VW Faces $17B Fine for Emissions Scam

There's also the US06 and SC03 Supplemental FTP test cycles.What's interesting is that U.S.-spec TDIs would have to have at least four different ECU software "models" for the four different EPA test cycles, based on what was discovered in the video Bob linked.

 

wow, a very elaborate deception. how does one go about regaining trust?

 

The curves appear to be upper and lower boundary distance limits to conform with the known test protocols. However, others were able to generate different dyno results by two simple changes:

• 4-wheel instead of 2-wheel testing (USA)
  
• repeating the test so engine starts hot (BBC)

It was a clever hack to start mapping the controller software. Finding the software is data-table driven makes a lot of sense. Some of his diagrams suggests there is more to discover. Also, the engine controller vendors assert the 'tuning', table modifications, is done by the vehicle manufacturers, not the controller builders and their frame-work software. That is why Bosch could send a note warning that using one part would be illegal.

The other curious bit is the engine controller software is available using their 'diagnostic software.' I have not done a through audit of the miniVCI/TechStream but now I wonder if firmware access is hidden in the code.

Bob Wilson

 

Nice video from VW about their problem: How Do Modern Diesel Engines Work? VW Explains It On Video?

Bob Wilson

Now the fun begins: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/business/vw-sued-justice-department-emissions-scandal.html?_r=0

The article has a link to the 31 page, complaint filing.

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 . . . .”​

Bob Wilson

 

What doubled the fun is the NY times web link was misworded (by the NY Times!) in bold above. I read it as VW was doing the suing. This I gotta read.

 

For those who choose to set their hair on fire: A Lawsuit to Scare VW Out of the U.S. - Bloomberg View

The lawsuit describes known facts. VW installed special software in approximately 580,000 cars sold in the U.S. that mitigated the level of nitrogen oxide (NOx) emission during tests but stopped doing so on the road, and it tried to hide the ploy from the authorities. The carmaker has admitted as much. The surprise is the amount of money the U.S. Department of Justice has demanded for the violations -- a maximum of $116,250 per car, or potentially $67.4 billion in total.
. . .
As for the damage to car owners, it cannot logically be higher than the price they paid for the cars. Unless the car caused them illness or worse, they have benefited from ownership. Based on Volkswagen's financial reporting, the weighted average price of a vehicle sold by the company in North America in 2009-2014, when the offending software was installed, reached $28,815. That would put the total cost of a buyback (using the government's number of missold vehicles) at $16.7 billion. So to completely erase the actual damage it has done with its cheating, VW would need to pay $16.8 billion. Even if the U.S. wants to make an example of the German company, multiplying the actual damage by four, as the lawsuit does, is unjustified.
. . .​

Back of the envelope, VW's gain was also ~$10-14 B loss of revenue by other car companies.

Bob Wilson

 

I was expecting this: Opinion: USA vs. VW - something′s not right | Business | DW.COM | 05.01.2016

So I sent feedback pointing out:

• VW sales went from ~$12 B in 2009 to ~$28 B when the cheat-diesels were revealed.
• VW continued to deny the problem for at least a year.
  
• The USA has a dim view of liars in the market place because it destroys the market.
• We have truthful polluters but no patience for lying polluters.

When dealing with a different culture, one that I don't speak the language, it is hard to communicate effectively. But I have no doubt that many of our German friends are going to be defensive about VW's behavior and point to our own, USA problems. As an excuse, perhaps, but justification . . . nien.

Bob Wilson

 

i think the epa is just getting tired of the rhetoric. it started eel before the cheating was found out. and they don't like the attitude of the mother country.

i have to wonder how long feinberg will stick around.

 

Michael Horn is the one most at risk. He was the head of VW North America starting in January 1, 2014 when the dung hit the fan. He could face criminal charges for what others committed in 2006-07.

Bob Wilson

 

Now the grim business begins: VW Boss Says He’s Focused on Fix, Not Cost, of Diesel Scandal | TheDetroitBureau.com

. . . Volkswagen brand boss Herbert Diess told an audience at the Consumer Electronics Show that “Our most important task in 2016 is to solve the diesel issue in the U.S.”

