment and provocation....

What should be done about those owners with <2012 models, that for some reason, have chosen to keep their vehicles vice returning them to VW? Or those with 2013 and later who have elected not to apply the EPA/CARB approved emissions modification?

I don’t care what someone drives or what they do to it.
Drive a hybrid, gasser, diesel, electric, whatever suits them. If primary concern is emissions, perhaps a choice other than a TDI is appropriate.

And what of those that keep their gasser vehicle in a
barely running state or those with under inflated tires. What of their pollution contribution?

Don’t recall starting it but it has been an interesting dialogue.

Over and out..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
Translation: I don't have a counterargument, but I don't want to admit you're right either, because then I'd have to admit I'm doing the wrong thing. I get it.


Your theory would only make sense if emission standards couldn't have been possibly met. But with things like DPF they are. So, nobody's getting money from this. In reality the opposite is true what you're implying. Money is the reason why are NOT having even stricter emission standards. Because that would mean companies would have to spend a lot more on R&D, they could make and sell less products (or only cars with smaller engines, for obviously less money), big oil's sales would plummet, etc.


We already did. Have you been living under a rock for the past century? The problem is not that we have not found other ways, but that people refuse to adopt those technologies. Like by saying stuff that "all these emissions requirements are a FU$$ING joke".


Did you know that lithium is actually used also as a medication for humans?


We've already figured out that one too: recycling, and not creating that much waste in the first place. But even if we wouldn't have, that would be just one more reason to cut emissions and waste the more where we can, like with DPFs and similar stuff.


They're essential steps to reach a goal gradually. Which is mostly hindered by naysayers asserting that if we can't change things gradually or every one of us do his little part that adds up, then we shouldn't even try in the first place.


It's not. For ex. the US emits twice as much CO2 than India, even in absolute terms. And per capita the US emits 2x as much as does China, and 9x as much as India. These are the actual facts.
Did I stutter? Take your rhetoric and shove it! You have no facts. And you’re a hypocrite driving a diesel Touareg, any Touareg for that matter. You europoors want socialism so bad you’ll import the third world to come replace you as you try to make countries like mine pay for your environmental programs. See my link for one example as to how your “facts” are flawed as is your reasoning behind why you get so assmad about someone removing the flawed dpf system in these vehicles.

https://www.vfa-solutions.com/en/air-quality-yale
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
Did I stutter? Take your rhetoric and shove it!
I already told you I accept your admission of not having any logical argument. Why do you keep repeating it? Do you think saying "shove it" repeatedly (or even once) will somehow magically make you "win" this argument, and not just prove more and more that you have nothing on your side? Why would you think that? Why would you have to keep falling back over and over to cussing and calling names if you could actually argue rationally?

You have no facts.
You not acknowledging the facts don't make them any less of a fact. It just makes obvious that you're not aware of them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions

And you’re a hypocrite driving a diesel Touareg, any Touareg for that matter.
Yeah, that has been already addressed too. Feel free to read back! And even if I would be a hypocrite, it would still not invalidate the points I made about the DPF, and still wouldn't change the fact that you calling me a hypocrite is just another logical fallacy. Well, actually two.

You europoors want socialism so bad
How many times do I have to tell you, that I accept your admission of not having a rational argument for what you say? You don't have to come up with newer and newer logical fallacies - like this ad hominem attack - to prove that you're incapable of a logical discussion. We get it.

why you get so assmad
There's obviously only one person being mad here. And that's you. Which is completely understandable, considering that you cling on to arguments you definitely have no rationale for. Well, other than "I want it that way, because of reasons", of course.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
gnits is sounding like one of these super- green kraut hypocrites! for sure voting for merkel, some socialists or/ and the greens; gnits, are you a member of the duh (german enviromental help organization)? and also supporting the vegan movement in their task to save the world?
I personally think we all should drive our Touaregs the way we want it and have a nice steak!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
lol. I read through this whole thread. Everyone has some good points. Some facts & some guesses.

Yes, the USA is top 3 of world polluters and as pointed out, top per capita. With that said, I don't have a problem with someone removing emission components to prolong their engine life ( and yes it will ) & gain fuel mileage, even if it is a small amount. Bottom line is better fuel mileage means one is burning less fuel period. That never seems to be brought up in these discussions. Burning less has a bigger effect in total. Less the refineries have to run, less the pipelines have to push, less the big tankers have to deliver the fuels to the pumping stations, less out of ones pocket. It all adds up. The electric cars may not pollute but it sure does take a lot of polluting to make the batteries for these cars & the batteries will have to be changed out at least once for the life of the car. Not to mention most countries have to either burn fossil fuels to make their power to supply charging power for them. So they are not as friendly to the environment as the gov wants you to believe. But then again, the figures are the electric car will cost one upwards of 7 times as much in the life of the car as it's equal in a gas or diesel vehicle. Gov makes more $ on taxes, right.

Years ago when Ford came out with the 6.4L Power Joke, their trucks on average got 9mpg.....sure it had every pollution control gizmo one could shake a stick at. California EPA should be proud of themselves. The engine needed over twice the amount of fuel to go the same distance as a same size Dodge Cummins or Dmax.
So the EPA pencil pushers can't see the forest through the tree's. What ever they say the expectable emissions level that the 6.4L diesel engine put out, facts are it put out over 2x the amount because it would use over 2x the amount of fuel to go the same distance as their competitors engines. But hey that's ok or over looked because it is a North American made engine. Then the EPA goes after VW for polluting on their smaller engines that get 30+mpg & as much as 50+.

I'm in the diesel business & these are facts. Think about this for a second. That's upwards as much as almost 6x less fuel needed for the VW's to go the same distance as the Power Joke at the time. That's almost 6x more pollution figures as the EPA says the Power Joke puts out. If they were serious about pollution figures, testing would be based on mileage & amount of fuel used for a given distance. But hey, the gov makes more $ because more fuel gets bought right. And by the way, all the big 3 in N.America have been caught too, among others, cheating the software/EPA testing but you don't hear about that do you. If they paid as much in fines & damage, the big 3 would have to fold. Well because they are N.American companies, that's not going to happen. Right.

So it's more about the $ for the gov than the health risks. Carbon tax is just that...tax. Another way to milk the common folk of their hard earned $. Plan & simple. Don't get me wrong, I'm not for everyone to be rolling coal or ignoring the facts that we are slowly polluting our planet. I'm just pointing out the facts the gov doesn't seem to be serious about taking the steps to help clean up the biggest things polluting our planet.
 
41 - 60 of 84 Posts
Top