CARB/EPA reject proposed fix 12-14 2.0L Passat Manual Vehicles

NOx combines with hydrocarbons in the presence of UV light (sunlight) to produce smog ... that's particulate matter ... that's why you can see it!

john.jackson9213 said:

Most California voters are pleased with our state's clean air requirements and are willing to pay the costs. Plain and simple.

Your comment about paid off scientists is really childish.

Click to expand...

The current light duty car regulations on diesels are ridiculously over zealous compared to the minimal impact, with the few of these that exist they cannot have any impact on actual air quality.....

If this had anything to do with clean air whatsoever, carb and the EPA would be passing laws dacades ago, enforcing them ago to reduce ultra fine gasoline engine produced PMs.,.....

Short of that, this is nothing more than a political exercise that has not a thing to do with clean air........

Regardless of the nonsense some are spewing over this. These cars will never exist in numbers large enough to have any impact on air quality locally. Some parts of the US they don't exist at all, so this entire exercise is stupid and is hurting America by taking away the most fuel efficient options that exist for a reasonable price today and like will for decades to come.....

On carb, that's a political organization, an unelected group with a declared war on all diesels, a war that has nothing to do with science or what the voters have to say....

What is the timeframe from submission to approval?

Was it 3 months?

When does VW have to have an approved fix for these?

turbocharged798 said:

Set ridiculous laws, expect them to get broken. New 10MPG ford raptor, legal 50 mpg TDI not legal.
If they would just pull back on the NOx requirement, we could get much more clean burning efficient diesels. They did it because they knew it would cause diesels to be pushed off the road.
What about gassers and their ultra-fine PM, EPA, CARB just sticks their head in the sand and pretends it does not exist.

Click to expand...

I was curious about truly how inequitable the EPA tier 1 (2003 requirements) to tier 2 (2009 requirements) were to diesels vs gas cars, and so I looked up all of the spec's for the requirements and quantified it (with a graph to boot). CO literally didn't have to decrease at all, and the NOx for the types of cars we drive had to be reduced to 5% of their previously allowed levels. It is ridiculous how specifically targeted small diesel engines are by the EPA.

This is really about the fact that is not considered, current rules s do not, have not even considered the positive effect, very high mileage diesel have on our economy and our energy use for on road transport.....

That is the lowered real world fuel use of current diesel fuel sipping options banned from sale here today....

Compared to ridiculous limits that are passed on these vehicles, the diesel light duty auto diesel class that have not existed in a real numbers compared to other vehicles, which put out megatons of ultrafine PMS since 1985.

That is over 3 decades of these things being sold in less than one percent of total fleet are suddenly put ridiculous overzealous emission requirements on....

While the other vehicles that polluted the most, the loophole vehicles until very recently and even now, continuing with cafe still over pollute compared to the miniscule numbers of these vehicles that is the point pass laws that consider positive effect versus measurements not to..

I commend VW along with any other auto make who at least tried to meet these stupid rediculious current auto class light duty diesel emissions limit's!!!!

rotarykid said:

I commend VW along with any other auto make who at least tried to meet these stupid rediculious current auto class light duty diesel emissions limit's!!!!

Click to expand...

They didn't try hard enough. Other automakers were able to meet the diesel standards, so it isn't impossible to do. As a result of VW's poor judgement, tdi's are gone from this market and probably going away completely years before they would have otherwise.

turbobrick240 said:

I commend VW along with any other auto makers who at least tried to meet these stupid rediculious current auto class light duty diesel emissions limit's!!!! Oh yeah, during this time frame no one else was able to meet the regs with a 2.0 engine without urea!

Click to expand...

They didn't try hard enough. Other automakers were able to meet the diesel standards, so it isn't impossible to do. As a result of VW's poor judgement, tdi's are gone from this market and probably going away completely years before they would have otherwise.

Click to expand...

actually, every auto make who has tried to meet these stupid regs with a small engine has run into some trouble....and for the time when these were first introduced no one, not a single auto maker could make their cars pass.....Mazda tried & failed......It took GM several years to get a car with a small engine to pass...BMW & MB took several more years to come up with a scheme that would work, one that only worked on larger more expensive diesel engines...

And allllllllll of you piling on please remember this.....even big engine producers had trouble meeting these stupid useless accomplishing nothing in the non-existent auto class diesels regulations!! If you look back into 2007 & 2008 when the first generations of this engine were tested & certified, no one else was even trying because no one thought the regs could be met with the tech that existed during this time....the scheme VWAG came up with in the time it was come up with was the only way they could actually pass the regs at the time and have the emissions last any time!

I say again, I am thankful VWAG even tried during the timeframe that they did when no one thought these regs could be actually met in the auto class with smaller diesel engines...

something else many seems to have either forgotten or never knew is the fact that during this time frame the epa had not yet signed off on was the use of urea....that is right, the epa was not during the 06, 07, or 08 time frame ready to even consider giving certification on urea use in the auto class! You look at the real facts on the ground at the time, what tech was accepted by the epa or carb for auto class diesel use, and the picture that some seem to have about this really do not hold water...

BMW made a 2 L common rail tdi that met the regs without cheating. So did GM. VW could have as well. Instead, they chose to cheat and deceive in order to save a pittance in licensing and production costs. And it certainly came back to bite them. No amount of polishing is going to put a shine on the turd that is dieselgate.

turbobrick240 said:

BMW made a 2 L common rail tdi that met the regs without cheating. So did GM. VW could have as well. Instead, they chose to cheat and deceive in order to save a pittance in licensing and production costs. And it certainly came back to bite them. No amount of polishing is going to put a shine on the turd that is dieselgate.

Click to expand...

Except for the fact they didn't, neither one of them made a 2 liter anything diesel for the us market during the time frame I'm speaking of and all of the offerings today come with urea, which was not certified to be used in the auto class with these designs until after VW had already introduced their 2 liter, which used the systems they used.
The first BMW & Mercedes offering were a v 6, a larger engine with multiple turbos, which allowed them to do what they did, and also the urea had been approved for use in auto class vehicles by that point.
GM offering also was after urea had been approved for use in auto class cars. So again facts matter at the time VW tried to do. This area was not an accepted proposal for auto class because the EPA and carb were not comfortable with the owners being responsible for meeting emissions.
MAzda"s offering could never get the system to work, which was developed during that time frame to make it reliably pass our emissions. No one else even tried to make the system work because they believed it could not work before urea was allowed to be used in auto class vehicles.

Well, we can spin VW's illegal cheating any way we want. The fact is they lied, cheated, and decieved. And they continued to lie, cheat, and deceive long after the EPA approved scr for light duty vehicles/passenger cars in '09. And they cheated in markets worldwide, not just here. It's pretty hard to blame the EPA or CARB for VW cheating emission regs in foreign countries on the other side of the globe. While I agree that the NOx standards here are probably stricter than necessary, that does not give VW the right to break the law and deceive thousands upon thousands of customers. They make great diesels, it's too bad they have done more to kill off the diesel passenger car than any other automaker.

EPA lies, cheats and deceives too so its kinda mutual....

rotarykid said:

If you look back into 2007 & 2008 when the first generations of this engine were tested & certified, no one else was even trying because no one thought the regs could be met with the tech that existed during this time....the scheme VWAG came up with in the time it was come up with was the only way they could actually pass the regs at the time and have the emissions last any time!

Click to expand...

Not 2 liter engines, but BMW and Mercedes both had EPA approved diesels in North America at that time, all using Adblue. VW and Mazda didn't want to use Adblue in their smaller engines, and, as we've now learned, couldn't meet regulations without it. Mazda chose to not sell a diesel here, VW chose to cheat. And they also chose not to meet regulations with the 3 liter engines with Adblue, even though competing 3 liters were meeting them with similar power and economy. Think what you want of that.

a 3+ decades long political based CARB declared war on all on road diesel

IndigoBlueWagon said:

Not 2 liter engines, but BMW and Mercedes both had EPA approved diesels in North America at that time, all using Adblue. VW and Mazda didn't want to use Adblue in their smaller engines, and, as we've now learned, couldn't meet regulations without it. Mazda chose to not sell a diesel here, VW chose to cheat. And they also chose not to meet regulations with the 3 liter engines with Adblue, even though competing 3 liters were meeting them with similar power and economy. Think what you want of that.

Click to expand...

While these auto makes had special models which were widely shown around the world, most if not all of those never saw the light of day here when it comes for being certified & sold here in the US/Canada market untill after ~2011.....some 5 years after the time VWAG was working on, durability testing and certifying the 2.oL TDI-CR's for sale in the US & Canadian markets.

I have been in & around the auto industry for almost 4 decades now, and the fact is all auto makes used similar schemes to meet regulations based on the meeting the bench/dyno test.

A fact that those who have piled onto this is,,,, We have a well-documented history of the epa & carb requiring passage of the bench e-test, but then allowing for real-world driving adjustment programming to deal with real-world issues a particular model offering faces.

And I can think of dozens of offerings with gasoline engine power who got reigned in for doing the exact same thing with fueling map changes that were only slapped on the wrist with minuscule fines and offset requirements of selling a particular number of cleaner models for failing to meet e-test limits.

There was a well-documented history going back to the beginning of the bench e-test era of how this had always been handled before on gasoline engine'd offerings, a history that was completely ignored on these minuscule number of these offerings with diesel power.....

This entire political, not science-based in any way thing of going after these minuscule numbers of this VWAG 2.0 diesel's ever being sold was not ever about cleaner air.... but this scapegoating of these cars was clearly based on CARB members statements of a planned out in advance war on all auto class diesel-powered offerings....

During the era when VWAG was trying to meet these stupid useless not giving cleaner air anywhere in the real world auto class diesel e-test regs 06-08 there were actually no MB offings if memory serves....

MB stopped offering diesel cars in the US in 1999...MB did not even try to sell the diesel offerings here in any numbers from around 1999 to ~2012, MB sat on the sidelines not even trying to meet these Light duty diesel auto class regs for most of the 00s....

Willy den CGI said:

Daimler has some things going on. New materials might be the solution. Low sulphur diesel is already provided at some places in the US. The third generation of CommonRail will provide such high peak firing pressure that CGI will be needed in the engine. The fuel will be fully used at that high pressure and the tailpipe-emissions will be very low.
During November ABB will start to upgrade the Mannheim foundry so they can produce "magnesiumtreated iron for truckengines " late in 2002. Further details are not disclosed for competetive reasons..
So what is going on ?

Plans for the future:

Mercedes-Benz DI diesel 2003. New family to fit in between current 2.9 and 4.2-litre engines.

Mercedes-Benz 2.9, 3.2 DI diesel Common rail diesel engines for use in light truck applications.

Mercedes-Benz V10 DI diesel New engine under development, related to existing V8?

Mercedes-Benz 3.2 V6 DI diesel 2004 Vee version of existing in-line 6 engine, to enable production on V6/V8 line.


---
DaimlerChrysler eyes CGI for blocks
DETROIT, Dec. 23 1999 -- In Stuttgart, Germany, DaimlerChrysler AG is making plans to use compacted graphite iron (CGI) in some major components of its diesel and gasoline engines starting in 2002.
A proprietary CGI parts-casting process will be established in a DaimlerChrysler foundry in Mannheim, and the first products of the process are expected to be lightweight iron blocks or heads.
The German builder of luxury cars and trucks wants to continue using iron in its engines, but at less of a weight penalty than normal, and CGI parts are seen as a way of accomplishing this.

.---

In May 1999 Daimler wrote:


The innovative strength of the Center of Competence Foundry is proven by
the advanced material CGI - cast iron with compacted graphite. This
material was cast for the first time by the Center of Competence Foundry in small series for cylinder blocks and cylinder heads.

This high-tech material is characterized by greater strength. It can endure higher peak combustion pressures, which results in the higher power output of diesel engines. CGI is being currently tested on European race tracks.

Last year it was used for cylinder blocks in the successful Mercedes-Benz race trucks, but now is being also used for cylinder heads which are even more complex.

The high load-bearing capacity is now proving its worth under the extreme conditions on race tracks. At the same time, less material is required which leads to a considerable weight saving.

-------

In July 2001 this news was found.

DaimlerChrysler Upgrades Mannheim Works

DaimlerChrysler, under an upgrading scheme for the existing medium-high frequency crucible induction furnace installation in their Mannheim works, placed an order with ABB Automation Systems GmbH, Eschborn, Germany, for a 12 MT crucible furnace and a 9,300 kW / 250 Hz medium-frequency power supply designed to melt base iron to produce magnesium-treated cast iron.

