What exactly did Chrysler do wrong?

What exactly did Chrysler do wrong?

This is a discussion on What exactly did Chrysler do wrong? within the FCA/EPA 3.0L Diesel Settlement and AEM (Approved Emissions Modification) forums, part of the FCA/EPA 3.0L Diesel Settlement and AEM category; I thought Chrysler Ram whatever they call themselfs claim they did nothing wrong and that they basically had to settle because their production line for ...

Results 1 to 5 of 5
Like Tree2Likes
  • 1 Post By 1stRAM
  • 1 Post By 97hmcs

Thread: What exactly did Chrysler do wrong?

  1. #1
    RAM Rookie 1stRAM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    8
    Member #
    6108
    Liked
    4 times

    What exactly did Chrysler do wrong?

    I thought Chrysler Ram whatever they call themselfs claim they did nothing wrong and that they basically had to settle because their production line for the coming years was shut down by the strong arm of the Government. Did I miss something?
    phprof likes this.

  2. #2
    RAM Professional Dieselfever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    West Tennessee
    Posts
    568
    Member #
    7134
    Liked
    536 times
    You missed something.

  3. #3
    RAM Professional phprof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    UP North
    Posts
    593
    Member #
    23562
    Vehicle
    2014 RAM Bighorn
    Liked
    277 times
    Quote Originally Posted by 1stRAM View Post
    I thought Chrysler Ram whatever they call themselfs claim they did nothing wrong and that they basically had to settle because their production line for the coming years was shut down by the strong arm of the Government. Did I miss something?
    I've found little "real" information in terms of how much and when the tune was over the EPA limits. FCA claimed it was a mistake when reporting their testing results to the EPA for approval. The EPA and DOJ claim it was intentional and egregious. FCA also stated that it occurs on "certain modes of operation". What all this means is "nobody is talking about the details to the public". If one could figure out a FOIA request, you probably could get the information including detailed measurements of NOx production and which modes it occurred under.

    My observation after having the truck AEM for 5 days and about 200 miles. Initial off the line throttle is softened a lot. When cold the engine can stumble badly but all diesels do that to some point. It was just a shocking change from what I have gotten use to in the past. I'm suspicious a lot of this is due to turbo lag and they have tuned it to be worse. I'm still working on some data I collected from my truck before and after the AEM. My first impressions for my routine home-to-work-to-home travels are as follows:

    1) Power builds more slowly through 2000 rpm. There is no more lurching starts and I have tried but failed to squawk the tires as easily as before.
    2) Turbo boost seems to be controlled more tightly. I need some data to back this up. Max boost seems to be about 18 psi. That's about the same.
    3) Top end power is there but it takes longer to reach due to limits on throttle response. Rolling into the throttle (rather than digital on/off) seems to alleviate some of the perception. This is always true on gas and diesels but more noticeable on diesels. The transmission plays a role as well.
    4) Particulate matter production is down. My DPF is filling noticeable more slowly. I need some solid data on this before confirmation.
    5) EGR appears to be open more and at lower RPMS it appears to be open more and longer. It's like they smoothed out its operation rather than so many quick changes.
    6) So far my home-to-work-to-home fuel mileage is up but this is preliminary data. I need a lot more data (3 weeks) to confirm this.
    7) It will be a long time before I will get a sense of DEF usage. I will be towing at the end of the month down to Ohio and back so I'll keep an eye on it but day-to-day usage will have to be assessed after September 4th.

    To be honest, it all makes sense. In order to meet the excessively low EPA requires on NOx emissions, they reduced early power build up when the combustion temperatures/pressures are higher. They may be starving the engine for air to limit (1) temps. and (2) available N and O for production of NOx. At higher speeds they are relying on the SCR to clean up the EPA's mess. Building engine speed more slowly will control the combustion processes more precisely.
    2014 RAM Ecodiesel Bighorn
    2014 Dodge Durango V6 3.6L

  4. Remove Advertisements
    Ram1500Diesel.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    MAS
    MAS is offline
    RAM Silver Member MAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    3,591
    Member #
    8120
    Vehicle
    2015 Ram 1500 CC 4x4 3.55's
    Liked
    1515 times
    Lord I don't know any more than the next guy. It was my understanding RAM did something they "thought" would be approved without asking or notifying. The powers that be found out and decided they wouldn't approve it, so at that point it is in violation.

  6. #5
    Administrator 97hmcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Location: Location, Location
    Posts
    7,867
    Member #
    1428
    Vehicle
    2014 Ram Ecodiesel
    Liked
    4564 times
    Quote Originally Posted by 1stRAM View Post
    I thought Chrysler Ram whatever they call themselfs claim they did nothing wrong and that they basically had to settle because their production line for the coming years was shut down by the strong arm of the Government. Did I miss something?
    1. What is this litigation about?
    On January 12, 2017, the EPA and CARB issued notices of violation to Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V.
    and FCA US LLC alleging that certain Ram and Jeep vehicles with 3.0-liter V6 diesel engines in the
    United States were equipped with eight Auxiliary Emissions Control Devices (“AECDs”) that were not
    disclosed to the EPA, and that the operation of one or more of the AECDs alone or in combination
    resulted in excess emissions of nitrogen oxides (“NOx”). January 12, 2017 is sometimes referred to in
    this Notice as the “Notice of Violation date” or “NOV date.”
    Attorneys representing owners and lessees of these EcoDiesel vehicles, including certain automobile
    dealers not affiliated with Fiat Chrysler, filed class action lawsuits against Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V.,
    FCA US LLC, VM Motori, S.p.A., VM North America, Inc., Robert Bosch GmbH, and Robert Bosch LLC,
    who are referred to as the “Defendants.” The people who sued are called the “Plaintiffs.”
    Plaintiffs allege that the Subject Vehicles were equipped with AECDs that caused the vehicles to emit
    significantly more pollutants than consumers reasonably expected, and more pollutants than were
    permitted under federal and state clean air laws. Plaintiffs further assert that the Defendants intentionally
    misled consumers about the qualities and characteristics of the Subject Vehicles.
    In addition to the class action lawsuits, the DOJ filed suit on behalf of the EPA and the State of California
    filed suit by and through the California Attorney General and CARB. The lawsuits filed by the DOJ/EPA
    and California assert that Fiat Chrysler violated the Clean Air Act and the California Health and Safety
    Code.
    The case is before Judge Edward Chen of the United States District Court for the Northern District of
    California (the “Court”). The case is known as In Re Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep EcoDiesel Marketing, Sales
    Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, No. 3:17-md-2777.
    Lifeson likes this.

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •