Slashdot Mirror
Nissan Workers In Japan Falsified Emissions Tests, Review Says (nytimes.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times: Nissan Motor has become the latest Japanese automaker to admit to falsifying product-quality data (Warning: source may be paywalled; alternative source), dealing a further blow to Japan Inc.'s reputation for dependable quality. An internal review of emissions and fuel economy tests at Nissan's production plants in Japan showed that company inspectors used "altered measurement values" on emissions inspection reports, the company said in a statement on Monday. The tests also "deviated from the prescribed testing environment," it said.
The review found that all models complied with Japanese safety and emissions standards, it said. The exception was the Nissan GT-R, a two-door sports car, which the company produces too few of to comprehensively review its record, said Nick Maxfield, a Nissan spokesman, in an email. The company said the falsification problems ultimately did not affect fuel-economy findings. Nissan said that it had already started investigating the falsifications and that it had retained a Japanese law firm, Nishimura & Asahi, to lead the effort. The investigation is likely to take one month, Mr. Maxfield said. "Nissan understands and regrets the concern and inconvenience caused to stakeholders," the company said in a statement.
The review found that all models complied with Japanese safety and emissions standards, it said. The exception was the Nissan GT-R, a two-door sports car, which the company produces too few of to comprehensively review its record, said Nick Maxfield, a Nissan spokesman, in an email. The company said the falsification problems ultimately did not affect fuel-economy findings. Nissan said that it had already started investigating the falsifications and that it had retained a Japanese law firm, Nishimura & Asahi, to lead the effort. The investigation is likely to take one month, Mr. Maxfield said. "Nissan understands and regrets the concern and inconvenience caused to stakeholders," the company said in a statement.
" dealing a further blow to Japan Inc.'s reputation for dependable quality"
Oh? Do falsified emission results have anything to do with whether the car will reliably start in the morning and get me to work? No? So that's bullshit.
This why self driving cars will lot's of testing and laws.
Maybe something like the FAA code audit that is done on autopilots.
Also rules like
software updates must be free for at least 5 years and free means that if say a bigger SD card / ssd / etc is needed then that part + install must be free.
No roaming fees or data fees for forced updates.
No forced onstar unless it's free for at least 5 years
No forced XM for data unless it's free for at least 5 years
So do they get fined 1 Billion+ jail time like VW? Or sweot under the rug like GM
Testing and peer review may also grammar problems :-)
Table-ized A.I.
sounds like they discovered the problem internally and that the people who did it only got away with it on a low selling sports car because nobody was checking their figures due to the low sales volume. Doesn't sound anything like what VW got caught doing. Time will tell I guess, since more might come out of this.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Please clarify.
Table-ized A.I.
dealing a further blow to Japan Inc.'s reputation for dependable quality.
Emissions tests to newer EPA standards such as CARB3 are not about product quality; they are about passing arbitrary regulations imposed upon them by a bureaucracy ---- the ever-evolving emissions standards actually COMPROMISE product quality from the customer's point of view, since the systems have to become ever more and more complicated to reduce emissions to arbitrary benchmarks, which means they are more prone to failures which cause them to stop working or become less efficient.
Given a choice between a vehicle where the testing wasn't fudged BUT will perform more poorly and fail more frequently AND a vehicle where the testing was fudged BUT the performance and reliability are better.... the higher quality product is the latter. That's why the remark about "Blow to their reputation" is BS. This is more another blow to the reputation of the regulators, in my book.
Of course the evolving government impositions are trending towards eventually mandating Zero emissions, which will essentially mean that all Combustion engines are going to be banned, and the most prone to failure equipment possible will be required to satisfy them: in other words, immature new technologies such as All-Electric or Alternative fuel.
Some of my best knowledge comes from making mistakes. If everyone who makes a mistake is "removed", then nobody will have realistic experience.
The Soviet Union kept removing generals for every failed battle at the beginning of WW2. But frequent replacement didn't work either. Eventually they ran out of sufficiently qualified new generals, so the existing ones began applying lessons from their prior failures. Their successes grew.
I see no evidence management explicitly condoned such; it's more a matter of being inattentive to inspection quality procedures.
Table-ized A.I.
GTRs are more than sportscars, they are supercars. They are often supercars that beat other supercars 3 times their price. I have the feeling this fudge factor was keeping the costs down and performance up... not sure GTR owners are going to be upset. However, I prefer my manufacturers to keep it honest. Japanese culture is all about the environment... they'll take the small amount of heat from the press in Japan is my guess.
Can't falsify emissions for that.
Adapt. The world cares nothing for your excuses, as we return to conditions suitable only for dinosaurs, not for humans.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
My brother had a powerful Impala a couple decades ago, and there was a way to jack up the performance going third party. As I recall, he did the work himself. Roll the cars off the line in compliance, and publish the relevant information to override the emissions system.
I understand why you posted as AC.
No one would publicly admit to owning a Nissan Juke.
The Juke looks like a crosstrainer that was specifically designed to be marketed to lesbians with Down Syndrome.
Have gnu, will travel.
The missing word is in his subject line.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Modnays.
Table-ized A.I.
"Our bot cars have the most and best testing in the world, believe me! Nobody tests harder; not Jiiina, not Elton John, and not even that Samsonite gorilla. Love that guy, high energy, I know his lawyer. Make Testing Great Again!"
FTFY
Table-ized A.I.
Testing and peer review may also grammar problems :-)
Speaking of Grammar problems... am I the only one who, the first time he read it, read the headline as:
Nissan Workers In Japan Failed Emissions Tests, Review Says
I'm very drowsy this morning and not functioning well.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
I purchased a Nissan Versa, rated at 38 MPG HWY. I have an approximately 100 mile daily commute largely over highway and back-country roads. (In otherwords, few stoplights, thought some areas of highway congestion.) Over two years, I averaged around 35.5 MPG - approximately 93% of expected HWY mileage. Not bad...
So I upgraded to a Nissan Rogue, rated at 31HWY / 25CITY, and a combined 27MPG. Same commute...and I averaged 23.5MPG, 75% of the rated HWY mileage. Even more abysmal, is the fact that I only managed 94% of the rated CITY mileage.
Here is the thing, this wasn't an anomaly. Almost every independent test was around the same, and most of the reports on fueleconomy.gov also were similar. Yet, these car manufacturers are allowed to print their own fraudulent estimates.
https://www.edmunds.com/nissan...
https://www.edmunds.com/nissan...
So yes, fuel economy was fudged by Nissan.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
That is what auto makers have been saying since CAFE standards were a twinkle in someone's eye.
From where I stand, it does not seem very true.
So many ideas have been investigated and used to increase power, fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.
Variable valve timing and valve lift is old school now.
We have gone back to direct injection ( yeah, I know, so very new. Did you know 1940's airplanes used it? )
Power recovery turbines, at the end of the mainstream use of piston engines in large aircraft, they would not only provide boost with the exhaust backpressure/flow, but they would extract more work from it, and put the work into the crank shaft. Fragile as heck in the 40's. Today?
Picking up the ideas behind how diesels work to start introducing HCCI like 'stuff' in gasoline powered engines.
Camless valve trains seem to be getting close to realizable.
Sleeve valve engines would be realizable, if poppet valves prove troublesome.
5 stroke engines ( injecting water or other "stuff" to add additional work stroke(s), recover more work from the combustion heat )
Going to a super charged, valved 2 stroke engine does not seem to get much love, everyone is hung up on the 2 stroke exhaust pipe.
Stop looking at it as a standard 2 stroke, look at it as a 4 stroke, but you are removing strokes, not using an intake stroke, but pushing the air in, but not from the crank case. Engine weight per unit of power would be lower, using less space and fuel to move the vehicle.
Combustion temperature control is currently a hot topic. Cant get too hot, or your oxides of nitrogen get out of hand.
But, figure out a way to get ( start with reducing ) the nitrogen in the cylinder to begin with.
No, don't lug around oxygen tanks, bad idea, find another way to keep the nitrogen out. Chemical/physical
Then you can go as high as you want on temperature ( use a ceramic block/heads, use the heat in the block/heads in either a steam or thermo-electric system )
Seems like you could loose the alternator, generate the electricity from the heat directly.
See also power recovery and 5 stroke concepts as well.
Just dont touch it!
emt 377 emt 4
I've got 380K miles on my truck and replaced spark plugs, oil and filters, and a throttle position sensor
You're lucky. By that time most people have spent a lot more. We had a 2000 Astro that was delivering paint for kelly moore which needed both engine and transmission overhauled by 2005. Most powerstroke owners will have replaced injectors and HPOP by that point. If they haven't defeated the cooled EGR, most 6.0 ford owners will have written off their truck by that point :) If you don't stake a pin in the front end of the engine, even Cummins owners stand a good chance of tears by then.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
We have gone back to direct injection ( yeah, I know, so very new. Did you know 1940's airplanes used it? )
We have gone to high pressure common rail direct injection, which didn't even exist commercially until the 2000s. We're not using mechanical direct injection, except on race cars.
Camless valve trains seem to be getting close to realizable.
Koenigsegg has them working right now ("Freevalve") but nobody wants to spend the money to put them into a production vehicle.
Sleeve valve engines would be realizable, if poppet valves prove troublesome.
Sleeve valves suck. You get buildup on the ports and then you destroy the rings. That's why we stopped using them. (It's also a problem with the ports on two-stroke diesels.) You could use Coates rotary valves, but they require frequent replacement. Maybe modern manufacturing techniques will make them cost-effective anyway.
5 stroke engines ( injecting water or other "stuff" to add additional work stroke(s), recover more work from the combustion heat )
You know you can just inject water along with the combustion charge, right? And that the water being converted into steam produces more power? However, it cools off the cylinder very rapidly, so you can only use it in a sustained fashion under the heaviest load. Water injection is a fairly common aftermarket improvement for diesel pickup trucks, and for race cars when permitted by regulation. AEM sells a cheap kit, for example.
Combustion temperature control is currently a hot topic. Cant get too hot, or your oxides of nitrogen get out of hand.
But, figure out a way to get ( start with reducing ) the nitrogen in the cylinder to begin with.
Actually, they're taking the carbon out of the fuel, not the nitrogen. Decarbonizing the fuel is the obvious way to reduce emissions. NOx is reduced by new combustion cycles involving more valve overlap. (Additional overlap is also now being used to reduce compression when desired...)
Seems like you could loose the alternator, generate the electricity from the heat directly.
You mean with a thermocouple? They are sufficiently inefficient that you wouldn't save any mass, and they are sufficiently expensive that auto companies would laugh in your face if you proposed it.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The CAFE standards are unachievable on vehicles that meet modern safety standards.
This is demonstrably incorrect. I own a car that gets 40+mpg and has a 5 star safety rating.
5years updaes for a car? That would mean that after 5 years it will become cheaper to buy a new one. What should happen is that when they decide to stop giving free updates, the code must be available for free. If possible even 1 year before they stop giving free upgrades.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
but then they can change $100 labor + $100 software at dealer for an forced update.