"We Didn't Lie" VW said in Detroit

[john.jackson9213]

Volkswagen's CEO says "We didn't lie" at the Detroit auto show.

Sounds to me like VW has been talking to a Criminal Defense Attorney.

Partial quote from NPR interview:

" Here's the exchange Sunday night:
NPR: You said this was a technical problem, but the American people feel this is not a technical problem, this is an ethical problem that's deep inside the company. How do you change that perception in the U.S.?
Matthias Mueller: Frankly spoken, it was a technical problem. We made a default, we had a ... not the right interpretation of the American law. And we had some targets for our technical engineers, and they solved this problem and reached targets with some software solutions which haven't been compatible to the American law. That is the thing. And the other question you mentioned — it was an ethical problem? I cannot understand why you say that.
NPR: Because Volkswagen, in the U.S., intentionally lied to EPA regulators when they asked them about the problem before it came to light.
Mueller: We didn't lie. We didn't understand the question first. And then we worked since 2014 to solve the problem. And we did it together and it was a default of VW that it needed such a long time." End of partial quote.

Link to Full story:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...-lie-volkswagen-ceo-says-of-emissions-scandal

 

[Drivbiwire]

Define "active" and "passive" emissions strategies.

Now explain that to the EPA who only understand "active" emissions strategies, and now you have an explanation of why they are inferring VW used a defeat device...

He's right, but the explanation is too complicated for the public and seemingly the EPA to comprehend.

The university study, if anything made the case that the EPA and CARB will need to switch to "RWE" (Real World Emissions) protocols for emissions testing as is the case in Europe under
Euro 5+.

Transient emissions in "RWE" conditions will always be different than a controlled laboratory with the car on rollers.

FWIW, anytime you plug in VCDS, you want the emissions controls to wake up so you can scan output values, that's kind of the point. The fact the car is not dosing the SCR 24/7 as you drive Down the road boggles the minds of the gasoline engine proponents.

 

[GoFaster]

"Active" or "passive" matters not ... it has to be real-world functional, which these cars are not.

 

[john.jackson9213]

"Active" or "passive" matters not ... it has to be real-world functional, which these cars are not.

Bingo! Exactly right.

All the car makers Except VW seem to have understood. Now VW claims they didn't understand the U.S. law? Or European law either?

 

[Ol'Rattler]

"Active" or "passive" matters not ... it has to be real-world functional, which these cars are not.

Which NONE of the other cars the EPA test are either. If the EPA went to actual driving testing conditions, how many cars would pass?

Any car made is designed to pass the emissions test as it is specified by the EPA which does not represent actual driving conditions.

 

[Drivbiwire]

"Active" or "passive" matters not ... it has to be real-world functional, which these cars are not.

Thats not how the tests are defined or emissions determined, VW did exactly as the EPA wanted and now the EPA is crying foul.

Real world emissions will NEVER parallel specific and controlled laboratory results.

Until the EPA adopts "RWE" standards, I sure hope they don't start in on other car makers tail pipes while driving down the road (Gas engines included)...

 

[GoFaster]

The "defeat logic" is certainly not what the EPA or CARB wanted. Given that VW has admitted its presence and the contents of the ECU have been more-or-less dissected by people who know, it's pointless to defend them in this matter - and given that the BMW X5 diesel that WVU tested did not exhibit emissions transgressions to anywhere near the extent that the two Volkswagens did, AND that EPA and CARB have approved light-duty diesel applications under greater scrutiny since the scandal broke, the "everyone else is guilty too" defence doesn't fly, either.

 

[Drivbiwire]

I think the main issue internal to VW is the fact they pushed for the NON-SCR system on the initial CR engines. This saved them the $300 per car and opened up the possibility of this getting out of control.

The SCR engines I feel will be the easiest to fix with higher dosing of the AdBlue (DEF).

Older cars will more than likely need the SCR retrofitted, a control ECU to manage the system that interfaces with the existing ECU to avoid a major hardware change. My guess a conformal tank will be installed in the front fender region with a simple filler tube to allow filling.

The BMW X5 being a larger vehicle won't suffer from the low load NOx output the smaller TDI's do. As we all know low load is the bane of diesel engines and NOx output. Heavier vehicles are easier to manage in terms of NOx, since load and engine size make the very low load conditions a rarity.

 

[jolvi1]

Which NONE of the other cars the EPA test are either. If the EPA went to actual driving testing conditions, how many cars would pass?

Any car made is designed to pass the emissions test as it is specified by the EPA which does not represent actual driving conditions.

This is a fact. Kind of like the MPG put all the numbers in crunch them and this is what they come up with. Real driving versus computer driving am betting a lot of vehicles would not pass there stated rate.

 

[redbarron55]

It was a "Technical" fault not a lie.
Technically they chose not to comply with the US law. I think they understood perfectly what they were doing, but convinced themselves that their superiority justified their "technical" solution.
There were most likely many in the chain if command that were aware of this "technical" marvel of engineering.
They were probably of the opinion that no one would notice and it met the requirements of the testing.
What we used to call creative rule reading back in my NASCAR days. Of course then they slapped your wrist and confiscated your "special" parts. Now they penalize the teams, drivers and crew chiefs etc.
VW just tried some creative rule reading and got caught. The penalties were posted at the time and they should have been aware of them and the risk involved.
They decided to cheat and risked the survival of the company. A very poor choice it would seem.

 

[dwfdiesel]

Engineer speak they do it all the time. Instead of applying a standard they reinvent the meaning of the language to meet the intent of the specification but this time they tried it on a law which is different we leave the interpretation of that to the courts ergo the charges and law suit.
The difference in language and social acceptance between the two country's also effects this. Did they know? sure they decided to justify it to what could be accepted. Did they know the intent? sure they engineered a solution. Are they guilty? Definitely in USA.
Solutions to the situation : there are many, we may speculate but the legal system and government will tell us the answer in time.