jcartwright99 Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 I can't remember if this had been brought up or not. There is some sensationalism in the headline from Jalopnik. What is going to come of this? Anyone know anything about this? investigation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 We discussed it when Ford first reported it back in February. It sounds like an honest mathematical error. Nothing showed up with the EPA sample tests nor have we seen any big complaints about real world mpg vs. EPA on newer models so I assume the actual mpg impact is small. As long as it wasn't a deliberate deception I think any penalties will be minor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blwnsmoke Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 It's been posted at least once (about 6 posts down) and Inremember it being posted when it first came out on here and that Ford voluntarily reported it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 5 minutes ago, blwnsmoke said: It's been posted at least once (about 6 posts down) and Inremember it being posted when it first came out on here and that Ford voluntarily reported it. This is a government investigation on top of that. Why it's criminal I'm not sure but after the diesel thing I can see why they don't want to play games Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 It's also important to clearing Ford's good name of any intentional wrong doing as quickly as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02MustangGT Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 8 hours ago, akirby said: We discussed it when Ford first reported it back in February. It sounds like an honest mathematical error. Nothing showed up with the EPA sample tests nor have we seen any big complaints about real world mpg vs. EPA on newer models so I assume the actual mpg impact is small. As long as it wasn't a deliberate deception I think any penalties will be minor. Yeah nothing like an “honest” mathematical error. The monetary fine will be of no importance compared to the negative publicity and the perception of Ford attempting to cheat the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 3 minutes ago, 02MustangGT said: Yeah nothing like an “honest” mathematical error. The monetary fine will be of no importance compared to the negative publicity and the perception of Ford attempting to cheat the system. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one. If there was truly any malfeasance involved I don't think they would have gone public with it 4 months ago like they did Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgeh Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 Not dieselgate large and Ford is cooperating not trying to cover up (and Ford itself notified authorities after it became aware of the issue via internal reporting). It could mean a fine down the road, depending on how serious the issue turns out to be, but it shouldn't be anything close to the company-shaking (many) multi-billion hit that VW/Audi got (for good reason). From the Detroit Free Press: -------------------- The investigation, which Ford confirmed, requires significant technical expertise and will last awhile. These cases often involve big fines. "Ford doesn’t know where this is going to end up," said Peter Henning, a former federal prosecutor who teaches law at Wayne State University. "The benefit of self reporting is that the company receives credit for that.The decision ultimately about whether to bring a criminal charge will hinge on how cooperative the company is. Here, Ford seems to have gotten out in front of this issue, and that will be a benefit for them going forward." ...Ford isn't the only member of the Detroit Three facing federal criminal investigation related to emissions. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is awaiting the results of an investigation into alleged diesel emissions cheating. The company, along with auto supplier Bosch, has agreed to settle a civil case in the matter that could result in payments of about $3,000 for some affected Jeep and Ram owners. FCA, which continues to deny any intentional cheating, expects to spend more than $790 million. The government, however, said the company not only broke the law but also tried to hide its actions. FCA is also facing an unrelated recall, announced last month, of close to 1 million cars and SUVs as a result of emissions investigations. ...And on April 14, Reuters reported Germany’s motor vehicle authority KBA was investigating Daimler on suspicion that 60,000 Mercedes cars produced between 2012 and 2015 were fitted with software designed to fool emissions tests. ...Unlike VW, Ford emphasized in February, when it disclosed its internal investigation, and again in Friday's SEC filing, "the potential concern does not involve the use of defeat devices." The Ford incident surfaced through an employee "Speak Up" program that allows people to reach out on a number of issues, including concerns. Feedback is submitted by phone, email, website or mobile app. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02MustangGT Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 32 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said: I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one. If there was truly any malfeasance involved I don't think they would have gone public with it 4 months ago like they did I agree with your perspective, however, the spin from the media will always make this seem worse than it is. It’s not a good look regardless of the outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron W. Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 3 hours ago, 02MustangGT said: Yeah nothing like an “honest” mathematical error. The monetary fine will be of no importance compared to the negative publicity and the perception of Ford attempting to cheat the system. My guess is the majority of people will not even be aware of this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02MustangGT Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 6 minutes ago, Ron W. said: My guess is the majority of people will not even be aware of this. Huh? So the majority of people don’t read the news? That makes zero sense. This will be plastered all over the news if Ford is indeed found guilty of what has been described in the articles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 8 hours ago, 02MustangGT said: Huh? So the majority of people don’t read the news? That makes zero sense. This will be plastered all over the news if Ford is indeed found guilty of what has been described in the articles. Depends on the severity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgeh Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 8 hours ago, 02MustangGT said: Huh? So the majority of people don’t read the news? That makes zero sense. This will be plastered all over the news if Ford is indeed found guilty of what has been described in the articles. Actually, the majority of people don't in fact read the news. How many do you think are aware that FCA and Mercedes are also under investigation, former suspected of being involved in a cover-up of its actions and the latter charged with producing cars that "were fitted with software designed to fool emissions tests"? People will generally become aware of the Ford emissions investigation if there is either a huge fine, a CEO goes to jail, or if car millions of Ford owners are told they have to bring their vehicles in and have them detuned to reduce their performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02MustangGT Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 You don’t have to read the news to see a headline. Your OPINION is that the majority of people don’t read the news. My opinion is that you are wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 22 hours ago, akirby said: We discussed it when Ford first reported it back in February. It sounds like an honest mathematical error. Nothing showed up with the EPA sample tests nor have we seen any big complaints about real world mpg vs. EPA on newer models so I assume the actual mpg impact is small. As long as it wasn't a deliberate deception I think any penalties will be minor. No such thing as an "honest mathematical error" ! This is a Fortune 50 company with access to thousands of high speed computer, and they are not "human computers". Road load calculation do have a bit of "fudge"/"interpretation" in them. It is NOT a PERFECT scientific process. Did they go beyond the limits ? We will find out. (Ford has been caught twice violating emission testing regulations. I worked in Engine Engineering both times.) If by "sample tests" you mean EPA Selective Enforcement Audits (SEA), my guess would be that Ford would pay for more SEA testing, but I think the real issue is fuel economy. It certainly does not look good. FYI - Since the last "debacle", engineers responsible for emission calibration and their immediate supervisors must "sign off" that there are no known "defeat device" on the vehicle. Their sign off also includes immediate dismissal if any defeat devices are later discovered. Road load calculations are done by different people and the emission engineers and certification technicians just "dial the number" into the test equipment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 2 hours ago, theoldwizard said: No such thing as an "honest mathematical error" ! Even if the wrong formula is used? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said: Even if the wrong formula is used? Apparently this is a very complicated formula that takes into account rolling resistance of the tires and wind resistance. It is a very complicated algorithm involving a lot of constants that all have to be accurate. It doesn’t appear to be an obvious excel formula error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcartwright99 Posted April 27, 2019 Author Share Posted April 27, 2019 25 minutes ago, akirby said: Apparently this is a very complicated formula that takes into account rolling resistance of the tires and wind resistance. It is a very complicated algorithm involving a lot of constants that all have to be accurate. It doesn’t appear to be an obvious excel formula error. It just takes one guy to program it wrong. And one QA to miss it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 44 minutes ago, akirby said: Apparently this is a very complicated formula that takes into account rolling resistance of the tires and wind resistance. It is a very complicated algorithm involving a lot of constants that all have to be accurate. It doesn’t appear to be an obvious excel formula error. That's my point. That's why I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one. They've been pretty forward with the public and the government about it ever since it was brought to management attention 4 months ago. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 (edited) It's like that virus in the movie Office Space. One little decimal is out of place and all of a sudden instead of a fraction of a penny you get hundreds of thousands of dollars Edited April 27, 2019 by fuzzymoomoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted April 29, 2019 Share Posted April 29, 2019 From a fellow retiree Quote The coast-down procedure is called out in e-CFR sub-parts 1066.305 (</= 14K GVWR) and 1066.310 (> 14K GVWR), both EPA regs utilize SAE J-2263 and/or J-1263 procedures. We have been using these procedures for a long time to calc. the chassis dyna. A, B, & C inertia coefficients (for road-load simulation on the chassis dynomometer), too low and F.E. looks better than it should and too high and F.E. looks worse than it should. If the coast-down coefficients are suspected of being too low, EPA/CARB will have Ford (or a third party), re-test the coast down (after 2000 mi break-in for light duty, 4000 mi for heavy duty) and rerun all exhaust emission testing. Criminal intent (if established) could trigger convictions and fines. Since Ford reported we had a suspected issues, I think it will be sorted out and fixed (if it needs to be fixed). If it turns out some (or all) Ford vehicles have lower actual F.E. than reported, Ford may need to pay out to the affected customers. If the exhaust emissions exceed standards (after D.F. calcs are factored in), that would be a significant problem, but I do not expect that to be the case. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 Basically it's C-Max all over again if I understand what happened correctly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 On 4/27/2019 at 11:54 AM, jcartwright99 said: It just takes one guy to program it wrong. And one QA to miss it. You have QA? Fancy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rperez817 Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 February 2021 update. Investigations by U.S. Department of Justice and by California Air Resources of Ford's emissions certifications procedures have ended. No further actions have been requested by either government agency. The investigations by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Climate Change Canada remain open, as does the class action lawsuit by Hagens Berman. Ford says U.S. Justice Dept, California end probe into emissions issue | Reuters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 Those pesky coast down coefficients......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.