alamcculloch:
Does anyone remember the SMOG that used to fill the cities back in the good old days.The coal fired locomotives had to be kept warm if not hot all of the time.Houses all had coal fires the mills and factories belched out all manner of toxins,but hey zb ho we bleat about diesel engines in cars of all things.
Great times, and with all those coal fires, and chimneys to sweep, there were gainful employment opportunities for 5 year olds.
Anyone on here who has had the upgrade done and able to confirm that Mpg and performanced hasn’t been reduced, mine is booked in on the 29th to be done.
raymundo:
Anyone on here who has had the upgrade done and able to confirm that Mpg and performanced hasn’t been reduced, mine is booked in on the 29th to be done.
Mines booked in for the 15th, I plan to do a before and after scan with my VCDS (VAGcom) software
Franglais:
Bluey Circles:
Nobby_Clarke:
I totally agree. I don’t know about that particulate gubbins but as far as smoke goes, diesels have never been so clean in my lifetime. Even plant on jobs in London have to have a minimum Tier 4 engine (DPF) it’s gone that far. Diggers are going towards Adblue, which will be interesting, when you see what gets put in the fuel tank. Mind you,I still wouldn’t want to ride a pushbike round LondonAlthough the colossal increase in diesel vehicles is what could be making the difference.
1.8 million in 1994 to 12.8 million in 2016 - they are cleaner but not 7x cleaner.Blame the EU, policies aimed at helping the environment by reducing CO2 has had a nasty side effect in poisoning us with NOx & particulates. Some really worrying studies are shown that the minute nano sized particles that are too small to be removed by DPFs are being found within the structure of our brains, some are questioning if there could be a link between the rise in dementia suffers and diesel fumes.
telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09 … uman-brai/That Telegraph report makes interesting reading and I`d agree there is some worrying info there.
OK, it`s a newspaper not a scientific journal, and is making us ask questions, so overall is a good thing.
The Telegraph is doing what the Telegraph always does tries to create a sense of fear in it’s readership. (I seem to remember they run a headline every October of worst winter ever, we’ll all die of cold a starvation or in April hottest summer ever we’ll all die of heat stroke and starvation) 
the resultant weather is mild and wet winter and slightly warmer and wet summer. 
And in these case they not only blamed foreigners but Germans which I assume gets the journalist a massive bonus. 
In doing so it will probably does total discredit to the original research, just cherry picking the bits and taking statistics out of context to produce the biggest sensational fear factor.
This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be aware of potential issue with vehicle pollution, but creating hysteria about it either from the Telegraph or from some environmental groups, (whose real agenda I’m sure is the removal of all powered vehicle from the roads and if pollution free vehicle became the norm they’d find a reason they shouldn’t be used.) isn’t really the answer to a sensible debate.
There seems to be a rise in various illnesses, people often attribute to an increase in vehicles, but there are many other things that have changed in modern societies, especially urban ones, in the 40-60 years
Centrally heated Sealed houses and offices, less manual work, Processed foods, Far more food, Electrical devices and Far more sterile environments, Far more chemicals being used on food and in the home, and it has improved our lives and reduced infant mortality and allowed great life expectancy, but for all the good bits there might be downsides we don’t fully understand yet
muckles:
The Telegraph is doing what the Telegraph always does tries to create a sense of fear in it’s readership. (I seem to remember they run a headline every October of worst winter ever, we’ll all die of cold a starvation or in April hottest summer ever we’ll all die of heat stroke and starvation)
And in these case they not only blamed foreigners but Germans which I assume gets the journalist a massive bonus.In doing so it will probably does total discredit to the original research, just cherry picking the bits and taking statistics out of context to produce the biggest sensational fear factor.
This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be aware of potential issue with vehicle pollution, but creating hysteria about it either from the Telegraph or from some environmental groups, (whose real agenda I’m sure is the removal of all powered vehicle from the roads and if pollution free vehicle became the norm they’d find a reason they shouldn’t be used.) isn’t really the answer to a sensible debate.
