Fiat News: EPA Alleges FCA Violated Diesel Emission Standards

[William Maley]

---

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles finds itself in hot water, this time with the EPA. During a conference call this morning, the agency accused FCA of violating diesel emission standards on 104,000 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 models equipped with the 3.0L EcoDiesel from 2014 to 2016. They are also accused of failing to disclose eight different software programs. The EPA alleges the software used on these models allowed them to produce excess pollution. At the moment, the EPA isn't calling the software a defeat device as FCA haven't explained the purpose of this software.

“Failing to disclose software that affects emissions in a vehicle’s engine is a serious violation of the law, which can result in harmful pollution in the air we breathe. We continue to investigate the nature and impact of these devices,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance in a statement. 

In lab tests done by the EPA, the 3.0L EcoDiesel meet emission standards. But at high speeds or driving for extended periods, the effectiveness of the emission's system was reduced by the software.

This possibly explains why the 2017 Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 EcoDiesel haven't been given the ok by the EPA as we reported last year.

The EPA says there is no immediate action for owners to take as the vehicles are safe and legal to drive while the investigation continues. FCA could be fined as much $44,539 per vehicle if they are found to be violating the Clean Air Act (about $4.6 billion).

In a statement obtained by Bloomberg, FCA said it “intends to work with the incoming administration to present its case and resolve this matter fairly and equitably and to assure the EPA and FCA US customers that the company's diesel-powered vehicles meet all applicable regulatory requirements."

FCA's stock price dropped 16 percent to $9.30 after the news broke. Soon after, trading on the stock was halted.

We'll be watching this and update this story as more information comes in.

Source: Reuters, Bloomberg , USA Today , EPA, FCA
Press Releases are on Page 2

---

EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

• FCA allegedly installed and failed to disclose software that increases air pollution from vehicles

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today issued a notice of violation to Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V. and FCA US LLC (collectively FCA) for alleged violations of the Clean Air Act for installing and failing to disclose engine management software in light-duty model year 2014, 2015 and 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks with 3.0 liter diesel engines sold in the United States. The undisclosed software results in increased emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from the vehicles. The allegations cover roughly 104,000 vehicles. EPA is working in coordination with the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which has also issued a notice of violation to FCA. EPA and CARB have both initiated investigations based on FCA’s alleged actions.

“Failing to disclose software that affects emissions in a vehicle’s engine is a serious violation of the law, which can result in harmful pollution in the air we breathe,” said Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “We continue to investigate the nature and impact of these devices. All automakers must play by the same rules, and we will continue to hold companies accountable that gain an unfair and illegal competitive advantage.”

“Once again, a major automaker made the business decision to skirt the rules and got caught,” said CARB Chair Mary D. Nichols. “CARB and U.S. EPA made a commitment to enhanced testing as the Volkswagen case developed, and this is a result of that collaboration.”

The Clean Air Act requires vehicle manufacturers to demonstrate to EPA through a certification process that their products meet applicable federal emission standards to control air pollution. As part of the certification process, automakers are required to disclose and explain any software, known as auxiliary emission control devices, that can alter how a vehicle emits air pollution. FCA did not disclose the existence of certain auxiliary emission control devices to EPA in its applications for certificates of conformity for model year 2014, 2015 and 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks, despite being aware that such a disclosure was mandatory. By failing to disclose this software and then selling vehicles that contained it, FCA violated important provisions of the Clean Air Act. 

FCA may be liable for civil penalties and injunctive relief for the violations alleged in the NOV. EPA is also investigating whether the auxiliary emission control devices constitute “defeat devices,” which are illegal.

In September 2015, EPA instituted an expanded testing program to screen for defeat devices on light duty vehicles. This testing revealed that the FCA vehicle models in question produce increased NOx emissions under conditions that would be encountered in normal operation and use. As part of the investigation, EPA has found at least eight undisclosed pieces of software that can alter how a vehicle emits air pollution.

FCA US Response to EPA

January 12, 2017 , Auburn Hills, Mich. - FCA US is disappointed that the EPA has chosen to issue a notice of violation with respect to the emissions control technology employed in the company’s 2014-16 model year light duty 3.0-liter diesel engines.

