Mitchell wrote: Not sure how much I would be interested in hiring someone exposing the prior employer to billions in fines and potential lost revenue.
If nothing else, they should be able to pull down some cash with hacking organizations; the Russkies, ChiComms, North Koreans, and the "Death to America" Iranians are some big orgs with cash that come to mind. 
I feel as though Smokey Yunick would approve of VW's creativity.
It's funny at first blush, but not so funny when you're an asthmatic city dweller. VW was caught selling a product advertised to meet clean air standards that emits 40 times the smog-causing pollutants than it claimed to.
It was an inventive deception, but still unethical and illegal.
what is sad.. those cars -can- pass the clean diesel emissions. The code in the computer just switches over to that clean diesel code when tested, and then reverts back to dirty once done.
At least if I am reading that article right
I don't understand a couple points though:
How drastic of a map change would it take to make a vehicle go from within EPA limits to 40x over? I presume the impact on overall vehicle performance must be substantial or there wouldn't have been any reason to have an illegal map anyway? So wouldn't someone notice the car running worse/differently all of a sudden once the legal map had loaded?
I'm not saying the story isn't true, but it does sound a little bit far-fetched.
Could they just say "Wow, even the check engine lights failed" and ad "Check "Check Engine" lights in a recall?
petegossett wrote: I don't understand a couple points though: How drastic of a map change would it take to make a vehicle go from within EPA limits to 40x over? I presume the impact on overall vehicle performance must be substantial or there wouldn't have been any reason to have an illegal map anyway? So wouldn't someone notice the car running worse/differently all of a sudden once the legal map had loaded? I'm not saying the story isn't true, but it *does* sound a little bit far-fetched.
How many emission tests actually use a person driving the car? I think most are on some sort of dyno to load the vehicle and run automatically, but we don't have emissions testing where I live so I could very well be mistaken.
I wonder how poorly the things run in "test mode".
I'd LOVE to see a side by side comparison with 1/4 mile times, torque and hp output as well.
If it was deliberate, you can file it under "Amazing things people thought they could get away with forever."
VAG has a development lab a few miles from where I live in Silicon Valley. I could almost see someone building this particular feature to get his own car through CA smog and then including it in a production software release by mistake. Mistakes and unofficial Easter eggs do make it through code reviews. 
I'll have to think of a clever comment for the next time I see a VAG convoy testing one of their autonomous vehicle prototypes on the roads near here.
I used to be a big fan of them but when a VAG starts emitting that much junk, I want no part of it.
Type Q wrote: I'll have to think of a clever comment for the next time I see a VAG convoy testing one of their autonomous vehicle prototypes on the roads near here.
In ten years we'll find out those VW "autonomous cars" were actually driven by outsourced cubicle dwellers from India using the built-in traffic and back-up cameras and an internet connection.
...$18...billion...plus litigation...and you thought Toyota...GM...and Takata got taken to the shed...
Junkyard_Dog wrote:Type Q wrote: I'll have to think of a clever comment for the next time I see a VAG convoy testing one of their autonomous vehicle prototypes on the roads near here.In ten years we'll find out those VW "autonomous cars" were actually driven by outsourced cubicle dwellers from India using the built-in traffic and back-up cameras and an internet connection.
Do you think VW is that inventive?
Actually I would not be surprised at all if I found out Uber is pursuing this.
ebonyandivory wrote: I wonder how poorly the things run in "test mode". I'd LOVE to see a side by side comparison with 1/4 mile times, torque and hp output as well.
How much adjustment do you have in a modern diesel? I know you can throw a gas car WAY out of spec with timing and fuel changes. It may be as simple as "if we ran it in test mode permanently we would break something" either through excessive heat or carbon build up or something. So they built a piece of code that will pass emissions and a piece of code that will make the engine last. Which is illegal, but I see where the line of thought was.
In reply to mazdeuce:
tons, even more so then with gas as it's simpler to manipulate in a diesel as it's primary all handled via fuel trim and diverter valve cycle at a lower pressure, with the compression ratios the results of the changes, as it pertains to recirculating the exhaust into the intake, and trimming down the fuel can really clean it up. But the power comes from throwing more fuel at a turbo diesel, upping the pressures, temps and NOx in the process.
Coldsnap wrote: "EPA regulators said that Volkswagen adopted a "sophisticated" algorithm that turned on vehicles' full emissions controls when it detected they were being tested for emissions performance." HOly E36 M3
If you think VW is the only company doing this, you're gullible. Ever drive a car that drove like E36 M3 until the upshift light came on, and then the engine pulled well? (If you have ever driven an E30 then you HAVE experienced this)
Just like standardized testing, they were studying for The Test rather than the full "education" so to speak. To sell a car in the US they have to pass The Test. VW found a way to do this... problem solved?
logdog wrote: How do you say "rolling coal" in German?
