AF: VW Dieselgate & AN: Winterkorn out: Door open for Marchionne? | Page 27 | Allpar Forums
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

VW Dieselgate & AN: Winterkorn out: Door open for Marchionne?

Discussion in 'Mopar / FCA News' started by tryphon, Sep 22, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JavelinAMX

    JavelinAMX Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    4,688
    Likes:
    2,914
    You're over thinking this.

    The emissions tests measure for specific concentrations of targeted substances. It doesn't cross-examine the engineering staff who designed the emissions equipment built into the vehicle. How we Treat those measurements after test has been taken is another separate matter.

    VW designed their 'gear' to operate at its best for test measurements process when and while the testing was occurring.
     
  2. valiant67

    valiant67 ...

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    36,663
    Likes:
    19,404
    Nope, no overthinking it.
    An unauthorized/undisclosed modification/operation mode is an automatic failure. As with GM's 1990s trouble, the failure "to disclose the use of the device or its adverse emissions effect" is failure to meet emissions law no matter what comes out the tailpipe during the tests.
     
  3. Dave Z

    Dave Z It's me, Dave
    Staff Member Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2001
    Messages:
    34,928
    Likes:
    20,600
    He is not overthinking it.

    There was undisclosed and illegal software on the vehicles. I know you hate to think that the government could be right and VW-Audi could be deliberately committing a crime by circumventing the tests, but that is exactly what happened.

    It is no different from faking research for the FDA, backdating research notes to get an illegal patent, etc.
     
    JKU12, Mike V., Rick Anderson and 3 others like this.
  4. Rick Anderson

    Rick Anderson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,412
    Likes:
    2,042
    No, there have been quotes of the law, VW violated specific wording in the law/standard that prevents the manufacturer doing this.

    VW cheated on the EPA certification, it's that simple and everyone agrees, even VW itself that admitted it.

    The EPA didn't catch them cause VW knew the test procedures and designed their cheat to get around them. The EPA could change their test procedures, and without changing one word in the law/standard, VW would have failed EPA certification but every other manufacture would have stilled passed. So what does that tell you?
     
    Mike V. likes this.
  5. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,139
    From the EPA Violation Notice to VW:

    To obtain a Certificate of Conformity (COC), a light-duty vehicle manufacturer must submit a COC application to the EPA for each test group of vehicles that it intends to enter into United States commerce. 40 C.F.R. § 86.1843-01. The COC application must include, among other things, a list of all auxiliary emission control devices (AECDs) installed on the vehicles. 40 C.F. R. § 86. 1844-0l(d)( ll ). An AECD is "any element of design which senses temperature. vehicle speed, engine RPM, transmission gear, manifold vacuum, or any other parameter for the purpose of activating, modulating, delaying, or deactivating the operation of any part of the emission control system." 40 C.F.R. § 86. 1803-01. The COC application must also include "a justification for each AECD, the parameters they sense and control, a detailed justification of each AECD that results in a reduction in effectiveness of the emission control system, and [a] rationale for why it is not a defeat device.,. 40 C. F .R. § 86. 1844-0 I (d)( 11 ).

    A defeat device is an AECD " 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, unless: (1) Such conditions are substantially included in the Federal emission test procedure; (2) The need for the AECD is justified in terms of protecting the vehicle against damage or accident; (3) The AECD does not go beyond the requirements of engine starting; or ( 4) The AECD applies only for emergency vehicles . ... '· 40 C.F.R. § 86.1803-01.

    Motor vehicles equipped with defeat devices, such as those at issue here, cannot be certified. EPA, Advisory Circular Number 24: Prohibition on use of Emission Control Defeat Device (Dec. II , 1972); see also 40 C.F.R. §§ 86-1809-01 , 86-1809-10, 86-1809-12. Electronic control systems which may receive inputs from multiple sensors and control multiple actuators that affect the emission control systems performance are AECDs. EPA, Advisory Circular Number 24-2: Prohibition of Emission Control Defeat Devices - Optional Objective Criteria (Dec. 6, 1978). "Such elements of design could be control system logic (i.e., computer software), and/or calibrations, and/or hardware items ." Id.

    Furthermore...

    The Clean Air Act makes it a violation "for any person to manufacture or sell, or offer to sell, or install, any part or component intended for use with, or as part of, any motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine, where a principal effect of the part or component is to bypass, defeat, or render inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine in compliance with regulations under this subchapter, and where the person knows or should know that such part or component is being offered for sale or installed for such use or put to such use."' CAA § 203(a)(3)(B), 42 U.S.C. § 7522(a)(3)(B); 40 C.F.R. § 86.1854- 12(a)(3)(ii). Additionally, manufacturers are prohibited from selling, offering for sale, introducing into commerce, delivering for introduction into commerce, or importing, any new motor vehicle unless that vehicle is covered by an EPA-issued COC. CAA § 203(a)( l ), 42 U.S.C. § 7522(a)(l); 40 C.F.R. § 86. 1854-1 2(a)(l ). It is also a violation to cause any of the foregoing acts. CAA § 203(a), 42 U.S.C. § 7522(a); 40 C.F.R. § 86- 1854- 12(a).

    Regardless of how you attempt to spin it, the vehicles in question do not comply with the EPA regulation for emissions and the information above makes your entire argument null and void.

    I suggest you move on from this thread.

    Mike

    -Source Information: EPA VW-NOV-CAA dated 9/18/15
     
    #525 Mike V., Oct 2, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2015
    HotCarNut, TheMan and Rick Anderson like this.
  6. Dave Z

    Dave Z It's me, Dave
    Staff Member Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2001
    Messages:
    34,928
    Likes:
    20,600
    Oh. Then we agree.

    The problem is they are under-funded, and the idea of the honor system was that they would spend far less money. It’s like the FAA, they rely on airlines and airplane makers to be honest with them, for the most part. However, when they find fault, they have to come down hard.

    At the University of Virginia, everything is on the honor system. They keep an unlocked door into the cafeteria with a simple sign that’s more effective than any lock, “Entry through this door is a violation of the honor code.” Bouncing checks if a violation if done with intent and/or not fixed. Tests are given without supervision. Guess who has a very low rate of cheating? But mostly because the sanction is expulsion. Period, end of story. (And that's administered by students, who appear to be more honest than doctors and some other professionals when it comes to self-policing.)

    The honor system only works when coupled with severe sanctions.

    I do expect the EPA to test other automakers’ engines — not just diesels — for this issue. I hope they will. However, I hope it will be temporary and then spot checks.

    Germany has claimed no evidence that anyone else has done this, which means that it is completely unnecessary to meet the rules.

    PS> I wrote this before Mike locked the thread. Sorry.
     
    HotCarNut, Mike V. and Rick Anderson like this.
  7. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,139
    No problem Dave.

    This thread has been locked due to repeatedly argumentative posts that can be considered "trolling".

    Mike
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...
 We are not affiliated with FCA. We make no claims regarding validity or accuracy of information or advice. Copyright © VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.