Cummins fined for installing emissions defeat devices
- Thread starter Wayne
- Start date
MSCH
Well-known member
I had a discussion about this with my brother ( he is an automotive engineer, currently employed at Borg Warner) and he said that since Cummins admitted defeat and paid the fine, they must have done something, but it probably was not an actual defeat device in the sense of a delete type equipment or tuners but an error or workaround of emissions programming, possibly in the same manner as Volkswagen but not so thoroughly. His understanding of how compliance works is that you can be in technical non compliance as long as you write it into the exceptions when testing and certifying, but since there can be thousands of possible exceptions ( drivability is never ending set of variables) it was probably something along those lines and Cummins either knew about it and hoped they didn't get caught or didn't bother with the exceptions in writing.
which leads to a different question? does anyone think the EPA takes this stuff too far and instead of trying for say 99% compliance they are shooting for the engines to run cleaner than the air going in the intake?
I think they EPA would be better off relaxing the rules a bit but going for full compliance than their current method
which leads to a different question? does anyone think the EPA takes this stuff too far and instead of trying for say 99% compliance they are shooting for the engines to run cleaner than the air going in the intake?
I think they EPA would be better off relaxing the rules a bit but going for full compliance than their current method
Last edited:
That's what I think - it was something in the software they didn't ask for an exception for. Honest mistake? Maybe.
I would like to see the data behind why the regulations are made in the first place. Is diesel soot bad for you yes, but studies have shown the air in most people's houses are bad for you too. Then there are GDI engines that spew way more soot than modern diesels. Why are they just picking on diesels?
MSCH
Well-known member
Wayne, speaking as a retired diesel mechanic, diesel spew far more soot (aka particulate matter) than gasoline fired engines. American Cancer Society has a nice article about diesel exhaust if you care to read it.
but the current stuff with a DPF is far cleaner... I suspect most of the EPA settlement revolves around NOx emissions, which are controlled by both EGR and SCR systems. unless the DPF has holes in it, it basically collects and regenerates all the metallics ,ash and carbon coming out of the engine and traps that stuff and cleans itself
www.cancer.org
but the current stuff with a DPF is far cleaner... I suspect most of the EPA settlement revolves around NOx emissions, which are controlled by both EGR and SCR systems. unless the DPF has holes in it, it basically collects and regenerates all the metallics ,ash and carbon coming out of the engine and traps that stuff and cleans itself
Diesel Exhaust and Cancer Risk
Diesel Exhaust and Cancer Risk
People can be exposed to diesel exhaust at work, around the home, or while traveling, mainly by breathing it in. Learn more about diesel exhaust here.
www.cancer.org
Last edited:
Yeah, the old diesels I grew up around had zero emissions controls. Open the exhaust valve and spew it out into the open air. Man I breathed a lot of that crap and had no idea it was harmful.
I've read that article and found it to be informative.
Yeah, that's my point. If you look at the exhaust on my 45k miles Duramax, it's perfectly clean. If you look at the exhaust on a GDI car with 5k miles, it's completely covered with soot. I believe it's just a matter of time before GDI vehicles are forced to use a particulate filter. It's already happening in Europe.
MSCH
Well-known member
maybe so, but the volume of soot in gasoline is not nearly what it is in fuel oil.. so maybe down the road .
my current truck is deleted.. I was fine with dumping DEF in the thing, but when the cost of a DEF pump outwieghed the cost to delete, the answer was simple what I was going to do.. but honestly, I think the EPA needs to pull the rules back a bit, because instead of trying to get a 98% reduction, they are shooting for 99.999% and that is where the problems comes from.
Guy down the street from me owns and operates a tractors trailer ( Peterbuilt with Cummins X15) and he deleted the thing..because it had issues.. I asked him was he worried about getting caught and he told me the DOT doesn't check that stuff.
I wonder if he will be able to get service work done at a dealer? Or, if he could trade the truck in at a dealer. I've heard that when a dealer or service shop sees a deleted truck, they invite the owner to leave because they want nothing to do with a deleted truck.
MSCH
Well-known member
these guys are Cuban... they have their own people they go to that aren't dealers... not too mention neither of them are mechanically challenged.. since the person in question is the son in law, just to let you know how they operate, the Father in Law is running a 2000 long nose Pete with a Cat engine...never asked him how many miles are on it but I'd be willing to bet its more than a million.... so I assume the Son in Law is following in the FIL's footsteps and will run that deleted truck 20 years. You can tell how they are, because they might both be gone for 3 or 4 weeks at a time, and when they are home they work on the trucks. Always doing something to their trucks..
OLEJOE
Active member
With the push to EV’s when they figure out how to kill the diesels they will start on the gasoline side then. They are already talking about particulate filters for gasoline cars and trucks. The push to everything electric might work 50 years from now but not today. I built my house to not be total electric simply because it is not 100% reliable. Springtime storms and ice storms sometimes we don’t have electricity for weeks. My understanding of the Cummins issue was that there was something in the programming that the EPA and CARB didn’t like concerning the NO2 emissions on the DEF equipped trucks and they have issued a recall on the 13-18 Ram trucks and said the 19’s had already been recalled when they did the CP4 pump recalls. Cummins said they did nothing wrong but agreed to pay the fine. It was cheaper to pay the fine than to litigate.
Personally I think it’s a back door to finding out which 13-18 trucks have been deleted. Non compliance with the recall whether from being deleted or refusing to have it done will be a reason to cancel the registration and get a visit from a government agency to collect your money or everything else.
Have to keep these “Criminals” in check.
Personally I think it’s a back door to finding out which 13-18 trucks have been deleted. Non compliance with the recall whether from being deleted or refusing to have it done will be a reason to cancel the registration and get a visit from a government agency to collect your money or everything else.
Have to keep these “Criminals” in check.
Last edited:
Possible, but I don't know that the EPA has the work force to go knock on doors.
I haven't heard that, what was wrong with the CP4 pump?
OLEJOE
Active member
The CP4 pump issue was the pumps were exploding internally and sending metal throughout the entire fuel system. They changed the pumps back to the CP3 pumps they used for years that was reliable. From what I understand about it, Ford also uses the CP4 pumps and has had problems also but with a conversion not possible.
tnt_motorsports
Member
Wayne, speaking as a retired diesel mechanic, diesel spew far more soot (aka particulate matter) than gasoline fired engines. American Cancer Society has a nice article about diesel exhaust if you care to read it.
but the current stuff with a DPF is far cleaner... I suspect most of the EPA settlement revolves around NOx emissions, which are controlled by both EGR and SCR systems. unless the DPF has holes in it, it basically collects and regenerates all the metallics ,ash and carbon coming out of the engine and traps that stuff and cleans itself
Diesel Exhaust and Cancer Risk
Diesel Exhaust and Cancer Risk
People can be exposed to diesel exhaust at work, around the home, or while traveling, mainly by breathing it in. Learn more about diesel exhaust here.
It is all about the NOx. That is the bad guy here...
I suspect Cummins created software coding that got them really close and couldn't get over the line. Keep in mind there is no testing body, just the EPA. Manufacturers run the testing and submit the results. It is a little bit of the fox guarding the hen house so to speak. It would take someone snitching or testing outside of the controlled environment to turn the EPA onto this. I'm guessing all the crackdown on the aftermarket defeat devices helped to shine the flashlight.
Regardless of all this, diesel engines today emit far few emissions than in the past.
Just my $0.02
MSCH
Well-known member
you are giving them more credit for street sense than they deserve.. I worked for government for 35 years, they ain't capable of pulling off a conspiracy.
for them it is much easier to identify one offender that supplies the stuff to thousands of customers, and break it off in the kingpins butt than to make the effort to even to identify lone offenders.. leave that portion of enforcement up to local authorities..
Last edited: