5 ms·

A friend in Germany said he trusts VW even more after the scandal, because it showed their engineering cleverness. And also because they cared for their custome

A friend in Germany said he trusts VW even more after the scandal, because it showed their engineering cleverness. And also because they cared for their customers and gave them even better performance than the government allowed. In general, VW has a good, somewhat inflated reputation in Germany + parts of EU. In my experience, the cars are quite solid and reliable, albeit considered a bit boring. But you can also buy a Seat or Skoda which is basically the same car with a different exterior but cheaper... Maybe the issue is that they are different cars in the US. VW didn't have a Jetta in Germany for years. I owned a Golf MK3 convertible in the US, and I felt it was of lesser quality than similar VWs for the European market.

yunohn 6y ago
>> better performance than the government allowed My understanding was that this performance came at the expense of more pollution, which is what the gov is regulating?
- YinglingLight 6y ago
  Your flaw is the assumption that all, or even most, customers prefer the non-tangible idea of "reducing pollution" to the tangible experience of greater performance.
  - yunohn 6y ago
    >> non-tangible idea of "reducing pollution" That's exactly the problem with the public's understanding of pollution [1]. If they can't see people dying in front of their eyes, they won't believe it... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/09/fossil-fuels-pollution-deaths-research https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/09/fossil-f...
- toast0 6y ago
  Different pollution, not necessarily more. Tuning the engine for more fuel efficiency generates more nitrogen oxides (above the legal limit in this case) and less carbon dioxide.
  - yunohn 6y ago
    That's a fair nitpick, but my reply to the parent comment still stands - that the regulation was about pollution, and not engine performance.
- Vrondi 6y ago
  Right, and many customers would prefer the performance, thank you very much.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    Yeah, but most of us -- even enthusiasts -- aren't cutting off their cats to do so.

yunohn 6y ago

>> better performance than the government allowed My understanding was that this performance came at the expense of more pollution, which is what the gov is regulating?

YinglingLight 6y ago
Your flaw is the assumption that all, or even most, customers prefer the non-tangible idea of "reducing pollution" to the tangible experience of greater performance.
- yunohn 6y ago
  >> non-tangible idea of "reducing pollution" That's exactly the problem with the public's understanding of pollution [1]. If they can't see people dying in front of their eyes, they won't believe it... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/09/fossil-fuels-pollution-deaths-research https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/09/fossil-f...
toast0 6y ago
Different pollution, not necessarily more. Tuning the engine for more fuel efficiency generates more nitrogen oxides (above the legal limit in this case) and less carbon dioxide.
- yunohn 6y ago
  That's a fair nitpick, but my reply to the parent comment still stands - that the regulation was about pollution, and not engine performance.
Vrondi 6y ago
Right, and many customers would prefer the performance, thank you very much.
- kube-system 6y ago
  Yeah, but most of us -- even enthusiasts -- aren't cutting off their cats to do so.