VW Diesel emissions dodginess

[Yw-slayer]

No interest in this? I find it pretty disgraceful myself.

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/09/18/volkswagen-diesel-federal-charges/

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/09/18/vw-air-rule-violation-allegations-stunning-18b-fine-unlikely/

http://jalopnik.com/why-did-volkswagen-delete-all-of-its-diesel-ads-from-yo-1731691453 (LOL)

Personally, I think someone should go to prison for what looks like deliberate deception. "The People's Car" indeed LOL.

[Leon]

There need to be some very serious outcomes for VW, this is some serious corporate misbehaviour.

[Yw-slayer]

Yes. At least someone in VW USA should get done for this. I suspect that someone at HQ in Germany must have either known of it, or knowingly closed their eyes to it.

[Sad, little man]

I've seen some people compare this to other automakers fudging their MPG numbers, which I think has mostly been done through clever engine calibrations which get ideal mileage under EPA test conditions, but not in very many other circumstances. To my knowledge, VW did something similar with their powertrain software where it would meet emissions under test conditions, but not at other times.

Maybe it's my own bias because Ford is one of the makers that got hit for false MPG numbers, but I feel like this emissions thing by VW is a much more sinister violation. First, people have to assume that MPG numbers will vary with conditions. No one can ever expect to get exactly the rated MPG at all times. I think that the assumption and the law with emissions is that a vehicle should never exceed the limit on emissions under any conditions. Second, with MPG, you can clearly see in the car's own info screen what mileage the vehicle is getting at any time. It's no secret whether you are or aren't meeting the rated vehicle mileage. With emissions, they forced half a million drivers to pollute the air excessively without their knowledge. Last, and most importantly, there's no actual harm to people when a vehicle doesn't meet the MPG numbers, aside from a financial burden on the driver when they have to buy more gas. With emissions, it's harmful to people and the environment.


Anyway, I think the federal fine for tampering with emissions equipment can be up to $25,000 per violation. Over 500,000 cars, that comes out to a $12.5 billion fine for VW. I think that's fair and downright generous. One would hope someone would get some jail time, but I doubt it will happen.

[Jason]

As big of a deal as it maybe is (it probably isn't), I bet they settle for a million or so if not less, long before seeing a fine per vehicle. And that settlement cost probably costs less than what it would have cost to make each vehicle meet regulations. It's the basic financial decisions these large corporations go through, because they can.

[LHutton]

So the software in the test vehicles is the same as in production vehicles but it's fudged to emit less noxious gases under test conditions only?

[TheBenior]

Yes. At least someone in VW USA should get done for this. I suspect that someone at HQ in Germany must have either known of it, or knowingly closed their eyes to it.
I would guess that VW USA has less to do with this than the engineers back home, as diesel passenger cars doing much worse on NOx emissions in real world driving isn't uncommon in Europe. In this study, 15 of 16 diesel passenger cars failed to meet Euro 5/6 emissions standards for NOx in real world testing (http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_PEMS-study_diesel-cars_20141013.pdf). Some miss it by a bit, which is no more damning than ECUs/transmissions/etc being programmed for the fuel economy test cycle. Others miss it by such wide margins, that in light of this VW news, makes one suspect cheating.


So the software in the test vehicles is the same as in production vehicles but it's fudged to emit less noxious gases under test conditions only?
Given the specific temperature, humidity, and loads involved, a vehicle could very well be programmed to cut performance to lower emissions for specifically for testing.

FWIW, a few years back, Mazda was looking pretty seriously into bringing their Skyactiv-D 2.2L diesel to the US, which like the VWs in question, doesn't use a diesel exhaust fluid treatment. However, nothing has yet to come of it, and the word is that they can't meet their performance goals and pass US emissions at the same time.

[Yw-slayer]

Thanks Benior. I'd be even happier if someone in Germany gets done for this disgrace.

Like SLM, I think this is certainly far more egregious than mpg gaming.

[samoht]

So the software in the test vehicles is the same as in production vehicles but it's fudged to emit less noxious gases under test conditions only?

My understanding is that 'cheat mode' is active in the annual emissions check of all cars (akin to the MOT over here), so it's not just the certification testing but the annual emissions test of all cars that it is used for.

[Freude am Fahren]

Downfall makes a comeback with the VW EPA scandal.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=229&v=dKef1JFpiCA
via Jalopnik

[FaultyMario]

Noble!

[JoshInKC]

This is a pretty interesting story, just a few random thoughts-

I'd be beyond pissed if I'd gone for one of the VWs rather than the Cruze when I was shopping this summer.

Will this be acceptably fixable? If not, is VW going to have to do a giant buy-back?

So when the recall/fix goes through, what's the likely effect both for consumers and VW? Power drop? - Class action suit. Reduced mpgs? - another class action. Reduced lifetime for some expensive piece of emissions equipment? - Class action and VW loses millions on exciting new warranty claims.

I remember reading about Mazda trying to bring a small diesel over a few years ago, but for some reason they couldn't get it clean enough and keep enough power without DEF and I thought "What, VW are the only people who can do it?" - Apparently not.

This is not good news for small-car diesels in general, since ze germans were the ones pushing it really hard.

[Yw-slayer]

VW stock down 24% apparently. WHAT A SURPRISE

[Sad, little man]

I've become really interested in this story because it relates somewhat to what I do for work. I wanted to try to really figure out what was going on and what the likely outcome was. I found the actual notice of violation the EPA sent to VW...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCYQFjADahUKEwjfs4TwrYjIAhVJFpIKHQ3gCto&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww3.epa.gov%2Fotaq%2Fcert%2Fdocu ments%2Fvw-nov-caa-09-18-15.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGmQ6aUjITQN5VLpQagbdK-5mdsTQ&bvm=bv.103073922,d.aWw

If that link doesn't work, just google "vw epa notice of violation."

Long story short, West Virginia University ran a study in May 2014 and found some excessive emissions from VWs while driving. VW dodged the issue and said that there were some technical issues that caused the excessive emissions. The EPA did more testing, and found that VW was bullshitting them. Because of this, the EPA said that they weren't going to give VW the green light to roll out their 2016 model year diesels, and VW finally caved and said that they cheated.

The method of cheating is pretty blatant. It seems that the car uses various inputs to determine when it's being tested on a dyno (including steering wheel input! Ie, there wouldn't be any steering wheel movement on a dyno.) When it determines it's being run through the EPA test on a dyno, somehow it reduces its emissions to an acceptable level.

The notice of violation specifically states that it reduces the effectiveness of the SCR system during normal driving. The SCR is the system that injects urea into the exhaust to reduce NOx. The foolish part about this is that, AFAIK, using the SCR system doesn't do anything to reduce mileage or performance. The only reason I can think of for VW to do this is just so they can use less urea and advertise that their cars go longer between urea fillups. Pretty ridiculous if you ask me.

However, something more is going on here. The vehicles singled out go all the way back to 2009, well before VW started using the SCR system in their cars. So, clearly this special calibration designed specifically for test conditions was doing more than just reducing urea consumption. It seems like NOx are the main emissions that seem to have been found over the acceptable limit. NOx is produced from excessively high combustion temperatures, which is how diesels generally operate, and that's why they are such a problem in diesels.

So, my guess is that the special calibration was designed to decrease the power the engine created, probably from retarding the injection timing, in order to reduce the NOx to an acceptable level. It seems like this may have been how VW managed to meet emissions without injecting urea into their cars for so long.

Since the early vehicles have no urea injection system to speak of, if VW is forced to make them truly meet the emissions standards for the year they were produced, my guess is that they will have to reduce the power to their "testing" levels at all times. This will probably result in decreased power and maybe mileage due to the less than ideal injection timing on the affected vehicles.

Now, granted, this is all my speculation, but I know things about things, so there.

[The359]

I believe that VW's program was found to also be outputting false data through the OBD port, which may be what the 2009 cars were doing. Hence to the tester it'd appear as though the car was running normally instead of probably leaned out.

[Godson]

This is some seriously fucked up shit going on.

[Random]

Will this be acceptably fixable? If not, is VW going to have to do a giant buy-back?

So when the recall/fix goes through, what's the likely effect both for consumers and VW? Power drop? - Class action suit. Reduced mpgs? - another class action. Reduced lifetime for some expensive piece of emissions equipment? - Class action and VW loses millions on exciting new warranty claims.


My WAG: ECU reflash and a $1k on the hood as compensation for (potentially) reduced mpg and power/torque.

[thesameguy]

I was thinking about that, but it's also possible that the "emissions testing profile" puts the engine in a danger zone of leanness that shouldn't be sustained for long. With the newer DEF cars there probably is no big issue, but the earlier cars might prove a real challenge.

