https://arstechnica.com/cars/2024/01/diesel-enginemaker-agrees-to-nearly-2-billion-in-fines-with-feds-and-california/

On 12/1/2024 6:29 pm, Keithr0 wrote:
> https://arstechnica.com/cars/2024/01/diesel-enginemaker-agrees-to-nearly-2-billion-in-fines-with-feds-and-california/
>

No surprise that VW weren't the only company doing that, I wouldn't be
surprised if many other manufacturers are found to have done the same thing.
When the expectations of the regulators and the expectation of the
paying customers vary so much its no surprise that manufactures take
short cuts to try and satisfy both.

--
Daryl

On 12/1/2024 8:49 pm, Daryl wrote:
> On 12/1/2024 6:29 pm, Keithr0 wrote:
>> https://arstechnica.com/cars/2024/01/diesel-enginemaker-agrees-to-nearly-2-billion-in-fines-with-feds-and-california/
>>
>
>
> No surprise that VW weren't the only company doing that, I wouldn't be
> surprised if many other manufacturers are found to have done the same
> thing.
> When the expectations of the regulators and the expectation of the
> paying customers vary so much its no surprise that manufactures take
> short cuts to try and satisfy both.
>
It's a battle between fuel economy and power expectations versus
emissions control. Particulate matter control will win out since it is
being driven by Euro emissions regulations. The above article relates to
California emissions regs and they focus much more on *NOx*. Good luck
retaining fuel economy and power whilst minimising NOx in a diesel
engine. The very nature of the diesel engine makes it a herculean task.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)