The contract also includes a channel induction furnace of 135 MT useful capacity which is adapted to hold and superheat the base iron, as well as two induction-heated ladle furnaces to be installed at flask molding units to cast magnesium-treated iron needed to produce castings for lorry engines.

The equipment will be supplied in partial-package deliveries during the period from November 2001 to November 2002.
-------------

I asked ABB/Daimler by mail if the intention was to make the new Hightech CGI after the upgrade.
This was the answer given from ABB/Daimler---

-------------
Dear Mr. xxx
Thank you for your question and your interest in our activities.

ABB and DaimlerChrysler signed a contract were all information about the production process itself are confidential.ABB is therefore not allowed to give you the requested information and cannot give further comments other than stated in the press release.

Sorry, we cannot provide further details.

---

Still TOP SECRET

If you are more interested You will find some useful information at the following link
Diesel Net

[ November 19, 2001: Message edited by: Willy den store ]</p>

Click to expand...

The other current BMW or Chevy diesel offerings did not go on sale until ~2012 after urea use was finally acceptable for use here by the epa & CARB and these makes had not been sold with diesel engine's in any vehicles here since 1985 MY.....

So many are acting like all was set in stone when it came to what was required to pass the e-test from 05-~11-12, when those of us who were in this know it wasn't.....None of this was really set all the way up to the point when this BS political based scapegoating of VWAG offerings in late 2016....

And please, enough with the VWAG cheated in their 2.0 offerings made & e-tested from 05-16 offerings....they did nothing more than do exactly what had always been allowed up to the point it suddenly wasn't!

If you don't believe this. look at the BS CARB pulled on all VW & MB offered diesel's on 2000 MY VW TDI's & MB CDI's in late 1999.....

Then ask someone at Fiat/Chrysler on how their current diesel offerings have been treated over the last year.....This has always been about the CARB declared war on all diesel-powered offerings offered here for sale over the last three decades...

None of these things have happened in a vacuum, CARB, and by default today will not be happy until all diesel offerings are banned from the US market by the regs that accomplish nothing in efforts to clean up the air anywhere in the US!!!!!

something I left out was the fact that VWAG saw all of this coming from the 04 to now...what most of us who have been here for years that other newer members might not be fully aware of was what VWAG did in 2005 with the overproduction of the 06 MY TDI-PDs......For those who are not aware,,,, the only VW diesel offering sold/offered new from late 06 to 08 was the 06 model year Diesel Editions that were built just enough to qualify under 06 e-test rules to be sold during 07 & 08 model years. These cars were started to be built all the way up to Dec. 31, 2006 then put aside for finishing the build over the next year for sale new in 07 & 08. In fact, they were still being sold new on VW lots in the US & Canada all the way up to the 09 CR's going on sale in Sept. 2009....

!!!!we all here know this was done because of the FACT no one! not even VW could pass these on the books light duty auto class diesel e-test rules during this time frame!!!


....So again I call BS that VWAG really was the bad guy in all of this, the epa & carb setup the circumstances of passing rules no one could meet that lead to them doing this BS over e-test rules....enough with the fake outrage(if like me you were in this during the time efforts were made to pass overzealously unmeetable in the real world during this time(05 to ~2012) auto class diesel e-test rules), or uninformed on the actual reality of what was involved in trying to pass the e-test rules while getting the needed durability of the required equipment during this time rage....

Turbo and Rotary, good debate.
Some food for thought.
EPA/carb are going after stationary power units, off road farming, fishing, logging and many I can't think to list here.

European cities are banning diesel powered vehicles and gas too some time moving into the future.

The European issue with diesel is the vast number of pre emmisions compliant vehicle
Remain on road for many years. Emmisions compliant vehicles will do nothing for air quality until they become the majority on the roads...
European cities need help NOW. NOW means not grandfathering old tech fo4 years to come.

Perhaps EPA/carb forsee this problem in North America and are setting their agenda the same way. They have to deal with relatively new diesel trucks emissions (exploiting loopholes) belching carbon and noX amongst other pollutants.

By banning 2015 compliant vehicles may make it easier for EPA/carb to ban precompliant old tech sooner.
I think that would be a no start.

I say get rid of the old technology. Keep the new, allow the new to be improved (it can and it will)

I say EPA/carb need to step up and accept the fact, the testing/certification system they administer is flawed,always was flawed, and they knew it was flawed.

