Volkswagen facing billions in EPA fines plus recalls over software that evades EPA emissions standards

[Mr.DirtyDangles]

Yeah, the mode that lowers NOx for testing only (the problem in question), apparently does so by running lower cylinder temps. Those lower temps create less NOx but they also create less power, lower fuel efficiency and create more soot. The additional soot of the 'cleaner' test mode will shorten the lives of components.

The test mode creates less power, less efficiency and shortens life span of components. The until now 'regular mode' creates more power, better efficiency and less soot but evidently too much NOx.

Exactly what I said

[aGENT]

Exactly what I said

Pretty sure you didn't...

[surtur]

Yeah, the mode that lowers NOx for testing only (the problem in question), apparently does so by running lower cylinder temps. Those lower temps create less NOx but they also create less power, lower fuel efficiency and create more soot. The additional soot of the 'cleaner' test mode will shorten the lives of components.

The test mode creates less power, less efficiency and shortens life span of components. The until now 'regular mode' creates more power, better efficiency and less soot but evidently too much NOx.

exactly and this is why many of us tune our vehicles. Just because it comes from the factory set a certain setting does not make it ideal in every aspect.

And it is not just the engine management that has this effect changing shift points and firmness etc can make the transmission last much longer if done correctly.

Manufacturer's set everything to get best fuel efficiency and emissions ratings but sacrifice many other aspects.

VW basically said f that we wanted best ofboth world's and installed this little hack to trick the engine into changing in order to pass.

Any respectable tuner can do this just like on my truck I have it tuned for fuel efficiency but my tow/haul mode is a performance mode could have it as a emissions setting if needed. VW just saved everyone the time and effort by having this stock and automatic plus it wouldn't void the warranty like other aftermarket tunes.

[Mr.DirtyDangles]

More power, better fuel efficiency, better longevity on parts... Yeah why would anybody want that?

And fyi, it does already exist. Tuners for most makes and models of cats can modify ecu settings to change / improve any number of parameters.

Do you even read your posts ? and yeah it is exactly what i said

"

Def not the case unless you are dialing back power on an forced induction engine. Any type of tuning that alters factory settings will inevitably have a serious affect on the engine and its over all longevity."

[Neversummer]

I'm kind of surprised that this cover up was kept secret for so long. No one leaked or whistle blew ... no retired engineer or disgruntled VW exec ... no whispers of this from anyone?

[surtur]

Do you even read your posts ? and yeah it is exactly what i said

"

Def not the case unless you are dialing back power on an forced induction engine. Any type of tuning that alters factory settings will inevitably have a serious affect on the engine and its over all longevity."

this is false. They set the engines to run best fuel economy and emissions. This does not ensure longevity of the engine Esp when you tinker with shift points as when you run the engine at its most efficient rpm more often you will make it last longer. And they do not come from the factory this way. How many vehicles now can last more then a couple hundred thousand Km back in the day many engines could hit 400+ without breaking a sweat.

They do not set a vehicle up for longevity they set it up to get more sales and meet stricken standards for emissions and fuel economy. Yet they can't even do that right.

[Mr.DirtyDangles]

this is false. They set the engines to run best fuel economy and emissions. This does not ensure longevity of the engine Esp when you tinker with shift points as when you run the engine at its most efficient rpm more often you will make it last longer. And they do not come from the factory this way. How many vehicles now can last more then a couple hundred thousand Km back in the day many engines could hit 400+ without breaking a sweat.

They do not set a vehicle up for longevity they set it up to get more sales and meet stricken standards for emissions and fuel economy. Yet they can't even do that right.

Exactly Surtur that was my point. Straying from factory settings on the average car can have long lasting negative affects on components and their longevity.

Just like when people put premium in their cars that are tuned for regular or low grade gas. This is actually a detriment to the motor not positive.

Factory specs are researched and tested to the tune(lol) of billions.

[surtur]

Exactly Surtur that was my point. Straying from factory settings on the average car can have long lasting negative affects on components and their longevity.

Just like when people put premium in their cars that are tuned for regular or low grade gas. This is actually a detriment to the motor not positive.

Factory specs are researched and tested to the tune(lol) of billions.

to meet certain standards not best engine life.

Best emissions and best fuel efficiency does not mean best for the engine or your pocket book. Why would VW find a sneaky way to avoid handicapping their cars if it was already the best it could be.? They did it to improve the vehicle not make it worse or unreliable. Every other manufacturer would do the same thing if they thought they could get away with it.

A factory tuned vehicle is a handicapped vehicle due to strict regulations that they need to adhere to. The research of which you say is costing them billions is not to get the best gas millage and most power while being the most reliable. It is to meet the guidelines set out for them.

30 years ago they made 3 cylinder turbo gas engine cars that got 35-40mpg and could keep up at highway speeds.

30 years later and they are struggling to get 40mpg out of a hybrid with decent power why?

Vehicles today are not optimized for anything other then meeting strict government regulations.

[Mr. Ambien]

to meet certain standards not best engine life.

Best emissions and best fuel efficiency does not mean best for the engine or your pocket book. Why would VW find a sneaky way to avoid handicapping their cars if it was already the best it could be.? They did it to improve the vehicle not make it worse or unreliable. Every other manufacturer would do the same thing if they thought they could get away with it.

A factory tuned vehicle is a handicapped vehicle due to strict regulations that they need to adhere to. The research of which you say is costing them billions is not to get the best gas millage and most power while being the most reliable. It is to meet the guidelines set out for them.

30 years ago they made 3 cylinder turbo gas engine cars that got 35-40mpg and could keep up at highway speeds.

30 years later and they are struggling to get 40mpg out of a hybrid with decent power why?

Vehicles today are not optimized for anything other then meeting strict government regulations.

I agree with much of what you're saying, but hybrids are still getting decent mpg (I've had this site bookmarked for over a decade, especially useful in Canada where sticker mileage is deceptive, whereas US ratings underwent an overhaul about a decade ago mandated by the EPA to be more realistic relating to how people drive). The '05 Prius for example was getting 45-55 US mpg (adjusted lower via change in EPA MPG ratings around 2007), the '15 Prius C gets 48-65 mpg. The '15 Jetta and Civic Hybrids are also mid to mid-high 40s. They really haven't changed much at all.

In Canada, our Escape Hybrid gets 7L/100km (8 during the winter), which is around 33-35 US MPG.

No doubt regulations has caused more efficient diesel, for example, to be less efficient. The VW Golf's we were talking about, I remember a friend's 90s diesel hitting over 40mpg. So there is quite a bit of truth to what you're saying, but not regarding hybrids per se.

[aGENT]

MKVII TDI Golfs get upper 40's/lower 50's quite regularly fwiw.

Or they did anyway, now we'll likely see then drop to low 40's in their 'improved' state lol.

[Ghostsof1915]

to meet certain standards not best engine life.

Best emissions and best fuel efficiency does not mean best for the engine or your pocket book. Why would VW find a sneaky way to avoid handicapping their cars if it was already the best it could be.? They did it to improve the vehicle not make it worse or unreliable. Every other manufacturer would do the same thing if they thought they could get away with it.

A factory tuned vehicle is a handicapped vehicle due to strict regulations that they need to adhere to. The research of which you say is costing them billions is not to get the best gas millage and most power while being the most reliable. It is to meet the guidelines set out for them.

30 years ago they made 3 cylinder turbo gas engine cars that got 35-40mpg and could keep up at highway speeds.

30 years later and they are struggling to get 40mpg out of a hybrid with decent power why?

Vehicles today are not optimized for anything other then meeting strict government regulations.

