11 ms·
GM accused of installing devices in diesel trucks to beat emissions tests
- braderhart 9y agoI was on the verge of buying at VW when this happened to them. I will never buy a VW now. Pretty soon I'll have to stick to bikes if companies are allowed to get away with anything. Surprised that they haven't arrested everyone involved, considering that the people from VW fled the country.
- toomuchtodo 9y agoWhat did you buy instead?
- braderhart 9y agoNothing. I decided to wait and saved the money.
- toomuchtodo 9y agoSmart. Take advantage of the deflationary environment auto is going to experience (auto sales have peaked, EVs coming to market, etc). Also, consider a used vehicle. Used vehicle prices are being pushed down due to lots of vehicles coming off lease and subprime auto credit deteriorating simultaneously.
- r00fus 9y agoThis is a very important factor - there is usually an option to a) buy used b) not buy. In my case, I've decided my future vehicles will be full-electric - just waiting for the right one (hopefully in a month or two).
- strictfp 9y agoI think this one runs deep and the fact that VW got caught actually means that they are one of the least guilty ones.
- linkregister 9y agoThere was nothing especially remarkable about VW's cheating method, the students who researched this apparently just wanted to work on Volkswagens. I understand your sentiment, it feels more bad when a person or group goes to greater lengths to hide wrongdoing.
- tormeh 9y ago>I will never buy a VW now Just remember that VW is a bit like Nestle; you also have to stay away from Audi, Bentley, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Porsche, SEAT, Škoda, Ducati, MAN and Scania (not that the last two matters to you unless you're buying a bus).
- twblalock 9y agoI wouldn't have bought a VW before the scandal, either. Everyone I know who has owned one has had tons of problems with them. They spend a lot of time at the dealer for warranty service. Owners of most other brands don't have to put up with that kind of stuff. Even my friends with pre-bailout low-end GM and Ford cars haven't had as many problems.
- jplayer01 9y agoYou do realize every other auto manufacturer is doing the exact same thing? VW has one of the biggest R&D divisions in the industry. If they couldn't do it, nobody else could either.
- SapphireSun 9y agoIt's not clear that they couldn't do it. The three possibilities are: 1) They couldn't do it. 2) Their margins would be thinner. 3) Their competitors are cheating, and emissions controls reduce performance, so everyone would buy the cheating competitor. Also, everyone has dirt on everyone else. This will be a big story all of the three cases.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- linkregister 9y ago> You do realize every other auto manufacturer is doing the exact same thing? What makes you think that? > VW has one of the biggest R&D divisions in the industry. If they couldn't do it, nobody else could either. Do what? Make performant cars? Their gasoline (petrol) cars weren't implicated in this scandal. After the patch, the cars were still performing relatively well, losing about a second in the 0-60 time, and losing about 4mpg.
- Arizhel 9y agoWhat I want to know is: why did they need to lose any performance or fuel economy at all? Am I missing something? My understanding is that this was all because they couldn't meet emissions targets without using a certain amount of DEF. They calculated that to do that, the customer would have to refill the DEF tank "too soon" (meaning sooner than every regular service interval at the dealership, which is at least 10,000 miles). So the simple fix is, in my mind: make the car use a lot more DEF so that it can generate the power and economy advertised, but the DEF tank will have to be refilled far more frequently (perhaps every 1000 miles, guessing). The driver will have to do it themselves obviously. And add some software code so that the car refuses to operate if the tank goes empty. If drivers can figure out that they need to put fuel (gas or diesel) in their car to make it go, and that it's going to die on the side of the road if they run that tank out, then they can do the same with a 2nd tank of fluid too.
- johngalt 9y agoTbh I never would have bought a VW before and now I would consider it. They are probably the most honest of any car company at the moment. They cant risk another scandal. Likely the most undervalued by the market as well.
- widowlark 9y agoThis is truly despicable. Shame on any company who attempts to skirt the laws that were instilled by the people who allow the company to operate within their borders in the first place. Truly shameful and sad.
