co2 Emissions TAX

[AFRICAR]

Hello Everyone

Do you know that next April 2010 your Montego car tax will be £205 per year.
(look it up on the Goverment web site).

This is based on your car being "old" not on co2 figures like "new" cars.

So I emailed the SMMT and asked the following question.

Can you please help me understand what the difference is between the MOT emissions tests carried out on the two following 2lt diesel powered estate cars?

Both are vehicles are tested on the same MOT emission machine.

The first vehicle has 98,760 miles on the clock, it was registered in 2004 and is showing these results.

Test limit applied. 3.00 1/m

Absorption coefficient 2.03 1/m -----1/min 0.75 1/m ----- 1/min
0.68 1/m -----1/min

0.48 1/m -----1/min

Mean Absorption coefficient 0.64 1/m Zero drift 0.00 1/m

Mean Absorption coefficient 0.64 1/m

Test type applied Turbo

Test Results Pass


The second vehicle has 89,130 miles on the clock, it was registered in 1994 and is showing these results.

Test limit applied. 3.00 1/m

Absorption coefficient 1.76 1/m -----1/min 0.52 1/m ------- 1/min
0.85 1/m -----1/min 0.74 1/m ----- 1/min
1.88 1/m -----1/min 0.82 1/m ----- 1/min

Mean Absorption coefficient 0.69 1/m Zero drift 0.01 1/m

Mean Absorption coefficient 0.68 1/m

Test type applied Turbo

Test Results Pass

The only difference I can see in the final results between the two vehicles is 0.05 1/m and 0.04 1/m on the Mean Absorption coefficients

How do you get a CO² figure from these results? What is the relationship between these results and a CO² figure?

The first vehicle is a VW Passat Estate which does 45-50mpg with a TAX disc of £150, the second is a Montego Estate which does 55-57mpg with a TAX disc of £190 this year and £205 in April. The difference in April will be £55.0
Us Montego owners are paying an extra £55.0 per year because Goverment do not have any trustworthy information, nor do any Montego owner.

The lower the CO² number the lower you pay in vehicle tax.
Eh - the Montego does not have a CO² number!!!!! why not, the answer from every source is it's "too old".

SO WHAT, my question is "WHY" is the government relying on the magazine "What Car" for their information and not producing the information for themselves. Answer is, keep bleeding the car owner dry.

All MOT testing stations DO NOT have CO² testing equipment.

So how can "ALL" 2LT vehicle owners and especially Montego vehicles owners get their own car tested as per the new cars,
ie. the Gas content of these emissions?

Does anyone know where you can get the Gizmo that can test the Montego diesels?

IF this can be carried out and if the results are a near match to the Passat or any other car for that matter and if enough people got to hear about ie. (BBC)how to carry out there own tests, you JUST MIGHT get lower vehicle tax.
Without proof there is NO chance.

The next stage would be political. However a general election is coming into view.


Here is the SMMT reply.

Good Morning,
We are not the best people to refer to on this matter, we only collect the data for the CO2 from the first Registrations of the vehicles.

You may find that VOSA are the best people to refer this matter to, the link to their website is below;

http://www.vosa.gov.uk/

What do you think?

Africar

[guussi]

my maestro diesel was 0.03 on idle the max is 0.3? before the turbo blew a leak
my old mechanic couldnt believe it...i keep engine clean, 20lb pull magnets on fuel lines, heavy noble metals

now iam really pissed as iam paying well over the odds on Co2 based Tax issues....the same above results for my nissan micra 1.0i16v £120 tax...its greener than the greenest small cars!! who pay all or very little.....with a car thats produced bloody loadsa CO2 in the production cycle

the only way forward is to do a 'mass class action suit' against this old car discrimination that is best part based on flawed prejudice!!
Part of this class action will demand that old car emissions be calculated and converted to bring it in line with newer cars and or baes on MOT results for older cars - not a blanket approach

Such action will need the full support of all car forums; legal eagle members and others up for a probably pointless exercise but would have bloody good fun causing headlines....men from the boys with the boys not a solo effort

[E_T_V]

CO2 has no relationship to the smoke emissions test conducted during the MOT test.

