51–60 of 137 posts
Why don't they just do emissions tests by attaching a probe to exhaust and taking the car on a normal drive. Harder to fake results when you're not performing them in the same lab conditions.
Oh, oh, let me guess: it's the fault of a single rogue engineer, and does not in any way implicate company upper management.
[1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/business/volkswagen-diese...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The standards escalated way too fast though. They were asking for essentially multiple orders of magnitude improvement in a single generation. Even the dirtiest of the cheating VWs would have passed the previous standards (from not that many years ago) with flying colors.
The urea injected Diesel engines meet the standards.
Why don't they just do emissions tests by attaching a probe to exhaust and taking the car on a normal drive. Harder to fake results when you're not performing them in the same lab conditions.
It's easier to standardize and precisely specify the test cycle on a dyno.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The release doesn't actually state that they violated emissions standards. It just says that they failed to notify the EPA of the presence of software that can alter the vehicle's emissions profile. Do trucks and SUVs in the US even have emissions standards? I know they're exempt from emissions tests in many states which is part of the reason for their popularity.
> Do trucks and SUVs in the US even have emissions standards? I know they're exempt from emissions tests in many states which is part of the reason for their popularity. In 1999, California enacted its LEV (low emissions vehicle) II regulations, which moved most pickup trucks and SUVs into the same regulatory scheme as passenger vehicles: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/levprog/levii/factsht.pdf
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you've ever been near a major automaker's test engineering lab, you quickly realize that ~all of them are doing shady things to hit their numbers. This is a result of the cold hard engineering fact that our current level of technology is insufficient to hit the numbers without raising costs significantly. But once one automaker starts to fudge the numbers at a given price point, all the others must do the same thi…
"This is a result of the cold hard engineering fact that our current level of technology is insufficient to hit the numbers without raising costs significantly. But once one automaker starts to fudge the numbers at a given price point, all the others must do the same thing or they fall behind." I'm going to have to remember to bring this up as an example whenever people claim private industry can police/regulate them…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FTA: "This testing revealed that the FCA vehicle models in question produce increased NOx emissions under conditions that would be encountered in normal operation and use."
Wow. Someone needs to tell the EPA about the inverted pyramid. You can't blame me for missing that when they bury the lede in the very last paragraph. That aside, the headline here still says the opposite of what it means to say. Exceeding the standard is a good thing. Exceeding the emissions limit is a bad thing.
> FCA allegedly installed and failed to disclose software
> that increases air pollution from vehicles
> The undisclosed software results in increased
> emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from the vehicles.
Volkswagen, a German company, admitted wrongdoing, is paying $4.3bn in fines and will see its executives, domestic and overseas, jailed by the U.S. government [1]. Curious if Fiat Chrysler will see those checkboxes--admission of wrongdoing, material fines and jailed executives--filled. [1] http://abcnews.go.com/US/volkswagen-pleads-guilty-pays-43-bi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not why they're popular. They're popular because the average American thinks bigger is better and they also want a bigger car for when they have an accident, they can kill the other person instead of themselves.
Have you ever driven in a snowstorm? They're popular in areas with snow because the drivetrain handles better in the snow, and the higher ground clearance means that they can handle unplowed roads.
Note: they mean exceeding in the bad direction, not the good direction. At first I thought this was some kind of spoof article, or Chrysler marketing effort. It should probably read "exceeding limits" not "exceeding standards". EDIT: actually the press release doesn't even say that really. It says Fiat Chrysler installed software that could impact emissions testing but didn't tell the EPA about it, which is considere…
FTA: "This testing revealed that the FCA vehicle models in question produce increased NOx emissions under conditions that would be encountered in normal operation and use."