WTF Emissions DELETES! The smelly Garbage can dumped on Motorsports! WTF

   #82  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
Yawn...a 300 baud modem.

Yeah, I know that they are still using 8-inch floppy disks in the silos.....


Just remember Art, just because something is old, doesn't mean you just toss it out.

You respect it for its service or wisdom.

Sometimes less is more........

Tried an true technology beats a Panzer tank....... or bigger dick tank theory.
As Johann said " you are not doing it right, if you don't bottom out ".

The task must be completed and newer disks are not eight inches.
 
   #84  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
Well that certainly is debatable, and you raise an exceptional list of reasonable examples.
That's why I call you a friend Art, without a list to reference, somehow diluting the significance as social media does.

I guess the same could be said about an EGR valve.
It's old and was a stupid idea....or was it marginally exceptional?
 
   #86  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
There I liked that one instead .......Happy Art?:cool:

Okay so who here thinks that the ABS system is not emissions related, being it's connected on the network, shares or limits data of the ECU, and has the ability to set an MIL if communications fail?

Anyone?
 
   #87  

Uwe

Benevolent Dictator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
31,629
Reaction score
22,594
Location
USA
VCDS Serial number
HC100001
There I liked that one instead .......Happy Art?:cool:

Okay so who here thinks that the ABS system is not emissions related, being it's connected on the network, shares or limits data of the ECU, and has the ability to set an MIL if communications fail?

Anyone?
If it was emissions related, wouldn't it be required by law to respond to generic OBD-II requests? ;)

-Uwe-
 
   #88  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
If it was emissions related, wouldn't it be required by law to respond to generic OBD-II requests? ;)

-Uwe-

That is a great point..........:D

Why is it that if the engine controller loses communication with the ABS .......why would it cause a DTC, & on the generic OBD2 side, and why would it have a designated P-code or further light the MIL?

I have seen where an assisted AUX vacuum pump on a 2004 1.8T 6 speed YUK automatic Beetle can be unplugged, while displaying a VAG code DTC, however, no code on the OBD2 side.

Than on a Passat/A4 with an assisted AUX vacuum pump will display a code in both systems, and fail you for inspection.

So who is the asshole that let all these cars get a conformity certificate...........?
 
   #89  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
Forging a paper trail right from the horses ass for later!


https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/octane.shtml







Selecting the Right Octane Fuel

What is octane rating?

octane.jpg

Octane rating is the measure of a fuel's ability to resist "knocking" or "pinging" during combustion, caused by the air/fuel mixture detonating prematurely in the engine.
In the U.S., unleaded gasoline typically has octane ratings of 87 (regular), 88–90 (midgrade), and 91–94 (premium). Gasoline with an octane rating of 85 is available in some high-elevation areas of the U.S. (more about that below).
The octane rating is prominently displayed in large black numbers on a yellow background on gasoline pumps.
What octane fuel should I use in my vehicle?

You should use the octane rating required for your vehicle by the manufacturer. So, check your owner's manual. Most gasoline vehicles are designed to run on 87 octane, but others are designed to use higher octane fuel.
Why do some manufacturers require or recommend the use of higher octane gasoline?

Higher octane fuels are often required or recommended for engines that use a higher compression ratio and/or use supercharging or turbocharging to force more air into the engine. Increasing pressure in the cylinder allows an engine to extract more mechanical energy from a given air/fuel mixture but requires higher octane fuel to keep the mixture from pre-detonating. In these engines, high octane fuel will improve performance and fuel economy.
What if I use a lower octane fuel than required for my vehicle?

Using a lower octane fuel than required can cause the engine to run poorly and can damage the engine and emissions control system over time. It may also void your warranty. In older vehicles, the engine can make an audible "knocking" or "pinging" sound. Many newer vehicles can adjust the spark timing to reduce knock, but engine power and fuel economy will still suffer.
Will using a higher octane fuel than required improve fuel economy or performance?

It depends. For most vehicles, higher octane fuel may improve performance and gas mileage and reduce carbon dioxide (CO[SUB]2[/SUB]) emissions by a few percent during severe duty operation, such as towing a trailer or carrying heavy loads, especially in hot weather. However, under normal driving conditions, you may get little to no benefit.
Why does higher octane fuel cost more?

The fuel components that boost octane are generally more expensive to produce.
Is higher octane fuel worth the extra cost?

If your vehicle requires midgrade or premium fuel, absolutely. If your owner's manual says your vehicle doesn't require premium but says that your vehicle will run better on higher octane fuel, it's really up to you. The cost increase is typically higher than the fuel savings. However, lowering CO[SUB]2[/SUB] emissions and decreasing petroleum usage by even a small amount may be more important than cost to some consumers.

What is 85 octane, and is it safe to use in my vehicle?

The sale of 85 octane fuel was originally allowed in high-elevation regions—where the barometric pressure is lower—because it was cheaper and because most carbureted engines tolerated it fairly well. This is not true for modern gasoline engines. So, unless you have an older vehicle with a carbureted engine, you should use the manufacturer-recommended fuel for your vehicle, even where 85 octane fuel is available.
Can ethanol boost gasoline's octane rating?

Yes. Ethanol has a much higher octane rating (about 109) than gasoline. Refiners usually blend ethanol with gasoline to help boost its octane rating—most gasoline in the U.S. contains up to 10% ethanol. Blends of up to 15% ethanol are available in some areas, and several manufacturers approve using this blend in recent-model vehicles.
View Data Sources…



http://papers.sae.org/2013-01-0883/

Paper #:

  • [h=2]2013-01-0883[/h]

Published:


  • 2013-04-08


DOI:


  • 10.4271/2013-01-0883



Citation:

Prakash, A., Jones, A., Nelson, E., Macias, J. et al., "Octane Response of Premium-Recommended Vehicles," SAE Technical Paper 2013-01-0883, 2013, doi:10.4271/2013-01-0883.



Author(s):





Affiliated:






Pages:

6



Abstract:

A higher octane quality fuel used in premium-recommended vehicles has the potential for delivering better acceleration and power. Octane number is a standard measure for the anti-knock quality of a gasoline fuel. A higher octane number fuel can withstand more compression before detonation (or knock). Higher compression ratios directly correlate with engine power and thermodynamic efficiency. Hence engines that are designed for higher octane or premium grade fuels should typically develop higher power by extracting more from the calorific value of the fuel. However, in the case of premium-recommended vehicle models that are designed to run even on lower octane fuels, the extent of performance benefits of using premium grade higher octane fuels can be deciphered via vehicle testing. In this regard, two gasoline fuels with anti-knock index values (AKI) of 87 and 91 respectively were compared in five premium-recommended vehicles for acceleration and power benefits. The engines in these modern vehicles were equipped with knock sensors that signal the engine management system to retard the spark timing on knock detection and hence prevent knock. In principle, a lower octane quality fuel used in such engines may reduce the relative torque output and hence the performance of the engine. On the other hand, a higher octane fuel can be run at a higher ignition advance and result in higher torque values. The acceleration time and steady state power at wide open throttle conditions were recorded from chassis dynamometer tests. Data were analyzed and statistically assessed at 95% confidence level. The results indicated that some vehicles were more sensitive to octane quality in terms of changes in acceleration and power than others. On an average, 91 AKI fuel performed 1-2% better than the 87 AKI fuel.
 
   #90  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
http://forums.ross-tech.com/showthr...-recalls-discuss&p=40549&viewfull=1#post40549

http://forums.ross-tech.com/showthr...-recalls-discuss&p=40584&viewfull=1#post40584

http://forums.ross-tech.com/showthr...-recalls-discuss&p=40671&viewfull=1#post40671


A tremor in the force has been felt ...........a bunch of people are about to get fired, and illegal businesses are about to get beat or sodomized with the FAT BAT!