There seems to be a rise in various illnesses, people often attribute to an increase in vehicles, but there are many other things that have changed in modern societies, especially urban ones, in the 40-60 years
Centrally heated Sealed houses and offices, less manual work, Processed foods, Far more food, Electrical devices and Far more sterile environments, Far more chemicals being used on food and in the home, and it has improved our lives and reduced infant mortality and allowed great life expectancy, but for all the good bits there might be downsides we don’t fully understand yet
Yep, Im afraid papers are, more or less, the same: most are there to make money and maybe push their owners political agenda too. There are certainly issues with pollution, and with public health too. Their are some complex mathematical tools to extract meaningful data from the masses of data beset with confusing factors etc, but they arent easy to use or to understand; and it seems too many reporters on newspapers study Shakespeare to a high level, but can`t tell the difference between average, median, mean, and absolutely misunderstand the reporting of health and risk assessment. Inaccurate reporting of stats causes too much worry and panic because of innumerate reporters. They understand how to avoid split infinitives but fail to understand anything about risk or elementary statistics. Some of this resulted in the terrible standard of reporting concerning the MMR fiasco. In order to prevent a “balanced view” equal time was given to Andrew Wakefield and his views, and to the 99.9% of other medics who said he was totally wrong. Sorry going off on one again…
peirre:
raymundo:
Anyone on here who has had the upgrade done and able to confirm that Mpg and performanced hasn’t been reduced, mine is booked in on the 29th to be done.Mines booked in for the 15th, I plan to do a before and after scan with my VCDS (VAGcom) software
Would greatly appreciate a heads up afterwards and let me know what you found Peirre
There’s a lot of info on the Ross-Tech (VCDS) forum forums.ross-tech.com
The advice given is that if possible that you do a before and after scan to see what changes have been made to the ecu. Though I doubt you have access to the necessary equipment to do so, as it’s not something owners have. I am lead to believe the 1.6 tdi will have new sensors fitted to the air duct, new glow plugs and a slight change to the ecu. Let’s hope they don’t undo the minor tweets I’ve done to the measuring block in the central electrics (auto windows, turn signals, alarm bleeps on/off etc).
no matter what happens it wont be any use to 99.999999% of us, the government will pocket the fines, the rich might get a bit of compo but for the rest of us it will be sweet nothing, no money, no health care as we wont have the resources, no way of knowing if it was diesel fumes or aircraft fuel that done for us. and do we care probably not lifes to short, well for us maybe.
Old John:
Oh dear, what a lot of hand wringers are on here today.
Diesel vehicles, even at euro 3, would be the cleanest they have ever been, and the VW so called scandal is really pretty minor stuff. Of course, it gives the English an opportunity to roger the Bosch once again, and m’learned friends all over the planet a chance to sue, grabbit and run! Where would we be without the compensation industry I ask? Millions on the dole , GDP on the slide, global catastrophe looming!! He he, it’s not only the TORYGRAPH that can come up with lurid headlines.I can only imagine that you are all to young to have witnessed a yard full of Gardner engined ERFs getting kindled up on a cold morning. They, (and early VOLVOs weren’t much better) produced more pollution in ten minutes than the entire German army’s assault on Moscow.
So chaps, the message from Johnny is this. Man up, take big breaths, and, like a really bad ■■■■, it’ll go away quicker.
I’m amazed that any of us of a certain age are still around. Having in my early years worked on Leylands and breathed in all the clag that came out of their exhausts, along with blowing out brake drums etc, I went driving and started my illustrious career on Fodens with the good old 150 and 180 Gardners, so I know what it’s like to stagger around in the fog, coughing and spluttering. With all the advances in diesel engines I still say they pump out more dangerous crap than their petrol engined mates, specially when there are now so many around. Also (going ot a bit) over here diesel is now and has been since the 70’s, more expensive than petrol. Maybe I’m being a bit cynical in my thoughts as to why.
Funny how we’re all living longer, it will be the results of deliberate overpopulation of the west and its downsides that will kill more of us, not global warming nor the current fad, Diesel fumes.
The current propaganda campaign is to get the easily led onside ready for the tax grab’s needed to prop up the failed economy for another few parliament’s terms.
My oldest friend (we started school together aged 4 and a bit in 1955) worked as a scientist at a government run establishment testing vehicles and 20+ years ago they submitted a report on the harm that diesel engines were doing to health and the environment. They were told to hush it up of course.
I remember when the BMC EA series of vans was introduced with the 2.5 indirect injection engine, they chucked so much crap out on start up until warm that a food supplier was forced to tow their vehicles outside after loading as the exhaust fumes were a health risk and could contaminate the food.
I run two diesel powerd vehicles myself, a car and a small van, and there is never a trace of smoke from their exhausts but I also remember our fleet of Gardner powered Fodens and Sed Aks starting up in the morning and it wasn’t a pleasant place to be, though when warm they smoked far less than the Rolls and ■■■■■■■ engined ones!
Pete.
Gardners 
,■■■■■■■ don’t smoke ,can’t ever remember one smoking unless it’s been messed with by an idiot .
The insides of my exhaust pipes on my diesel Passat are as clean as the day it left the factory, done 52k miles.
Punchy Dan:
Gardners
This.
My last ■■■■■■■ would just give a slightest trace of black smoke just as you went under power following upshift, but it did have a set of trick test injectors fitted by the dealer when it was demo, went like hell and superb on fuel.
Gardners? how i hated those things, night out at Crawford arms circa winter 76 /77, next morning lots of Gardners and a few Volvos (nearly as bad) firing up, the only way was to feel your way through the smoke fog across the car park, churn the heap over for about 5 minutes till it finally spluttered into life, then feel your way back to safety across the road for about half an hour till some of the smog shifted and you could see your lorry.
Yeh I remember f88,86 f10 churning over and over ■■■■■■■ and popping smoke everywhere not firing on all cylinders even worse than the Gardners , the ■■■■■■■ turn over and go ,infact the eagle diesels even started in less turns than the ■■■■■■■ .
