Req'd fix for Gen 1

r11 · Jul 12, 2016

3.2 Additional Requirements for Generation 1 2.0 Liter Subject Vehicles:
In addition to the requirements of Paragraph 3.1, each Proposed Emissions Modification for any Generation 1 2.0 Liter Subject Vehicle must also:

3.2.1 Require the installation of a new exhaust flap, EGR filter, and NOx Trap that meets the specifications of BASF TEX2064, as proposed by Settling Defendants to EPA and CARB on January 28, 2016, or, subject to EPA/CARB approval, such other functionally and effectively equivalent hardware or software, provided that Settling Defendants propose such other hardware or software in the applicable Proposed Emissions Modification.

3.2.2 Require that PM filter efficiency monitoring shall be accomplished using the pressure differential across the low pressure EGR filter and the pressure differential across the DPF as a secondary backstop monitor. The backstop monitor shall detect malfunctions before FTP PM emissions exceed 0.040 grams per mile and is not subject to the 0.035 gram/mile limitations specified in subparagraph 3.2.5. The backstop monitor demonstration must be completed no later than the respective time period allowed for the Final OBD Demonstration.

Allowed emission levels: ≤ 0.240 g/mile NMOG + NOx and ≤ 0.0175 g/mile PM

fredthe · Jul 12, 2016

Ah, been reading the documents, I see

(Which is why I fully expect there to be a Gen 1 fix, without adding a urea tank on the roof.

)

r11 · Jul 12, 2016

Yep, treasure trove out there. To spare other participants, decided to post the relevant snippets.

jims2321 · Jul 12, 2016

Why is only automatic transmissions for GEN1 being used?

Settling Defendants must measure, and provide to EPA and
CARB, the fuel economy and emissions impacts of the Proposed Emissions Modification
by using the FTP, US06, SC03, HWFET, and 20°F FTP test cycles, based on A-to-B
testing that compares (A) vehicles without the 2014 Reflash and with the Road Mode
Calibration active and operative during the batch of test cycles with (B) vehicles to which
Settling Defendants have applied the Proposed Emissions Modification. The comparison
testing must be conducted on the same vehicle, and using the same testing parameters
that could affect emissions, including but not limited to fuel. Settling Defendants must
conduct such test cycles on Generation 1 Model Years 2011 and 2014 Jetta automatic
transmission vehicles;

Are they indicating that manual transmission GEN1 cars are either compliant right now, or can't be fixed? Something smells fishy in Denmark

jims2321 · Jul 12, 2016

r11 said:
3.2 Additional Requirements for Generation 1 2.0 Liter Subject Vehicles:
In addition to the requirements of Paragraph 3.1, each Proposed Emissions Modification for any Generation 1 2.0 Liter Subject Vehicle must also:

3.2.1 Require the installation of a new exhaust flap, EGR filter, and NOx Trap that meets the specifications of BASF TEX2064, as proposed by Settling Defendants to EPA and CARB on January 28, 2016, or, subject to EPA/CARB approval, such other functionally and effectively equivalent hardware or software, provided that Settling Defendants propose such other hardware or software in the applicable Proposed Emissions Modification.

3.2.2 Require that PM filter efficiency monitoring shall be accomplished using the pressure differential across the low pressure EGR filter and the pressure differential across the DPF as a secondary backstop monitor. The backstop monitor shall detect malfunctions before FTP PM emissions exceed 0.040 grams per mile and is not subject to the 0.035 gram/mile limitations specified in subparagraph 3.2.5. The backstop monitor demonstration must be completed no later than the respective time period allowed for the Final OBD Demonstration.

Allowed emission levels: ≤ 0.240 g/mile NMOG + NOx and ≤ 0.0175 g/mile PM

So in addition to the emission fix (TBD) they will also require them to put in place or replace these additional things. I think this is not the total solutions, but just a part that VW is hoping gets them there.

sriracha · Jul 12, 2016

jims2321 said:
Why is only automatic transmissions for GEN1 being used?

Are they indicating that manual transmission GEN1 cars are either compliant right now, or can't be fixed? Something smells fishy in Denmark

Probably because the manual transmission is more efficient than the automatic transmission? Maybe the auto transmission represents the worst case scenario?

GoFaster · Jul 12, 2016

jims2321 said:
Why is only automatic transmissions for GEN1 being used?

Are they indicating that manual transmission GEN1 cars are either compliant right now, or can't be fixed? Something smells fishy in Denmark

Probably because the automatics represent the bulk of the in-service vehicles.

MBfrontier · Jul 12, 2016

I read through selected areas of the referenced document after fredthe posted the link in another thread. Before reading through section 3.2 of this document, I was reading other opinions that VW could not pass emissions regulations without adding a urea injection system. I am not an emissions engineer so I have no idea what they will have to do to my 2012 Golf TDI DSG for it to be in compliance. I did know that if it required an ADblue reservoir and injection system I would be selling my car back to VW.

