It might be difficult dealing with CARB. They answer to no one. If they disagree with VW then VW is done.
CARB rejects VW's proposal
- Thread starter HTSS_TR
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
It might be difficult dealing with CARB. They answer to no one. If they disagree with VW then VW is done.
I'd like to see businesses pull out of calif.
It might be difficult dealing with CARB. They answer to no one. If they disagree with VW then VW is done.
I'd like to see businesses pull out of calif.
If the ads that VW paid for, full page print ads, saying we have to earn your trust back..if that's not an admission of lying then I am one dumb bunny.
VW will, IMHO, never sell another diesel in California again. Electric, fuel cell, yes, but no diesels.
VW will, IMHO, never sell another diesel in California again. Electric, fuel cell, yes, but no diesels.
Originally Posted By: motor_oil_madman
Originally Posted By: javacontour
It reads like VW said "We'll fix them" and CARB was left wanting with respect to specifics.
Why don't they just pull out of California? lol That's the only state engines have to be carb compliant I think, maybe and a couple others.
yeah lets just give up 10% of the market....lol
Originally Posted By: javacontour
It reads like VW said "We'll fix them" and CARB was left wanting with respect to specifics.
Why don't they just pull out of California? lol That's the only state engines have to be carb compliant I think, maybe and a couple others.
yeah lets just give up 10% of the market....lol
Originally Posted By: KGMtech
If the ads that VW paid for, full page print ads, saying we have to earn your trust back..if that's not an admission of lying then I am one dumb bunny.
VW will, IMHO, never sell another diesel in California again. Electric, fuel cell, yes, but no diesels.
For a few years back in early 2000 there was no diesel engine from any European makers on sale in California. The CA emission law for diesel was so tough such that almost no one could meet it.
If the ads that VW paid for, full page print ads, saying we have to earn your trust back..if that's not an admission of lying then I am one dumb bunny.
VW will, IMHO, never sell another diesel in California again. Electric, fuel cell, yes, but no diesels.
For a few years back in early 2000 there was no diesel engine from any European makers on sale in California. The CA emission law for diesel was so tough such that almost no one could meet it.
Originally Posted By: spasm3
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
It might be difficult dealing with CARB. They answer to no one. If they disagree with VW then VW is done.
I'd like to see businesses pull out of calif.
A lot of businesses are doing just that. Governor Moonbeam is the head cheerleader for the campaign to eradicate corporations in California.
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
It might be difficult dealing with CARB. They answer to no one. If they disagree with VW then VW is done.
I'd like to see businesses pull out of calif.
A lot of businesses are doing just that. Governor Moonbeam is the head cheerleader for the campaign to eradicate corporations in California.
Quote:
But if you work for the company at a high level, the part that must really make you want to throw up is that working with CARB and the EPA is only step one. It hasn’t dealt with class action lawsuits, accusations of fraud, or criminal prosecutions yet. It cheated emissions tests all over the world, and regulators besides the EPA and CARB are going to come after the automaker. VW’s position going forward is the corporate equivalent of standing in front of a pitching machine—before it gets over the pain of one fastball to the chest, the next one’s on its way.
Quote:
“It’s sort of like a game of whack-a-mole. When they resolve a matter with one entity, they will likely face many additional investigations all driven by the same facts,” says Heaphy. “The company will try to resolve these investigations as coherently and collectively as possible, but they will have to be more transparent to achieve that goal.”
http://www.wired.com/2016/01/vw-may-not-be-trying-hard-enough-to-fix-those-diesels/
But if you work for the company at a high level, the part that must really make you want to throw up is that working with CARB and the EPA is only step one. It hasn’t dealt with class action lawsuits, accusations of fraud, or criminal prosecutions yet. It cheated emissions tests all over the world, and regulators besides the EPA and CARB are going to come after the automaker. VW’s position going forward is the corporate equivalent of standing in front of a pitching machine—before it gets over the pain of one fastball to the chest, the next one’s on its way.