CO2 is related (although not completely directly) to the fuel economy of the vehicle on a prescribed test cycle.

Unless you could subject a brand new car to the standard emissions test cycle and get it to pass all the other euro regs to get it a CO2 rating then you'll just have to pay the tax.


The government doesn't use the magazine statistics to generate the tax figures, it uses the type approval documentation that every new car model is subject to at ain independent testing laboratory. These figures are also published by car magazines as they give a good indication of the running costs in terms of tax and fuel economy.

The harmful emissions from the montego are higher than the passat as the passat will have a catalytic convertor on it to reduce hydrocarbon emissions. It'll also have a more sophisticated EGR system to reduce NOx emissions too.

[E_T_V]

my maestro diesel was 0.03 on idle the max is 0.3? before the turbo blew a leak

Smoke at idle tells you virtually nothing about the emissions of an engine. The max smoke content is 2.5 for non turbo and 3.0 for turbo diesels

my old mechanic couldnt believe it...i keep engine clean, 20lb pull magnets on fuel lines, heavy noble metals

MAgnets simply don't help emissions and nor do heavy noble metals (heavy and noble metals are not the same thing and are mutually exclusive)

now iam really pissed as iam paying well over the odds on Co2 based Tax issues....the same above results for my nissan micra 1.0i16v £120 tax...its greener than the greenest small cars!! who pay all or very little.....with a car thats produced bloody loadsa CO2 in the production cycle

the only way forward is to do a 'mass class action suit' against this old car discrimination that is best part based on flawed prejudice!!
Part of this class action will demand that old car emissions be calculated and converted to bring it in line with newer cars and or baes on MOT results for older cars - not a blanket approach

Such action will need the full support of all car forums; legal eagle members and others up for a probably pointless exercise but would have bloody good fun causing headlines....men from the boys with the boys not a solo effort

What a load of tripe.

If you could prove your car met the euro 3/4/5 emissions regs and put it through the proper testing then I'm sure you'd have a good case to get the tax on your car reduced. However it doesn't and won't meet these emissions regs and to put the car through the relevent tests would costs 10's of thousands of pounds. far more than you'd ever save on tax anyway.

[Guest]

If old cars had co2 ratings my turbo would end up costing me over £400 a year to tax. I am glad the goverment started on cars from 2001 onwards.

As well as my turbo i have a vauxhall vectra 2.0 16v auto CDX with a co2 of 226. As its a w plate (2000) i will only have to pay £205, if it was a Y plate it would be £405 very soon

[guussi]

Smoke at idle tells you virtually nothing about the emissions of an engine. The max smoke content is 2.5 for non turbo and 3.0 for turbo diesels

MAgnets simply don't help emissions and nor do heavy noble metals (heavy and noble metals are not the same thing and are mutually exclusive)


What a load of tripe.

If you could prove your car met the euro 3/4/5 emissions regs and put it through the proper testing then I'm sure you'd have a good case to get the tax on your car reduced. However it doesn't and won't meet these emissions regs and to put the car through the relevent tests would costs 10's of thousands of pounds. far more than you'd ever save on tax anyway.

Thanks for the reply
The load of tripe is that a nissan micra does up to 60mpg....is only 1.0i16v and runs very efficiently per unit getting you to A to B with a modest amount of fuel and one has to pay £120 per year!! It has a CAT maybe produced with less stringency as todays CATs...but its low in comparison to alot of others!! grrrr

CATs have heavy noble metals present within CATs to crack the hydrocarbons reducing emissions as part of its whole process...is this a load of tripe? might be but iam still researching on the subject as its fascinating!

The same principle was used by the French in the second world war to improve the octane rating of unleaded type petrol...the presence of this lead increased its octane...it was also used with one of the aircraft that was designed to run on better quality fuel..is this a load of tripe?.....during the second world war engineers found that adding magnets to boiler fuel lines increased the size of the combustion flame...is this a load of tripe? it could be a folk myth but ive read it numerous times under different sources and keep an open mind

Thanks ETV for your comments always appreciated

[E_T_V]

CATs have heavy noble metals present within CATs to crack the hydrocarbons reducing emissions as part of its whole process...is this a load of tripe? might be but iam still researching on the subject as its fascinating!