The real success of EPA/carb is visibly cleaner air in most cities in Canada and USA since the inseption of emissions controls on motor vehicles powered by gasoline engines starting and improved on since the 1970's

There are some true believers here (possibly suffering from Stockholm Syndrome) who will probably never see the error of VW's ways. That's fine- fight the power! Whether we see what they did as right or wrong, the end result is pretty obvious.

rotarykid said:

While these auto makes had special models which were widely shown around the world, most if not all of those never saw the light of day here when it comes for being certified & sold here in the US/Canada market untill after ~2011.....some 5 years after the time VWAG was working on, durability testing and certifying the 2.oL TDI-CR's for sale in the US & Canadian markets.
The other current BMW or Chevy diesel offerings did not go on sale until ~2012 after urea use was finally acceptable for use here by the epa & CARB and these makes had not been sold with diesel engine's in any vehicles here since 1985 MY.....

Click to expand...

I think you missed a few models.

• Mercedes E320 CDI with the OM648 inline 6 from '06 - 08
• Mercedes E350 CDI with the OM642 from '09-15
• Mercedes R-Class, GL, and ML with the OM642 from '07 on
• BMW 335d and X5d with the M57 engine from '09-11
• Jeep Liberty with a 2.8L VM Motori engine in '05-'06
• Jeep Grand Cherokee with a Mercedes OM642 in '07-'08

Depending on the application, Mercedes transitioned to Adblue use in '07 or '08 in all diesels. Jeep didn't use it. BMW always had Adblue.
And because they have different standards, I haven't included the Dodge/Freightliner/Mercedes Sprinters with the OM612 and OM642 engines.
These vehicles didn't sell in large numbers, but there were developed, tested, and certified during the same time period as VW's 2.0L common rail engines were brought to market.

nozel said:

Turbo and Rotary, good debate.

The real success of EPA/carb is visibly cleaner air in most cities in Canada and USA since the inception of emissions controls on motor vehicles powered by gasoline engines starting and improved on since the 1970's

Click to expand...

I agree, but in the 1980s they allowed the loophole class to be misused for auto class offerings which gave back a lot of the gains gotten over the previous 20 years. Instead of dealing with the real culprits that caused pollution issues of today, the epa & carb let this clearly illegal use if you look at the original law passed in 1982 which created the loophole class for industrial use only failed to enforce that law!

Then compare that to this entire political action being taken against light duty auto class diesel's since the early 1990s where there was never any clean air to be gotten from not sold here in any numbers since 1985 MY.....No clean air to be gotten from overregulating vehicles no one even tries to sell here!!

This action and the stricter rules put into place on non-existent for over 30 years now auto class diesel offerings were never about cleaning up any air anywhere in the US...but was always an action to make the air look cleaner only on paper while allowing the illegal continuing use of the loophole class to fill our roads for the next two decades plus of fuel-wasting pollution spewing vehicles always produced to skirt CAFE & emissions rules/laws....

I shared these vehicles because they have drivetrains that met EPA standards in '08/'09 using Adblue. Doesn't matter what they cost or how many sold. I have numbers, but not here. I can tell you it's enough for us to run an active parts business supporting these vehicles alongside VWs.

VW elected not to use adblue. Their claim (as shared by the VW engineer who attended the '07 Montreal TDIFest) was that they didn't want to have meeting standards dependent on customers refilling the Adblue tank. Or perhaps it was cost. Perhaps it was arrogance, just like the arrogance that caused them to use the PD injection strategy because they didn't want to license common rail technology from Bosch. Whatever it was, they failed. And got caught.

And I don't know enough about this to be sure, but I believe larger engines in heavier vehicles have more difficulty meeting the '07/'08 standards, not less. This is, in part, why VW was able to successfully meet the negotiated standards for fixed '09-'14 2.0L cars without adblue, but by using a CAT that performs similarly to the one in the '07 E320 CDI. That catalyst would allow the Mercedes sedan to meet BIN3 standards, but it didn't do the job in the heavier ML and GL with the same engine. They needed Adblue that same year.

IndigoBlueWagon said:

I think you missed a few models.

