5 ms·

I'm not terribly surprised, considering that the whole scandal is basically meaningless to the consumer experience. I wonder how many people who report on stori

by ufmace 11y ago

I'm not terribly surprised, considering that the whole scandal is basically meaningless to the consumer experience. I wonder how many people who report on stories like this are aware of how little the average consumer actually cares about deals and tricks between giant corporations and the Government regarding changes in emissions characteristics that they will probably never notice.

Zhenya 11y ago
The problem with this view is that emissions are a function of engine management. As with any engineering decision, trade-offs have to be made to hit goals. Adjusting the code to lower emissions will absolutely impact power output and fuel efficiency. This impacts the consumers directly. And anecdotely, was the reason most people bought TDIs - the amazing combo of power, efficiency and percieved "greeness"
dragonwriter 11y ago
> I'm not terribly surprised, considering that the whole scandal is basically meaningless to the consumer experience. Right: the scandal is about VW fudging a test to mislead on the scale of an externality; unlike government tested fuel economy (which is about consumer information, so deception on that hurts primarily the direct purchaser), emissions testing is about protecting the public at large from paying (through environmental impacts) for benefits received by the particular consumer of the vehicle (and, in the form of profits from the trade, the vehicle manufacturer.) So, on the VW scandal, drivers and the company are the beneficiaries of the deception, so its unsurprising that drivers qua drivers would not be angered by the company's deception.
- roymurdock 11y ago
  > drivers qua drivers This is a silly distinction. You can't sensibly divorce "drivers" from all the other various functions of human beings who drive. Many drivers are also people who enjoy living in a clean city with minimal pollution. Many more do not enjoy being lied to by a company they have paid in an explicit contract to exchange money for certified goods. Some of these drivers are also angry that they are being disrespected by their elected officials who are unable or unwilling to represent them in an appropriate manner. Sure, drivers get a cheaper car in a vacuum. But this vacuum doesn't exist and is merely an academic distinction/rhetorical argument.
  - ScottBurson 11y ago
    You make a good case, but the sales numbers will tell whether you're right. For my part, I can say I was toying with the idea of buying a Golf, and now VW is firmly off my list. But I'm not really serious about buying a car at this time anyway.
  - bryanlarsen 11y ago
    You're agreeing with the post you're calling silly. "drivers qua drivers don't care" says that while the part of a driver which cares about driving doesn't care, it very strongly implies that there's another part of drivers that does care. Otherwise the OP would have just said "drivers don't care" instead of "drivers qua drivers don't care".
    - roymurdock 11y ago
      Not calling the post silly. OP has a good point. Saying that it's silly to consider anyone a driver qua driver.
- drdeca 11y ago
  Until recently(ish) I was unfamiliar with the ___ qua ___ thing, so I thought it would be good to include a definition here, for the benefit of anyone who isn't aware of the term. "In the capacity of" "as being" Those might not make the meaning clear by themselves ... Uh. Ok so in this situation, drivers qua drivers is like, the drivers in being drivers, seperate from what they might be other than drivers. I think the idea is like, they might care for other reasons, but they don't care about it as part of their being drivers. I hope that this explanation is not insufficient for anyone who is looking to it to understand the term.
  - seabrookmx 11y ago
    I appreciate it!
bsilvereagle 11y ago
> considering that the whole scandal is basically meaningless to the consumer experience As soon as an owner takes their vehicle in to get the water pump replaced, or more Urea added to the system, or a host of "dealership only" maintenance tasks that are cropping up in modern cars, their gas mileage will (presumably) take a very large hit. The dealers will have to install the EPA emissions fixes. A manual 2014 VW Passat TDI can hit 50 MPG in a highway driving situation. Fuel efficiency was traded for emissions. The emissions 'patch' will presumably reverse the trade off, and instead of getting higher fuel efficiency, you'll now have lower emissions output. Having a lower fuel economy directly impacts the consumer experience.
- wstrange 11y ago
  I can see a lot of VW owners wanting to defer maintenance for this exact reason.
- selimthegrim 11y ago
  How is urea a dealership only task? Is VW just trying to make it another profit center? Isn't it like adding oil?

