Dustyw85 Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 DEARBORN — Media are reporting that VW outfitted its diesel-powered cars with software that would employ measures to reduce emissions when tested. Reports also indicate that this type of “defeat device” was engaged during the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency emission testing of VW diesel-powered vehicles. Official investigations into the matter are ongoing. Below is a brief Ford Q&A as well as a number of VW-related articles from outside media on this issue. Ford Q&A: Does Ford have any vulnerability similar to VW’s emissions issues? No. Our vehicles and engines meet all applicable emissions standards, and they are designed to preform consistently both in the lab and on the road. Does Ford have “defeat devices” in any vehicles? No. Is Ford worried about its own vehicle emissions transparency? No. We have designed emissions control systems that perform consistently both in the lab and on the road. In which vehicles does Ford offer diesel powertrains in the U.S.? Ford diesel offerings in the U.S. are limited to heavy-duty vehicles: The Transit 3.2-liter Power Stroke and F-Series Super Duty F250-450 pickup trucks and F-350-750 chassis cab products equipped with the 6.7-liter Power Stroke. http://www.at.ford.com/news/cn/Pages/VWDefeatDevice.aspx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 (edited) I have no doubt that Ford NA has done a good job on valid compliance with EPA but what about your European diesels, is it absolutely confident that no anomalies will be found? I guess we'll find out soon..... Edited September 23, 2015 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 "Do you have a defeat device installed on any of your vehicles?" Reporters....geez....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 It would be interesting to see how the actual emissions from a 6.7 compares to the VW engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blwnsmoke Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 (edited) It would be interesting to see how the actual emissions from a 6.7 compares to the VW engines. Well they definitely use more UREA to reduce Nox emissions. VW was claiming 10,000 miles per tank of DEF and owners are reporting they were getting 15-20,000 miles. With the 6.7 under light duty use, we use 5 gallons every 6,300 miles or so and some are filling up every 3,000 miles if towing heavy. Granted you can't compare towing heavy to a VW so if you factor 6,300 miles per 5 gallons compared to VWs 15k-20k miles... Not sure if that is a good comparison or not. You can say that the 6.7 is over 3 times the size of the 2.0 so it obviously will emit more which is why it uses more.. Edited September 23, 2015 by blwnsmoke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 I got to believe that Ford is doing everything by the book but also a bit cynical since they skirted the policy with regards to fuel mileage. The bottom line is there needs to be more 3rd party involvment to ensure everything is completely transparent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 sidebar...we were informed the air coming out of the 6.7 exhaust is cleaner than the air going in....and NO, Im not going to be the guinea pig that verifies that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blwnsmoke Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 sidebar...we were informed the air coming out of the 6.7 exhaust is cleaner than the air going in....and NO, Im not going to be the guinea pig that verifies that. I do have to say that after 16 months of ownership and 17,000 miles on my 6.7, the Exhaust is as clean as it was the day I bought it. I however would not want to pull the intake side of the engine part and look at all the soot build up in there though... I think it would make me cry on all the crap that keeps getting recirculated through the motor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 I got to believe that Ford is doing everything by the book but also a bit cynical since they skirted the policy with regards to fuel mileage. The bottom line is there needs to be more 3rd party involvment to ensure everything is completely transparent. I think every automaker needs to proof that they are not cheating. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 (edited) Ford's diesel are all over 8,500 lbs GVWR so they are all classified as medium duty trucks for emission purpose, which has higher allowable NOx limits in both EPA and CARB standards. I think this is why Ford resisted putting 3.2 I5 in F-150... it would be under 8,500 lbs GVWR and subject to passenger vehicle emission standards. The lightest Transit is certified at 8,550 GVWR for a reason... Anything under 8,500 lbs GVWR is automatically passenger vehicles and subject to toughest EPA and CARB category. I'm curious about the Nissan Titan XD diesel GVWR... Edited September 23, 2015 by bzcat 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 touché......... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 thick and fast.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 sidebar...we were informed the air coming out of the 6.7 exhaust is cleaner than the air going in....and NO, Im not going to be the guinea pig that verifies that. I remember hearing that about the 6.4L when the '08 Super Duty trucks were released. I think that's only in California though. I do have to say that after 16 months of ownership and 17,000 miles on my 6.7, the Exhaust is as clean as it was the day I bought it. I however would not want to pull the intake side of the engine part and look at all the soot build up in there though... I think it would make me cry on all the crap that keeps getting recirculated through the motor. Likewise on my '08 with 61k. The tailpipes are perfectly clean. My dad's '13 EcoBoost, on the other hand, is coal-black! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 I think every automaker needs to proof that they are not cheating. Really?? That is without a doubt, the dumbest statement yet..