News EPA says Volkswagen installed software to cheat on emissions

[nsaspook]

Huh? Maybe we're not talking about the same thing. VW's big problems right now are:
1. They aren't allowed to sell their diesel cars.
2. A lot of the cars they sold are violating emissions rules.

Until they fix these issues, they are dead as a company. So they need to upgrade the software of some 11 million cars and be able to prove (enable the owners to prove) the cars are compliant. What happens after that is not their concern. If the owners go back and undo the "fix", that isn't VW's problem.

Normally I would agree but I don't think that would be acceptable in this case due to the level of total mistrust in VW being honest.
The people most upset are members of the enviro crowd who used the TDI as a sign of green. That won't be an easy group to appease.
http://www.autonews.com/article/20150924/OEM11/150929883/vws-clean-diesel-promotion-now-looks-like-jon-stewart-gag

Needless to say, many Gen Xers now feel like rubes.

Nikki Medoro, 36, almost bought a Prius when she moved to San Jose, Calif. She wanted to limit the expense and environmental impact of her daily commute to and from San Francisco. A friend at the radio station where Medoro is a news anchor persuaded her to buy a 2012 Jetta diesel sports wagon instead. It was her first Volkswagen. That was 133,323 miles ago.

Feeling duped

“I’ve been their No. 1 fricking fan this whole time,” she said. “I told everyone about my car. I loved my car. Then this happened. I get madder every moment that passes by about this. Every mile of that I was just polluting. I feel so duped.”
...
After learning that her 2011 diesel Jetta station wagon had turned her into an unwitting uber-polluter, Grabriela Paz, a single mom from Oakland, Calif., knew one thing for sure: “I definitely won’t buy a VW again.”

If they really are thinking about buying back every car affected in the USA instead of a fix. That tells me two things

1: A simple software fix is impossible in the US without turning the car into a driving dud.
2: It's better to limit the damage at great cost than to continue to support the cars here.

 

[nsaspook]

http://autoweek.com/article/car-news/vw-emissions-defeat-device-isnt-first

In 1974, Volkswagen agreed to pay $120,000 to settle a complaint filed by the EPA that the company failed to properly disclose the existence of two devices that modified emissions controls on about 25,000 1973 model VWs, according to a Wall Street Journal report and an EPA press release about the case. The settlement included no admission of wrongdoing by VW, the Journal reported. The devices consisted of two temperature-sensing switches that deactivated part of the emissions control systems, the EPA said.

The EPA said at the time that VW failed to disclose the existence of the devices on its 1973 emissions certification applications. VW did disclose them on a 1974 application, which the EPA rejected, and VW agreed to remove the devices.

 

[Hornbein]

Volkswagen could end up going down the tubes if all of the possible fines are actually levied after all the tricked out cars are found all over the world.

This will not occur. Judges are very reluctant to punish industries to such an extent. I can't recall it every having happened.

 

[russ_watters]

I was thinking about that in post 20 but kept coming up with various issues. The main one being that each state has it's own software that would have to be updated to access the database.

Sorry I missed that. I really don't see the database idea being an issue though. A service tech at a gas station can simply enter the vin number into a web form and find out if the car has had its recall service performed. It wouldn't have to be done automatically.

Normally I would agree but I don't think that would be acceptable in this case due to the level of total mistrust in VW being honest.

I don't see how VW's dishonesty enters into the equation moving forward. Nobody is going to trust VW and they won't have to: they will verify by checking the cars.

If they really are thinking about buying back every car affected in the USA instead of a fix. That tells me two things

1: A simple software fix is impossible in the US without turning the car into a driving dud.

I haven't seen any indication that they are actually considering buying-back the cars, however in researching a bit for that, I did find a significant gap in my understanding of the situation implied by your #1:

The standard way of making a diesel run cleanly is to use selective catalytic reduction, a chemical process that breaks NOx down into nitrogen and water. Part of that process includes adding urea to the mix. The super effective system can eliminate 70 to 90 percent of NOx emissions, and is used by other diesel manufacturers like Mercedes and BMW. The downside is that it adds complication to the system, and cost—$5,000 to $8,000 per car. And you need to periodically add the urea-based solution to your car to keep it working.

