EPA caught VW cheating - how does the car know it's being tested?

Ahhh, that will do it. The spotted owl breaths easier.

Reply to
Ed Pawlowski
Loading thread data ...

May not be able to pass emmissions next year if the recall is not done.

The "fix" may be a lot more involved than removing the "over-ride" code.

Reply to
clare

Happens a lot more than you might think. States get into the act under the umbrella of the EPA laws.

VW intentionally wrote software for their vehicles with the express intent of violating the EPA laws. They admitted to that already so it will be interesting to see what happens. The EPA could recall the cars, judge them as "unrepairable gross polluters" and have them crushed. I doubt they will go that far but they have done it before under the "cars for cash" BS.

Reply to
Steve W.

Don't know how other jurisdictions do it, but in Ontario the old "drive clean" test was a "rolling road" sniffer test at two speeds, with the car connected to the computer via the diagnostic port, but not accessing discrete codes.

The new system does away with both the "rolling road" and the sniffer, meaning it can only "guess" or "deduce" if the NOX is within range - it cannot tell if the reduction catalyst is working because only the oxidizing catalyst is monitored by the secondary O2 sensor.

It is POSSIBLE that VW implements the "over-ride" whenever a certain sequence of events is performed that are substantially the same as the initialization procedure for running the test (There is a perscribed sequence of events that MUST be performed to get a valid test result) (like 20 many seconds at a particular RPM, followed by another given period of time at another RPM) which, if performed during the normal process of driving would also put the system in "bypass" for the anticipated duration of the test.

Reply to
clare

Then how do you explain the FACT that todays engines -

1)produce higher spedific output than engines in the past 2) Consume fewer gallons of gas per unit distance travelled AND 3) produce lower exhaut emissions

-than the engines of only a few years back - muchless the "uncontrolled" engines of the 50s and 60s, and the early emission engines of the 70s and 80s?

VW will just have to step up to the plate and spend in retrofits what they should have spent in initial design and production - plus.

Reply to
clare

I've still yet to hear or read of a single case myself.

Yes, I know. But the EPA will be the only route by which this could be addressed given that many states don't even do testing.

Reply to
.

I will respectfully dissagree - with qualifications.

In the early years of safety checking, at least in Ontario, the initial passs rate was quite low - and the requirement that a cat pass a safety check when changing ownership took a LOT of dangerous crap off the road. Annual safety checks in Ontario only affect commercial vehicles - and again there is a pretty high failure rate - and since selective enforcement has been in place the number of wheels coming off commercial vehicles and killing drivers of other vehicles has dropped SIGNIFICANTLY. Enforcement is the key.

As for emission testing - in the early years it had merit. There were a LOT of "gross poluters" on our roads - and it was very simple to defeat emission controls and change the calibration of an rngine (by adjusting timing, rejetting carbs etc) so that what left the manufacturer and what was on the road were not necessarilly the same.

With today's computer controlled vehicles, unleaded gas, etc, the VAST majority of vehicles pass, even when 20 years old - if reasonably maintained, and the OBD2 only testing is a total farce and nothing but a money-grab -

Safety shecks for vehicle transfer and annually for commercial vehicles is both a consumer protection AND safety issue - and worth continuing. (along with "selective enforcement" on the roads - see a "questionable" vehicle - pull it over and inspect it for basic safety standards, and possible send for "secondary inspecion" by a registered safety inspection station. Bring it up to standard or take it off the road.

Reply to
clare

Not even for driving in the winter with bald summer tires. The insurance company HAS to pay up - but they can make it EXTREMELY difficult to afford insurance in the future - - - - - - - - - - -

Reply to
clare

Not any more. The ECU is linked to the VIN, and the OBD2 tester reads the VIN directly from the ECU

Reply to
clare

I hope they don't follow the Microsoft Windows 10 model, where upgrades and patches will be installed automatically no matter what you do.

Reply to
Steve Stone

If only there were any documentation to support that claim.

Annual safety checks in Ontario only affect commercial

My comment referred only to individual owned passenger cars.

It still is.

so that what left the

And those that in any manner overrode emission controls were an insignificant percentage of the motoring public.

Again, my comment referred only to individual owned passenger cars.

Reply to
.

Spot checking of modified vehicles at large "car shows" has been promised, and reported. Just because your car is registered as a 1927 model "T" ford does not mean it is exempt from emissions testing if it has a 2009 Chevy LT between the frame rails.