Fahrvergnuegen.
(my Volvo was recording 42mpg today... on gasoline... 100% OE-level emissions compliant... and I'd just paid $2.29 for 93 octane when Diesel was still up around $2.69. Let me laugh even harder)
Roll Kohle.
The0retical wrote: Wow now that is ballsy. I was wondering how VAG got its clean diesel program going so quickly and efficiently in the US but Mazda hadn't been able to do the same.
Mazda wants to do it without DEF because, for some reason, people are willing to spend $40k on a new car but not $10-20 or so every year for DEF. Which is so difficult to find that every podunk truck stop, gas station, outhouse, and doghouse that I've seen sells it. So Mazda was berkeleying around with trying to make a Diesel with low enough compression (14:1, if I do recall) that it didn't create enough NOx to need DEF and the associated gigantic catalyst train, and also get the ability to start when cold. Last I heard, they were playing with funky exhaust manifold geometry that had a 2-stroke like effect where one cylinder's exhaust stroke pumped air into a different cylinder's intake stroke so that a relatively low compression Diesel could even start...
I guess it didn't work out too good?
Me, I figure, DEF is the price of having a Diesel that starts when cold and makes more power than a 9 volt electric screwdriver. Suck it up, welcome to reality. But I guess Mazda would rather pander to whiners than go with proven technology that actually works.
Thankfully, I might own one of these effected vehicles, woooohooo!!!
I believe the under the surface of the story is emissions compliance vs warranty cost. Until you have to pony up the dough to clean and or replace egr coolers and valves with very little mileage on them and if you "ignore" them, soon to be dpf filters and egr coolers, you'll realize that crap ain't cheap and it's all epa driven. Same thing with def. Mazda doesn't want to put more E36 M3 into the environment just to make ecofreaks "happy"......
IMO if you are concerned about the environment, you'd drive a non-hybrid gasoline engined car. Newer is better but ending isn't better than mending, the enviromental cost of producting a new car is equal to something like 250-300k miles of driving (assuming the emissions controls are still effective and the vehicle is compliant) So it's still generally better to fix old than buy new even if "old" isn't as unicorn-farts-and-rainbows as a new car.
Yes, I fully recognize the irony of preaching environment-friendliness on a Realistic Level, while my avatar proudly proclaims that one of my cars would be on the EPA's 10 Most Wanted list if such a thing existed. If it is any consolation, it spends most of its life annoying people with its statue-like presence due to perpetual drivetrain-breakage issues, while I drive a car that gets much better economy and emits air cleaner than it ingests....
How the testing works in MA is the testing computer does not test anything it just asks the on board system if everything is ok. If it answers yes then you pass. If the VW code in question in efrct was lying and was saying yes the emissions are ok when in fact they were 40x to high the that is equal to lying to the feds/EPA. They could in theory charge them for every inspection that was made to these vehicles that lied.
I am a MA inspector and this is a really big deal. I am not going to be surprised if this becomes a really really big deal. I can see recalls or even by backs being mandated.
VW is in for a world of hurt on this one if it proves out.
In reply to dean1484:
This isn't really like that, I don't think. Reading between the lines, the VW computer specifically looked for the conditions that would be seen when being run through the official certification test, and ran emissions-friendly and clean under THOSE conditions, but would revert to a more consumer-oriented control strategy when not in those conditions.
The Federal test is a controlled drive in a controlled environment. So it probably sees, hey, it's exactly 60F and I have been idling for exactly X seconds and then I accelerated at exactly Y rate to Z mph... I must be being tested! switches to clean mode
More info on the drive cycle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FTP-75
The part that I find interesting is that since they measure the TOTAL emissions of the car, even things like new-car smell count. Plastics are hydrocarbons and outgassing plastics are hydrocarbon emissions.
Well, so far the story doesn't seem like it is getting too much traction if I go by what google tells me I should read for my news. Interesting story, but just may not become a big deal for the general population unless a Kardashian owns an affected vehicle.
Wired has an interesting take on this. They say that the EPA first found out about this last year and has since been fighting to make access to the code illegal which would've prevented the WVU dude from discovering the defeat device int he first place.
So, when the recalls start will people be forced into taking their car in and getting a software 'fix' that will clean up the emissions but at the expense of power and drivability? What if someone owns a VW and doesn't consent to making their car perform and drive worse? Will the cars be forcefully recalled? Is that a thing?
You'll need to log in to post.