What I don't entirely get is how none of this ever came to light with California's diesel emissions testing. That software that detects emissions tests must be VERY good. I guess "front wheels moving, rear wheels not, zero steering" is a good cue. ;)

[Sad, little man]

Yeah, it's not really hard for a car to determine if it's on a dyno if you really wanted it to be able to tell that.

Also, your thoughts about a "danger zone of leanness" are incorrect. Diesels are always running extremely lean. Far leaner than a gas engine would ever be. In fact, in most cases, the air coming in is not throttled or varied at all. You just vary the amount of fuel going in to control engine speed.

[thesameguy]

I know how diesels work, but thanks. :)

Look into diesel EGT, then get back us. :up:

[Fogelhund]

I find it curious that VW's are being implicated, but none of the Audi Diesels are... strange.

If any of you Euros can speak up, is there concern that the same has been done over there? What is the Euro chatter on this?

[The359]

I find it curious that VW's are being implicated, but none of the Audi Diesels are... strange.

If any of you Euros can speak up, is there concern that the same has been done over there? What is the Euro chatter on this?

The Audi A3's Straight-4 diesel is named, but the rest of Audi line's TDIs are V6s with the Urea Injection systems.

[Freude am Fahren]

Just saw a good point on facebook regarding this and the recent F1 rumors. Any chance of that seems dead considering the huge losses VAG is already taking on this. Hell, WEC/LM and DTM could be in danger. I don't know what kind of loss/gain those have, but certainly jumping into F1 would be nixed if it were even on the table.

[Sad, little man]

What I find more interesting than anything about this whole mess is that in all likelihood it will result in VW having to issue a recall that will cause cars to get lower mileage and poorer performance. How is that going to work!? I bet the PR department is going to have to work as hard as the software engineers to figure out how to get people to swallow that one.

I mean, class action lawsuits not withstanding, this is a big problem with no easy solution. When it comes out that people are getting worse mileage and performance after the recall, how many people are going to crumple up their recall notification letter and throw it in the trash? Will the EPA try to persuade individual owners to have this done if they refuse? It will be interesting, because this should show which VW owners are truly concerned about the environment, and which would rather just pollute more and get better mileage.

And what about cars that just come into the dealer for normal maintenance. It's Ford's policy to do any open recalls on a car any time it comes in to the dealer for anything. Will that be the case here too? "We did that 30k service for you Mr. Schmidt, oh and now your car gets worse mileage." This might be the first recall in history that people don't want to get done to their cars.

What a mess. I'm glad the Germans gave us a word for this, because this schadenfreude at their expense is just too much fun not to watch.

[LHutton]

Good luck getting the Audi drivers to co-operate.

It'll be interesting to see what the law on this actually says word for word. Undeniably they broke the spirit of the test but the court case could be more complicated. Are there any precedents?

[Yw-slayer]

http://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-is-screwed-1732039455

This is going to be good, everyone is baying for blood. Well, at least I am. "People's car" indeed, LOFL.

[samoht]

How many cars? The initial EPA notice related to about half a million vehicles sold in the USA. Now "Volkswagen says 11 million vehicles worldwide are involved in the scandal that has erupted over its rigging of US car emissions tests." - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34325005

11 million is equivalent to one year's worth of global sales for the VW Group - they delivered 10 million cars worldwide in 2014. (Obviously not all cars are 2.0 TDIs, the 11 million affected cars were sold over five or six years).

I assume this means that cars sold in Europe (where about half of all cars are diesels) also featured this 'dyno mode' cheat.

As far as enforcing the recall on the owners goes, my understanding from Ars Tech is that in the US, states can make it a 'mandatory recall', which means they will refuse to renew the annual registration without proof the recall has been performed, hence enforcing it this way. I don't believe we have any comparable mechanism in the UK (?)

[Sad, little man]

It remains to be seen how many of those 11 million are in countries where that actually matters as it does in the US.

You know, part of me feels like, being the German Engineers that they are, VW was so caught up in the sheer genius of this scheme (because really, it is genius) that they completely forgot to consider how incredibly underhanded and deceptive it is. I mean, maybe in their minds, you have this problem of passing an emissions test, but you still need to give people a car with good mileage and performance. This software elegantly solves both problems. It seems like a very German thing to do when you look at it from a practical standpoint rather than with the idea that there's some VW boss in a castle somewhere coming up with ideas that are just evil for the sake of being evil. It almost feels like this whole time that they were advertising clean diesel they were actually advertising their cunning ability to outsmart the emissions tests.

What I'm also wondering is, if they said that the real world emissions while driving were 10 to 40 times higher than what's acceptable, does this mean that they will have to de-tune the cars to make 10 to 40 times less power and get 10 to 40 times worse mileage? It seems like no one else had been able to meet the emissions standards without adding diesel exhaust fluid back when VW was still not using it. Adding that system to a car after the fact is almost certainly too complex. I'm thinking that for vehicles that came before they started using the DEF, they will absolutely have to chop the engine's balls off to keep it within emissions specs.

Oh man, this is getting good.

[Yw-slayer]

Genius? Come on, this is basic, downright dirty (heh) cheating. I'm more in the "evildoer" school of belief. They can't actually have failed to recognise the ethical ramifications of doing this. If they did so fail then they are incompetent and/or psychopaths.

[Godson]

Crazy idea. Cheapest and easiest fix might be to pull the cars from the market, give them new ones...

[Freude am Fahren]

Speaking of which, in a state where once you register a car, the state never looks at it again, Floridians could get an absolute steal on a TDI.

[TheBenior]

Crazy idea. Cheapest and easiest fix might be to pull the cars from the market, give them new ones...
They'd still be paying fines on top of that though.

That being said, I'm not sure how they'd add DEF systems to existing vehicles without seriously encroaching on trunk space. I've read that the Mk 7 Golf TDI ditches the independent rear suspension for a a more compact twist beam to make way for the DEF tank.

[Fogelhund]

Stock is down another 19% today, after being down nearly 18% yesterday... that is some $35 Billion off the market cap in two days.

[Sad, little man]

Adding a DEF tank is only one of the problems that would be encountered if they had to add a DEF system after the fact. You also need a place in the exhaust for the DEF injector. You also need a device just behind the injector that's about the size of a catalytic converter that mixes the DEF and the exhaust fumes together. Oh, and DEF freezes, so you need a heating system for the tank and the lines. The powertrain module would also have to communicate with the module running the DEF system, requiring a big change in the software, and maybe a different powertrain module. Then there's the fact of how do you neatly add in all the wiring to run this system that simply wasn't there before?

I really don't think adding a DEF system after the fact is at all feasible. And yes, I can see the possibility of massive buybacks on these vehicles because there isn't any good way for VW to fix this without ruining vehicle performance.

This... Is... A... Mess.

[thesameguy]

As far as enforcing the recall on the owners goes, my understanding from Ars Tech is that in the US, states can make it a 'mandatory recall', which means they will refuse to renew the annual registration without proof the recall has been performed, hence enforcing it this way. I don't believe we have any comparable mechanism in the UK (?)

Can't speak for other states, but that is a thing in California for sure. They will withhold your vehicle registration until outstanding recalls are completed. Our electric Fiat was subject to that a few months ago.

[Crazed_Insanity]

VW really should enter F-1. Surely they will be able challenge Mercedes with their ingenuity!

[Godson]

They'd still be paying fines on top of that though.

That being said, I'm not sure how they'd add DEF systems to existing vehicles without seriously encroaching on trunk space. I've read that the Mk 7 Golf TDI ditches the independent rear suspension for a a more compact twist beam to make way for the DEF tank.

I'm sure they could tier the fines to help out. I'm just waiting for that stock to drop more...

[samoht]

So when VW said they could meet US emissions standards without using a urea injection system, they were taking the piss?

[TheBenior]

Apparently they don't have any amazing technology unavailable to the rest of the auto industry that let them meet US emissions without DEF treatment.

In retrospect, we shouldn't be too surprised by the whole mess.

[Random]

So when VW said they could meet US emissions standards without using a urea injection system, they were taking the piss?

I see what you did there...;)

[Sad, little man]

Thinking about this more, I'm shocked that no other vehicle manufacturers had knowledge of this. Ford is always buying other manufacturer's cars and tearing them down to the frame to inspect every part and see how other automakers do things. VW had this period of multiple years when they were the only ones who could figure out how to make a clean diesel. Did no other automaker ever buy one of their cars and test it and tear it down to figure out how they made such clean engines? Maybe when they tested them they were always doing it on a dyno, and so they activated their dyno calibration.

