VW Has Emissions-Cheating Fix Ready, Says Report (pressherald.com) 64
An anonymous reader writes from a report via Portland Press Herald: Volkswagen plans to fix the engines that were rigged to cheat on emissions tests by updating computer software and installing a larger catalytic converter to trap harmful nitrogen oxide, according to two dealers who were briefed by executives on the matter. The dealers said that limited details of the plan were made public last week at a regional dealer meeting in Newark, New Jersey, by Volkswagen of America Chief Operating Officer Mark McNabb. Portland Press Herald reports: "One dealer said the group was told that early testing of a small sample of repaired cars showed that the fix made 'no discernible difference' in the cars' mileage, horsepower or torque. Both dealers said they were told that more testing was needed and that the plans still had to be approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board. One of the dealers said the so-called 'Generation 1' diesels -- about 325,000 VW Jettas, Golfs, Passats and Beetles from the 2009 to 2014 model years – would get new software and bigger catalytic converters in January or February of next year. About 90,000 'Generation 2' Passats already have sufficient emissions systems and would get only a software update early next year. Another 67,000 'Generation 3' 2015 models would get software in October and would get additional hardware a year later, the dealer said. Dealers also were told that they'd be reimbursed by VW for sales losses due to the scandal, and that new vehicles are coming." Last month, Volkswagen agreed to a record $14.7 billion settlement over the emissions cheating.
Emissions fix? Call me skeptical... (Score:2, Insightful)
I'd love to see an independent, third-party certification that there isn't discernible loss in MPG or power.
Re: (Score:2)
I just opened the comments thinking, do I even want this "fix" on my car? If I lose MPG or power then; it aint no fix in my book. MPG and power were factors I considered when buying my car. I paid a lot of money based on the MPG and power the car had when I bought it. I have no interest in seeing either reduced.
If I can, I will probably avoid this "fix"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd love to see an independent, third-party certification that there isn't discernible loss in MPG or power.
Heck, I fully expected that. See, I thought VW would release a firmware patch for emission testing equipment. All VWs would start passing, no need to bother the owners with coming in for the recall.
Gas Mileage (Score:2, Interesting)
How much will it hurt gas mileage. For all of the bs about harming the environment, the reduction in CO2 emissions from the cheating is probably the best thing that's happened for the environment this century.
Re: (Score:3)
I can understand not reading TFA. But it's in TFS, for f***s sake.
One dealer said the group was told that early testing of a small sample of repaired cars showed that the fix made 'no discernible difference' in the cars' mileage, horsepower or torque.
(emphasis mine)
Re: Gas Mileage (Score:1)
As if nobody has ever lied at a meeting.
Re: (Score:3)
There must be some trade off or they would have made it that way to start with. Either it's costing VW a lot, or it's going to put up maintenance costs (consumables etc) or reduce component lifespan/reliability (running hotter etc) or all three.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Discernible"
Are you able to discern a 1 MPG difference in your milage from day to day? What about over the life of a vehicle. Will that loss be enough to keep people in their VW diesels when you can get a Skyactiv gasser that performs just as well?
Re: (Score:2)
One dealer said the group was told that early testing of a small sample of repaired cars showed that the fix made 'no discernible difference' in the cars' mileage, horsepower or torque.
Surely some folks will throw their stock VWs on a dyno before and after, right? I'm skeptical that tweaking the computers and adding bigger cats can significantly lower emissions while not impacting HP, torque, and mpg. Or does "discernible" only refer to butt dyno results? $14 billion (or whatever it is up to) sounds like an impressively large sum, but the unknown impact on resale values is something that can only be revealed in time. I must say, VW prices have begun to look attractive to me, and the chea
VW needs a bankruptcy "fix" ready (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't cry for VW. They're the world's largest automaker and they're sneezing, spitting, sweating, shitting, and farting money. That's why there's such a thing as the Bugatti Veyron, on which millions are lost on every sale; or for that matter, the Volkswagen Phaeton. The background on that car is incredibly stupid. So Audi makes a chassis called D1, puts their first ever V8 engine in it (they're still using the same basic design today, although the heads are very different) and sells it as the "Audi V8", wh
Re: (Score:2)
Don't cry for VW. They're the world's largest automaker ...
Clearly you are confusing VW with Toyota, who are still the world's biggest automaker.
I can't comment on the rest of your manifesto, other than to say I have no idea why you are so interested in how the Phaeton was destined to be a phailure from the beginning. Every automaker makes mistakes, some dumber and more costly than others, so it is the successes that drive them. VW will survive this with a black eye (or two), and I will continue to test drive Audis every time I'm in the market for a new car. (Mo
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly you are confusing VW with Toyota, who are still the world's biggest automaker.
They are neck and neck, and VW employs more people due to all the marques they own.
