Apparently Volkswagen/Audi cheated on the USA emissions tests since
2009 to 2015 by turning off the EGR to lower nitrogen oxide emissions
ONLY when the car was being tested for emissions.

REFERENCES:
http://blog.ucsusa.org/volkswagen-ca...cle-recall-887
http://www.engineering.com/AdvancedM...EPA-Tests.aspx
http://hothardware.com/news/vw-inten...-482k-vehicles
etc.

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm
wrote:

Apparently Volkswagen/Audi cheated on the USA emissions tests since
2009 to 2015 by turning off the EGR to lower nitrogen oxide emissions
ONLY when the car was being tested for emissions.

REFERENCES:
http://blog.ucsusa.org/volkswagen-ca...cle-recall-887
http://www.engineering.com/AdvancedM...EPA-Tests.aspx
http://hothardware.com/news/vw-inten...-482k-vehicles
etc.

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

My guess is that anytime something was connected to the diagnostic
connector the car turned on all the emissions systems. I know that
here in AZ they have been doing the emissions test for cars for quite
a few years now by plugging into the diagnostic connector and reading
the computer looking for pending codes that haven't turned on the CEL.
If you have more then a couple pending codes you fail. My PT is a
2009 model and it's always been tested that way so the time frame is
certainly doable.

On 9/18/2015 8:19 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
Apparently Volkswagen/Audi cheated on the USA emissions tests since
2009 to 2015 by turning off the EGR to lower nitrogen oxide emissions
ONLY when the car was being tested for emissions.

REFERENCES:
http://blog.ucsusa.org/volkswagen-ca...cle-recall-887
http://www.engineering.com/AdvancedM...EPA-Tests.aspx
http://hothardware.com/news/vw-inten...-482k-vehicles
etc.

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?


I found that interesting for two things. I assume the car's computer
knows an instrument is plugged in so it changes the program.

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?

On 9/18/2015 9:42 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?

Will you have any choice?
If the test procedure for those cars is changed to test the "real"
emissions, they will FAIL.
If you care about air quality, you have to do that.
Here in Oregon, you don't get your license plates renewed if you fail.

You want VW to FIX the problem consistently with the
original driveablilty and economy.
Since that's likely not possible, what do you do now?
Force them to replace the whole car?

Fix the emissions by reprogramming the computer
(Let the air quality test people enforce owner compliance.
Maybe require a recall complete document. Maybe require
VW to supply a zillion adapters to make the tests right.)
AND
refund the owner the current (pre-disclosure)
bluebook value of the vehicle...let that be the fine and paid to
the people actually financially harmed? That sounds like a simple
solution that puts the cash where it's needed and fixes the emissions
and hits VW where it hurts. No fuss, no muss, no new laws, just
enforce the existing ones.
It's a win-win...except for VW.

OR we could just
Fine them billions and fritter it away wherever such fines
are frittered?

Do nothing and get a better gas mask?

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:12:53 -0500, mike wrote:

On 9/18/2015 9:42 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their
cars?

Will you have any choice?
If the test procedure for those cars is changed to test the "real"
emissions, they will FAIL.
If you care about air quality, you have to do that.
Here in Oregon, you don't get your license plates renewed if you fail.

Some cut.

Some states, like Nebraska, do no testing. We had some testing
for horns, lights, etc. back in the 70s, but dropped it. I think
the testers hollered too loud about the low testing fee allowed.
I wonder how many of the non-compliant vehicles will end up in
states with no testing.

--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On 9/19/2015 8:40 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:12:53 -0500, mike wrote:

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their
cars?

Will you have any choice?
If the test procedure for those cars is changed to test the "real"
emissions, they will FAIL.
If you care about air quality, you have to do that.
Here in Oregon, you don't get your license plates renewed if you fail.

Some cut.

Some states, like Nebraska, do no testing. We had some testing
for horns, lights, etc. back in the 70s, but dropped it. I think
the testers hollered too loud about the low testing fee allowed.
I wonder how many of the non-compliant vehicles will end up in
states with no testing.

Passenger car testing of any type has ALWAYS been a scam
and is enacted for generating revenue. Nothing more, nothing
less. "Unsafe" cars have NEVER been a significant proximate
cause of accidents nor does smog testing of these vehicles
lead to measurably cleaner air. These two concerns are best
addressed at time of manufacture.

On 9/19/2015 9:40 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:12:53 -0500, mike wrote:

On 9/18/2015 9:42 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their
cars?

Will you have any choice?
If the test procedure for those cars is changed to test the "real"
emissions, they will FAIL.
If you care about air quality, you have to do that.
Here in Oregon, you don't get your license plates renewed if you fail.

Some cut.

Some states, like Nebraska, do no testing. We had some testing
for horns, lights, etc. back in the 70s, but dropped it. I think
the testers hollered too loud about the low testing fee allowed.
I wonder how many of the non-compliant vehicles will end up in
states with no testing.


They test here in DE but plug into the computer to do it, not just sniff
the tail pipe. Would guess our computer would be fooled too.
Testing is also static without running load which I would assume EPA did.

On 9/19/2015 9:36 AM, . wrote:
On 9/19/2015 8:40 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:12:53 -0500, mike wrote:

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their
cars?

Will you have any choice?
If the test procedure for those cars is changed to test the "real"
emissions, they will FAIL.
If you care about air quality, you have to do that.
Here in Oregon, you don't get your license plates renewed if you fail.

Some cut.

Some states, like Nebraska, do no testing. We had some testing
for horns, lights, etc. back in the 70s, but dropped it. I think
the testers hollered too loud about the low testing fee allowed.
I wonder how many of the non-compliant vehicles will end up in
states with no testing.

Passenger car testing of any type has ALWAYS been a scam
and is enacted for generating revenue. Nothing more, nothing
less. "Unsafe" cars have NEVER been a significant proximate
cause of accidents nor does smog testing of these vehicles
lead to measurably cleaner air. These two concerns are best
addressed at time of manufacture.

The VW case is a conspicuous textbook example of how and why
emissions testing is a doomed to failure approach similar to solving
drug abuse by arresting individual users. As even the admitted guilty
party have undeniably exposed, emissions control MUST be properly
addressed at the point of manufacture.

mike posted for all of us...


OR we could just
Fine them billions and fritter it away wherever such fines
are frittered?


Just like all the fines imposed on Co's and people. Found money for the
gov't. Like the tobacco Co's the states get all this money and what exactly
do they do with it. If education is it having an impact? Should be for the
medical costs. Instead that is spread amongst the ratepayers or taxpayers
through third party payers. How to fix IDK...

--
Tekkie

On 9/19/15 08:12, mike wrote:
On 9/18/2015 9:42 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?

Will you have any choice?
If the test procedure for those cars is changed to test the "real"
emissions, they will FAIL.
If you care about air quality, you have to do that.
Here in Oregon, you don't get your license plates renewed if you fail.

You want VW to FIX the problem consistently with the
original driveablilty and economy.
Since that's likely not possible, what do you do now?
Force them to replace the whole car?

Yeah. Do a buyback and sell them where it's bloody hot
3rd world countries in africa and asia would rejoice
(australians would too I'm sure)

On 9/19/2015 12:42 AM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?


I'm likely mistaken, but my gut sense is that lower emissions
means lower performance, and lower mileage. My guess is that
the "fix" will be a downgrade of some kind.

-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 08:25:23 -0400, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 9/19/2015 12:42 AM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?


I'm likely mistaken, but my gut sense is that lower emissions
means lower performance, and lower mileage. My guess is that
the "fix" will be a downgrade of some kind.

Then how do you explain the FACT that todays engines -
1)produce higher spedific output than engines in the past
2) Consume fewer gallons of gas per unit distance travelled
AND
3) produce lower exhaut emissions

-than the engines of only a few years back - muchless the
"uncontrolled" engines of the 50s and 60s, and the early emission
engines of the 70s and 80s?

VW will just have to step up to the plate and spend in retrofits what
they should have spent in initial design and production - plus.

-
.
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
. www.lds.org
.
.

wrote:

Then how do you explain the FACT that todays engines -
1)produce higher spedific output than engines in the past
2) Consume fewer gallons of gas per unit distance travelled
AND
3) produce lower exhaut emissions

-than the engines of only a few years back - muchless the
"uncontrolled" engines of the 50s and 60s, and the early emission
engines of the 70s and 80s?

This is almost entirely the result of fuel injection combined with
accurate feedback control. Feedback control makes a huge improvement
in the efficiency of the engine and that means both lower emissions
and more power.

