Dodge Durango Forum banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
If this is true and they have to put the software to EPA specs, you will lose power and economy like Volkswagens did. Suprising, if its true, that someone wouldn't have quick called all the rams back to get rid of this before getting caught, after the VW fiasco. And what about the JGC with the ecodiesel?

EPA Claims Fiat Chrysler Used Software to Cheat Emmisions on 100K Vehicles | Construction Equipment

I think this EPA stuff is going to be the death of private transportation. I would like to know where the fine money goes, I mean if it went to replanting forests or something Enviromentally related instead of deep pockets that would make me feel a little better. And yet when they spill contaminated water from an old mine shaft into a river that a Native American lives off from, no big deal. Don't think they are paying fines to the people of Colorado, who may be poisoned by this.
http://www.vox.com/2015/8/10/9126853/epa-mine-spill-animas

And trying to further trying to attack free trade and increase dependency of foreign oil
EPA fails to link fracking to water contamination for third time | The Daily Caller
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,660 Posts
Some chatter over in the GC land about this.

Politics aside, it appears to be quite a bit different from the VW issue, tho apparently Bosch is involved in both..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
You wouldn't happened to have a link to the differences or more specific issue they have with them would you Tom? I was going to quick snatch one up if it was like VW, before they all were neutered, but if its different it may not be so bad?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
228 Posts
Cheating is like winning a race... It don't matter if it's an inch or a mile, it's still cheating/winning. Provided that there is any actual case to begin with,.but then again it's big brother media portraying it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
It all comes down to the AECDs in question, and if FCA can prove they protect the engine or not. Considering this investigation has been going on since Sept of 2015, if FCA hasn't made that point by now then that could spell trouble. On the other hand considering the timing of the accusations, and that the EPA hasn't specifically called this a "cheat" or defeat devices yet, it may be the EPA trying to gain traction via public opinion equating this to the VW cheat. This could all be a misunderstanding by FCA of what AECDs they actually needed to disclose at the time, considering some of them only occur outside of EPA test parameters anyway.

FCA has said they will fight the other class actions that have popped up and will "work with the incoming administration" with the EPA, so it will be very interesting to see how this plays out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
In this case, it is like moving the goalposts.

They built their emissions controls to handle the EPA's cycle (like a runner training for a specific-distance quick race or something), and then when asked to something besides that, the engine emits more than expected. So that's like asking the runner to keep sprinting 2x the length for what he trained for, to carry the basic analogy.

I honestly don't know how you'd expect a diesel to do different. EPA's cycle is like an "ideal", but driving around in reality never matches this cycle.

I don't think you can call that cheating, I think you can call that matching the requirements and ONLY the requirements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Exactly Lanson. The only thing they are actually allegedly guilty of is not disclosing some 8 or 9 AECDs (which are allowed for engine start up or to protect components for example). Considering the ecodiesel is now probably the most popular light duty/car diesel motor (now that VW has pulled diesels out of North America) is was next on the EPA's list to take down, so they investigated for over a year to find a technicality they could squeeze $ out of. Supposedly this could be a 4.6 billion dollar fine.

GM and Ford better double check the fine print.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
Exactly Lanson. The only thing they are actually allegedly guilty of is not disclosing some 8 or 9 AECDs (which are allowed for engine start up or to protect components for example). Considering the ecodiesel is now probably the most popular light duty/car diesel motor (now that VW has pulled diesels out of North America) is was next on the EPA's list to take down, so they investigated for over a year to find a technicality they could squeeze $ out of. Supposedly this could be a 4.6 billion dollar fine.

GM and Ford better double check the fine print.

EPA is not an organization working on pure intentions, as it is part of an organization that has ulterior hidden motives (like most alphabet agencies.) Not to make someone don their tinfoil hat, but the reality is this could still result into FCA taking a huge hit, even if they aren't really at fault. A technicality in the law or some sort of tiny issue will be blown out of proportion, the media which is told what to do (by the ones with ulterior motives in the first place) will ostracize and obfuscate the issue, and do what they do best which is make mountains of out of molehills to avoid the actual issue, which is the EPA's reach and authority without a watchdog in place.

Popcorn standing by.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,022 Posts
We all like to bad mouth the government. But look at the big picture. By following, or in my state's case exceeding, Federal requirements, we have made a major stride toward cleaner air overall. Let's not forget the huge hp gains made by using the computer to do this. We would still be looking at low hp smokers instead of 700 hp monster rigs like the Hellcat being a legal street machine. Every time the EPA makes newer more stringent rules we hear about all the crying coming from the automaker's reps about how it can't be done, but they always meet them and get more power to boot. So where is the complaint? Just because big brother is involved doesn't make it a bad thing. Meeting requirements is a fact of life. We shouldn't be crying because of a screw up, we should be working together to correct it and make it better. Personally I expect more findings like this. It won't hurt to look into this. They aren't saying that there will be fines yet as they don't know all the facts yet, and neither do we. Yes, FCA could have goofed. But it is also possible that the facts will clear them. Let's not hang folks until we have all of the facts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,463 Posts
We all like to bad mouth the government. But look at the big picture. By following, or in my state's case exceeding, Federal requirements, we have made a major stride toward cleaner air overall. Let's not forget the huge hp gains made by using the computer to do this. We would still be looking at low hp smokers instead of 700 hp monster rigs like the Hellcat being a legal street machine. Every time the EPA makes newer more stringent rules we hear about all the crying coming from the automaker's reps about how it can't be done, but they always meet them and get more power to boot. So where is the complaint? Just because big brother is involved doesn't make it a bad thing. Meeting requirements is a fact of life. We shouldn't be crying because of a screw up, we should be working together to correct it and make it better. Personally I expect more findings like this. It won't hurt to look into this. They aren't saying that there will be fines yet as they don't know all the facts yet, and neither do we. Yes, FCA could have goofed. But it is also possible that the facts will clear them. Let's not hang folks until we have all of the facts.
I agree to a certain extent. Where I live we only follow federal emissions standards, even my Durango says "not for sale in California" lol. But in my state, only 2 counties are required to have vehicle emissions testing, and even then if your car is a 1996 or newer all the emissions test consists of is a gas cap pressure test and an obd-II scan to make sure all emissions monitors are reading properly and have not been reset. No actual measurement of exhaust gasses... which frankly is ridiculous, because I'm sure the refinery and all the steel mills (hint hint at which state lol) pollute FAR more than all the cars and truck traffic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
928 Posts
Where I live we only follow federal emissions standards, even my Durango says "not for sale in California" lol.
This no longer applies to new cars sold in the US, all cars are now manufactured to be 50 state compliant. Enough states adopted the CARB rules that its easier for them to just make all cars compliant now. So while your state may not have stricker laws than at the federal level your cars are still CARB compliant (which is stricter).

Also as a side note, the CARB announced this week that they don't care what the new administration does at the federal level, they will not be backing down on their standards. So just because the federal EPA could reduce requirements, doesn't mean automakers can now produce cars that are less efficient and pollute more, they still have to comply with state laws, which are equal too or in this case greater than federal.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,022 Posts
Remember, they build 2 different vehicles now. One to meet Cali emission and one to meet the Fed. They just mark them differently and ship to appropriate states. So that model of construction will stay the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,463 Posts
This no longer applies to new cars sold in the US, all cars are now manufactured to be 50 state compliant. Enough states adopted the CARB rules that its easier for them to just make all cars compliant now. So while your state may not have stricker laws than at the federal level your cars are still CARB compliant (which is stricter).

Also as a side note, the CARB announced this week that they don't care what the new administration does at the federal level, they will not be backing down on their standards. So just because the federal EPA could reduce requirements, doesn't mean automakers can now produce cars that are less efficient and pollute more, they still have to comply with state laws, which are equal too or in this case greater than federal.
I can promise you it says it's not CARB compliant. My 2012 caliber is, but my 2011 Durango v8 is not. I'll try to find the picture on my next break at work


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
928 Posts
I can promise you it says it's not CARB compliant. My 2012 caliber is, but my 2011 Durango v8 is not. I'll try to find the picture on my next break at work


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I know, that's why I said all "New" Cars. Your 2011 and 2012 are far from "New". I believe the change occurred in 2014, maybe 2015. But you're not going to find a 2017 that isn't CARB compliant being sold in the US.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,022 Posts
And what's the problem with being CARB compliant, other than we will be able to breathe better because of it. I can tell you that the system works to better our air quality and the cars still make all kinds of power. It's a win/win situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
Yeah, trying to validate CARB to me is going to be tough. California is LONG known for being litigious to a very unnecessary level, and still has a huge smog problem (because of other issues, not the cars.)

Cali laws are insane. I know because in my profession I deal with them all the time, relative to the automotive field.

Example: On a repair order, a shop must NOT use "R&R" when explaining they are replacing a part. Only in California, they MUST type out "Remove and Replace". Stupid stuff like that (I have 100's of examples) just because of CA.

And why? Lawyers of course!

And I have news for you, it isn't for the betterment of the common person.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
928 Posts
And what's the problem with being CARB compliant, other than we will be able to breathe better because of it. I can tell you that the system works to better our air quality and the cars still make all kinds of power. It's a win/win situation.
Nothing at all. I think it used to suck the fun out of cars for awhile, but manufacturers haven gotten much better at meeting the standards and giving us fun and powerful cars.

Regardless.... it's going to be interesting to see what they decide about the FCA diesels....
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top