Well, the TV station could have gone after Circle K - seems like they were the ones selling poor quality diesel.
If I get dirt in my gasser that tanks the engine, am I supposed to chase Dodge or Marathon?
No mention was made of any other autos being affected adversely by fuel from this station. If any evidence is there I would think VW would be trying to get their 5 grand back from the station.
Well, the TV station could have gone after Circle K - seems like they were the ones selling poor quality diesel.
If I get dirt in my gasser that tanks the engine, am I supposed to chase Dodge or Marathon?
Well like I said , this VW Fiasco is just the small tip of a huge,huge, huge iceberg !
Now it is coming to light Big Corp (fuel stations ) sell sub standard fuels, standards they purportedly meet . Again, some government oversight agency is again asleep at the wheel. Aka, buck naked with a digit up the six. There iare those who would want to say that this is the only one . This "issue" has actually been known for a while, aka circa late 2006, almost a decade ago. So yes, the fuel stations should be sued or given the repair bills. They in turn should get their supplier to pay.
Hard to say; there's quite a few folks saying they've sworn off VW. VW hasn't had the best reliability reputation for ages, and now they've lost the green crowd. That pretty much leaves the GTI fanboys.
I think we're still a bit close to the revelation to tell yet. Right now some folks don't want to look like they're on a "wrong side". It will be interesting to watch this all shake out.
Kind of odd that they tested a 6 cyl. BMW. My understanding is that the VW 6 cyl. diesels were also OK, with only the 4 cyl at fault. Doesn't BMW also make 4 cyls?
They are now selling 4 cylinder BMW diesels here. Not sure what all models. MB uses their great 4 cylinder in several vehicles. Dropped the 6 cylinder in the ML class from what I understand. The new GLE 300d will be high on my list when I get ready for a new SUV.
Hard to say; there's quite a few folks saying they've sworn off VW. VW hasn't had the best reliability reputation for ages, and now they've lost the green crowd. That pretty much leaves the GTI fanboys.
I think we're still a bit close to the revelation to tell yet. Right now some folks don't want to look like they're on a "wrong side". It will be interesting to watch this all shake out.
Kind of odd that they tested a 6 cyl. BMW. My understanding is that the VW 6 cyl. diesels were also OK, with only the 4 cyl at fault. Doesn't BMW also make 4 cyls?
They are now selling 4 cylinder BMW diesels here. Not sure what all models. MB uses their great 4 cylinder in several vehicles. Dropped the 6 cylinder in the ML class from what I understand. The new GLE 300d will be high on my list when I get ready for a new SUV.
Despite the VW diesel and diesel brouhaha, I really see no reason to switch from passenger car diesels. If VW does not do the right thing with the affected one I have, again I would join any effort or lawsuit to get the right thing done. If I do not prevail, I would simply vote the pocketbook, if brand loyalty will be important to them. I probably would get another Mercedes-Benz. I still however really like the 12 VW Touareg. So far,VW has done right by me.
The funny part is the 2009 VW Jetta TDI according to CARB smog only inspections has been/is in full compliance with all CARB smog regulations !
According to the WSJ, (hard copy) the Tete-a-Tete btw VW and the EPA began more than three years ago on the TDI emissions abnormalities. So it would appear, the West Virginia study was just additional confirmation.
Diesel emissions appeared to be within regulations, except for the possibility of @ least 2/3 units, tested VW products. So without 100% testing, even the VW suspect list is... suspect.
Without getting into a long discussion, to me the reason why 100 percent testing is important is you need to know the full emissions variance of the "allegedly suspect " units, if indeed it is allegedly true.
Otherwise logically, why did mine need to be CARB smog tested? It also PASSED each inspection with flying colors! All reported electronically to the DMV .
So does anybody see why this can actually be a potential felony criminal fraud by CARB & DMV, et al, aka food chain?
"Based on discussions with knowledgeable sources, we surmise that once an emissions test was detected, VW got the affected TDI engines to meet the Tier 2, Bin 5 NOx limits by reducing the fuelflow rate.
This would reduce performance, but most likely not to the point where the car couldn't complete the emission cycles.
Lowering fuel flow would also reduce combustion temperatures and/or the duration of high-temperature operation enough to keep NOx emissions barely within EPA limits.
If the car detected that it was no longer in "testing mode" but had returned to "driving mode," it would restore fuel flow to the regular level--which would send NOx emissions soaring."
Their "expert" sources may or may not be correct but with a lot of the blog-type journalism I'd take it with a grain of salt until a technical evaluation and report is published. Until then we don't really know exactly how they did it and what the impact might be from an engine calibration designed to run cleaner (if possible with the current emission hardware).
To speculate and make an educated guess without see what the code is doing during the test, there could be a number of strategies VW used to pass. While they could have leaned the engine out I somewhat doubt that's what they were trying to do.
When you run a diesel engine lean the combustion temperatures and pressures increase. That combination of elevated temperature and pressure promote the creation of oxides of nitrogen since nitrogen makes up most of the air going into the engine. In order to run leaner for better economy the newer engines use a NOx trap/catalyst that stores the NOx during lean operation and then when the engine runs rich the catalyst can effectively start to break NOx back down into oxygen and nitrogen. The use of DEF aids in this process and allows for a greater amount of NOx to be converted.
It still isn't clear exact how the algorithm in the computer determined when to change into the special test mode, but on a technical level it probably did one of a few things to get the car to pass. The NOx emissions are the hardest to control due to the inherent design of how a compression ignition, diesel engine operates but it's important to remember that the EPA test is also looking at things like carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and un-burnt hydrocarbons.
If VW leaned the engines out the NOx would have spiked really high. If the catalyst that temporarily stores (adsorbs) the NOx has the capacity and ability to fully capture enough NOx to pass the test VW could run the engine lean, then when they go back to normal rich operation the catalyst would start converting and breaking the NOx down into oxygen and nitrogen. If it adsorbs too much NOx and runs too rich it could also dump excess. That would likely cause the spike in post-testing NOx emissions.
Because of how NOx increases significantly during lean conditions, I'd suspect they were instead trying to reduce it below normal levels. If they ran it way too rich hydrocarbon numbers would spike, but if they ran the engine slightly richer than normal it would lower NOx but elevate carbon monoxide. The question is whether the regular oxidation catalyst would be able to compensate for this.
If they could reduce NOx for the test they wouldn't want to run rich all the time as it could reduce the service life of that catalyst and impact fuel economy. There's also another way they could reduce NOx. I believe all variants of this TDI engine in question have a throttle plate. Normally diesel engines are un-throttled, meaning they don't have a conventional throttle body to restrict airflow. Instead they control engine speed and power by how much fuel is injected. Having no throttle for a free-flowing intake and less pumping losses combined with higher compression ratio and a more energy dense diesel fuel is what provides the better economy.