I can't comment on the rest of your manifesto, other than to say I have no idea why you are so interested in how the Phaeton was destined to be a phailure from the beginning.
It's interesting because it's Ferdinand's fault, like everything else wrong with VW today. Germans love a hardass, though, and that's how they got him in the big chair. And what else is interesting about it is just how spectacularly stupid it was when they already had a car in that space. But what's relevant about it is that they have money to burn.
Pretty simple fix... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
2015 models already have a DEF system.
Re:Pretty simple fix... (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem isn't technically how to do it. It's how to do it within the confines of what space is available on the car.
Poke around a modern car, truck or heavy equipment and it's 'full'. Had VW done it properly the first time the floor pan of the car would have likely had a completely different shape than what was shipped.
They had to find a solution that worked and worked on the car's dimensions as it shipped.
Re: (Score:3)
If you look at the newer Gen-3 diesels and compare to similar gasser models, the one notable difference is that the diesels lack the independent rear suspension. Why? Most likely to make room for the DEF tank.
As you say, retrofitting DEF would be a challenge. Not just the tank, but plumbing, wiring, a new ECU, more sensors.
And where/how do you fill the tank? Where is the fill tube, in other words? If they end up having to cut the body panels to make room for it, how do they ensure that the metal around
Re: (Score:2)
If VW's claims are really true, (Score:2)
then the bastards must be kicking themselves in the ass. It hasn't taken them very long to come up with a fix; if they'd spent the time to do that back in the development cycle, they could have saved themselves a shitload of money - not to mention all the damage to their reputation since they got caught trying to pull a fast one.
As the old engineering saying goes, 'never time to do it right, but always time to do it over'.
Re: If VW's claims are really true, (Score:3, Interesting)
This wasn't a mistake in engineering, it was deliberate. I wonder if the "larger catalytic converter" now being retrofitted was part of the reason for the fraud - those things are filled with expensive precious metals.
Re: (Score:2)
reports are it's no fix (Score:2)
That the cars will still emit 200% of legally mandated NOx levels.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c... [thetruthaboutcars.com]
Only the newest vehicles with the urea injection (2015 and newer) will make it to the legal levels.
So if you bought a "clean Diesel" based upon VW's bogus claims, remember what they did to you next time you're out buying.
Re: (Score:3)
200% of the legally mandated levels is still pretty fantastic. We're still pretending that CO2 isn't serious, so we're focusing on the NOx. But the CO2 reduction that comes with the efficiency improvements of using a small turbo diesel is frankly worth a little NOx.
the CO2 improvements are minor at best (Score:2)
Diesel engines emit 15-20% more CO2 per unit volume (liter/gallon) of fuel burned because the fuel contains more energy/carbon.
And once the companies stop cheating, the fuel economy of the Diesel just isn't all that much better than a turbo gas engine.
Why put up with extra NOx and particulates (depending on the car you compare to) to save such a small amount of CO2? Just get a gas hybrid and do better all around. Or a plug-in hybrid like the Volt where you can do most of your driving burning no liquid fuel
Re: (Score:2)
Diesel also costs slightly less than premium gas...
Re:the CO2 improvements are minor at best (Score:4, Informative)
Diesel engines emit 15-20% more CO2 per unit volume (liter/gallon) of fuel burned because the fuel contains more energy/carbon.
Irrelevant; they emit less CO2 per mile traveled because of the efficiency improvements.
And once the companies stop cheating, the fuel economy of the Diesel just isn't all that much better than a turbo gas engine.
False. This fix does not substantially affect mileage.
Why put up with extra NOx
Worth it
and particulates (depending on the car you compare to)
Bullshit [slashdot.org]. Gassers make just as much particulate, but it's of the most hazardous type, which means their particulate emissions are actually worse than diesel. They also emit more HC than diesels, and unburned hydrocarbons are bar none the most harmful automotive emission. Gasoline also has to be refined more than diesel, which means more energy input and more polluting output. Gasoline engines are shit for the environment.
to save such a small amount of CO2?
Diesels emit less of everything but soot (theirs is less harmful) and NOx (worth the trade).
Just get a gas hybrid and do better all around.
You know that battery electrolyte isn't recycled, right? It's just disposed of and then replaced. A small diesel engine won't give the same performance, but that's fine; it will give adequate or even quite good performance these days. It will give superior mileage, and without involving a battery.
Or a plug-in hybrid like the Volt where you can do most of your driving burning no liquid fuel at all?
Plug-in hybrids at least have a reason to exist, unlike non-plug-in hybrids. But I live in the boonies, so I would still have to do most of my driving on liquid fuel. And they are also quite expensive, to boot.
