Ram Eco Diesel settlement

[schuyler]

$800 million Jeep/Ram diesel settlement will include cash compensation for owners

https://autoweek.com/article/diesel/fca-reaches-800-million-diesel-settlement-will-include-cash-compensation-owners

I still love the truck...and it just got cheaper!

[RedSHED]

Emissions compliance has 3 main areas:
1) the actual tailpipe emissions
2) diagnostics of the devices related to the tailpipe emissions
3) documentation
It's darned near equal parts of difficulty - the old joke about aircraft work applies: you're ready to ship when the weight of the documentation equals the weight of the product.

Non-compliance can mean the regulators think you deliberately switched things off (like a recent European company was accused of).
or...
it can mean you didn't document things correctly - which is what I understand is what happened here, although I could be wrong.

The first case - where they deliberately cheated is offensive at every level, especially professionally.
If this really is a doc problem, it's more of a dropped plate in the kitchen than arsenic in the soup - still a mess-up, but they aren't actually trying to kill you.

You may read that the regulators examined 300,000,000 lines of code. I'll take that bet. If the total lines of code in all the emissions related devices hits 2,000,000, that would be believable. But if there were fifty instances of each of 1000 files each with 1000 lines of code, you'd have 50,000,000 so maybe that's it.

But anybody tells you they "examined" all of them is gunning for headlines at the expense of precision. That's just about as bad as what the accusation was. Running a script that examines "diff" between versions is to "examining" as watching a sunset is to space travel.

[jcl]

Originally Posted by RedSHED

Non-compliance can mean the regulators think you deliberately switched things off (like a recent European company was accused of).

or...

it can mean you didn't document things correctly - which is what I understand is what happened here, although I could be wrong.

It would be worth reviewing the lawsuit and seeing what the eight emissions defeat devices were that were found to exist on these vehicles.

https://www.clg.org/pdf/3/2/1/1/EPA-Lawsuit.pdf See page 23.

One of the defeat devices reduced the EGR at increasing speeds, with no EGR in effect at highway speeds. That is pretty deliberate. It constitutes a bypass to the EPA test, since the EPA test doesn't go to highway speeds. In the separate California lawsuit, there is mention of a steering wheel position sensor to turn off the emissions controls when the steering wheel moved, and keep them turned on when the steering wheel didn't move while driving, as is experienced on a set of dyno rollers. This is the same type of device that VW used. Note that Bosch developed these controls for both manufacturers, and are paying a portion of the settlement.

There is always the potential of having a feature that you forgot to document. But while a feature that turns off emissions controls could be potentially be allowed if disclosed, it wouldn't be allowed in these cases, as it wasn't just protecting the engine during a short time after start up, for example, but rather defeating the emissions controls during normal expected operation. These features weren't simply a case of failure to document, their very existence is problematic. Combine this with the trail of emails from the VM Motori engineer in charge of compliance, noting that FCA was attempting to circumvent the test, and it looks like a smoking gun.

Some info on those emails here: https://www.greencarreports.com/news...as-2010-report

The settlement was just for the civil damages, for owners who didn't get what they were promised, namely a diesel which was clean, or eco. The criminal charges haven't been settled yet, that case is ongoing.

I will be interested to see what the effects on hp, driveability, etc, are with the software upgrade, if any. Some owners may not want to take the settlement, preferring their existing software.

[Tuco]

Originally Posted by jcl

It would be worth reviewing the lawsuit and seeing what the eight emissions defeat devices were that were found to exist on these vehicles.

https://www.clg.org/pdf/3/2/1/1/EPA-Lawsuit.pdf See page 23.

One of the defeat devices reduced the EGR at increasing speeds, with no EGR in effect at highway speeds. That is pretty deliberate. It constitutes a bypass to the EPA test, since the EPA test doesn't go to highway speeds. In the separate California lawsuit, there is mention of a steering wheel position sensor to turn off the emissions controls when the steering wheel moved, and keep them turned on when the steering wheel didn't move while driving, as is experienced on a set of dyno rollers. This is the same type of device that VW used. Note that Bosch developed these controls for both manufacturers, and are paying a portion of the settlement.

There is always the potential of having a feature that you forgot to document. But while a feature that turns off emissions controls could be potentially be allowed if disclosed, it wouldn't be allowed in these cases, as it wasn't just protecting the engine during a short time after start up, for example, but rather defeating the emissions controls during normal expected operation. These features weren't simply a case of failure to document, their very existence is problematic. Combine this with the trail of emails from the VM Motori engineer in charge of compliance, noting that FCA was attempting to circumvent the test, and it looks like a smoking gun.

Some info on those emails here: https://www.greencarreports.com/news...as-2010-report

The settlement was just for the civil damages, for owners who didn't get what they were promised, namely a diesel which was clean, or eco. The criminal charges haven't been settled yet, that case is ongoing.

I will be interested to see what the effects on hp, driveability, etc, are with the software upgrade, if any. Some owners may not want to take the settlement, preferring their existing software.

Wait, engineers cheat? Clutch the pearls!

