Belgians provide evidence for cheating with Opel Zafira
Posted on 21-04-2016 at 9:59 am by Dizono – 38 Comments”
Opel denies the geniep sjoemelsoftware to unmerging, but the editors of VRT in the case teeth and comes up with new evidence.
One of the first non-Volkswagens, which after the outbreak of dieselgate on the radar appeared, was the Opel Zafira. Initially claimed Swiss researchers that Opel’s mpv has a much higher NOx emissions than the plant data suggest. Opel rejected all the allegations, but in the south they were not yet convinced of the innocence of Opel.
One of their journalists, self-Opel-rider, found out that with regular maintenance the Opel-dealers a software update. According to Opel, the all of nothing with the cover up of sjoemelsoftware to make, but according to VRT decreased the NOx emissions after this software update -which Opel-mechanics, incidentally, have no idea where this should be – considerable.
According to Opel / vauxhall were the measured differences in the two Belgian Zafira’s due to a by a marten kapotgebeten sensor cable and the overall poor condition of the cars. Therefore, they decided at the VRT again to test with two nearly identical Zafira’s. A Belgian 1.6 CDTI that his last maintenance just after dieselgate had and a Dutch Zafira in exactly the same version and similar good condition, but with a last service just before dieselgate.
The results are astonishing. The Dutch Zafira nudged 873 milligrams of nitrogen oxides per kilometer, while the Belgian Zafira was 203 mg/km. They repeated the test again at two Belgian Zafira’s, where once again the only difference will be the time of the last maintenance was, and it showed similar values: 807 mg/km versus 371 mg/km. It should be mentioned that the Zafira, with emissions of 807 mg/km) through equipment to a small error, and therefore, VRT is not included in the results. The tests were carried out by Emission Analytics LTD.
Opel pulls on her turn, the outcome again in doubt, in a reaction to the VRT:
The report that you forwarded makes it more than clear that the “testing” were not performed in a scientifically sound manner, with test parameters that differ from the standardized test for certification.
The used test are to a large extent opaque and questionable. You also refers repeatedly to an “update”, while we and the authorities informed that we have no software updates are performed in a way that the greenhouse affect.
With thanks to @martin for the tip!