Volkswagen's Clean Air Act violations on 2009+ TDIs spark huge recall, investigations

[Perry01]

How many years ago was the whole Pinto thing? Almost 40?

This is a pretty weak argument.

How about Toyota recalling millions of vehicles in 2010 due to runaway acceleration. No threat to deny registration if owners didn't comply with the recall. My argument is that if a major safety issue will not prompt the denial of vehicle registration, an emissions issue will be less likely so.
.

 

[alpinex]

Took my Jetta TDI to have timing belt changed at my dealers and as a loaner they gave me a Jetta TDI. When I asked if any changes have come down the pike, they told me that a couple of hours prior to my arrival, they had to move all their TDI's to a vacant lot and that all sales are pending until further word not from the EPA, but from VW. With this said, they still gave me the Jetta TDI as a loaner.....go figure....LOL. While I was there I asked if the recall would be mandatory and they said that they have not received anything from VW about the recall, but followed up by stating that as a customer, if I refused the recall, they would not apply the change to my vehicle, but that I would probably have to sign a waiver of service....no one seems to know what is really going to happen except that VW is going to pay out the highest fines ever applied by the EPA.

What remains to be determined is if the newest cars with the EA 288 are affected.

http://jalopnik.com/vw-discontinued-the-guilty-tdi-in-2014-so-why-cant-you-1732311030

 

[jayp111]

sure, even if you can see the symptom (bias) - what is the reason for it? Like did Diesel beat them up on the playground when they were young and Gas was nice to them? Usually human behavior can be tracked to a motive. I just don't see it here. it seems more likely that they simply believe that Diesels are worse and so believing that they will naturally be strict with something they are suspicious of.
other sources of bias could be that the people financially benefit directly or indirectly from the action. I don't see how that is possible when you are just making a salary working for the government.
I prefer the Diesel engine because observations show me that the core components last longer and I put a lot of miles on cars. I am not biased toward Diesel I just prefer it.

I really dont care why

The simple fact of the matter is that the bias exist against diesel passenger vehicles just like it has for a pile of other products since the EPA was created by executive fiat out of thin air by tricky dick nixon in the early 1970's

The EPA has tried to pick winners/losers since its creation through regulation/penalties based on manipulated data instead of letting people pick good products in a free market

People freely adopt good ideas.....bad ideas need to be forced on them through manipulation, deception and the threat of force

 

[Nuttendiesel]

Imagine an engine with great power and acceleration.
Fantastic fuel mileage
And meets all EPA standards.

As the saying goes......if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

You mean like the 3 liter BMW ?

 

[SageBrush]

Scientific American has a nice explanation of the HOW VW got the cheat past the EPA.

 

[Aquaticmind]

Without merit? You mean like the spill they knew was more than likely beforehand (AP FIOA request), the lack of a suitable disaster plan, the denial to release initial analysis data to state agencies, and the doctoring of the video they put up on their own website because it painted them in a less than positive light? Oh no my friend, the EPA has earned its reputation.

I think you raise good points but I generally disagree with your assertions. I think this the situation with the mine is far more complicated than you let on, but starts with a private mining operation that walked away from a toxic mess.

The improvements in air quality in the US should speak to the EPA's reputation. Their reputation of reducing chronic asthma, bronchitis, smog and other ailments related to air pollution isn't bad?

And when was the last time that a river caught on fire (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuyahoga_River? for the youngins)? Are rivers cleaner to swim and fish in now? Are there more rivers where it's safe to eat the fish from and don't have signs along their banks stating that pregnant women should ever eat the fish? the answer is YES

Why, because the EPA imposed limits on pollutant from cars, factories, power plants, etc.

Is the EPA perfect, no, but they are terribly underfunded for what we ask them to do.

And don't get me going on the Clean Water or Air Act since I have dealt with those regulations and regulators over the last 24 years as an environmental engineer. ... Suffice to say, the EPA does NOT have our best interests at heart nor are they concerned with anything so noble as protecting us. You agree with them because you see what they want you to see and not behind the scenes. They are not your friend.

