California to start checking OBDII cars for tunes

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Considering some tunes could actually lead to an overall "cleaner" running, such as changing the shifting points in an automatic transmission, in the end this new regulation is quite pointless.
https://www.dieselarmy.com/news/cali...he-workaround/

[JSH]

I had thought about the possibility of someone setting up a library of loaner ECUs for people to use to pass smog. (As noted in the last paragraph) It could be a moneymaker.

As to the idea that some tunes decrease emissions - LOL. Sure they do. If a simple tune could be used to reduce emissions OEMs would do it and book the emission credits.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by JSH

I had thought about the possibility of someone setting up a library of loaner ECUs for people to use to pass smog. (As noted in the last paragraph) It could be a moneymaker.

As to the idea that some tunes decrease emissions - LOL. Sure they do. If a simple tune could be used to reduce emissions OEMs would do it and book the emission credits.

Dieselgate 2.0

[Vekke]

I mean that is sure again lot of work for no gains from the goverment side for a problem that is not a problem. Meaning almost all modern cars stock program only meets the regulations in the official drive cycle. In normal driving you are not using those parts of the maps much so why on earth its now super important to use the stock files that wont meet any standards for most of the time anyhow?

Also I havent seen a system or car that cannot be made to look normal even its not. I know the hassle from normal car inspections that it takes one day to make it registration ready and one day after inspection to make it work again like it should. All the work to get a fresh stamp for your car. There are easier ways to get fresh stamps than swithing parts back and forth, but who needs that knows them already or will find ways to make it work also in the future.

[Piotrsko]

The issue with "smog" software is the concept that it causes a loss of performance or old lady driveability.

Notice I said concept. The hypermilers here are accepting things to get high mileage results that I won't do, mostly for my convenience. Sure aren't going to get Joe Average to buy into KOEO pulse and glide or high EGR.

Mentioning EGR: back in my hotrodding days, EGR was a serious thing to avoid because it reduced HP in a vehicle that the typical was trying to squeek the last bit of HP/performance out of.

Todays cars are making more power cleaner than ever. Imagine a stock aircooled VW making 200+ hp reliably for 100,000 miles or more and passing CALI smog rules. Kind of boggles the mind. No valves to adjust, no points to set, never fiddle with the carb, just gas and go.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by JSH

As to the idea that some tunes decrease emissions - LOL. Sure they do. If a simple tune could be used to reduce emissions OEMs would do it and book the emission credits.

The off the shelf tunes most people get that bump up some ignition timing and lean out the open loop AFR map do run cleaner though...for a while at least (maybe with marginally increased NOx emissions, esp with people who disable EGR). OEMs try to avoid running rich on the test cycle but in normal operation some cars dump a pretty good amount of unburned fuel out the exhaust.

The only problem I see is the guys who run without cats and force the emissions readiness monitors to pass. The number of people attempting lean burn is close to 0, mostly because of the widely held belief that lean burn raises EGT and doesn't help fuel economy.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by JSH

If a simple tune could be used to reduce emissions OEMs would do it and book the emission credits.

Real-world driving is way different than the standardized certification tests, to the extent that a shifting point other than what EPA requires may eventually lead to a much better efficiency overall. And a more efficient engine burning less fuel due to better shifting may also feature a decrease to the emissions.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Real-world driving is way different than the standardized certification tests, to the extent that a shifting point other than what EPA requires may eventually lead to a much better efficiency overall. And a more efficient engine burning less fuel due to better shifting may also feature a decrease to the emissions.

Yes, real world driving is different than standard certification test. That is why after the diesel emission scandal (involving more manufacturers than just VW) regulators around the world are adding on-road emissions tests in addition to dyno tests.

Fuel economy and emissions are often at odds. VW's approach to emissions cheating was specifically focused on improving fuel economy at the expense of NOx emissions.

[Piotrsko]

JSH: my Golf has lower compression than your avatar, and it makes less NOX comparatively for it's size. Vw got stuck in a spot where they couldn't compete with gasoline powered NOX standards applied to their diesel engines instead of the appropriate diesel specs they were aiming for. The brouhaha ended with Cali giving them an exemption to "pollute" more in fewer cars. My golf emission is still cleaner than the same year suburu WRX.

[redpoint5]

Perhaps VW was onto something with the intelligence they programmed into the vehicle to pass the test and adjust the operating parameters.

Maybe vehicles should have variable tuning that relies on GPS to determine where running dirtier but more fuel efficient is fine, and where tighter emissions tolerances are needed.