I suggest that you need to do a LOT more research then and stop believing the carp you are obviously reading on the internet. Catalytic converters do indeed have noble metals in them. If you put heavy metals in them then they cease to work the two are very different. Catalytic converters also have to operate at many hundred degrees celcius before they start to work. Until they "light-off" then they are completely useless. They do not "crack" hydrocarbons either. That requires HUGE pressures/temperatures. The catalytic convertors on most diesel engines are simple oxidation catalysts that oxidise hydrocarbons.

The same principle was used by the French in the second world war to improve the octane rating of unleaded type petrol...the presence of this lead increased its octane...it was also used with one of the aircraft that was designed to run on better quality fuel..is this a load of tripe?.....during the second world war engineers found that adding magnets to boiler fuel lines increased the size of the combustion flame...is this a load of tripe? it could be a folk myth but ive read it numerous times under different sources and keep an open mind

Thanks ETV for your comments always appreciated

The octane rating of unleaded petrol was increased by adding tetra-eythyl-lead to the fuel. This is a lead compound and has nothing to do with sticking lead pellets or anything else in the fuel tank. It is a chemical that is added to the fuel to improve its knock resistance and the reason that leaded fuel was typically 97Ron and unleaded typically 95Ron. You cannot create tetra-eythyl-lead at room temperature and pressures from saturated hydrocabons and lead it simply doesn't work.

Adding magnets to fuel lines of boilers simply traps metallic particles usually rust or scale in the fuel. If left untrapped these would block or partially block the fuel jets and so decrease the fuel flow through them obviously decreasing the size of any combustion flame.

Don't you think if these miricle magnets actually worked they'd be used in cars and industry. Where I work our fuel bill is literally millions and millions of pounds. If they worked we'd certainly be using them to improve efficiencies. But quite simply they don't. Try and convince me if you want, but I've never seen any fair and unbiased tests that give any indication that they work.

If you have any reliable evidence then please tell me in which journal it is in and I'll take a look. If I could make a 0.1% fuel efficiency saving at work I'd be a hero and save the company hundreds of thousands of pounds, if not millions.

[Chris Y]

I've got some tiger repellant here. Improves your fuel efficiency as well as reducing emissions and makes you more attractive to the opposite sex. A man said it works on the Internet, so it must be true..

[E_T_V]

haha.. Can I buy some please. I've never seen a tiger around your place so it must work well.

[guussi]

Adding magnets to fuel lines of boilers simply traps metallic particles usually rust or scale in the fuel. If left untrapped these would block or partially block the fuel jets and so decrease the fuel flow through them obviously decreasing the size of any combustion flame.

funny and probably true lol

i'll carry on trundling thro the tripe just out of interest...can i have some of that tiger juice...the local cats like to poop in the gravel borders ...

[G51 NAV]

The motorist always gets the blame for all of this planet's ills...what's the big surprise? We're easy targets. The 'big picture' clearly shows to any fool that it's better to keep what you've got in good condition than to ritualistically scrap it every few years and replace it with new. You don't bulldoze your house down every time it needs decorating, do you? But that ethos doesn't sell new cars or boost the flatlining economy. So you're wasting your voice.

[guussi]

its all good fun

The only thing i can think off with the lead pellets is that fuel has a water content circa 5% and is sulphur contaminated....this might react with the lead......still deliberating....

[countrydude]

Has no one ever thought to get on a zebra and have a quick gallop about?
Now that is fuel efficient, being a wild animal you wouldn't even need to feed it!

[E_T_V]

its all good fun

The only thing i can think off with the lead pellets is that fuel has a water content circa 5% and is sulphur contaminated....this might react with the lead......still deliberating....

Diesel contains water. Petrol doesn't (or at least shouldn't as it causes a lot of problems!.

Lead is also rather unreactive which is why it is used for roofing and water pipes.

[guussi]

Has no one ever thought to get on a zebra and have a quick gallop about?
Now that is fuel efficient, being a wild animal you wouldn't even need to feed it!

iam up for zebra racing...i think it would catch on!