Just worked out, based on the latest news, that my F V8R has a lower CO2 emissions than a new VW Beetle Result!

 

I was wondering whether anyone was going to bring this up. It is quite a story. Once these cars get fixed, I wonder how VW/Audi is going to deal with all the angry customers whose TDI diesels no longer have the same amount of power they once had.

Several times on this forum, I've been involved in discussions with a lot of people complaining about the start/stop system (eco-mode). I've always tried to make the point that it is amazing that manufacturers are allowed to build the system such that there is a button to turn it off, and several other very easy ways to make it go away. Manufacturers have gotten away with it because they've been allowed to test for fuel economy with start/stop systems fully operational, and with drivers behaving as the proverbial "grandma on the way to church on Sunday."

While not the same thing as cheating on emissions testing, it is very similar conceptually. I would not be surprised if that loophole gets closed very soon, and the VW case may well push US EPA and similar entities in the EU into doing it sooner rather than later.

 

The articles I have read on the subject indicate that the "pollution" emitted by some VW diesel engines which exceeds EPA standards is NOx, or nitrogen oxides, not H2O, CO, CO2, or unburned HC's. But yes, if those engines met the NOx standard all the time, performance would likely be somewhat reduced, which means less power and less MPG, I guess.

 

Don't know what you've been reading, but not according to the VCA. Data I found shows the F-Type V8R puts out 259 g/km. Whereas the VW Beetle for petrol engines puts out: 1.2 L engine = 137 g/km, 1.4 L engine = 153 g/km, 2.0 L engine = 169 g/km. If it's a diesel, then 1.6 L engine = 114, 2.0 L. engine = 129 g/km. Even the 3.6 L V6 engine = 219. All engines are far lower than the F-Type V8, which I would expect.

Of course that's what the Brit gov. "testing" shows... heh!?

 

I think that the test figures that you have there are rigged! The 1.2 L Beetle is 280Kg/m if you override the 'test' algorithm in the ECU's


Let's face it, ALL manufacturers are at it - Be interesting to see who is next in the firing line, now that VW have been found out...?

 

Looking at NOX emissions, the F-type is a lot more environmentally friendly

 

Going to be one heck of a class action law suit - hopefully large enough that no manufacture will ever again thinking about blatantly cheating / lying / deceiving governments around the world.

Hopefully a few wind up in jail too....

(If you can wind up dead for selling loose cigarettes on a street corner the least they can do is arrest a few folks here... )

 

I agree, and I have already heard that others had been caught a few years ago. I think there's more to come.

 

According to one news report around here, the 'officials' are already looking past the 'VW bug' and now focusing on the 'Porsche bug' .. I guess all things VW are under suspicion, diesel or not.
Lawrence.

 

Does anybody know how high up the food chain this was approved? Was it the engineers who did this w/o the executives knowing, or did the execs know this and approved it. I can see how engineers would do this as a creative solution and I don't blame them. But if this was actually approved/known by the execs and lawyers, that deserves big, big fines. Even jail time, IMO.

 

That hasn't come out yet, and I expect it will be a long time coming.


Interesting article on the history of cheating in the automotive world...
Volkswagen Test Rigging Follows a Long Auto Industry Pattern [NYTimes]

 

You reap what you sow.

(And it never ceases to amaze me how anyone thinks they can get away with some of the stuff they do!).

 

Help me understand how it's OK for an engineer to design a blatant test-rigging feature, but bad/criminal if it was approved by an exec. and/or lawyer.

Desert Hiker

 

Simply developing software, a drug, a weapon, etc. doesn't constitute a criminal act. The criminal act occurs when that "thing" causes harm. The engineers or programmers who designed/developed the software/system would not be criminally liable per se, it would the individual(s) who authorized the software for use in production vehicles offered for sale.

For example, the software (just as a weapon) may be useful for other reasons, but it was clearly illegal the way it was used in this case.

 

OK, so the engineers were under enormous pressure to deliver more fuel efficient vehicles. Simple: embed a few lines of code to manipulate testing results and (perhaps/hopefully) regulators and customers will never know they've been scammed - pressure relieved, problem solved.

IMHO, if the engineers knowingly embedded test cheating software in production software (even without executive approval) then they should be held responsible. Running it up the exec. ranks for approval just widens the scope of the conspiracy to defraud. Does exective approval absolve the engineers of responsibility? Not IMH(non-legal)O.

Desert Hiker

 

OK, I was just providing a hypothetical answer to your question, but we're both just speculating. The purpose of the Justice Department investigation is to determine who could possibly be held criminally responsible under the statutes, and then it's up to prosecutors (US Attorneys) to decide if they have enough to take it to a grand jury seeking indictments.

For example, if software engineers were simply instructed by management to develop software that turns the emissions system on a off given certain parameters, they certainly couldn't be accused of a crime because they would not necessarily have knowledge that it was intended for use production vehicles. It could just as easily be used for engine development and testing.

But yes, if the software engineers "went rogue," which is highly unlikely and just did it, that's a different matter. However, VW was very quick to accept blame at the senior mgmt. level, which suggests a different scenario.

 

Speaking of criminal penalties... you won't see any. You'll see civil penalties.

From the NY Time article... " There are no criminal penalties under laws applying to the E.P.A. for violations of motor vehicle clean air rules, though there is a division of the Justice Department devoted to violations of environmental law."

You can thank big business, and lobbyists. Money talks!

 

Yes, most likely, but they could use more general environmental statutes, outside of the EPA clean air statutes, to seek criminal prosecution. I am inclined to agree that large civil penalties are the most likely outcome.

One of the many decisions the US Attorneys Office will have to make is "can we get indictments from a grand jury, and if so, can we win the case." Often the answer will be "unlikely or no" to one or both of those questions, so they'll opt for civil penalties, which is a much lower bar.

 

Suppose there could be a case for fraud in there somewhere, though that might be the approach a class action would take. Or perhaps they'll just call the cars defective.

 

And yet again we witness a few greedy m-f's - usually at the highest levels - affecting many thousands (both in and mostly out of their respective companies) - with, often, nothing more than a slap on the wrist. Many times, with golden parachutes thus adding insult to enormous injury! By the way, MF also stands for MF Global and Jon Corzine (although it's far from limited to just him).