Ford’s new diesel engines emitted more NOx

[timmm55]

 

Ford’s new diesel engines emitted more NOx on average than all the other manufacturers tested in the sample

Dr James Tate, lecturer and researcher at the Institute for Transport Studies at Leeds University, said: ‘The surprising finding for us was that even the Volkswagen engines were polluting 35 per cent less than other comparable cars, suggesting all manufacturers have found their own ways of passing the laboratory tests.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3259067/It-s-not-just-VW-Official-tester-claims-four-diesel-car-giants-break-toxic-emissions-limit.html

Edited October 9, 2015 by timmm55

[akirby]

Just because vehicles create more pollutants in "real world driving" does NOT mean that all mfrs are cheating on the lab tests. It could simply mean that the lab tests are not reflective of "real world driving". We saw this with EPA window stickers being adjusted to better reflect real world experiences.

 

Jumping to conclusions of cheating based on one set of uncontrolled tests is not just shoddy - it could be grounds for a defamation lawsuit by the companies accused to have been cheating.

[silvrsvt]

This almost sounds like someone was paid off by VW to point fingers at other manufactures to say hey we aren't the only one doing this!

[03 LS]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3259067/It-s-not-just-VW-Official-tester-claims-four-diesel-car-giants-break-toxic-emissions-limit.html

Testers used a Remote Sensing Device to record exhaust emissions as vehicles drove by on public roads. The tests are tightly controlled and widely used across the United States to monitor compliance of clean air rules.

The cars number-plates were recorded and cross- referenced with the DVLA so researchers could see the make, model and engine size for each car. It is believed to be the most comprehensive picture yet of diesel fumes on Britains roads.

 

Look at their test method. I question their accuracy as to which specific car emits how much pollutants.

They may well be "the most comprehensive picture yet of diesel fumes on Britains roads", I'd trust UWV method more when it comes to meassuring of a single vehicle pollution, as that is done at the exhaust pipe.

[akirby]

No way you can "tightly control" passive monitoring of emissions from a few feet or yards away.

[92merc]

If all of these numbers pan out to be somewhat true, I see diesels going away in all non-commercial vehicles. Not sure how long that'll take. But diesel's will be getting a black eye over it, one way or another.

 

GTDI achieves "most" of what a diesel will do, at a cheaper cost to build and emits less pollution.

[akirby]

So was Ford that smart when they went ecoboost instead of diesel here or did they just get lucky?

[akirby]

And where is mlhm5 when you need him?

Edited October 9, 2015 by akirby

[RichardJensen]

So was Ford that smart when they went ecoboost instead of diesel here or did they just get lucky?

 

I don't know. Is it smart to opt out of a strategy that is plainly unworkable?

[jpd80]

Or was it more a case of Ecoboost side stepping the need for a lot of regulatory "red tape"? in the first place.

Ford often cites that Ecoboost is much easier, less costly strategy compared to diesel engines.

 

It is disturbing to hear that drive by remote testing was used in this instance rather than same on board

test equipment used to confirm VW's NOx deviation, if VW wasn't the only one with high readings,

why weren't more manufacturers singled out as well?

[bzcat]

The only thing this shows is that EU6 emission test is a joke. The laboratory test doesn't emulate the real world driving conditions (e.g. the test has very few start and stop cycle and no sustained full load acceleration). So of course in real driving test, the cars pollute a lot more.

 

Mazda and Honda both tried to Federalize their EU6 diesel in the US but they couldn't pass the EPA nor the CARB test because those tests have repeated start and stop cycle and sustained full load acceleration (i.e. more like real world driving conditions).

[bzcat]

This almost sounds like someone was paid off by VW to point fingers at other manufactures to say hey we aren't the only one doing this!

 

No one is doing what VW did, which is to outright cheat.

 

To put it in context I think this is how I would describe the situation:

 

• VW cheated by writing answers on the hand to ace a standardized test.
• Others memorized enough answers to pass a standardize test (because the questions were known).
• No one in class actually learned the subject material.

Edited October 9, 2015 by bzcat

[jpd80]

The only thing this shows is that EU6 emission test is a joke. The laboratory test doesn't emulate the real world driving conditions (e.g. the test has very few start and stop cycle and no sustained full load acceleration). So of course in real driving test, the cars pollute a lot more.