And, it's true that it took the emission control regulations to force
the car manufacturers to start thinking out of the box at new ideas to
try and improve efficiency back in the seventies. Had it not been for
the emission control regulations, we might never have got the engine
improvements that make engines so much more efficiency today.

BUT, it's true that many of the other tricks used to get emissions
numbers down have been at the expense of performance, and many of them
have been just plain attempts to game the system.

There is a very longstanding tradition of gaming the system, dating back
to air pumps back in the seventies which did in fact improve the efficiency
of early catalytic converters, but mostly just diluted the exhaust so that
the concentration of emissions was reduced. The actual amount of emission
was the same, but the numbers recorded at the smog station were lower.

This current attempt on VW's part is not something new in isolation, this
is part of a tradition going back forty years now. It shouldn't surprise
anyone, and it's certainly not anything specific to VW.

VW will just have to step up to the plate and spend in retrofits what
they should have spent in initial design and production - plus.

Odds are that instead they will take the route of just leaving the
controller in "low emissions" mode all the time, which probably will
affect performance. Part of how that will work out will depend on what
they were actually doing to bring the numbers down, and we don't know that
without actually measuring it or looking at the controller source.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

wrote:

VW will just have to step up to the plate and spend in retrofits what
they should have spent in initial design and production - plus.


And the resulting diesels may be a lot less desired.

The diesel differences between testing and reality are not a new thing.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/...y-diesels.html

posted for all of us...


Then how do you explain the FACT that todays engines -
1)produce higher spedific output than engines in the past
2) Consume fewer gallons of gas per unit distance travelled
AND
3) produce lower exhaut emissions

-than the engines of only a few years back - muchless the
"uncontrolled" engines of the 50s and 60s, and the early emission
engines of the 70s and 80s?

VW will just have to step up to the plate and spend in retrofits what
they should have spent in initial design and production - plus.


Wise business decision... Why do they do this? It would be a great subject
of an independent analysis. Weren't they owned by Chrysler at the start of
this?

--
Tekkie

On 9/19/15 15:25, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 9/19/2015 12:42 AM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?


I'm likely mistaken, but my gut sense is that lower emissions
means lower performance, and lower mileage. My guess is that
the "fix" will be a downgrade of some kind.


The proper fix would be to buy the cars back from the (willing) owners
at bluebook and sell them to the (3rd world) countries that do not
participate in the smear campaign against VAG and could not care less
about the emissions.
An even more proper fix would be for VAG to withdraw from the american
market altogether.
There are lots of other markets where you do not have to make
emissions claims at all and that would appreciate the 4 banger
[turbo]diesels from VAG

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:42:00 +0000, Ewald Böhm wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their
cars?

Possibly the insurance companies might deny liability for any claims if
the car has not been maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's
recommendations? They're well known for trying any get-outs they can and
the courts generally find in favour of them due to the doctrine of
'utmost good faith' which applies to insurance contracts.

On 9/19/2015 9:17 AM, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their
cars?

Possibly the insurance companies might deny liability for any claims if
the car has not been maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's
recommendations? They're well known for trying any get-outs they can and
the courts generally find in favour of them due to the doctrine of
'utmost good faith' which applies to insurance contracts.


Do you know of any claims denied because the owner did not get an oil
change? Dirty air filter?

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 10:45:01 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 9/19/2015 9:17 AM, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their
cars?

Possibly the insurance companies might deny liability for any claims if
the car has not been maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's
recommendations? They're well known for trying any get-outs they can and
the courts generally find in favour of them due to the doctrine of
'utmost good faith' which applies to insurance contracts.


Do you know of any claims denied because the owner did not get an oil
change? Dirty air filter?
Not even for driving in the winter with bald summer tires. The
insurance company HAS to pay up - but they can make it EXTREMELY
difficult to afford insurance in the future - - - - - - - - - - -

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 10:45:01 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Do you know of any claims denied because the owner did not get an oil
change? Dirty air filter?

Sorry, I should have mentioned that the position I set out is that under
English law and other jurisdictions will no doubt differ.

On 9/19/2015 12:42 AM, Ewald Böhm wrote:


If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?