• Mercedes E320 CDI with the OM648 inline 6 from '06 - 08
• Mercedes E350 CDI with the OM642 from '09-15
• Mercedes R-Class, GL, and ML with the OM642 from '07 on
• BMW 335d and X5d with the M57 engine from '09-11
• Jeep Liberty with a 2.8L VM Motori engine in '05-'06
• Jeep Grand Cherokee with a Mercedes OM642 in '07-'08

Depending on the application, Mercedes transitioned to Adblue use in '07 or '08 in all diesels. Jeep didn't use it. BMW always had Adblue.
And because they have different standards, I haven't included the Dodge/Freightliner/Mercedes Sprinters with the OM612 and OM642 engines.
These vehicles didn't sell in large numbers, but there were developed, tested, and certified during the same time period as VW's 2.0L common rail engines were brought to market.

Click to expand...

how about a few numbers on how many of these were actually sold here?? how much did they cost compared to the one other make, VWAG who tried to at least offer a diesel option here?????

I stand by what I said, these cars were sold in such low numbers as to be irrelevant to this discussion....

and the chrysler jeep stopped being offered because of the rules that went into effect from 07 MY forward...which makes my point for me!

all of these listed were larger displacement diesel engines than the 2.0 offering of VWAG, we all know that a larger engine offering was easier to make pass these stupid rules that went into effect from 07 MY forward! So again my points are backed up by the facts on the ground again...

and on the truck class are irrelevant to this discussion, they operated under different rules than the auto class did under this time frame....and how many here remember the failure rates of these junk that had a failure rate so bad that some were brought back by manufacturers after repeated engine failures...!....

I had personal experience of some of the junk the emissions regs produced which rendered these offerings as useless in the real world for use due to their failure rates that were so high! I know personally of chrysler & gm offerings from the 07-10 time range which had their engines replaced several times due to failures caused by trying to meet these stupid regs...

IndigoBlueWagon said:

I shared these vehicles because they have drivetrains that met EPA standards in '08/'09 using Adblue. Doesn't matter what they cost or how many sold. I have numbers, but not here. I can tell you it's enough for us to run an active parts business supporting these vehicles alongside VWs.

VW elected not to use adblue. Their claim (as shared by the VW engineer who attended the '07 Montreal TDIFest) was that they didn't want to have meeting standards dependent on customers refilling the Adblue tank. Or perhaps it was cost. Perhaps it was arrogance, just like the arrogance that caused them to use the PD injection strategy because they didn't want to license common rail technology from Bosch. Whatever it was, they failed. And got caught.

Click to expand...

VW tested the PDs & the CRs in the Denver area out a Porsche dealer trying to get the small displacement TDI offerings to pass the e-test & have a e-system that would last the required lifespan, I talked to one of the guys who told me of the resistance they were getting on trying to get the epa & carb to go along with all the driver involved emissions options for certification of the 09 MY CRs(the epa & carb did not want urea use in the auto class during this time). Any discussion of this has to consider these facts if it is going to be discussed in a relevant to really based during this time matter...

this comes down to the "fact" the epa & carb were more willing to allow urea use in the truck class & the luxury market than they were in average person lower price class all the way up to the 2011-12 time frame...they were not sold on allowing urea in the auto class while VWAG was in testing of something they could put on sale in the 2008(09 MY offerings)....

Not until the regulators changed their tune for the 12 MY for this class did VW finally start to use urea. again the realities on the ground from 05-11-12 must be considered in this discussion to get a clear picture of what vwag was up against in offering a e-test passable option for sale here in Canada & the US....

I am sorry, but the luxo class offerings in no way compare to VWAG trying to offering a reasonable priced diesel offering in the US / Canada. The vw's in some offerings outsold the luxo-box MB offerings 10+ to one.

The MB larger displacement offerings were sold to people the epa knew(were confident) would follow the rules on allowed urea use...

While the lower price vw offerings were sold to a different demographic that the epa & carb were not convinced without proof would follow the rules they demanded be put in place to use urea as an option. Allowed urea use came with specific requirements that were not really set in place in a useful, usable way until after 2010(11-12 MY) in average buyer passenger class....

So you were told that the EPA and CARB didn't want VW to use Adblue in their 4 cylinder cars? Engineers and VW reps I spoke to at that time said it was their preference, and that they were proud of meeting standards without urea (if only we knew).

And VW didn't use urea in 4 cylinder TDIs in NA until '15. If what you were told was true, why did they continue to build the CJAA engine in '12-14 without urea?