Your welcome AFT and OEM..............!

Please make a selection........

https://www.google.com/search?q=fat...bm=isch&q=fat+baseball+bat+louisville+slugger
 
   #91  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blo...defeat-device-rendered-vw-ad-claims-deceptive



FTC alleges defeat device rendered VW ad claims deceptive: A closer look at the lawsuit

By: Lesley Fair | Mar 29, 2016 11:13AM
Lesley Fair
Mar 29, 2016

Tags:



Volkswagen Group of America spent multi-millions positioning its “clean diesel” technology as an environmentally conscious choice for car buyers – and sales of more than 550,000 so-called clean diesel vehicles suggest it was a persuasive pitch. But as a just-filed FTC lawsuit alleges, VW scored impressive green numbers by installing each car with a “defeat device” that cheated on emissions testing. According to the FTC’s complaint, the vehicles emitted excess nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions measuring as much as 40 times the maximum allowed by EPA regulations under normal driving conditions. That, says the FTC, renders VW’s campaign of eco-hype deceptive.
Green was the theme for VW’s extensive marketing campaign. As ads claimed:

  • “Diesel. It’s no longer a dirty word.”
  • “With the new Jetta TDI Clean Diesel, you get a great car that’s low on emissions . . . .”
  • “[C]lean-diesel technology such as ours can achieve 40-percent better fuel economy and reduce nitrogen-oxide emissions by 90%.”
  • “Touareg V6 TDI meet the most stringent emission requirements of the world [with] its advanced DeNOx system.”

Other ads delved into the purported technology that led to such impressive numbers, but according to the FTC’s complaint, the relevant technology was “illegal software designed to defeat EPA’s testing procedures” – in other words, VW’s defeat device.
The complaint charges VW with multiple violations of the FTC Act. Count I alleges that because of the defeat device, a host of the company’s claims about low emissions, NOx reductions, emissions compliance, eco-consciousness, and comparative resale value were false or deceptive.
Count II charges that VW deceptively failed to disclose the existence of defeat devices that would adversely affect the cars’ resale value – information that would have been material to prospective buyers.
Count III focuses on ads, brochures, and other promotional items VW distributed to dealers and distributors – materials the FTC alleges provided those companies with the means and instrumentalities to engage in deceptive acts or practices.
Court IV alleges that VW’s use of defeat devices constitutes an unfair practice under the FTC Act.
The case is pending in federal court in California. In addition, the FTC continues to work closely with other agencies investigating VW’s defeat devices. We’ll follow up as developments arise.




Comments

Dan777 replied on Mar 29, 2016 11:52AM Permalink
I don't think it's 40x the Emission limit here in NJ and NY so as an American consumer this is confusing.


ital lambert! replied on May 26, 2016 9:20PM Permalink
despite the fact that electric cars are coming in to play the issue pertaining to "clean diesel"is an important issue to pursue.


Audi Q7 owner replied on Jul 1, 2016 10:08AM Permalink
Reviewing the documents for the 2.0 liter settlement, the adjustment for mileage is unfair.
The reason I purchased a diesel vehicle was to have a vehicle that could obtain high-mileage and still retain value. The mileage adjustment should be capped to that amount made during the period of the loan or financing.
Based upon the VW settlement, it looks like I will be penalized and made to suffer for the Audi/VW dishonesty and flagrant violation of U.S. law.
The feedback loop to FTC seems inconsistent; I feel as though this settlement will be a take-it-or-leave-it with no real consumer input on the front end.


Dr. Goodwrench replied on Jul 5, 2016 3:58PM Permalink
Part of the mitigation plan is to provide funds to businesses and government agencies to replace older medium and heavy duty diesel trucks with newer diesel trucks. Problem is these newer trucks DO NOT reduce pollution as claimed. CARB's own studies show thee newer trucks emit pollution at the same or higher rate that old diesels when driven in the city. These "new" diesels emit PM and NOx and much higher levels than the VW cars yet CARB and EPA won't fine or shut down these trucks like they are doing to VW. In CARB's own studies, ONLY natural gas trucks consistently maintained legal emission levels at all times, and electric heavy duty trucks could not complete most drive cycles for testing, let alone an actual work day.
Non of these mitigation funds should be spent on new diesel trucks...we need to get diesel off the road!





