there’s a number of ways. the test procedure defines ambient temperature, a precise warm-up time, the steering wheel is always straight forward (important for a FWD car because the test is done on rolls,) the stability control has to be disabled, etc.
Everyone blamed GM for kneecapping the idea of diesel cars in the '80s. Well, now you can thank VW for putting a bullet in its head.
I also read and also can’t find that article, but I think the hood cheat was related to GM trucks. I haven’t heard what criteria VW used to cheat, but it may very well have also been the hood unlatched.
Not sure steering angle input would be best because you’d run your default program for some amount of time before diagnosing that you’re on a dyno. Would the change in behavior be noticeable to the tester?
Here are twoarticles about how VW programmed their cars to tell when they were undergoing smog testing. The first article points out that a car being tested is on a dynamometer, so that the front (powered) wheels would be spinning while the rear (unpowered) wheels would be stationary. The second article gives a summary of the steps in the testing procedure.
Both articles say that testing modes are pretty common in cars. The usual purpose is to prevent the cars’ automated systems from misinterpreting the test conditions. For instance, running the car on a dyno with the non-driving wheels stationary might trick a traction-control system into thinking something was wrong. What’s different in this case is that the test mode was designed not to only prevent false errors from being reported, but to temporarily enable the emissions controls.
Kind of like how in the mind of the general public there is no TDI engine that is gas.
Please note that funny little green face… it denotes I’m kidding a bit. You should not get defensive and feel like you have to prove that something exists even though it can’t be called that due to some “marketing/trademark fluff.”
Geeze… you would think you have never seen a pendant on these boards before.
Yes but is that how they did it?
It is easy on a CAN bus car to put the steering wheel angle/velocity on the CAN bus, but even on rollers there can be minute steering corrections.
I also thought of the ABS detecting that the drive wheels were moving, but the non-drive wheels weren’t. That would work except on AWD cars. Again this info placed on the CAN bus would be available for the ECM.
I also thought of the alarm hood switch status being put on the CAN bus which would work unless for some reason the hood was not opened during the test.
Does anyone know for a fact how they did it?
right now there’s tons of speculation, but it’ll probably be months before there’s an official report on how it all went down. much of the speculation, though, seems plausible.
What gets me about this scandal is all the apologies I’ve heard from every VW official right up to the CEO who just resigned sound so insincere. I keep hearing: “Uh, ve are zo zorry. Yes, zorry. Tank you, dat vill be all.”
All this talk about VW being “done” is seriously making me wonder if the German government will end up doing something to save them. Letting VW fail is absolutely not going to be an acceptable option from Germany’s POV. But given the likely massive cost (reaching into the many billions of dollars/euro) a financial bailout is likely out of the question as well. What might be left is a legislative solution. An “Old VW/New VW” strategy would be right out of the Obama administration’s playbook regarding GM, which would help to blunt the outrage this move would generate. (“What? You guys did the same thing…”)
This would very much be the nuclear option, and it would mean VW writing off the US market for the forseeable future, but I honestly think this is more likely than VW undergoing a “disorganized” bankruptcy.