>Wasn’t dieselgate about companies rigging their software to trigger emissions control only during testing to meet NOx standards? Essentially yes. >And wasn’t

>Wasn’t dieselgate about companies rigging their software to trigger emissions control only during testing to meet NOx standards? Essentially yes. >And wasn’t dieselgate about trying to trick US standards rather than about European standards? No, most likely not. The main motivation at the time they put these "devices" in place was to trick the European standards, the so called Euro 1 to Euro 6, and regulators. Of course it helped with the US/Californian standards too, but hardly the main concern. But the primary diesel market was (and still is) the EU, also with new diesel models introduced there first. E.g. in 2015 over half of all new passenger cars in Europe were diesel. At the same time the US diesel new passenger cars were about 3%. Diesel was incentivized by European governments in particular the German. What's more is that a lot of other countries outright adopted the Euro standards too, or based their local standards directly on the Euro standards, e.g. Israel, Turkey, Australia, India, and even China to a degree, to name a few. Getting e.g. an Euro 5 certification meant you not only were able to sell in the EU but a lot of those places too. Of course, it was US researchers and regulators who uncovered this fraud first (or at least the first who made it public and issued fines), kudos to them, so that's probably why there is a perception that this thing was about US and US standards. BTW, those "cheat devices" really aren't devices per see but ECU configuration data to instruct the ECU to limit the urea solution (AdBlue) use to likely test scenarios. And they started doing this cheat mainly because they fucked up their designs installing too small, tiny urea solution tanks (which often were hard to access) which would have required car owners to refill that tank really often.