*sigh*
I can't get the original article to load, but I think the only news here is the duration of the cheating.
The company officially admitted the cheating back in March, almost exactly 1 year after they opted to stop producing these types of engines because they couldn't get them to pass emissions tests.
Incentivize emissions, companies will find ways to comply with emissions.
This is as surprising as the sunrise.
In reply to Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) :
Like most laws, the incentive is to avoid massive fines and possible jail time.
alfadriver said:In reply to Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) :
Like most laws, the incentive is to avoid massive fines and possible jail time.
And with most fines, if you have enough money its no longer a fine, its a fee.
This just isn't a good news week for Toyota, is it?
Mr_Asa said:alfadriver said:In reply to Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) :
Like most laws, the incentive is to avoid massive fines and possible jail time.
And with most fines, if you have enough money its no longer a fine, its a fee.
All of the fines I've seen are significantly more than doing it right the first time. The agencies have a very good idea how much it costs to meet the requirements, so they can easily calculate a penalty that makes the cost look like peanuts. So while most companies can afford the fine, the lesson is doing it right is a lot cheaper.
Mr_Asa said:alfadriver said:In reply to Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) :
Like most laws, the incentive is to avoid massive fines and possible jail time.
And with most fines, if you have enough money its no longer a fine, its a fee.
Like, allegedly, Chrysler in the late 70s.
"$250 fine per car for not having a catalytic converter? Sounds like a deal to us, who do we make the check out to?"
alfadriver said:Mr_Asa said:alfadriver said:In reply to Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) :
Like most laws, the incentive is to avoid massive fines and possible jail time.
And with most fines, if you have enough money its no longer a fine, its a fee.
All of the fines I've seen are significantly more than doing it right the first time. The agencies have a very good idea how much it costs to meet the requirements, so they can easily calculate a penalty that makes the cost look like peanuts. So while most companies can afford the fine, the lesson is doing it right is a lot cheaper.
The evidence of how many manufacturers do this kinda disagrees with your argument.
In reply to Mr_Asa :
AFAIK, you are projecting too much. This kind of cheating is pretty rare, so...
And don't extrapolate cheating in one country with everywhere in the world. VW may have done that, but you need to point out others in the last decade.
In reply to alfadriver :
Cummins, Cat and Detroit did it as well, and paid the price. In fact it was part of the reason Cat exited the truck engine market.
alfadriver said:In reply to Mr_Asa :
AFAIK, you are projecting too much. This kind of cheating is pretty rare, so...
And don't extrapolate cheating in one country with everywhere in the world. VW may have done that, but you need to point out others in the last decade.
Not quite sure what you mean by that. I've only heard projecting as taking one's own negative thoughts and urges and putting them on another. I have no issue with emissions control. If you'd like to clarify that I'll listen.
I'm also not sure why I only have to restrict myself to companies that do this in the U.S. as the article that started this thread is a company that mainly operates in Japan.
However, bearmtnmartin gave a couple examples and I'd add Navistar to that list as that's why they no longer exist.
bearmtnmartin (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to alfadriver :
Cummins, Cat and Detroit did it as well, and paid the price. In fact it was part of the reason Cat exited the truck engine market.
Mercedes and their OM642 is a cheater engine.
Everybody cheats.
Following the old mailing lists for hacking GM ECMs, they found that there is an unused "economy mode" function in those 80s computers. What it would do is use the narrowband O2 sensor to find where stoich is, and then when the enable criteria were met it would use that info to ratchet the mixture leaner to some target lambda, periodically ramping back up to stoich to recalibrate itself. The EPA found out and said no, stop doing that.
You'll need to log in to post.