I guess I'm just shocked that with everyone trying to figure out how VW was able to build such clean diesels so they could mimic them that it took until now for anyone to figure out the smoke and mirrors they were using.

[thesameguy]

Could just as well be others knew, and were waiting until the house of cards was built high enough to say anything.

I also wouldn't put it past "these people" to have a gentleman's agreement about ratting each other out. I'm sure someone found out about Hyundai's fuel efficiency lies too, but with all the automakers doing random shady stuff now and again, maybe nobody wants to be the rat for fear of being ratted on themselves down the road.

[The359]

I think you'd have to understand the software to know how the engines does stuff. And software patents may stand in the way of someone really cracking them.

[Leon]

My workmate who is a former engineer from a few big car manufacturers advises us that a lot of companies do some tricky things to "sort of" comply with rules.

He said that he'd worked on two cars with cunning work arounds.

One being a car that was set up with a valve in the exhaust that dialed back the drive by exhaust noise when it detected the particular set of parameters of speed, gear, and throttle position dictated by one country's drive by noise test regime, and another car in a territory that only did testing in the first 500 miles from new on a vehicle, so the ECU kept a cork up it for the first 500 miles.

Note: I do not say this to minimise the VW situation. I say this to say that perhaps we should not be too surprised if further shenanigans are uncovered. Be it for noise, exhaust emissions etc.

[MR2 Fan]

Long story short, West Virginia University ran a study in May 2014 and found some excessive emissions from VWs while driving.

So what you're saying is....VW got ratted out by WV

[XHawkeye]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPlBN4ZWsAAE10C.jpg:large

[KillerB]

I'd wager Mazda figured it out. The SkyActiv-D was supposed to be on sale in the US by now, but they gave up after several years, because they couldn't get the engine to meet emissions standards without urea injection and still have acceptable performance.

This from the only company that managed to make the Wankel durable enough for a production car.

Whether they took a VW apart and figured out the code that puts it in "compliance mode" on a dyno, who knows.

What does surprise me is that no tuners figured this out. They hack the ECUs and dyno the cars all the time. One would think "compliance mode" would show up then, but perhaps it doesn't affect full throttle application. I'm not sure any emissions test in the US uses full throttle.

[Yw-slayer]

Tuners probably don't work on TDIs, and/or can't be bothered to shop VW though.

[KillerB]

There are tons of VW tuners in the US, and there is definitely a TDI enthusiast group here that tunes them. Check out TDIClub.com.

Remember that, in the US, diesel is something of an eccentric choice in passenger cars.

[Yw-slayer]

Well, then they can't be bothered to shop (as in, rat out) VW. Or don't want to.

[The359]

I can't imagine too many of them were worrying about emissions testing. They likely wiped clean everything related to emissions when they flashed the ECUs, without too much concern for what everything actually did.

[KillerB]

Ah, didn't quite get the slang there, YW, thanks.

I would think it would have showed up when doing baseline runs, but who knows, maybe it did on TDIClub.

[The359]

I'd think they'd be dynoing, not running emissions tests while baselining. The car isn't going into cheat mode on a dyno, that'd only defeat the purpose if it ran lower horsepower on a dyno.

[samoht]

Martin Winterkorn steps down
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/vw-emissions-scandal-winterkorn-steps-down-volkswagen-boss

"I am clearing the way for a fresh start."

[samoht]

It's striking how little we know about the scope of this scandal, even several days in.

How many cars were affected? At least 500,000 2.0 TDI VWs, however VW have stated that total production of the 2.0 TDI models is 11 million - did they all cheat in emissions tests? How many of the 11m were sold in markets where the real emissions would have been too high? We still don't know if any other VAG models cheated (ie the V6 diesels), or any other manufacturers.

How much difference did it make? CARB have stated that the 'true' NOx emissions were ten to forty times greater than the limit, however I suspect that they are referring to the 'real-world' emissions, not the emissions the car would legitimately have registered if tested without the 'dyno map' present. EU limits are about twice as generous as US ones I believe, it's unknown as yet if the models met EU limits without cheating.

Can the cars be modified to be compliant, and at what cost? Retro-fitting urea injection looks possible but may be unfeasible. Would it make much difference to economy to re-tune them to run in dyno mode (ie compliant) all the time?

Who knew? Not just who at VW, but it's been alleged that the German govt were aware, that other car-makers would have known, that Bosch cooked up the scheme and offered it to other companies as well as VW.

FWIW, the alpha capture system run by the company I work for rates VW as a 'strong buy' this morning, so some of the big-name investment bank brokers think that the stock will partially recover.

[KillerB]

Yes, and tailpipe emissions tests are done on a dyno.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I'd certainly consider buying VW stocks.

I don't think the company would fold even if forced to pay hefty carbon tax/fine and buy back all the cars that can't honestly pass local smog tests.

[MR2 Fan]

I'd certainly consider buying VW stocks.

It is intriguing....I'd definitely wait until more data comes out and if we see any trends where it "safely" bottoms out, and that could be a while

[Godson]

I've been watching the stock. I have a few k I could burn if needed.

[Sad, little man]

It is intriguing....I'd definitely wait until more data comes out and if we see any trends where it "safely" bottoms out, and that could be a while
That's the irony with stocks... If you wait until it's safe to buy, you have missed the stock when it was a good buy.

Anyway, this whole thing makes me feel so slimy. I'm really of the opinion that there must have been other OEMs that knew this was going on. There's no way they didn't obsess about how VW was able to pull off diesels without adding a DEF system for so long. I guarantee their cars were bought by other manufacturers and thoroughly gone through. They must have realized something fishy was going on, even if they didn't quite nail down what it was. And the fact that it wasn't any of them that called them out to the EPA just makes me feel like it was probably because other manufacturers are doing similarly shady things. Maybe not specifically with emissions, but just in general.

[thesameguy]

Ford and Hyundai just got nailed for lying about economy. Auto manufacturers do slimy stuff all the time, just like the rest of the corporate world.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Lying about mpg is cheating consumers. Lying about emission this way is kinda taking advantage legal loophole. To me, it's slimeier to take advantage of consumers than to take advantage of legal policies. Kinda like screwing with people's retirement money vs coming up with clever ways of evading taxes.

For the consumers who really want to be green, they really should've bought EVs.

[thesameguy]

I guess that's a fair viewpoint, except emissions standards laws are there to keep the air clean for people to breathe. Lying about your emissions levels is a big fuck you to pretty much everyone. What if every car polluted 40x more than the allowable levels? 1970 all over again. Profits > all, right?

[Leon]

One thing to keep in mind, is that all these standards, tests, numbers etc, the car makers design their cars to pass various tests, rather than specifically to be genuinely good at a particular thing in real life conditions.

So they will have an engine designed to nail a particular type of emissions test conditions. Which we are all cynically aware, does not mean that they will as economical as the very dubious claims.

The VW example is a blatant piss take. But it's the next logical continuation of the process of fiddling figures to try to sell a car.

Will this usher in a grand new age of "honest" testing and economy figures? No chance in hell.

[LHutton]

https://i.imgur.com/fAyXReg.jpg

[samoht]

Things get worse:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34345210


Germany's transport minister says Volkswagen has admitted using the same fake emissions test in Europe as it used to falsify results in the US.
Mr Dobrindt said he had been told vehicles with 1.6 and 2.0 litre diesel engines are "affected by the manipulations that are being talked about".

Based on this it sounds like the total number of vehicles affected globally is closer to 11m than the 500k USDM models. Technically I guess the inclusion of the 1.6 engine means it could be even more, since the 11m was just for the 2.0 as I understood it.

The German government will want to protect VW. The French, however, may see things differently since they're wrestling with NOx pollution issues there and their own manufacturers could benefit from a weaker VW. (In France there have been temporary speed limits and temporary city-centre car bans to get NOx pollution down when it's been really high). Stand by for a big EU fight (unless they are found to all have been at it, in which case it will be swept under the carpet here).

[overpowered]

http://www.computerworld.com/article/2985283/telematics/a-diesel-whodunit-how-software-let-vw-cheat-on-emissions.html

[thesameguy]

Storage writers should stick to writing about storage.

[Yw-slayer]

The only people I really feel bad for are those pensioners whose fund managers bought VW and whose pensions are coming up for realisation.

EVERYONE ELSE, LET'S GET IT ON

[KillerB]

Buybacks of the US cars seemed feasible, but 11m times, say, even just $5k per car is $55 billion.

[thesameguy]

Too big to fail in ... 3 ... 2 ...

[Crazed_Insanity]

All 11 million vehicles are running in areas that has the same strict emission standard?


