Should it?

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #405,300 by drook 10/12/15 1:25:32 PM Reply	Should it? In theory it seems obvious you'd want the test to simulate "real world conditions", but why is that obvious? Real people have wildly different habits and driving styles. The benefit of a regulation is to set a standard that everyone can evaluate their product against, and improve performance against that standard over time. Whether that standard matches any particular driver's performance is a crap shoot. -- Drew
Post #405,302 by malraux 10/12/15 2:26:45 PM Reply	Point being: "Real world tests" not matching the results of the mandated emissions testing isn't the same thing as what VW did: they made the cars secretly act differently during the tests in order to pass them. The other manufacturers' cars pass the tests without skulduggery, but still have different performance in the wild. VW's cars didn't have the same emissions when on the same test rig with and without the diagnostics port in use. As I recall, there is a new test that more closely matches real world performance (in aggregate, not any one individual, supposedly). The problem right now, of course, is that the current test is so wildly unlike anything you would see in the real world as to be essentially useless, particularly when it is also used to set emissions policy against pollution targets. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #405,305 by drook 10/12/15 2:39:22 PM Reply	Your first two paragraphs, 100% agree, it's the third I question Of course it's possible that the test is so divorced from reality that you can substantially increase real-world emissions without affecting the test, and that would be a bad test. But if the test doesn't allow you to predict actual emissions, as long as it roughly identifies "more" and "less" then it can work for a regulatory lever. -- Drew
Post #405,307 by malraux 10/12/15 2:51:39 PM Reply	From what I remember, the test is that bad. I can't find the article right now, unfortunately. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.

VW post 2008 diesels had "defeat device" software to avoid emissions scrutiny. - (Another Scott) - (56) - Sept. 18, 2015, 01:17:45 PM EDT

how would the software know - (lincoln) - (4) - Sept. 18, 2015, 02:43:25 PM EDT

It's plugged in - (drook) - (2) - Sept. 18, 2015, 02:53:05 PM EDT

Found another article. - (static) - Sept. 18, 2015, 10:51:33 PM EDT

Re: It's plugged in - (lincoln) - Sept. 19, 2015, 01:50:29 PM EDT

Re: how would the software know - (hnick) - Sept. 19, 2015, 02:10:06 PM EDT

Wonder who ratted that one out... - (scoenye) - (2) - Sept. 18, 2015, 09:50:32 PM EDT

Ouch. Seems the CARB had it figured out. - (Another Scott) - Sept. 18, 2015, 10:03:12 PM EDT

I heard a similar story even further back. - (static) - Sept. 18, 2015, 10:55:34 PM EDT

Reuters: VW could face $18B in fines. - (Another Scott) - (3) - Sept. 18, 2015, 09:58:55 PM EDT

Are diesels even a good idea? - (drook) - (2) - Sept. 19, 2015, 09:54:22 AM EDT

Rolling back - (scoenye) - Sept. 19, 2015, 10:26:23 AM EDT

TANSTAAFL. - (Another Scott) - Sept. 19, 2015, 10:32:48 AM EDT

years ago in alaska diesels were exempt from emissions testing - (boxley) - Sept. 20, 2015, 05:24:46 PM EDT

It's all OK now. The CEO said he's sorry! - (a6l6e6x) - (20) - Sept. 21, 2015, 09:25:21 AM EDT

As I read it, the $37,500 is per day of non-compliance, not per car. - (Another Scott) - (2) - Sept. 21, 2015, 10:30:05 AM EDT

Of course, the stories explicitly say per car, so ... :-/ - (Another Scott) - (1) - Sept. 21, 2015, 11:52:57 AM EDT

Yah, what he said! :) -NT - (a6l6e6x) - Sept. 21, 2015, 04:21:49 PM EDT

I think it's absurd to imagine that such a plan could possibly be implemented - (Ashton) - (15) - Sept. 21, 2015, 04:41:59 PM EDT

is it? - (boxley) - (14) - Sept. 22, 2015, 09:16:00 AM EDT

And is your "retired petro chemist" a Tea Party member? - (lincoln) - (5) - Sept. 22, 2015, 01:56:42 PM EDT

no, catholic liberal -NT - (boxley) - (4) - Sept. 22, 2015, 02:49:28 PM EDT

I've never met a liberal - (lincoln) - (3) - Sept. 25, 2015, 02:44:28 PM EDT

your loss -NT - (boxley) - Sept. 25, 2015, 03:19:19 PM EDT

You claim to be a "liberal" and yet support a Nixon created entity? -NT - (mmoffitt) - (1) - Sept. 28, 2015, 08:17:22 AM EDT

Hey, even crooks can do something good - (lincoln) - Sept. 28, 2015, 10:43:12 AM EDT

Doesn't smell right. - (Another Scott) - (7) - Sept. 22, 2015, 04:51:05 PM EDT

dunno about smell but sulpher burns hot, take it out harder to burn -NT - (boxley) - (6) - Sept. 22, 2015, 06:21:47 PM EDT

Not the way it works. - (Another Scott) - (5) - Sept. 22, 2015, 06:37:11 PM EDT

kinda makes my point, regulators make the cars run like crap, what the retired guy said -NT - (boxley) - (4) - Sept. 22, 2015, 07:11:57 PM EDT

Um, modern diesels are great compared to, say, a 1980 Rabbit diesel. - (Another Scott) - Sept. 22, 2015, 07:23:00 PM EDT

Burning point is no criterion for use in a Diesel engine - (scoenye) - (2) - Sept. 22, 2015, 09:09:52 PM EDT

Neat stuff. Thanks. -NT - (Another Scott) - Sept. 22, 2015, 09:32:52 PM EDT

very nice -NT - (boxley) - Sept. 22, 2015, 09:58:45 PM EDT

The CEO is really sorry now! - (a6l6e6x) - Sept. 23, 2015, 11:07:07 AM EDT

The problem is world wide -- 11 M vehicles. - (a6l6e6x) - Sept. 22, 2015, 09:25:44 AM EDT

I'm convinced there's a joke in there ... - (mmoffitt) - Sept. 22, 2015, 09:51:26 AM EDT

Here's how they caught them - (malraux) - (4) - Sept. 22, 2015, 02:11:40 PM EDT

Good find! -NT - (a6l6e6x) - Sept. 22, 2015, 03:53:22 PM EDT

What I cannot parse at all, though.. - (Ashton) - Sept. 22, 2015, 04:35:36 PM EDT

Interesting reason - (scoenye) - Sept. 22, 2015, 08:41:59 PM EDT

Maybe the EPA will update their tests, too. - (static) - Sept. 23, 2015, 01:57:57 AM EDT

What I was thinking, in more detail - (drook) - (1) - Sept. 25, 2015, 01:24:57 PM EDT

one piece has been around a few years - (boxley) - Sept. 25, 2015, 02:09:59 PM EDT

We're gonna need a bigger probe - (scoenye) - (1) - Sept. 28, 2015, 09:53:58 PM EDT

Interesting. Thanks. -NT - (Another Scott) - Sept. 29, 2015, 12:47:30 AM EDT

Four more carmakers join emissions rigging list - (lincoln) - (5) - Oct. 12, 2015, 10:31:08 AM EDT

Not the same thing - (malraux) - (4) - Oct. 12, 2015, 12:04:36 PM EDT

Should it? - (drook) - (3) - Oct. 12, 2015, 01:25:32 PM EDT

Point being: - (malraux) - (2) - Oct. 12, 2015, 02:26:45 PM EDT

Your first two paragraphs, 100% agree, it's the third I question - (drook) - (1) - Oct. 12, 2015, 02:39:22 PM EDT

From what I remember, the test is that bad. - (malraux) - Oct. 12, 2015, 02:51:39 PM EDT

There, fixed. - (scoenye) - (4) - Oct. 28, 2015, 06:07:52 PM EDT

Interesting. - (Another Scott) - (2) - Oct. 28, 2015, 09:54:34 PM EDT

The test was going to change in 2017 - (scoenye) - (1) - Oct. 28, 2015, 10:44:17 PM EDT

Ah. Thanks. -NT - (Another Scott) - Oct. 28, 2015, 11:40:36 PM EDT

BBC has you covered. - (a6l6e6x) - Oct. 29, 2015, 12:14:18 AM EDT

I used to work for them, I recognize the pictures. They ran the law firm I was employed at.
117 ms