 

Mazda and Honda both tried to Federalize their EU6 diesel in the US but they couldn't pass the EPA nor the CARB test because those tests have repeated start and stop cycle and sustained full load acceleration (i.e. more like real world driving conditions).

Even under those conditions Euro 6 limits for NOx are around four times higher than EPA Tier 2 Bin 5.

When you get down to lower and lower emissions level, it's critical to have a wide margin of error

as opposed to only just passing the tests.

 

I suspect those manufacturers were right on the bump with Euro 6 and as a consequence

nowhere near the required mark for the much tougher EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 emission Levels.

Hat tip to Richard for often mentioning this point (euro Vs EPA) over the past few years.

Edited October 9, 2015 by jpd80

[timmm55]

 

I don't know. Is it smart to opt out of a strategy that is plainly unworkable?

Ford wisely didn't bring the Euro Diesel version of the Mondeo/Fiesta/Focus here. But instead we got the cool 1.0 EB Fiesta. I think Ford simply used the EU testing procedures as given and nothing more.

 

If EU doesn't use a WOT in diesel testing........ that's nuts. I remember being behind old Mercedes diesels when they floored it, obviously I knew why they make a convertible diesel!

 

When contacted for comment, the manufacturers insisted that their engines met EU regulations and they did not cheat on tests.

A Government spokesman said: ‘We have been open about the difference between real-world and laboratory testing for diesel cars. We have been pushing at a European level for real driving emissions testing to ensure tests reflect vehicles’ actual performance on the road.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3259067/It-s-not-just-VW-Official-tester-claims-four-diesel-car-giants-break-toxic-emissions-limit.html#ixzz3o60dHUVv

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

I also think they knew the Euro Ford diesels wouldn't pass in the US. I'd also guess Ford knew VW would get caught sooner or later. I'm confident the US Ford truck diesels are clean as advertised and tested.

[jpd80]

The highest levels of NOX are created under light cruise and thta;s the area where road tests of VW fell down,

and it wasn't the only brand either, there were something like 10 out of an original 15 Euro brands that had high NOx.

 

while oher euro manufacturers may not be gaming Euro tests like VW,

I think some of them would struggle to live up to the spirit of those

emission laws in real world driving on light cruise.

Edited October 9, 2015 by jpd80

[bzcat]

Ford wisely didn't bring the Euro Diesel version of the Mondeo/Fiesta/Focus here. But instead we got the cool 1.0 EB Fiesta. I think Ford simply used the EU testing procedures as given and nothing more.

 

If EU doesn't use a WOT in diesel testing........ that's nuts. I remember being behind old Mercedes diesels when they floored it, obviously I knew why they make a convertible diesel!

I also think they knew the Euro Ford diesels wouldn't pass in the US. I'd also guess Ford knew VW would get caught sooner or later. I'm confident the US Ford truck diesels are clean as advertised and tested.

 

 

You are probably right about the first part. Nissan, Honda, Mazda etc all tried to get their EU6 diesel certified in the US after VW did it. But they all came up short. I'm sure Ford did their homework too and concluded it is not possible. GM, BMW, and Mercedes all had to add urea injection to their EU6 diesel to get it to pass CARB emission, which adds a lot of costs to the car.

 

The answer to the second part is more complicated. Ford only sell diesel in vehicles with GVWR over 8,500 lbs, which are subject to less stringent emission standards. Everything under GVWR 8,500 lbs is considered a "passenger vehicle" and subject to the same higher standards - i.e. Fiesta and F-150 both have to pass the same passenger vehicle emission but F-350 only has to pass the less stringent medium duty truck emission.

 

There is a reason why Ford put the 3.2 I5 in Transit (over 8,500 lbs) but not in F-150 (under 8,500 lbs)... they know it could pass emission in Transit but couldn't pass emission in the F-150. However, I'm fairly certain that Transit, F-350/450/550, and F-650/750 all meet the lower medium duty truck emission standards in the US.

Edited October 9, 2015 by bzcat

[mackinaw]

A quote from today's Detroit Report on this issue:

 

But that’s no surprise, and not necessarily a problem – never mind anything illegal — stressed Nick Molden, the CEO of that lab, Emissions Analytics, in an exclusive interview with TheDetroitBureau.com and NBCNews.

“They picked up the data…which intonate four other manufacturers have been conducting illegal activities,” said Molden, but in reality, “no one has any hard evidence of anyone doing anything clearly illegal.”The problem, Molden and other experts point out, is that government emissions tests are conducted under tightly controlled lab conditions that generally don’t reflect the way vehicles are driven in the real world. The European tests, in particular, don’t put a vehicle through the aggressive acceleration, uphill climbs and cold weather conditions a motorists is likely to experience.

“You’ve got a very gentle test cycle with a lot of loopholes in it,” said Molden.

In reality, most diesel vehicles produce almost no NOx when the engine and emissions system have been warmed up and they’re cruising smoothly down a flat highway. But that will spike under more aggressive driving, at times – briefly — to up to 20 times the supposed limit.

As a result, tests of about 200 diesel models have found that while the latest European standard permits the emission of 80 milligrams of NOx per kilometer, “on the road it will be four times the limit, or 320 mg,” said Molden, “and all legal.”

[jpd80]

 

 

You are probably right about the first part. Nissan, Honda, Mazda etc all tried to get their EU6 diesel certified in the US after VW did it. But they all came up short. I'm sure Ford did their homework too and concluded it is not possible. GM, BMW, and Mercedes all had to add urea injection to their EU6 diesel to get it to pass CARB emission, which adds a lot of costs to the car.

 

The answer to the second part is more complicated. Ford only sell diesel in vehicles with GVWR over 8,500 lbs, which are subject to less stringent emission standards. Everything under GVWR 8,500 lbs is considered a "passenger vehicle" and subject to the same higher standards - i.e. Fiesta and F-150 both have to pass the same passenger vehicle emission but F-350 only has to pass the less stringent medium duty truck emission.

 

There is a reason why Ford put the 3.2 I5 in Transit (over 8,500 lbs) but not in F-150 (under 8,500 lbs)... they know it could pass emission in Transit but couldn't pass emission in the F-150. However, I'm fairly certain that Transit, F-350/450/550, and F-650/750 all meet the lower medium duty truck emission standards in the US.

The funny part is that by definition (grams per mile) those larger vehicles are in all likelihood

much cleaner on emissions than the current crop of Euro 6 based diesels or at least no worse.

Given the size and engine capacity of those vehicles, that's impressive.

[RichardJensen]

I did the math on that some time ago. And yes, an F250 was significantly cleaner than a diesel Fiesta under the old EU 5 protocol.

[jpd80]

I did the math on that some time ago. And yes, an F250 was significantly cleaner than a diesel Fiesta under the old EU 5 protocol.

And from meory, the jumps from Euro 4 to 5 to 6 are small with emphases on 5 to 6 being extension to 160,000 km

[theoldwizard]

Just because vehicles create more pollutants in "real world driving" does NOT mean that all mfrs are cheating on the lab tests. It could simply mean that the lab tests are not reflective of "real world driving".

Ding ding ding ! We have a winner !!

 

This is "common knowledge" for engineers responsible for doing emission calibration. In the US, EPA "reserves the right" to test vehicles in "real world" condition. This basically how VW was caught.

[theoldwizard]

GTDI achieves "most" of what a diesel will do, at a cheaper cost to build and emits less pollution.

And the folks doing GTDI calibrations for EU know all the same loop holes AND USE THEM !

 

GDI/GTDI vehicle do NOT get the same mileage in the US as they do in EU, simply because of the loop holes in the EU emission testing.

[theoldwizard]

So was Ford that smart when they went ecoboost instead of diesel here or did they just get lucky?

Mostly luck. The other big part of the decision was it was fairly easy to adapt existing petrol engines to GDI/GTDI. Also, diesel just has NOT had the broad appeal to the masses in the US, especially with the high cost of diesel fuel and the huge loss of power/economy that has come from the last bump in emission regs.

[theoldwizard]

Or was it more a case of Ecoboost side stepping the need for a lot of regulatory "red tape"? in the first place.

Ford often cites that Ecoboost is much easier, less costly strategy compared to diesel engines.

Easier = cheaper. No diesel injection fluid system and CGI isn't cheap or light ! Edited October 11, 2015 by theoldwizard

[Joe771476]

Recent issue of Automotive News was plastered with the VW fiasco. Arrogance is the underlying theme and one article says they might not have to endure the wrath of the EPA. Huh??!! Bottom line is if it was Ford or GM, they'd have the book thrown at them! One thing mentioned was the fiasco could help Ford and Opel in Europe