I guess that's a fair viewpoint, except emissions standards laws are there to keep the air clean for people to breathe. Lying about your emissions levels is a big fuck you to pretty much everyone. What if every car polluted 40x more than the allowable levels? 1970 all over again. Profits > all, right?

Evading taxes is similar to a big fuck you to everyone too because you're not paying YOUR fair share. But of course legal doesn't really make something right. VW is utilizing this legal loophole to the extreme...

But anyway, speaking of air pollution, I can still see lots of diesel bus and trucks emitting clouds of black smokes on the road today. I don't understand how is that still allowable. Sometimes when driving behind seemingly new Harleys, if I allow fresh air to come in... I can also smell their exhaust. However, I really haven't seen or smell any new VWs exhaust yet. Maybe NOx are just not as noticeable...

Exactly how bad is 40x the allowable? Maybe this is full load at full throttle, probably not always like that. Plus, who deemed the legal limit is the 'right' limit anyway? It's just some number we think is reasonable, right? You sell 40 more cars, you're polluting the same exact amount into the atmosphere anyway. To truly curb emission, we need to limit the # of cars on the road... and that's not something we're doing.

Lastly, like Leon said, cars are also specifically designed to pass certain crash tests. Whenever they update the test... a supposedly safe vehicle last year could all of a sudden become dangerous next year. All because of change in the test.

I don't know. I think VW should pay for their sliminess, but I personally still think Ford and Hyundai are slimier. Heck, forget about false mpg advertisement, my Santa Fe's onboard computer still doesn't tell me the correct mpg calculation. Maybe Hyundai's not slimy, just stupid.

[samoht]

I don't think the rumours of 'billion-dollar' fines are anywhere close to likely:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/24/opinion/volkswagen-and-the-era-of-cheating-software.html?_r=0


In 1998, Ford was fined $7.8 million for using defeat devices that allowed its Econoline vans to reduce emissions to pass testing, and then to exceed pollution limits when driving at highway speeds. The same year, Honda paid $17.1 million in fines for deliberately disabling a “misfire” device that warned about excess emissions. In 1995, General Motors paid $11 million in fines for the “defeat devices” on some of its Cadillac cars, which secretly overrode the emissions control system at times. The largest penalty for defeat devices to date was an $83.4 million fine in 1998 on Caterpillar, Volvo, Renault and other manufacturers.

Note the use of the letter 'm' in the above paragraph, rather than 'b'. (It's also a generally interesting article)

No, the more significant questions are first, the cost of rectifying the 11m illegal cars, and second the impact on VW's brand value, on people's willingness to pay for 'German quality'. Obviously the two are linked, in that how well VW take care of their customers will affect their reputation. The cars in question are basically all the diesels VW sold in the past six years; since most people probably don't keep a new car that long, the 500k customers basically represent the entire current customer base for VW diesels. If they're left feeling aggrieved or let down, this would do huge damage to VW's future prospects.


Anyway, If I were VW USA, I'd be writing to all those customers pronto, offering them a straight swap for an equivalent petrol VW, a buyback at pre-scandal blue book value, or to wait until VW work out what they're going to do with all these cars.

[Yw-slayer]

FFS, this is not a "legal loophole" so stop describing it as such. It is plain, egregious cheating used to make sure the car emits far less than it actually does to avoid the consequences of a test.

[thesameguy]

4realz

[Godson]

FFS, this is not a "legal loophole" so stop describing it as such. It is plain, egregious cheating used to make sure the car emits far less than it actually does to avoid the consequences of a test.

I think you will need to use a nazi or a Hitler reference to help him understand...

[IMOA]

I'd be stunned if the fine in the US isn't in the billions, this was a egregious breech with half a million vehicles, they aren't getting a gentle slap on the wrist. In terms of rectification I would assume that they will need to retrofit adblue and then make some form of compensation payment to the owners of the vehicles.

However the real problem isn't the US, it's europe. NOx is a massive issue there with estimates in the tens of thousands of people killed every year because of it. This is where the bulk of the cars are and this is where regulators have been scratching their head wondering why NOx levels haven't been coming down even though the emission standards have been tightened even though (for other pollutants like sulphar they have reduced significantly). The US has the focus atm because they're the ones that caught them but once the european governments catch up there's going to be hell to pay.

Oh yeah, and then there's Toyota who bet the farm on Hybrid, if you want to be buying a automotive stock thats the one I'd be getting.

[Yw-slayer]

I think you will need to use a nazi or a Hitler reference to help him understand...

Without even having to go there, this is like getting a job by deliberately and dishonestly stating on your resume that you got 80% on the exam (with the threshold for the job being say 50%), when in reality you only got 8%. That's not a "legal loophole" and I can't see how anyone can even begin to try and describe it as such.

[KillerB]

I think the US fine will be in the billions, though likely not close to the maximum $18 billion. I just think the buybacks are going to be a real problem. I don't the earlier cars will be able to be retrofitted in a way that they'll ever run right.

I don't know the legal situation in Europe, but since basically 95% of them were sold there, I suspect that it'll be a big issue.

Also worth noting, despite the size of Caterpillar's fine, they exited the over-the-road truck engine market as a result of the whole fiasco.

[thesameguy]

I am going to wager the fine will not be all that ridiculous, as given the size of the damages to consumers I doubt "the governments" will want to strip VAG of the ability to take care of those. VW is also ginormous, and putting them into a very difficult financial position on top of the future competitive difficulties as a result of their tarnished name may be more weight than they're willing to pile on.

[IMOA]

I agree that the fine won't be up around the 18b 'maximum' however Toyota was fined 1.2b and I think this will be seen as warranting a larger fine.

[LHutton]

Evading taxes is similar to a big fuck you to everyone too because you're not paying YOUR fair share. But of course legal doesn't really make something right. VW is utilizing this legal loophole to the extreme...

Evading taxes is not legal. Avoiding taxes is. Subtle differences, but very important in court.

[LHutton]

I am going to wager the fine will not be all that ridiculous, as given the size of the damages to consumers I doubt "the governments" will want to strip VAG of the ability to take care of those. VW is also ginormous, and putting them into a very difficult financial position on top of the future competitive difficulties as a result of their tarnished name may be more weight than they're willing to pile on.
All comes down to the fact that employees vote and jobless employees are unlikely to vote for you and they don't pay tax either, or buy as much. So if the fine is too large, it comes back and bites you on your own arse.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Without even having to go there, this is like getting a job by deliberately and dishonestly stating on your resume that you got 80% on the exam (with the threshold for the job being say 50%), when in reality you only got 8%. That's not a "legal loophole" and I can't see how anyone can even begin to try and describe it as such.

Your analogy is more like what Ford and Hyundai have done. Deliberately lying on a resume(or their sticker) and fucking with the consumers.

A better analogy for VW would be an athlete taking undetectable performance enhancing drugs gaining unfair advantage over its rivals.

Both are cheating of course. I never claimed what VW did was perfectly fine. It's just that personally, I'm more upset at them putting bogus #s on their stickers. As for emissions standards, I don't really care as much. CA air quality is pretty decent considering how many cars are on the road! Granted, we probably don't have as many turbo diesels on the road as Europeans. Wonder if the Europeans noticed a drop in air quality thanks for those millions of vehicles?

[Freude am Fahren]

Instead of a fine, they should force VW to refund every purchase completely. Wouldn't that be in the Billions?

[Freude am Fahren]

Your analogy is more like what Ford and Hyundai have done. Deliberately lying on a resume(or their sticker) and fucking with the consumers.

A better analogy for VW would be an athlete taking undetectable performance enhancing drugs gaining unfair advantage over its rivals.

Both are cheating of course. I never claimed what VW did was perfectly fine. It's just that personally, I'm more upset at them putting bogus #s on their stickers. As for emissions standards, I don't really care as much. CA air quality is pretty decent considering how many cars are on the road! Granted, we probably don't have as many turbo diesels on the road as Europeans. Wonder if the Europeans noticed a drop in air quality thanks for those millions of vehicles?

Or really taking a detectable, banned drug and using a masking agent or someone elses pee/blood for the test.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Whatever analogy suits your fancy. My point was VW was able to jumped thru 'legal loophole' by being able to pass tests. Another word for such 'jumping thru legal loophole' is cheating.

It's just that on a personal level, I'm more outraged by deliberately lying about MPG than by what VW has done.

EPA is beginning to road test all cars and not telling manufacturers how they're doing it... Wonder how many other maker will get found out!

[samoht]

CA air quality is pretty decent considering how many cars are on the road! Granted, we probably don't have as many turbo diesels on the road as Europeans. Wonder if the Europeans noticed a drop in air quality thanks for those millions of vehicles?