- metalliqaz 9y agoI'd be more eager to cast scorn if I could find a company that hasn't skirted the law.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- widowlark 9y agoIt's not that I'm surprised, I just wish it was better
- simonsarris 9y agoWell, there's always Tesla. All the more reason to consider EVs a moral good.
- wand3r 9y agoIf anyone thought VW was the only one they aren't a student of history. Lance Armstrong wasn't the only biker to live stronger. This stuff is systematic.
- function_seven 9y agoWhen I played Marco Polo as a kid, I would cheat. When I was “it”, I’d yell out “Marco!” like you’re supposed to, but I also opened my eyes underwater a little bit to see where the other kids were. One day a friend brought over special goggles. They were covered in black vinyl to block your vision completely. That day we all found out that every one of us cheated the same way. When playing with the new goggles, suddenly it was: “this game sucks” and: “let’s do something else”. It was eye-opening (sorry). Cheating on emissions tests strikes me the same way. “All the other car companies seem to be meeting their targets, how can we keep up?” Well, it turns out that to be as good as the other players, you have to cheat just like they do.
- transpostmeta 9y agoI always wondered why companies don't try to catch each other cheating. If would seem that if Ford wanted to, they could easily figure out VW was cheating, and go to the press and government with that info.
- vertex-four 9y agoBecause all companies cheat in some way, and intentionally going to war when you know you're not clean yourself isn't a good idea.
- thmsths 9y agoMy first guess would be that since they would probably be cheating too they wouldn't want to attract attention on this issue.
- nkrisc 9y agoGlass houses, throwing stones, and all that.
- tyingq 9y agoThe law firm that's filed suit has an article with more detail on how the cheating works. https://www.hbsslaw.com/cases/chevy-silverado-emissions/pressrelease/chevy-silverado-duramax-diesel-2500-and-3500-emissions-consumers-sue-general-motors-for-allegedly-installing-multiple-emissions-cheating-defeat-devices-in-over-705000-duramax-diesel-trucks https://www.hbsslaw.com/cases/chevy-silverado-emissions/pres...
- upofadown 9y ago>"deadly NOx pollutants" That's over the top in this context. It makes it sound like the trucks are poisoning the owners of those trucks.
- TheCoelacanth 9y agoPollution is responsible for thousands of deaths every year. "Deadly" is perfectly accurate.
- swamp40 9y agoHagens Berman’s automotive legal team has dedicated substantial resources to uncovering cheating devices used by automakers. Seems like a conflict of interest to me.
- gok 9y agoIf Volkswagen couldn't figure out how to meet US emission standards for diesel without cheating, I find it likely other manufacturers (who have less diesel expertise) would have an even harder time. VW expects to pay $7.3B for 11 million cheating cars, so less than $700 per vehicle. GM will probably get about the same deal. Considering the profit margin on these vehicles in particular (big trucks), cheating was probably a good call financially.
- revelation 9y agoNone of the car manufacturers can show anywhere close to emissions testing performance in real-world tests: https://youtu.be/7t4paclIwuU?t=13m15s https://youtu.be/7t4paclIwuU?t=13m15s And for GM, the linked video already shows Opel installed defeat devices, which is a daughter brand. So it's just natural that the same "technology" shows up in other GM cars.
- jabl 9y agoThat presentation is awesome, thanks!
- chrisweekly 9y ago$700 per vehicle doesn't come close. Anecdata: buyback option on my 2011 jetta sportwagen tdi netted me a check north of $8000 -- after they paid off my loan balance. Maybe the $700 per car is the penalty per se, but the scandal cost a lot more than that!
