# Diesel brothers read this



## operator (Jan 2, 2015)

lol, was wondering how VW didnt have the problems we were having in regards to sensors and emission systems.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

operator said:


> lol, was wondering how VW didnt have the problems we were having in regards to sensors and emission systems.


We'll have to see if that changes.

I wonder how the EPA got tipped off.


----------



## MOTO13 (Mar 26, 2014)

I can almost forgive VW due to their commercials and the fact that I am sick of the EPA and their BS regulations. I applaud you VW...well done...almost.


----------



## diesel (Jun 8, 2013)

That could be quite a blow to VW.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

I'm wondering how many other countries will now start investigating VW for this.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

obermd said:


> I'm wondering how many other countries will now start investigating VW for this.


According to one article I read on this, several are already.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

obermd said:


> I'm wondering how many other countries will now start investigating VW for this.


As I posted in the other thread, Europe already knows their tests results do not reflect reality. But this may make them re-examine why.

This might be a good time to short VW stock.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

ChevyGuy said:


> We'll have to see if that changes.
> 
> I wonder how the EPA got tipped off.


A university research team noticed variences in the way a VW test vehicle was responding and told the EPA about it. I think it was MIT, but I'd have to go find the article I read it in to be sure.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

Jim Frye said:


> A university research team noticed variences in the way a VW test vehicle was responding and told the EPA about it. I think it was MIT, but I'd have to go find the article I read it in to be sure.


Yeah, I saw that later in a different article. At first I wondered if someone at GM was reverse-engineering the VW and discovered it. But if that was the case, they could have timed it better and waited until GM had a strong offering in that area. 

Right now, I'm not so sure as this is black eye only for VW. This might be a hit against the entire TD market. VW was the one making the idea "legitimate" and GM could ride the coattails. I'm sure GM is going to study the public's reaction to this before they start up the 2017 CTD.


----------



## PanJet (Jun 18, 2013)

Duplicate threads on this topic. Perhaps we should close this one.


----------



## Scott M. (Apr 23, 2013)

It now makes perfect sense how they managed to avoid the use of a DEF system and all the hassles that come with it. They cheated. The diesel emission standards in the US are impossible to achieve without sacrificing reliability. I applaud VW in there attempts to find a work around. The US standards will kill the diesels.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

West Virginia University, under contract to the ICCT in Belgium. ICCT was investigating why it appeared that diesel cars weren't passing road side tests but passed stationary tests and they contracted WVU to do a similar study in the US for those brands that were selling diesels in both Europe and the US. VW wasn't the only car company caught doing this in Europe. They were the only car company selling diesels in the US as well however.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

Do you have the article of the companies caught in Europe?


----------



## PanJet (Jun 18, 2013)

Scott M. said:


> It now makes perfect sense how they managed to avoid the use of a DEF system and all the hassles that come with it. They cheated. The diesel emission standards in the US are impossible to achieve without sacrificing reliability. I applaud VW in there attempts to find a work around. The US standards will kill the diesels.


The 2015 model year is affected as well as 2014 Passat - all DEF equipped vehicles, so even their new, DEF equipped system is affected.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

money_man said:


> Do you have the article of the companies caught in Europe?


Here's the actual  ICCT report as a PDF.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

obermd said:


> Here's the actual  ICCT report as a PDF.


I just skimmed that. I think it took the track that the test wasn't a good indicator of real-world results. I didn't see any discovery of cheating.


----------



## blk88verde (Apr 30, 2011)

> WVU to do a similar study in the US for those brands that were selling diesels in both Europe and the US. VW wasn't the only car company caught doing this in Europe. They were the only car company selling diesels in the US as well however.


 WVU tested two VWs and a BMW X5. If I read the study correctly the VWs both failed real world testing and the BMW passed.


----------



## Mikeske (Jun 19, 2012)

I was always kind of curious how VW got away from using DEF and a bit of side note was the fact when I drive I notice that the VW diesel Jetta's cars had soot on the rear bumpers and the diesel Cruze nothing. Kind of strange that one brand had soot on the bumpers and other brand nothing. When I clean my car I never have anything on the rear but sucked up road splash


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

Yup. Outside of my exhaust tip is still shiny.


----------



## fj40intow (Nov 4, 2013)

I am wondering if the EPA will go after tuners that could possibly cause more pollution out the tail pipe?


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

Comme il faut.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

fj40intow said:


> I am wondering if the EPA will go after tuners that could possibly cause more pollution out the tail pipe?