The big “advance” from VW was the “clean diesel” technology that supposedly made the whole urea thing unnecessary on its smaller cars...

http://www.wired.com/2015/09/vw-owners-arent-going-like-fixes-diesels/

Well if the VW engines don't use urea, then how, exactly do they do it? Maybe I was wrong above when I said it "works fine". Maybe it "works fine" if you only run it a hundred hours over the lifespan of the car or don't run out of a secret urea stash somewhere? But if there is something fishy about the technology, why don't a whole bunch of people know about it already? Shouldn't VW's technology be patented? Shouldn't the other manufacturers have reverse engineered it? Shouldn't a million gearhead car owners have been suspicious of a system that couldn't possibly work as advertised? Shouldn't 10,000 engineers in the VW drivetrain team realize that their emissions control system they were designing is a black box with nothing in it? This is almost feeling like a perpetual motion machine type hoax!

Wiki on the typical method:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust_fluid

 

[PietKuip]

Well if the VW engines don't use urea, then how, exactly do they do it?

Some of the VW cars use urea. There is a link to it on this page: http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/technology/diesel
But that link (that I could read earlier today) is gone now... still here: http://web.archive.org/web/20150912083859/http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/technology/diesel/adblue

VW cars used suspiciously little of this. Maybe only enough when the "defeat device", the "switch" was on?

This is almost feeling like a perpetual motion machine type hoax!

 

[nsaspook]

I haven't seen any indication that they are actually considering buying-back the cars, however in researching a bit for that, I did find a significant gap in my understanding of the situation implied by your #1:

http://www.wired.com/2015/09/vw-owners-arent-going-like-fixes-diesels/

Well if the VW engines don't use urea, then how, exactly do they do it? Maybe I was wrong above when I said it "works fine". Maybe it "works fine" if you only run it a hundred hours over the lifespan of the car or don't run out of a secret urea stash somewhere? But if there is something fishy about the technology, why don't a whole bunch of people know about it already? Shouldn't VW's technology be patented? Shouldn't the other manufacturers have reverse engineered it? Shouldn't a million gearhead car owners have been suspicious of a system that couldn't possibly work as advertised? Shouldn't 10,000 engineers in the VW drivetrain team realize that their emissions control system they were designing is a black box with nothing in it? This is almost feeling like a perpetual motion machine type hoax!

Then how, exactly do they do it? They don't and I'm sure that car has been torn apart to the last bolt or wire looking for the magic they used. This fact is the one that makes me believe that this is not a little slice of code but is a very sophisticated and well engineered system on the level that usually only governments can pull off.

The bigger the lie the better it works. Maybe their lie was little too good because the technical information that caught them was done by a group that wanted to prove others could do what VW was selling. My speculation: This is similar to a compartmentalized operational plan where many innocent looking things in isolation are combined for the needed function to happen.

I normally Poo Poo conspiracy theories but sometimes that's where the facts seem to lead. Maybe there's a simple answer to how they did it with everyone overlooking it for years because it was like one almost identical tree in a huge forest of trees.

I'm still waiting for more facts in this fascinating story.

 

[Borg]

The horse has left the barn - time for the EPA to finally act.

The EPA outlined its plan in a strongly worded letter to car manufacturers on Friday.

the EPA won't be relying solely on vehicles provided by manufacturers for its baseline standards testing anymore. It will now borrow specific models from private citizens and rental companies as well.

 

[mheslep]

the EPA won't be relying solely on vehicles provided by manufacturers for its baseline standards testing anymore. It will now borrow specific models from private citizens and rental companies as well.

That action would not have necessarily helped detect the cheat, as per the reports the software was specifically designed to detect EPA test parameters so that any vehicle off the VW line would have detected the test and and curbed emissions.

 

[mheslep]

I'm reminded of this prescient comment from GM executive Bob Lutz back in 2007 when GM was justifying its PHEV decision. Lutz contended the EPA's NOx standard, 0.7 g/mile, which causes problems for diesel engines, was six times higher than the EU standard. Technically there was a solution, barely, but it entailed another $2K to $2.8K in costs and lower fuel mileage on the diesel. Together with the pending gasoline engine technology improvements at the time, GM concluded that diesel had no long term efficiency or market advantage.



The large difference between US and EU NOx standards is a bit suspicious. I can speculate on a technical rationale in that the US has nearly double the vehicle ownership rate of the EU, and more cars per city entails more smog per city with other variables constant. Political reasons are also possible via regulatory capture, on both continents. In the EU perhaps NOx standards were kept low at the cost of more smog to advantage EU diesel manufacturers. In the US, perhaps NOx standards have been set unreasonably high to protect US manufacturers from EU diesel imports.