Have a look at the old Sprints/Fireflies. The vehicle was a tiny box on wheels with a tiny engine. All cars are bigger, and heavier now, for the exception of Smart cars. Most of the power is just to move the weight. That's why mileage is so bad. The sad part is they need hybrids and they can't even get huge savings from that from vehicles like CRX's from 30 years ago. Vehicles need to be put on a diet, or made from carbon fibre. Aerodynamic shapes, lighter weight, that will improve mileage.

[aGENT]

Have a look at the old Sprints/Fireflies. The vehicle was a tiny box on wheels with a tiny engine. All cars are bigger, and heavier now, for the exception of Smart cars. Most of the power is just to move the weight. That's why mileage is so bad. The sad part is they need hybrids and they can't even get huge savings from that from vehicles like CRX's from 30 years ago. Vehicles need to be put on a diet, or made from carbon fibre. Aerodynamic shapes, lighter weight, that will improve mileage.

Modern cars are also way WAY safer, better handling, higher performing and lower polluting. I'd far rather be in a head on collision in a modern Honda Fit than a 30 year old Sprint. The Fit would also be far more capable of avoiding the accident altogether with it's ABS, better handling etc.

I'm not disagreeing that cars can and should get lighter but it's only part of the equation. What shouldn't be part of the equation is going backwards on safety and pollution to a 1989 Sprint.

Things like carbon fiber manufacturing are getting there in price competitiveness but they're not there yet. You have to also appreciate that car companies have been making cars with steel for the better part of a century. That's a whole lot of design, manufacturing, infrastructure etc that would need to be changed to CF. That doesn't happen overnight even if CF becomes cost comparable to manufacture as that doesn't take in to account the cost of upgrading all of that infrastructure, design knowledge etc.

[Armada]

I still fail to see why General motors gets a slap on the wrist for $900M with a deadly ignored defect that killed roughly 170 people. No one has even been criminally charged even though GM knew about it and had documents about this issue.

Here's the article.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2015/09/17/why-general-motors-900-million-fine-for-a-deadly-defect-is-just-a-slap-on-the-wrist/

[aGENT]

I have been wondering about the more recent EA288 engine and came across this:

Source: http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/info_center/en/news/2015/09/Volkswagen_AG_has_issued_the_following_information.html

Evidently VW has been dodging questions about TDI emissions since early 2014, maybe earlier. This might explain the seemingly abrupt addition of AdBlue to the 2015 models. I'd wager they will find either the EA288 is not affected, or can be 'fixed' with relatively minor modifications, and vehicles with the EA189 motor that was found to be at fault in the OP testing, will require more extensive or drastic changes.

[MattJVD]

CEO steps down;

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/volkswagen-martin-winterkorn-resigns-1.3239916

[Mr.DirtyDangles]

to meet certain standards not best engine life.

Best emissions and best fuel efficiency does not mean best for the engine or your pocket book. Why would VW find a sneaky way to avoid handicapping their cars if it was already the best it could be.? They did it to improve the vehicle not make it worse or unreliable. Every other manufacturer would do the same thing if they thought they could get away with it.

A factory tuned vehicle is a handicapped vehicle due to strict regulations that they need to adhere to. The research of which you say is costing them billions is not to get the best gas millage and most power while being the most reliable. It is to meet the guidelines set out for them.

30 years ago they made 3 cylinder turbo gas engine cars that got 35-40mpg and could keep up at highway speeds.

30 years later and they are struggling to get 40mpg out of a hybrid with decent power why?

Vehicles today are not optimized for anything other then meeting strict government regulations.

Never said that it does. I stated tuning a factory car to go beyond it's FACTORY specification will lead to premature part failure. Factory tuned vehicles do not have the proper internals to be tuned to their top parameters.

You would have to change tens of thousands of dollars worth of parts to get even the highest performance factory car to get the maximum performance from it.

Factory tuned vehicles maximize their performance with the parts that they are constructed with. Crappy metals, shoddy plastics, brutal electronics and horrible assembly. A very small percentage of the cars on the road will benefit form anything other than a factory tune for DAILY driving.