The point is, after getting this information, I will be waiting for documentation on the fix and see what other owners opinions are after getting their cars modified. I'll be interested in their mileage and performance after the fix to determine if I will get mine fixed, sell it back, or do nothing. I feel better about deciding not to rush into a decision before I have all the facts.

Thanks to fredthe and others that have posted information/opinions on this document.

sriracha · Jul 12, 2016

Is it possible that the new equipment is what VW should have used in the first place, but they opted for a lower cost option with a cheat? Is it possible that the new LNT is more robust and efficient? Maybe the fix will be a legitimate improvement for our gen1 TDI's?

IF that is the case, new/better/more robust emissions equipment plus extended warranty and compensation money does not sound like a bad option for those of us that want to keep our cars.

The court documents specify that efficiency, performance, noise, vibration and reliability are not to be compromised.

I'm certainly curious about the fix details and real world results.

scooperhsd · Jul 12, 2016

GoFaster said:
Probably because the automatics represent the bulk of the in-service vehicles.

I agree with GoFaster on this
+1

Max Period · Jul 12, 2016

sriracha said:
The court documents specify that efficiency, performance, noise, vibration and reliability are not to be compromised.

I'm certainly curious about the fix details and real world results.

Sound like it's gonna be very difficult to get approval for the purposed fix without SCR... or alternatively VW may decide not to submit any Gen 1 fix proposal at all... Or VW unable to get the fix proposal done before the January 2017 deadline...

From what I read online, Cummins RAM pickup trucks without SCR are troublemakers, until they finally introduced SCR in 2013 to the pickups. (Chassis cabs always had SCR)

GoFaster · Jul 12, 2016

The preliminary fix proposal is already spelled out (post #1 of this thread is a snippet of the official agreement documents).

I'm thinking that VW has engineered this fix, proposed it on 28 January 2016 as stated, and is in the midst of doing the durability testing (which takes many months), and the submission dates that are given elsewhere in the agreement are when VW is expected to have all the validation testing done and documented and ready for presentation to EPA and CARB. There's some wording in the agreement about "... or other functionally and effectively equivalent hardware and software" which is basically an out in case the original proposal doesn't adequately get through validation and they have to change something (or if another supplier is able to provide something meeting the same spec).

Obviously, it remains to be seen what the real world effects of this are going to be.

tobianogreg · Jul 12, 2016

Any idea of timeline Brian? in case we get stuck with it. A couple of years if all goes well?

Paulinski · Jul 13, 2016

Every other manufacturer had to use SCR as anything else would not work.

The LNT exhaust has had its share of problems so now VW will add more robust LNT another sensor and expect it to last 120k on a 150k 2010 CR? (Kind of extreme example I know but it's possible)

Rico567 · Jul 13, 2016

All of this is so fraught with potential long-term problems that if I owned an LNT vehicle (ours is an SCR Passat) I wouldn't even consider anything but a buyback without a lifetime warranty on all the affected components— and it's already clear that's not happening.

740GLE · Jul 13, 2016

Paulinski said:
Every other manufacturer had to use SCR as anything else would not work.

The LNT exhaust has had its share of problems so now VW will add more robust LNT another sensor and expect it to last 120k on a 150k 2010 CR? (Kind of extreme example I know but it's possible)

Cummins had an LNT on their Dodge products until their credits ran out and limits were lowered in 2010, then they went SCR.

imurrx · Jul 13, 2016

Paulinski said:
Every other manufacturer had to use SCR as anything else would not work.

The LNT exhaust has had its share of problems so now VW will add more robust LNT another sensor and expect it to last 120k on a 150k 2010 CR? (Kind of extreme example I know but it's possible)

Say this scenario happens and it fails after the extended warranty expires, what will be the availability and cost for the hardware to fix it? Without knowing that, buybacks are more attractive or you go the delete and tune root on a 300,000 car.

Improbable but possible.

jims2321 · Jul 13, 2016

All the documentation I have seen most recently on the LNT systems for reduction of NOX gas levels show that on engines <2.5L are not very efficient or effective. This is why VW went to the SCR systems for GEN 2 and GEN 3 cars. If LNT was a viable solution, they would have kept it and pocketed the additional profit. Playing swap the part game to find a combo tht works is not going to end well for anybody, least of all the consumer.

JSWTDI09 · Jul 13, 2016

My big question about the gen 1 fix has to do with my 2009 model year. I have the one piece DPF/LNT. In order to replace the LNT they will have to also replace the DPF with the 2010+ design. If I decide to keep my car, I am not entirely certain that I would turn down a new free DPF at about 120k miles. I actually doubt that VW would do this for cost reasons, but I will admit to being very curious about how this Gen 1 "fix" will apply to 2009 cars. 2010+ cars will be considerably easier (and cheaper) to "fix" than the 2009 model year cars. Time will tell.

Have Fun!

Don

beyondwind · Jul 13, 2016

jims2321 said:
Why is only automatic transmissions for GEN1 being used?
Are they indicating that manual transmission GEN1 cars are either compliant right now, or can't be fixed? Something smells fishy in Denmark

fix for Gen1 with Manual transmission are also outlined in court document. A higher level of transient NOx is allowed.

jims2321 · Jul 13, 2016

beyondwind said:
fix for Gen1 with Manual transmission are also outlined in court document. A higher level of transient NOx is allowed.

As I dug further down, I saw the manual transmission test. At this point, I can be swayed either way. Buyback and I essentially drove my car for cost of diesel/insurance the past 3+ years. Wait and wonder if the fix will ever happen and if it does wait until the last minute to get it done, to see what else breaks first. It's a coin toss for me.

sriracha · Jul 13, 2016

I'm going to keep driving my TDI for at least another 18 months before I make up my mind. At that time, I will gage the fix, reliability of the fix and compare that to any other options. Maybe there will be another vehicle on the market to entice a buy back? Maybe they will stop offering the TDI? These are all factors I will consider and decide when the time comes.

For now, I will continue to drive my TDI, enjoying the torque and fuel economy while I can.

meerschm · Jul 13, 2016

JSWTDI09 said:
My big question about the gen 1 fix has to do with my 2009 model year. I have the one piece DPF/LNT. In order to replace the LNT they will have to also replace the DPF with the 2010+ design. If I decide to keep my car, I am not entirely certain that I would turn down a new free DPF at about 120k miles. I actually doubt that VW would do this for cost reasons, but I will admit to being very curious about how this Gen 1 "fix" will apply to 2009 cars. 2010+ cars will be considerably easier (and cheaper) to "fix" than the 2009 model year cars. Time will tell.

Have Fun!

Don

You and Me, both. (and a few others, I guess)

GoFaster · Jul 13, 2016

JSWTDI09 said:
My big question about the gen 1 fix has to do with my 2009 model year. I have the one piece DPF/LNT. In order to replace the LNT they will have to also replace the DPF with the 2010+ design. If I decide to keep my car, I am not entirely certain that I would turn down a new free DPF at about 120k miles. I actually doubt that VW would do this for cost reasons, but I will admit to being very curious about how this Gen 1 "fix" will apply to 2009 cars. 2010+ cars will be considerably easier (and cheaper) to "fix" than the 2009 model year cars. Time will tell.

Have Fun!

Don

Theoretically, there is nothing about that one piece DPF/LNT that can't be dealt with by cutting the pipe between the two and welding in a flange ... accurately. Any muffler shop could do it if the parts are designed properly.

It's entirely possible that the 2009s will get a new DPF out of the deal. It's also entirely possible that VW will realize that those cars have lost most of their original value, say "screw it" and exclude them from the "fix" option (i.e. buyback only).

JSWTDI09 · Jul 13, 2016

GoFaster said:
It's entirely possible that the 2009s will get a new DPF out of the deal. It's also entirely possible that VW will realize that those cars have lost most of their original value, say "screw it" and exclude them from the "fix" option (i.e. buyback only).

This is pretty much what I was thinking also. We shall see what happens.

Have Fun!

Don

Paulinski · Jul 14, 2016

Or another option is the 15% non compliance threshold is because of the 09 model year.

jessej · Aug 18, 2017

how to effectively kill a good thing

The US government via vindictive bureaucrats have effectively negated further development of a good engine design, i.e. the diesel by requiring a ridiculously high limitation on NOx emissions. The world is having life styles engineered by totalitarian nincompoops whose ignorance is so dangerous that they don't realize that the engine is not the problem. It's the fuel. A diesel engine was originally designed to run on vegetable oil. Change the fuel and no problem. Does anyone else here see the actual story?

GoFaster · Aug 18, 2017

Uh, no, that's not it. Other manufacturers have been able to conform to the regulations with diesel engines - notably, BMW and GM. VW was simply some combination of too cheap or too "not invented here" to put the proper hardware on the car. If you take the "whatever works" attitude (I don't care what fuel has to be put in the tank as long as it accomplishes the desired objective), there are a number of other vehicles that happen to run on gasoline which are close enough in efficiency to not worry about the difference, and some of those other vehicles are powered by VW's own 1.4 TSI and 1.8 TSI gasoline engines. Mazda Skyactiv gasoline engines are also very efficient. So are the new Toyota "Dynamic Force" engines. For that matter, I have no issue with the Chrysler 3.6 Pentastar in my van; it has reasonable fuel consumption considering the great big box it has to move.

Veg-oil is not good for emissions, by the way. The viscosity is too high for it to atomize and burn properly, and this ends up being incompatible with modern emission controls. And no, heating it up doesn't fix this.

Req'd fix for Gen 1

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Moderator at Large

Member

Veteran Member

Top Post Dawg

Veteran Member

Moderator at Large

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Top Post Dawg

Top Post Dawg

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Top Post Dawg

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Top Post Dawg

Moderator at Large

Top Post Dawg

Veteran Member

Member

Moderator at Large