Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-11-2019, 12:16 PM   #1
New Member
 
2016 27' Flying Cloud
albany , California
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 4
Ram Eco Diesel settlement

$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!
__________________

schuyler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 04:30 PM   #2
Liquid Cooled
 
RedSHED's Avatar
 
2017 27' Flying Cloud
Columbus , Indiana
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 529
Images: 2
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.
__________________

RedSHED is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 05:15 PM   #3
jcl
Rivet Master
 
Currently Looking...
Vancouver , British Columbia
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,734
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSHED View Post
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.
jcl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 05:34 PM   #4
4 Rivet Member
 
Tuco's Avatar
 
1988 32' Excella
Ojai , California
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 273
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcl View Post
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!
__________________
Dave & MJ
1988 32' Excella 1000 (Beauty)
1999 White Dodge SLT Laramie 3500 Dually, 4x4, 5spd, 5.9 CTD 265k+ (The Beast)
Tuco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 05:43 PM   #5
Liquid Cooled
 
RedSHED's Avatar
 
2017 27' Flying Cloud
Columbus , Indiana
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 529
Images: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcl View Post
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 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 05:56 PM   #6
Liquid Cooled
 
RedSHED's Avatar
 
2017 27' Flying Cloud
Columbus , Indiana
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 529
Images: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuco View Post
Wait, engineers cheat? Clutch the pearls!
I never have, but I've always had management support. I'd leave if i ever felt pressure to.
RedSHED is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 06:45 PM   #7
jcl
Rivet Master
 
Currently Looking...
Vancouver , British Columbia
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,734
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSHED View Post
Nuts. That stuff's hard enough to do that there's some pride involved. Every cheat eats at that.
Sorry, but I donít understand your comment. Nuts to what? What stuff is hard to do?
jcl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 06:53 PM   #8
3 Rivet Member
 
AirstreamJim's Avatar
 
2007 25' Safari FB SE
Lake Worth Beach , Florida
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcl View Post
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 ď[t]he software reflash does not affect average fuel economy, drivability, durability or refinement of the vehicles.Ē While they donít 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 donít 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
__________________
WBCCI 1433
🌴 Palm Beach County, FL 🌴
Silver Meteor - 2007 Airstream Safari SE LS 25FB
2016 RAM 2500 Laramie Crew Cab 4x4, Cummins TurboDiesel
AirstreamJim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 07:06 PM   #9
jcl
Rivet Master
 
Currently Looking...
Vancouver , British Columbia
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,734
Quote:
Originally Posted by AirstreamJim View Post
FCA specifically stated that ď[t]he software reflash does not affect average fuel economy, drivability, durability or refinement of the vehicles.Ē
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.
jcl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 07:15 PM   #10
Liquid Cooled
 
RedSHED's Avatar
 
2017 27' Flying Cloud
Columbus , Indiana
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 529
Images: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcl View Post
Sorry, but I donít 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.
RedSHED is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2019, 04:03 AM   #11
Rivet Master
 
2012 19' International
Southeastern MI , Michigan
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by schuyler View Post
$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).
Countryboy59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2019, 11:11 AM   #12
3 Rivet Member
 
VernDiesel's Avatar
 
Dayton , OH, 2017 33' Classic 8,561 dry
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 233
"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.
__________________
Transportr AS & TT Mfg 2 dealr RAM ED factory brake controller tow mirror hitch camera & receiver 1,290/12k, No sway WDH, Adj. hitch, axle 2 frame air bags, tune w turbo brake, SLT Grill, 31.9" load tires, Max ED tow 9,200, GCAR 7,800, Max Ram 1500 GCVW 15,950, truck hitches steer 3,240 drive 2,560
VernDiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2019, 12:03 PM   #13
1 Rivet Member
 
2018 25' Flying Cloud
Sebastopol , California
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 16
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.
Glassman484 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2019, 12:29 PM   #14
jcl
Rivet Master
 
Currently Looking...
Vancouver , British Columbia
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,734
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.
__________________

jcl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ram Eco diesel vs. F-150 3.5 Eco-boost Vagante Towing, Tow Vehicles & Hitches 43 06-25-2015 03:16 PM
New Ram Eco-Diesel Making Owners Sick! TheDuke Tow Vehicles 32 03-08-2015 11:43 PM
2014 Ram 1500 Eco Diesel RamblinManGa Tow Vehicles 2 02-11-2014 10:43 PM


Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Disclaimer:

This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Airstream, Inc. or any of its affiliates. Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.