GMI News Editor
I don't get the 1.8 to 8 times the federal standard thing that is listed on every single test metric. How can it be a range?
GMI News Editor
Smells of Lawyers trying to pull a fast one for some low hanging fruit. I would hedge all automakers have done this deed as well. However I think the owners in question of the Cruze Diesels are smoking something. They probably did not take care of the vehicle as the owner manual states or service centers recommend or common sense. I have a 2011 1.4t cruze LTZ w/ 18" alloys and summer tires that has developed a small right tire leak and instead of replacing one tire I will replace all in a few months, but just due to 3-10 psi difference my average mpg city/hwy dropped by 3-5 mpg. Also I believe you are supposed to replace the urea injection system every oil change or rather every 3,000-5,000 miles. Then add in driver habits, lead foot, speedster on the hwy etc which increases drag and lowers mpg etc. There are so many variables to this that 5-6 owners probably are the exception not the rule. I know my argument is not adressing the issue of carbon emission except the urea injection system fluid changing but I think GM will be okay and make it through this non-sense. They SAE certify every vehicle for hp torque and emissions. If GM were to lose and not because of faulty cheat box rather a EPA, CARB, NHTSA or whatever governing body inspected this is to blame. Who watches the watchers and their pockets? I assume a human can be bribed or a whole governing body if the price is right. I mean people are suffering to survive which degrades our moral equity/humanity and causes us to behave like animals so anything is possible.
I doubt that GM has actually installed a defeat procedure in the code.
But in Europe the Opel Astra and Zafira are under investigation for using extremely narrow scopes in which the emission control software actually works. Under the guise of protecting the engine (which is allowed in Europe), the actual emission control only works under a defined set of circumstances. Not above a certain height above sea level (800m?) within a certain temperature range and not above a certain speed.
Opel has said that they don't use a defeat device and that the software code was misinterpreted. But they don't deny that in certain circumstances, the emission control does shut off.
I suspect this case is far more nuanced than the VW case. The discussion could be how acceptable the narrow scope in which the emission control software actually works are.
Isn't it posted on the sticker that mileage may vary and all kinds of other crap? I don't think this case is going to hold water, just another crooked lawyer who needs to be in jail is how I see it.
This could be a big fishing expedition to extort money from GM.
Well the automakers should be happy, I'm sick of all this talk and don't care anymore. Sometimes intense media coverage is a good thing, it burns out fast.
And the lawyers' little portable device won't carry any real weight compared to the EPA tests. Of course, the court won't require EPA input nor will the EPA suddenly get to emission testing every single vehicle released this year. Hopefully, these whiners won't get anything.
Current emission controls have taken away any advantage for modern diesels, they're costing large truck owners enough that fleets are already trying LP gas. Buh bye diesels.
This is just another attempt to kill the diesel.
Good for Nissan...
*raises eyebrow sharply*
THIS is what the lawyers go after? Uhhhhhh
Cort > www.oldcarsstronghearts.com
pigValve.paceMaker.cowValve | 1979 Caprice Classic (needs new owner)
"It's just a matter of time" __ TG Sheppard __ 'Somewhere Down The Line'
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)