Buy a X-164r for $60 on eBay to reset OCI. Do the oil change yourself for $80 in parts. I picked up an oil extractor for $40 on Craigslist and oil change is a 15 min job.

 

This feed has gotten severely off topic.

 

It does that when we haven't had anything new to discuss for a few weeks. Hopefully Friday we will have something to keep us stored up for the holidays.

 

No settlement coming...dealers have no info yet but hard rumors are nope...just a fix. This is what mine just sent me...and I don't even have a CD! LOL

"We have heard nothing either fix. GM and a few just got back from PAG-NA in Atl and we are rumored to not be doing a payout, just a repair."
3.0L Buyback is not a likely option guys. Too costly most likely. Just a fix and probably some decrease in performance with free Ad-Blue and the increased CPO as a settlement to current owners. I hear nothing for those buying CD's tho as 2nd owners and those will be "as is" transactions to minimize the costs and due to the low numbers of avail CDs still in the US now. Anyone hear similar?

 

That would be...disappointing...

I don't buy it though. I can see no buyback option for 2nd gen 3.0s if a reasonable fix is viable, but I don't see a further extended warranty flying as the only compensation. I don't expect a huge windfall here, but the way this judge managed the 2.0 case says we'll see some cash from the deal.

 

I think they will have to fix the vehicles whether sold "as-is" or not. That will absolutely be part of the settlement. The judge is not going to allow unfixed vehicles to stay on the road and not forcing a recall/fix isn't a means to that end. So, fix and extended warranty for all CDs, at least, since they've all had the warranty applied in the system.

But offering no compensation will be a huge mistake.

Reduced performance? That'll be a problem. Reduced performance with compensation to offset that loss? Maybe. But any reduction in performance with nothing to offset it will shatter the class, no matter how much DEF they give us. I can't think of anyone who would accept that.

While I'm sure VW is pushing that, I can't imagine it's under serious consideration by, well, either side, really. VW floats it on the off chance it could gain traction, but can't really believe they could get away with that. No way.

 

If it was just fix and extended warranty, it would have been settled eons ago.

 

That's probably what VW/ PAG-NA wants and may not give in...so that means no settlement, but no agreement = it goes to trial. Why do you think the class lawyers would come out and mandate the agreement must include a buyout option and compensation and suggest the settlement should follow the 2.0 agreement? And the judge has said all along the claims of the 3.0 folks are equal to those of the 2.0 folks. Guess we'll see tomorrow if there is an update.

 

They definitely won't allow them to just be sold "as-is". It will be "fix" or "remove from the road." No way a judge/EPA/gub'mt will deliberately allow non-emissions-compliant vehicles to remain on the road. I imagine there will be a sort of VIN record... and non-fixed vehicles won't be register-able.

That's a good point. Tho I imagine some of the push-back has to do with the 3.0TDI vehicles being *substantially* more expensive than most of the 2.0 versions out there.

... "free DEF"... ok I'm gonna have to search this thread a little to read up on that...

 

I am tired of the thesis that 3.0 are substantially more expensive. There are substantially less 3.0s than 2.0s. Don't tell me that a 30,000 or so 3.0 will bankrupt VW while 100,000+ 2.0 won't

 

That's what we thought, when we bought our lease return '15 in March '16. The car was leased only 7 months earlier, and the owner was "incentivized" into a hybrid. It was just going through Service when the longer 125K warranty was announced.

The fix had been proposed and it looked like it had been accepted, but apparently CARB raised their hand and put a stop to THAT. Can't be having a fix without our pound of flesh!

I hope the hearing tomorrow is more than an acceptance by the Court of already submitted documents, for further consideration by the Court.

He has, however, indicated his desire to move forward on this - let's hope there is substantive decisions, or at least strong guidance. Specific guidance by model and year. And time frame.

 

Well, as an exercise, assuming your #'s are accurate (30,000 vs. 100,000).... I'm sure the average MSRP of a diesel-equipped 3.0 cost at LEAST 2x that of the average MSRP of a 2.0 vehicle.

Figure your typical Jetta Sport Wagon TDI retailed for, what, $25k? The MSRP on the CD I bought was $75k... so that's 3x...

And if we go by typical used values, you're closer to 4x...

 

Just read an article. There are 475,000 2.0 tdi. So, basically, VW is saying "we paid enough. Won't pay more." But this is all speculation. Since the beginning of the case, all the plaintiffs ("our" lawyers, the EPA and CARB) has consistently been saying that whatever fix should not affect the drivability of the 3.0 cars. I interpreted that to mean "should be the same." That is why I thought the proposal of a bigger catalytic converter plus software = what it is today in terms of torque/hp/mpg. The remaining issue is (and I bet continues to be) how much to compensate owners like us so that we can sell the cars at a discount to owners like "you." lol

 

I think we're all waiting for news that we know we won't like. If the news is a stinker, we can vote with our wallets and never touch another VAG product again for our remaining car buying life span. We can influence family and friends to avoid the products too. Finally, when they become sellable, dump them on the market, which will drag down new Cayenne sales too (just like Porsche plans to do with the unsold inventory). It's gonna get ugly, but for us, its $10k- 20k per head of loss. For VAG, it billions.

 

Save you the trouble. Rumored fix will increase (by some accounts, as much as double) the DEF consumption. So the theory is that Porsche will provide lifetime DEF refills on the vehicles.


We know there are about 85,000 of the 3.0l vehicles affected. Assume, for arguments sake, that the average cost of them (between VW, Audi and Porsche) is 2.5 times the cost of the 2.0l vehicles. Given the $10.03B for 475,000 vehicles, that's about $21,115 per vehicle average. At 2.5 times that for 85,000 vehicles, it's another $4.5 billion! That's about 45% the cost of the 2.0l engines for 82% fewer vehicles. At just 2 times the VW settlement, it's just under $3.5 billion. 35% of the cost for 82% fewer vehicles. Of course they don't want to offer any type of buyback if there is a viable fix.

Not sure where the 30,000 number comes from, but between VW, Audi and Porsche, all reports say there are 85,000.

Hell, even at $20,000 compensation for 85,000 owners, that's $1.7 billion and at $15,000 per, it's $1.275 billion. BILLION! These aren't small numbers here and, as the saying goes, a billion here, a billion there... it all adds up! And that doesn't even include installing any fix (be it just software or software and hardware).

So yes, any wholesale buyback would be extremely expensive for VAG because the 3.0s are, indeed, substantially more expensive than the 2.0s and it's no surprise they don't want to go that route. And even a repair option is costly because of the difference in price and expectations of buyers of these more expensive vehicles. It's not really a thesis... the numbers prove that even with significantly fewer 3.0l vehicles, the cost to get out of this mess will still be staggering.