Is there any detailed information anyone can find on what they allegedly did, at a technical level? "Defeat device" is such a broad category of term that it's useless for understanding the details of what it's claimed they did.
The Justice.gov writeup [0] isn't any better.
> The company allegedly installed defeat devices on 630,000 model year 2013 to 2019 RAM 2500 and 3500 pickup truck engines. The company also allegedly installed undisclosed auxiliary emission control devices on 330,000 model year 2019 to 2023 RAM 2500 and 3500 pickup truck engines.
I'd be interested in reading technical details on what, exactly, they did or didn't supposedly do.
Engine computers can easily be reprogrammed to make the engine run at all sorts of different operating bands. You could easily detect state emissions equipment, since it must pull information from the ECU. To me- these devices are either pre-programmed operating modes that produce clean emissions but the vehicle would not operate under this tune (emissions testing is often not under load) and so once back on the road, returns to the original operating mode. OR, entirely fake modules created to trick emissions systems without altering the operating mode.
PS check out Megasquirt if you want to learn about DIY Fuel Injection. I ran a home brew Megasquirt/Megaspark system off an IBM laptop in my Volvo 740 Turbo back in the 90s, one of the things that got me into hardware.
It's actually surprising to me just how differently an engine can perform with different tuning. The ECU can control all sorts of parameters depending on the engine. Things like fuel/air mix, ignition timing, valve timing, shutting down some cylinders, skipping ignition cycles, a lot more than you'd ever expect.
You can tune an engine to sound like a braap braap muscle car or have it be nearly silent. You can burn all your fuel to get a few more horses or blow black smoke, or you can tune it to consume no fuel, emit nothing, and produce nearly no torque.
Plenty of people tune their engines with aftermarket kit and/or software. There are even simple plug and play kits of extremely dubious quality any average Joe can install.
What these defeat devices do is detect the testing equipment or conditions and tunes the engine in a way that meets requirements. Once the vehicle is out of testing, it reverts to the factory tuning which usually gives more power at the cost of illegally high emissions.
That's really all it is, there's not too much magic involved. Just simple cheating.
I'm guessing they're doing it during state emissions certification. When they do those tests they hook up to your OBD2 port [1] and generally a tube goes onto your exhaust. It'd be pretty trivial to detect, "Cable is hooked up, exhaust has more back pressure. Tune engine to X mode."
I think there was a point where regulators said "diesel puts out lung damaging levels of pollutants killing X people a year. We shall either ban diesel engines ... or make manufacturers make diesel engines that don't pollute that badly"
So they set a safe level.
And no manufacturer has been able to achieve the technology to meet that level.
I know some manufacturers claim they can, but honestly that's like a cyclist claiming that they won the Tour De France without drugs. After so many cyclists have been caught (about half since 1990) it's really hard to take the drug free claim seriously - just as it's hard to take the "our diesel engine does it really honestly guv"
It’s actually worse than that - they set goals and then manufacturers started lying to meet those goals, which told the regulators that those goals were attainable and so they set new goals. The entire notion of clean diesel is a farce and has been built on lies from the outset.
> And no manufacturer has been able to achieve the technology to meet that level.
Urea-injection seems to work (that's what Mercedes does). But it requires another tank and special equipment.
And VW could meet the emissions requirements. That was the cheat. When they detected that they were being tested, they tuned the engine to meet emissions requirements. During normal use, the engine would make better power or efficiency but higher emissions.
I think everyone was doing it. After VW got caught, literally every other foreign car maker pulled all diesel models out of the US market. The only manufacturers still selling diesel here are domestic (and maybe MB’s Sprinter?), and that’s only because 10,000 lb GVWR diesel vehicles are allowed to bypass emissions.
Used to be known as emissions cheating before VW, now it's emission fraud.
Imo every manufacturer does/did it for gas and diesel engines. I've heard of gas cars in the 90s assuming that they're on a test stand if you rolled down the window shortly after starting and kept it down and reduced power output. And stories like that.
I mean, we don’t have any details yet. What if the “defeat device” is something like “if $SENSOR is reading a little high, turn on service light and operate as normal otherwise” As a customer I’d be pissed if my truck wouldn’t run.
I have an old Dodge Ram with a Cummins 12 valve engine. The next generation version of my same truck came with a 24 valve engine and more emissions controls. The 24 valve Cummins engine is famous for the ability to re-tune and "delete" features on the engine for better performance and dirtier emissions.
The 12 valve I own only needs a screwdriver to change the fuel mix and increase horsepower. These engines are considered highly desirable because they are very simple with unusual durability (the design comes from Cummins industrial engine product line). When you see the a-holes on YouTube "rolling coal" it is typically from one of these Cummins engines.
These are older than the trucks mentioned in this article, but I wonder if Cummins continued to allow easy adjustments to defeat emissions controls.
The VP44 24v didn't have any more emissions controls than the 12v in the traditional sense. No cat, no DPF, no EGR. It just ran cleaner because of tighter control on injection timing and volume due to the switch from a purely mechanical pump/injectors to electromechanical pump in the VP44, then to fully electronically controlled injectors in the common rail after 2002.
This change to electronic control is what made dial-your-horsepower and emissions skirting like this so trivial.
Is there any article explaining what they actually did, or are alleged to have done? With the VW scandal, there was a fairly in-depth discussion of the technical aspects of it. But all the articles about Cummins seem exceedingly vague.
IIRC, VW had code to detect emissions testing and reduce performance at that time. What did Cummins do?
US company so a penalty that is less than the profit, "no wrongdoing admitted" (its a defeat device!), no criminal investigation (there would be precedent), press release goes out on the Friday before Christmas.
That enforcement action is from 1998. There was even a consent decree but they've been doing this bullshit for a quarter century. It isn't a small isolated incident, it's literally built into the culture of the company. We need a corporate death penalty for repeat offenders like this.
Air pollution kills 10 million/year[1]. All the legacy carmakers + fossil fuel companies are responsible for this. Nearly all the big car manufactures have done this[2-6], and probably continue to do so, these small fines are not a deterrent, just cost of business.
I was just thinking "wasn't Volkswagen vilified for this not long ago?"
So basically all automakers with diesel do the needful and fake around results anyways. I guess these rules are merely up for interpretation loosely, and this is why the planet is dying.
There's no way to make a diesel or gasoline car that's not actively bad for the environment. Electric is the only way. (And maybe hydrogen, but that's quite a ways off)
An electric car is bad for the environment (described generally, not in the laser-focused "CO2 emissions are the only thing that matters!" modern sense) in almost all the same ways an ICE vehicle is, just with a reduction in runtime carbon emissions, and with quite a bit more mining going into the raw materials.
Hydrogen, meanwhile, is nonsensical in every way you care to look at the problem, unless you look at it through the lens of "petrochemical suppliers who want to ensure that a future vehicle fleet needs to fill up at stations they supply with fuel that can be rapidly delivered in a 5 minute window." And maybe shipping, but even there, I think metal-air batteries that are smelted for recharging are likely to work better. And that's before you get into what a devious little pain in the ass hydrogen is to deal with at a chemical/technical level.
Modern gasoline vehicles don't really release noxious emissions, at least if they are well maintained. Of course CO2 is not benign, but electric and hydrogen will also have CO2 emissions at this point, just further up the supply chain for the energy.
[+] [-] Syonyk|2 years ago|reply
The Justice.gov writeup [0] isn't any better.
> The company allegedly installed defeat devices on 630,000 model year 2013 to 2019 RAM 2500 and 3500 pickup truck engines. The company also allegedly installed undisclosed auxiliary emission control devices on 330,000 model year 2019 to 2023 RAM 2500 and 3500 pickup truck engines.
I'd be interested in reading technical details on what, exactly, they did or didn't supposedly do.
[0]: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-attorney-general-me...
[+] [-] spacecadet|2 years ago|reply
PS check out Megasquirt if you want to learn about DIY Fuel Injection. I ran a home brew Megasquirt/Megaspark system off an IBM laptop in my Volvo 740 Turbo back in the 90s, one of the things that got me into hardware.
[+] [-] calamari4065|2 years ago|reply
You can tune an engine to sound like a braap braap muscle car or have it be nearly silent. You can burn all your fuel to get a few more horses or blow black smoke, or you can tune it to consume no fuel, emit nothing, and produce nearly no torque.
Plenty of people tune their engines with aftermarket kit and/or software. There are even simple plug and play kits of extremely dubious quality any average Joe can install.
What these defeat devices do is detect the testing equipment or conditions and tunes the engine in a way that meets requirements. Once the vehicle is out of testing, it reverts to the factory tuning which usually gives more power at the cost of illegally high emissions.
That's really all it is, there's not too much magic involved. Just simple cheating.
[+] [-] kotaKat|2 years ago|reply
https://www.chrysler.com/universal/webselfservice/pdf/VB6.pd...
[+] [-] oooyay|2 years ago|reply
1: https://www.progressive.com/answers/what-is-car-emissions-te...
[+] [-] Guvante|2 years ago|reply
Similarly you could lie on the OC2 response.
[+] [-] gmane|2 years ago|reply
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20151002043823/http://www2.epa.g...
[+] [-] chewmieser|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lifeisstillgood|2 years ago|reply
Renault probably did it
These guys probably did
I think there was a point where regulators said "diesel puts out lung damaging levels of pollutants killing X people a year. We shall either ban diesel engines ... or make manufacturers make diesel engines that don't pollute that badly"
So they set a safe level.