by ufmace 11y ago

Zhenya 11y ago

The problem with this view is that emissions are a function of engine management. As with any engineering decision, trade-offs have to be made to hit goals. Adjusting the code to lower emissions will absolutely impact power output and fuel efficiency. This impacts the consumers directly. And anecdotely, was the reason most people bought TDIs - the amazing combo of power, efficiency and percieved "greeness"

dragonwriter 11y ago

> I'm not terribly surprised, considering that the whole scandal is basically meaningless to the consumer experience. Right: the scandal is about VW fudging a test to mislead on the scale of an externality; unlike government tested fuel economy (which is about consumer information, so deception on that hurts primarily the direct purchaser), emissions testing is about protecting the public at large from paying (through environmental impacts) for benefits received by the particular consumer of the vehicle (and, in the form of profits from the trade, the vehicle manufacturer.) So, on the VW scandal, drivers and the company are the beneficiaries of the deception, so its unsurprising that drivers qua drivers would not be angered by the company's deception.

roymurdock 11y ago
> drivers qua drivers This is a silly distinction. You can't sensibly divorce "drivers" from all the other various functions of human beings who drive. Many drivers are also people who enjoy living in a clean city with minimal pollution. Many more do not enjoy being lied to by a company they have paid in an explicit contract to exchange money for certified goods. Some of these drivers are also angry that they are being disrespected by their elected officials who are unable or unwilling to represent them in an appropriate manner. Sure, drivers get a cheaper car in a vacuum. But this vacuum doesn't exist and is merely an academic distinction/rhetorical argument.
- ScottBurson 11y ago
  You make a good case, but the sales numbers will tell whether you're right. For my part, I can say I was toying with the idea of buying a Golf, and now VW is firmly off my list. But I'm not really serious about buying a car at this time anyway.
- bryanlarsen 11y ago
  You're agreeing with the post you're calling silly. "drivers qua drivers don't care" says that while the part of a driver which cares about driving doesn't care, it very strongly implies that there's another part of drivers that does care. Otherwise the OP would have just said "drivers don't care" instead of "drivers qua drivers don't care".
  - roymurdock 11y ago
    Not calling the post silly. OP has a good point. Saying that it's silly to consider anyone a driver qua driver.
drdeca 11y ago
Until recently(ish) I was unfamiliar with the ___ qua ___ thing, so I thought it would be good to include a definition here, for the benefit of anyone who isn't aware of the term. "In the capacity of" "as being" Those might not make the meaning clear by themselves ... Uh. Ok so in this situation, drivers qua drivers is like, the drivers in being drivers, seperate from what they might be other than drivers. I think the idea is like, they might care for other reasons, but they don't care about it as part of their being drivers. I hope that this explanation is not insufficient for anyone who is looking to it to understand the term.
- seabrookmx 11y ago
  I appreciate it!

bsilvereagle 11y ago

> considering that the whole scandal is basically meaningless to the consumer experience As soon as an owner takes their vehicle in to get the water pump replaced, or more Urea added to the system, or a host of "dealership only" maintenance tasks that are cropping up in modern cars, their gas mileage will (presumably) take a very large hit. The dealers will have to install the EPA emissions fixes. A manual 2014 VW Passat TDI can hit 50 MPG in a highway driving situation. Fuel efficiency was traded for emissions. The emissions 'patch' will presumably reverse the trade off, and instead of getting higher fuel efficiency, you'll now have lower emissions output. Having a lower fuel economy directly impacts the consumer experience.

wstrange 11y ago
I can see a lot of VW owners wanting to defer maintenance for this exact reason.
selimthegrim 11y ago
How is urea a dealership only task? Is VW just trying to make it another profit center? Isn't it like adding oil?