At the moment, I think they're busy frying bigger fish and checking out other big fish. 

But once that settles down ....


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

fj40intow said:


> I am wondering if the EPA will go after tuners that could possibly cause more pollution out the tail pipe?


I would say that might happen, but only if the tuners were advertising meeting EPA standards with their tuning. Otherwise, the individual owner will be on the hook if his/her tuned vehicle fails testing.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

Jim Frye said:


> I would say that might happen, but only if the tuners were advertising meeting EPA standards with their tuning. Otherwise, the individual owner will be on the hook if his/her tuned vehicle fails testing.


The EPA has gone after the maker of O2 defeat devices. So I tend to doubt if the tuner would be off the hook. 

If the owner would be on the hook is a different story. I'd think they'd be forced to use a compliant tune. I could see them being fined if they knew it wasn't EPA complaint. BTW, I'm not sure as EPA compliance matters for off-road use - such as track racing.


----------



## Aussie (Sep 16, 2012)

So why do gas guzzling trucks and SUV vehicles get off scott free and a fuel efficient little diesel cop a hammering? Is the EPA really serious?


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

Aussie said:


> So why do gas guzzling trucks and SUV vehicles get off scott free and a fuel efficient little diesel cop a hammering? Is the EPA really serious?


I don't have a complete answer, but "utility vehicles" play by different rules than "passenger cars".


----------



## Aussie (Sep 16, 2012)

ChevyGuy said:


> I don't have a complete answer, but "utility vehicles" play by different rules than "passenger cars".


Why? The government really should hang it's head in shame the way heavy privately used vehicles are encouraged when a smaller, fuel efficient vehicle, would do the same job as many of these heavy vehicles are used. Vehicles used for business I understand. Families with 3 or more children in a van fine, but a pickup with only 3 seats I don't understand. It is about time small vehicles that can handle snow were designed.


----------



## spaycace (Feb 9, 2012)

ChevyGuy said:


> We'll have to see if that changes.
> 
> I wonder how the EPA got tipped off.


From what I was reading ... a college out East was doing testing for some reason and discovered the "glitch" in the software. I'm just curious as to how the software knew when emissions testing was happening? That is supposedly the only time the software kicked in.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

Aussie said:


> Why?


I was going by memory. I think that was the safety regulations. SUVs didn't have to have the 5MPH bumper and a few other things. Looking at the EPA site, it's divided into Cars & light trucks, Trucks, buses and engines, and Motorcycles.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

Aussie said:


> So why do gas guzzling trucks and SUV vehicles get off scott free and a fuel efficient little diesel cop a hammering? Is the EPA really serious?


In 1972 when the Clean Air Act was passed you didn't see an overwhelming number of trucks on the road. They were pretty much limited to farming, thus they got a separate category in the act to appease agricultural interests. This is no longer true and it's time to update this law to state that if you sell the vehicle to the general public it must meet the same standards.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

spaycace said:


> From what I was reading ... a college out East was doing testing for some reason and discovered the "glitch" in the software. I'm just curious as to how the software knew when emissions testing was happening? That is supposedly the only time the software kicked in.


Steering wheel straight ahead, particular ambient air temperature at startup and run, particular acceleration and steady speed rate.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

spaycace said:


> From what I was reading ... a college out East was doing testing for some reason and discovered the "glitch" in the software. I'm just curious as to how the software knew when emissions testing was happening? That is supposedly the only time the software kicked in.


West Virginia University was working on a contract to the ICCT in Belgium. The ICCT was looking into reports that diesels in Europe weren't meeting the European emissions standards and contracted with WVU to see if the same was occurring in the US. When researchers at WVU determined that this was going on they alerted the EPA.

As for how the software knew, simple. All newer cars have ABS. ABS hubs are constantly reporting wheel speed to the BCM. For non-AWD cars and trucks, stationary emissions testing is done on a machine where only the drive axle spins with rollers in the floor. All it takes to detect this machine is to monitor the non-drive wheels speed according to the ABS system - all wheels turning => turn emissions off. Only drive wheels turning => turn emissions on. Notice that not a single one of the cars involved is AWD. I posted the link to the ICCT report in the http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/9-general-discussion-forum/138633-vw-caught-cheating.html thread.

