Just you wait

Fiat Chrysler has been drawn into the “dieselgate” emissions scandal, sending its shares plunging by almost a fifth.

America’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accused the car maker of fitting 104,000 of its cars with software which cheated pollution tests.

It warned that Fiat “may be liable for civil penalties and injunctive relief for the violations”, news which drove shares down 18pc.

There will be more. Simply because large numbers of people have been fiddling the tests.

15 thoughts on “Just you wait”

  1. If Fiat-Chrysler is seen by the DoJ (or whichever branch of the government is engaged in this shakedown) as an American company, they’ll be given a slap on the wrist. If they’re seen as foreign, expect an eye-watering fine.

  2. So Much For Subtlety

    A lot of cash flowing to ACORN if they can do it before Trump takes office.

    God knows where it will go once Trump is in office. Can we hope for Girls Gone Wild?

  3. Tim Newman, quite. This will be an interesting test of my theory that they’re interested only in shaking down foreign companies like BP, DB and VW.

  4. Alert! Oiky Bolshy Communistic material has penetrated this sanctum of all things sacred. Get things straight false news jerks: private enterprise has never ever done anything wrong and exists to serve only the public interest!.
    (Real politik note Start admitting that some do and some don’t will only confuse the over-mortgaged masses yearning to be bribed with constantly rising house prices.)

  5. DBC Gotnowt, you still haven’t explained when the last time was that the UK elected a Prime Minister. Your comment is just more drivel from a mouth-breathing window-licker.

  6. Hell’s Bells Mr Reed, you really must start taking more water with it old chap, your incoherence is reaching epic levels.

  7. People have gamed emissions testing ever since the introduction of regulations; the use of standardised testing inevitably distorts results. Two examples:

    1) Lean-burn engines which work in a European context were killed off after lobbying by catalytic convertor manufacturers; the standard test is (or at least used to be) derived from California commuting and involves a start at 20 degC, a short potter, then a long run at a steady 50mph or so. There is literally almost nowhere in Europe where daily use looks like that, but cats have been designed to pass the test, not to reduce emissions

    2) Volvo and Renault got into a huge spat a few years ago when Renaults kept getting five star NCAP safety ratings but weren’t that safe in practice; Volvo publicly accused them of designing to the test, not to real life

  8. heh… I’ve commented on the widespread gaming of the emissions and additives testing here and I feel quite safe in saying that it’s a chronic issue. The quoted DT piece is long on bureaucrat -ese and short on tech detail.

    The matter of collusion between the testers and the tested deserves some examination – but it won’t happen as the PR crew will move journos on to the next tub of outrage before they’ve inspected the present one.

    Has all the markings of bureaucratic banditry.

  9. Flat cap is spot on. My (old) M5 pumps extra fuel through alongside directly injecting air into the exhaust to burn in the catalyst comvertor to warm it up faster. Not great when the air injection system gets clogged up and fuel vapour comes out to poison the catalyst.

    Surely better emissions control would let the thing warm up at a natural rate? But no… the rules encourage the manufacturers to put Ina system that breaks and breaks the car….

  10. @Henry Crun
    Why are you obsessing about unelected Prime Ministers? I did n’t mention the subject in this exchange.
    Since you are so confused, perhaps recourse to Google might help . Try “Unelected Prime Ministers, common or not?” but be careful: some of the publications quoted, have a left wing disposition, which can be dangerous to the innocent and unworldly.

  11. tomo,

    Mr Stafford could very well be getting a visit from the Postal Police. It is a federal offence to use Post Office equipment for non-Postal business. None of the 5 visible hods in the picture are being used correctly and bureaucrats will most likely exploit this situation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *