Posted on 05/23/2016 11:39:24 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
It's a distress signal, isn't it? A signal that "no, I didn't just park here randomly, I am having car trouble."
Also a bit of "please don't tow me, I'm coming back."
Why shut it off? Doesn’t sound like it would affect performance
Emission standards are so unrealistic, I would not be surprised to learn that nearly all mfg are cheating on them. Might be the only way to sell a car.
Maybe after the engine gets good and warmed up it can meet the standards without whatever they’re doing in the first 20 minutes.
Not sure how emission reduction works on a diesel, but I'd stab at it -- there's a recirculator to recover unburned fuel, 20 minutes would be about right for the engine to reach operating temperature so the glow plug could handle it on its own.
“Maybe after the engine gets good and warmed up it can meet the standards without whatever theyre doing in the first 20 minutes.”
The fact that they didn’t is what started this investigation into FC.
Test runs twenty minutes so it is timed to run for the test only.Ohhhhhhhhh, I get it now. I'm not nearly suspicious enough. It's timed to run 22 minutes, because they're aware that the test only lasts 20, so they're in compliance for the duration of the test, then the process, whatever it is, stops. Brilliant. Not as sophisticated as the VW approach, but had been working fine.
So were they doj g this only to pass the govt tests, or was this to comply with general rule of operation on the road? I had the impression they were meeting govt rules on how emmissions systems were supposed to operate, in the real world.
In the late 1980s I read how 40 percent of European car sales were diesel, but of course, they get good fuel economy.
Too bad it wasnt the other way around.
Apparently the 20 minute test is supposed to monitor something resulting from combustion, and the contraption that was supposed to control those emissions is supposed to operate all the time.
So it was only to pass a test, like volkswagon.
Wel then let em hang.
“So were they doj g this only to pass the govt tests, or was this to comply with general rule of operation on the road? I had the impression they were meeting govt rules on how emmissions systems were supposed to operate, in the real world.”
EU passed new rule for 2016+ vehicles to meet on-road conditions.
“...Fiat rejected to hold a meeting with the German Transport Minister Alexander Dobrindt to further discuss the issue.”
Translation: Fiat said that it had paid enough extortion and saw no need to bring another suitcase of money to Minister (bribes for $200) Alex.
Truth
They’re going to fight tooth and nail, drag it out for a few years, and eventually pay a settlement, but not to the current pencil-neck.
Hey, who gave you a number and took away your name? ;’)
On a little different note, did Chrysler (or Fiat) ever pay back all the loans the federal government gave them in the bailout? A lot of people were really upset at General Motors about the loans but seem to give Chrysler a pass. Perhaps there is a reason that I missed.
I didn't see this in the article. What I did see makes the whole thing very dubious:
The matter first came to German authorities attention when an environmental lobbying group blamed Fiats 500 X diesel crossovers had NOx emissions well beyond the legal limits.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.