Jeep Garage  - Jeep Forum banner

VW admits to EPA that diesel equipped cars will only meet emissions when tested

10K views 73 replies 30 participants last post by  hayasa 
#1 ·
#2 ·
#3 ·
Apparently the EPA says that VW was using the ECU to manipulate the SCR on 2.0L TDI's to alter fuel economy figures. I hope the EPA gains nothing from this as anything they do will only hurt diesel owners everywhere. The EPA can take their biodiesel and ethanol mandates and shove up their tailpipes! :eek:
 
#4 ·
Amazing that VW would cheat so egregiously. Think of the engineering resources and costs FCA has invested to try to get this CRD to meet emissions requirements in the US. Once the software cheat is disabled, it'll be interesting to see how many VW owners suffer the same soot buildup/CAT/EGR problems that have plagued us, and whether VW will stand behind their products like Jeep has.
 
#5 · (Edited)
I am no fan of our out of control EPA but in this case I hope they throw the book at VW. To intentionally design something to evade and violate law like that has no excuse. There are enough problems with unintended defects in vehicles but to do something like this, I hope they get the full 18 Billion in fines and they are made to buy back every vehicle that won't meet the spec they was sold under.
 
#8 ·
Why would that matter? You can disagree with the law and fight to get it changed, but until it's changed, you have to comply. You can disagree with a state deciding to keep the 55mph speed limit, but if you get a ticket going 70, you should be exempt because you disagree? Try telling that one to the judge.

I'm amazed that a corporation would willfully violate the law like this. I almost hope there's some mistake being made.

Jim
 
#9 ·
Before you all buy the EPA's assertion hook, line, and sinker perhaps you ought wait to learn more and hear VW's side of the story? The EPA says in their own letter to VW that they allegedly manipulated the ECU to alter how the SCR works to pass emissions tests, and they cite all the 2.0L TDI's in their North American lineup. The problem with that however unfortunately for the EPA and CARB, is that the only vehicle in the NA lineup that uses the 2.0L TDI and SCR, is the Passat.

I'm thinking that much like with most everything else to come out of the EPA and CARB's mouths, they don't know what they are talking about here. Let's learn more before you condemn VW and rush to a premature judgement.
 
#10 ·
"The EPA says VW admitted that the device existed when they were threatened with not being allowed to sell 2016 model year diesels in the US."

Yes, VW is being unfairly persecuted by the EPA. :lol:
 
#11 · (Edited)
VW should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

And before you are quick to judge EPA, think of the competitive advantages that a cheating automaker can have on the market through such manipulations. It may allow them to sell cars (and dominate the market) in places where they would comply with state-specific requirements (e.g. CARB) and other manufacturers don't.

Or maybe all manufacturers would be able to sell cars in those markets (e.g. California) except that the cheating manufacturer doesn't have to install the additional $750 dollar emission control device (DPF, urea injection, whatever) in order to pass the testing. So, they would be able to either price their vehicle lower than the competition, leading to a price advantage, hence more sales; or price it similar to the competitors but have a greater profit because their manufacturing cost was lower or any combination of these and other strategies.

And this nation has laws. Good or Bad they are to be followed until repelled. I personally care for the future and think that EPA tail pipe emission regulations (and any other regulations) serve to bring about technological progress as well as impact the overall morbidity and mortality. I love how Republicans love to say that we cannot change global warming by ourselves. No we cannot. And the fact that China may not cut its greenhouse gas emissions, will impact us. For sure. But emissions related to global warming also relate to the increased morbidity (disease) and mortality at local and regional levels. Of course there are advances in modern medicine which increase mean life expectation, but still translates into your parents dying sooner, you living a few years more than your parents but with chronic diseases, and your kids having chronic diseases that develop at much earlier ages. And that is all thanks to the toxic particulates PM 2.5 and PM 10 that you inhale, despite living miles or tens of miles away from industrial parks.
 
#21 ·
F1ANATIC, thanks for generalizing and marginalizing the opinions of others. The 'settled science' argument of our current president is getting tiring.

