VW firmware engineers morally bankrupt??

[SL4P]

What is the point in setting pollution standards for cars if everyone wipes their ass on those standards ?

This is called 'the race to the bottom'.

Why stop at car companies, how about public utilities, governments, education providers, food suppliers... virtually every level of a market driven economy!
Don't imagine for a moment that competitive business in any industry relies on the paricipants 'playing by the rules'.  They play for profit - bugger anything else that gets in the way.

Assuming a null difference... If you can imagine a company that might achieve greater market share, offset by reduced profitability for an extended period... which would they take?
Follow the money.

[Marco]

If they have to pay 18 billion I dare say there was no profit in it.

[SeanB]

The current revisions that came in 18 months or so ago, now allow the speedometer to be up to 21% low, this is actually best seen in great wall utes, the speed will read 100km when only travelling at about 82kmph, i've since fitted electronic ration boxes to about 15 of the things,

GWM, locally known as the upside down Toyota. Locally not known for reliability, there have been quite a few that had drive shafts fall off them, because the bolts used were so poor quality. Add to that the rather hit and miss build quality and the expensive spares.

[IanB]

Speedometers already cheat. Usually they show about 8% less. Interestingly the speed you can read from the ECU is more accurate so the -8% is deliberate!

Not all of them. I have compared mine with those roadside "Your Speed" warning signs and also with GPS measurements. As far as I can tell from these comparisons my speedometer is accurate.

[Augustus]

Speedometers in the EU are only allowed to show ~10% more, never one single km/h less than the actual speed. It's the law. And that takes into account any allowed aftermarket tire/rim combo you may throw onto your car. So, yes, they show deliberately more, just to be on the safe side. And for the Tesla guys who preach morale from a higher ground, lets wait until their company gets some really stiff competition and see if they don't feel any need to cut some corners in order to stay competitive... 

[bitwelder]

Where is RMS when you need him?! Open source the damn thing! 

[Dr. Frank]

Speedometers in the EU are only allowed to show ~10% more, never one single km/h less than the actual speed. It's the law. And that takes into account any allowed aftermarket tire/rim combo you may throw onto your car. So, yes, they show deliberately more, just to be on the safe side....

That's still not fully correct, see ECE R39:2011-06-07 for approval of vehicles' speed measurement.
Speedometers shall never display less  than the actual speed, but not more than (+10% +4km/h) of the actual speed.

Example: While driving at 50km/h actual speed, the speedometer would be allowed to display between 50km/h and 59km/h.

As there are deviations in series production of the tyres and also the speedometer itself, the car manufacturers usually define a characteristic for the speedometer / cluster instrument, that let it always display at least a few km/h more than the actual speed. (But not more than these 4km/h +10%)

Frank

[nctnico]

Speedometers already cheat. Usually they show about 8% less. Interestingly the speed you can read from the ECU is more accurate so the -8% is deliberate!

Not all of them. I have compared mine with those roadside "Your Speed" warning signs and also with GPS measurements. As far as I can tell from these comparisons my speedometer is accurate.

Those roadside speed warning signs are way too optimistic (some even show 60 when I pass with 50). The only way is to use GPS + cruise control on a straight road in order to 'calibrate' the speedometer. Actually I don't get why it should show more. It would be much better if the law says it has to be accurate within 1%. It is easy to adjust the ECU for a different tire diameter if necessary.

[cs.dk]

Those roadside speed warning signs are way too optimistic (some even show 60 when I pass with 50). The only way is to use GPS + cruise control on a straight road in order to 'calibrate' the speedometer. Actually I don't get why it should show more. It would be much better if the law says it has to be accurate within 1%. It is easy to adjust the ECU for a different tire diameter if necessary.

Not if people change their tires in the garage, and don't own a tester. +/- 5% in tire circumference is legal here in Denmark. 
I can adjust tiresize in the ECU on my Citroën C5, don't know what the function does however.

[SeanB]

Roadside speed warning is designed to slow down the motorists, so will deliberately be set to display a higher speed than actual. Even a GPS is not too accurate at instantaneous speed, it will have errors in it due to drif of the calculated position. Only accurate one is a laser or radar doppler module operating against the surrounding scenery, or a calibrated towed wheel to get instantaneous speed.

[BradC]

Roadside speed warning is designed to slow down the motorists, so will deliberately be set to display a higher speed than actual. Even a GPS is not too accurate at instantaneous speed, it will have errors in it due to drif of the calculated position. Only accurate one is a laser or radar doppler module operating against the surrounding scenery, or a calibrated towed wheel to get instantaneous speed.

Or a timed distance on flat ground. We used to calibrate the rally computers on a measured distance. You knew if the odometer was properly accurate the speed was too.

[Rerouter]

That is only the case on rally computers, on almost all of the vehicles that show faster than there true speed the odometer shows correctly, Inface many VW cars have 3 settings in the cluster one for the impulse per km of the speedometer, and one for the odometer, and then a displayed vs actual speed mapping for the pointer,

Its been much harder to find it, but i can say visteon made clusters have something similar,

[rob77]

btw.. i'm curious how did they measure teh 40x increase in emissions if the ECU is detecting the dyno did they tow the emission measurement station behind the car ?
and why only VW ? they should have a look at ALL car manufacturers if the pollution is the concern (i'm pretty sure everyone is doing the same because the laws of physic are the same for everyone)... unless they investigate all the car manufacturers (including GM) it looks like a stupid attack aimed at VW.

and furthermore... if the air pollution is the real concern - then the US government should rather focus on local industries - use electric traction on railways instead of diesel, steer away from coal based electricity...etc...

[0xdeadbeef]

I have a theory too that manufacturers will only ever just meet the expectations set by the government.  Why bother to exceed them? That will only make it harder when you have to hit your next milestone set by the government.
If you could make your cars 50% more efficient, would you do it now, or do it over the course of the next 5 to 10 required improvement cycles?

Now really, that's a tinfoil hat theory. If it was easily possible to fulfill all regulations and customer expectations, there wouldn't be the need for trickery.
And how should this holding back of innovations work with all the competition between suppliers on the on hand and manufacturers on the other?

[0xdeadbeef]

btw.. i'm curious how did they measure teh 40x increase in emissions if the ECU is detecting the dyno did they tow the emission measurement station behind the car ?
and why only VW ? they should have a look at ALL car manufacturers if the pollution is the concern (i'm pretty sure everyone is doing the same because the laws of physic are the same for everyone)... unless they investigate all the car manufacturers (including GM) it looks like a stupid attack aimed at VW.

I guess it's the question how the dyno detection is implemented. There were known silly approaches like checking the hood switch in the past (because the test was known to be executed with open hood). Also using the wheel speed sensors or the driver detection is an option.
You would assume though that in the meantime, there are more clever methods that are not so easily identified as cheating. Like using specific calibration for certain load situations.
As I said: the problem is that most probably everybody is cheating but obviously the methods differ, so if you change the testing setup just a bit, some approaches will fail and others won't.

[wreeve]

The Lotus Carlton (UK super car) had this sort of fakery in it’s firmware over 25 years ago. A timer which gave you full turbo boost after the car has been first switched on / stationary for a while (can’t remember the specifics). Basically it allowed for headline 0-60 times and magazine testing but it meant the owners couldn’t match those figures in the real world (which would probably have broken the car!). So to get full power out of a bend you had to lock the rear wheels (speed sensor) and cycle the ignition and you were good to go…..that was before the ECU was hacked of course!

[Mechanical Menace]

Apples and oranges. Your examples are against the interest of the car buyer.  VW here provides better performance.

VAG are are providing lower MPG and higher pollutants at that performance level than they are advertising. They're conning their customers and making the rest of us pay with our health. You're basically arguing that tobacco companies should of been able to carry on covering up the known risks of smoking because smokers liked to smoke wherever they wanted to and liked to believe it did them no harm.

[SeanB]

If VW are doing it then all manufacturers are doing it. So either the US will have to revise the law or recall all vehicles from all manufacturers and make them compliant all the time.  Will basically mean no more new vehicles sold in California, though there will be a lot of out of state vehicles there though.

Just like here in SA, where there are some restrictions against import of used vehicles, they have to be made compliant with SA standards. So, simple solution is to transship them through on a car carrier, or stacked 4 up in a container, to a neighbouring country, then register them where it is lax, and drive them back here. Only thing you have to do is drive through the border once every few weeks, get the paperers stamped and drive back. no worry about fines, unless you have accumulated enough that customs puts the vehicle on a list, and even that is easy to overcome with the appropriate provision of something for "thirst".