Quote:
“It’s sort of like a game of whack-a-mole. When they resolve a matter with one entity, they will likely face many additional investigations all driven by the same facts,” says Heaphy. “The company will try to resolve these investigations as coherently and collectively as possible, but they will have to be more transparent to achieve that goal.”
http://www.wired.com/2016/01/vw-may-not-be-trying-hard-enough-to-fix-those-diesels/
Originally Posted By: MNgopher
Saw the same discussion that the VW CEO was trying to play this off as a misunderstanding. If that's the route VW is going to try to take on its way out from under this, yikes!
Comes across to me as being well, we just didn't understand Oops... Does anyone really believe that to be true?
Nuremberg trials all over again.
Saw the same discussion that the VW CEO was trying to play this off as a misunderstanding. If that's the route VW is going to try to take on its way out from under this, yikes!
Comes across to me as being well, we just didn't understand Oops... Does anyone really believe that to be true?
Nuremberg trials all over again.
Originally Posted By: eljefino
Yeah everyone wastes engineers' time and the company money by having them write code to put it in "treadmill/ certifying mode" if the rear ABS sensors see no movement.
To me, requiring a special mode, is just inviting trouble, much like EPA (and Environment Canada) fuel efficiency testing protocols. Obviously, they have to have a testing procedure of some sort. But, this happens in all kinds of automotive scenarios, from racing all the way to the most generic production vehicles. You create a very specific test, engineers will strive to pass that test, period. Unfortunately, there can be unintended consequences and even cheating.
Look at all the complaints about EPA fuel economy testing. Cars are designed to provide good fuel economy numbers for EPA testing procedures, not necessarily for real world driving.
Yeah everyone wastes engineers' time and the company money by having them write code to put it in "treadmill/ certifying mode" if the rear ABS sensors see no movement.
To me, requiring a special mode, is just inviting trouble, much like EPA (and Environment Canada) fuel efficiency testing protocols. Obviously, they have to have a testing procedure of some sort. But, this happens in all kinds of automotive scenarios, from racing all the way to the most generic production vehicles. You create a very specific test, engineers will strive to pass that test, period. Unfortunately, there can be unintended consequences and even cheating.
Look at all the complaints about EPA fuel economy testing. Cars are designed to provide good fuel economy numbers for EPA testing procedures, not necessarily for real world driving.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Look at all the complaints about EPA fuel economy testing. Cars are designed to provide good fuel economy numbers for EPA testing procedures, not necessarily for real world driving.
Yeah, and I hope no one realises that most cars are designed specifically to excel in the conditions used in standard crash tests as well.
Look at all the complaints about EPA fuel economy testing. Cars are designed to provide good fuel economy numbers for EPA testing procedures, not necessarily for real world driving.
Yeah, and I hope no one realises that most cars are designed specifically to excel in the conditions used in standard crash tests as well.
Originally Posted By: spasm3
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
It might be difficult dealing with CARB. They answer to no one. If they disagree with VW then VW is done.
I'd like to see businesses pull out of calif.
CARB is directly responsible for having clean air in California-in-spite of the fact there are double the amount of people (who all drive) than there was 50 years ago.
It's hard to visualize how bad the air was unless you grew up there.
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
It might be difficult dealing with CARB. They answer to no one. If they disagree with VW then VW is done.
I'd like to see businesses pull out of calif.
CARB is directly responsible for having clean air in California-in-spite of the fact there are double the amount of people (who all drive) than there was 50 years ago.
It's hard to visualize how bad the air was unless you grew up there.
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: spasm3
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
It might be difficult dealing with CARB. They answer to no one. If they disagree with VW then VW is done.
I'd like to see businesses pull out of calif.
CARB is directly responsible for having clean air in California-in-spite of the fact there are double the amount of people (who all drive) than there was 50 years ago.
It's hard to visualize how bad the air was unless you grew up there.
You could smell fresh air after a slight rain, which didn't happen often, in the late 70's early 80's.
Driving I5 North from San Diego early 80's I could see a brown dome cover Los Angeles city from 50 miles away. One time I saw a jet suddenly flew out of the brown dome, that tells you how dark the color was, and how bad was the pollution in LA.
