FCA cheating diesel settlement

Fiat-Chrysler has reached a settlement for their emissions cheating software in the 2014-'16 3.0l "ecodiesel" vehicles. It looks like eligible owners may get around $3000 and an extended warranty along with the software update.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/chrysler/2019/01/10/jeep-ram-fca-settlement/2530204002/

turbobrick240 said:

Fiat-Chrysler has reached a settlement for their emissions cheating software in the 2014-'16 3.0l "ecodiesel" vehicles. It looks like eligible owners may get around $3000 and an extended warranty along with the software update.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/chrysler/2019/01/10/jeep-ram-fca-settlement/2530204002/

Click to expand...

A lot of folks I've seen talking about their 1/2-ton Ram & Jeep Cherokees with the Fiat diesels don't have any interest in a software update. I know one fellow who just plain dumped his ecodiesel once he got word of the software update. We'll have to see what happens!

Miss_Athanatos said:

A lot of folks I've seen talking about their 1/2-ton Ram & Jeep Cherokees with the Fiat diesels don't have any interest in a software update. I know one fellow who just plain dumped his ecodiesel once he got word of the software update. We'll have to see what happens!

Click to expand...

Yeah, it will be interesting. Bosch is also chipping in again. But neither FCA nor Bosch are owning up to it like VW eventually did. The main difference here is that the ecodiesels are fully capable of meeting the standards with the factory hardware. I guess they wanted to reduce DEF usage and/or prolong emissions equipment lifespan.

I would believe it. A friend has one. Even with the cheat it burns through a lot of DEF when he is towing. It's kind of a headache and one of his least favorite things about the truck.

My friend has one that has an eco-tune on it, that now uses zero DEF, gets 30 MPG on the highway, and has just as much power as it always did.

He was able to leave all the hardware intact, but was told to drain the def tank and rinse it out thoroughly and dry it so that it can be put back into service some day if need be. But that is difficult to do aside from dropping it out altogether.

Miss_Athanatos said:

A lot of folks I've seen talking about their 1/2-ton Ram & Jeep Cherokees with the Fiat diesels don't have any interest in a software update. I know one fellow who just plain dumped his ecodiesel once he got word of the software update. We'll have to see what happens!

Click to expand...

I felt the same way with VW, but I eventually got over it. I said I’d never own a TDI again, but after owning a new Passat TSI, I ended up with another 2015 Passat TDI. Even my wife went and bought a 2015 Audi Q7 TDI a few weeks ago. There’s just something about owning a diesel. I’m sure ECO Diesel owners might feel the same way eventually

I bought my 17 Ram ecodiesel, almost a year ago, knowing full well about the pending emissions issues and even the engine failure issues. I'm sitting at just over 16,000 miles with a lifetime average of just over 22 mpg. I figure I'd be at least 5 mpg under that if I were running rug.

I love driving the beast with all most all of the bells and whistles. It's supposed to be our retirement tow vehicle. Although if the stock market doesn't stop yo-yoing, I may have to stretch the retirement timeline and then need to upgrade the truck.

oilhammer said:

My friend has one that has an eco-tune on it, that now uses zero DEF, gets 30 MPG on the highway, and has just as much power as it always did.
He was able to leave all the hardware intact, but was told to drain the def tank and rinse it out thoroughly and dry it so that it can be put back into service some day if need be. But that is difficult to do aside from dropping it out altogether.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, blatantly ripping off emissions equipment instead of having sneaky software that makes it active part of the time is a much better solution

-J

Exactly, better fuel economy, less down time. Readiness always set, totally a stealth deal. DPF still intact and working, just greatly reduced regen cycles since there is much less soot created in the first place.

Oil stays cleaner longer, too, so a 25k mile service interval is all that is needed. No more dumping 10 liters of oil every 10k miles.

Smashed Ixnay said:

I felt the same way with VW, but I eventually got over it. I said I’d never own a TDI again, but after owning a new Passat TSI, I ended up with another 2015 Passat TDI. Even my wife went and bought a 2015 Audi Q7 TDI a few weeks ago. There’s just something about owning a diesel. I’m sure ECO Diesel owners might feel the same way eventually

Click to expand...

The folks I'm talking about, other than the fellow that got rid of his, just want to keep their trucks as they are now. No software update. If a software update is mandated in order to register the vehicles, these folks say they will dump their ecodiesels...at least until they see whether other people are getting good service out of the "fixed" ecodiesels.