Most European capitals are over safe levels of NOx pollution. Paris is the worst I think - see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32016730


On Monday the number of cars on the road in Paris will be cut in half - only motorists with odd-numbered plates will be allowed to drive.

Public transportation will be free as well car-sharing and bike-sharing programmes.

Similar measures were put in place last year when pollution soared in Paris.

And yeah, authorities have been concerned that, although they keep applying ever-stricter limits on vehicle NOx emissions, the problem doesn't get any better. Certainly we have many diesels - I think about 50% of cars here in the UK are diesel, although the real killer I think are the 99% of vans, buses, taxis and trucks that are diesel, all of which have bigger engines and are used more intensively.

It it a diesel issue; diesels burn fuel in an excess of air (lean), which means more complete, hotter combustion which is more efficient - but making the air hotter means more of the nitrogen in the air forms nitrogen oxides, which cause the air pollution. It's a trade-off between CO2 / using up oil on the one hand, and nitrous oxides on the other. (Unless you're VW, in which case you favour low consumption, and just cheat the NOx tests).

[thesameguy]

Whatever analogy suits your fancy. My point was VW was able to jumped thru 'legal loophole' by being able to pass tests. Another word for such 'jumping thru legal loophole' is cheating.

I don't think you're grasping what a loophole is. A loophole is a gap in the law which results in a specific set of circumstances being exploited to someone's benefit. There is no gap in the law here. Using a defeat device is specifically illegal. It is called out and prohibited. VW did not exploit a gap in the law, they did not take advantage of a loophole. They flat-out broke the law. There is no grey area here, they did the opposite of what the law calls for, they flagrantly violated the letter. It's not a matter of cheating, unless you consider shoplifting cheating. "Hey, the cashier could have stopped me."

The sole difference between Hyundai/Ford and VW is that Hyundai/Ford took advantage of the fact that nobody is watching over shoulders when mileage figured are produced and VW created a system which showed testers numbers that were better than the cars could normally attain. They all lied, they all broke the law with the exact same result.

[Yw-slayer]

Yes. Billi, please stop misusing the term "legal loophole". It is insulting and misleading to call this fraud a loophole. Altering your own urine sample to pass a drugs test is still fraudulent and is not "taking advantage of a legal loophole".

[TheBenior]

FWIU, Hyundai basically cherry-picked the best figures instead of averaging them, which made for a 1-2 mpg difference for most models. For example, if there was a model that lacked heavy options like a big moonroof (panoramic examples can be 80lbs+), they went with those.

They didn't make a separate test engine map that turned on emissions tuning and a separate normal driving map that they knew would massively pollute.

[LHutton]

We'd have to know exactly what the law says before we can determine whether it's a 'loophole' or just illegal.

The one thing for sure is that if they were in the financial sector, the government would probably say, "meh," and give an absolutely pathetic fine. But unfortunately they like to crack down on people who actually make stuff.

[samoht]

We'd have to know exactly what the law says before we can determine whether it's a 'loophole' or just illegal.

Yup, lets have a look. From the EPA Notice of Violation ( http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/cert/documents/vw-nov-caa-09-18-15.pdf ):


A defeat device is an Auxiliary Emission Control Device "that reduces the effectiveness of the emission control system under conditions which may reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal vehicle operation and use..." 40 C.F.R S 86.1803-01 (Clean Air Act Title II Part A)

I understand that the law is very clear that you can't have devices that increase emissions under specific conditions, and there is ample case law from previous similar cases too.

Also an interesting comment from an ex-EPA tester:


When I worked at the EPA, finding these defeat devices was “part of the job.” We never had any trouble with the Japanese, but all the other manufacturers were doing highly suspect things. With microprocessor engine controls in every car, it is very hard to find what is going on.

Once, a VW was in the middle of failing a 100,000-mile driving test (pollution devices had to work for 100,000 miles) and suddenly caught fire, so the test had to be restarted. EPA engineers joked they were sure they saw a broken “Molotov cocktail” on the road next to the car. There were some other VW shenanigans, but they were too complicated to explain. I owned a VW at the time, but it was falling apart constantly so I had no sympathy whatever for VW.

Chrysler got caught doing something like VW, but was caught in testing, so it paid a smaller fine.

Ford lied like crazy and the EPA director had a big photo over his desk of the million $ check for a fine they had to pay. They were also ordered to “behave cooperatively” as opposed to the snarling obnoxious behavior they had formerly exhibited.

I also caught Ford in a defeat device and had to write a memo to them asking for written info instead of the lying (but sooo friendly) PR guys they sent out. They never answered, so my letter was used in court as proof that we had tried but they hadn’t cooperated.

GM was no better, but they were cleverer so we couldn’t catch them in testing. Enforcement division out in the field got them.

Honestly, it was just an “EPA doesn’t tell US what to do” attitude — it would have been cheaper for them if they had followed the Japanese example and just made clean cars to begin with.

http://cleantechnica.com/2015/09/22/how-common-are-cheating-epa-test-defeat-devices-in-the-auto-industry/

[Sad, little man]

As for emissions standards, I don't really care as much. CA air quality is pretty decent considering how many cars are on the road!
Well hey, as long as your own air quality is pretty decent, why bother caring? You know what, Michigan isn't going through a drought, water shortage, or wild fire outbreak right now. I know California is, but I don't really care as much about that.

Regarding MPG claims vs emissions claims... First, MPG numbers are known to vary. They're called EPA estimates for a reason, they're estimates. You can clearly see what mileage you're actually getting on most new cars. And even if they don't meet estimates, you're just out a few bucks, that's it.

Emissions standards are not meant to be estimates, they're standards, ie, the car is expected to meet them at all times. This is why your opinion is off base. You don't understand the concept of an estimate vs. a standard. Also, there is no display to show how much a car is emitting, so we must put our trust in these standards in a way that is not necessary with MPG estimates. Also, when emissions standards aren't met, the environment is harmed, and peoples' health is affected. But hey, I guess as long as your respiratory system is working ok, then I guess you "don't really care as much."

[LHutton]

Yup, lets have a look. From the EPA Notice of Violation ( http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/cert/documents/vw-nov-caa-09-18-15.pdf ):



I understand that the law is very clear that you can't have devices that increase emissions under specific conditions, and there is ample case law from previous similar cases too.

Also an interesting comment from an ex-EPA tester:


http://cleantechnica.com/2015/09/22/how-common-are-cheating-epa-test-defeat-devices-in-the-auto-industry/
That is pretty clear cut then.

[thesameguy]

Yeah, it's not even remotely grey. They not only broke the law, but kept doing it for YEARS. It isn't going to go well.

[LHutton]

ECB just dealt them a hefty blow too:

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/business/Industry/article1612540.ece


THE European Central Bank has dealt Volkswagen a fresh blow by refusing to buy the loans that finance sales of its cars.

The veto, confirmed yesterday by an ECB insider, raises the prospect of the manufacturer being unable to borrow to fund sale and lease deals on new cars.


http://www.beheadingboredom.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/meanwhile-vw-emissions-test.jpg

[The359]

http://vwdieselinfo.com/

[thesameguy]

As environmental protection and sustainability are among Volkswagen’s strategic corporate objectives, the Company takes this matter very seriously and is cooperating with the investigation.

:lol:

We love this stuff so much, we lied about it for six years!

[Crazed_Insanity]

The sole difference between Hyundai/Ford and VW is that Hyundai/Ford took advantage of the fact that nobody is watching over shoulders when mileage figured are produced and VW created a system which showed testers numbers that were better than the cars could normally attain. They all lied, they all broke the law with the exact same result.

Yep. I suspect most folks' outrage against VW is due to the fact that they were able to lie for so long after so many cars. Again, never defended VW as if they're doing the right thing. It's just that if I were the judge, I'd punish automakers who'd hide a known defect that'd actually cause occupants life threatening injuries. Such as exploding tanks or faulty ignition switches, etc. (Pollution can definitely cause harm to people, but it's just not immediately life threatening.) As for bogus MPG #s, they are definitely not life threatening, but it does directly effect consumers pocket book. Yes, I know MPG's are estimates, but I'm pretty sure there'd be no way for Ford or Hyundai to rig any kind of tests in order to help their vehicle's to reach those advertised MPG #'s.

Anyway, I used the word 'loophole' because in F-1, if you can pass inspection, even if you've violated the spirit of the rule, you're still okay, right? Of course the remedy is that new regulation or new testing procedures would come into place to close the 'loophole' and take away your unfair advantage. But of course in non-racing situation, regulators can certainly come back to investigate and asses punitive fines. This is not auto racing. We certainly don'g want millions of vehicles polluting the environment unnecessarily.