[RedSHED]

Originally Posted by jcl

It would be worth reviewing the lawsuit and seeing what the eight emissions defeat devices were that were found to exist on these vehicles.

https://www.clg.org/pdf/3/2/1/1/EPA-Lawsuit.pdf See page 23.

One of the defeat devices reduced the EGR at increasing speeds, with no EGR in effect at highway speeds. That is pretty deliberate. It constitutes a bypass to the EPA test, since the EPA test doesn't go to highway speeds. In the separate California lawsuit, there is mention of a steering wheel position sensor to turn off the emissions controls when the steering wheel moved, and keep them turned on when the steering wheel didn't move while driving, as is experienced on a set of dyno rollers. This is the same type of device that VW used. Note that Bosch developed these controls for both manufacturers, and are paying a portion of the settlement.

There is always the potential of having a feature that you forgot to document. But while a feature that turns off emissions controls could be potentially be allowed if disclosed, it wouldn't be allowed in these cases, as it wasn't just protecting the engine during a short time after start up, for example, but rather defeating the emissions controls during normal expected operation. These features weren't simply a case of failure to document, their very existence is problematic. Combine this with the trail of emails from the VM Motori engineer in charge of compliance, noting that FCA was attempting to circumvent the test, and it looks like a smoking gun.

Some info on those emails here: https://www.greencarreports.com/news...as-2010-report

The settlement was just for the civil damages, for owners who didn't get what they were promised, namely a diesel which was clean, or eco. The criminal charges haven't been settled yet, that case is ongoing.

I will be interested to see what the effects on hp, driveability, etc, are with the software upgrade, if any. Some owners may not want to take the settlement, preferring their existing software.

Nuts. That stuff's hard enough to do that there's some pride involved. Every cheat eats at that.

[RedSHED]

Originally Posted by Tuco

Wait, engineers cheat? Clutch the pearls! [emoji38]

I never have, but I've always had management support. I'd leave if i ever felt pressure to.

[jcl]

Originally Posted by RedSHED

Nuts. That stuff's hard enough to do that there's some pride involved. Every cheat eats at that.

Sorry, but I don’t understand your comment. Nuts to what? What stuff is hard to do?

[AirstreamJim]

Originally Posted by jcl

I will be interested to see what the effects on hp, driveability, etc, are with the software upgrade, if any. Some owners may not want to take the settlement, preferring their existing software.

FCA specifically stated that “[t]he software reflash does not affect average fuel economy, drivability, durability or refinement of the vehicles.” While they don’t mention hp, my guess is that any reasonable customer would assume that there would be no noticeable change of any kind to their vehicle after the flash. FCA pays a lot of lawyers a lot of money to make sure they don’t box themselves into yet another lawsuit over statements like this, so my money is on no change in hp. I, for one, will gladly take the settlement, especially given the issue I had with the engine in my Grand Cherokee (catastrophic engine failure at 25K miles).

Jim

[jcl]

Originally Posted by AirstreamJim

FCA specifically stated that “[t]he software reflash does not affect average fuel economy, drivability, durability or refinement of the vehicles.”

I saw that. The issue is that they presumably included the defeat devices for some purpose. So what does it affect? There has to be some trade off, or there would have been no motivation to do it. I would like to see independent testing showing the before and after.

That said, if I owned an ecodiesel, I would get it updated.

[RedSHED]

Originally Posted by jcl

Sorry, but I don’t understand your comment. Nuts to what? What stuff is hard to do?

Nuts that it looks like they really did cheat. I was hoping it was accidental, which really can happen.

OBD is hard to do well. I did that for several years earlier this century. Got a patent out of it, which is kind of fun for a software guy. [emoji16]

[Countryboy59]

Originally Posted by schuyler

$800 million Jeep/Ram diesel settlement will include cash compensation for owners

https://autoweek.com/article/diesel/...nsation-owners

I still love the truck...and it just got cheaper!

Well I certainly feel safer, and Ecodiesel owners won’t notice the extra soot being filtered through their oil after the Reflash. I do wonder what the EPA does with the billions it collects from manufacturers.

I wonder how many diesel owners even know about cleaning the EGR periodically (assuming they leave it functioning at all)? I’m getting ready to do mine, at 38,000 miles, because I suspect it hasn’t been done before. These things are not like a gas engine where you can hop in and go 100,000 miles with just oil and filter changes. Cleaning the EGR correctly takes a few hours. It’s one of the easier diesel tasks (at least it is on my Cummins).

[VernDiesel]

"I do wonder what the EPA does with the billions it collects from manufacturers." I'll take a shot, um shall we say "re-invests it" back into things that lead to more regulation more gov control more insidious projects and to further make Mfgs have to bow to the evil empire of totalitarian type governance instead of to serve the citizens interests through the free market. Insult to injury the costs placed on Mfgs by government has to be passed onto the next consumer. A purely evil cycle. Seems communist strategies have been secreted into our free market system.