[h=2]Comments[/h] Dan777 replied on Mar 29, 2016 11:52AM Permalink
I don't think it's 40x the Emission limit here in NJ and NY so as an American consumer this is confusing.


ital lambert! replied on May 26, 2016 9:20PM Permalink
despite the fact that electric cars are coming in to play the issue pertaining to "clean diesel"is an important issue to pursue.


Audi Q7 owner replied on Jul 1, 2016 10:08AM Permalink
Reviewing the documents for the 2.0 liter settlement, the adjustment for mileage is unfair.
The reason I purchased a diesel vehicle was to have a vehicle that could obtain high-mileage and still retain value. The mileage adjustment should be capped to that amount made during the period of the loan or financing.
Based upon the VW settlement, it looks like I will be penalized and made to suffer for the Audi/VW dishonesty and flagrant violation of U.S. law.
The feedback loop to FTC seems inconsistent; I feel as though this settlement will be a take-it-or-leave-it with no real consumer input on the front end.


Dr. Goodwrench replied on Jul 5, 2016 3:58PM Permalink
Part of the mitigation plan is to provide funds to businesses and government agencies to replace older medium and heavy duty diesel trucks with newer diesel trucks. Problem is these newer trucks DO NOT reduce pollution as claimed. CARB's own studies show thee newer trucks emit pollution at the same or higher rate that old diesels when driven in the city. These "new" diesels emit PM and NOx and much higher levels than the VW cars yet CARB and EPA won't fine or shut down these trucks like they are doing to VW. In CARB's own studies, ONLY natural gas trucks consistently maintained legal emission levels at all times, and electric heavy duty trucks could not complete most drive cycles for testing, let alone an actual work day.
Non of these mitigation funds should be spent on new diesel trucks...we need to get diesel off the road!


[h=2]Add new comment[/h]Comment Policy
Username Please enter a username. Don't use your email address.

Comment *








<iframe src="https://www.google.com/recaptcha/api/noscript?k=6LcCZgATAAAAAEYHeixCnqsAaoNSgC301C9i7kh5" height="300" width="500" frameborder="0"></iframe><br/> <textarea name="recaptcha_challenge_field" rows="3" cols="40"></textarea> <input type="hidden" name="recaptcha_response_field" value="manual_challenge"/>



[h=2]Privacy Act Statement[/h]It is your choice whether to submit a comment. If you do, you must create a user name, or we will not post your comment. The Federal Trade Commission Act authorizes this information collection for purposes of managing online comments. Comments and user names are part of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) public records system (PDF), and user names also are part of the FTC’s computer user records system (PDF). We may routinely use these records as described in the FTC’s Privacy Act system notices. For more information on how the FTC handles information that we collect, please read our privacy policy.
[h=2]Subscribe[/h]Get Business Blog updates by email.

[h=2]Topics[/h]




[h=2]Selected Industries[/h]




[h=2]Archives[/h]


View More




Utility menu

[h=2]About the FTC[/h]


[h=2]News & Events[/h]


[h=2]Enforcement[/h]
 
   #92  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
This isn't just a civil fine anymore..........

You are welcome illegal aftermarket nefarious purported acts! .............:thumbs:

Looks like most tuning businesses that delete devices, and for the sole purpose of setting readiness flags to "always ready" will be subject to the RICO Act.........