And no manufacturer has been able to achieve the technology to meet that level.
I know some manufacturers claim they can, but honestly that's like a cyclist claiming that they won the Tour De France without drugs. After so many cyclists have been caught (about half since 1990) it's really hard to take the drug free claim seriously - just as it's hard to take the "our diesel engine does it really honestly guv"
[+] [-] luma|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] avidiax|2 years ago|reply
Urea-injection seems to work (that's what Mercedes does). But it requires another tank and special equipment.
And VW could meet the emissions requirements. That was the cheat. When they detected that they were being tested, they tuned the engine to meet emissions requirements. During normal use, the engine would make better power or efficiency but higher emissions.
[+] [-] 4wsn|2 years ago|reply
> bypass emissions sensors on 630,000 RAM pickup truck engines
In this case, and in nearly _every report of a scandal_, the issue is with passenger vehicle engines, not commercial vehicle engines.
Diesel engines can be engineered to meet emissions requirements without cheating, they just aren't except for commercial use.
[+] [-] dclowd9901|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chrismartin|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sottol|2 years ago|reply
Imo every manufacturer does/did it for gas and diesel engines. I've heard of gas cars in the 90s assuming that they're on a test stand if you rolled down the window shortly after starting and kept it down and reduced power output. And stories like that.
[+] [-] wannacboatmovie|2 years ago|reply
The same ones that declared everyone will be driving EVs by 2030.
[+] [-] BugsJustFindMe|2 years ago|reply
Fuck me, though, right? I know the government can't do it, but this kind of statement itself should merit some kind of additional punishment.
[+] [-] tantalor|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] peyton|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LiquidPolymer|2 years ago|reply
The 12 valve I own only needs a screwdriver to change the fuel mix and increase horsepower. These engines are considered highly desirable because they are very simple with unusual durability (the design comes from Cummins industrial engine product line). When you see the a-holes on YouTube "rolling coal" it is typically from one of these Cummins engines.
These are older than the trucks mentioned in this article, but I wonder if Cummins continued to allow easy adjustments to defeat emissions controls.
[+] [-] twisteriffic|2 years ago|reply
This change to electronic control is what made dial-your-horsepower and emissions skirting like this so trivial.
[+] [-] gnabgib|2 years ago|reply
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38746664
[+] [-] pardoned_turkey|2 years ago|reply
IIRC, VW had code to detect emissions testing and reduce performance at that time. What did Cummins do?
[+] [-] arrosenberg|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thuuuomas|2 years ago|reply
If your safety systems fail, we pierce the corporate veil.
[+] [-] stefan_|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cyanydeez|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JoshTko|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sottol|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TheLoafOfBread|2 years ago|reply
And then Americans are surprised when Europe does not play ball with US big tech industry in EU.
[+] [-] AmVess|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwup238|2 years ago|reply
That enforcement action is from 1998. There was even a consent decree but they've been doing this bullshit for a quarter century. It isn't a small isolated incident, it's literally built into the culture of the company. We need a corporate death penalty for repeat offenders like this.
[+] [-] Hamuko|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thelastgallon|2 years ago|reply
1) Air Pollution Kills 10 Million People a Year. Why Do We Accept That as Normal?https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/08/opinion/environment/air-p...
2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal
3) ICCT and ADAC showed the biggest deviations from Volvo, Renault, Jeep, Hyundai, Citroën and Fiat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_emissions_scandal
4) “Disguise, defeat and deny:” Toyota loses appeal and must pay $1.3bln for dodgy diesel filters: https://thedriven.io/2023/03/28/disguise-defeat-and-deny-toy...
5) Mercedez-Benz faces over 300,000 UK claims over diesel emissions: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/merced...
6) Daimler to Settle U.S. Emissions Charges for $2.2 Billion: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/13/business/daimler-emission...
[+] [-] bastard_op|2 years ago|reply
So basically all automakers with diesel do the needful and fake around results anyways. I guess these rules are merely up for interpretation loosely, and this is why the planet is dying.
[+] [-] causality0|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] draw_down|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] juanani|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] DueDilligence|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] orenlindsey|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Syonyk|2 years ago|reply
Hydrogen, meanwhile, is nonsensical in every way you care to look at the problem, unless you look at it through the lens of "petrochemical suppliers who want to ensure that a future vehicle fleet needs to fill up at stations they supply with fuel that can be rapidly delivered in a 5 minute window." And maybe shipping, but even there, I think metal-air batteries that are smelted for recharging are likely to work better. And that's before you get into what a devious little pain in the ass hydrogen is to deal with at a chemical/technical level.
[+] [-] cyanydeez|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maxerickson|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] userbinator|2 years ago|reply
(Not judging, I personally like seeing it once in a while. Everything in moderation, including moderation...)