FCA US intends to work with the incoming administration to present its case and resolve this matter fairly and equitably and to assure the EPA and FCA US customers that the company’s diesel-powered vehicles meet all applicable regulatory requirements.

FCA US diesel engines are equipped with state-of-the-art emission control systems hardware, including selective catalytic reduction (SCR).  Every auto manufacturer must employ various strategies to control tailpipe emissions in order to balance EPA’s regulatory requirements for low nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions and requirements for engine durability and performance, safety and fuel efficiency. FCA US believes that its emission control systems meet the applicable requirements.

FCA US has spent months providing voluminous information in response to requests from EPA  and other governmental authorities and has sought to explain its emissions control technology to EPA representatives.  FCA US has proposed a number of actions to address EPA’s concerns, including developing extensive software changes to our emissions control strategies that could be implemented in these vehicles immediately to further improve emissions performance.

FCA US looks forward to the opportunity to meet with the EPA’s enforcement division and representatives of the new administration to demonstrate that FCA US’s emissions control strategies are properly justified and thus are not “defeat devices” under applicable regulations and to resolve this matter expeditiously.

View full article

[David]

Sergio is hoping trump will kill the EPA and he can get away unlike VW with Polluting and hurting humans as he steals the profits for his own pocket.

FCA needs to be broken up and killed. Time for Fiat / Alfa to die for good.

Course this would also cause pain for Ram, Jeep, Dodge and Chrysler. Wonder how Frump would deal with it. Break it up and sell it off, consolidate and allow it to be taken as one piece?

2017, the year of business taking money and change at the expense of the consumer.  H'mmmmmmmmmm

[FAPTurbo]

FCA cheats its sales numbers so cheating emissions is unsurprising. 

shame FCA can't cheat up a reliable car. 

also, who the hell's going to buy a diesel passenger vehicle anymore? it's just a crapshoot now. 

[ccap41]

1 minute ago, FAPTurbo said:

also, who the hell's going to buy a diesel passenger vehicle anymore? it's just a crapshoot now. 

Somebody trying to drive a vehicle for free for a couple of years, get a settlement check, or a new car on the cheaps.

[David]

^ +1 Totally agree that FCA cheating will really hurt Diesel future here in America. I question if GM will bother to keep diesels in their lineup much past a few years out other than the full size trucks.

I bet a Hybrid truck could give you the same performance as a diesel if done with that focus in mind.

[Stew]

Why do i get the feeling that by the time this is over there will be no light duty or passenger car diesels left?

[Frisky Dingo]

Oh, if this isn't just fuck ing rich.

Wonder what all the people bemoaning VW and crying for their heads will have to say about this one. Wonder what the penalties will look like.

I'm not even going to criticize them. They, like everyone else, knows how unrealistic our diesel regs are, and figured out a way around them. VW was just the first in a line to get caught. There will be more. And probably not just diesels. 

[cp-the-nerd]

VW got themselves burned by selling diesels without urea treatment. The only magic way around that was cheating. The ecodiesels and cummins trucks have all the required equipment to be legal. I think the final verdict will be much less dramatic than the initial report implies.

[David]

9 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

Oh, if this isn't just fuck ing rich.

Wonder what all the people bemoaning VW and crying for their heads will have to say about this one. Wonder what the penalties will look like.

I'm not even going to criticize them. They, like everyone else, knows how unrealistic our diesel regs are, and figured out a way around them. VW was just the first in a line to get caught. There will be more. And probably not just diesels. 

We already know that CARB has discovered that Audi Gas auto's have cheat code. So this is going to be interesting to see what all comes out of this.

[ccap41]

10 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

They, like everyone else, knows how unrealistic our diesel regs are, and figured out a way around them.

So don't make a diesel vehicle if you can't follow the laws put in place. Nobody is forcing VW or FCA to produce a diesel Ram 1500 or Golf with a TDI engine.