VW for sure will have to pay out a lot to fix their mistake out of the sheer # of vehicles sold.

However, if we're strictly talking about assessing punitive damages, if you were to judge, you guys really think what VW has done is the most appalling of automotive history?

Like I said, I'd assess maximum penalties to those who'd deliberately hide known defects that would jeopardize occupants.
Then, it would be those who deliberately trying to rip off consumers.

VW clearly broke the law, my posts wasn't meant to defend VW as if they didn't break the law, however, it's just that I don't believe their cheating would cause any physical harm to the occupants nor were they trying to directly rip off consumers. However, emission laws are in place to protect everyone and the environment. I can understand why a lot of you are upset because of that. But as a polluter myself on a daily basis, I just don't see it as THAT huge of a deal. But in Europe, based on what samoht has describe, NOx emission does seem like a huge deal over there. It is kinda mind boggling why VW didn't take the time to properly develop their 'clean diesel' technology and continued to rely on this cheating method. Or perhaps they did? On the news, sounds like not all Audi diesel cars are effected only the older EU5 engines, but not the newer EU6 engines?

Anyway, hope there's a fix for this and won't cause diesel to completely disappear...

[Yw-slayer]

Yep. I suspect most folks' outrage against VW is due to the fact that they were able to lie for so long after so many cars.

I don't know about "most folks", but I'm outraged because it was a CYNICAL, DELIBERATE, and CAREFULLY CALCULATED attempt by the "People's Car" company, and which recently became the largest car company in the world, to reduce emissions to defeat the test, which was successful initially and which was made worse by a long and continued campaign for VW and Audi touting the superiority of german engineering, clean diesel, blah blah blah when the whole thing was just a massive fraud and scam. It was on the back of that deception that they became the only real game in light-diesel car sales in the US.

Or rather, it's not just about the number of cars (QUANTITY), it's about the way in which they went about lying (QUALITY).


Anyway, I used the word 'loophole' because in F-1, if you can pass inspection, even if you've violated the spirit of the rule, you're still okay, right? Of course the remedy is that new regulation or new testing procedures would come into place to close the 'loophole' and take away your unfair advantage. But of course in non-racing situation, regulators can certainly come back to investigate and asses punitive fines. This is not auto racing. We certainly don'g want millions of vehicles polluting the environment unnecessarily.

I don't know much about F1, but this is not violating the "spirit of the rule". This is obvious RULE-BREAKING, it is not even anywhere close near rule-bending.


However, if we're strictly talking about assessing punitive damages, if you were to judge, you guys really think what VW has done is the most appalling of automotive history?

Given how they have conducted themselves and their dominant position, it's pretty high on the list.


... however, it's just that I don't believe their cheating would cause any physical harm to the occupants nor were they trying to directly rip off consumers. However, emission laws are in place to protect everyone and the environment. I can understand why a lot of you are upset because of that. But as a polluter myself on a daily basis, I just don't see it as THAT huge of a deal. But in Europe, based on what samoht has describe, NOx emission does seem like a huge deal over there.

From a quantitative point of view, they were clearly trying to rip-off consumers, since by my understanding the cars would lose MPG, lose performance, and/or cost more if they had been made compliant.

Money aside, they were also ripping them off via marketing like "Vorsprung durch technik" and all those BS commercials talking about how clean and brilliant the car and their diesel technology was. It was all part of a massive scam. How much more blunter can I be? Or do you simply not have any understanding of how horrific and repulsive it is when a company called "People's Car" makes money via claimed technical superiority which is, in fact, all utter bollocks (and when they knew it)? As someone mentioned earlier, the VW story really is like the auto industry's version of Lance Armstrong. His scam was the claim that his recovery from cancer somehow explained his wins (utter bollocks of course since it was all due to illegal substances), while in the meantime he built up a fearsome reputation, media empire, and made loads of money, although of course he went even further in attacking and destroying (prior to his admission of guilt) the reputations and lives of anyone who spoke out to the contrary.

That aside, if your car emits 40x the amount of legitimate emissions do you really think that that won't cause any physical harm to the occupants of the car? What about everyone else who has to put up with all those extra emissions (which limits are not simply plucked out of thin air)? Is no-one else on the road or around the car entitled to protection too? So if a company covers up an ABS defect that could lead to an accident, it's bad because the occupants could die, but it's too bad about the other car that was hit by the original car? And yes, we all pollute, but don't you think it would be an issue if everyone did whatever the fuck they wanted?


It is kinda mind boggling why VW didn't take the time to properly develop their 'clean diesel' technology and continued to rely on this cheating method. Or perhaps they did? On the news, sounds like not all Audi diesel cars are effected only the older EU5 engines, but not the newer EU6 engines?

MONEY, man, do you not understand it??!!!!


Anyway, hope there's a fix for this and won't cause diesel to completely disappear...

Actually I don't mind it disappearing, I have never really liked diesel cars, buses, etc.

But I wouldn't mind if a few VW executives disappeared into a US jail for a few years.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Anyway, based on the responses here, I know I'm not 'most people'. I can understand how you feel. It is a huge scandal, but considering all things illegal, it's just not the kind that I find the most appalling. But you're right that one could see this as VW also ripping off turbo diesel lovers by convincing them that they are driving a clean car. So at most I'd equate this scandal on par with misleading mpg #s. I still would not see this 'huge' scandal as appalling as hiding known problems such as exploding tanks or faulty ignition switches.

Apparently all auto companies who achieved the #1 in the world status all compromised their integrity to get there. All these big companies are profit driven, it's not that I don't understand. I'm not that naive to not know that we have a cynical world. There are lots of way for these companies to increase their profit or sales. However, if you get there by sacrificing people's lives or wallet, I'd seek maximum punitive penalty. With regard to 40x above legal limit, that is pretty bad, but it's not lethal, right? Like I've said, even if VW were to create really clean cars that can pass real world tests, selling 40 of them will still achieve the same level of pollution again. What are we doing to stop that? If air quality is such an issue, emission level isn't enough. They need to limit sales or tax the hell out of them.

Anyway, I don't particularly love diesel as well, but surely that industry employs a lot of folks. I also don't mind we jail the executives, but I'd find that very hypocritical of US government to not jail one banker after the global financial meltdown but would go out of its way to jail German auto executives. But I suppose frying some fish is better than frying no fish at all.

[Yw-slayer]

Like I've said, even if VW were to create really clean cars that can pass real world tests, selling 40 of them will still achieve the same level of pollution again. What are we doing to stop that? If air quality is such an issue, emission level isn't enough. They need to limit sales or tax the hell out of them.

This is a fallacious argument. If VW had bothered created really clean diesels then they would not have sold 40x the number of the dirty diesels they had since, amongst other things, they would have cost more, returned worse mpg or performance, and/or not been on the market as long). Conversely, if they had adhered to the rules they wouldn't have been able to sell even ONE dirty diesel on the market.

Setting high standards for emissions is another way of "limiting sales" and/or "taxing the hell out of them", since making cars that meet those high standards, yet meets other internal targets, costs more to the corporation and is likely to mean that less people will be able to buy the car.


Anyway, I don't particularly love diesel as well, but surely that industry employs a lot of folks. I also don't mind we jail the executives, but I'd find that very hypocritical of US government to not jail one banker after the global financial meltdown but would go out of its way to jail German auto executives. But I suppose frying some fish is better than frying no fish at all.

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-vw-is-a-great-test-on-white-collar-crooks-20150921-column.html

[thesameguy]

Put some smoke up, go to jail.

Put some diesel out, nothing.

Hmm.

[thesameguy]

This of course is the worst:


The trend continued even after the issuance of the Yates memo. General Motors last week settled for $900 million federal criminal charges that it connived in hiding a lethal flaw in its auto ignition switch for as long as a decade. No individual executives were named.

While VW did some shitty things, they didn't knowingly kill anyone. I can't imagine an EPA violation being considered more serious than the reckless endangerment of tens of thousands of people along with the murder and/or manslaughter of a couple dozen. Lying is bad. Lying about polluting the air is reprehensible. Lying about your product killing people is top of the heap.

The only thing that makes VW's situation worse is the widespread coverage. That's gonna hurt. But I can't think of any universe where GM's offense wasn't actually worse, and they only paid a billion bucks.

Don't get me started on HSBC or BP.

Conceptually I like the idea of criminal prosecution for individuals, but I have a tough time wrestling with the idea of one guy taking the fall for an entire giant corporation. That's a hell of a potential burden to take on and might have repercussions on a large scale.

