Volkswagen is in trouble with just about everybody on the f'ing planet

[eizbaer]

There's a whole discussion about whether or not it is on a similar level as what VW did:
https://forums.finalgear.com/automo...at-chrysler-of-excess-diesel-emissions-61432/

 

[Spectre]

Most of those VW are MkV Golf/Jettas. Here in Europe, they have the Injector-Pumo diesels, which were not implicated in the emission scandal. Were they sold in the US with the Common Rail system?

VWNA's product cycle and offerings are often considerably out of sync with you guys in Europe. No, those are injector pump cars too - but they were subject to the US Tier 2 regulations that VW couldn't meet in reality. The US Year Without A Diesel (2007) apparently absolutely freaked VW out. We didn't get the Mk6 Golf until October 2009 as a 2010. Calendar year 2008 and 2009 cars were Mk5s and came with a supposed 'clean diesel' injector-pump motor that VW has since admitted they can't/won't ever get to be compliant. Again, there is *no* fix for these cars with software and apparently VW finally (after way too much time) decided that it is less expensive to buy the cars back than try to get some hardware solution in place - which I very much doubt would work anyway. So pretty much all the CY 08 and 09 TDI cars are going to the crusher in the US as the law stipulates that non-complying cars must either be crushed or re-exported at the violator's expense. Crushing is cheaper.

Also, we had headlines about an FCA diesel scandal or something, but our press cannot be really trusted on these matters when the news is about FCA (though the group is no more italian than Volkswagen is). What is the reality behind the headlines? Is there any new scandal growing?

Doesn't seem to be anything like the VW one - apparently the deficiencies were known by FCA prior to the models going on sale. The very big difference here is that FCA didn't try to cheat; apparently they told the EPA about the issues during the new car acceptance/type certification program and the EPA gave them a conditional approval to put the cars on sale - the condition being that they work on and bring the cars into compliance within a certain time. At this time, the scandal seems to be only that FCA fixed one of the multiple issues, but haven't fixed the rest and the EPA got tired of them dragging their feet. This wasn't a case of FCA hiding anything - it's not good that they couldn't get the vehicles in compliance but they didn't lie to the EPA and they didn't cheat in the test. Big, big, BIG difference here.

The EPA, as mentioned before on this thread, is surprisingly willing to work with auto makers to meet pollution regs. See the Navistar references upthread for a previous incident where this occurred. We do have a thread about this over in the news section, complete with some Germans trying to conflate FCA's woes with VW's when other than the fact that pollution occurred the two incidents don't resemble each other very much at all to most North Americans participants' point of view - VW deliberately intended to defraud people and lied to the government then destroyed evidence whereas FCA was up front, got conditional approval (according to the latest news) from the US EPA to sell the cars 'now' and fix them as time went on then just didn't do a very good job of fixing them (or filing paperwork - accounts vary). Again, this is *just* in North America - their conduct in Europe or the rest of the world may and probably is another matter entirely since apparently everyone in Europe cheats on diesel emissions.

There doesn't seem to be a big huge deal about the FCA issues either - partially because FCA doesn't have many diesels in the US market unlike VW where diesels were a big part of their lineup. Well, that and just about nobody bought the affected FCA diesels because everyone looked at the Italian diesel and ran screaming into the darkness.

 

[Spectre]

(EDIT: Also, why on earth not disassemble the cars and sell the used spares, instead of crushing them? That's not a good way to help the environment by throwing away perfectly usable petrol-based and energivore plastic)

As I recall, they're not allowed to separate much other than wheels, the car must otherwise be crushed in toto per the law.

If you want to blame someone for this waste, blame Mercedes. This particular penalty for non-compliance, where the car must be crushed with basically nothing removed or be exported back where it came from, was part of the Mercedes Law that pretty much ended personal vehicle importation in the US. Mercedes didn't want any of those profit-stealing gray market car parts getting out, so they very specifically had that written in.

Even Cash For Clunkers, where many otherwise good cars had their engines destroyed, allowed for the car to be properly dismantled and reused/recycled.

 

[bone]

also, if you have to pay someone to strip the cars, his wages have to be paid for by the resale price of those parts, which would make them as expensive (or even more so) than new ones...

 

[SirEdward]

There's a whole discussion about whether or not it is on a similar level as what VW did:
https://forums.finalgear.com/automo...at-chrysler-of-excess-diesel-emissions-61432/

Thanks. I was wondering where that was.

