VW-Style Cheating: An Experiment

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Remember, the Ford Excursion V10 is a certified low emissions vehicle. A Honda Civic HX from the 90s is a gross polluter.


And its true. Hate 'em or not, emission controls work. There was a news story a few years ago that would have been dark comedy if it hadn't been true. A guy tried to commit suicide with a Ford Explorer idling in his closed garage, but it didn't emit enough CO to kill him. Probably had a helluva headache though.

There's nothing much more laughable than seeing a "green party," "environmental defense fund" or similar sticker on a 1960s VW bug or Volvo.



I agree with you. I recently had the option to remove the cat from my Jeep when the exhaust fell off. Since it's the big cat, there is no oxygen sensor on it ... but I do like having catalysts so I put it back on. And the raw exhaust fumes were horrible.


But I believe a Ford Excursion is going to be putting out much, much more pollution over it's life than a Honda Civic that, literally, burns less than 1/5 of the fuel.

I'm sure their oddball calculation is based on a crazy formula; in the end, the Civic probably puts out less bad stuff per mile driven than the Excursion. Probably not per gallon of fuel consumed since the ultra lean burn mode can't keep the catalyst up to temperature.
 
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
In 1970 driving through Downey into LA on the freeway I pulled over to the shoulder and stopped because my eyes were burning. A motorcycle cop stopped and gave me a small bottle of eye drops and dropped some in his eyes from a bottle in his jacket pocket just before the took off. As I was using the eye drops I realized I could not see the building in downtown LA because the smog was so bad.

Today, no problem.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/warming-lakes-1.3369700

'Another, ironically, is that decreased pollution in North America is leading to less smog and cloud cover.

So more solar radiation is hitting the lakes and water temperatures are warming faster than you'd just expect simply [from] climate change," Sharma said. "But hopefully, this will be a short-lived phenomenon.""
 
Emissions is grams per mile. I think it changes when you go above 8,500lb GVWR, so a V10 might be getting in under that... or it's literally low emissions.

But don't confuse CO2 with HC, NOx, or other stuff. That 8mpg V10 might well make less grams/mile of HC+NOx+etc than the Civic. I too would find it hard to believe, but maybe it's true.

Also, at some point in the last few years evaporative emissions got tightened up. It might be that the Ford has a better evap system than that old Civic. Both have evap systems, but as you might guess, the newer stuff is simply tighter.

Also, I think they tightened up cold start emissions. Today cars certainly work very hard to control cold start, maybe back in the day that Civic, since it had more lax targets, simply made more at cold start.
 
Originally Posted By: supton

Also, I think they tightened up cold start emissions. Today cars certainly work very hard to control cold start, maybe back in the day that Civic, since it had more lax targets, simply made more at cold start.


Fords certainly idle ridiculously high on a cold start to get that cat to light right off. That probably plays a part. My Focus will idle between 1800 and 2500 RPM until it senses that the catalyst is working. The same with my old Taurus and the '01 F350.
 
My truck does likewise, 1800rpm or so before coming down to 1500 or so. For some reason it takes several seconds for the mechanical fan to do its bit and stop spinning--so those first few seconds is quite the commotion.
 
There is no mpg penalty per Ford engineer interview for the current emission system on the HD Ford diesels.

I don't know why Dodge didn't design this system correct in the first place? That was just a bad design trying to get by without DEF. Maybe VW hired the engineers who should have been fired from the Ram design team who designed the Ram emission systems?
 
Originally Posted By: Olas
44%?! If everyone did that global fuel use would be halved! Supplies would last twice as long and prices would tumble.


thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Koz1
Originally Posted By: Olas
44%?! If everyone did that global fuel use would be halved! Supplies would last twice as long and prices would tumble.


thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif



Prices wouldn't drop because production would be cut, and we wouldn't be able to breathe.
 
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: Koz1
Originally Posted By: Olas
44%?! If everyone did that global fuel use would be halved! Supplies would last twice as long and prices would tumble.


thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif



Prices wouldn't drop because production would be cut, and we wouldn't be able to breathe.


EGR was made to reduce NOX, SCR does that without robbing power or fuel mileage. With SCR EGR becomes a Dinosaur consuming much much more fuel and destroying performance for no reason.
 
