Ford gone the route of VW?
#32
01-11-2018, 01:04 PM
Senior User
#33
01-11-2018, 02:08 PM
Hotshot
I read 124 pages of the lawsuit. The essence of the case is that Ford passes the EPA's NOx test which operates the vehicle at low speeds and medium speeds, but based upon their own testing the Bosch engine controls intentionally reduce or completely shut off both DEF injection and EGR operation at high engine loads...whether that be wide open throttle or during engine operation when towing or hauling a load, climbing grades, or operating at high speeds.
The lawsuit seems almost bulletproof in its assertions that the truck's Bosch engine controls definitely violate emissions laws at high loads based upon industry-standard testing.
The lawsuit lists several different "plaintiff owned" trucks, including a couple of 2016 trucks, a 2015, a 2014, and a 2012. Only the 2014 F-250 was actually tested, but the lawsuit is confident that no changes were made to the emissions control systems between 2011 and 2017. Specific technical layouts of the 2017 system were published.
One problem I see is that clearly the 2017 trucks have a larger DEF tank but owners are not getting additional mileage from their trucks. This would imply greater DEF usage. It could be in response to the VW scandal or it could have been as result of the more powerful engine.
The lawsuit alleges the 5 or 6 "plaintiff owners" were expecting a clean truck and would not have purchased had they known at high loads the truck would not be in compliance. I call BS on this considering most people buying a HD diesel truck really aren't the same as Prius people when it comes to the environment.
The lawsuit also cites a lot of Ford marketing for the 2011-2016 generation of truck, specially citing an 80% reduction of NOx...but that was in regards to the previous generation. Nowhere does the brochure state that the 80% reduction will be at all times.
The final, ironic thing is that F-450 trucks (which can be pickups and share the same engine) are not named, nor are 2018 trucks. No chassis cab trucks are cited either, and I personally noted the C/C trucks use a reverse order for DPF and SCR systems (the C/C trucks have the DPF first, then the SCR while on pickups it is the reverse). The lawsuit makes a big point of discussing how Ford uses a non-standard configuration of SCR then DPF in their efforts to cheat...but make no mention of C/C trucks using the "standard" method.
I wonder if F-450 pickups use the C/C DPF layout? Or if all 2018 trucks do?
Bottom line - some claims seem very much like a stretch, but others seem rock solid. Obviously, more trucks would need to be tested, but the suit clearly believes with confidence all trucks will be the same from 2011-2017.
Interestingly, it seems if Ford reprogrammed for the trucks to use more DEF, more EGR, and allowed the more frequent active regens that would result...emissions would be in compliance.
The lawsuit seems almost bulletproof in its assertions that the truck's Bosch engine controls definitely violate emissions laws at high loads based upon industry-standard testing.
The lawsuit lists several different "plaintiff owned" trucks, including a couple of 2016 trucks, a 2015, a 2014, and a 2012. Only the 2014 F-250 was actually tested, but the lawsuit is confident that no changes were made to the emissions control systems between 2011 and 2017. Specific technical layouts of the 2017 system were published.
One problem I see is that clearly the 2017 trucks have a larger DEF tank but owners are not getting additional mileage from their trucks. This would imply greater DEF usage. It could be in response to the VW scandal or it could have been as result of the more powerful engine.
The lawsuit alleges the 5 or 6 "plaintiff owners" were expecting a clean truck and would not have purchased had they known at high loads the truck would not be in compliance. I call BS on this considering most people buying a HD diesel truck really aren't the same as Prius people when it comes to the environment.
The lawsuit also cites a lot of Ford marketing for the 2011-2016 generation of truck, specially citing an 80% reduction of NOx...but that was in regards to the previous generation. Nowhere does the brochure state that the 80% reduction will be at all times.
The final, ironic thing is that F-450 trucks (which can be pickups and share the same engine) are not named, nor are 2018 trucks. No chassis cab trucks are cited either, and I personally noted the C/C trucks use a reverse order for DPF and SCR systems (the C/C trucks have the DPF first, then the SCR while on pickups it is the reverse). The lawsuit makes a big point of discussing how Ford uses a non-standard configuration of SCR then DPF in their efforts to cheat...but make no mention of C/C trucks using the "standard" method.
I wonder if F-450 pickups use the C/C DPF layout? Or if all 2018 trucks do?
Bottom line - some claims seem very much like a stretch, but others seem rock solid. Obviously, more trucks would need to be tested, but the suit clearly believes with confidence all trucks will be the same from 2011-2017.
Interestingly, it seems if Ford reprogrammed for the trucks to use more DEF, more EGR, and allowed the more frequent active regens that would result...emissions would be in compliance.
#34
01-11-2018, 02:25 PM
Hotshot
I read 124 pages of the lawsuit. The essence of the case is that Ford passes the EPA's NOx test which operates the vehicle at low speeds and medium speeds, but based upon their own testing the Bosch engine controls intentionally reduce or completely shut off both DEF injection and EGR operation at high engine loads...whether that be wide open throttle or during engine operation when towing or hauling a load, climbing grades, or operating at high speeds.
#35
01-11-2018, 02:35 PM
Senior User
#36
01-11-2018, 02:43 PM
Hotshot
That's a lot of reading. It seems to me if their claims were true, we would use less DEF when towing, and that is opposite of what we read about constantly here. When towing heavy, most people report more passive regen, but a whole lot more DEF usage. I hope this, and NYC's lawsuits against "Big Oil" get dumped as frivolous.
#37
01-11-2018, 02:47 PM
Hotshot
If a subsequent fix causes much higher fuel consumption and DEF usage, there will likely be additional "loss of value" lawsuits...and without a big payout (which seems unlikely here) most customers will simply opt to not have the fix applied.
That's the funny thing...who would ever accept a "fix" that decreased performance and / or fuel economy. People would just delete! They already do at even current stock "good" levels of performance!
#38
01-11-2018, 03:14 PM
Senior User
It won't matter. The lawsuit isn't hinging upon performance or fuel economy claims...but rather that Ford deceived consumers into thinking they were getting a truck that met emissions standards at all time during operation.
If a subsequent fix causes much higher fuel consumption and DEF usage, there will likely be additional "loss of value" lawsuits...and without a big payout (which seems unlikely here) most customers will simply opt to not have the fix applied.
That's the funny thing...who would ever accept a "fix" that decreased performance and / or fuel economy. People would just delete! They already do at even current stock "good" levels of performance!
If a subsequent fix causes much higher fuel consumption and DEF usage, there will likely be additional "loss of value" lawsuits...and without a big payout (which seems unlikely here) most customers will simply opt to not have the fix applied.
That's the funny thing...who would ever accept a "fix" that decreased performance and / or fuel economy. People would just delete! They already do at even current stock "good" levels of performance!
The big picture is does the epa/carb get involved. They have the authority stop sales like they did with VW and Ram on the 3.0 EcoDiesels.
If that happens they will demand that vehicles be brought into compliance, the effects of any remedy would be weighed against the original certification. In the case VW they were not able to bring some of their vehicles into compliance because the potential fix hit mpg to hard. On vehicles that were approved for a fix by epa/carb part of the restitution was for decreased mpg compared to the original certification, think window sticker.
All of this hinges on the epa/carb. In the case of the 6.6 duramax they haven’t got involved so far.
#39
01-11-2018, 03:36 PM
Senior User
#40
01-11-2018, 03:41 PM
The people that wrote that lawsuit are about to get loved tenderly.
Last time I checked, every single truck on the road turns off it's EGR at heavy engine loads. Pumping inert gas into the engine, that doesn't burn, to reduce heat, to reduce NOx, also reduces power. EGR is for cruising, and light loads, it does frackin NOTHING to a well loaded engine. Some idiot lawyer needs to go to a basic tech school. This is beginner stuff. Like the 3rd week after 2 weeks of semi truck drive train. Retarded nonsense.
I have no idea on the DEF, that's far after my training. But I'd imagine that dumping DEF into the exhaust at full throttles extremely high EGT, would just vaporize it and waste it.
If I was Ford, I'd counter sue for a billion dollars. After all the EPA hurdles they had to pay......
Last time I checked, every single truck on the road turns off it's EGR at heavy engine loads. Pumping inert gas into the engine, that doesn't burn, to reduce heat, to reduce NOx, also reduces power. EGR is for cruising, and light loads, it does frackin NOTHING to a well loaded engine. Some idiot lawyer needs to go to a basic tech school. This is beginner stuff. Like the 3rd week after 2 weeks of semi truck drive train. Retarded nonsense.
I have no idea on the DEF, that's far after my training. But I'd imagine that dumping DEF into the exhaust at full throttles extremely high EGT, would just vaporize it and waste it.
If I was Ford, I'd counter sue for a billion dollars. After all the EPA hurdles they had to pay......
#41
01-11-2018, 03:42 PM
Ford didn't start building and shipping '18's until late November, which means very few people even HAD an '18 at the time the lawsuit was filed.
#42
01-11-2018, 03:52 PM
Senior User
#44
01-11-2018, 03:55 PM
Seeing how well plaintiffs did in the VW TDI case, many lawyers are jumping on the bandwagon and testing diesels from almost every brand to see "if they are over the limit."
Frankly, while the TDI owners may have purchased their vehicles as part of a tree-hugging image, Ford Powerstroke owners are buying for raw towing power, of which the Powerstroke delivers. I've never heard any Ford marketing claims of "reduced real-world NOx" yet I've certainly heard the TDI "Clean Diesel" slogan.
Such claims are insanity, and a way to get a quick money grab by lawyers which end up costing the consumers in the end. The VW TDI was an excellent vehicle, and now VW no longer sells diesels. Instead, they are putting a lot of money into crappy electric cars. They were also fined by the EPA and had to spend billions on "universal electric vehicle charging infrastructure" that benefits anyone building crappy electric cars, not just VW. In my opinion, the consumer loses.
NOx measures are pretty silly. How much NOx is emitted by a vehicle that is older, or a gas engine? How much NOx is saved because the diesel uses less fuel? Nobody ever considered that the VW TDI cars could get 50mpg...and because people were getting 50mpg instead of 30mpg in a gas-powered sedan...how much NOx was reduced because we didn't need to pump as much oil from the ground, refine as much, transport as much, and burn as much? Very short sighted. The EPA got caught with its pants down and tried to make an example of VW while simultaneously promoting its liberal electric vehicle agenda. Shame.
Keep in mind there were similar claims made against the Duramax back some months ago, and nothing has come of it.
The "order of the catalytic" is meaningless. Ford's pickup trucks go DOC-SCR-DPF while chassis cabs go DOC-DPF-SCR. It does not matter, the DPF is a filter that catches all particles that pass through it, regardless of what position it is located in.
Frankly, while the TDI owners may have purchased their vehicles as part of a tree-hugging image, Ford Powerstroke owners are buying for raw towing power, of which the Powerstroke delivers. I've never heard any Ford marketing claims of "reduced real-world NOx" yet I've certainly heard the TDI "Clean Diesel" slogan.
Such claims are insanity, and a way to get a quick money grab by lawyers which end up costing the consumers in the end. The VW TDI was an excellent vehicle, and now VW no longer sells diesels. Instead, they are putting a lot of money into crappy electric cars. They were also fined by the EPA and had to spend billions on "universal electric vehicle charging infrastructure" that benefits anyone building crappy electric cars, not just VW. In my opinion, the consumer loses.
NOx measures are pretty silly. How much NOx is emitted by a vehicle that is older, or a gas engine? How much NOx is saved because the diesel uses less fuel? Nobody ever considered that the VW TDI cars could get 50mpg...and because people were getting 50mpg instead of 30mpg in a gas-powered sedan...how much NOx was reduced because we didn't need to pump as much oil from the ground, refine as much, transport as much, and burn as much? Very short sighted. The EPA got caught with its pants down and tried to make an example of VW while simultaneously promoting its liberal electric vehicle agenda. Shame.
Keep in mind there were similar claims made against the Duramax back some months ago, and nothing has come of it.
The "order of the catalytic" is meaningless. Ford's pickup trucks go DOC-SCR-DPF while chassis cabs go DOC-DPF-SCR. It does not matter, the DPF is a filter that catches all particles that pass through it, regardless of what position it is located in.
IF we want to stop this insanity we need to change the rules...LOSER PAY$ (like in almost ALL other countries in the world)
The people that wrote that lawsuit are about to get loved tenderly.
Every single truck on the road turns off it's EGR at heavy engine loads. Pumping inert gas into the engine, that doesn't burn, to reduce heat, also reduces power. EGR is for cruising. Some idiot lawyer needs to go to a basic tech school. This is beginner stuff.
I have no idea on the DEF, that's before my training. But I'd imagine that dumping DEF into the exhaust at full throttles extremely high EGT, would just vaporize it and waste it.
Every single truck on the road turns off it's EGR at heavy engine loads. Pumping inert gas into the engine, that doesn't burn, to reduce heat, also reduces power. EGR is for cruising. Some idiot lawyer needs to go to a basic tech school. This is beginner stuff.
I have no idea on the DEF, that's before my training. But I'd imagine that dumping DEF into the exhaust at full throttles extremely high EGT, would just vaporize it and waste it.
Helium
Neon
Argon
Krypton
Xenon
Radon
Oganesson
My truck has none of those on board and I have never had to add any. Other than that it could pump air as we know it which is 78% Nitrogen and 21% Oxygen + 1% other. My guess is it pumping air into it rather than a inert gas????? I am no diesel expert but I did stay in a Holiday Inn the other night.
#45
01-11-2018, 04:10 PM
Senior User
