Dr Cayenne

I am pretty sure this is the correct interpretation of the situation. Furthermore so far all the other manufacturers other than VW seem to pass these standards. I am sure VW could have accomplished this goal too....That is of course if they wanted.

And I realize more or less the testing is conducted in every country in a fairly similar manner. With different set of goals but in similar test conditions.

Dr Cayenne

1- Engineers did not pull anything over the eyes of management. They conducted this fraud together "hand in hand". Realize unlike US most of the management there have engineering degrees. They knew what was going on.

2- Getting Mathias Mueller in charge speaks a lot. No management or "culture" change to speak of. Keep dreaming.

3- Why do you think CARB wants do drag this? There is evidence on the contrary. When VW came up with a reasonable solution for 2.0 nobody on the other side of the aisle objected. The key to solve this mess is in VW's hands. And based on 2.0 solution, they can solve it if they want to. They simply are trying hard not to. Easy.

4- Media can misrepresent many things. But let me tell you about the biggest misrepresentation of all in this mess (maybe then you'll recognize that everything pales in comparison). VW when confronted with the emission results denied that they "cheated" for a year, claiming that the methodology that uncovered this inconvenient truth was faulty....until many 3rd party resources supported the original claim. They knew they cheated, but they choose to lie about it when it got uncovered, trying to intimidate researchers who found it. Their actions are indefensible....

5- So far I haven't seen anything that makes me believe VW values its core customers. Quite the contrary - and I will use your words here- they do everything that they can to in the expense of their customers to save a buck (I know you said that it is the judge and the regulators that are doing everything that they can do in the expense of VW customers). So we will continue to have a difference in opinion there.

6- They are trying to convince the people for a half baked fix which will cost them less. They don't care If this will affect the customers adversely. They do not seem to be trying to change this pattern of misconduct unless forced by the Judge.

visitador

I am with Dr. Cayenne on this one. I find it galling that the AUDI chief, during press interviews, throws out the October dates as if the deadlines came from them. Does he think we are stupid and don't have Internet access to court transcripts? If you read the court transcript, all VW was saying was "we are almost there, we are almost there, just let us drag this with the regulators." Had not the judge imposed the October deadline, we would still be now held hostage by VW's so claimed "technical salvation around the corner."

Searcher356

I agree that VW's circumventing the tests and intent was egregious and unethical, but here we are.

The real EPA regulations (please do read them) say nothing about real world driving. They specify exactly what new cars must do in the test cycle, under test conditions. No more is written. After the "car drives off," there are no more standards to meet. There are loopholes galore.

Courts found the EPA to be in violation of Regs requiring them to issue guidelines for "durability tests," but to my knowledge they only issued a set of "Proposed Rules" for durability tests about a decade ago. Maybe someone on this forum can find newer Regs.

Different States in Non-attainment areas have different tailpipe tests to approximate the EPA's intent, but the EPA doesn't specify the standards there, either.

As a result of the weak EPA rules and lack of enforcement later (nothing to enforce), manufacturers have had it pretty easy. Well, they have had to work hard to meet test cycle standards, but that's the relatively easy part.

Dieselgate is a result of, as D.R. Canne says, third party watchdogs that pressured regulators to take action on some strong evidence. Political pressure.

We don't agree on where the fault originated, but I have been watching this for many years before the Media got swept up in the story - watching the VW Board get overwhelmed by Union members while the Piech family lost control of what i considered an ethical corporation, starting in the 2000s. This goes back a ways, and I'm not surprised that the Winterkorn reign blew up.
I also watched the Mercedes-VW-Peugeot consortium devise ways to meet Tier 3 and 4 Emission Standards - leading to AdBlue and SCR.
But that's not important to us - as we wait for outcomes.

In a way, this is a big test case.

The results may take years to work through, but one result should be that EPA writes rules that most folks assumed are in place already.
The next result should be that manufacturers won't be able to skate, and in the end, they will build cars that are more environmentally friendly, that don't incite the Environmental Community, and we will see internal combustion engines further into the future.

Which is a good thing, because the alternatives aren't ready for Prime Time yet.

Searcher356

I should add that I would like to see the EPA write RESPONSIBLE regs that are tied to real world goals. Those goals should be cleaner air in cost-effective ways.

visitador

Talking about EPA/CARB regulations being unfair/unrealistic is just a red herring. Other manufacturers have been able to meet them. I bet there are tons of independent researchers doing all kinds of testings to support the "they all cheat" claims. So far, I haven't read one about the competitors (that is, BMW, MB, Range Rover, Jeep). They are all still being certified, right? I am sure EPA/CARB have been conducting road testing on them by now.

There is a valid argument about whether the regulations meet the ultimate goal of us not being like living in Beijing or Shanghai. But the VW event is not one of them. It is just plain cheating to take an advantage over the competition.

mdrobc1213

Skiahh...didn't do the full math..was an estimate for comparison. Even if the Tourareg was $55K as quoted that would still be about 40-50% cost of a loaded Cayenne Diesel no? Ours ordered was about $78k and that was lightly optioned...of course the stop sale prevented us taking delivery.
Figure an Audi Q7 would be a bit more but come under the CD right? So numbers would be somewhat roughly in the the ballpark for comparison sake guys.
Gnat...that was quoted in quite a few of the 1,001 articles/reports on this issue. But to clarify...the 2.0L fix while probably a bit more complicated was readily accepted or shall I say the deal while the 3.0L fix/deal has been not as easy an the earlier reported ECU flash or catalytic converter replacement originally thought/proposed. Sorry if that was unclear.

But the biggest thing I think some of us are missing or just refusing to acknowledge is that the Cayenne Diesel is gone..a dinosaur for the most part after 2016 model year. Those remaining may still be sold and CARB/EPA may eventually authorize a fix hopefully that will be applied to all cars and not affect registration and/or efficiency/performance. The later is probably unlikely. But what is a given is at this point with VW's announcement and future plans is that all of the VW powered diesels will lose some financial value and likely appeal overall given the nature of what has transpired. Some owners will feel they have been injured irreparably without a buy back while others will feel that way if performance suffers post fix. Others may think both. But with the model now dead; as most of us have seen unless we're dealing with a special model (i.e. a Ferrarri 458 Speciale or similar) these cars aren't going to appreciated. Given public fears and the ever present need for the newest and most trouble free vehicle so to speak...the consumer block Audi once had will move on at some point and the values and desire for these vehicles will drop off a cliff for most of those except the faithful and the economically trapped who cannot afford to get out of their vehicles for financial reasons or otherwise. We can debate which EPA/CARB interpretation will be ultimately chosen/selected [which is almost pointless as at this point none of us know the fix nor what they are thinking in full] or whether the vehicles met certification A or B at the time written upon initial market release but that too is fruitless also as I would argue that EPA/CARB isn't going to go back and review the case and magically clear all of VW's transgressions and say "Opps we were wrong!" Their result have been certified by now by numerous 3rd parties and a few European agencies also I think. VW has admitted yep..we did it. BTW love the Corvette v4 vs v8 analogy previously mentioned. The cat is out of the bag and the market has changed irrevocably and won't be the same. We can see that 12+ months out and still without a fix in place....the diesel landscape in NA at least is in trouble with only a few remaining players (MB, BMW, Land Rover) for luxury buyers...either those remaining will move into the vaccum and take VWs market share or not. My bet would be they will wait to see what the final EPA/CARB disposition and how much increased scrutiny new diesls get or continue to recieve before putting more models/funding into expanded diesel optoins in the US to replace VW. To do otherwise would be foolish and put them at risk of having a similar fate as VW IF regulatory agency become non-diesel friendly. However I will say if another manufacturer is caught doing the same in the near future especially before the VW solution is announced or agreed upon; then in my opinion; diesels in NA will be toast for likely the next decade for personal vehicle use. Just my thoughts from what I've read and also a few of the discussions here from page 1-100! LOL

http://www.automobilemag.com/news/vo...D396A4DCAD27B1

What is the same for all here is that VW/Porsche/Audi's crisis management, risk mitigation, and customer service has not been up to par and what I would have expected from the brand. They've made it worse by lack of transparency and in some ways just not seeing this via their customer's eyes. In that they've kinda been like the US drone strikes into Pakistan...we've gotten some good kills and all but in a way have made a few more enemies with each strike than previously existed! This I think didn't have to be the case and add to the the mismatch between what VW customers/owner have recieved so far versus what the more premium owners of Audi and Porsche have gotten in similar kind just leave a bad taste in quite a few folks mouths and should never have been. Both equally paid for vehicles certified to be good to go and with X promised performance...they were not party to the fraud perpetrated so the differential in how each party has been treated is just wrong. Just because one can afford to pay X for a vehicle more than the lesser brand/model does in no way entitle them to less information, courtesy or right to a fix and in a way I would think if it was the other way around and owners of the lesser costing vehicle was receiving similar treatment maybe the media or even VW would be more "in arms" demanding actionable fixes. Just my 2 cents...

Searcher356

mdrobc1213, what you say about diesel markets doesn't apply only to VW. ALL manufacturers are facing increased scrutiny - and delays in the Feds' releasing the 2017 models. Also Nissan Titan 5.0 and Chev/GMC 2.7L Duramax were delayed.

You are right, the landscape has changed for diesels. Strangely, though, there is increased interest from other manufacturers in introducing diesel models here. Maybe they are blind, or maybe they still see the advantages over gasoline as we approach the next CAFE mandate of @54 mpg.

The newer Ultra ULSD (even lower sulfur - don't know what they will call it) that's due in 2018-19 will allow even better emission controls, with improved performance, just as ULSD and DEF provided with the Tier 4 cars. Maybe we will even see improved Cetane numbers here for even more benefits.

Maybe the EPA will get more scientific about their emission regulations. Maybe they will realize that, with the increased energy content of diesel over gasoline, they can go back to grams/mile standards instead of the less relevant grams/liter. (a generalization.)
And maybe they will write regs that address cars on the road, over ownership cycles, that have enough specificity to actually enforce, instead of having to litigate suspected violations of non-existent regulations.