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/racketeering-rico.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racket_(crime)

Racketeering is when organized groups run illegal businesses, known as “rackets,” or when an organized crime ring uses legitimate organizations to embezzle funds. Such activities can have devastating consequences for both public and private institutions. Consequently, the federal government and numerous state governments have created systems of laws designed to prosecute these criminals.
Typical Rackets and Their Consequences
Most older forms of rackets dealt in industries that were clearly illegal, such as prostitution or sex trafficking, drug trafficking, illegal weapons trafficking, and counterfeiting. These “businesses” organized large groups of people to help keep the racket profitable and covert, allowing them to make illegal products available to the public quickly and in such large amounts that authorities couldn’t make all the necessary arrests and prosecutions.
Over time, organized crime gradually entered other kinds of businesses. Mob bosses used labor unions to steal funds from workers' pension plans and other benefits accounts. When organized crime operatives rise up the corporate ranks, they can rob corporations through various white collar criminal methods, potentially ruining the companies along with the shareholders and employees who depend on them.
Using RICO to Prosecute Racketeers
Before Congress enacted laws that specifically combat organized crime, prosecutors found it very difficult to end these rackets. Prosecutors could often convict the lower ranked members of the organizations, because they were the ones who actually performed the illegal activities. However, the masterminds behind the organized crime rings were often much harder to prosecute because they couldn’t be directly connected to any of the crimes.
In 1978, Congress enacted the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, providing prosecutors with the tool they needed to fight organized crime. Many states have enacted similar laws. In order to convict someone under RICO or a state equivalent, it’s no longer necessary to prove the suspect personally committed an illegal activity. Instead, prosecutors must prove:
· The defendant owns and/or manages an organization;
· The organization regularly performs one or more specific illegal activity.
Although RICO was initially enacted to prosecute famous crime rings it has also been used in many other scenarios. For example, RICO charges were brought against pro-life activists for illegally blocking the entrance to abortion clinics. In another instance, members of the Catholic Church sued several clergy men under RICO for reportedly allowing priests to molest children. Since it has such far-reaching implications, RICO remains a controversial law even as it continues to aid in prosecutions across the US.
 
   #93  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
FYI Aftermarket tuners.......... a public warning................

Why using the VIN # is going to make or break your day!

Tuners should heed the fact, that if they link their code or imply that a VIN # is required to install their illegal software for altering, tampering, & modifying a vehicle which is driven on public roads, & that they peddle as "for off road use".

That doing this implies,......... and can be construed as their tuning is for on the road use.


If the tuner holds no CARB/Conformity exemption certificate, they are further screwed if no sufficient documentation shows the destruction of said conformity certificate in some type of VIN # police book, & with affidavit.

VIN # implies that a vehicle is for a passenger vehicle, & which is lawful to drive on a public highway, because a VIN # is only assigned when in conformity with not just the EPA, however, also the DOT Conformity.

Further example:
Modifying output which exceeds the vehicles ability to stop safely, due to brake size, or top speed limiters removed etc..

In order to convert a car to a "race car" as per the EPA for off road racing competition, the rules state you must remove the conformity certificate on the car, and inform the custodian of records administrator at the EPA, & that the car is no longer for public road use under Title 42 period!

Further......... using the VIN and the alteration of the device, and implying this through a dealer network for cars hard plated and driven to be re-flashed, also constitutes prosecution possibilities for the second requirement fulfilled under the RICO ACT, & for the needed action for execution of Title 18 for racketeering!

The more you know right?

Better have your shit in order..............see ya soon..........

NostraJackAss Has Spoken!


https://www.justice.gov/usam/crimin...ive-date-motor-vehicle-identification-numbers


1374. Effective Date - Motor Vehicle Identification Numbers

The provisions of 18 U.S.C §§ 511, 512, and 2321 were enacted into law on October 25, 1984, and became effective as of that date. The mandatory passenger car component identification (parts marking) standard became effective on April 25, 1986 and covered 81 passenger car lines starting with model year 1987. The number of lines subject to the parts marking standard has varied in each subsequent model year. In the future, parts marking may be extended to all passenger motor vehicle lines, depending on whether an evaluation of the Department of Transportation's parts marking program by the Attorney General determines whether or not parts marking substantially inhibits chop shop operations and vehicle thefts. See 49 U.S.C. § 33103.
While component parts have had somewhat limited protection under 18 U.S.C. §§ 511, 512, and 2321, that is not the case with the actual public vehicle identification number (VIN). While all "road" motor vehicles are required by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 115 (49 C.F.R. §§ 511.115 and 565.1 - 561.5) to have a VIN, this requirement was phased in over several years. Starting on January 1, 1969, all passenger cars manufactured in the United States or manufactured overseas on or after January 1, 1969, and subsequently imported into the United States were required to have a VIN. See 33 Fed. Reg. 10207, July 17, 1968. As a practical rule of thumb, this means that every passenger car from model year 1970 to date has been required by the Department of Transportation (DOT) to have a VIN. Until January 1, 1980, the VIN's characteristics (i.e., its length, the types and kinds of information encoded within particular positions or sections of the VIN, etc.) for passenger cars could be determined by each manufacturer.
Effective September 1, 1980, the VIN requirement was expanded to multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, trailers, and motorcycles manufactured in the United States on or after September 1, 1980, and such vehicles manufactured overseas after September 1, 1980, and subsequently imported into the United States. Hence, for non-passenger motor vehicles a VIN has been federally required only for model years 1981 to date. See 43 Fed. Reg. 36448, August 17, 1978. The September 1, 1980 date was extended, however, to January 1, 1981, for two manufacturers (Fruehauf Corporation and Rolls-Royce Motors International), see 45 Fed. Reg. 12255, February 25, 1980. January 1, 1981, reflects the date used by those two manufacturers to start their 1981 model years. The September 1, 1980 date was the changeover date in the 1981 model year for most other manufacturers. VINs are also now required to follow a 17 character format. See 49 C.F.R. §§ 511.115 and 565.1-561.5. The 17 character VIN format was applicable to passenger cars as of January 1, 1980 and as to other vehicles as of September 1, 1980 (except for those vehicles manufactured by Fruehauf Corporation and Rolls-Royce Motors International in which case the effective date was January 1, 1981). See 43 Fed. Reg. 36448, August 17, 1978; 45 Fed. Reg. 12255, February 25, 1980.
Accordingly, after October 25, 1984, the falsification or removal of any VIN required by the DOT on a motor vehicle is a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 511. Motor vehicles which have had their DOT required VINs falsified or removed after October 24, 1984, are subject to seizure and forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. § 512. Persons trafficking in motor vehicles with DOT required VINs that have been falsified or removed after October 24, 1984, are subject to prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 2321. See 130 Cong.Rec. S13584 (daily ed. October 4, 1984). See also H.R.Rep. No. 1456 on H.R. 4178, 96th Congress, 2d Sess. 25-26 (1980); 125 Cong.Rec. 12244 (1979).



And it's a felony.............ummmmm Lemony

That's Title 49 ...........and the ad-blue you just drank.

https://www.justice.gov/usam/crimin...removing-motor-vehicle-identification-numbers



1364. Altering Or Removing Motor Vehicle Identification Numbers


Section 511(a) of Title 18 makes it a felony knowingly to remove, obliterate, tamper with, or alter an identification number for a road motor vehicle or a road motor vehicle part. Section 511(b) of Title 18 creates exceptions for certain persons who engage in lawful conduct that may result in removal or alteration of an identification number. The legislative history is abundantly clear that subsection (b) is not intended to create a loophole for the operators of "chop shops." See H.R.Rep. No. 1087 on H.R. 6257, 98th Congress, 2d Sess. 23-25 (1984).
Section 511(c) of Title 18 contains the definitions for "identification number," "motor vehicle," "motor vehicle demolisher," and "motor vehicle scrap processor." The term "identification number" means a number or symbol that is inscribed or affixed for purposes of identification under chapter 301 and Part C of subtitle VI of Title 49.
Title 49, Chapter 301 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to promulgate motor vehicle safety standards. Pursuant to this authority, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 115-Vehicle Identification Number (49 C.F.R. §§ 571.115 and 565.1 to 565.5) requires public VIN numbers on road vehicles (passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, trailers, and motorcycles). Part C of subtitle VI of Title 49 (49 U.S.C. § 33101 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to promulgate theft prevention (parts marking) standards. The parts marking regulations are set forth in 49 C.F.R. Part 541. The mandatory component identification requirement applies to certain high theft passenger car lines starting with model year 1987. In 1995, the theft prevention (parts marking) standard was expanded to include certain multipurpose passenger vehicles and certain non high theft lines beginning with model year 1997.
For a discussion of proving violations of 18 U.S.C. § 511, see this Manual at 1376.


Trafficking..........

https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1376-proving-violations-18-usc-2321

1376. Proving Violations Of 18 U.S.C. 2321

Section 2321 of Title 18 is a trafficking offense. The previous discussion relating to proving violations of 18 U.S.C. § 511 should be consulted. See this Manual at 1375. In the indictment for 18 U.S.C. § 2321 you may wish to use the false or altered VIN actually on the motor vehicle in order to help specify the motor vehicle which is the subject matter of the charge.
To establish a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2321 the government must establish that: (1) the defendant acquired or possessed a road motor vehicle or component on which the vehicle identification number (VIN) or component identification number (after the component standard becomes effective) had been removed, obliterated, tampered with, or altered; (2) the identification number was one required by the United States Department of Transportation; (3) such removal, obliteration, tampering with, or alteration was done unlawfully; (4) the defendant was aware of the unlawful removal, obliteration, tampering with, or alteration; and (5) defendant had an intent to sell or otherwise dispose of the motor vehicle (or component part).
In most cases proof of the defendant's awareness of the stolen nature of the motor vehicle (or component) will satisfy the knowledge requirements. Also, the presence on the defendant's premises of several vehicles or numerous components lacking the proper numbers should help satisfy the knowledge and intent requirements.
[updated May 1999] [cited in Criminal Resource Manual 1364; Criminal Resource Manual 1366; Criminal Resource Manual 1377; USAM 9-61.700]
 
Last edited:
   #94  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
http://www.wsj.com/articles/volkswagen-probe-in-germany-extended-to-chairman-1478429066


BERLIN—Regulators in California recently discovered software installed on some of Volkswagen AG’s Audi models that appears to have allowed the cars to cheat carbon-dioxide emissions testing standards, according to people familiar with the matter.


http://forums.ross-tech.com/showthr...-recalls-discuss&p=40303&viewfull=1#post40303

http://forums.ross-tech.com/showthr...-recalls-discuss&p=40452&viewfull=1#post40452

http://forums.ross-tech.com/showthr...-recalls-discuss&p=40979&viewfull=1#post40979




[h=2]Volkswagen Probe in Germany Extended to Chairman[/h]Investigators considering allegations that management failed to inform investors in a timely fashion

BN-QQ573_2vw110_GR_20161106053612.jpg

Volkswagen chairman Hans-Dieter Pötsch pictured in June. PHOTO:REUTERS
.









By WILLIAM BOSTON
The Wall Street Journal
Nov. 6, 2016 5:44 a.m. ET
BERLIN—German prosecutors have widened their probe of Volkswagen AG’s management to include the current chairman on allegations that they failed to inform investors about the U.S. diesel emissions probe in a timely fashion, which is also the basis of civil litigation seeking at least €8 billion ($8.92 billion) in damages.
Volkswagen said on Sunday that prosecutors in Braunschweig have named Hans Dieter Pötsch in their investigation. Mr. Pötsch was Volkswagen’s long-serving chief finance officer until September 2015, when he was named chairman in a management shake-up in the wake of the diesel scandal.
Volkswagen said no evidence has emerged to suggest that the company’s management failed to disclose the diesel issue to markets as early as possible, saying the company reaffirmed its belief that Volkswagen’s management board “duly fulfilled its disclosure obligation under German capital markets law.”