Modern diesels do use a throttle body or plate device to limit incoming airflow during exhaust gas recirculation events. It's possible VW activated this during part of the test to limit airflow into the engine. Since a diesel is inherently lean running, reducing the air part of an air-to-fuel mixture would cause the mixture to richen and having less air volume reduces the amount of nitrogen from the air which in turn then means less NOx can form. If they did this during normal driving when the engine is loaded it wouldn't make good power and economy would suffer, but on a chassis dyno it could be used to artificially manipulate the emissions.
VW also has the ability to alter fuel injection timing to tailor the combustion process. Combined with how much fuel is being injected and potentially using artificial airflow limitations from the throttle plate in the intake they could cause the engine to produce less NOx, trapping it in the catalyst and not allowing it to regenerate and effectively convert it back to the base elements.
While NOx is extremely important and difficult to control on a diesel VW might also have been trying to reduce CO/CO2/hydrocarbon emissions and not worrying about the creation of excessive NOx, instead relying on the trap/catalyst to store it during the test and not allowing the engine to return to conditions where it can slowly be processed. I'd find that more challenging as NOx creation is harder to control with the engine management and the catalyst can only store so much. Because the normal EPA test is just under 9 minutes it would lead me to believe they weren't running lean the entire time but instead using other methods to reduce airflow and richen the mixture while staying within limits of the oxidation catalyst.
From a powertrain controller calibration (tuning) standpoint it's an interesting exercise trying to get an engine to run super clean for a short period of time but also points out how it might be difficult or impossible to "fix" the problem with just software. They can store parts of the exhaust gasses but if the hardware (i.e. NOx trap/catalyst) doesn't have the capacity to process enough of the NOx under normal operation they'll have to try reducing it using alternate methods, which means running richer (less fuel economy) or throttling the intake to richen the mixture without increasing fuel (which will cause a loss in power).
Diesel emissions appeared to be within regulations, except for the possibility of @ least 2/3 units, tested VW products. So without 100% testing, even the VW suspect list is... suspect.
Without getting into a long discussion, to me the reason why 100 percent testing is important is you need to know the full emissions variance of the "allegedly suspect " units, if indeed it is allegedly true.
Otherwise logically, why did mine need to be CARB smog tested? It also PASSED each inspection with flying colors! All reported electronically to the DMV .
So does anybody see why this can actually be a potential felony criminal fraud by CARB & DMV, et al, aka food chain?
Again this is huge huge huge!
It's difficult to understand some of the points you're trying to make but I think you might be trying to say all cars should be smog tested (mean tail pipe tests)?
The biennial smog test on newer diesels and gasoline cars produced after the model year 2000 is now done in California with only a visual inspection and an OBD-II check. The intent is to use the extensive self-diagnostic capabilities built into a car's computer to monitor and test emission related components and continually monitor operating characteristics to identify a failed component or problem that would cause the car to fail a conventional tail pipe test.
In order to rely on OBD-II results the automaker first must certify the car to EPA standards. This proves that the hardware and software calibration are producing tail pipe measurements within acceptable standards. If they are, then the OBD-II self-test should be able to flag when you have a problem and indicate that the car probably wouldn't pass another tail pipe emission test.
The change in CARB regulations to allow only an OBD-II testing was designed to reduce equipment smog test stations needed to test newer vehicles and also reduce consumer cost and time since all the expensive OBD-II controls were mandated so vehicles would be able to monitor for evaporative emission problems and conditions where exhaust tail pipe emissions could be out of range.
California could move back to 100% percent testing at the tail pipe but your consumer smog check every couple years is a very, very simple test just to check raw numbers and not nearly as in-depth as the EPA certification. It would be much easier for the manufacturer to create a "cheat" or alter emissions for that test and still spoof the system.
OBD-II monitoring and smog testing via the car's built-in computer works great but it relies on the fact that the exhaust gas components that it doesn't have sensors to directly measure (NOx, CO and hydrocarbons) are within range when the engine is operating normally. This is what's validated by the extensive EPA testing and what certifies the car to be able to self-test and monitor.
If you're talking about ensuring that every individual model/trim level/model year is breaking the law, if they all use the same powertrain, fuel components, emission components, and engine calibration they all be affected the same, especially when VW admits to it, but I'm sure the EPA and regulatory agencies will be doing or have already done their own testing to validate it before making the case public.
LOL So what about 100% testing is difficult understand, even as I have already said 100% testing ?
So yes I understand how the current (past also) testing works. Like I said, the suspect 2009 VW Jetts TDI passed with flying colors, ergo total compliance. So thanks for posting it. Hopefully others will glean stuff from what you have posted.
Some countries ban diesel engines for passenger cars and SUVs. Only used for heavy commercial vehicles and agricultural vehicles and products. Time to bring back that policy to Europe and USA. Europeans were greedy about the high mileage provided by diesel so that then can save on the expensive gas which is twice the price of that in USA. Greed has bitten them in their backside .Diesels should never be allowed for passenger vehicle applications like cars and SUVs.
Obviously, you didn't read the AQMD.gov link. They say that the ones you are advocating are precisely the problems, not the diesel passenger cars To be clear, diesel trucks (over 14,000 #'s) to big rigs are some of the culprits. Why is this important ? Very simply, new 14,000 pounds and over trucks fall under different standards over late model diesel car, as do brand-new big rigs. Older ones are grandfathered in and some to most have little to no emissions controls.
Diesel passenger cars don't even rate a mention. Yet gasser cars and SUVs and trucks are MAJOR N0x emitters. .
LOL So what about 100% testing is difficult understand, even as I have already said 100% testing ?
So yes I understand how the current (past also) testing works. Like I said, the suspect 2009 VW Jetts TDI passed with flying colors, ergo total compliance.
Perhaps you've got what you want, which is a "natural" diesel that pollutes a lot but has better power and better mpg? But you seem to be blaming CARB for VW's cheating.
When you blame the Obama Administration for politicizing emissions, do you think the same about Ronald Reagan for signing the law establishing CARB in 1967?
The law that Reagan signed establishing CARB is one reason why VW ultimately couldn't get away with cheating.
I believe that VW can simply remove the software that switches to normal mode if they want. It will have certainly effects on performance and MPG if they do. I suspect they will try and tune it before the recall so as to minimize impact. I expect that the cars will not do nearly as good in real world as they did in the EPA testing after the fix. Our Passat TDI could do with a 15% loss in performance - no problem. But a 15% loss of MPG would be 32 MPG instead of the 42 we get at the moment - that would be big.
Keep in mind that the EPA MPG will not change; the car will still have the same ratings, since it passed the EPA tests.
I think VW already tried that, and it failed. It's a much bigger problem.
I believe that VW can simply remove the software that switches to normal mode if they want. It will have certainly effects on performance and MPG if they do. I suspect they will try and tune it before the recall so as to minimize impact. I expect that the cars will not do nearly as good in real world as they did in the EPA testing after the fix. Our Passat TDI could do with a 15% loss in performance - no problem. But a 15% loss of MPG would be 32 MPG instead of the 42 we get at the moment - that would be big.