 

[Astronuc]

VW emission recall could be the most expensive ever
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/vw-recall-could-be-the-most-expensive-ever-194521326.html

Volkswagen (VOW3.DE) has a much more complicated problem. It hasn’t issued a recall yet for nearly 500,000 turbodiesel models in the U.S. with “defeat devices” that shut down emission controls during normal driving. But it almost certainly will. The government won’t even let VW sell new models with the device until it fixes the problem, which has exploded into a scandal likely to http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sell-sue-stay-put-considerations-153231784.html and possibly criminal prosecution.

VW has already set aside $7.2 billion to deal with recalls, fines, litigation and other costs resulting from what appears to be a deliberate effort to deceive regulators and customers, however, the cost could be twice as much or more.

Meanwhile, VW has promoted the head of Porsche, Matthias Mueller, to CEO of the VW Group.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/vw-names-porsche-chief-mueller-ceo-supervisory-board-170719236.html

 

[nsaspook]

VW emission recall could be the most expensive ever
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/vw-recall-could-be-the-most-expensive-ever-194521326.html
VW has already set aside $7.2 billion to deal with recalls, fines, litigation and other costs resulting from what appears to be a deliberate effort to deceive regulators and customers, however, the cost could be twice as much or more.

...
Offer to buy back vehicles. This could be very expensive, but it might be the most thorough way to earn back the trust of VW customers -- and placate regulators. And there’s precedent. Fiat Chrysler (FCAU) recently negotiated a deal with the government involving fire-prone vehicles from 1993 to 1998, which required the automaker to offer to buy the affected vehicles back from customers at market price plus 10%. Other Fiat Chrysler recalls negotiated as part of the same deal include discounts up to $2,000 (on top of any other offers) on new Fiat Chrysler models for owners who trade in one of the qualifying recalled vehicles.

VW must be looking at the cost of the US market vs future liability and the weighting the possibility of a complete US buy back costing less in the long run while they concentrate on the massive EU market problems they have.

 

[russ_watters]

I don't think a buy-back would be enough because I don't think you can force people to sell their cars. So the people who choose not to sell still need a car that can meet emissions standards.

 

[nsaspook]

Maybe not in all states but in places like California or the NE they can by simply saying 'no registration' for public roads.
If as many believe they designed the cheat to beat the requirement of urea because it's impossible to meet US emissions and efficiency without it they are forced to retrofit (if they can even make a retrofit work and still be compatible with other safety requirements) old cars like a 2009 Jetta with Adblue or urea for $5000 per car plus overhead plus fines. If the buy back cost for older cars is ~$8000 per car + an incentive. I think a deal (on the fines) can be easily justified financially with VW and environmentally with the EPA to get the old cars off the road by effectively banning them.
I'm not in favor of a road ban without the people who were tricked being well paid for it. So you won't have to sell your car but you can't drive it as the unfixed cars were never actually legal for sale with falsified paperwork.

 

[nsaspook]

This is the end game for 'Clean Diesel'.

http://www.vw.com/features/clean-diesel/

 

[PietKuip]

This is the end game for 'Clean Diesel'.
http://www.vw.com/features/clean-diesel/

"Efficiency. Now available without compromise.
Hybrids aren’t the only game in town. TDI® Clean Diesel engines offer up impressive efficiency numbers too. Take the Passat TDI for starters. It can go up to 814 miles uninterrupted. Now that’s a game changer."
etcetera...
http://web.archive.org/web/20150816221300/http://www.vw.com/features/clean-diesel/

 

[PietKuip]

I took a quick look the the hardware. It seems to be a Bosch (The EDC17 from Bosch) unit with the TCL1796 controller. http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/tc1796...fileId=db3a304412b407950112b41bc4972cb1&ack=t

Very complex controller hardware that controls a very complex emissions and engine system.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2015/09/20150921-vw2l.html

The person(s) who did this had an extreme level of expertise at the code level to build something like this without detection from the outside for so long. I find it hard to believe the design code base for the system was only known at the VW engineering level if they did it. VW might just be the tip of a very large iceberg.

Bosch knew about it as early as 2007, when they wrote a letter to VW. According to Bild am Sonntag, Bosch wrote the software for testing purposes. In 2007 Bosch wrote a letter to VW, telling them that the use that VW intended was against the law. According to Bild, this letter was adressed to the highest management circles.
http://www.bild.de/geld/wirtschaft/...1-vor-abgas-manipulationen-42736218.bild.html (in German)

 

[nsaspook]

http://www.autonews.com/article/20150927/COPY01/309279989/bosch-warned-vw-about-illegal-software-use-in-diesel-cars-report-says

Bild am Sonntag said the roots of the crisis were planted in 2005 when then-VW brand chief Wolfgang Bernhard wanted VW to develop a new diesel engine for the U.S. market. Bernhard recruited Audi engineer Rudolf Krebs who developed a prototype that performed well in tests in South Africa in 2006, the paper said.

Bernhard and Krebs argued that the only way to make the engine meet U.S. emission standards was to employ in the engine system an AdBlue urea solution used on larger diesel models such as the Passat and Touareg, according to the report.

 

[PietKuip]

From a Dutch test report:
"One of the six Euro 6 diesel passenger cars currently in production that was tested in 2015 with EGR and SCR reached average NOx emissions in real-world on-road conditions of around 650 mg/km, even though in laboratory tests all chassis dynamometer measurements – i.e. also during cycles other than the type-approval test – the same vehicle easily satisfied the Euro 6 limit value of 80 mg/km. It is striking that real-world NOx emissions are more than eight times as high as the type-approval limit values. The difference illustrates that the settings for the engine, the EGR, and the SCR during a combined real-world trip are ineffective to achieve low NOx emissions. "
http://content1b.omroep.nl/urishieldv2/l27m1bc98a514f405bfc00560876ac000000.6ddfc991494e5dc6218f136d4d67431e/nos/docs/20150927%20TNO-2015-R10838.pdf

 

[Astronuc]

VW facing 'tsunami' of legal trouble in emissions scandal
http://news.yahoo.com/vw-facing-tsunami-legal-trouble-emissions-scandal-114744459.html#

Apparently some German media have reported that "Volkswagen had received warnings years ago about the use of illegal tricks to defeat emissions tests. Bild am Sonntag said VW's internal investigation has found a 2007 letter from parts supplier Bosch warning Volkswagen not to use the software during regular operation. Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung said a Volkswagen technician raised concerns about illegal practices in connection with emissions levels in 2011."

Not a good time for VW.

 

[nsaspook]

 

[nsaspook]

Cut to about 22:00 for the VW discussion.

 

[256bits]

Bosch knew about it as early as 2007, when they wrote a letter to VW. According to Bild am Sonntag, Bosch wrote the software for testing purposes. In 2007 Bosch wrote a letter to VW, telling them that the use that VW intended was against the law. According to Bild, this letter was adressed to the highest management circles.
http://www.bild.de/geld/wirtschaft/...1-vor-abgas-manipulationen-42736218.bild.html (in German)

Thanks PeitKuip,
That's what I was wondering about. How much did Bosch know about the whole code being used in production.

 

[nsaspook]

Thanks PeitKuip,
That's what I was wondering about. How much did Bosch know about the whole code being used in production.

That's something that IMO will be hard to find out unless this ends up in a count with the power to break confidentially agreements under oath. Bosch looks like the hardware integrator for the ECM using the infineon TCL1796. If VW specified something like a special code protection module, drivers and demonstration code to hide firmware from prying eyes that would be nothing special as most advanced controllers have this capability in the hardware as options but if Bosch provided technical advice with the specific details and information of designing a defeat device with possible cloaking or cryptographic masking of the functions for the willing purpose of committing a fraud they would be in deep, deep trouble.

Most auto engine management software systems are networked with CAN bus so the information needed for the system to tell which engine mode it needed to operate in could have easily been linked in from several other modules each with a little part of the pie making it very hard to nail down exactly who did what if the architect of the system was on the ball.

Things like this are why the 'IOT' where networked computers are in everything might not be so great an idea in reality.

 

[edward]

My son bought a 2011 Passat TDI about three months ago. He had been waiting for quite a while to find a low mileage used one. He just checked with various sources and they tell him his vehicle lost over half of it's resale value. New car dealerships, not just VW, won't even take them as a trade in. The irony is that he loves the car just the way it is. It is really a quick little sedan that gets over 40 mpg on the highway.