Did you business have my or America's best interest at heart? Doubtful.

I agree with the EPA because the EPA has improved the health of people's lives, the quality of the water in the country has improved and this has ultimately helped keep American's healthy and the US a prosperous nation. I don't wish the air quality of China on the US nor the health effects it will have on it's people.

I see the EPA as, while imperfect, as trying their best to keep the air safe to breath, the water clean to fish in, swim in and boating in, and keep Americans from dying prematurely from environmental pollution.

As to the private contractor ricochet, they were hired by the EPA who was on site directing them.

Really? Seems like there is more to the story. So you mean there was at least one EPA employee on site?

They were also not there trying to clean up the mess, they were doing a site assessment, try to get your facts right if you're going to deflect responsibility. To anyone who doubts this, do the research, there is plenty out there and how it was mishandled by the EPA from the very beginning.

How do you decide what an appropriate disaster plan is if you haven't done a site assessment?

If a private company tried to do this they'd be in jail right now, but the EPA is not culpable or responsible.

Really? Because there are so many BP executives in jail from the much more significant spill in the Gulf of Mexico, or from the numerous oil pipe line breaks over the last few years into rivers and estuaries around this country. Regardless of the EPA's mine debacle, the country is light on punishment for breaking environmental laws.

What about the the mine operators who walk away from their mines and leave Americans for the bill to clean it up? What punishment for them?

When they start regulating all forms of pollutant the same, since we 'live in one world', then maybe their rules will have more merit. But so long as the rules are for sale to the highest bidder and ignored by numerous point and non-point sources, they will continue to be ineffective.

One reason all pollutants might be regulated the same way is due to the toxicity of the pollutant. I would think that less toxic pollutants might be regulated less severely. I also don't see any evidence that EPA is for sale to the highest bidder, what I do see is politicians who are for sale. They tend to hate the EPA.

Do you have any idea of how hard non-point source pollutants are to deal with in a regulatory fame work? The biggest issues come from agriculture and cities. Agriculture is exempt from the Clean Water Act. Cities don't have the funds to deal with their issues and can't even keep sewer pipes from overflowing in the creeks and rivers. Where do you want the money to deal with that to come from? It is a big complex issues.

As to being immoral or unethical to 'go along with' the enforcement and made up laws on which you had no say, I call bunk on that. This very country was FOUNDED on such dissension.

And here I thought we wanted representation in the British parliament.

Meanwhile, I'll keep my rusty, smokey, dirty old TDI's going as long as I can because that is what benefits me as an individual. If rules are in place to make me an environmental criminal, then I have no problem being one.

If it is not a 2009-2015 TDI, I think you're safe. I seriously doubt my 2003 would pass a NOx test but I'd be happy to own another diesel that does sometime in the dear future. Ain't nothing wrong with clean air.

 

[Jeta Life]

3 liter BMW diesel is clean so not a dream just VW's nightmare!

That is a nice ride, good to see them on the road. As long as there's still diesels on the road like that Bimmer or Benz Bluetec. Nice

It's all good. Passat TDi is no slouch either. Roomy and Zippy.

 

[Booth44]

I have to start laughing right now. A lot of forum members are hoping that VW somehow comes to their rescue.

Huh? We already have the finished product. Many of us couldn't understand/believe how the fuel economy #s were so much better than EPA estimates. Now we know. We don't need VWoA to do anything at all (except maybe stall the EPA as long as possible). It's done.

 

[CruisingWagon]

Dunno if this has been posted yet, but Jalopnik reports that the guilty motor is the Type EA 189, not the new-for-2015 Type EA 288 -- and also questions why the 2015s are being blocked. Undoubtedly more to come on this.

http://jalopnik.com/vw-discontinued-the-guilty-tdi-in-2014-so-why-cant-you-1732311030

Interesting article. Depending on how this turns out I am going to assume anyone with a VW TDI (heck maybe even anyone with a VW period) will face the wrath of the "worst case scenarios." Time will tell....

 

[ccbsecu]

You mean like the 3 liter BMW ?