There still is brown dome over LA but much lighter color.
Originally Posted By: spasm3
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
It might be difficult dealing with CARB. They answer to no one. If they disagree with VW then VW is done.
I'd like to see businesses pull out of calif.
CARB is directly responsible for having clean air in California-in-spite of the fact there are double the amount of people (who all drive) than there was 50 years ago.
It's hard to visualize how bad the air was unless you grew up there.
You could smell fresh air after a slight rain, which didn't happen often, in the late 70's early 80's.
Driving I5 North from San Diego early 80's I could see a brown dome cover Los Angeles city from 50 miles away. One time I saw a jet suddenly flew out of the brown dome, that tells you how dark the color was, and how bad was the pollution in LA.
There still is brown dome over LA but much lighter color.
Originally Posted By: CKN
It's hard to visualize how bad the air was unless you grew up there.
Could not agree more - LA was unbearable in the '60s and early '70s, especially in summer. No one would tolerate those conditions in the US today.
It's hard to visualize how bad the air was unless you grew up there.
Could not agree more - LA was unbearable in the '60s and early '70s, especially in summer. No one would tolerate those conditions in the US today.
Originally Posted By: Kiwi_ME
Yeah, and I hope no one realises that most cars are designed specifically to excel in the conditions used in standard crash tests as well.
Shhhh! That'll be next, too, and if the lawyers hear you, look out!
Yeah, and I hope no one realises that most cars are designed specifically to excel in the conditions used in standard crash tests as well.
Shhhh! That'll be next, too, and if the lawyers hear you, look out!
Originally Posted By: Kiwi_ME
Originally Posted By: Garak
Look at all the complaints about EPA fuel economy testing. Cars are designed to provide good fuel economy numbers for EPA testing procedures, not necessarily for real world driving.
Yeah, and I hope no one realises that most cars are designed specifically to excel in the conditions used in standard crash tests as well.
You bring up a good point. The C5 Corvette with the manual transmission performed better in EPA tests because of a device that forced shifting from first gear to fourth gear. People would eventually drive their car in a certain way so that the "Skip shift" device wouldn't engage. The C5 Corvette still got good MPG in real life driving, but it doesn't change the fact that a gadget was invented to get artificially good numbers on the EPA test.
The Camaro and Firebird had the same device at that time.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Look at all the complaints about EPA fuel economy testing. Cars are designed to provide good fuel economy numbers for EPA testing procedures, not necessarily for real world driving.
Yeah, and I hope no one realises that most cars are designed specifically to excel in the conditions used in standard crash tests as well.
You bring up a good point. The C5 Corvette with the manual transmission performed better in EPA tests because of a device that forced shifting from first gear to fourth gear. People would eventually drive their car in a certain way so that the "Skip shift" device wouldn't engage. The C5 Corvette still got good MPG in real life driving, but it doesn't change the fact that a gadget was invented to get artificially good numbers on the EPA test.
The Camaro and Firebird had the same device at that time.
Originally Posted By: artificialist
You bring up a good point. The C5 Corvette with the manual transmission performed better in EPA tests because of a device that forced shifting from first gear to fourth gear. People would eventually drive their car in a certain way so that the "Skip shift" device wouldn't engage. The C5 Corvette still got good MPG in real life driving, but it doesn't change the fact that a gadget was invented to get artificially good numbers on the EPA test.
The Camaro and Firebird had the same device at that time.
Some drivers can avoid "Skip shift" and others can use it in real world driving. The cheating device/software in VW TDI engines can't be defeated in real world driving.
You bring up a good point. The C5 Corvette with the manual transmission performed better in EPA tests because of a device that forced shifting from first gear to fourth gear. People would eventually drive their car in a certain way so that the "Skip shift" device wouldn't engage. The C5 Corvette still got good MPG in real life driving, but it doesn't change the fact that a gadget was invented to get artificially good numbers on the EPA test.
The Camaro and Firebird had the same device at that time.
Some drivers can avoid "Skip shift" and others can use it in real world driving. The cheating device/software in VW TDI engines can't be defeated in real world driving.
- Status
