"Some Mercedes-Benz models released about five times more pollution than the latest diesel emission limits. Some Honda diesel models released between 2.6 and six times the allowable levels, according to data obtained by the Guardian.
The Mazda and Mitsubishi models tested had lower emissions. Mazda's tested diesel cars had between 1.6 and 3.6 times test levels of the EU's lab-based tests, and the Mitsubishi models tested had between 1.5 and 3.4 times the emissions tested in the lab."
This just gets more interesting. It's starting to look like the EPA
with an $8 bil budget, had no actual on the road testing to see
what cars were actually doing? I can understand why they would
rely primarily on stationary, simulated testing, but you would think
that there would be at least some spot checking to see what cars
be driven on the highway are actually doing and that the dyno tests
were consistent and valid. The VW thing was
uncovered by some non-profit environmental group or similar. But
then this is govt we're dealing with here.
On another angle, anyone see the CEO of VW America testifying before
Congress? He told them management didn't know anything, it was all
done by 3 software engineers who had been suspended. Turns out the
3 suspended are high level execs, one headed engine development,
another was head of R/D, etc. This is a classic example of how
not to handle a crisis. Really amazing.
From what I understand cockroaches will survive atomic blasts.
Don't know about termites, how are they necessary? To keep pest control
people in business?
My opinion of global warming is that A/C was invented. It takes all the heat
inside a structure and moves it outside. Refrigerant has nothing to do with
it. Californication just passed laws to make utility co's put up wind and
solar and some other changes I can't remember. The elec rates will shoot
upward and so will our taxes because we finance all this nonsense. Remember
Solyndra? And the Spanish wind turbine manufacturer? (Olestra or something
There is a revolving door between industries and the government entities
that are supposed to be regulating them that minimizes the chance of
*effective* regulation. Does a former employee in some industry want to
make things too difficult for his former colleagues with whom he may
want a better job again in the future?
According to this Fox Business report, http://alturl.com/ytndi ,
make up about half the cars in Europe. They make up under 3% of cars in th
U.S. Maybe our friends in the EPA are overzealous.
You'll be glad to know the EPA has amphibious assault ships according
to the Washington Times. http://alturl.com/qm957
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
On Saturday, October 10, 2015 at 8:44:29 PM UTC-4, Tony Hwang wrote:
n the latest diesel emission limits. Some Honda diesel models released betw
een 2.6 and six times the allowable levels, according to data obtained by t
ted diesel cars had between 1.6 and 3.6 times test levels of the EU's lab-b
ased tests, and the Mitsubishi models tested had between 1.5 and 3.4 times
the emissions tested in the lab."
MAKE THEM BUY BACK EVERY VEHICLE FOR THE ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE.THEN EITHE
R PROVE THEY ARE FIXED OR SEND THEM OFF TO THE CRUSHER. WITH BIG FINE, AND
5 YEARS IN PRISON FOR THE EXECS INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT OF EACH COMPANY.
make the penalties so terrible no one will ever do this again.....
my guess, a mere software upgrade wouldnt fix them.........
if thereb even is a fix it will hurt driveability, hurt gas mileage, and fo
r most owners they wouldnt want their vehicles fixed
if there had been a easy cheap workable fix carmakers bwould of done it fro
m the beginning
I haven't seen a definitive assessment of that, either way. I've
seen some claims that blue book values of diesels are down compared to
"pre-fiasco" prices. And, all sorts of doom-n-gloom predictions as to
the costs/consequences for owners of the affected vehicles.
But, I think still too early to come to any lasting conclusions.
Hard to imagine all those vehicles "suddenly" becoming "so much
useless tin"; their owners will simply NOT sell them if their
valuations drop too low.
The real fallout will come from the *consequences* of a "fix".
Owners may end up with the performance of a gasoline powered car
having paid for a diesel. Or, even something worse. I suspect
VW will be looking to slide out from under this "on the cheap"
so figure that will come at those buyers' "expense" (i.e.,
they'll get less than they "paid for")
Look to Europe to be VW's Waterloo. Too many jurisdictions
each wanting a bite of that pie. And, nothing incentivizing
those folks from putting it behind them, quickly!
On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 5:30:52 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
This brings up another interesting question. It seems certain that
VW will have to issue some kind of compensation to "owners". But
which owners? The owner that bought it 4 years ago and sold it after
2 years? The owner that bought it from him, but sold it 3 months
ago, before the problem was known, the owners after the problem was
known, or the owner that owns the car when they finally issue the compensation?
It would seem the ones entitled to compensation are the owners at the
time it was made public, but who knows...
Look to Europe to be VW's Waterloo. Too many jurisdictions
Not so sure about that, especially given the move to the EU
IDK there is always a market for cheap cars. I don't believe the people that
buy these cars would car about the pedigree.
There will be some deal where the gov't makes out well and the owners not so
well. See if the brand can take the hit.
I heard this morning that Mercedes has the same problem. They didn't want
their customers to get involved with the urea aspect so they diddled it.
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 23:08:55 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
Real world testing is NOT, as far as I know, part of the requirement
for certification. So designing and building a vehicle that performs
on the dyno certification testing is all that's required as long as
the same software used on the dyno is what is also used in the real
world. A company that "did more" because out in the real world some
limit was exceeded which was not exceeded on the dyno would be putting
themselves at a competitive disadvantage, assuming the "doing more"
meant worse mpg or driivability.
The same would be true of the crash testing. Teh gvt mandates
specific crash tests. If a company passes those tests but realized
that they could do "Even more" they are under no legal obligation to
do so. And if that "doing more" makes the vehicle heavier with lower
MPG they may well be working at cross purposes.
I'm not saying they can't "do more", only that they are not required
to and should not be blamed if they don't.
On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 4:19:18 PM UTC-4, Ashton Crusher wrote:
an the latest diesel emission limits. Some Honda diesel models released bet
ween 2.6 and six times the allowable levels, according to data obtained by
sted diesel cars had between 1.6 and 3.6 times test levels of the EU's lab-
based tests, and the Mitsubishi models tested had between 1.5 and 3.4 times
the emissions tested in the lab."
the ECU. All vehicle manufacturers are well aware of EPA test procedures an
d it has been a calculated risk that no one would do real world testing. I
also assume that gasoline fueled vehicles have been programmed the same way
. I guess all the manufacturers never considered that some NGO full of clou
d huggers would discover the deception and start howling. Get ready for a r
esurgence of bicycles and donkey carts. ^_^
As far at meeting the govt standards, you're probably right, although
we don't know what the actual law says. But the bigger problem would
appear to be the EPA. If those cars from various manufacturers were
tested correctly on the road per that article, then there's only a
couple of possibilities.
One thing that wasn't stated was whether these cars from manufacturers
other than VW were tested on a dyno setup too and what that showed or would
The possibilities would be:
1 - The cars also fail the dyno test and the emissions performance there
is similar to what is going on under actual driving conditions, ie
the dyno certification test is a valid one and the cars are later failing
for whatever reasons.
2 - The cars pass the dyno test, but spew out 2 to 6 times the legal
pollution on the roads. In which case the EPA test protocol that
they established and use is a total joke.
But above all it's stunning that the EPA from all indications so far,
is clueless. You would think that they would be very interested in
monitoring a sample of the cars out there to make sure of two things.
One is that their dyno certification process is a valid one and two,
that cars on the road actually perform to within the standards for
X years. You would think they would be very interested in the actual
on the road emissions from these cars at 2 years, 5 years, 10 years,
15 years.... It would be pretty stupid to be jacking the emissions standa
ever higher, while the millions of cars out there are spewing 5x what
they are supposed to, either when brand new or even when they are 5 years
old. These cars in the article, if putting out 5X, probably aren't
even meeting the requirements from 20 years ago.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.