- pvnick 9y agoThen it is the regulations that need changing
- endorphone 9y agoIf Volkswagen couldn't figure out how to meet US emission standards for diesel without cheating VW could meet the emissions standards, and went through the actual testing and passed. It had such an effect on either fuel economy or long term reliability however that they cheat on the road. However it's notable that the only VW vehicles that fail are the ones that don't use diesel exhaust fluid (DEF). This is something that you refill periodically and it's sprayed into the exhaust to reduce a lot of the harmful exhaust. That system costs a couple of thousand dollars, so they eliminated it and claimed that they found a way around it. The GM trucks, in contrast, have the DEF systems, just like all of the Mercedes and higher end VW diesel cars do. Too many commentators are taking the word of a legal firm that got some easy prey and now hopes there's blood in the water.
- Zigurd 9y agoI predicted it would not be only VW. This kind of cheat would either take a lot of custom code in the ECU, or the ECU supplier has parameters that can be readily tweaked for strategies that would circumvent tests. There's probably an "app note" that says "You should never do this, but..." The fact the tests are so reliably circumvented is a failure of regulation. It's evident that until recently regulators were not testing the tests to see if they are predictive of real world performance.
- ChuckMcM 9y agoWait, you mean everyone cheats? I'm shocked I tell you, shocked! When the VW story first broke and I learned you could readily control the trade-off between performance and emissions using software in the engine controller of a diesel engine, I knew that everyone would do that. They would rationalize it in what ever way they could "Oh the stomping on the accelerator indicates an emergency so we go with maximum performance rather than emission compliance, it's to save lives don't cha know?"
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- r00fus 9y agoThe problem with "everyone cheats" is that we don't have proof of that. We're seeing proof that multiple companies have cheated so far... hopefully the punishments are equivalent.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- iamthepieman 9y agothey are all cheating and the punishments won't be equivalent (I assume you mean to the amount of damages and money they made during the cheating period on the cheating vehicles) But you're right, we don't have proof right now. I think the logical proof, that other companies are selling similar vehicles at similar price points that are "passing" the emissions testing is proof but obviously not of the legal variety.
- thinkling 9y agoOnce you have the necessary portable emissions testing equipment, how much work is it to test a vehicle? I've been wondering why the researchers at WVU who found the VW cheating have not gone on to test a larger set of vehicles to see who else is cheating.
- jessaustin 9y ago
- bischofs 9y agoHagens Berman’s automotive legal team has dedicated substantial resources to uncovering cheating devices used by automakers. The firm has become a trailblazer in this highly specialized realm, outpacing federal and state agencies in unmasking fraud in emissions reporting. This is hilarious - this is the firm that made tons of money off the VW case, now they are going after the money and cutting out the middleman (EPA)
- iamthepieman 9y agoit's nearly 100% analogous to the performance enhancing drug problem in cycling and other sports. performance vs following rules check performance directly translates to better perception by public and therefore more money check small monetary repercussions if discovered in comparison to amount to be gained by cheating check arms race of detection/regulation no check yet (on the automotive side) but it will be interesting to see how this develops
- csours 9y agoDisclaimer: I work for GM. I do not work on anything related to diesel engines. I will not be commenting further on this story; what follows is just for context and is not intended to explain or justify anything about these accusations. The EPA (and other regulators) allow engines to emit more NOx and Particulate under certain circumstances to protect the engine. Each set of parameters where an engine will do this is called an auxiliary emissions control device [AECD], even where it is just programming, not a separate physical device. For instance, FCA recently got in trouble for not disclosing all of their AECDs [0] - the AECDs may not have been illegal, but FCA neglected to inform the EPA of all of them. As noted elsewhere in comments, very very few (if any) vehicle achieve the same emissions or efficiency in the real world as in a test lab. The disparity between test and real world is not necessarily illegal. AECDs are not necessarily defeat devices. 0. http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/chrysler/2017/01/12/fiat-chrysler-diesel-emissions/96485778/ http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/chrysler/201...
- atourgates 9y agoIn April, Mercedes Benz told[1] its investors it might get in EPA trouble for an "undisclosed auxiliary emissions-control device" as well. 2017 Shipments of Mercedes Benz Sprinters were actually prevented from being delivered to dealers for a while. The last I'd heard, 6-cylinder models were released, but 4-cylinder models were still being held by the EPA. While I'm sure at some level the EPA enjoys punishing German auto makers, hopefully the same accusations being leveled towards US car makers will encourage them to adopt a more fair and reasonable stance, assuming these are not actually "defeat devices". [1] http://autoweek.com/article/diesel/mercedes-parent-company-daimler-braces-its-own-potential-diesel-crisis-us http://autoweek.com/article/diesel/mercedes-parent-company-d...
- awqrre 9y agoHopefully they get the proportion of fines as you know who...
- linkregister 9y ago"I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!" "First they came for the trade unionists," "Dunning-Krueger Effect!" "Wouldn't have happened if they used a secure coding language, like Rust" "That's a _____ fallacy." [Link to Wikipedia list of logical fallacies] Sorry for the OT post, I'm getting sick of the oft-repeated HN expressions that don't add to the discussion. We can do better. And I forgot one, "I know I'll be downvoted for this, but..." ;)
- ChuckMcM 9y agoAs there is literally no way for an HN comment to actually infect you, when you say "I'm getting sick of ..." you must be describing an emotional distress. Can you explain where that emotional tension is coming from?
- leppr 9y agoBoredom I presume ? The same kind of feeling one gets when listening to mainstream radio or reading Youtube comments, for instance.
- omginternets 9y ago>As there is literally no way for an HN comment to actually infect you, when you say "I'm getting sick of ..." you must be describing an emotional distress. Hyper-literalist interpretation followed by condescending pedantry ... check. We could almost have a HN Bingo night at this rate!
- snerbles 9y agoIt'll be amusing if this thread pops up on n-gate's weekly HN summaries: http://n-gate.com/hackernews/ http://n-gate.com/hackernews/
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- Karunamon 9y agoWow. The person who writes that site sounds remarkably angry and upset at the world.
- hx87 9y agoI seriously have to wonder why "drivers don't want to fill DEF tanks too often" is given as a reason by automakers to skimp on DEF injection. DEF costs, what, $15 for 2.5 gallons, which lasts a couple of thousand miles, and can be filled either at a fuel station or at home, no dealership required. If dealership visit is required, well, since when are automakers concerned about dealerships making too much money from servicing their cars?
- problems 9y agoProbably just more mental overhead people don't want to deal with. No one wants to remember to do more stuff. If you're comparing 2 trucks, one with a DEF system and one without, chances are as an average consumer, you're going to take the one without because it's cheaper to run and less effort for you. Heck, the other day I was looking at some electronics on a very large Chinese shopping site and ran across a device that can emulate DEF systems in 8 different manufacturers vehicles with no actual DEF consumption occurring for ~$15. People are lazy, cheap and just don't give a shit.
- briffle 9y ago$2.75 a gallon at truck stops...
- tareqak 9y agoThe real test will be whether or not General Motors is treated with the same level of scrutiny (regulatory, legal, public etc.) and penalized as heavily as Volkswagen was. I am alluding to the fact that General Motors being regarded as an American company, and Volkswagen being a foreign one. I am pessimistic: I will be somewhat saddened, but not at all surprised if General Motors gets less harsh treatment. People will no doubt argue that these are trucks and not cars, so there are less of them, so the damage done was less, so the penalty should also be less. However, no one will likely admit the fact that the same sort of cost/benefit analysis and moral repercussions were involved in both events beyond the accusers. I apologize if the above comes across as a rant or a whine. I can at most ask the legislator in my constituency to investigate, but that is yet another game of numbers.
- devoply 9y agoNow let's see them stick GM with similar fines as VW. In fact I would encourage the EU to do the same. Oh sweet sweet quid pro quo.
- rmason 9y agoGM is denying the claims that it cheated, calling them baseless. http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/lawsuit-alleges-gm-cheated-diesel-pickup-truck-emissions-47639588 http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/lawsuit-alleges-gm-...
- holri 9y agoAnother proof that Stallman was correct.