U.S. environmental authorities disclosed in September 2015 that Volkswagen had admitted to installing illegal software on some diesel vehicles to rig them to cheat on emissions tests. The disclosure sparked a massive selloff of Volkswagen shares, which lost nearly half their value over a matter of days.
[h=4]RELATED ARTICLES[/h]


Write to William Boston at william.boston@wsj.com
http://www.wsj.com/articles/volkswagen-probe-in-germany-extended-to-chairman-1478429066






 
Last edited:
   #95  

Eric

Active Member
Staff member
Ross-Tech Employee
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
2,971
Reaction score
4,229
Location
Lansdale, PA, USA
VCDS Serial number
HC800000
We should tally the number of cheating cars we have/have had at Ross-Tech. The white A6 is apparently now on that list :)

Code:
Address 02: Auto Trans (J217)       Labels: 0BK-927-156.clb
   Part No SW: 4G0 927 158 P    HW: 0BK 927 156 R
   Component: 0BK 30TFSIUSA H08 0003  
   Revision: --H08---    
   Coding: 000002
   Shop #: WSC 00000 000 00000
   ASAM Dataset: EV_TCMAL551211 002017
   ROD: EV_TCMAL551211_AU48.rod
 
   #96  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
Can you feel the TIP? ........so far its just the TIP :D

"Get ready" ................It's going to HURT.......... with some big FOD for Tuners!
 
   #97  

jyoung8607

FoRT
Verified
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
2,584
Reaction score
4,180
Location
Cincinnati, OH
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=25607
We should tally the number of cheating cars we have/have had at Ross-Tech. The white A6 is apparently now on that list :)
I wouldn't count on a buyback just yet. From a non-paywalled source: http://www.inquisitr.com/3686287/vo...-vehicles-automatic-transmission-diesel-cars/

Without citing any sources, the weekly newspaper claimed the California Air Resources Board (CARB) discovered the software in Audi cars that featured automatic transmission systems. CARB, as well as Audi, have refrained from issuing any statements about the report, reported Fortune.
So it's alleged by literally nobody of importance, as of yet, probably because...

The software made the decision by monitoring the steering wheel. Under testing conditions, the steering wheel is in its stationary position. If the software detected movement of the steering wheel, it would remain deactivated. In terms of numbers, the software was designed to notice if the wheel had turned by 15 degrees. However, if the steering wheel wasn’t being turned, the software determined the vehicle was being tested and turned on a gear-shifting program which produced less carbon dioxide than in normal road driving. This allowed the car to meet the emissions criteria.
... they thought about it for fifteen seconds (or asked Audi) and realized turning is a valid and desirable input into dynamic shift point programming. Makes good clickbait, though.

Didn't the current gen Audi A8 have some GPS/nav lookahead for curves which also fed input into the dynamic shift program? Can't wait for that one to be "discovered" as a "cheat device" which "disables emissions control when GPS detects they're in an emissions testing center."

Jason
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uwe
   #98  

Eric

Active Member
Staff member
Ross-Tech Employee
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
2,971
Reaction score
4,229
Location
Lansdale, PA, USA
VCDS Serial number
HC800000
Yeah but does the early shifting come back when the steering wheel gets straight again? :)

Also unless "BAmS" is making documents up,
To make matters worse for Volkswagen, the new scandal won’t be easily explained away as the work of a few rogue engineers who lacked adult supervision. BamS found a document where Audi’s chief of powertrains, Axel Eiser, asks:

“When will we have the cycle-optimized shift program?” The program, says the document “needs to be designed to be 100% active on the dyno, but only 0.01% in the hands of the customer.”
 
   #99  

Jack@European_Parts

NostraJackAss
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
21,611
Reaction score
9,129
Location
Montgomery, NY, USA
VCDS Serial number
C?ID=57337
Bam Bam

Don't you know he's all about muscle........:p

See if you can reason with VWGoA first......don't speak mean!

 
Top