The simple fact is these 'laws' are actually regulations set forth by the EPA for emissions levels. The arbitrary levels of reduction set by the current administration have one goal, kill off internal combustion engines of any type. Zero emission vehicles is the ultimate goal.

Nobody in the EPA mentions the lower efficiency of adding new emission controls. Less efficiency means more fuel burned per mile. This at a time where they are also pushing MPG standards higher.
 
#19 ·
And now for an opposing viewpoint:

FIrst, Diesel exhaust is incredibly bad. Back maybe 15 years ago I was working for a company that made equipment for aerosol particle measurement..
Much of the crap that diesels spew is right in the sweet-spot (in terms of particle size) for absorption by human lungs.. the pharma companies were trying desperately (and are still trying) to get that particle-size range reliably generated for inhaled drug delivery.

So no, the EPA isn't doing bad things here.

Second, VW knew the rules. VW was surely deeply involved in the process that created the rules. The question in this case (not a lot has come out yet) is whether VW violated the "letter" or the "spirit" of the rules. Back a decade before my adventures in aerosols, I was doing computer architecture/design for a major computer company.. and we (and all our competitors) worked hard to get whatever set of benchmarks was important at a given time to fly, whether or not that made any difference at all to what real users saw for performance.. but we were adhering to the "Letter" of the benchmark rules, and not the "Spirit" of what the benchmarks were supposed to do...

Not clear VW can be fined for anything other than violating the "letter" of the law..
 
#20 ·
And now for an opposing viewpoint:

FIrst, Diesel exhaust is incredibly bad. Back maybe 15 years ago I was working for a company that made equipment for aerosol particle measurement..
Much of the crap that diesels spew is right in the sweet-spot (in terms of particle size) for absorption by human lungs.. the pharma companies were trying desperately (and are still trying) to get that particle-size range reliably generated for inhaled drug delivery.

So no, the EPA isn't doing bad things here.

Second, VW knew the rules. VW was surely deeply involved in the process that created the rules. The question in this case (not a lot has come out yet) is whether VW violated the "letter" or the "spirit" of the rules. Back a decade before my adventures in aerosols, I was doing computer architecture/design for a major computer company.. and we (and all our competitors) worked hard to get whatever set of benchmarks was important at a given time to fly, whether or not that made any difference at all to what real users saw for performance.. but we were adhering to the "Letter" of the benchmark rules, and not the "Spirit" of what the benchmarks were supposed to do...

Not clear VW can be fined for anything other than violating the "letter" of the law..

I will be surprised if the EPA is attacking VW on diesel particulate emissions. They are probably attacking VW on NOX emissions which is nothing more than global warming fear mongering.
 
#24 ·
I'm surprised VW would supposedly "admit" to the CARB and/or the EPA that they had an ECU altering emissions during testing without at least that being contingent upon they all agreeing on a course of action and form of punishment. That doesn't sound very good counsel, at the least.

Also, I'd be curious as well as to how these US spec TDI's compare to the Euro spec TDI's as far as emissions outputs are concerned. Euro spec emissions I thought were very strict as well, but their cars usually required less emissions crap like the modern diesels do over here.

As for having to create a special tool to analyze NOx levels, that sounds just like the EPA and CARB, creating a threshold that before then couldn't be accurately measured.
 
#25 ·
You are missing my point but you appear to not have an open mind about other opinions on the matter. It does not matter when congress enacted the laws or how long these policies have been evolving. You made it a political conversation. The well known current political agenda is to push mass subsides to hybrid and electric while increasing the costs for internal combustion via regulation.

If you have so much trouble with diesel emissions why did you buy one?

I do not doubt VW will get nailed for this but I actually have an open mind to see there is some justification for what they have done to increase the life of this newer technology that we have seen so many issues with our own VM diesels. FCA pushed theirs through and now has a black mark for reliability on the Grand Cherokee that they now need to dig themselves out. That will take years. VW took a gamble while they worked the kinks out and lost.
 
#27 ·
No, that would be inefficient. It is more likely they will spend it doing something for their supporters. The returns will be huge in comparison.

I was wondering how/why the government found out about this. Maybe somebody who doesn't like the way they cozy up to the unions ... :lol:


---
 
#28 ·
Awesome.