Officially it needs to meet the requirements for the 2009 vehicle the LT was originally supplied for (determined by the engine number).

Reply to
clare

This is almost entirely the result of fuel injection combined with accurate feedback control. Feedback control makes a huge improvement in the efficiency of the engine and that means both lower emissions and more power.

And, it's true that it took the emission control regulations to force the car manufacturers to start thinking out of the box at new ideas to try and improve efficiency back in the seventies. Had it not been for the emission control regulations, we might never have got the engine improvements that make engines so much more efficiency today.

BUT, it's true that many of the other tricks used to get emissions numbers down have been at the expense of performance, and many of them have been just plain attempts to game the system.

There is a very longstanding tradition of gaming the system, dating back to air pumps back in the seventies which did in fact improve the efficiency of early catalytic converters, but mostly just diluted the exhaust so that the concentration of emissions was reduced. The actual amount of emission was the same, but the numbers recorded at the smog station were lower.

This current attempt on VW's part is not something new in isolation, this is part of a tradition going back forty years now. It shouldn't surprise anyone, and it's certainly not anything specific to VW.

Odds are that instead they will take the route of just leaving the controller in "low emissions" mode all the time, which probably will affect performance. Part of how that will work out will depend on what they were actually doing to bring the numbers down, and we don't know that without actually measuring it or looking at the controller source.

--scott

Reply to
Scott Dorsey

Well, as a mechanic back then, I can assure you I failed a LOT of dangerous cars, repaired many of them, and scrapped almost as many.

Which here in Ontario only require safety checks for transfer, or if older than a certain age, depending on the insurance company, to get or maintain insurance coverage.

Tell me how the average hack can adjust the timing on his 2002 Ford Taurus 3.0 32 valve V6??? Or even adjust the mixture?

You would be surprised how many Olds 350 rockets back in the mid seventies had the timing significantly altered to eliminate overheating when pulling a trailer, or how many "super six" mopars had the carburetion and timing adjusted off-spec to get rid of "driveability problems" - and how many "lean burn" mopars were "converted" to non-lean-burn without changing the camshaft (which was required if you were going to be anywhere CLOSE to passing emissions) and how many AIR systems were removed from GM engines - and how many EGR systems were disconnected ---- just for starters. (under the mistaken idea that they could get better mileage by simply removing them)

The numbers WERE significant.

And "selective enforcement" can be, and is, applied to private passenger vehicles as well - at least here in Ontario.

Reply to
clare

mike posted for all of us...

Just like all the fines imposed on Co's and people. Found money for the gov't. Like the tobacco Co's the states get all this money and what exactly do they do with it. If education is it having an impact? Should be for the medical costs. Instead that is spread amongst the ratepayers or taxpayers through third party payers. How to fix IDK...

Reply to
Tekkie®

I'd like to know how the EPA found out about this hack

Reply to
Malcom Mal Reynolds

snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca posted for all of us...

+1 My experience exactly.

PA had twice yearly inspections but now has yearly . I remember all the uproar over what the garages had to buy, the 3 gas analyzers, dynamometers, leased or privately owned... It was a circus. I think it was a politicians dream. (It was in NJ).

I remember customers that had notorious vehicles with bad emissions; blowing blue smoke, heavy fuel smell, missing engines. A lot of "beaters".

Then the lead issue. I don't know if lead in gas was harmful or not but that train has left the station. My observation is the air is "better" but is that because of cars or the fact PA is ground zero of the "rust belt" and manufacturing has left?

My gripe is that counties around major city's have testing while the rest of the state doesn't. What, the wind doesn't blow through the whole state?

There are also exemptions if the cost of repairs exceed a threshold.

Claire would remember PCV valves and tune ups...

Reply to
Tekkie®

trader_4 posted for all of us...

+1 Huh?
Reply to
Tekkie®

snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca posted for all of us...

Wise business decision... Why do they do this? It would be a great subject of an independent analysis. Weren't they owned by Chrysler at the start of this?

Reply to
Tekkie®

The original twice yearly was a safety inspection. That was a joke. You could get inspected so easily or you could get scammed by shops selling un-needed repairs.

The shop I went to was owned by an old guy that could not lift a wheel if he had to. checking the brakes was pushing on the pedal while scraping off the old sticker.

Before that, I took three cars to a shop in one day and every one needed headlight adjustment for $2. Never mind that the ball joints they never checked were loose. Quick easy money.

Reply to
Ed Pawlowski

HomeOwnersHub website 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.