Calendar year 2008 and 2009 cars were Mk5s and came with a supposed 'clean diesel' injector-pump motor that VW has since admitted they can't/won't ever get to be compliant.

They can't. That's one of the main reasons VW stopped the injector-pump, IIRC.

Doesn't seem to be anything like the VW one - apparently the deficiencies were known by FCA prior to the models going on sale. The very big difference here is that FCA didn't try to cheat[...]

Thanks for the info.

just about nobody bought the affected FCA diesels because everyone looked at the Italian diesel and ran screaming into the darkness.

Not even disguised as american brands and vehicles?

As I recall, they're not allowed to separate much other than wheels, the car must otherwise be crushed in toto per the law.

Yep, that's quite stupid.

If you want to blame someone for this waste, blame Mercedes. This particular penalty for non-compliance, where the car must be crushed with basically nothing removed or be exported back where it came from, was part of the Mercedes Law that pretty much ended personal vehicle importation in the US. Mercedes didn't want any of those profit-stealing gray market car parts getting out, so they very specifically had that written in.

If that's true, that's greedy.

 

[Spectre]

also, if you have to pay someone to strip the cars, his wages have to be paid for by the resale price of those parts, which would make them as expensive (or even more so) than new ones...

In a world where we didn't have the Mercedes Law, we could treat them like Cash For Clunkers - destroy the engine and put the car out on a junkyard for people to take parts off of. See my Dallas Junkyard Run thread, they make lots of money selling car parts cheap at self-service junkyards where customers do the vehicle stripping themselves. See thomas' Caddy thread later today or tomorrow where I'll list all the stuff I got from my Sunday junkyard run and how little I paid for it.

- - - Updated - - -

They can't. That's one of the main reasons VW stopped the injector-pump, IIRC.

Yeah, that's in the documents that came out after VW got caught, I posted a link to an article that said the same thing upthread here.

Not even disguised as american brands and vehicles?

Nope. The Dodge Ram EcoDiesel didn't get too many takers even down here in Texas, Land Of The Diesel Pickup Truck. FCA liked to tout that 20% of Ram 1500s came with the EcoDiesel but it turns out that most of those were Euro-market sales. US sales were pretty brisk during 2014, but tanked in 2015 and basically fell off a cliff in 2016. Case in point - year-end-prior-model-year-closeout level discounts on current model year Eco Diesels - this is a small town Texas dealer trying to dump these things:

If that's true, that's greedy.

See my prior posts about the Mercedes Law for citations from periodicals of the time. That's exactly why they did it.

 

[bone]

In a world where we didn't have the Mercedes Law, we could treat them like Cash For Clunkers - destroy the engine and put the car out on a junkyard for people to take parts off of. See my Dallas Junkyard Run thread, they make lots of money selling car parts cheap at self-service junkyards where customers do the vehicle stripping themselves. See thomas' Caddy thread later today or tomorrow where I'll list all the stuff I got from my Sunday junkyard run and how little I paid for it.

in that case, most of the parts pulled would've been bought new if the scrapped cars weren't there, i don't see VW allowing that additional loss of income

 

[Spectre]

in that case, most of the parts pulled would've been bought new if the scrapped cars weren't there, i don't see VW allowing that additional loss of income

-shrug- That's entirely a different matter than the correct, sensible and ecologically sensitive disposal of perfectly good parts that could be re-used to keep other vehicles in running condition. This is a question of efficiency and getting the most good for the most people from a bad situation, the fact that a car has to be disposed of. As it is, instead of saving other cars, those cars will generate significant and unnecessary pollution one last time as they're dumped into a smelter with all their parts still intact.

In any case, VW doesn't get a choice so what they want or don't want doesn't signify. With regards to Mercedes, it wasn't even the "we're cutting into US parts profits if we let the cars be parted out" motive because they refused to sell gray market parts. No sales, no profit. They just wanted to be gits over that.

 

[CD82]

Small update since my car actually has an EA189 engine: Audi keeps sending me these letters that they will "fix" the car eventually and that there is nothing to worry about. That's been going on for 1.5 years now. I'm not worried and I don't particularly feel like having it fixed either, anyway.