The Environmental Protection Agency and California officials will test other diesel vehicles for use of software that deceives regulators measuring toxic emissions following news Friday that Volkswagen could face $18 billion in penalties for using that technology, an agency official said Monday.The federal and California Air Resources Board will test other vehicles for possible "defeat devices" after announcing on Friday that Volkswagen AG uses software that turns off emissions controls in cars when driving normally and turns them on when undergoing emissions tests.
EPA, California to test other diesel vehicles after Volkswagen | TODAYonline
 
#29 ·
EPA is a joke. Awhile back we had an R-12 chiller refrigerant leak...2000 pounds worth. I called them to report it..there response was that if its under 5000 lbs, they do not need to know???
Really..why do they fine a poor tech who lets loose a few onces on the side of someone's house...idiots
 
#30 ·
So VW stock price gets slammed, losing 23% in one day of trading, most of it in the early morning today. It could be a very intersting buy opportunity for their stock price since every car manufacturer bounces back (look at GM, Toyota, and Honda).

Here's an interesting link with much information: VW's Emissions Cheating Found by Curious Clean-Air Group - Bloomberg Business

Clean Air Group tested the cars with West Virginia University, which then sent their findings to the EPA. Interestingly enough, the BMW X5 was also tested and passed.

Bosch manufactured the modules but claims no responsibility on how they are used by the manufacturer (VW).

VW purposefully misled the public, its customers and the regulatory bodies with their "Defeat software", and will face a hefty fine. As others mentioned earlier, the VW group benefited from a commercially unfair advantage, whether intended or not (although everything points to it being deliberately programmed, why else would it be there?).
 
#33 ·
Does the VW 'workaround' do the same thing the Green Diesel ECU tune does for the GC diesel...turns off the EGR and DEF? I bet the VW diesels will soot up unbelieveably and become maintenance nightmares once the emissions cheat is removed. Comparitively, it seems that FCA has done a really good job of standing behind their product and re-engineering their diesels to make the emissions stuff work.

I had a VW Jetta diesel circa 2000. That car stranded me 7 actual times and was expensive to fix. It isn't surprising that they would have to cheat to make their cars function. Would never buy another VW.
 
#35 ·
VW has been at the forefront for getting the U.S. Interested again in light duty diesel vehicles. Making torquey sedans that get 45+ mpg go a long way towards forgetting the abomination of a diesel that GM pushed to us in the 80's. Did they mess up, you betcha! However, I wish them a full and speedy recovery.
 
#43 ·
Yeah, I'm worried that they may be forced to make some really stupid moves in order to deal with this.

NOx is largely a result of combustion temperature, the higher it is, the more NOx you get. Unfortunately, the higher the combustion temperature is, the higher performance/efficiency you tend to get.

It would cost a fortune to retrofit all of these with NOx scrubbing technology, but if that isn't the solution, driveability [they are nice little cars] could suffer.
 
#36 ·
We have a very poor standard of judgment in this country. GM just recently knew it had a problem that was literally deadly to its customers. 124 people died as a result and they get a $900M fine. That's pittance to a company that size. No criminal prosecution of management and those who knew or changed the part without changing the part number to help hide the problem. It's ok because GM is an American company that the Gov't bailed out due to it being too big to fail.

VW is foreign owned and lied and cheated but no one died as a result. I'm expecting them to get an even worse fine because of this one factor. Don't believe me - not too long ago Ford knew their new hit vehicle the Explorer ase dangerous at high speeds due to higher center of gravity and engineers called for a suspension redesign (something Ford did in Venezuela). However in the US that would cost them a lot of money so the solution was to have dealers deflate tires to 26 psi as standard procedure on a cheaply constructed passenger car tire Ford choose as standard equipment on an SUV. Many died but Ford and the US had a scapegoat - Firestone who was a foreign owned company could foot the blame for the majority of the negligence even though we had documentation stating the Explorer's design was the core root of the blame and Ford deflated tires leading to higher propensity of blowouts. Didn't matter foreign company gets the shaft and Ford was a "victim".
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top