[FordCosworth]

Look at FCA's record over the past couple years:

500k faulty vehicle buy back - previous repairs have been unsuccessful, so Fiat Chrysler agreed to the buyback, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Record ( at the time ) civil fine of $105 million - auto company’s lax attitude toward addressing safety issues in millions of its vehicles. NHTSA said it was concerned about slow completion rates on recalls the automaker announced, slow or inadequate notifications to consumers, faulty approaches to fixing the safety issues and improper actions by dealers

Owners of more than a million older Jeeps with vulnerable rear-mounted gas tanks will be able to trade them in or be paid by Chrysler to have the vehicles repaired.

Falsifying Sales Data.

Lawsuit between FCA, Cummins and customers over emissions.

And now this....

FCA - I can think of a few fitting acronyms for this company.

 

[Stew]

Did some further research and this is all quite premature.  it is only in the investigation stage right now and FCA IS going to meet with the EPA to review and explain their emissions equipment.  Always looking at the negative and jumping to conclusions............

[oldshurst442]

5 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

Look at FCA's record over the past couple years:

500k faulty vehicle buy back - previous repairs have been unsuccessful, so Fiat Chrysler agreed to the buyback, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Record ( at the time ) civil fine of $105 million - auto company’s lax attitude toward addressing safety issues in millions of its vehicles. NHTSA said it was concerned about slow completion rates on recalls the automaker announced, slow or inadequate notifications to consumers, faulty approaches to fixing the safety issues and improper actions by dealers

Owners of more than a million older Jeeps with vulnerable rear-mounted gas tanks will be able to trade them in or be paid by Chrysler to have the vehicles repaired.

Falsifying Sales Data.

Lawsuit between FCA, Cummins and customers over emissions.

And now this....

FCA - I can think of a few fitting acronyms for this company.

 

You and I are in agreement here.

The F part of FCA is f@#k ing douchey

The C part of FCA is crappy.

But since Marchionne is in charge of all this shyte and his company that he runs is based in Europe somewhere and not Auburn Hills, USA, than I absolve all wrong doing done only on the Chrysler part. The FIAT part could just suck it!

 

[FAPTurbo]

1 hour ago, Stew said:

Did some further research and this is all quite premature.  it is only in the investigation stage right now and FCA IS going to meet with the EPA to review and explain their emissions equipment.  Always looking at the negative and jumping to conclusions............

it's the perception - VW's own marketing and hubris had them bear the cross for 'clean diesels,' and they were rightfully crucified for their malfeasance and dishonesty. if no one can trust the standard-bearer, why would anyone trust FCA, GM, Ford, etc.

FCA's issue may not be nearly as serious but it's just an extra nail being pounded into diesel's rapidly descending coffin. 

[Stew]

10 minutes ago, FAPTurbo said:

it's the perception - VW's own marketing and hubris had them bear the cross for 'clean diesels,' and they were rightfully crucified for their malfeasance and dishonesty. if no one can trust the standard-bearer, why would anyone trust FCA, GM, Ford, etc.

FCA's issue may not be nearly as serious but it's just an extra nail being pounded into diesel's rapidly descending coffin. 

It is just a matter of time before the GM twin diesels come under the spotlight and from what I hear it is starting to heat up for Nissan's Cummins. 

[FordCosworth]

20 minutes ago, Stew said:

It is just a matter of time before the GM twin diesels come under the spotlight and from what I hear it is starting to heat up for Nissan's Cummins. 

The 2.8L Duramax was already under the spotlight...before the engine was even released.

" The pickup's engine features NOx-reducing tech like exhaust gas recirculation, and the EPA and California Air Resources Board recently chose the truck to take the additional step of real-world emissions tests. The 2.8-liter Duramax four-cylinder with 181 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque had no problems with the more stringent evaluation, and "the agency expressed no issues or concerns," according to the company's statement. "

Read More

 

" The effects of Volkswagen's long-running diesel emissions evasion are starting to spill over to other automakers, but General Motors is taking things in stride. The 2.8-liter, four-cylinder Duramax in the 2016 Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon is the first engine to get extra scrutiny by the Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board, Automotive News reports. Rather than just the usual in-lab test, it's also being checked on the road. However, the extra evaluation shouldn't have any impact on when the trucks with his mill hit dealers later this fall "

Read More

[Stew]

1 minute ago, FordCosworth said:

The 2.8L Duramax was already under the spotlight...before the engine was even released.

" The pickup's engine features NOx-reducing tech like exhaust gas recirculation, and the EPA and California Air Resources Board recently chose the truck to take the additional step of real-world emissions tests. The 2.8-liter Duramax four-cylinder with 181 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque had no problems with the more stringent evaluation, and "the agency expressed no issues or concerns," according to the company's statement. "

Read More

 

" The effects of Volkswagen's long-running diesel emissions evasion are starting to spill over to other automakers, but General Motors is taking things in stride. The 2.8-liter, four-cylinder Duramax in the 2016 Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon is the first engine to get extra scrutiny by the Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board, Automotive News reports. Rather than just the usual in-lab test, it's also being checked on the road. However, the extra evaluation shouldn't have any impact on when the trucks with his mill hit dealers later this fall "

Read More

You realize it will only take one complaint and they will be back up GM's rear, right?  My point was, as mentioned above, every dishonest tom dick and harry is going to try and get their fair share of the diesel money pie. 

[Drew Dowdell]

Indeed. GM went through extra certification tests on the 2.8 Duramax before they even released it. 

 

To be clear, what VW did and what FCA did in this case are (so far) quite different.  FCA didn't disclose the entire design of the emissions control system which is indeed a violation of the law, but that is not the same as VW taking direct actions to try and cheat the test.

[FordCosworth]

3 minutes ago, Stew said:

You realize it will only take one complaint and they will be back up GM's rear, right?  My point was, as mentioned above, every dishonest tom dick and harry is going to try and get their fair share of the diesel money pie. 

You realize the EPA and CARB made sure the 2.8L was emission compliant, right? In the case of this engine, due to VW's dishonesty, the EPA and CARB didn't rely on the mfg's word about emission compliancy.

[Drew Dowdell]

Also, I wonder how long it will take before FCA denies designing this engine.... it is actually designed and built by a 3rd party called VM Motori...so I wonder how long before Serg throws VM under a diesel powered bus.

[Stew]

8 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

You realize the EPA and CARB made sure the 2.8L was emission compliant, right? In the case of this engine, due to VW's dishonesty, the EPA and CARB didn't rely on the mfg's word about emission compliancy.

That is great,  there is still the previous gen Cruze diesel and that was just an example anyway, you take it way to serious and do everything you can to try and drag out an argument

1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Also, I wonder how long it will take before FCA denies designing this engine.... it is actually designed and built by a 3rd party called VM Motori...so I wonder how long before Serg throws VM under a diesel powered bus.

That is a good point and this whole diesel thing is turning into a massive mess. 

[Drew Dowdell]

1 minute ago, Stew said:

That is great,  there is still the previous gen Cruze diesel and that was just an example anyway, you take it way to serious and do everything you can to try and drag out an argument

That is a good point and this whole diesel thing is turning into a massive mess. 

The first gen Cruze Diesel was a VM motor design also, though in that case was built by GM. 

Irony of ironies, the new GM 1.6 diesel is actually a product of GM's partnership with Fiat.  It was developed in Turin Italy.  However as part of the breakup between GM and FIAT, they do not get access to this engine.   It is supposed to be very clean for a diesel and GM has a whole bunch of patents just on the emissions controls.

[Stew]

5 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The first gen Cruze Diesel was a VM motor design also, though in that case was built by GM. 

Irony of ironies, the new GM 1.6 diesel is actually a product of GM's partnership with Fiat.  It was developed in Turin Italy.  However as part of the breakup between GM and FIAT, they do not get access to this engine.   It is supposed to be very clean for a diesel and GM has a whole bunch of patents just on the emissions controls.

Wow  this is all pretty nuts haha

[FordCosworth]

13 minutes ago, Stew said:

That is great,  there is still the previous gen Cruze diesel and that was just an example anyway, you take it way to serious and do everything you can to try and drag out an argument

That is a good point and this whole diesel thing is turning into a massive mess. 

I'm not the one making stuff up on the fly - ie GM 2.8L going to be under the spotlight.

So when one knows better, and the length GM/EPA/CARB went too to make sure this engine was emission good, you're damn right I'll take it seriously and counter with "facts ".

 

 

 

 

 

[Stew]

1 minute ago, FordCosworth said:

I'm not the one making stuff up on the fly - ie GM 2.8L going to be under the spotlight.