[neanderthal]

The fine is going to be humongous.

In essence every single one of the affected cars is NOT EPA compliant (or whatever body in the various countries they are sold.) This means they were never fit for sale. Which means each sale is essentially null and void. That's just the consumer side. VW basically can't refuse anyone who says give me my money back. (I think the Milli Vanilli thing may be precedent.) Figuring out who is owed what when a car is on its 2nd, 3rd or 4th owner will be the tricky part.

The cheating aspect just amplifies how expensive this recall is going to be for VW. Framed a deliberate fraud by prosecutors, it'll be a lighthouse beacon to every class action attorney. Dump your VW stock now

[thesameguy]

Totally agree, it's just sad. A manufacturing defect subject to years of coverup that actively kills people costs less than an EPA violation because working against the EPA is illegal, selling a dangerous product actually isn't. :sadbanana:

[Dicknose]

Which means each sale is essentially null and void.
Thats a big call.
It would take a court to make that sort of decision.
And I doubt they would say that the owners are due a refund and the cars taken off the road.
Its more likely they would get some payment in compensation.

What could be more interesting is if a state like California gets tough and says the cars are not compliant and cant be registered.
But I doubt that would happen, the owners would not be very happy (unless its tied to a refund)

I just cant see a govt doing that as it would potentially inconvenience the owners. They are people who vote for you (while the VW board is not!)

[thesameguy]

I think it's almost likely California will ban the cars. Non-compliance has been overlooked for a lot of 1996-1999 cars, but Y2K+ doesn't get a lot of leeway. Definitely a sticky wicket!

[Crazed_Insanity]

This is a fallacious argument. If VW had bothered created really clean diesels then they would not have sold 40x the number of the dirty diesels they had since, amongst other things, they would have cost more, returned worse mpg or performance, and/or not been on the market as long). Conversely, if they had adhered to the rules they wouldn't have been able to sell even ONE dirty diesel on the market.

Setting high standards for emissions is another way of "limiting sales" and/or "taxing the hell out of them", since making cars that meet those high standards, yet meets other internal targets, costs more to the corporation and is likely to mean that less people will be able to buy the car.



http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-vw-is-a-great-test-on-white-collar-crooks-20150921-column.html

I think you missed the point of my 'argument'.

My point is, assuming if we can all legally dump used motor oil down the drain(and therefore right into the ocean) for X amount. When BP or Exxon have their oil spills and 40x or 400x the amount, you'd be totally outraged because of that? Polluting at the 'legal' X amount is just fine, but once above legal limit, then all of a sudden that becomes totally evil? So the fine line between good and evil is just whatever the law specified?

By allowing cars to exist, we accept a certain level of pollution. Yes, VW cunningly cheated and lied about their level. It's certainly illegal and should be penalized, but like I've said before, at least it isn't immediately life threatening and it doesn't really rip consumers off financially. Of course now after the news broke, the sudden drop in turbo diesel's value can hit owner's wallet... So at most I equate this as the same level as lying about MPG. However, deliberately covering up about life threatening defects would be top of my list as appalling... and should be penalized to the max.

I wouldn't want GM or VW to cease to exist, but executives in charge at those time periods really do need to pay a hefty fine personally or goto jail. CEOs get paid huge sums of money. When companies do well, they share the profit. When they fuck up badly, resigning is the only penalty? Doesn't sound right.

Likewise with the bankers. They take their commissions when markets do well. Maybe even bonuses. They also take commissions when markets do poorly.

Why wouldn't these boneheads make risky stupid decisions? They're encouraged to do so to maximize their earnings.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Conceptually I like the idea of criminal prosecution for individuals, but I have a tough time wrestling with the idea of one guy taking the fall for an entire giant corporation. That's a hell of a potential burden to take on and might have repercussions on a large scale.

If you don't have a good idea of what this big company is doing, you probably shouldn't be its CEO! When your company is doing something naughty..., if you know about it and failed to correct it, you should take the fall. Personally pay fines out of your own salary and go directly to jail when caught!

If you honestly don't know about it, then there needs to be an investigation to see who's the top guy that knows about it. Once found, that guy will goto jail. CEO can then avoid personal fines and jail times, but still needs to be fired for his incompetency. If no fall guy can be found and entire company plays ignorant, then again, CEO gets fined and jailed still.

If you want to make the big bucks, you absolutely should also bear the extra responsibility.

Current system is fucked up that's why most of our giant corporations are fucked up.

BTW, of course often times there can be honest mistakes. I'm not asking jail time or penalties in those cases. As long as they fix their mistake, that's good enough. However, for intentional unethical risky behaviors, somebody gotta be held responsible. CEO ought to be held responsible. If this kind of practice is in place... and if certain company can end up having a very difficult time finding replacement CEOs... those are the companies that need to be watch out for and probably need to be shut down!

[LHutton]

Conceptually I like the idea of criminal prosecution for individuals, but I have a tough time wrestling with the idea of one guy taking the fall for an entire giant corporation. That's a hell of a potential burden to take on and might have repercussions on a large scale.
I have zero problem with it and it may not be just one person. Crimes are committed by individuals not corporations. Without individuals a corporation is just a collection of inanimate objects completely incapable of crime and penalising corporations as a pseudo entity only hurts pension schemes and individuals otherwise uninvolved. It's basically a socialisation of crime and punishment, equivalent to fining a community every time a resident commits a crime. All you end up doing is harming future tax revenue. It's insane and illogical.

Now I should emphasize that in this regard I don't hold the CEO responsible for decisions he didn't make just because he's CEO, only those who made decisions and gave directions to break the law should be punished. At the moment we have a system whereby, in the financial sector particularly, individuals are free to commit fraud under the corporate umbrella, with zero risk and plenty of reward on a personal level.

The other point of note coming from these revelations is that the tests are pretty inaccurate anyway. Even BMWs are a factor of 11 out in test vs road emissions and they have no defeat device installed.

[LHutton]

Looking at it another way, VW's cars didn't actually kill anyone.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/14/business/gm-air-bag-failures-linked-to-303-deaths.html?_r=0
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-02-27/gm-investigated-over-ignition-recall-linked-to-13-deaths

The fine:
http://wn.com/gm_to_pay_$900m_fine_for_a_defect_that_caused_100_ deaths_-_newsy

[neanderthal]

I have zero problem with it and it may not be just one person. Crimes are committed by individuals not corporations. Without individuals a corporation is just a collection of inanimate objects completely incapable of crime and penalising corporations as a pseudo entity only hurts pension schemes and individuals otherwise uninvolved. It's basically a socialisation of crime and punishment, equivalent to fining a community every time a resident commits a crime. All you end up doing is harming future tax revenue. It's insane and illogical.

Now I should emphasize that in this regard I don't hold the CEO responsible for decisions he didn't make just because he's CEO, only those who made decisions and gave directions to break the law should be punished. At the moment we have a system whereby, in the financial sector particularly, individuals are free to commit fraud under the corporate umbrella, with zero risk and plenty of reward on a personal level.

The other point of note coming from these revelations is that the tests are pretty inaccurate anyway. Even BMWs are a factor of 11 out in test vs road emissions and they have no defeat device installed.

"Corporations are people my friend." Mittens Rmoney.

[neanderthal]

It's egregious that corporations can declare bankruptcy, fold up, and die, then pop up as the same operators under a different name.

Remember "The Rainmaker" a novel, and later movie starring Matt Damon, by John Grisham about the insurance company.

[FaultyMario]

Ydubs, what would be the reasoning behind audi suing vw?

[LHutton]

It's egregious that corporations can declare bankruptcy, fold up, and die, then pop up as the same operators under a different name.

Remember "The Rainmaker" a novel, and later movie starring Matt Damon, by John Grisham about the insurance company.
Individual rewards, collective punishment. Privatised profits, socialised losses. Ultimately punishing a company is not a deterrent to the individuals who commit the offences.

[Yw-slayer]

Ydubs, what would be the reasoning behind audi suing vw?

Possibly that they relied on VW to supply and vet the engines and VW probably undertook that the engines were compliant etc. There might also be an indemnity given by VW to cover all of Audi's losses in the event of a situation like this. But

[neanderthal]

Just returned a rental Vaixhall. Diesel.

I'm a convert to the gospel of diesel. Review coming soon.

[Jason]

I came away with a positive experience with my rental A4 TDi over there. Don't know what year it was, so not sure if it was one of them killer engines or no :P

[overpowered]

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpt1/v/t1.0-9/12096359_713100888823689_6225460722528719332_n.jpg ?oh=9515d41a919fa5e95993adb703904e29&oe=56CFBBCA

[21Kid]

Weekly Recap: Diesel scandal continues to fuel VW's woesDo they expect it to be over already? It just happened? This is going to haunt them for a long time.