Since I do very little driving I don't give a shit anyway; I bought an old and cheap Audi A8 Quattro and am restoring it to good-enough condition. (Next: AC compressor.) It doesn't get particularly good mileage or have particularly great emissions, but it did cost thousands and thousands of dollars less than a new car, and it is dramatically better to drive than any econo shitbox. With the money I save not buying a Volt, I could buy an S8 (let alone the A8) and drive it everywhere with a lead foot for years. Sorry, environment! I seriously don't go out much, though. My prior car was a 300SD, which was a bit better on mileage and which ran on a more environmentally-friendly fuel. But frankly, it's cheaper to buy a whole new car than to upgrade the turbo and more expensively upgrade the injection pump on that diesel, so that's what I did. German luxobarge forever. I'm two meters tall, I'm over clown cars.
Re: (Score:2)
> False. This fix does not substantially affect mileage.
What fix? This is not a fix. It doesn't actually bring the car into compliance. If gas cars were allowed to exceed emissions then they also would be more efficient.
> Gassers make just as much particulate, but it's of the most hazardous type, which means their particulate emissions are actually worse than diesel.
That's only true of direct injected gas engines. This is why I said "depending on the car you compare to". Either way, gas cars, even DI
Re: (Score:2)
> Gassers make just as much particulate, but it's of the most hazardous type, which means their particulate emissions are actually worse than diesel.
That's only true of direct injected gas engines.
Who told you that? That's bullshit. The only way in which DI gassers are worse than other gassers is that they foul their intake valves which have to be expensively cleaned, sometimes including head removal.
Gasoline also has to be refined more than diesel
This isn't true anymore. Diesel is a highly refined product now also. Clean emissions requires clean and homogeneous input fuel and that means more processing.
Not only is it still true (it still takes less energy to make diesel, it just takes more than it used to) but guess what? Automakers are now asking fuel companies to make higher-octane fuels, over 100 on the scale we use in the USA. That's what they need to make cleaner-burning gasoline engines. So gasol
Re: (Score:2)
Good comment. I DO like that last paragraph!
Re: (Score:2)
Why put up with extra NOx
Why indeed. NOx limits were crafted to kill off high performance engines (high efficiency, high power output per liter of fuel, less HC, CO2) by the car haters. Why worry at all about NOx when the automobile sources are down in the noise level compared to background NOx levels?
Re: (Score:2)
Diesel engines emit 15-20% more CO2 per unit volume (liter/gallon) of fuel burned because the fuel contains more energy/carbon.
And they use less fuel, because they're more efficient.
And once the companies stop cheating, the fuel economy of the Diesel just isn't all that much better than a turbo gas engine.
Why put up with extra NOx and particulates (depending on the car you compare to) to save such a small amount of CO2? Just get a gas hybrid and do better all around. Or a plug-in hybrid like the Volt where you can do most of your driving burning no liquid fuel at all?
Or even better, have a plug in diesel hybrid, where you can trundle round town on the battery and so not emit NOx in built up areas (where NOx emissions matter) then fire up the diesel for extended journeys on open roads where NOx matters less.
Diesel engines are just more efficient than even turbo gasoline engines, largely due to not being throttled and being lean burn. At low loads (which is probably where engines spend most of their time) diesels have
Re: (Score:1)
Comparable VW petrol engines, in terms of power and very close torque, produce less co2, mostly because a petrol engine can be lower displacement.
What? Who told you that? That is literally the opposite of the truth. For about the same level of driving experience (less power, more torque, make it less immediate but more relentless) you have a much smaller engine. OR, and this is a bit hilarious, you build a gasoline engine with all the drawbacks of a diesel (AKA direct injected gasoline) but without the benefit of being able to run on diesel fuel.
Once you no longer ignore the carbon in the diesel soot, diesel stops looking good,
False, ignoramus [slashdot.org]. In fact, once you no longer ignore the almost-entirely-PM2.5-and-thus-most-carcinogenic
Oh noes, I called him an ignoramus (Score:2)
But if you want Slashdot to be full of more ignorant bullshit, you're an asshole
Re: (Score:2)
Gift (Score:1)
Without reading even yhe summary.... This whole emissions-cheating circus couldn't have worked out better if Elon Musk had organised the whole thing himself.
Is the testing equipment open-source? (Score:2)
Why is it that nobody is demanding to see the schematics and source-code to the testing equipment for verification of its accuracy? If VW can cheat, then it follows that the testing agency, which does have motive and more than one, could fake the test results too.
People showing real colours (Score:2)
It's saddening to see people not giving a **** about anyone's health including their own, they'd rather save a few cents per week and poison people to death.
idiots at the wheel (Score:1)
And, if there was no DMCA, we wouldn't be having this conversation...
the "Fix" would have been spotted long ago.
The EPA should have seen this right away...
But as my father used to say, "If you can't get a Real Job, then you go to work for the government."