The fact that this "glitch" appears in multiple models, combined with the fact that it is very specific, means that someone deliberately coded this in.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

obermd said:


> As for how the software knew, simple. All newer cars have ABS. ABS hubs are constantly reporting wheel speed to the BCM. For non-AWD cars and trucks, stationary emissions testing is done on a machine where only the drive axle spins with rollers in the floor. All it takes to detect this machine is to monitor the non-drive wheels speed according to the ABS system - all wheels turning => turn emissions off. Only drive wheels turning => turn emissions on.


While that's certainly possible, from the reports I'm reading, that's not what happened. The software apparently detected the exact profile of the EPA test. My own feeling is that it was done that way to hide from reverse engineering efforts. The code would have hidden in the engine tuning software and not as obvious as GM's "hood switch" from years ago.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

ChevyGuy said:


> While that's certainly possible, from the reports I'm reading, that's not what happened. The software apparently detected the exact profile of the EPA test. My own feeling is that it was done that way to hide from reverse engineering efforts. The code would have hidden in the engine tuning software and not as obvious as GM's "hood switch" from years ago.


The only problem with using the exact profile is there are multiple profiles. In Colorado alone there are two different profiles depending on if you're in a basic emissions zone or an enhanced emissions zone.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

*How VW Got Caught*

This article may help explain what happened. It lends credence to Obermd's theory. In the article, it states that WVU tested three U.S. spec'd diesel cars. Two of them were VWs. Wonder what number 3 was?

It Took E.P.A. Pressure to Get VW to Admit Fault

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/business/it-took-epa-pressure-to-get-vw-to-admit-fault.html?_r=0


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

jim frye said:


> this article may help explain what happened.





> in the lab, the two vws performed flawlessly. But when they were taken out on the roads in california, they were belching out levels of nitrogen oxide that were 30 to 40 times higher than the regulatory standards. Even the heavy-duty trucks the researchers had tested had never performed that poorly by comparison.


The same cars, and not off by a little.


----------



## gulfcoastguy (Feb 21, 2013)

Jim Frye said:


> This article may help explain what happened. It lends credence to Obermd's theory. In the article, it states that WVU tested three U.S. spec'd diesel cars. Two of them were VWs. Wonder what number 3 was?
> 
> It Took E.P.A. Pressure to Get VW to Admit Fault
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/business/it-took-epa-pressure-to-get-vw-to-admit-fault.html?_r=0



The third was a BMW diesel and it passed.


----------



## diesel (Jun 8, 2013)

I wonder if this will blow over. I also wonder what it means for the future of diesels in the US. Mercedes is planning on dropping diesels. 

Mercedes Plans to Phase Out Diesels, Replacing them with Hybrids - autoevolution


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

It's Oldsmobile LF9 diesel all over again.


----------



## diesel (Jun 8, 2013)

Tomko said:


> It's Oldsmobile LF9 diesel all over again.


It only took 30 years to recover from that! lol


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

http://jalopnik.com/hitler-is-understandably-pissed-about-volkswagens-diese-1731943072


----------



## rockinrotho (Oct 18, 2013)

the more I read the more I think the third vehicle tested was the Cruze, this helps back it up, if this is a repost than delete please..... 
How the Chevy Cruze Diesel Stays Clean – Tech Dive


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

rockinrotho said:


> the more I read the more I think the third vehicle tested was the Cruze, this helps back it up, if this is a repost than delete please.....
> How the Chevy Cruze Diesel Stays Clean â€“ Tech Dive


Interesting read.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

rockinrotho said:


> the more I read the more I think the third vehicle tested was the Cruze, this helps back it up, if this is a repost than delete please.....
> How the Chevy Cruze Diesel Stays Clean – Tech Dive


VERY interesting read: "The European engine produces 163 hp and 260 lb.-ft. while the US engine produces 151 hp and 250 lb.-ft. The fuel economy is also noticeably better for the European version"

And there you go. VW's motivation becomes clear, as well as what kind of trouble they'll be facing. Emissions compliance will just be a reflash, but to deal with the owners, they may have to pay them off or offer a buy back. It may not be possible to maintain performance and be compliant. Yes, the Cruze is compliant - only because they never "promised" that kind of performance. 

The thing about diesel tunes is interesting as well.


----------



## KpaxFAQ (Sep 1, 2013)

ChevyGuy said:


> VERY interesting read: "The European engine produces 163 hp and 260 lb.-ft. while the US engine produces 151 hp and 250 lb.-ft. The fuel economy is also noticeably better for the European version"
> 
> And there you go. VW's motivation becomes clear, as well as what kind of trouble they'll be facing. Emissions compliance will just be a reflash, but to deal with the owners, they may have to pay them off or offer a buy back. It may not be possible to maintain performance and be compliant. Yes, the Cruze is compliant - only because they never "promised" that kind of performance.
> 
> The thing about diesel tunes is interesting as well.


They will probably just do a reflash but if that's all it took to start they wouldn't of done the cheat. I suspect major soot problems down the road in these pre-def DPF equipped TDI's.


----------



## Aussie (Sep 16, 2012)

obermd said:


> Interesting read.


The engine shown in the picture is the early single cam 16V engine the Australian Korean import used. It had 148hp and 236ibs tq. The later engine used in the Australian Cruze is 161hp and 266lbs tq, and looks quite different and has 2 OHC's and chain drive for cams. If you compare the picture in the article to mine you will see that they are totally different. Even the turbo has moved from the back to the front and neither use urea.
View attachment 165338


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

rockinrotho said:


> the more i read the more i think the third vehicle tested was the cruze,


bmw


----------



## Dvan5693 (Jul 8, 2014)

Idk if it was tested at exactly the same time but a Bmw X3d also did not pass. Report: BMW X3 Diesel Emissions Also Exceed Legal Limit – News – Car and Driver | Car and Driver Blog


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

Dvan5693 said:


> Idk if it was tested at exactly the same time but a Bmw X3d also did not pass. Report: BMW X3 Diesel Emissions Also Exceed Legal Limit – News – Car and Driver | Car and Driver Blog


Sigh. I smell a rat. I'll refer you back to the graphic PanJet posted in the other thread:









Yes, the BMW *can* be made to exceed the limits - *if you push it beyond the standardize road test*.

Does that mean it doesn't comply? That depends on if the car is expected to comply in *all* phases of driving. Something which is not tested for. Since it's not tested, I tend to doubt if it's in the standard.

But does that mean some tree-hugger or sensationalist media won't pounce on the fact that BMW exceeded the limits in some test? I think you know the answer to that.


----------



## PanJet (Jun 18, 2013)

ChevyGuy said:


> VERY interesting read: "The European engine produces 163 hp and 260 lb.-ft. while the US engine produces 151 hp and 250 lb.-ft. The fuel economy is also noticeably better for the European version"
> 
> And there you go. VW's motivation becomes clear, as well as what kind of trouble they'll be facing. Emissions compliance will just be a reflash, but to deal with the owners, they may have to pay them off or offer a buy back. It may not be possible to maintain performance and be compliant. Yes, the Cruze is compliant - only because they never "promised" that kind of performance.
> 
> The thing about diesel tunes is interesting as well.


The funny thing is, in the US, the GM engine generates more power while still delivering better highway mileage than the VW (of the same generation, the newer VW EA288 engine has matched the GM diesel in mileage and just shy in power with less torque). Granted, the GM engine takes a hit in combined MPG vs. the VW, which stands to reason since city driving is the worst for trying to control emissions.

In other words, it is _possible_ to deliver what VW promissed while still meeting emissions, but VW apparently decided not to put the engineering into it at that point. Now, it may be too late for some owners to deliver on those promises while meeing emissions, but it might be possible with the EA288 engine without too much sacrifice.

Picky side note: Their numbers are just a tiny bit off. The U.S. spec 2.0L diesel produces 264 lb.ft. of torque (up to 280 with briefly available overboost), not 250. That doesn't change the point of what they're saying - just pointing that out.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

ChevyGuy said:


> Sigh. I smell a rat. I'll refer you back to the graphic PanJet posted in the other thread:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Tests are standardized for certain test conditions. 

Your SATs are standardized to be taken under lit conditions with a temperature around 72 degrees. With the candidate sitting down and able to use their eyes. 

If you repeated your SATs in the dark at 120 degrees while on a treadmill I gurantee that you will get worse results. 

It is no different for the EPA emissions test.


----------



## diesel (Jun 8, 2013)

Very interesting read indeed.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

Tomko said:


> It is no different for the EPA emissions test.


You know that, and I know that. But the ammunition is there for the spin doctors.

The public may perceive this is a loophole in the regulations - cars are allowed to go over the limit if pushed beyond the test. So one potential outcome is new regulations that set a cap on emissions in all modes of driving. That's going to bode ill for performance.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

CG - I take your point, and I'm not trying to be argunentive. 

But if we can put a man on the moon, and Honda can do this How Honda Got An Impala To Meet EPA Regs When GM Said It Couldn't Be Done , diesel emissions can be solved.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

Tomko said:


> But if we can put a man on the moon,


And we haven't returned. Why? No money in it. Clearly there's a lot of things you can do when you don't care about profit.




Tomko said:


> and Honda can do this How Honda Got An Impala To Meet EPA Regs When GM Said It Couldn't Be Done ,


I suspect GM's stand may have had more to do with politics than engineering. Interesting that CVCC hasn't spread. Licensing costs or some other shortcomings?




Tomko said:


> diesel emissions can be solved.


(Voice: Captain Kirk)But for - how much? how much? 

And nothing happens in a vacuum. It's entirely possible that 'benz's view that hybrids and electrics will eat the diesel market could be right. If you look at why most people would by a diesel, a hybrid or electric plays the same card. "Electric" has more sex appeal than "diesel". The only ones left standing for diesel are the long-distance drivers. I'm not sure as that market is large enough to be worth pursuing. The fact that VW sales were drooping before this doesn't help.

With a diesel/electric hybrid, you could use batteries for the peak performance and avoid those spikes in emissions, so we could see a convergence. 

I think it's safe to say that what the next 10 years brings will depend heavily on what kinds of new batteries can be developed.


----------



## Danny5 (Dec 22, 2011)




----------



## Su8pack1 (Apr 17, 2014)

This is going to get interesting. The EPA is power hungry.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

The EPA is doing its job.


----------



## MOTO13 (Mar 26, 2014)

The EPA sucks.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

Su8pack1 said:


> This is going to get interesting. The EPA is power hungry.


If so, then obviously are the Canadian and Swiss counterparts. Canada and Switzerland have both issued stop sales on all VW diesels until the smoke clears.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

This morning, the CNN crawler stated that the EPA would be reviewing ALL diesel engine vehicles sold in the U. S. to ensure they really meet the standards. Can't wait to see if the Citizen United backers get their hooks into the next congress/administration to neuter the EPA.


----------



## KpaxFAQ (Sep 1, 2013)

MOTO13 said:


> The EPA sucks.


The EPA can burn in ****


----------



## PanJet (Jun 18, 2013)

KpaxFAQ said:


> The EPA can burn in ****


Sorry, no can do. The EPA banned **** until they can clean up their emissions.


----------



## diesel (Jun 8, 2013)

I personally like breathing clean air, so I am all for it. Do you guys really want to live in China?


----------



## KpaxFAQ (Sep 1, 2013)

diesel said:


> I personally like breathing clean air, so I am all for it. Do you guys really want to live in China?
> 
> View attachment 165522


No one is advocating complete deregulation. That's an apples and oranges comparison to what all of us EPA haters are saying. It all comes down to money and relevance. It is in the EPA's best interest to extort as much money as possible while increasing regulation as much as possible to extort more money and justify their existence. 

Where do we draw the line at the point where it's economically practical while sustaining the environment at the same time? Some of the regulations they are trying to impose on power generation are just insane and economically unfeasible. 

Personally I'd rather be able to drive over bridges that aren't about to implode before we worry about climate change that no one can definitively prove human beings are even causing.


----------



## diesel (Jun 8, 2013)

KpaxFAQ said:


> No one is advocating complete deregulation. That's an apples and oranges comparison to what all of us EPA haters are saying. It all comes down to money and relevance. It is in the EPA's best interest to extort as much money as possible while increasing regulation as much as possible to extort more money and justify their existence.
> 
> Where do we draw the line at the point where it's economically practical while sustaining the environment at the same time? Some of the regulations they are trying to impose on power generation are just insane and economically unfeasible.
> 
> Personally I'd rather be able to drive over bridges that aren't about to implode before we worry about climate change that no one can definitively prove human beings are even causing.


I do agree there is a happy balance somewhere. Personally, I think the real problem isn't the VW's that are putting out a little extra NOx, rather the constant stream of semi trucks that I see every day rolling coal. Many of the trucks are clean, but there is still a significant percentage that aren't complying even with 1973 EPA regulations. The evidence is coming out of the exhaust pipes.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

I'm old enough to remember a time before emissions controls. I remember my eyes tearing up because of the pollution on the autobahn. I remember the smog days in Ontario. I remember those gorgeous sunsets caused by airborne pollution. And I remember all of the ash from Mount St. Helens passing over Manitoba three or four days after its eruption.


----------



## Mikeske (Jun 19, 2012)

The thing I wonder is VW cheated on the diesels did they also cheat on their gas powered cars. They have the program on the diesels I wonder how easy it would be to do the gassers


----------