The "treadmill" :) emissions test is a joke compared to real world driving. Very few cars would do as well out on the road. The test drivers creep up to speed very gradually.

If VW comes up with a performance and economy degrading fix how long will it be until the aftermarket comes out with something to defeat the fix?

 

[nsaspook]

If VW comes up with a performance and economy degrading fix how long will it be until the aftermarket comes out with something to defeat the fix?

I'm sure somebody will try but I would not like to the first one marketing the defeat 'fix' under this kind of heat.

 

[Astronuc]

The "treadmill" :) emissions test is a joke compared to real world driving. Very few cars would do as well out on the road. The test drivers creep up to speed very gradually.

My first Honda Civic (5 speed, standard) did better than the test mileage on the highway.

 

[nsaspook]

The Bosch system VW and many others use.

 

[nsaspook]

Then
http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/info_center/en/news/2015/09/sustain.html

Full marks were awarded to Volkswagen in the areas of codes of conduct, compliance and anti-corruption as well as innovation management, climate strategy and life cycle assessment. The Group is also the industry benchmark for supplier management and environmental reporting. Furthermore, significant progress has been made in human capital development, occupational health and safety, tax strategy and talent attraction.

Now
http://www.sustainability-indices.com/images/150929-statement-vw-exclusion_vdef.pdf

"Volkswagen AG to be Removed from the Dow Jones Sustainability Indices"

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ars-been-unfairly-demonised-for-air-pollution

The car industry on Wednesday launched a campaign to “challenge the increasing demonisation of diesel” vehicles.

 

[edward]

It looks like Dow Jones is coming down really hard on VW. VW is a very big company and employs a lot of people. At this point I am a bit concerned about unintended consequences in a shaky global economy. S&P ?? how do they fit into this . S&P was one of the companies that gave packaged sub prime loans an AAA rating.

 

[nsaspook]

“The purpose seems to be to pass the peak luminance measurement test and then reduce luminance (and power) to get a better energy label ranking when the on power is measured,” the correspondence says. “All very clever and it is not dimming so much that it makes a huge difference, but does the commission consider this an acceptable practice or is this a non-compliant activity?”
...
More testing is planned to establish whether manufacturers are gaming television testing procedures. But “it wouldn’t take much for an unscrupulous manufacturer to install software to detect the unique ‘signature’ of the test and to then have the unit go into some sort of eco-mode and produce superior results (ie lower energy use) that wouldn’t occur under normal usage,” Horowitz said.

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...e-energy-efficient-in-tests-than-in-real-life

Now it's TV defeat devices.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/09/volkswagen_and_.html

Computer-security experts believe that intelligence agencies have been doing this sort of thing for years, both with the consent of the software developers and surreptitiously.

This problem won't be solved through computer security as we normally think of it. Conventional computer security is designed to prevent outside hackers from breaking into your computers and networks. The car analog would be security software that prevented an owner from tweaking his own engine to run faster but in the process emit more pollutants. What we need to contend with is a very different threat: malfeasance programmed in at the design stage.

 

[nsaspook]

It's interesting to look back with the current state of knowledge and see the comments and theories about the TDI cars in 2009 when people discovered the EPA ratings were low when compared to 'real world' driving.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1019256_volkswagen-jetta-tdi-much-more-mileage-than-epa-admits

His results confirm consistent reports from actual drivers that the EPA's official mileage numbers for the JettaTDI (29 mpg city / 40 mpg highway for the automatic, 30 / 41 for the manual) are far too low.

Last July, Volkswagen hired independent tester AMCI to test the Jetta TDI's"real world" mileage on the road. They came back with 38 city / 44 highway--or 24 percent and 10 percent higher respectively.

 

[Hornbein]

It's interesting to look back with the current state of knowledge and see the comments and theories about the TDI cars in 2009 when people discovered the EPA ratings were low when compared to 'real world' driving.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1019256_volkswagen-jetta-tdi-much-more-mileage-than-epa-admits

My cousin Scott informs me he was told about the VW trickery back in 2013.

 

[nsaspook]

My cousin Scott informs me he was told about the VW trickery back in 2013.

Are you sure it wasn't your cousin Vinny.

 

[Hornbein]

Are you sure it wasn't your cousin Vinny.