....for $50k.....better be true....

 

[Bloggingemail973]

Looking For Details To Reduce My Confusion

First, this is my first post and, if I am in the wrong thread I apologize.

I purchased a Golf 2015 TDI on 7/1/15. I purchased it cause it was a fun car to drive, "clean" and had good mileage. It is a great car. In reading about TDI's, some had urea (AdBlue) systems and some do not. Mine does. I recognize that my car must have the software "problem" but is the AdBlue system actually doing its job or is it just for looks? Is it likely that this vehicle is actually spewing out all those pollutants?

Thank you.

 

[BudMan5]

I have a 2009 Jetta TDI which right now has about 115,000 miles and pretty much averages 42 MPG.

I don't post here much but I do drop in often to read posts because I am not ashamed to admit there are a lot of people who have a lot of technical expertise that I don't have. The forum has been a good teaching tool for me.

I am probably older than a lot of you here. In many other things I do have a lot of experience with I thought I would offer my opinion. That's all it is by the way, just my opinion..

I am not going to do the 'flash' and in order to accomplish this, my VW dealer just lost all my future service business.I won't do it because I like how my Jetta runs just the way it is now. I see no reason to change it just to satisfy the EPA.

Here's some predictions:

What does that mean in the future? That means I will be able to sell it sometime in the future, as being "pre-ban" just like folks do now for high capacity firearm magazines. You know, a higher premium because it will still be getting 42 mpg and still have the same amount of power because it hasn't been changed.

I'll buy VW stock tomorrow or whenever it appears that it has reached the bottom. That's because I know that sooner or later, the stock will bounce right back up to the same level it was before the scandal and probably even higher. I know this because I have faith the in the average American's short term memory.

VW is going to pay a fine but it will be where near $18B. I would guess somewhere nearer $1B.

Those opportunistic folks who have already filed a lawsuit have kind of screwed the rest of us out of a quick resolution payment from VW. The VW managers will have to hold off offering anything because of the pending litigation but sometime, waaayyyy in the future everybody will probably get a pretty nice check but it may be linked to having the flash done.

How do I know all of this? Because history repeats over and over again.

So, go out and buy VW stock and probably ammo too, especially .22lr if you can find it. If Hilary gets in, stock up on high cap magazines too.

History always repeats.

 

[Booth44]

First, this is my first post and, if I am in the wrong thread I apologize.
I purchased a Golf 2015 TDI on 7/1/15. I purchased it cause it was a fun car to drive, "clean" and had good mileage. It is a great car. In reading about TDI's, some had urea (AdBlue) systems and some do not. Mine does. I recognize that my car must have the software "problem" but is the AdBlue system actually doing its job or is it just for looks? Is it likely that this vehicle is actually spewing out all those pollutants?
Thank you.

The AdBlue system is doing it's job. Not as well as the EPA would like, but better than prior versions. Your vehicle is spewing out quite a few pollutants - just like every other motor vehicle ever built - but fewer than most.

 

[pfennig]

It's been just less than a year since I purchased my TDI JSW. Do you think this problem would in some way fall under state Lemon Law rules?

I like the car I had before I knew it polluted like, uh, me the day after curried broccoli casserole. And I'm highly sceptical the VW will be able to make me happy, suspect it will be more like "here's credit towards another one" or "let us wash your car".

 

[Booth44]

What does that mean in the future? That means I will be able to sell it sometime in the future, as being "pre-ban" just like folks do now for high capacity firearm magazines. You know, a higher premium because it will still be getting 42 mpg and still have the same amount of power because it hasn't been changed.

Most likely your car will increase in value. I encourage you to read the EPA announcement in the first post of this thread. By the sounds of it they have every intention of holding VWoA's feet to the fire but leaving car owners themselves unscathed, provided you don't take the recall when it's eventually released.

 

[TDIfor]

Well, I was directed to post my inquiry here.

What does this mean for ALH owners? Do we now have a TDI that can be sold at a premium? A veritable collector's edition TDI?