. . . Diess told reporters attending a preview of several battery-powered concept vehicles that “I assure you we are doing everything we can to make things right.” The executive added that he “is confident we will win their approval (for a fix) in the coming weeks and months.”
. . .
The two plug-based concepts, meanwhile, underscore the maker’s growing focus on electrified vehicles. Executives have told TheDetroitBureau.com that the goal is to offer at least one battery-based version of every model in the VW brand portfolio within a decade.

That said, Diess insisted that even after the emissions cheating scandal, he believes “diesel will (continue to) play a role” in VW’s line-up, including the U.S., where the high-mileage technology had been generating about 25% of the brand’s sales until recently.

“I wouldn’t give up on diesel,” concluded Diess, “even in the U.S.”​

Looking at the latest dashboard report, it looks like many diesel sales might have moved up-scale. But these were SCR equipped models anyway. Still, VW is spending a lot that is NOT on new products and this drain doesn't appear to be coming to an end.

Bob Wilson

 

are they convinced they can fix them, or are they trying to convince u.s. officials/public?

 

I am reluctant to report something that sounds too good to be true: VW proposes catalytic converter to fix U.S. test cheating cars - Bild am Sonntag| Reuters

Volkswagen (VOWG_p.DE) engineers have come up with a catalytic converter that could be fitted to around 430,000 cars in the United States as a fix for vehicles capable of cheating emissions tests, German daily Bild am Sonntag reported.

The converter would be fitted to cars with the first generation of the EA 189 diesel engine, the paper reported on Sunday, without providing information on its sources.

A source familiar with the matter told Reuters that the proposal for a technical solution VW has drawn up includes a new catalytic converter system made in part from new materials.
. . .​

This reads like a report about a rumor. Oh by the way, the rumor is <stuff>. There may be some new catalytic converter, previously unknown, that can drop-in and make the EA 189 compliant. It just sounds to convenient.

I understand VW will be meeting with the EPA this next week. Those talks have been kept secret, which opens the door for rumors. Patience and a bit of skepticism should be the word. After all, this is not a press release car.

Bob Wilson

 

VW is taking a cue from their salesmen, "Just trust me".

 

You are absolutely right to be very suspicious. Bild, a popular sensationalistic paper, is a very poor source of information.

Also, information from VW has been misleading. (e.g. 3.0 l Diesel cheat "denial" response to EPA NOV)

I have no doubt that some sort of solution involving a catalytic converter is being discussed. That is obvious from purely technical considerations. In German terminology, both LNT (Lean NOx Trap = NOx Speicherkatalysator) and SCR (selective catalytic reduction = Selektive Katalytische Reduktion) are commonly simply referred to as a "Katalysator" = "catalytic converter". So unless a truly credible source specifies which sort, we cannot be sure which technology is being favored.

The smaller portion of the cheat diesels have SCR, and apparently, they need only the cheat software removed, but possibly also a larger DEF tank or shorter service intervals.

The majority of the cheat diesels in the US, about 430k, have the LNT, which is generally considered less effective than SCR. There has been speculation that they might be converted from LNT to SCR, which might be just as expensive as a buy back. But do not forget the fact that these LNT diesels can and did pass the EPA test while running the clean mode part of the ECU software. However, the side effects of running clean all the time might be too disadvantageous for an acceptable software only solution.

My personal speculation is that the original LNTs are el cheapos, sized and spec'ed to just pass the EPA test, but otherwise perform poorly. If these were to be replaced by better LNTs, that might reduce the unwanted side effects of continuous clean mode, such as higher fuel consumption and lower power and durability.

 

Found at Jalopnik:


Bob Wilson

 

That's pretty darn funny!!

 

is that the original cat, or aftermarket?

 

That's Diesel, the Orange Tabby.

Sorry...couldn't resist. Lol.

 

Looks like a cat-astrophe.

 

i suppose @catgic will be weighing in soon.