[21Kid]

The VW diesel scandal is now a Halloween costume (http://www.autoblog.com/2015/10/05/vw-diesel-scandal-halloween-costume/)


http://o.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/GLOB/legacy_thumbnail/800x450/format/jpg/quality/85/http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/ab6c1dabcc5ec9fde778e3d37ede2e9f/202742328/costume.jpg

[thesameguy]

Not sexy enough.

[Crazed_Insanity]

It would be if a girl wears the same outfit.

[Yw-slayer]

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/10/09/vw-diesels-cheat-mode-consumer-reports-test/

[thesameguy]

That is very interesting. With such good numbers in cheat mode, it seems *really* weird that VW left it on in the first place!

[Leon]

Do they go "bang" if you leave them in cheat mode long term though?

[thesameguy]

They might, but Autoblog wasn't measuring EGT or doing repeated or ongoing hard romps so it's impossible to know just from what's been done.

[JoshInKC]

Do they go "bang" if you leave them in cheat mode long term though?I'm thinking completely unacceptable lifespan for expensive emissions equipment. But going bang is a possibility as well.

[Sad, little man]

You guys are missing the point here. You look at the MPG changes and think well, it's only a few MPG different. But by my calculations, it's a 6% and 8.6% improvement in MPG. Powertrain engineers would kill their own mother for a 6 or 8 pct increase in mileage. You're thinking like consumers, not an auto company trying to wring out every last sale they can get. 6 or 8 pct is HUGE! 6 or 8 pct is what it will take to top your competitors' MPG numbers.

[Crazed_Insanity]

It'd be much easier to just lie about mpg #s. Plus, who are VWs diesel competitions? Mazda couldn't even pass smog tests right?

[Yw-slayer]

Because VW cheated.

[thesameguy]

You guys are missing the point here. You look at the MPG changes and think well, it's only a few MPG different. But by my calculations, it's a 6% and 8.6% improvement in MPG. Powertrain engineers would kill their own mother for a 6 or 8 pct increase in mileage. You're thinking like consumers, not an auto company trying to wring out every last sale they can get. 6 or 8 pct is HUGE! 6 or 8 pct is what it will take to top your competitors' MPG numbers.

Nobody is missing the point.

Your statement is an oxymoron. You can't say it's bad "we're thinking like consumers" and then go on to say "the improvement is huge for sales." Who do you think buys these things? I think you'll find the answer is... CONSUMERS.

If we, as consumers, don't care, then that loss or gain is academic.

[LHutton]

It'd be much easier to just lie about mpg #s. Plus, who are VWs diesel competitions? Mazda couldn't even pass smog tests right?
Largely BMW in Europe.

[Sad, little man]

In a sense, VW diesels compete against more than just other diesels. I'm sure that a large portion of the car buying public, the ones that look at a car as an appliance, doesn't give a damn what fuel their car uses, so if a diesel provides enough of an improvement over gasoline cars in the same class, they will be inclined to buy the diesel simply because it will give significant fuel cost savings.

tsg, you continue to look at this from a very narrow minded perspective. You are not consumers, you are one single consumer. It's true that just a few MPG bump may not mean much to you, but what about people that live 50 or 75 miles from work? A few MPG higher may be a huge deal to them, maybe the deciding factor of what car to buy.

So, when I say you're thinking like consumers, I mean that you're thinking like one single consumer and not taking into account that other peoples' priorities regarding what they're looking for in a new car may be much different from yours. Car companies understand that they could potentially capture several more sales from people who are extremely concerned with good mileage just by bumping the mileage a few digits higher, even if that won't make much of a difference to a lot of buyers.

[thesameguy]

These theoretical other people whom I do not represent and are generally more ignorant of cars don't know what VW TDI's might be capable of. They only know what's on the Monroney, which shows EPA mileage. The Autoblog article suggests that the VW's in defeat mode still beat the EPA numbers. So even if these real-world 50-75 miles from work people might cared about a 3-4mpg difference, they would be unaware of it. More to the point, perhaps, is that VW couldn't even legally advertise or suggest it was possible.

[JoshInKC]

The Autoblog article suggests that the VW's in defeat mode still beat the EPA numbers.
That's what my response was in relation to. Of course, I don't know enough about the epa test cycle to know what effect this extra mpg when driving might have in relation to window sticker numbers. It would be interesting to have somebody run a full epa mpg test with the test mode off.
Also, in regards to my previous post - Aren't automakers legally on the hook to warrant emissions equipment for something like 100K? If one or more of their components are expensive to replace in parts/labor and it regularly fails within that timeframe, that'd start cutting into profits with the quickness.

[thesameguy]

Aren't automakers legally on the hook to warrant emissions equipment for something like 100K?

I believe Federal requirements are 5 years, but several states have longer warranty requirements. In California, for example, many of the xZEV specs require a 10 year warranty. A funny aspect of this is that "air filter" is part of the emissions equipment, so on xZEV cars you get free air filters. :lol:

On topic, VW's had more than a few emissions-related SNAFUs. They had a slew of EPA-mandated cat recalls & warranty extensions due to their parts not reliably lasting.

I could totally see them using the defeat to cover up an equipment problem. Especially in light of what Autoblog found, I don't think they were trying to improve economy or 0-60 times. There just isn't enough meat there. I think they were trying to cover up an equipment problem - screwing with the tuning to make parts last and reduce warranty costs.

[samoht]

As if this whole thing wasn't astonishing enough, the next couldn't-make-it-up twist is that it's apparently going to be turned into a book and a Hollywood movie, starring Leonardo di Caprio.

http://news.sky.com/story/1568710/dicaprio-plans-to-make-volkswagen-scandal-film

I can't resist cross-posting some good suggestions for the title of this new movie from the evo forum (http://community.evo.co.uk/forums/thread.cfm?threadID=105266&startRow=0) -

"Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Tailpipes"
"Emission Impossible"
"It Was Smokey And They Banned It"
"Groundsmog Day"
...

[thesameguy]

Wonder how it'll compare to Kidnapping Mr. Heineken or The Advocate.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Maybe this can be a sequel to The Wolf of Wall Street! But call it the Volf of Wall Street.

Or it could be a sequel to Titanic...

[21Kid]

Leo has done quiet a few Environmental Documentaries. I don't think it's going to be that kind of movie.

[LHutton]

Other killer car movies.

http://www.standardmadness.com/18-killer-car-movies/

[Sad, little man]

This appears to be one of those "getting worse before it gets better" kinds of things.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/02/us-volkswagen-usa-epa-idUSKCN0SR22L20151102

[thesameguy]

So, it looks like there is a preliminary agreement between VW and the gubment. They will buy back vehicles or offer $5000 to owners as an apology.

So, do I go buy this:

http://sacramento.craigslist.org/cto/5539609758.html

And hope it turns into a $900 car in a couple months?

:lol:

[Leon]

Depreciation on Euro cars causes that to happen here .... $5900 cars turn into $900 cars as soon as an airbag light comes on

[Phil_SS]

How does offering $5000 fix the emissions issue?

[Kchrpm]

Covers the diminished resale value of the vehicle?

[Kchrpm]

http://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-will-pay-5000-to-customers-affected-by-dies-1772110979

So it looks like:
- $5000
AND
- Free repair or buyback


VW will pay cash compensation to owners who either sell their vehicles back or get them fixed, a source briefed on the matter said. Owners selling back their vehicles will get an additional cash payment on top of receiving the estimated value of the vehicles from before the emissions scandal became public in September 2015.

[Phil_SS]

Covers the diminished resale value of the vehicle?

Except as the article states. It doesn't solve the emissions issue.

And, it would seem that you could make a pretty penny selling that car back TSG. Though I can't believe that to be the case. My thought is you would have had to own the car prior to this announcement or prior to the initial dieselgate announcement. If not then there will be a run on cars like this. Especially stuff in junk yards.

[Kchrpm]

Except as the article states. It doesn't solve the emissions issue.

As I said, it seems the $5000 is in addition to fixing the emissions issue (or buying the car back from you, which is up to the owner). I'm not sure what happens if they can't find a fix.

[thesameguy]

Yeah.... I have been thinking about a TDI Sportwagen to replace the Fiat for a while and am really tempted to do this now before word gets out. I just wonder whether a 10-owner rebuilt title car would be eligible or not. I honestly don't see how it could - the one holding the car when it becomes illegal is the one who is affected, not the first leaseholder who moved on a long time ago. Hmmm.