I went the tune route so as to make the truck burn less fuel & run cleaner. It also turned off the EGR so I've never had to clean fix & replace the mess created by recirculating waste. I'm now at 500,000 miles on my smokeless lil econo diesel truck. Best thing to some is that its the most green in that it hasn't had to be dumped with lots of energy resources and expense being put into building another new truck.

[Glassman484]

Wow, this is quite a bit of news! I had not heard anything about it before today, other than a lot of talk about FCAs ongoing issues with getting the eco-diesel[sic] certified each year.
As an owner of a 2016 model (purchased in late 2015), I have not received any communication from FCA or the government about it. Curious...
As I have mentioned in a couple of previous thread comments, I loved the truck until we purchased an ‘18 FC25 last year and took it on a couple of long trips. Yes, it got us there and back, but verrry slowly up most grades, and with considerable coolant and oil/tranny heat, which produced much stress.
Reduction of stress is why we travel, so I’ve been shopping for a replacement TV, which is made complicated by this news. Actually just drove a Ram 2500 Cummins yesterday, which I liked - plenty of capacity to pull the FC. Funny though, not a peep from the sales dept about this lawsuit...I’m sure they would love to get mine back at a discount to what might be a better settlement if I wait until it’s formalized.

[jcl]

Owners won’t have heard directly about the settlement yet, as it has yet to be approved by the court. That is in process. Updates are expected to software around May.

Lots of info on line.

If the vehicle has been sold, the payment is likely to be reduced. If the vehicle was sold after the announcement, the payment is likely to be not applicable. There are no vehicle buybacks in either case. The payments are designed to compensate owners for the premiums they paid for the diesel option.

[VernDiesel]

How do you have trouble with just a 25? Were you trying to go 65 up a long 6 percent grade? I do have 3.92 & a tune but if I stick to 3k which is about 55 I can take an 8k 30' Classic up a long grade and stay below derate. Do you have tall tires and one of the restrictive grills?

Yea might be $3k to you for FCA not disclosing the conditions such as cold starts etc where the truck would not meet emissions requirements. Well unless they had filed for approval first. I think the final hearing is on Jan 23rd. Eventually you will be able to take the truck to the dealer get an updated tune and have a check sent to you.

[brad1]

Originally Posted by VernDiesel

"I do wonder what the EPA does with the billions it collects from manufacturers." I'll take a shot, um shall we say "re-invests it" back into things that lead to more regulation more gov control more insidious projects and to further make Mfgs have to bow to the evil empire of totalitarian type governance instead of to serve the citizens interests through the free market. Insult to injury the costs placed on Mfgs by government has to be passed onto the next consumer. A purely evil cycle. Seems communist strategies have been secreted into our free market system.

Monies actually collected as a result of EPA actions goes to the US Treasury. They pay it out for things like, oh I don’t know, maintaining the highways you drive down, for instance

It must really bum you out when you drive down an Interstate Highway or any of the highways with a US in front of them, like I80 or US 101.

Live your principals, stay on state and country roads. Or are those too communist for you too?

[jcl]

Originally Posted by VernDiesel

Yea might be $3k to you for FCA not disclosing the conditions such as cold starts etc where the truck would not meet emissions requirements. Well unless they had filed for approval first. I think the final hearing is on Jan 23rd. Eventually you will be able to take the truck to the dealer get an updated tune and have a check sent to you.

The issue wasn’t cold starts, it was excessive pollution under normal and expected operating conditions. One example was driving at highway speeds, when the EGR was being turned off.

They would not have received approval if they had disclosed the software defeat devices, as those defeats applied to expected operating conditions. Exceptions aren’t permitted under those conditions. This wasn’t a failure to disclose issue.

We probably won’t get much more information until the criminal trial concludes, though. The VW execs got jail time for a very similar situation, and that was after they pled guilty and cooperated. FCA appears to not be accepting responsibility.

[Countryboy59]

Originally Posted by brad1

Monies actually collected as a result of EPA actions goes to the US Treasury. They pay it out for things like, oh I don’t know, maintaining the highways ...?

Yeah, sure they do. Anyway, I know where the money comes FROM: everyone who buys a new vehicle.

[TRIPPPIN]

Has anyone heard of a conclusion to the Mercedes Bluetec diesel case similar to the FCA one with accusations of defeat software?

[jcl]

Originally Posted by TRIPPPIN

Has anyone heard of a conclusion to the Mercedes Bluetec diesel case similar to the FCA one with accusations of defeat software?

The EPA investigated, but then didn’t prosecute. That may be related to changes at the EPA related to changes in the US government since 2016. States that have been frustrated with that have filed their own suits, like New Jersey and Arizona, and those suits continue. There are also civil suits in the works, but no conclusion. In the mean time, Mercedes has pulled all diesel models from its lineup in North America.

What regulators in Europe found and prosecuted were multiple defeat devices in Mercedes vehicles, including one that turned the emission controls off under 50 F (the test is run above that) and another that counted elapsed distance from engine start and turned the controls off after 16 miles (the distance test is less than that). The differences in having controls on or off is dramatic. One test measured offending vehicles at 91 times the legal limit. Clean diesel? People have been had.