FenwickHockey65's Great Thread of GM Knowledge

[E. Bryant]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

Maybe so...

But come on now. First VW, then FCA getting hit with the same (or very similar) accusations, and now GM?

Am I the only one that thinks its a bit unbelievable that all of these major automakers would all cheat at this?

The report says that they all use some sort of cheat device to beat the testing. Except that, these devices can be legal under "certain circumstances". OK...so what is that?

Also, I found it interesting that the report indicated that Bosch was the company behind the programming/electronics for all three above cases...VW, FCA, and GM. So is Bosch also involved, or responsible for the "cheating"?

So, here is the deal - it is illegal to implement "emissions defeat devices" as part of the vehicle's engine management systems. The EPA cracked down on "highway mode" in heavy-duty diesel engines in the late 90s and made it very clear that it is not legal to detect a particular operating condition that occurs outside of testing and intentionally defeat any part of the emissions control system. Clear, right?

Well, then we have cases that occur outside of the strict "drive cycles" (lab tests) where we may need to alter an engine's emissions performance to avoid damage. If the coolant or ambient air temperature is abnormally cold or hot, or if a catalyst is determined to be excessively hot, or if a component has failed, then it is acceptable to temporarily alter emissions performance for the sole purpose of protecting the engine and emissions controls system. Maybe we alter fuel injection volume and typing, or discontinue the use of EGR, or avoid regen events, or any number of other things that we wouldn't typically do during normal operation. On gas engines, we might see that the air-fuel ratio goes pig-rich when the coolant is excessively hot, or that we retard timing if the fuel quality is poor. That's perfectly legal.

What VW did was as clear as can be - they broke the law by designing software that discriminated between the lab and the real world, and then engaged in a broad conspiracy to cover up their illegal behavior. This is as black-and-white as it gets.

The FCA case appears to be a bit less cut-and-dried. The EPA has accused the company of implementing several emission defeat devices that alter the performance of various emission control systems based upon vehicle operating conditions, but it isn't quite so simple as "detect that the vehicle isn't on a dyno and turn everything off". I suspect that there was a deliberate attempt to exploit grey areas of the regulations, but this case might be as much about FCA's unwillingness to roll over as it is about the technical nature of the alleged wrongdoing.

GM has not yet been accused by the EPA of any wrong-doing; the lawsuit was a civil case filed by a group of lawyers. I have not yet seen what evidence they are presenting, other than allegations that certain GM diesel pickups exhibit "in-use" emissions (those measured while the vehicle is being driven on an actual road, not on a test lab dyno) that exceed the federal limits for drive cycle testing. Guess what? Most every vehicle does the same thing, since the lab tests don't do a great job of replicating typical driving. Here is the "US06" drive cycle, which is by far and away the most aggressive:



If you accelerate even modestly quicker than the values shown on this graph, then you will likely see higher loads and thus higher emissions. If you run this cycle at temperatures hotter or colder than the ambient temp used for the lab tests, you may get higher emissions. If you run this into a headwind or up a grade, you will get higher emissions. This is why we test in a lab - to remove variables.

Until the EPA alleges illegal behavior by GM, I do not feel this case has any merit.

With regards to Bosch, they are the industry's leading and largest supplier of engine management hardware and software, so it's not surprising that they are involved with all of these cases. That alone does not indicate wrong-doing. The fact that they supplied "test" software isn't by itself an indication of wrong-doing, as such software is potentially beneficial during development. All that being said, I find it very difficult to believe that they didn't know of any misuse of their technology by their customers, as I would fully expect that they would run tests on production cars to determine the performance of their products in the real world. If nothing else, the performance of VW's products relative to every other manufacturer of similar vehicles would be reason enough for a big supplier to investigate further. We'll see what comes out in court.

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by E. Bryant

So, here is the deal -...

Good explanation there.

Thanks!

[Rwarchol]

NASCAR's 2018 Chevrolet to be revealed Aug 10th in Detroit.

[FenwickHockey65]

Taking bets, Malibu or Impala.

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

Taking bets, Malibu or Impala.

Isn't the Impala due for a refresh? It hasn't really changed any since it came out as a 2014 model.

[FenwickHockey65]

It could use one, but it's still by far the best looking sedan in the Chevrolet lineup IMO.

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

It could use one, but it's still by far the best looking sedan in the Chevrolet lineup IMO.

I agree, much better looking than what Ford and Chrysler offer in that segment.

[Expunge]

Originally Posted by Angrybird 12

I agree, much better looking than what Ford and Chrysler offer in that segment.

I disagree. The Dodge Charger looks far better than the Malibu or Impala. My 2 cents from someone who has owned nothing but Chevy's.

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by Expunge

I disagree. The Dodge Charger looks far better than the Malibu or Impala. My 2 cents from someone who has owned nothing but Chevy's.

As someone who works with Chargers on a regular basis, you couldn't pay me enough to own one.

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by Expunge

I disagree. The Dodge Charger looks far better than the Malibu or Impala. My 2 cents from someone who has owned nothing but Chevy's.

I am talking about your regular full sized family sedans.

[SS 1LE]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

It could use one, but it's still by far the best looking sedan in the Chevrolet lineup IMO.

I think the Malibu looks better overall, and I think it is getting a mild refresh next year? The Impala has an "old fart" stigma still.

[Rwarchol]

My mind thinks it will be the Impala since it's the direct competitor to the Fusion and the Camry. Dale Jr was down in Darlington a few months back and during his interview they panned out and showed an Impala pace car with the Southern 500 logo on it - the first marquee race after the reveal. They wouldn't use an Impala as a pace car for a prime race for no reason.

HOWEVER, last year NASCAR changed the rules allowing you to use a new car model 1 year prior to it's release- hence Toyota using the '18 Camry before it was officially for sale, so technically Chevy could use the '19 Malibu next year if they want to unveil the refresh less than 6 months after the first spy shots were taken.

My other thought it that the unveil is in Detroit and not at a track. It's the Thursday before the Michigan race so why show it off in Detroit and not at the track where more followers of the car would be? Most likely it means GM wants to show something else off besides just a race car. It seems unlikely they would just unveil an Impala race car using a 4 year old design.

What if those Camaro spy shots after the ZL1 1LE reveal were hiding something else besides another Camaro?

[shaffe]

Malibu competes with Fusion and Camry

Impala competes with Taurus and Avalon

[ssrs2lt]

Yeah want it to be impala but its probably malibooyahh