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Ozone action days. I do wonder how many of those we'd be getting if everybody drove electric cars. You see, ozone is emitted by high voltage electrical discharges. I also wonder what emissions are produced by charging batteries, especially by Tesla's Superchargers. The whole photochemical smog issue took root in California because the local topography of the LA Basin forms a thermal inversion layer which traps warm gases close to the ground, leading to an exaggerated effect of photochemical smog formation. So why does LA drive emissions standards for the rest of the country, when the rest of the country doesn't have their inherent problem?


It's not just California that has smog. I can see it out the windows of our office here in downtown Houston during the summer. Dallas has it, El Paso, San Antonio. It's been getting better over the last 10 years I've been in Houston but it's still here. I just moved to suburbs of Houston last year. It's nice being able to go out and jog after I get home whereas when we lived in apartment near downtown I would wait until around 9pm to go so that the air quality would improve.
 
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Fortunately most people are more mature than that.

It has nothing to do with maturity. Most people don't know how to change their own oil, much less defeat any emissions system. And, they're also cheap, as has already been pointed out.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Fortunately most people are more mature than that.

It has nothing to do with maturity. Most people don't know how to change their own oil, much less defeat any emissions system. And, they're also cheap, as has already been pointed out.

Also it is illegal to tamper with emission control in some states, especially in California where we do smog test every other year.
 
That, too. Some places have legislation in place, some do not. There are plenty of reasons why one does not tamper with emissions systems, including maturity, cluelessness, inability, fear or warranty, legislation, laziness, cheapness, feelings of social responsibility, and so forth. Heck, some simply couldn't care either way, as long as the vehicle goes from Point A to Point B.

But, look at us on BITOG. I suspect well over half the population doesn't know what brand of oil is in their crankcase, and to us, that is scandalous.
 
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
If I said that...

By merely unplugging an EGR on a 6.7L without existing issues, my MPG increased by 44%.

Would you believe me?


Knowing how the emission systems work on a 2007+ diesel...YEP!
 
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
So you proved the EPA cheat works, and why they did it. You also proved why urea systems are preferred.


That truck was built BEFORE UREA SYSTEMS WERE IN USE!

Quote:
The invisible thing that happened when you pulled that EGR plug is that NOx emissions shot thru the roof. To be honest, its not a problem in rural areas where there aren't a lot of cars, because the ozone formed from the NOx quickly dissipates.

Its a HUGE problem in cities, though, because the ozone concentrations at certain times of day get so bad that it damages lung tissue.

There's really no downside to urea-injected diesels. You get the power and economy of non-EGR, plus the lower emissions. The urea catalyst doesn't add any exhaust restriction, because the DPF already dominates that (and now the DPF doesn't load up as fast as it would with EGR, so it has lower restriction too) Oh, I guess the owner has to suffer the SOUL CRUSHING burden of putting in a few gallons of DEF every few hundred miles.... the horror, the horror. ;-)

This is why VW should suffer horribly over this. Everybody else played the game, did their civic duty, took the initial consequences, and figured things out. Cheaters suck.


Actually, the downsides are obvious: more fuel burned, and big repair bills. (Another tractor at work needs a DPF, which will run about $6500.)
 
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: supton

Also, I think they tightened up cold start emissions. Today cars certainly work very hard to control cold start, maybe back in the day that Civic, since it had more lax targets, simply made more at cold start.


Fords certainly idle ridiculously high on a cold start to get that cat to light right off. That probably plays a part. My Focus will idle between 1800 and 2500 RPM until it senses that the catalyst is working. The same with my old Taurus and the '01 F350.


Not just Ford, but true. My Magnum would rev to ~1200 for a second or two, my Vic goes to ~1500 for a few seconds.
 
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
There is no mpg penalty per Ford engineer interview for the current emission system on the HD Ford diesels.


And I'm sure he has a nice beach house for sale, just north of Phoenix!

Quote:
I don't know why Dodge didn't design this system correct in the first place? That was just a bad design trying to get by without DEF. Maybe VW hired the engineers who should have been fired from the Ram design team who designed the Ram emission systems?


One more time: NOBODY USED DEF IN 2007!
 
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Fortunately most people are more mature than that.

It has nothing to do with maturity. Most people don't know how to change their own oil, much less defeat any emissions system. And, they're also cheap, as has already been pointed out.

Also it is illegal to tamper with emission control in some states, especially in California where we do smog test every other year.


My Caddy produces approximately one-tenth the exhaust emissions allowable, and half what it produced new. It would not pass the visual check in Kalifornia.
 
They tested a TDI jetta on a dyno, the power difference between emissions on and off was considerable, about 10% I believe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top