You can feel good that the spotted owl is not choking on your fumes.
The only way to force you to get the fix is if the car will no longer
pass unless it was done. I don't know if the eqipment doing th testing
will be able to tell.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 9/19/2015 12:42 AM, Ewald Böhm wrote:

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?


You can feel good that the spotted owl is not choking on your fumes.
The only way to force you to get the fix is if the car will no longer
pass unless it was done. I don't know if the eqipment doing th testing
will be able to tell.

Sure will. You have to enter the VIN into the system to start the
inspection. IF the EPA requires a recall to reflash the ECM to remove
that software and "correct" the problem, that would have to be done at a
dealer. They will track completed vehicles by VIN. The state can just
flag ALL those vehicles. You pull in, they plug in the tester, and your
VIN doesn't show on the "recall complete" list. You don't get inspected.

That has happened before for other recalls. I'm betting the fix will be
to re-flash the ECM software to remove the "switch". Then run each one
through the full EPA test regardless of registration state. That because
this if a federal law that was broken.

What will be fun will be watching all the johnny racer types who
modified the cars by removing emissions gear and "tuning" the ECM. VW
could actually show them to the EPA and say "THEY removed the systems so
they should pay a fine as well".

--
Steve W.

On 9/19/2015 11:12 AM, Steve W. wrote:

Sure will. You have to enter the VIN into the system to start the
inspection. IF the EPA requires a recall to reflash the ECM to remove
that software and "correct" the problem, that would have to be done at a
dealer. They will track completed vehicles by VIN. The state can just
flag ALL those vehicles. You pull in, they plug in the tester, and your
VIN doesn't show on the "recall complete" list. You don't get inspected.

That has happened before for other recalls. I'm betting the fix will be
to re-flash the ECM software to remove the "switch". Then run each one
through the full EPA test regardless of registration state. That because
this if a federal law that was broken.

What will be fun will be watching all the johnny racer types who
modified the cars by removing emissions gear and "tuning" the ECM. VW
could actually show them to the EPA and say "THEY removed the systems so
they should pay a fine as well".

When has the EPA ever gone after individual passenger car vehicle owners?

On 9/19/2015 12:12 PM, Steve W. wrote:

I don't know if the equipment doing the testing
will be able to tell.

Sure will. You have to enter the VIN into the system to start the
inspection. IF the EPA requires a recall to reflash the ECM to remove
that software and "correct" the problem, that would have to be done at a
dealer. They will track completed vehicles by VIN.

Ahhh, that will do it. The spotted owl breaths easier.

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 12:12:41 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 9/19/2015 12:42 AM, Ewald Böhm wrote:

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?


You can feel good that the spotted owl is not choking on your fumes.
The only way to force you to get the fix is if the car will no longer
pass unless it was done. I don't know if the eqipment doing th testing
will be able to tell.

Sure will. You have to enter the VIN into the system to start the
inspection.
Not any more. The ECU is linked to the VIN, and the OBD2 tester reads
the VIN directly from the ECU

IF the EPA requires a recall to reflash the ECM to remove
that software and "correct" the problem, that would have to be done at a
dealer. They will track completed vehicles by VIN. The state can just
flag ALL those vehicles. You pull in, they plug in the tester, and your
VIN doesn't show on the "recall complete" list. You don't get inspected.

That has happened before for other recalls. I'm betting the fix will be
to re-flash the ECM software to remove the "switch". Then run each one
through the full EPA test regardless of registration state. That because
this if a federal law that was broken.

What will be fun will be watching all the johnny racer types who
modified the cars by removing emissions gear and "tuning" the ECM. VW
could actually show them to the EPA and say "THEY removed the systems so
they should pay a fine as well".

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:42:00 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

May not be able to pass emmissions next year if the recall is not
done.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

The "fix" may be a lot more involved than removing the "over-ride"
code.
It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

I hope they don't follow the Microsoft Windows 10 model, where upgrades
and patches will be installed automatically no matter what you do.

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:42:00 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?

I'm pretty sure VW will be required to put some kind of "code" in
their "fixed" system's computer. If you don't get it fixed they will
know at the inspection station that it's not fixed and will fail you.

In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:42:00 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?

Only with half of what you say. They will do t he same on the
emissions test, and continue to pass unless something is broken.

But yes, that means they'll get lower mileage, not just during the test.

Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their cars?