Keep in mind that the EPA MPG will not change; the car will still have the same ratings, since it passed the EPA tests.
I think VW already tried that, and it failed. It's a much bigger problem.
Source for this? I have not read that.
Just read back on this thread. Stories have been posted about this here with links. Or check today's Automobile News.
LOL So what about 100% testing is difficult understand, even as I have already said 100% testing ?
So yes I understand how the current (past also) testing works. Like I said, the suspect 2009 VW Jetts TDI passed with flying colors, ergo total compliance.
The smog tests that an individual owner has performed for their state is nowhere near as in-depth as the EPA certification process. If you have a 2009 model year in California and are just coming up on your first biennial smog test and the car "passed" that means the car's computer hasn't spotted any problems that would cause the actual tail pipe emissions to change. The car's computer can't measure NOx directly but can infer conditions that would cause it and other emission gasses to fall outside acceptable ranges.
The assumption is that what's actually coming out of the tail pipe when the car's computer thinks it is operating normally will meets EPA standards. The computer states "you pass" but what's coming out of the tail pipe in normal driving wouldn't meet standards since VW cheated using a special mode to custom tailor exhaust emissions during only the certification test.
If you're calling for your state to go back to 100% tail pipe testing for all cars as part of the biennial smog test that still might not prove anything. Those tests aren't as sensitive as the EPA testing and the automaker could easily have yet another special operating mode to detect when this test is being performed and alter the emission to pass, then change back to a mode with increased pollution when an owner drives out of the testing facility.
I noticed in one of the articles a mention of the much higher cetane rating on European diesel. Could the fact that some of our ULSD has low cetane that gives noticeably lower MPG, be a factor in emissions? I know I quit using Mobil ULSD after 3 tanks dropped me under 24 MPG. It seems to me that when an engine works harder to move the vehicle, emissions are likely to be higher. Like pulling a long grade.
I believe that VW can simply remove the software that switches to normal mode if they want. It will have certainly effects on performance and MPG if they do. I suspect they will try and tune it before the recall so as to minimize impact. I expect that the cars will not do nearly as good in real world as they did in the EPA testing after the fix. Our Passat TDI could do with a 15% loss in performance - no problem. But a 15% loss of MPG would be 32 MPG instead of the 42 we get at the moment - that would be big.
Keep in mind that the EPA MPG will not change; the car will still have the same ratings, since it passed the EPA tests.
I think VW already tried that, and it failed. It's a much bigger problem.
Source for this? I have not read that.
Just read back on this thread. Stories have been posted about this here with links. Or check today's Automobile News.
I believe I have read the entire thread (I follow it). Can you please repost a link?
I know from a practical level, higher cetane is better, but past a certain point, it really doesn't make that much difference in mpg. So for example, there are cetane supplements.They can be mixed to get specific certain increases. But then at some point, you have to calculate whether the supplement are worth the extra $$'s. I bought them when I first started, I really couldn't tell much difference. I don't do not use them now.
I believe I have read the entire thread (I follow it). Can you please repost a link?
Here's one. Going back to original sources, this is the letter that CARB sent to VW on Sept. 18th saying that its software "fix" didn't work. It explains the steps that finally brought VW to admitting that it installed a defeat device. But this has been in several news stories as well.
I believe I have read the entire thread (I follow it). Can you please repost a link?
Here's one. Going back to original sources, this is the letter that CARB sent to VW on Sept. 18th saying that its software "fix" didn't work. It explains the steps that finally brought VW to admitting that it installed a defeat device. But this has been in several news stories as well.
Thanks for the link. That was one document I had not read, although I had read of the Dec 2014 VW "fix". However, I'm not sure this means that they could not simply change the software. VW was trying to game the system, leaving the cheat device in while making some small changes.
It is possible the fix may be harder than is thought, I take your point there. But I'm not sure VW was really trying to make it work - I think they were trying to preserve MPG and performance AND make it work at the same time. I fully expect some reduction in either (real world) MPG or performance, or more likely both.
Obviously it can be done, since the BMW passed testing.
Yes, Indeed VW can easily do it. Only one of my three VW's is on the alledged suspect list . The MBGLK250BT is not on any alledged suspect list either.
LOL So what about 100% testing is difficult understand, even as I have already said 100% testing ?
So yes I understand how the current (past also) testing works. Like I said, the suspect 2009 VW Jetts TDI passed with flying colors, ergo total compliance.
The smog tests that an individual owner has performed for their state is nowhere near as in-depth as the EPA certification process. If you have a 2009 model year in California and are just coming up on your first biennial smog test and the car "passed" that means the car's computer hasn't spotted any problems that would cause the actual tail pipe emissions to change. The car's computer can't measure NOx directly but can infer conditions that would cause it and other emission gasses to fall outside acceptable ranges.
The assumption is that what's actually coming out of the tail pipe when the car's computer thinks it is operating normally will meets EPA standards. The computer states "you pass" but what's coming out of the tail pipe in normal driving wouldn't meet standards since VW cheated using a special mode to custom tailor exhaust emissions during only the certification test.
If you're calling for your state to go back to 100% tail pipe testing for all cars as part of the biennial smog test that still might not prove anything. Those tests aren't as sensitive as the EPA testing and the automaker could easily have yet another special operating mode to detect when this test is being performed and alter the emission to pass, then change back to a mode with increased pollution when an owner drives out of the testing facility.
It also goes for the testing that you're saying. If you only tested three vehicles to draw a scientific conclusion about a population of over 500,000 , they would laugh you off the planet. If they were being polite, they would say anecdotal with an extremely small test population then roll the eyes or do eye flutters. . But front loaded testing would also show the variances, which for the purposes of what you speak, it's probably more useful, important than the after or downstream smog testing.
I believe I have read the entire thread (I follow it). Can you please repost a link?
Here's one. Going back to original sources, this is the letter that CARB sent to VW on Sept. 18th saying that its software "fix" didn't work. It explains the steps that finally brought VW to admitting that it installed a defeat device. But this has been in several news stories as well.
Thanks for the link. That was one document I had not read, although I had read of the Dec 2014 VW "fix". However, I'm not sure this means that they could not simply change the software. VW was trying to game the system, leaving the cheat device in while making some small changes.
It is possible the fix may be harder than is thought, I take your point there. But I'm not sure VW was really trying to make it work - I think they were trying to preserve MPG and performance AND make it work at the same time. I fully expect some reduction in either (real world) MPG or performance, or more likely both.
Obviously it can be done, since the BMW passed testing.
BMW diesels have had AdBlue for several years. VW just added it for 2015 for the 2.0 diesel.
So, do you think VW could have just fixed this with a software update, but chose not to?
VW has said the fix is going to take substantial time and billions of dollars, which sounds like more that just a software update.
And since they were informed about this in 2014, we assume that to some degree VW has been working on it for almost a year already....
Once VW finally comes up with a real fix, those in most of the country might be able to avoid it, since it will likely cut down on performance and mpg. But in California, apparently, the DMV won't register your car again until you get the repair done....