AndrewG:
the maoster:
AndrewG:
Clogged arteries and bowels full of undigested red meat due to the good old full english fry up will do far more harm than exhaust fumes…I grabbed a kebab on the way back from the pub the other night and can categorically state that there is no undigested red meat or in fact anything at all left in my bowels!
A chicken kebab with salad isnt bad at all. A doner though with all that processed condensed meat, eyeballs/ guts and brains not so especially smothered in garlic mayo…
Garlic is good for you.
Juddian:
Punchy Dan:
GardnersThis.
My last ■■■■■■■ would just give a slightest trace of black smoke just as you went under power following upshift, but it did have a set of trick test injectors fitted by the dealer when it was demo, went like hell and superb on fuel.Gardners? how i hated those things, night out at Crawford arms circa winter 76 /77, next morning lots of Gardners and a few Volvos (nearly as bad) firing up, the only way was to feel your way through the smoke fog across the car park, churn the heap over for about 5 minutes till it finally spluttered into life, then feel your way back to safety across the road for about half an hour till some of the smog shifted and you could see your lorry.
But could this be where the dangers lie - you clearly identified that all that thick smoke was not the place to be and limited how much you breathed in by walking away, it was an obvious health hazard, and your body told you it was unpleasant, also the particles in that smoke were probably large enough for your body to recognise as invasive and cough them back up.
Can a comparison be made here with asbestos; when they first realised it was harmful they give people face masks to wear, this made it more pleasant to work in the dusty enviroment so people worked hard for longer in thicker dust - the sad bit being the masks did not filter out the really damaging stuff, so in fact the masks made the situation worse.
Now we have DPFs and the fumes from diesels no longer look harmful, it filters out all the stuff we can see, we no longer feel choked by it, we may spend longer breathing in the dam stuff because our bodies are not recognising it as obnoxious and harmful - but are the really minute particles passing through the DPFs and then straight through our lungs into our bloodstream. In the same way face masks made the asbestos situation worse are DPFs making the diesel pollution problem worse.
Who knows what to believe about anything now, the media feeds us nonsense too much of the time.
Punchy Dan:
Gardners
The reason that vertical exhaust stacks came into use in the first place was because ■■■■■■■ engined trucks in the thirties chucked that much smoke out other vehicles were running into the back of them, they moved the exhaust uphill instead of curing the smoke! 
Our dumpers with ■■■■■■■ 220 units certainly chucked some crap out at times but it didn’t matter in a quarry. The two L10’s I had were not too bad though, and they started well (as long as that poxy electric stop didn’t need a knock with a hammer, bloody things! 
) just as good as the two Rolls I had previously with just a turn of the key but they also had more oil outside the engine than inside. Still not really a ■■■■■■■ fan though, can you tell?
Pete.
Bluey Circles:
But could this be where the dangers lie - you clearly identified that all that thick smoke was not the place to be and limited how much you breathed in by walking away, it was an obvious health hazard, and your body told you it was unpleasant, also the particles in that smoke were probably large enough for your body to recognise as invasive and cough them back up.Can a comparison be made here with asbestos; when they first realised it was harmful they give people face masks to wear, this made it more pleasant to work in the dusty enviroment so people worked hard for longer in thicker dust - the sad bit being the masks did not filter out the really damaging stuff, so in fact the masks made the situation worse.
Now we have DPFs and the fumes from diesels no longer look harmful, it filters out all the stuff we can see, we no longer feel choked by it, we may spend longer breathing in the dam stuff because our bodies are not recognising it as obnoxious and harmful - but are the really minute particles passing through the DPFs and then straight through our lungs into our bloodstream. In the same way face masks made the asbestos situation worse are DPFs making the diesel pollution problem worse.
Who knows what to believe about anything now, the media feeds us nonsense too much of the time.
Good point. And the media are largely populated by innumerate, scientifically uneducated arts graduates. They simply dont understand whats going on. I remember one Science Correspondent saying that his correct copy was often edited to nonsense before publication. Of course when the political slant of some publishers into the equation as well we end with misinformation.
Franglais:
Good point. And the media are largely populated by innumerate, scientifically uneducated arts graduates. They simply dont understand whats going on. I remember one Science Correspondent saying that his correct copy was often edited to nonsense before publication. Of course when the political slant of some publishers into the equation as well we end with misinformation.
Sensationalist journalism multiplied by the commercial interests of the all powerful motor industry multiplied by governments trying to protect sensitive economies = was it worth reading in the first place.
I have really no idea what the answer is to the OP. I wouldn’t want to spend all day everyday working in the middle of a city, the amount of traffic is just bizarre, it can’t be healthy whether it be petrol or diesel. But I can’t imagine a few hours evry week doing that much harm. As it is I live out in the countryside, truly hate cities and if I never see one again it won’t bother me - but that has nothing to do with pollution.
I am sure I read once that the particulate pollution is marginally heavier than air, so the higher up you are the better. Trucks generally take their ventilation in much higher than cars, so we’re probably better off than cars. who knows ?