If some of these things come to pass as a result of Dieselgate, we may see wider acceptance of diesel power, and diesel hybrids, while we wait for other technologies to mature. (Fuel cells, etc. and supporting infrastructure)

In my mind, THIS is what this is all about. I believe that every manufacturer (gas, diesel, and especially electric) is guilty of skirting the intent of the law, at least at some time during the driving cycle.
Some manufacturer was bound to get caught. VW was the most egregious so it was them.

This may sound overly optimistic, but that was my same position when catalytic converters first appeared on cars in the 70s. As one of the first emission-certified mechanics in Colorado, I could see the potential. And guess what - the potential was far greater than most imagined.

If Porsche/Audi can do what they do at LeMans, how much of that technology will filter down to our CDs? I think quite a lot.
Here's some wishful thinking: We may even see some of it on a fix for our CDs.

Searcher356

I represent a minor segment of the Cayenne market - I like the fuel economy, I like the low-rev drivability. It's handling is superb and un-SUV-like. I like the looks on friends' faces when I tell them they have been riding or driving a diesel! I love driving 700 miles at 85 mph, and I pull a 27' RV through the Colorado mountains (not at 85, though). Gas engined cars just aren't up to the task. I don't want another pickup truck.

I was hoping the several fixes that Porsche offered (long before the oft-mentioned new cat and ECU flash) would be accepted, as they were in other countries. But they weren't.

VW is being maligned for not being more open, but we must remember that they have a gag order, and probably have strong guidance from Counsel not to blab too much, especially since new lawsuits continue to appear.

We can all wish that communications and promises were more forthcoming, but in our litigious society (it's worse in Europe), I'm not surprised that they are quiet.

I am delaying buying winter tires while this plays out, so I wish there were more guidance. But, in reality, if VW were running around hinting about possibilities, I'd probably respect them even less.

Searcher356

visitador, I agree that VW cheated.

AND the other manufacturers you mention have been sued, and/or class-action lawsuits assembled or attempted. By what I called "Ambulance Chasers" in an earlier post. (Except Jeep - I am not aware of a Jeep suit.)
We have been contacted by one because we also own a M-B ML Diesel. Ignored by us, of course. I followed that one and it was disallowed as frivolous.
Another class-action for M-B made it part way through California Courts but stalled, but still may be affecting the release of the '17 models. The others I don't follow but have seen the references in Autoweek.

I didn't say EPA regs were unfair/unrealistic - I said they were Nonexistant for other than the certification test cycle. Which, by the way, most manufacturers perform in-house. It's a relatively small sample of cars that actually make it to Ann Arbor in any given year. The in-house tests are probably fine.

visitador

Hi Searcher356,

I am pretty sure that all the manufacturers with diesels will be sued one way or another by the ambulance chasers. What I am trying to say is this: The whole affair started a couple of years ago when the independent researchers attached mobile sniff detectors to the exhaust pipes of different diesels and drove them up and down California. That is when they found the VW 2.0s were spelling more than 40 times the allowed amount. I have pointed this previously and Gnat said he was going to study the data - the BMW X5 complied or was better in real life performance.

Till today, no one has refuted those findings. I suspect the regulators and other independent scientists must by now have re-done those tests. Surely I would have read on the news that "see, they all cheat."

Anyway, I also suspect that AUDI and the regulators are doing similar road tests to see if "the fix" works. Those fixes were announced early this year. Surely we would have known by now if they work. The utter silence and claims of "salvation is around the corner" just reinforces to me that they haven't been able to meet those real world tests, unlike the BMW X5 in the original road tests.

Cowboys5

For what its worth, I was at my dealership yesterday and they say that although they have no official word, the strong rumour mill internally has it that the CD will be fixed via a rather minor software fix, without affecting performance or mileage. Which begs the question: if its that simple, why the defeat device in the first place?

Count me skeptical.

gnat

Ahh, but there is no approved fix for the 2.0l yet. Only the plan for customer compensation has been accepted by the court. I thought that the 2.0l fix was supposed to be ready for approval by Oct, but I think I read a month or so ago that it's been pushed again until Jan.

I we say we should expect the same for the 3.0l too. They'll lay out the compensation plan and it will be approved pending the fix being approved which will be kicked down the road a bit farther. Hopefully we'll get at least that far in Oct, but I won't hold my breath over it.

Mark Dreyer

FWIW, just recalled that my 2010 VW Touareg TDI had a $5k wheel/tire/interior upgrade, so while it cost me $55k, the base price was $50k.

skiahh

If this is true, then why is VW paying billions of dollars? If their defeat devices let them pass the test, but there are no more requirements, then they did not do anything illegal and should not have to pay any fines... or even fix the vehicles.

There has to be something more here; no company would just capitulate to the tune of billions of dollars if they did not technically violate any laws, rules or regulations. It would be cheaper to fight the charges and pay the legal costs that would clear them. Or at least minimize any costs associated with the charges.

VAG violated something that gave the US Government and the class(es) some very big teeth, whether EPA rules or something else.