So when one knows better, and the length GM/EPA/CARB went too to make sure this engine was emission good, you're damn right I'll take it seriously and counter with "facts ".

 

 

 

 

 

Ther have been a number of times when the EPA or even the NHTSA has said something is ok and then change heir mind in a few years.  I never said it would, I said it is possible that a customer will complain and it will be put back under the microscope.  Never say never.

[Drew Dowdell]

12 minutes ago, Stew said:

Ther have been a number of times when the EPA or even the NHTSA has said something is ok and then change heir mind in a few years.  I never said it would, I said it is possible that a customer will complain and it will be put back under the microscope.  Never say never.

There was a story here a while back.  GM participated in real world testing from the EPA rather than just the standard testing procedure and GM got a certificate of compliance for the 2.8 Duramax from the EPA.  It would be more egg on the the EPA's face than GM's if they did an about-face on that one. 

Edit:  I'm guessing by your comment that you're unaware of how a lot of this certification works.  Most things with the NHTSA and EPA are self-certified by the manufacturers and those agencies take the manufacturer's word.  Manufacturers' motivation to not falsify things is that if they do, they get giant scandals and fines like what we've been seeing with VW.  So when the EPA or NHTSA "change their mind", it is more likely that they discovered something that wasn't disclosed by the manufacturer or wasn't tested for by the manufacturer. (think of the Grand Cherokee gas tank rupture recall as an example)

[Stew]

11 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

There was a story here a while back.  GM participated in real world testing from the EPA rather than just the standard testing procedure and GM got a certificate of compliance for the 2.8 Duramax from the EPA.  It would be more egg on the the EPA's face than GM's if they did an about-face on that one. 

Edit:  I'm guessing by your comment that you're unaware of how a lot of this certification works.  Most things with the NHTSA and EPA are self-certified by the manufacturers and those agencies take the manufacturer's word.  Manufacturers' motivation to not falsify things is that if they do, they get giant scandals and fines like what we've been seeing with VW.  So when the EPA or NHTSA "change their mind", it is more likely that they discovered something that wasn't disclosed by the manufacturer or wasn't tested for by the manufacturer. (think of the Grand Cherokee gas tank rupture recall as an example)

Good points.  i do wonder what will happen with the new administration too.  This may all end up being a moot point in the end anyway. And thank you for coming through as communicative and not combatant like others..... 

Edited January 12, 2017 by Stew

[Drew Dowdell]

2 minutes ago, Stew said:

Good points.  i do wonder what will happen with the new administration too.  This may all end up being a moot point in the end anyway. And thank you for coming through as communicative and not combatant like others..... 

I'm not sure what the new administration can even do.  If the companies broke the law, they broke the law. If the administration tells the EPA or DOJ to back off without a significant and transparent explanation, there could be serious legal ramifications across the industry. 

[Stew]

1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I'm not sure what the new administration can even do.  If the companies broke the law, they broke the law. If the administration tells the EPA or DOJ to back off without a significant and transparent explanation, there could be serious legal ramifications across the industry. 

You kinda hit a point about the new administration there.  i think a lot is because to be done without any explanation and I am not just talking about the auto industry.  We know the GOP congress in office now despises the EPA so I think it could get interesting and we may have o be careful not o choke on our popcorn. 

[ccap41]

This popcorn?

[Cmicasa the Great]

And it looks like this guy is being held without bail...

Oliver Schmidt, 48, is charged with eleven felony counts, which could be punished by up to 169 years in prison, the government said. He is one of 6 VW execs charged.  This is coming from Autonews While I will admit that no company is immune to this.. I love the fact that VW buyers are getting the shaft along with the execs.. for BETRAYING the Domestics... GM and Ford    Its no secret that I believe if U currently own or buy a product from any manufacturer other than these two.. U should be deported or arrested   

[Frisky Dingo]

4 hours ago, ccap41 said:

So don't make a diesel vehicle if you can't follow the laws put in place. Nobody is forcing VW or FCA to produce a diesel Ram 1500 or Golf with a TDI engine.

Or the government could, you know......place actual realistic regs in place, rather than bullshit ones. They have no problem with diesel HD's polluting like crazy.

[Drew Dowdell]

The low hanging fruit for curbing pollution is really the shipping (as in the seas) industry.

Even the railroads are getting on board with lowering diesel pollution.

[ccap41]

6 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

Or the government could, you know......place actual realistic regs in place, rather than bull$h! ones. They have no problem with diesel HD's polluting like crazy.

I agree but that doesn't mean companies should put out products knowingly failing emissions testing(without a form of cheat). That's just stupid.

[Frisky Dingo]

8 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I agree but that doesn't mean companies should put out products knowingly failing emissions testing(without a form of cheat). That's just stupid.

Well, a lot companies seem to think it's easier than the alternative.

[Drew Dowdell]

8 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

Well, a lot companies seem to think it's easier than the alternative.

Well that doesn't seem to be working so well. VW is up to about $19 billion in fines so far just in the US.  I haven't kept track of what they're doing in the EU.How many engine programs is $19 billion?

And if GM can engineer it right, why can't VW who was supposed to be the diesel king?

If you can't do it... just don't release it.

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, Frisky Dingo said:

Well, a lot companies seem to think it's easier than the alternative.

It isn't easier than just not making a product. It isn't like any of these companies NEED to make small Diesel engines. Or it isn't like they don't charge a premium for them. Just make the product compliant or don't make it. It's pretty much the most simple concept out there. 

[Cmicasa the Great]

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Well that doesn't seem to be working so well. VW is up to about $19 billion in fines so far just in the US.  I haven't kept track of what they're doing in the EU.How many engine programs is $19 billion?

VW could be up to about $80 Billion in fines right now globally

[hyperv6]

What gets lost in the VW deal is they were told to make the cars work and with them failure is not an option. The leadership just expects results and that is what they gave them. 

I figure they knew they were going to lose their jobs anyways so they assumed the risk. I do not think the engineers expected as much trouble from the different regulating agencies and to be honest I think they expected to be retired before anyone caught them. 

The German mind set in business and failure is much different than many places. 

[Suaviloquent]

No no no no no, dammit FCA, I have a day dream which had a sexy Quadriofoglio was a part of it, and you are going out of your way to cause trouble for yourselves...

Being dramatic aside, it seems like the investigation has only begun....well, what's the worse that could actually happen?

 

[David]

17 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The low hanging fruit for curbing pollution is really the shipping (as in the seas) industry.

Even the railroads are getting on board with lowering diesel pollution.

Very cool to see the details of where the green house gas comes from here in North America.

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions

Better yet is that the EPA has in place emission standards for trans along with exhaust treatment system much like the Diesel trucks do with the Urea system according to this site.

https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/loco.php

Had no Idea the Locomotives had changed so much in the last 17 years or so. Gotten very clean with Diesel treated generators producing the electricity for the electric motors that push all the freight around this country.

The EPA one seems to point to Long Haul trucking / all Commercial Trucking and Shipping as the last big area to pull into cleaner emissions.

[ccap41]

39 minutes ago, dfelt said:

The EPA one seems to point to Long Haul trucking / all Commercial Trucking and Shipping as the last big area to pull into cleaner emissions.

That does need to get cleaned up next. It seems like all too many of them are puffing black smoke under acceleration. seems relatively simple to make a standard across the board,

[David]

28 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

That does need to get cleaned up next. It seems like all too many of them are puffing black smoke under acceleration. seems relatively simple to make a standard across the board,

Excited for Nikola Semi's to hit the road and push Kenworth, Peterbuilt, Mac and others into a much cleaner phase of Trucking. Time to remove the smell and particle dirt from the roads and cities.

[David]

5 hours ago, ccap41 said:

That does need to get cleaned up next. It seems like all too many of them are puffing black smoke under acceleration. seems relatively simple to make a standard across the board,

Just read this about Union Pacific and how their new Locomotives with 80% less Nitrous Oxides and 90% less Particles being emitted by these new engines.

GREEN LOCOMOTIVES

 http://www.uprr.com/newsinfo/releases/environment/2007/0522_iden.shtml

[Guest Wadhamite]

It would be interesting to take "FCA" apart and determine if this violation was a Fiat action or a Chrysler action.