“If DMV is notified that a vehicle owner has not responded to a manufacturer’s emission recall notice, registration of the vehicle will be refused until a Proof of Correction Certificate is submitted," the agency said. "The Proof of Correction Certificate is obtained from an authorized dealership after the recall repairs are performed and must be submitted to DMV by the vehicle owner prior to receiving registration.”
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) cause ozone, smog, and respiratory problems. Wood and fuel oil combustion have similar levels of NOx emissions.
Gary:
Interesting comments regarding the home heating emissions! This is a MAJOR point of discussion in interior Alaska due to our winter smog levels that makes our area quite the offender. We're fairly high up on the EPA's hit list.
I have a condensing oil-fired boiler heating our house (~2,400 sq. ft. of heated space) and it uses about 650 gallons of #1 diesel (heating oil) per year. This is really good for this area; it's about half of what most places this size use.
The condensing nature of the unit not only increases heating efficiency, it dramatically reduces emissions, particularly particulate (don't say/read that too quickly!). Fine particulates (called PM<2.5 [microns]), which are NOT part of the discussion/issue for VW, are really the major culprit for harmful air pollution as it relates to asthma triggers and lung cancer, and home heating devices produce this stuff in spades.
Condensing boilers allow the exhaust to condense both within a heat exchanger and in the stack itself, and the water carries with it much (most?) of the exhaust particulates. I am actually shocked at how much of this stuff (a fine black paste) builds up in the drainage system in just a year's time. If I had to estimate (and this is probably low because I don't have any idea how much remains suspended through the whole drainage process), I would say that there is at least a full gallon of this paste that settles out of the exhaust each year.
And, this is just *my* house, one of tens of thousands, burning about half of what the "average" home here burns each year.
Why are we talking about the pollution from VW diesel engines again?
PS - Allow me to apologize for being well behind the general discussion here. Y'all are posting them far faster than I can read them, so I'm still a couple pages back!
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) cause ozone, smog, and respiratory problems. Wood and fuel oil combustion have similar levels of NOx emissions.
Gary:
Interesting comments regarding the home heating emissions! This is a MAJOR point of discussion in interior Alaska due to our winter smog levels that makes our area quite the offender. We're fairly high up on the EPA's hit list.
I have a condensing oil-fired boiler heating our house (~2,400 sq. ft. of heated space) and it uses about 650 gallons of #1 diesel (heating oil) per year. This is really good for this area; it's about half of what most places this size use.
The condensing nature of the unit not only increases heating efficiency, it dramatically reduces emissions, particularly particulate (don't say/read that too quickly!). Fine particulates (called PM<2.5 [microns]), which are NOT part of the discussion/issue for VW, are really the major culprit for harmful air pollution as it relates to asthma triggers and lung cancer, and home heating devices produce this stuff in spades.
Condensing boilers allow the exhaust to condense both within a heat exchanger and in the stack itself, and the water carries with it much (most?) of the exhaust particulates. I am actually shocked at how much of this stuff (a fine black paste) builds up in the drainage system in just a year's time. If I had to estimate (and this is probably low because I don't have any idea how much remains suspended through the whole drainage process), I would say that there is at least a full gallon of this paste that settles out of the exhaust each year.
And, this is just *my* house, one of tens of thousands, burning about half of what the "average" home here burns each year.
Why are we talking about the pollution from VW diesel engines again?
PS - Allow me to apologize for being well behind the general discussion here. Y'all are posting them far faster than I can read them, so I'm still a couple pages back! </p>
The whole blow up is somewhat reminiscent of the Bible verse about getting the log out of your own eye before you worry about the speck in someone else's eye. Jesus called them hypocrites. I would say the EPA timing is about par, with the fact they just destroyed the river environment in Colorado.
Just reading the CARB regulations on heavy duty trucks. They are allowed over 150 times the NOx we are talking about with these few VW cars. I would say that is hundreds of times more semis out there on the highways than a few Beetle TDIs.
I have been in Fairbanks during the Winter when hundreds of cars are left running in the parking lots of supermarkets and malls. We left our diesel trucks running 12 hours a day in the Arctic during the Winter. When you need to use the truck you don't always have half an hour to get it warm enough to drive.
To all those who say that heavy trucks and semis and the home heating boilers are the major polluters of NoX, I will agree with them , but there is no alternative to diesel for them., I cannot imagine a semi truck or a diesel locomotive running on gas. . Simply no torque to pull all that tonnage. But cars can run easily and safely on gas and no need of diesel just to get a better mileage.Nor can you run a home boiler on gas. Nor can ships and aircraft run on gas. They all need fuel oil. If you emasculate the diesel engines in the semi-trucks, locomotives and farm equipment, to reduce their 'emissions'., you will never get the same work done out of them .
Again, the lack of even taking the time to even understand the issues, by folks on this board emphasizes the chicken little aspects of the VW diesel witch hunt and how completely and wildly over blown this is and will further become. A non pc characterization would be hysteria. Anyone who thinks that I follow a "conspiracy theory" is a complete idiot. This is not to mention almost complete IGNORANCE of the germane topic/s. The facts speak for themselves.
So why is this web site important? Let me quote them: "SCAQMD is the air pollution control agency for all of Orange County and the urban portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, among the smoggiest regions of the U.S." ...
So they are a case study, if you will, of a gov agency responsible for "making it happen" and in the smoggiest area in the NATION!!!
I lived in Riverside, AKA, March Air Force Base for approximately three months and can attest to at least an anecdotal perspective. More currently, I do get in the areas for both business and pleasure. AKA, @ least a 43 year perspective.
Again, diesel cars are not even on the mentioned list. It's affects are not even measurable!!!
NOW look @ N0x emissions for GASSER cars and SUV's! They de facto are in compliance.
Definitely a case of the pot calling the kettle black!
So you can wave your magic wand, or in ISIS way of looking at things, you can cut off the heads of every diesel passenger car and .... ( literal NADA)
So of the 11 top N0X emitters, NO CHANGE to no significant amount of N0x elimination will occur.
Since maybe 97% or so of the cars on the road are gas, it would make sense that they count for most of the pollution. Those in favor of strict pollution controls on diesels also want strict controls on gas cars, trucks, factories, etc., etc. But VW cars shouldn't get a free pass. They are only a very small contributor in larger the scheme of pollution in the US, but they should follow the rules too. And I have no doubt that one way or another, even if it comes to a buy back, that VW will eventually fix the problem.
As you yourself said, ruking1, it seems like a glitch of serious dimensions somehow took place at VW.
But at this point the US seems like small potatoes compared to the 10.5 million VW diesels elsewhere with programming that defeats their already weaker emission controls.
In Europe diesels make up 50% of the vehicle population, and so the cheating there is a big deal, and no doubt has brought some serious pollution that has hurt some people and even shortened a few lives.
And the seeming coverup by VW in 2014 and 2015 also might be serious.
But I do hope VW can bounce back from this. And I hope real clean diesels can bounce back too.
Well, the TV station could have gone after Circle K - seems like they were the ones selling poor quality diesel.
If I get dirt in my gasser that tanks the engine, am I supposed to chase Dodge or Marathon?
No mention was made of any other autos being affected adversely by fuel from this station. If any evidence is there I would think VW would be trying to get their 5 grand back from the station.
Good point however it sounds like the poor fuel problem in this case didn't happen just from one tank of diesel.
In Europe diesels make up 50% of the vehicle population, and so the cheating there is a big deal, and no doubt has brought some serious pollution that has hurt some people and even shortened a few lives.
And the seeming coverup by VW in 2014 and 2015 also might be serious.
But I do hope VW can bounce back from this. And I hope real clean diesels can bounce back too.
For many reasons, the answers are no. What would be interesting however is the comparison of the AQMD area ( smoggiest in the nation) to a similar one in Europe (smoggiest in Europe) BUT similar to AQMD. Then set up control conditions to see the effect of theoretical 3% TDI 's in the AQMD area to a theoretical 50% diesels in the European area .
If I had to guess, I would say the AQMD is much more smoggy. And the fact that the 50% plus diesel percentage will probably be statistically insignificant .
Not related, I suspect that diesels will get back to some normalicy. I think diesels will continue to grow.
"The EPA hit-list also includes the 2015 TDI versions of all of these cars, and has refused to certify any 2016 versions for sale. But these use a totally new 2.0-liter TDI engine, one that belongs to a whole new engine family that goes by the name EA288. All of them have SCR systems that use DEF, not just the Passat.
VW's response includes a statement that says the bad software was limited to the older EA189 engine family, which only goes as far as the 2014 models. If true, the 2015 and later vehicles may fall off the EPA's list with no need for updated software or other recall measures to be in compliance. Time will tell."
"In theory, any new calibration would move real-world performance closer to the test-only calibration that currently passes the dyno tests. Since that calibration drives today's window sticker fuel economy, a customer's observed mpg should fall, but only to the level of the current window sticker. VW's mpg-based marketing claims may still hold up after the dust settles."
Well yes, that's the thing, the EPA probably use those threats 2015/2016 MY's as carrot and stick approach.
But given what I know, I'd be fine with 43 to 45 mpg, for a Golf, Jetta, Passat TDI!s. They have already demonstrated they can do it without cheating . Thankfully they put the AdBlue filler behind the locking fuel cap door.
If the mpg holds up using the test mode, that takes away one claim from the owners who want to sue, since they will still be getting what they paid for after the recalibration.
If the fix requires more than going back to the test mode 24/7, then it's a bigger problem.
My guess is that the EPA is more concerned about the NOx emissions and they'll leave "performance" and "greenmail" issues to the lawyers. Although I suppose the FTC could get interested in false advertising kinds of issues. DOJ is a big cloud since VW actively hid the ball and using default devices are specifically named as a violation. Nothing that a few campaign contributions (to both parties) shouldn't help clear up.
Now you are getting down to the SOS/DD ! I'm sure Merkel and Obama are already in the loop, Not to mention the EU representatives, Labor unions, for sure. Truly, IF you want a worldwide funk, prosecute this thing to the hilt!!!
"The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Resource Air Board (CARB) separately announced plans to expand testing to Volkswagen’s 3.0-liter engines. Models offering this 6-cylinder engine include the Porsche Cayenne, Volkswagen Toureg and Audi A6."
Now you are getting down to the SOS/DD ! I'm sure Merkel and Obama are already in the loop, Not to mention the EU representatives, Labor unions, for sure. Truly, IF you want a worldwide funk, prosecute this thing to the hilt!!!
It's absurd to say the solution to VW cheating is individual vehicle tailpipe emissions testing. That might be a good approach to bag the intentional/individual coal-rollers, but that is another issue entirely. Let's try to stay on topic!
Assume all of VAG's emissions software has a similar cheat device, until proven otherwise. Retest every VW/Porsche/Audi produced with software since 1996 and rack up the penalties. Subpoena the source code for every VW since 1996. Disassemble it and look for other cheats.
Also I would like all the engineers involved to be interviewed as part of any criminal probe and/or the screenplay: _The Soul of the Cheating Cheaters New Diesel Machine_.
Old friend of mine was senior engineer at Bosch and Ford/Mazda. This one dude, absolutely no WAY would he allow something like this to occur on his watch. Not a chance. But he is an airflow engineer not an emissions/ECM software+chemical eng.
But considering the Stanley Milgram proof of what people will do, maybe some of my hundreds of engineer friends would have allowed the cheating if told by management to do so?
?Were the engineers PAID OFF to keep their mouths shut about the cheating?
Those concerned with the EPA terminology of calling software a "device" can quibble with an english professor and then go ahead and get industry & government & 4 zillion software patents to adopt whatever preferred newspeak terminology.
The 2007 & later Rube Goldberg USA road-diesel-vehicle emissions requirements may be onerous and this seems to have contributed to the incentive for carmakers to cheat with diesel ECM more than with gasser ECM.
ps - Stupid "jokes" about refugees are particularly unappreciated by us descendants of refugees who were sent to USA as children 100 years ago, from the same country, due to the same religious persecution.
I find Fiat's Marchione to be highly annoying. But it's true that at the current price VW stock is about 50% less than its high of about 6 months ago....
Yes, it has been a great money making opportunity !
It has to be highly interesting that even the Pope was advertising FIAT and JEEP (roll barred Pope mobile) during his recent American trip.
It would be interesting if (he) Marchione was trying to get the Pope to do some inadvertent merger schlepping?
But like I said all along, this VW diesel fiasco is just the tiny tip of the huge, huge, huge almost global iceberg. To say it has had a world wide ripple effect, should be blatantly obvious and would only be clueless to only somebody just coming back to the planet.
Let's see, drawn in @ the very least: the Porsche & Piech scions, State of Lower Saxony, VW labor unions, union pension funds, Germany, EU, German auto industry, EPA, CARB, other regulatory agencies, Nuclear, Coal power industries, etc., etc. It is not a stretch to say that common diesel owners have been victimized.
Mark my words: IF cheating is done on the diesel side, which is less than 2.5% in AM markets, how prevalent would it be on the 98% AM gasser side ??? Those with stakes really don't want Klieg lights on that issue. To say that nobody is cheating / has not cheated on the gasser side would be the height of naïveté . 98% of the passenger vehicles fleet, in light of the 54.5 miles per gallon standard is way behind (@optimistically 20 mpg).!!! But defacto, the truth might be closer to burn more, while saying you should burn less.
I cite Toyota Prius 2004 60 c/50 h mpg that only got app 43 mpg.. Relatively nothing happened to them. If anything they are saying behind closed doors) a great way to sell pick up trucks/ SUV's that only get 16 mpg, if that!
I bet the Koch brothers are miffed they haven't been implicated !
"Auto Bild, said Thursday in a pre-release of an article to be published later this week that BMW’s X3 xDrive 20d SUV, powered by a diesel engine, emitted more than 11 times more nitrogen oxide than permitted by the European Union under standardized conditions. The magazine said the results came through a street test conducted by the International Council on Clean Transportation, a nonprofit research organization." (WSJ registration link)
It really calls the whole measuring system gas, gas hybrid etc. into question. AQMD slides show gas,gas hybrids,cars, SUV's & light trucks as significant N0x generators in the real world.
>It's absurd to say the solution to VW cheating is individual vehicle tailpipe emissions testing
Tailpipe testing isn't that big of a deal and could be done after any fix is applied as a crosscheck and to catch owners who didn't apply the fix. They used to tailpipe my cars in Boise along with the OBDII data gathering. They never got put on a dyno.
Comments
If I get dirt in my gasser that tanks the engine, am I supposed to chase Dodge or Marathon?
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Now it is coming to light Big Corp (fuel stations ) sell sub standard fuels, standards they purportedly meet . Again, some government oversight agency is again asleep at the wheel. Aka, buck naked with a digit up the six. There iare those who would want to say that this is the only one . This "issue" has actually been known for a while, aka circa late 2006, almost a decade ago. So yes, the fuel stations should be sued or given the repair bills. They in turn should get their supplier to pay.
They are now selling 4 cylinder BMW diesels here. Not sure what all models. MB uses their great 4 cylinder in several vehicles. Dropped the 6 cylinder in the ML class from what I understand. The new GLE 300d will be high on my list when I get ready for a new SUV.
The funny part is the 2009 VW Jetta TDI according to CARB smog only inspections has been/is in full compliance with all CARB smog regulations !
According to the WSJ, (hard copy) the Tete-a-Tete btw VW and the EPA began more than three years ago on the TDI emissions abnormalities. So it would appear, the West Virginia study was just additional confirmation.
Diesel emissions appeared to be within regulations, except for the possibility of @ least 2/3 units, tested VW products. So without 100% testing, even the VW suspect list is... suspect.
Without getting into a long discussion, to me the reason why 100 percent testing is important is you need to know the full emissions variance of the "allegedly suspect " units, if indeed it is allegedly true.
Otherwise logically, why did mine need to be CARB smog tested? It also PASSED each inspection with flying colors! All reported electronically to the DMV .
So does anybody see why this can actually be a potential felony criminal fraud by CARB & DMV, et al, aka food chain?
Again this is huge huge huge!
To speculate and make an educated guess without see what the code is doing during the test, there could be a number of strategies VW used to pass. While they could have leaned the engine out I somewhat doubt that's what they were trying to do.
When you run a diesel engine lean the combustion temperatures and pressures increase. That combination of elevated temperature and pressure promote the creation of oxides of nitrogen since nitrogen makes up most of the air going into the engine. In order to run leaner for better economy the newer engines use a NOx trap/catalyst that stores the NOx during lean operation and then when the engine runs rich the catalyst can effectively start to break NOx back down into oxygen and nitrogen. The use of DEF aids in this process and allows for a greater amount of NOx to be converted.
It still isn't clear exact how the algorithm in the computer determined when to change into the special test mode, but on a technical level it probably did one of a few things to get the car to pass. The NOx emissions are the hardest to control due to the inherent design of how a compression ignition, diesel engine operates but it's important to remember that the EPA test is also looking at things like carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and un-burnt hydrocarbons.
If VW leaned the engines out the NOx would have spiked really high. If the catalyst that temporarily stores (adsorbs) the NOx has the capacity and ability to fully capture enough NOx to pass the test VW could run the engine lean, then when they go back to normal rich operation the catalyst would start converting and breaking the NOx down into oxygen and nitrogen. If it adsorbs too much NOx and runs too rich it could also dump excess. That would likely cause the spike in post-testing NOx emissions.
Because of how NOx increases significantly during lean conditions, I'd suspect they were instead trying to reduce it below normal levels. If they ran it way too rich hydrocarbon numbers would spike, but if they ran the engine slightly richer than normal it would lower NOx but elevate carbon monoxide. The question is whether the regular oxidation catalyst would be able to compensate for this.
If they could reduce NOx for the test they wouldn't want to run rich all the time as it could reduce the service life of that catalyst and impact fuel economy. There's also another way they could reduce NOx. I believe all variants of this TDI engine in question have a throttle plate. Normally diesel engines are un-throttled, meaning they don't have a conventional throttle body to restrict airflow. Instead they control engine speed and power by how much fuel is injected. Having no throttle for a free-flowing intake and less pumping losses combined with higher compression ratio and a more energy dense diesel fuel is what provides the better economy.
Modern diesels do use a throttle body or plate device to limit incoming airflow during exhaust gas recirculation events. It's possible VW activated this during part of the test to limit airflow into the engine. Since a diesel is inherently lean running, reducing the air part of an air-to-fuel mixture would cause the mixture to richen and having less air volume reduces the amount of nitrogen from the air which in turn then means less NOx can form. If they did this during normal driving when the engine is loaded it wouldn't make good power and economy would suffer, but on a chassis dyno it could be used to artificially manipulate the emissions.
VW also has the ability to alter fuel injection timing to tailor the combustion process. Combined with how much fuel is being injected and potentially using artificial airflow limitations from the throttle plate in the intake they could cause the engine to produce less NOx, trapping it in the catalyst and not allowing it to regenerate and effectively convert it back to the base elements.
While NOx is extremely important and difficult to control on a diesel VW might also have been trying to reduce CO/CO2/hydrocarbon emissions and not worrying about the creation of excessive NOx, instead relying on the trap/catalyst to store it during the test and not allowing the engine to return to conditions where it can slowly be processed. I'd find that more challenging as NOx creation is harder to control with the engine management and the catalyst can only store so much. Because the normal EPA test is just under 9 minutes it would lead me to believe they weren't running lean the entire time but instead using other methods to reduce airflow and richen the mixture while staying within limits of the oxidation catalyst.
From a powertrain controller calibration (tuning) standpoint it's an interesting exercise trying to get an engine to run super clean for a short period of time but also points out how it might be difficult or impossible to "fix" the problem with just software. They can store parts of the exhaust gasses but if the hardware (i.e. NOx trap/catalyst) doesn't have the capacity to process enough of the NOx under normal operation they'll have to try reducing it using alternate methods, which means running richer (less fuel economy) or throttling the intake to richen the mixture without increasing fuel (which will cause a loss in power).
If you would put that on say WSJ, as intelligent as most of that audience is, you'd lose most of them.
The biennial smog test on newer diesels and gasoline cars produced after the model year 2000 is now done in California with only a visual inspection and an OBD-II check. The intent is to use the extensive self-diagnostic capabilities built into a car's computer to monitor and test emission related components and continually monitor operating characteristics to identify a failed component or problem that would cause the car to fail a conventional tail pipe test.
In order to rely on OBD-II results the automaker first must certify the car to EPA standards. This proves that the hardware and software calibration are producing tail pipe measurements within acceptable standards. If they are, then the OBD-II self-test should be able to flag when you have a problem and indicate that the car probably wouldn't pass another tail pipe emission test.
The change in CARB regulations to allow only an OBD-II testing was designed to reduce equipment smog test stations needed to test newer vehicles and also reduce consumer cost and time since all the expensive OBD-II controls were mandated so vehicles would be able to monitor for evaporative emission problems and conditions where exhaust tail pipe emissions could be out of range.
California could move back to 100% percent testing at the tail pipe but your consumer smog check every couple years is a very, very simple test just to check raw numbers and not nearly as in-depth as the EPA certification. It would be much easier for the manufacturer to create a "cheat" or alter emissions for that test and still spoof the system.
OBD-II monitoring and smog testing via the car's built-in computer works great but it relies on the fact that the exhaust gas components that it doesn't have sensors to directly measure (NOx, CO and hydrocarbons) are within range when the engine is operating normally. This is what's validated by the extensive EPA testing and what certifies the car to be able to self-test and monitor.
If you're talking about ensuring that every individual model/trim level/model year is breaking the law, if they all use the same powertrain, fuel components, emission components, and engine calibration they all be affected the same, especially when VW admits to it, but I'm sure the EPA and regulatory agencies will be doing or have already done their own testing to validate it before making the case public.
So yes I understand how the current (past also) testing works. Like I said, the suspect 2009 VW Jetts TDI passed with flying colors, ergo total compliance. So thanks for posting it. Hopefully others will glean stuff from what you have posted.
Europeans were greedy about the high mileage provided by diesel so that then can save on the expensive gas which is twice the price of that in USA. Greed has bitten them in their backside .Diesels should never be allowed for passenger vehicle applications like cars and SUVs.
Diesel passenger cars don't even rate a mention. Yet gasser cars and SUVs and trucks are MAJOR N0x emitters. .
When you blame the Obama Administration for politicizing emissions, do you think the same about Ronald Reagan for signing the law establishing CARB in 1967?
The law that Reagan signed establishing CARB is one reason why VW ultimately couldn't get away with cheating.
The assumption is that what's actually coming out of the tail pipe when the car's computer thinks it is operating normally will meets EPA standards. The computer states "you pass" but what's coming out of the tail pipe in normal driving wouldn't meet standards since VW cheated using a special mode to custom tailor exhaust emissions during only the certification test.
If you're calling for your state to go back to 100% tail pipe testing for all cars as part of the biennial smog test that still might not prove anything. Those tests aren't as sensitive as the EPA testing and the automaker could easily have yet another special operating mode to detect when this test is being performed and alter the emission to pass, then change back to a mode with increased pollution when an owner drives out of the testing facility.
I believe I have read the entire thread (I follow it). Can you please repost a link?
Here's one. Going back to original sources, this is the letter that CARB sent to VW on Sept. 18th saying that its software "fix" didn't work. It explains the steps that finally brought VW to admitting that it installed a defeat device. But this has been in several news stories as well.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/in_use_compliance_letter.pdf
It is possible the fix may be harder than is thought, I take your point there. But I'm not sure VW was really trying to make it work - I think they were trying to preserve MPG and performance AND make it work at the same time. I fully expect some reduction in either (real world) MPG or performance, or more likely both.
Obviously it can be done, since the BMW passed testing.
BMW diesels have had AdBlue for several years. VW just added it for 2015 for the 2.0 diesel.
So, do you think VW could have just fixed this with a software update, but chose not to?
VW has said the fix is going to take substantial time and billions of dollars, which sounds like more that just a software update.
And since they were informed about this in 2014, we assume that to some degree VW has been working on it for almost a year already....
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-california-dmv-vw-diesel-20150921-story.html
“If DMV is notified that a vehicle owner has not responded to a manufacturer’s emission recall notice, registration of the vehicle will be refused until a Proof of Correction Certificate is submitted," the agency said. "The Proof of Correction Certificate is obtained from an authorized dealership after the recall repairs are performed and must be submitted to DMV by the vehicle owner prior to receiving registration.”
Interesting comments regarding the home heating emissions! This is a MAJOR point of discussion in interior Alaska due to our winter smog levels that makes our area quite the offender. We're fairly high up on the EPA's hit list.
I have a condensing oil-fired boiler heating our house (~2,400 sq. ft. of heated space) and it uses about 650 gallons of #1 diesel (heating oil) per year. This is really good for this area; it's about half of what most places this size use.
The condensing nature of the unit not only increases heating efficiency, it dramatically reduces emissions, particularly particulate (don't say/read that too quickly!). Fine particulates (called PM<2.5 [microns]), which are NOT part of the discussion/issue for VW, are really the major culprit for harmful air pollution as it relates to asthma triggers and lung cancer, and home heating devices produce this stuff in spades.
Condensing boilers allow the exhaust to condense both within a heat exchanger and in the stack itself, and the water carries with it much (most?) of the exhaust particulates. I am actually shocked at how much of this stuff (a fine black paste) builds up in the drainage system in just a year's time. If I had to estimate (and this is probably low because I don't have any idea how much remains suspended through the whole drainage process), I would say that there is at least a full gallon of this paste that settles out of the exhaust each year.
And, this is just *my* house, one of tens of thousands, burning about half of what the "average" home here burns each year.
Why are we talking about the pollution from VW diesel engines again?
PS - Allow me to apologize for being well behind the general discussion here. Y'all are posting them far faster than I can read them, so I'm still a couple pages back!
The whole blow up is somewhat reminiscent of the Bible verse about getting the log out of your own eye before you worry about the speck in someone else's eye. Jesus called them hypocrites. I would say the EPA timing is about par, with the fact they just destroyed the river environment in Colorado.
Just reading the CARB regulations on heavy duty trucks. They are allowed over 150 times the NOx we are talking about with these few VW cars. I would say that is hundreds of times more semis out there on the highways than a few Beetle TDIs.
I have been in Fairbanks during the Winter when hundreds of cars are left running in the parking lots of supermarkets and malls. We left our diesel trucks running 12 hours a day in the Arctic during the Winter. When you need to use the truck you don't always have half an hour to get it warm enough to drive.
If you emasculate the diesel engines in the semi-trucks, locomotives and farm equipment, to reduce their 'emissions'., you will never get the same work done out of them .
Again, the lack of even taking the time to even understand the issues, by folks on this board emphasizes the chicken little aspects of the VW diesel witch hunt and how completely and wildly over blown this is and will further become. A non pc characterization would be hysteria. Anyone who thinks that I follow a "conspiracy theory" is a complete idiot. This is not to mention almost complete IGNORANCE of the germane topic/s. The facts speak for themselves.
http://www.aqmd.gov
So why is this web site important? Let me quote them: "SCAQMD is the air pollution control agency for all of Orange County and the urban portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, among the smoggiest regions of the U.S." ...