 

[eizbaer]

Oh, about that: a neighbour of my parents also has a VW Caddy (ohgodwhy) with an already fixed EA189. He claims the engine now behaves like the old IP diesels: torkwe, but only in a 500 rpm band. Nothing below that, nothing above. He's now had it back at the dealership twice (who claimed it was totally fine) and finally at the VW factory even (for them to check). I've seen it back in their driveway, so I should probably go and ask him what they finally did to it and whether they managed to somehow get it back "in character"

 

[Mitchi]

Small update since my car actually has an EA189 engine: Audi keeps sending me these letters that they will "fix" the car eventually and that there is nothing to worry about. That's been going on for 1.5 years now. I'm not worried and I don't particularly feel like having it fixed either, anyway.

Why would anyone get it actually fixed? They work perfectly fine as they are. No need for any software update I'd say...

 

[SirEdward]

My dad got his Golf Plus 1.6 fixed last week. They gave him a box with a pen, a keyholder and a USB external battery pack for electronic devices.

The car, he says, behaves perfectly normal. My father drives gently though, and doesn't push the car very much. I still haven't driven it, so I can't say whther it's changed in any way.

 

[bone]

Why would anyone get it actually fixed? They work perfectly fine as they are. No need for any software update I'd say...

because if you arrive at TUV without the fix, you won't pass?

 

[CD82]

Why would anyone get it actually fixed? They work perfectly fine as they are. No need for any software update I'd say...

I think if you decline the fix then you could potentially void any remaing warranty (at least regarding the engine and anything emissions-related). Supposedly the non-fixed cars will also be harder to sell (because at some point VW/Audi will stop fixing them for free), and also you kinda sorta maybe breach some emissions regulations without the fix. The more important question is whether you can actually get in trouble for it.

On the other hand, my car runs perfectly fine and the engine feels responsive across a large rpm range while the fuel consumption is also reasonably good. And now Audi is supposed to fix that emissions-problem without touching any of the other parameters, and with just an updated software? So either the software really only disables the cheat that tells external devices wrong emissions values, or it adjusts some of the properties of the engine and makes it cleaner, but overall worse. (Because if it was possible to have the engine this good and also clean, then why cheat in the first place?)

In case they actually change something about the engine I expect either the power to go down (which would be annoying) or the fuel consumption to go up (which wouldn't be too bad).

 

[Mitchi]

I think if you decline the fix then you could potentially void any remaing warranty (at least regarding the engine and anything emissions-related). Supposedly the non-fixed cars will also be harder to sell (because at some point VW/Audi will stop fixing them for free), and also you kinda sorta maybe breach some emissions regulations without the fix. The more important question is whether you can actually get in trouble for it.

On the other hand, my car runs perfectly fine and the engine feels responsive across a large rpm range while the fuel consumption is also reasonably good. And now Audi is supposed to fix that emissions-problem without touching any of the other parameters, and with just an updated software? So either the software really only disables the cheat that tells external devices wrong emissions values, or it adjusts some of the properties of the engine and makes it cleaner, but overall worse. (Because if it was possible to have the engine this good and also clean, then why cheat in the first place?)

In case they actually change something about the engine I expect either the power to go down (which would be annoying) or the fuel consumption to go up (which wouldn't be too bad).

Good points.

AFAIK the cheat device for european cars just works in when it recognizes that's it's time for emissions testing. Basically, it notices you're shifting at 1700 into 3rd and or whatever and goes into full lean mode - and that's how the system works. It's nothing more than that. And it's just for when a car has its first ever official emission testing before it goes onto the market. So I've been told by someone I know at VW. I don't know of any other cheat devices for european cars - so basically you shouldn't feel any difference at all between the old and new software since this is just ironed out.

And afaik VW tells the people their car will drink a bit less and have a bit more power, just the typical marketing yadda yadda as if the car got a proper software tune.

 

[eizbaer]

Well yes, fixing the cheat device is easy. However, with or without the device, the car does not comply with regulations - they have to do something to fix that and try to get the emissions down.

 

[Mitchi]

Well yes, fixing the cheat device is easy. However, with or without the device, the car does not comply with regulations - they have to do something to fix that and try to get the emissions down.

...soooo, basically less power.

Which doesn't comply with what they're saying about it, but that's just marketing chit chat anyway.

 

[D-Fence]

I'd get my VW fixed and then chiptune it to hell and back. If I ever got caught with the tune I'd play stupid and say "must've been a problem with that VAG fix".

 

[bone]

if your CPU features the "tuned by ABT" decall, you'll have to play really stupid though :lol:

 

[93Flareside]

"tuned by ABT"

As in the housewares store?