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blazerdude20 Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 I remember hearing that about the 6.4L when the '08 Super Duty trucks were released. I think that's only in California though. Likewise on my '08 with 61k. The tailpipes are perfectly clean. My dad's '13 EcoBoost, on the other hand, is coal-black! There are many states that use California emissions standards. Oregon and Washington do for sure and I believe most the north east does as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 There are many states that use California emissions standards. Oregon and Washington do for sure and I believe most the north east does as well. No, I meant the air was only cleaner coming out if you were in California. In other words, California has air dirtier than diesel exhaust, whereas everywhere else has cleaner air. You know, a little joke (even though there is likely a lot of truth to it). Aren't most vehicles 50-state compliant now anyway? Are there vehicles with different emissions for different states? I thought they were all pretty much the same, building them to the worst-case scenario (cleanest). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 (edited) No, I meant the air was only cleaner coming out if you were in California. In other words, California has air dirtier than diesel exhaust, whereas everywhere else has cleaner air. You know, a little joke (even though there is likely a lot of truth to it). Aren't most vehicles 50-state compliant now anyway? Are there vehicles with different emissions for different states? I thought they were all pretty much the same, building them to the worst-case scenario (cleanest). So are you saying we need more Ford diesel trucks in California to combat the pollution? Edited September 23, 2015 by rmc523 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 So are you saying we need more Ford diesel trucks in California to combat the pollution? Bingo! Well, to combat the pollution VW is spewing out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 (edited) Looks like VW's goal of 800,000 US sales in 2018, 3 years from now, is "notgonnahappen.com"!!! Oh, and the Euro-philes wanting a manual trans station wagon Focus diesel all over the US, same thing! Edited September 23, 2015 by 630land Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 (edited) No, I meant the air was only cleaner coming out if you were in California. In other words, California has air dirtier than diesel exhaust, whereas everywhere else has cleaner air. You know, a little joke (even though there is likely a lot of truth to it). Aren't most vehicles 50-state compliant now anyway? Are there vehicles with different emissions for different states? I thought they were all pretty much the same, building them to the worst-case scenario (cleanest). Yes, pretty much all cars are 50-state compliant now. EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 is pretty much identical to CARB LEV II, and almost identical to EU6. http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/standards/light-duty/tier2stds.htm For reference... Tier 2 Bin 1 = CARB ZEV = EV Tier 2 Bin 2 = CARB SULEV = Prius Tier 2 Bin 3 = CARB ULEV = various gasoline engine cars Tier 2 Bin 5 = CARB LEV = VW 2.0 TDI (in test mode) Bin 6-11 are now expired, meaning no new cars can be worse than Tier 2 Bin 5, which is the same as the lowest level allowed by CARB LEV II standards. California is actually now in LEV III, but that phase is primarily aimed at reducing CO2 emission, so the NOx limits are not significantly changed. Edited September 23, 2015 by bzcat 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 Looks like VW's goal of 800,000 US sales in 2018, 3 years from now, is "notgonnahappen.com"!!! Oh, and the Euro-philes wanting a manual trans station wagon Focus diesel all over the US, same thing! That goal belonged to "notgonnahappen.com" when they announced it......same with Fiat's goals for that matter..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt in blue Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 I've been watching my dreams of a diesel, manual wagon die over the last few days. While I am no fan of VW and would like to see emissions and safety standardized with Europe, it seems that the only way to get a good performing small diesel to meet current US standards is to cheat. Evidence is VW's share of the US diesel market - they sold well, but everything else that has tried to compete has been a dud (diesel Cruze) or hasn't actually reached the market (Skyactiv-D - repeatedly delayed for bad performance). It makes Ford's decision to stay out make a lot more sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 Looks like VW's goal of 800,000 US sales in 2018, 3 years from now, is "notgonnahappen.com"!!! Given that the potential fines per vehicle are higher than the sales prices of a bunch of their vehicles, I'm thinking they're probably glad it's fahrfromhappening--they couldn't afford that many sales. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 Really?? That is without a doubt, the dumbest statement yet..... Are you saying like all time or just this week? Anyways staying away from personal attacks. VW is in a world of hurt right now but I honestly think all the OEM's can be manipulative. But that is a long way from being outright criminal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 (edited) There's a bright line between criticizing statements and criticizing people. It is essentially impossible to "prove" that one is not cheating, however, what I think Biker meant was that there needs to be much more independent verification. The problem with that is twofold: 1 - Who's going to pay for it? 2 - Independent verification is going to require procedures, and those procedures will not be comprehensive because nothing is comprehensive, aside from the comprehensive statement that nothing is comprehensive (but enough about Russell's Paradox), therefore independent verification will not eliminate cheating because there's going to be exploitable holes in the test procedure. I mean, I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but it's not going to solve the problem. Edited September 23, 2015 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.