Why else would you have a showroom, glass windows and salespeople on the floor, when you cannot drive the vehicle off the pavement legally.

[rob77]

and making the rest of us pay with our health.

and you can say we're paying with our health for the coal produced electricity - those coal power plants are producing orders of magnitude more NOx per burnt fuel compared to cars. (and let's not forget about Sulfur - no-one is removing sulfur from coal ! they burn the coal as it is !)
and let's not forget - any new regulation is useless as long as old cars (and mainly old trucks) are still on roads.

"paying with our health" in this case (VW cheating) is a propaganda BS.... unless all industries are clean and there are no more old truck on the roads... sorry but that's the reality.

[Mechanical Menace]

and making the rest of us pay with our health.

and you can say we're paying with our health for the coal produced electricity - those coal power plants are producing orders of magnitude more NOx per burnt fuel compared to cars.

Yup. But to a much lower degree due to the locations and extra filtration coal, gas, oil, and even trash burning power stations need. Well unless you're in some total backwater that makes even the UK look modern :/ And definitely less per watt than a car without even taking those into account just due to the greater efficiencies. The average person only uses 3kw/h of electricity a day anyhows, how far would that get you in car?

"paying with our health" in this case (VW cheating) is a propaganda BS.... unless all industries are clean and there are no more old truck on the roads... sorry but that's the reality.

So if you're not fixing everything all at once it's best to do nothing? Don't try and minimise the risk just allow a free for all because we can't make it perfect? Why are you even bothering breathing then? You'll never fix any problem with one big stroke so given your logic you might as well just give up and die...

The reality is you can't make new laws apply to old vehicles, but new vehicles can be safer, cleaner, more efficient etc. In exactly the same way some classic consoles or computers had much more shielding added part way through their lifespan to comply with new regulations. You can't reasonably ban the old ones (and in some countries such retroactive legislation is not just difficult and politically risky but straight up illegal) but can make sure new ones are compliant. And in the long run the older ones will be replaced or only about in very small numbers due to enthusiasts keeping them going.

I've also not seen a commercial vehicle on the road older than 7 years old ever, and only rarely anything older than 5, so the truck argument is load of BS propaganda as you put it.

[fcb]

Apples and oranges. Your examples are against the interest of the car buyer.  VW here provides better performance.

VAG are are providing lower MPG and higher pollutants at that performance level than they're are advertising. They're conning their customers and making the rest of us pay with our health. You're basically arguing that tobacco companies should of been able to carry on covering up the known risks of smoking because smokers liked to smoke wherever they wanted to and liked to believe it did them no harm.

^^Quite agree.

If all the car companies are doing this (and that remains to be proved), then it will be quite a headache for the prosecuting authorities. However this doesn't mean they should be allowed to get away with it.

 

[SeanB]

Because the old UK vehicles get exported to other countries. Here there are a lot of HGV trucks that are 30 or 40 years old, and still running. We have hundreds of Leyland buses in daily use, though commercial vehicles over a certain mass, and those used to transport passengers for gain, have to have annual roadworthiness done.  Been quite a few cases where a vehicle fails at one centre then passes at another 400km way within an hour.

[fcb]

Because the old UK vehicles get exported to other countries. Here there are a lot of HGV trucks that are 30 or 40 years old, and still running. We have hundreds of Leyland buses in daily use, though commercial vehicles over a certain mass, and those used to transport passengers for gain, have to have annual roadworthiness done.  Been quite a few cases where a vehicle fails at one centre then passes at another 400km way within an hour.

Well you do drive quite fast over there...

[SeanB]

Not as fast as in Russia. Really good channel on YT Gazzliner........

[nctnico]

and making the rest of us pay with our health.

and you can say we're paying with our health for the coal produced electricity - those coal power plants are producing orders of magnitude more NOx per burnt fuel compared to cars.

Yup. But to a much lower degree due to the locations and extra filtration coal, gas, oil, and even trash burning power stations need.

And you really think that with filters those power stations are cleaner than a modern car? Owners of power plants have their emissions on (not at but on) the limit!