My cousin is Scott Howard, CEO and owner of Shandam Consulting. http://www.shandam.com/

 

[256bits]

Things like this are why the 'IOT' where networked computers are in everything might not be so great an idea in reality

IOT - too many systems to keep track of them all in the code.

I had this thought that the code design team got confused about which code was actually the production code, and inadvertently switched the test code to the running code, and visa-versa, with both sets being in there as a design choice.

The test code was to have the engine run raw ( so to speak ) and then add in systems or remove them to probe a problem. Satisfaction was when the engine performance and emissions became equal to design standards. Then the run code was set, and compared, and if equal again, the car was good to go, otherwise re-diagnose.

They could have unwittingly duped themselves, rather than deliberately duping the public.

That would be part of the quality control lax that was mentioned earlier ( by Borg I think.)

 

[Hornbein]

My cousin is Scott Howard, CEO and owner of Shandam Consulting. http://www.shandam.com/

Here's the relevant part of a letter he wrote to me.

I have a friend that works for the Bureau of Automotive Repair here in [Sacramento] CA – he said they picked up on the VW testing inconsistencies several years ago, and it took some time to bubble upward.

 

[nsaspook]

IOT - too many systems to keep track of them all in the code.

I had this thought that the code design team got confused about which code was actually the production code, and inadvertently switched the test code to the running code, and visa-versa, with both sets being in there as a design choice.

The test code was to have the engine run raw ( so to speak ) and then add in systems or remove them to probe a problem. Satisfaction was when the engine performance and emissions became equal to design standards. Then the run code was set, and compared, and if equal again, the car was good to go, otherwise re-diagnose.

They could have unwittingly duped themselves, rather than deliberately duping the public.

That would be part of the quality control lax that was mentioned earlier ( by Borg I think.)

You don't really believe that do you? They have flat out admitted to cheating. If there was the tiniest possibility of a coding mix-up that lasted for 6 years with many model revisions they would have the guys responsible for it frog-marched in from of the press in a nanosecond to save billions of dollars.

 

[mheslep]

There was no, is no, version of the software that makes the VW diesel "good to go". There's a version (mode) with good acceleration and mileage performance and emissions well over limit, and there's a mode with lousy performance but certifiable emissions. There's no mode that does both.

 

[nsaspook]

There was no, is no, version of the software that makes the VW diesel "good to go". There's a version (mode) with good acceleration and mileage performance and emissions well over limit, and there's a mode with lousy performance but certifiable emissions. There's no mode that does both.

As is usually the case a new version of this has arrived on the web: NSFW language
http://jalopnik.com/hitler-is-understandably-pissed-about-volkswagens-diese-1731943072

 

[Vanadium 50]

There's no mode that does both.

There is clearly no present-day VW mode that does both. I am less certain that there is no aftermarket chip that does both. There is a counter-culture of "chippers" who use aftermarket ECU software to improve performance. It would not strike me as impossible that one could get at or near design performance by using this modified software. Why doesn't VW do it then? More wear on various engine elements. But given a choice between replacing 500,000 cars now or 10,000 turbochargers over the next decade, which would VW prefer?

 

[russ_watters]

There is clearly no present-day VW mode that does both. I am less certain that there is no aftermarket chip that does both.

I am: the separate modes are mutually exclusive. You can have chemistry or physics, but not both at the same time. That's why the fraud was needed.

More wear on various engine elements. But given a choice between replacing 500,000 cars now or 10,000 turbochargers over the next decade, which would VW prefer?

Ok, no mode that does both without destroying itself or needing a refill of the hidden urea tank (guess) once a week. Same diff.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The ECU design balances four priorities: emissions, economy, reliability, and performance. VW decided they wanted economy, reliability, and performance at the cost of emissions. No reason why one couldn't tilt the balance differently: emissions, economy, and performance at the cost of reliability. Whether this is feasible is a matter of numbers: if you could get legal emissions and substantially similar economy and performance at a cost of reducing the average engine lifetime from 400,000 miles (I made this number up) to 399,999 miles, we would also say "do it!". If it changed from 400,000 miles to 1 mile, we'd all say that's ridiculous.

I'm not an expert on these chips, but expect that there is substantial additional wear on the EGR valve ($200-300 to replace) and some additional wear on the turbos themselves ($1500-$3500 to replace). If VW had to replace every EGR valve and 10% of the turbos over the lifetimes of these cars, they'd jump at the chance.