VW should pay them for the extra gas they will have to buy, and pay them
for the time it takes to go to the gas station and get it.

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I assume the car's computer
knows an instrument is plugged in so it changes the program.

Very few states use OBD emissions testing, and certainly California
doesn't yet, where California is fining VW along with the EPA.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/smogche...bd_only_im.pdf

Most use tailpipe testing.

Some, like California, run the car through the Federal Test Procedure
on a dynomometer.

Given thats at least three different procedures (where each state can
easily be different), I don't see *how* the engine computer *knows* it's
being tested for emissions.

Since almost no states use the OBD method, that's why I asked how the car
knows it is being tested.

Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I assume the car's computer
knows an instrument is plugged in so it changes the program.

Very few states use OBD emissions testing, and certainly California
doesn't yet, where California is fining VW along with the EPA.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/smogche...bd_only_im.pdf

Most use tailpipe testing.

Some, like California, run the car through the Federal Test Procedure
on a dynomometer.

Given thats at least three different procedures (where each state can
easily be different), I don't see *how* the engine computer *knows* it's
being tested for emissions.

Since almost no states use the OBD method, that's why I asked how the car
knows it is being tested.


How do you figure that "almost no states use OBD" testing. In fact most
of the states do not use a dyno any longer.

Alaska, Arizona, California (in areas that require "enhanced" emissions
testing), Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky,
Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri (St. Louis), Nevada, New Hampshire, North
Carolina, Oregon, Texas (Houston and Dallas/Ft. Worth), Utah (Salt Lake
City), Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin, New Jersey, New York (in areas
that require emissions testing), Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh and
Philadelphia) and Virginia ALL use some type of OBD II testing, some use
both OBD II and tailpipe.

As to how it knows it's being tested. Simple, as soon as the OBD test
link gets plugged into the port it starts asking the ECM which protocol
it communicates with. Emissions testing uses a specific test protocol,
that doesn't query ALL of the systems on the vehicle. Easy enough to
tell the ECM - When this protocol is queried activate this programming.

No different than the way software is set up in some cars to change the
driving parameters based on different "modes" or valet keys or key fob type.


--
Steve W.

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 05:30:45 -0400, Steve W. wrote:

How do you figure that "almost no states use OBD" testing. In fact most
of the states do not use a dyno any longer.

I just had mine tested, in California, and they used a dyno.
No OBD hookup whatsoever.

On 9/19/2015 10:51 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 05:30:45 -0400, Steve W. wrote:

How do you figure that "almost no states use OBD" testing. In fact most
of the states do not use a dyno any longer.

I just had mine tested, in California, and they used a dyno.
No OBD hookup whatsoever.

How did they check for pending codes if they did not use a code scanner?
You can't pass with more than two pending codes (one on some years).

That shop would be shut down by the state if it was found that they were
passing cars without checking for pending codes.

Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I assume the car's computer
knows an instrument is plugged in so it changes the program.

Very few states use OBD emissions testing, and certainly California
doesn't yet, where California is fining VW along with the EPA.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/smogche...bd_only_im.pdf

Most use tailpipe testing.

Some, like California, run the car through the Federal Test Procedure
on a dynomometer.

Given thats at least three different procedures (where each state can
easily be different), I don't see *how* the engine computer *knows* it's
being tested for emissions.

Since almost no states use the OBD method, that's why I asked how the car
knows it is being tested.



http://obdclearinghouse.com/index.php

--
Steve W.

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:45:38 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I assume the car's computer
knows an instrument is plugged in so it changes the program.

Very few states use OBD emissions testing, and certainly California
doesn't yet, where California is fining VW along with the EPA.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/smogche...bd_only_im.pdf

Most use tailpipe testing.

Some, like California, run the car through the Federal Test Procedure
on a dynomometer.

Given thats at least three different procedures (where each state can
easily be different), I don't see *how* the engine computer *knows* it's
being tested for emissions.

Since almost no states use the OBD method, that's why I asked how the car
knows it is being tested.
Don't know how other jurisdictions do it, but in Ontario the old
"drive clean" test was a "rolling road" sniffer test at two speeds,
with the car connected to the computer via the diagnostic port, but
not accessing discrete codes.

The new system does away with both the "rolling road" and the sniffer,
meaning it can only "guess" or "deduce" if the NOX is within range -
it cannot tell if the reduction catalyst is working because only the
oxidizing catalyst is monitored by the secondary O2 sensor.