If you want to get into performance/economy based discussion of non factory tuning you need to understand the average car is not made to the best standards. Most are practically 5 yr throw away cars. Why would any manufacturer make a car that lasts ?

Ever watched a Maytag commercial ?

The reason why 30 years later they are so called struggling to get hybrids to be their best is becasue THEY DONT CARE !!!

Why make a car that lasts 25 years when they can charge you 40k for one every 5 years ? Certain models are safer yes. Most are death traps. Economy and performance lol yeah if you want to pay over 65k.

As for regulations ? That is the biggest scam of all. Transport authorities around the world cannot agree on anything safety related from country to country.

The consumer twists in the wind while the auto companies cackle at our stupidity.

[aGENT]

I have been wondering about the more recent EA288 engine and came across this:

Source: http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/info_center/en/news/2015/09/Volkswagen_AG_has_issued_the_following_information.html

Evidently VW has been dodging questions about TDI emissions since early 2014, maybe earlier. This might explain the seemingly abrupt addition of AdBlue to the 2015 models. I'd wager they will find either the EA288 is not affected, or can be 'fixed' with relatively minor modifications, and vehicles with the EA189 motor that was found to be at fault in the OP testing, will require more extensive or drastic changes.

More on this:

http://jalopnik.com/vw-discontinued-the-guilty-tdi-in-2014-so-why-cant-you-1732311030

The diesel engines found in Volkswagen products since the 2015 model year are not the Type EA189 TDIs that admittedly have the emission cheating software installed, but VW still can’t sell you the newer Type EA288 TDI engines in 2015 and 2016 model year cars either. Why? We’re not sure yet.

http://www.themotorreport.com.au/62277/volkswagen-admits-it-cheated-emissions-test-11-million-cars-affected

Volkswagen has confirmed that engine management software on some of its diesel-powered models allowed it to cheat emissions testing, giving affected cars the ability to return a lower result on an official test yet emit a larger volume of pollutants during regular driving.

Uncovered by an investigation by the United States' Environmental Protection Agency, the software - dubbed a "defeat device" by the EPA - loaded a different engine tune when it detected it was being put through an emissions test.

And Volkswagen has now confirmed that the defeat device issue could affect up to eleven million cars worldwide.

Any car equipped with the VW Group's EA189 turbo diesel inline four could be affected, including cars from Volkswagen, Audi, Seat and Skoda. The EA189 was superseded by the EA288 (which isn't affected) in 2012, but continues to be sold in some markets.

Other diesel engines in the VW Group are said to carry the same software package, but without any effect on emissions output. The problem only pertains to the EA189.

In a statement released tonight, Volkswagen said its current family of Euro 6-compliant diesels (to which the EA288 belongs) are not equipped with the emissions-cheating software.

The German auto giant is preparing itself for the inevitable legal fallout of the scandal, and has announced that it will earmark 6.5 billion Euros (AU$10.2 billion) to cover the cost of removing the errant software as well as for "other efforts to win back the trust of our customers".

The cost to the company in fines, damages, and possibly criminal prosecution, in the USA and in other jurisdictions in Europe and elsewhere, may be many multiples more.

According to Volkswagen: "...it remains the top priority of the Board of Management to win back lost trust and to avert damage to our customers".

So the new motor doesn't appear to be an issue (or only a minor one), yet they're still not selling them. Could be as simple as the EPA/VAG have agreed on a stop sale until they sort out the EA189 cars. Or perhaps the EPA is demanding independent testing to confirm the new motor is doing what it's supposed to before allowing further sales... The saga continues...

[aGENT]

Also:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-23/volkswagen-hires-kirkland-ellis-in-pollution-controls-scandal

Volkswagen AG has hired the U.S. law firm Kirkland & Ellis LLP to help it deal with the widening scandal over the carmaker’s faked pollution controls, according to a company spokeswoman.