And also, why does the CKRA engine in the Passat, using urea, not meet EPA standards, even after a fix?

Finally, all cars I know of that use urea (including VWs) won't restart at some point if you fail to refill the tank. So compliance really isn't an issue.

IndigoBlueWagon said:

So you were told that the EPA and CARB didn't want VW to use Adblue in their 4 cylinder cars? Engineers and VW reps I spoke to at that time said it was their preference, and that they were proud of meeting standards without urea (if only we knew).

And VW didn't use urea in 4 cylinder TDIs in NA until '15. If what you were told was true, why did they continue to build the CJAA engine in '12-14 without urea?

And also, why does the CKRA engine in the Passat, using urea, not meet EPA standards, even after a fix?

Finally, all cars I know of that use urea (including VWs) won't restart at some point if you fail to refill the tank. So compliance really isn't an issue.

Click to expand...

The passat getting that change was mainly due to two facts, first the epa & carb by this point as I stated signed off on useful urea use rules in late 2010 in regular priced auto class offerings. and the fact that vwag knew that without the use of this in the larger heavier passat with the power the car needed for sale here they could not get the reliability they needed in emissions equipment without urea use.

Second, this car was the test bed for their epa & carb certification of this setup across the board in 2015 MY. With no issue at that point from the epa or carb they saw no hurry to go forward with across the board earlier.....

As far as vwag knew the adjustments they made to improve drivability were no different than what had always been allowed since the beginning of the bench e-test in the 1970s. And the way I read the rules, the way the rules had always been enforced up to the fall of 2016 they were correct in their assessment of the e-test rules...

This comes down to the fact that the way the epa & carb put these unpassable regs into place at the time they were put into place lead directly to the mess of today that has created this fake emissions issue....

ALso, remember that many places in the west still had LSD at the pump(which we all here at least know destroys required equipment needed to pass these e-test rules) all the way up to feds finally banning its use in on-road vehicles, you get a much clearer picture of how we ended up here.....

Perhaps. But even long after the transition to urea use, VW was building 2.0L cars that didn't meet EPA standards. And BMW's 2.0L engine does (in the 328d and X3). Additionally, even the "fixed" 15s with urea only meet a higher emissions threshold than they were originally supposed to be certified to meet, and may require hardware replacement during the emissions mileage period to meet this higher threshold.

I'm not disputing any of what you're asserting, I'm just saying that regardless VW made a product that failed standards, hid it, and continued to do so long after at least one competitor was meeting the standard with the same displacement engine.

I don't agree with some of the penalties that VW has been subjected to in this scandal. And I have a bigger stake in the outcome of this series of events than most. However, I do feel that VW has been arrogant, lazy, and dishonest in how they've engineered, marketed, and tested their cars. It's disappointing, to say the least.

loophole class was illegally used for over three decades to skirt e-test & CAFE rules

Here is something to consider for those are piling on.....

I didn't do a search for articles from the era before the public hanging of VWAG over this BS non-existent issue...

But I can remember GM, Toyota, Nissan, Ford and Mitsubishi specifically getting into similar trouble in the late 80s to early 90s on at least one model, they all passed the bench e-test but failed in the real world.

Someone who I can't recall fixed some cars, sold more lowered price fuel-sipping cleaner models and purchased back some of these models that failed e-test rules in the real world because they knew from the time they were built, knew their offering failed the e-test regs by a ridiculous amount in the real world, units sold were about 5 times these vwag offerings....



None of these were publicly gone after like vwag has been for some reasons..someone wanted a public hanging to make example of vwag over this to make diesel offerings get a scarlet letter that those who pushed this hoped would dampen all auto class diesel sales...

As I mentioned the loophole class was illegally used for over three decades to skirt e-test & CAFE rules, where is the fake outrage over this.....

IndigoBlueWagon said:

Perhaps. But even long after the transition to urea use, VW was building 2.0L cars that didn't meet EPA standards. And BMW's 2.0L engine does (in the 328d and X3). Additionally, even the "fixed" 15s with urea only meet a higher emissions threshold than they were originally supposed to be certified to meet, and may require hardware replacement during the emissions mileage period to meet this higher threshold.

I'm not disputing any of what you're asserting, I'm just saying that regardless VW made a product that failed standards, hid it, and continued to do so long after at least one competitor was meeting the standard with the same displacement engine.

I don't agree with some of the penalties that VW has been subjected to in this scandal. And I have a bigger stake in the outcome of this series of events than most. However, I do feel that VW has been arrogant, lazy, and dishonest in how they've engineered, marketed, and tested their cars. It's disappointing, to say the least.

Click to expand...

??really??? you are comparing a multiple turbo offering from BMW engine which costs almost double what the vwag offering costs??

you put that engine in a jetta or golf the base price will rise by at least 10 to 15k....pricing the vw out of the US?Canadian market....How many here are willing to consider the ~$37-40k minimum price tag that would come with vw using that setup on a ~25k jetta/golf, ~45-50k price tag on the passat to get the diesel engine option you speak of????

I don't how much crap they put on these cars, those price tags would kill the US /canadian vwag diesel market....then imagine the nightmare this multiple turbo offering would suffer through when those turbos start to fail with age.....

they would have created a line of offerings that would fill the junkyards with failed engines that only specialists can fix for a price that exceeded the resale value......Yeah....that would work,

You know as well as I do that bmw uses fancy options which cost's them pennies on the dollar to put on the car to hide the real cost associated with bringing that offering here and not lose money on every car sold here....


You need a perfect example of what would happen if vwag was actually able to sell the Wvonder cars with multiple turbos to average jo blo who has no clue what a turbo is, what it costs, of finding out who can actually work the car would be restricted even more than the current offerings adding $$$$$$$$$$$$$ to ownership costs....

Anyone else who remembers the mitsubishi/chrysler/eagal offerings with some fancy engines in the late 80s to mid to late 90s that filled the junkyards....
I had a couple of close friends that had these planters parked in their backyards for years with the idea of fixing their low mile in good shape body cars....

IN the end, most of these ended up with perfect bodies, with no reasonable priced engine replacement options going to the crusher...

The N47 in the 328d has one turbo. Twin scroll, but one turbo. Costs about $1,500 in the aftermarket. More than a VW CR turbo, but not an order of magnitude more.

No argument that BMW's pricing and value proposition is absurd. But I wouldn't be surprised if the actual cost (not price) of the hardware they used to meet emissions standards wasn't simlar to VWs. Of course they're working on an entirely different price structure here in the US. But that really doesn't have anything to do with that the stuff actually costs.

The 328d has a single twin scroll turbo. And there is no chance in hell that bmw 2L powerplant costs $10k more than the vw tdi powerplant. What about the gen 1 chevy cruze diesel? It's just as affordable as the tdi without resorting to cheating the regs. This seems like a circular argument- everyone is entitled to their opinion. But not all opinions are supported by the facts.

turbobrick240 said:

There are some true believers here (possibly suffering from Stockholm Syndrome) who will probably never see the error of VW's ways. That's fine- fight the power! Whether we see what they did as right or wrong, the end result is pretty obvious.

Click to expand...

We have a result of public hangings of VWAG carried across the US & Canada media for what reason..?..no syndrome here....just the facts,,,...''

I have already shown with the facts this was not ever about clean air...if anyone wants to go in that direction...there was never any clean air to be gotten from the overregulation of auto class diesel-powered vehicles no one has sold here in any numbers since 1985 MY....what does anyone think this was about...>?<...Not ever about clean air anywhere in the US when these rules were put into place!!

Nothing??

How about the fact that gasoline-powered cars, along with the real polluters(loophole class vehicles built specifically, "illegally" built for passenger use) during the time these regs were put into place have been given a quiet pass when they did similarly..?...

Real pollution producers have been given three decades long pass on their pollution....But we hang VWAG in the courthouse square over this,...

And we falsely accuse other auto makes of similar, fiat/chrysler just went through similar when there was no evidence in carb's or the epa's hands saying they had done anything wrong...which in the end was proved not to have broken the rules...We live in a world today where diesel's are guilty until proven innocent..?..

A world where BMW, MB & GM are forced to endure the added costs of extra testing proves they meet current rules with no evidence they did anything wrong....

MB seems to be saying !-this, if this is going to be how things are done in the US we will just stop offering diesels here ....is that where we are going, seems like it to me....are those going after vwag over this ok with this outcome..??...I know I am not ok with any of this....