It is POSSIBLE that VW implements the "over-ride" whenever a certain
sequence of events is performed that are substantially the same as the
initialization procedure for running the test (There is a perscribed
sequence of events that MUST be performed to get a valid test result)
(like 20 many seconds at a particular RPM, followed by another given
period of time at another RPM) which, if performed during the normal
process of driving would also put the system in "bypass" for the
anticipated duration of the test.

In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:45:38 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I assume the car's computer
knows an instrument is plugged in so it changes the program.

Very few states use OBD emissions testing, and certainly California
doesn't yet, where California is fining VW along with the EPA.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/smogche...bd_only_im.pdf

Most use tailpipe testing.

Some, like California, run the car through the Federal Test Procedure
on a dynomometer.

Given thats at least three different procedures (where each state can
easily be different), I don't see *how* the engine computer *knows* it's
being tested for emissions.

Since almost no states use the OBD method, that's why I asked how the car
knows it is being tested.

Maryland used OBD on cars new enough. That includes my 2000 car, but I
don't think included my 1995 car.

(For the 1995 it used the dynamometer and tailpipe stick) I think when
I turn 70, if I don't drive too much, I won't have to be tested. Or
my car.

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 03:46:05 -0400, micky
wrote:

In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:45:38 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I assume the car's computer
knows an instrument is plugged in so it changes the program.

Very few states use OBD emissions testing, and certainly California
doesn't yet, where California is fining VW along with the EPA.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/smogche...bd_only_im.pdf

Most use tailpipe testing.

Some, like California, run the car through the Federal Test Procedure
on a dynomometer.

Given thats at least three different procedures (where each state can
easily be different), I don't see *how* the engine computer *knows* it's
being tested for emissions.

Since almost no states use the OBD method, that's why I asked how the car
knows it is being tested.

Maryland used OBD on cars new enough. That includes my 2000 car, but I
don't think included my 1995 car.

(For the 1995 it used the dynamometer and tailpipe stick) I think when
I turn 70, if I don't drive too much, I won't have to be tested. Or
my car.
Officially, all cars 1996 and newer must be OBD2 compliant, but most
jurisdictions using OBD2 for E-Testing only start at 1997 models
because some 1996 models were not fully compliant. Only a very few
1995 vehicles had OBD2 capability as 1995 was "pre-standard"

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:08:01 -0400, wrote:

Officially, all cars 1996 and newer must be OBD2 compliant, but most
jurisdictions using OBD2 for E-Testing only start at 1997 models
because some 1996 models were not fully compliant. Only a very few
1995 vehicles had OBD2 capability as 1995 was "pre-standard"

This article says the whole TDI Clean Diesel campaign is a fraud.
I don't drive a diesel.

What was the "TDI Clean Diesel" campaign anyway?

In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski
wrote:

On 9/18/2015 8:19 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
Apparently Volkswagen/Audi cheated on the USA emissions tests since
2009 to 2015 by turning off the EGR to lower nitrogen oxide emissions
ONLY when the car was being tested for emissions.

REFERENCES:
http://blog.ucsusa.org/volkswagen-ca...cle-recall-887
http://www.engineering.com/AdvancedM...EPA-Tests.aspx
http://hothardware.com/news/vw-inten...-482k-vehicles
etc.

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?


I found that interesting for two things. I assume the car's computer
knows an instrument is plugged in so it changes the program.

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

Many corporations have no morals these days, and like most criminals,
they think they won't get caught. Do you remember Bank of America,
how when it got several checks whose total exceeded the money in
someone's checking account, regardelss of the order they came in, they
would process the biggest ones first, so as to empty the checking
account so that all the little checks bounced, giving them as much
insufficient funds fees as possible. That was outright stealing by the
Bank of America. They only changed because the government caught them
and made them.

I had occasion to be in a Wells Fargo branch, and I was telling the bank
officer why I despised Bank of America and he was telling me I should
change to Wells Fargo, and 6 months later, 2 or 3 years afer the
incident with Bank of Am. and I reed in the paper that Wells Fargo is
doing the same thing, and they didn't even stop after Bank of Am got
caught. They are also thieves and if they don't steal more often, it's
because they think they'll get caught, not because those in charge have
any morals.