I'm still running a stock TDI with no software "fix"...and I am quite pleased with it.

I'd feel better about FCA if they just admitted to knowingly installing defeat devices that reduced emissions during testing. They probably saw the $30 billion that VW paid out and decided to take a different tack.
I was looking up the 3.0 VM Motori ecodiesel engine and was pretty surprised that besides Jeeps, and Ram pickups, it can be found in Maseratis.

It was also slated to go into a Cadillac but GM pulled out. It is a decent engine to drive, but perhaps less refined than VAG's 3.0L V6 and certainly less refined than the MB 3.0L V6. But in a big full framed pickup, it works fine.

That extended warranty might be more valuable than the $3k. The VM 3.0 likes to rev more than traditional truck diesels, and apparently has some flaws in the lubricating system that manifest during low rev, high load usage. They revised the oil spec from 5w30 to 5w40 in an effort to address the problem.

I purchased my Ram 1500 ecodiesel new back in 2014. 76k miles, average of 25.5 mpg over it's lifetime and still running strong. I'll take the fix. Supposedly the issue wasn't about cheating for emissions testing purposes but rather disabling certain things under certain conditions. FCA did not disclose every mechanism for this to the EPA during certification, and thus the lawsuit. FCA has maintained since day one they were in compliance with the law and followed industry standards. The lawyers are the only one's getting rich off of all of this stuff. I still love my truck and I will keep it.


Also, since I already have an extended warranty, I'll put off getting the fix for as long as practical, assuming the extended warranty starts from the time of the fix.

Fiat Chrysler should have been required to invest in the Electrify America charger network like VW was. They committed the exact same crime even if bringing their vehicles up to standard will be easier.

Any updates on the MB Bluetec scandal?

gulfcoastguy said:

Fiat Chrysler should have been required to invest in the Electrify America charger network like VW was. They committed the exact same crime even if bringing their vehicles up to standard will be easier.

Click to expand...

No they didn't. They did not intentionally engage their emissions systems only during emissions testing, and disable it during normal driving. They did not lie to the government when the issue was discovered either.

What FCA engineers did was disable some of the emissions systems during extreme operating conditions to avoid engine and component damage. This included disabling regens during extreme hot temperatures, extreme loads and extreme cold starts. The EPA rules allow for manufacturers to do this.

The non-compliance is that they did not disclose every possible combination with regard to when and what was disabled. The trucks fully comply with the emissions regulations under all normal driving conditions and under all EPA test conditions.

It wasn't until the lawyers started independently hiring test facilities to look for deficiencies in the emissions systems that the problem was identified. I honestly believe this was an overreach by the EPA. The settlement by FCA claims no intentional wrongdoing. My understanding is that FCA has cooperated with the government since day one. Also, I have no doubt FCA didn't want this to go to court and possibly face the type of settlement VW ended up having to pay out, so they took the deal.


One more thing. If the EPA was really concerned about CO2 emissions and global warming, they would have done everything possible to ensure both VW and FCA continued making these fuel efficient vehicles.

Only correction is that it went to court and was handled under arbitration by the same lawyer that tried to put VW out of business.

The vehicles in question did in fact produce excessive NOx emissions when tested under normal operating conditions by researchers at WVU. The government investigation isn't over yet. There could still be criminal charges.

turbobrick240 said:

The vehicles in question did in fact produce excessive NOx emissions when tested under normal operating conditions by researchers at WVU. The government investigation isn't over yet. There could still be criminal charges.

Click to expand...

And that is the crux of the issue. "Normal" operating conditions are defined by the EPA. However, "normal" and real world are two different things. The ecodiesel does indeed disable the emissions systems under real world conditions that are outside the defined "normal".

Many, if not most, auto manufacturers have looked at ways to skirt the emissions standards over the last 50 years. It's pretty clear to me that VW, FCA, Merdcedes, etc. knew that the diesel cheat software was not legit, and in fact illegal. They just figured they could get away with it.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/chrysler/2018/05/18/fiat-chrysler-diesel-emails-emissions-cheating/35063895/

IMHO, what really brought all of the agencies and WVU together was VW advertising of "clean diesel" and the publications stating that the lighter weight vehicles, golf, jetta, jsw, did not need urea treatment to meet the regulations. Bold statements that started the dieselgate rock rolling.