 

[mheslep]

It seems to me government can best serve consumers and the environment in this case by leaving the VWs already on the road alone and beating the heck out of VW corporate, thus sending a message to other mfns who might attempt a similar fraud. Air pollution is effected by the level of NOx emissions from the entire US fleet. The relevant VW diesels in the US start with 2009 models and appear to number in the thousands (482,000 ?). They really don't matter among a fleet of 200 million vehicles, IF the price for such fraud is shown to be extreme.

 

[russ_watters]

The ECU design balances four priorities: emissions, economy, reliability, and performance. VW decided they wanted economy, reliability, and performance at the cost of emissions. No reason why one couldn't tilt the balance differently: emissions, economy, and performance at the cost of reliability. Whether this is feasible is a matter of numbers...

Assuming it is even physically possible to tip the trade-off that way, sure: the car has a certain warranty (arrived at via competition) and needs a certain reliability for that to be economical. That's pretty much non-negotiable. It's the least malleable of the parameters.

I'm not an expert on these chips, but expect that there is substantial additional wear on the EGR valve ($200-300 to replace) and some additional wear on the turbos themselves ($1500-$3500 to replace). If VW had to replace every EGR valve and 10% of the turbos over the lifetimes of these cars, they'd jump at the chance.

I'm not either and I'm still unsure of how they are able to operate in a mode that passes emissions at all, given that other cars need a consumable catalyst, which these apparently do not have. That's why I'm saying I don't know that the trade-off you are suggesting is even possible. But sure, if it were a fairly minor reliability issue, I'm sure they'd jump at the chance. The fact that they chose fraud instead implies to me that it is worse than that.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Well, we know that they balked at a $300 urea-based NOx remover, so a reliability reduction of $300 equivalence would also be rejected. Rejecting that putative tune point may have made sense in 2007. It may look a lot more reasonable today, when faced with fines that are two orders of magnitude larger.

Looking at dyno curves, it looks like there is about a 10% loss in power in test mode. This is a number that is not out of the question to get by reprogramming ECUs. Maybe the EGR valve dies sooner.

 

[mheslep]

A 10% power loss by choice is out of the question for most owners I suspect.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The loss is 10% if you do nothing beyond . I believe that may well be recoverable by programming. 20% or so can be gained by increasing the turbo boost, which will, in turn put more stress on various systems. That may reduce reliability, but as I argued above, this may be the least expensive alternative for VW.

 

[nsaspook]

Any 'fix' must include another one to fix the corrupt executive management and corporate structure.

 

[nsaspook]

http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-vw-cancels-2016-diesel-line-up-20151007-story.html
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF02/20151008/104046/HHRG-114-IF02-Wstate-HornM-20151008.pdf

CSPAN schedule: http://www.c-span.org/video/?328599-1/hearing-volkswagen-emissions-violations

The decision came to light late Wednesday afternoon after Volkswagen's U.S. chief executive, Michael Horn, released written copies of testimony he is expected to give before Congress on Thursday.

In the testimony, in which Horn offers "a sincere apology for Volkswagen's use of a program that served to defeat" emissions tests, the executive said, "We have withdrawn the application for certification of our model year 2016 vehicles.
...
"They’ve abandoned the entire 2016 model year (2.0L diesel engine) diesels, and that's not good news for owners," Brauer said. "It suggests that the fix is probably not going to be easy. It suggests that the fix involves so much challenge that they’re not even going try to make the 2016s work."
...
Update: The EPA issued a statement saying, "Today Volkswagen withdrew their certification application for 2016 vehicle models that use the 2.0L diesel engine including the AUDI: A3 VOLKSWAGEN: BEETLE, BEETLE CONVERTIBLE, GOLF, GOLF SPORTWAGEN, JETTA, PASSAT models."
A Volkswagen representative said the Touareg diesel, which uses a 3.0-liter engine, was not affected by the EPA discussions and would be part of the 2016 line-up.

 

[nsaspook]

The hearing is on CSPAN3 online now.

Quick notes from the hearing:

No software only fix for at least the 1st gen cars 430,000 cars.
Needs AdBlue and catalytic converter, no current time frame for a fix.
Fix will affect overall drive-ability, possible compensation to customers of affected cars.

Software and some hardware senors added ,maybe next year for 2nd gen cars, 95,000 cars.

Dealers: VW to fund money to save dealers. No plans to buy back current new car inventory.