So they are a case study, if you will, of a gov agency responsible for "making it happen" and in the smoggiest area in the NATION!!!
http://www.aqmd.gov
I lived in Riverside, AKA, March Air Force Base for approximately three months and can attest to at least an anecdotal perspective. More currently, I do get in the areas for both business and pleasure. AKA, @ least a 43 year perspective.
Again, diesel cars are not even on the mentioned list. It's affects are not even measurable!!!
NOW look @ N0x emissions for GASSER cars and SUV's! They de facto are in compliance.
Definitely a case of the pot calling the kettle black!
So you can wave your magic wand, or in ISIS way of looking at things, you can cut off the heads of every diesel passenger car and .... ( literal NADA)
So of the 11 top N0X emitters, NO CHANGE to no significant amount of N0x elimination will occur.
As you yourself said, ruking1, it seems like a glitch of serious dimensions somehow took place at VW.
But at this point the US seems like small potatoes compared to the 10.5 million VW diesels elsewhere with programming that defeats their already weaker emission controls.
In Europe diesels make up 50% of the vehicle population, and so the cheating there is a big deal, and no doubt has brought some serious pollution that has hurt some people and even shortened a few lives.
And the seeming coverup by VW in 2014 and 2015 also might be serious.
But I do hope VW can bounce back from this. And I hope real clean diesels can bounce back too.
If I had to guess, I would say the AQMD is much more smoggy. And the fact that the 50% plus diesel percentage will probably be statistically insignificant .
Not related, I suspect that diesels will get back to some normalicy. I think diesels will continue to grow.
VW's response includes a statement that says the bad software was limited to the older EA189 engine family, which only goes as far as the 2014 models. If true, the 2015 and later vehicles may fall off the EPA's list with no need for updated software or other recall measures to be in compliance. Time will tell."
2013 Volkswagen Passat TDI: Our Long-Term MPG Results May Shed Light on Future Emissions Recall Expectations
"In theory, any new calibration would move real-world performance closer to the test-only calibration that currently passes the dyno tests. Since that calibration drives today's window sticker fuel economy, a customer's observed mpg should fall, but only to the level of the current window sticker. VW's mpg-based marketing claims may still hold up after the dust settles."
But given what I know, I'd be fine with 43 to 45 mpg, for a Golf, Jetta, Passat TDI!s. They have already demonstrated they can do it without cheating . Thankfully they put the AdBlue filler behind the locking fuel cap door.
If the fix requires more than going back to the test mode 24/7, then it's a bigger problem.
My guess is that the EPA is more concerned about the NOx emissions and they'll leave "performance" and "greenmail" issues to the lawyers. Although I suppose the FTC could get interested in false advertising kinds of issues. DOJ is a big cloud since VW actively hid the ball and using default devices are specifically named as a violation. Nothing that a few campaign contributions (to both parties) shouldn't help clear up.
http://news.yahoo.com/catastrophe-german-media-reacted-vw-135151722.html
Officials Expand Investigation To 3.0-Liter Volkswagen Diesel Engines (hybridcars.com)
"Seems VW fought diesel wars with smoke and mirrors, mostly smoke.
Volkswagen called it clean diesel. Clean like Lance Armstrong. Clean like the Chicago River.
VW has admitted to the Environmental Protection Agency that hundreds of thousands of its diesel cars have been using what is literally a killer app."
VW comes clean on dark heart of its diesel cars. Can it clear the air? (Chicago Tribune)
Assume all of VAG's emissions software has a similar cheat device, until proven otherwise.
Retest every VW/Porsche/Audi produced with software since 1996 and rack up the penalties.
Subpoena the source code for every VW since 1996. Disassemble it and look for other cheats.
Also I would like all the engineers involved to be interviewed as part of any criminal probe and/or the screenplay: _The Soul of the Cheating Cheaters New Diesel Machine_.
Old friend of mine was senior engineer at Bosch and Ford/Mazda. This one dude, absolutely no WAY would he allow something like this to occur on his watch. Not a chance. But he is an airflow engineer not an emissions/ECM software+chemical eng.
But considering the Stanley Milgram proof of what people will do, maybe some of my hundreds of engineer friends would have allowed the cheating if told by management to do so?
?Were the engineers PAID OFF to keep their mouths shut about the cheating?
Those concerned with the EPA terminology of calling software a "device" can quibble with an english professor and then go ahead and get industry & government & 4 zillion software patents to adopt whatever preferred newspeak terminology.
The 2007 & later Rube Goldberg USA road-diesel-vehicle emissions requirements may be onerous and this seems to have contributed to the incentive for carmakers to cheat with diesel ECM more than with gasser ECM.
ps - Stupid "jokes" about refugees are particularly unappreciated by us descendants of refugees who were sent to USA as children 100 years ago, from the same country, due to the same religious persecution.
It has to be highly interesting that even the Pope was advertising FIAT and JEEP (roll barred Pope mobile) during his recent American trip.
It would be interesting if (he) Marchione was trying to get the Pope to do some inadvertent merger schlepping?
But like I said all along, this VW diesel fiasco is just the tiny tip of the huge, huge, huge almost global iceberg. To say it has had a world wide ripple effect, should be blatantly obvious and would only be clueless to only somebody just coming back to the planet.
Let's see, drawn in @ the very least: the Porsche & Piech scions, State of Lower Saxony, VW labor unions, union pension funds, Germany, EU, German auto industry, EPA, CARB, other regulatory agencies, Nuclear, Coal power industries, etc., etc. It is not a stretch to say that common diesel owners have been victimized.
Mark my words: IF cheating is done on the diesel side, which is less than 2.5% in AM markets, how prevalent would it be on the 98% AM gasser side ??? Those with stakes really don't want Klieg lights on that issue. To say that nobody is cheating / has not cheated on the gasser side would be the height of naïveté . 98% of the passenger vehicles fleet, in light of the 54.5 miles per gallon standard is way behind (@optimistically 20 mpg).!!! But defacto, the truth might be closer to burn more, while saying you should burn less.
I cite Toyota Prius 2004 60 c/50 h mpg that only got app 43 mpg.. Relatively nothing happened to them. If anything they are saying behind closed doors) a great way to sell pick up trucks/ SUV's that only get 16 mpg, if that!
I bet the Koch brothers are miffed they haven't been implicated !
"Auto Bild, said Thursday in a pre-release of an article to be published later this week that BMW’s X3 xDrive 20d SUV, powered by a diesel engine, emitted more than 11 times more nitrogen oxide than permitted by the European Union under standardized conditions. The magazine said the results came through a street test conducted by the International Council on Clean Transportation, a nonprofit research organization." (WSJ registration link)
Wouldn't matter much for here anyway, the 20d isn't sold in NA, AFAIK.
>It's absurd to say the solution to VW cheating is individual vehicle tailpipe emissions testing
Tailpipe testing isn't that big of a deal and could be done after any fix is applied as a crosscheck and to catch owners who didn't apply the fix. They used to tailpipe my cars in Boise along with the OBDII data gathering. They never got put on a dyno.