Yeah, we dumped our emissions plumbing too, and Vag-commed the EGR settings, so I see this latest issue as a natural progression. And for a 2002 at 278K miles still pulling an honest 48mpg, I figger my emissions more than offset the increased fuel I don't burn, the new metal I don't need to have mined for a new car or the transit costs getting the car to my dealer.

 

[WardB]

As the US constitutes just 6% of VW's market, the EPA and all of us here may just be a minor part of their overall problem. Their neighbors in the EU may decide to raise some hell.

 

[bring]

What remains to be determined is if the newest cars with the EA 288 are affected.

EA288 engine on 2015 models is included - according to EPA link on Dieselgate thread

 

[KERMA]

Your vehicle is spewing out quite a few pollutants - just like every other motor vehicle ever built - but fewer than most.

I think this is important and being overlooked in the frenzy/panic.

Even at the "higher than expected" emissions level, these are still VERY clean cars! Especially when you consider what has gone before.

They just may not qualify for "ULEV" status any more.

 

[eb2143]

First, this is my first post and, if I am in the wrong thread I apologize.
I purchased a Golf 2015 TDI on 7/1/15. I purchased it cause it was a fun car to drive, "clean" and had good mileage. It is a great car. In reading about TDI's, some had urea (AdBlue) systems and some do not. Mine does. I recognize that my car must have the software "problem" but is the AdBlue system actually doing its job or is it just for looks? Is it likely that this vehicle is actually spewing out all those pollutants?
Thank you.

I encourage you to continue reading, but in short, yes your AdBlue system (the selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system) is functional. The best case scenario is that VW will adjust the computer software so that your car uses more urea/DEF, but is able meet the on-road NOx emissions VW promised it would. It is also possible that more aggressive reductant metering will not be enough, and tweaks to other engine parameters, like EGR duty cycles, will be needed.

It's the older CR TDIs that utilized lean NOx traps that are emitting the most NOx and don't possess the hardware needed to meet requirements, in all likelihood.

 

[tdibigd]

It's been just less than a year since I purchased my TDI JSW. Do you think this problem would in some way fall under state Lemon Law rules?

I like the car I had before I knew it polluted like, uh, me the day after curried broccoli casserole. And I'm highly sceptical the VW will be able to make me happy, suspect it will be more like "here's credit towards another one" or "let us wash your car".

I don't believe Lemon laws would apply here. Those apply to cars that have had repeated unsuccessful attempts to fix problems. VW hasn't tried to fix this one yet.

I think your thoughts on possible compensation are much more realistic than most posters here.

 

[V8Boatbuilder]

I think this is important and being overlooked in the frenzy/panic.

Even at the "higher than expected" emissions level, these are still VERY clean cars! Especially when you consider what has gone before.

They just may not qualify for "ULEV" status any more.

Yep... that's what everyone is forgetting!! We're all still getting amazing economy out of these cars.

Fewer gallons burned means fewer gallons transported means fewer gallons refined means fewer gallons extracted from the dinosaurs.

Keep calm and drive on... without having to stop at the pump as often.

 

[Nuttendiesel]

I have a 2009 Jetta TDI which right now has about 115,000 miles and pretty much averages 42 MPG.

I don't post here much but I do drop in often to read posts because I am not ashamed to admit there are a lot of people who have a lot of technical expertise that I don't have. The forum has been a good teaching tool for me.

I am probably older than a lot of you here. In many other things I do have a lot of experience with I thought I would offer my opinion. That's all it is by the way, just my opinion..

I am not going to do the 'flash' and in order to accomplish this, my VW dealer just lost all my future service business.I won't do it because I like how my Jetta runs just the way it is now. I see no reason to change it just to satisfy the EPA.

Here's some predictions:

What does that mean in the future? That means I will be able to sell it sometime in the future, as being "pre-ban" just like folks do now for high capacity firearm magazines. You know, a higher premium because it will still be getting 42 mpg and still have the same amount of power because it hasn't been changed.

I'll buy VW stock tomorrow or whenever it appears that it has reached the bottom. That's because I know that sooner or later, the stock will bounce right back up to the same level it was before the scandal and probably even higher. I know this because I have faith the in the average American's short term memory.

VW is going to pay a fine but it will be where near $18B. I would guess somewhere nearer $1B.

Those opportunistic folks who have already filed a lawsuit have kind of screwed the rest of us out of a quick resolution payment from VW. The VW managers will have to hold off offering anything because of the pending litigation but sometime, waaayyyy in the future everybody will probably get a pretty nice check but it may be linked to having the flash done.

How do I know all of this? Because history repeats over and over again.

So, go out and buy VW stock and probably ammo too, especially .22lr if you can find it. If Hilary gets in, stock up on high cap magazines too.

History always repeats.

I like this guy!

 

[SageBrush]

The US has a reputation for relatively strict air pollution and auto emission regulations, so I decided to look around the world a little to see if it is true. Here is Japan's Diesel auto emissions

 

[akjdouglass]

I feel betrayed! VW lied to me! No one has ever lied or cheated to sell a car before! Omg! Omg!

I bought a car to save the planet and instead I've been destroying the universe! Omg! Omg!

VW is going to buy my car back and give me free pedicures for the rest of my life! Omg! Omg!

Help, help, a cloud just hit me in the head. Omg! Omg!

 

[pfennig]

I don't believe Lemon laws would apply here. Those apply to cars that have had repeated unsuccessful attempts to fix problems. VW hasn't tried to fix this one yet.

I think your thoughts on possible compensation are much more realistic than most posters here.

Well, I could take it in for repair tomorrow, then return the next day when it didn't work..... an automaker can't just say "we'll wait and try after your lemon-law period of one year has expired"...... bah, who am I kidding, of course they can.

Hopefully you were referring to my earlier thoughts on compensation a la "full service on all powertrain elements to 200k miles, with a detune" rather than "let us wash your car". The former could be very expensive for them, but would keep me as a customer. I'd even consider another VW after 200k miles. And their cost would be spread out rather than immediate. And it would benefit dealers' service depts.


Of course, the odds of that happening rather than getting ye olde car wash while the class action lawyers buy walk-in humidors? This sucks.


And, because I'm still in my original warranty period, it will potentially be extra hard to avoid a snuck-in detune unless I take the extra kick in the teeth and pay for my own service somewhere else. This sucks.

 

[pknopp]

I still love my car and have no plans on getting rid of it.

 

[jhinsc]

Just read a news release that VW is offering dealer compensation for the loss of sales of TDI's due to their stop-sale order. IF VW can't get the emissions levels down to a consistent level without affecting longevity, drivability, and mileage, my hypothetical guess is they will offer both dealers and customers some kind of compensation/incentive to get the cars back and customers into a TSI model. It would be a two-fold step to help dealers and customers, and keep VW owners in the 'fold'. Of course, I'm speaking from LA LA land where birds and butterflies glide upon puffy pure white clouds because of the all the fresh air we're creating by driving "clean" diesels.

BUT, I still love my TDI!!!

 

[TDIpilot4u]

i feel betrayed! Vw lied to me! No one has ever lied or cheated to sell a car before! Omg! Omg!

I bought a car to save the planet and instead i've been destroying the universe! Omg! Omg!

Vw is going to buy my car back and give me free pedicures for the rest of my life! Omg! Omg!

Help, help, a cloud just hit me in the head. Omg! Omg!

lol :d

 

[EDTucker]

It's hard to wade through all the doom and gloom in this thread. Just be patient and wait. Playing the arm chair EPA agent or the uncertified diesel emission guru is just adding fuel to this fire. VW messed up at this point multiply governments around the world are investigating and we will get an answer, a solution and then should we judge on what to do with all the info. As for resale value just remember that flooding out a market has the same affect as a car that does not meet emissions. I am disappointed at VW but truth be told the history of diesel says it all it does not burn as clean as other fuels and if you really thought this Clean TDI was the environmental savior you did not do your home work. It has always been false advertising go to Europe where diesel is on par with gas sales and see the SMOG your self.