Kirkland led BP Plc’s defense in the criminal investigation of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil disaster that claimed 11 lives and caused the worst offshore spill in U.S. history, according to the firm’s website. Kirkland spokeswoman Olivia Clarke declined to comment on the Volkswagen hiring.

And for a bit of 'fun':

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/24/business/international/volkswagen-test-rigging-follows-a-long-auto-industry-pattern.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Volkswagen Test Rigging Follows a Long Auto Industry Pattern

Long before Volkswagen admitted to cheating on emissions tests for millions of cars worldwide, the automobile industry, Volkswagen included, had a well-known record of sidestepping regulation and even duping regulators.

For decades, car companies found ways to rig mileage and emissions testing data. In Europe, some automakers have taped up test cars’ doors and grilles to bolster their aerodynamics. Others have used “superlubricants” to reduce friction in the car’s engine to a degree that would be impossible in real-world driving conditions.

Automakers have even been known to make test vehicles lighter by removing the back seats.

Cheating in the United States started as soon as governments began regulating automotive emissions in the early 1970s. In 1972, certification ofFord Motor’s new cars was held up after the Environmental Protection Agency found that the company had violated rules by performing constant maintenance of its test cars, which reduced emissions but did not reflect driving conditions in the real world. Ford walked away with a $7 million fine.

The next year, the agency fined Volkswagen $120,000 after finding that the company had installed devices intended specifically to shut down a vehicle’s pollution control systems. In 1974, Chrysler had to recall more than 800,000 cars because similar devices were found in the radiators of its cars.

Such gadgets became known as “defeat devices,” and they have long been banned by the E.P.A. But their use continued to proliferate, and they became more sophisticated, as illustrated by Volkswagen’s admission this week that 11 million diesel cars worldwide were equipped with software used to cheat on emissions tests. The scandal played out on Wednesday with the resignation of the automaker’s chief executive, Martin Winterkorn.

Beyond emissions, the industry has long been contemptuous of regulation. Henry Ford II called airbags “a lot of baloney,” and executives have bristled at rules requiring higher mileage per gallon. Robert A. Lutz, the former General Motors vice chairman and Chrysler president, often said the rules were like “trying to cure obesity by requiring clothing manufacturers to make smaller sizes.”

The universe of automotive scandals has been a broad and often tragic one, including Ford’s 1978 recalls of 1.5 million Pintos after evidence emerged that its gas tanks were prone to catch fire during impacts. The Chrysler Corporation was indicted in 1987 on charges of disconnecting the odometers of 60,000 cars used by executives and then selling them as new. The Ford-Firestone scandal that started in the late 1990s was linked to 271 deaths. And more than 23 million cars have been recalled by 11 automakers over airbags made by Takata that could violently rupture in an accident.

Misleading gas mileage claims have disturbed regulators and consumers who find that cars often use more gas than promised on the window sticker. Last year, the Korean automakers Hyundai Motor and Kia Motorspaid $300 million in a settlement with the Justice Department and the E.P.A. for overstating the mileage of 1.2 million vehicles. Ford also cut the mileage rating of one of its hybrid electric vehicles in 2013 after complaints, and the E.P.A. has imposed stiffer fines for overstating mileage claims.

No matter the offense, penalties have often been fleeting. Executives are not jailed; fines are manageable.

In the United States, automakers’ lobbying has ensured that the statute giving powers to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration “has no specific criminal penalty for selling defective or noncompliant vehicles,” says Joan Claybrook, a former administrator of the agency and a longtime advocate of auto safety. There are no criminal penalties under laws applying to the E.P.A. for violations of motor vehicle clean air rules, though there is a division of the Justice Department devoted to violations of environmental law.

“I don’t see them changing this behavior unless criminal penalties are enacted into law that allow the prosecutor to put the executives in jail,” Ms. Claybrook said.

Enforcement outside the United States is rarer, and other major car markets, like Germany and Japan, tend to be protective of their domestic automakers. This year, the South Korean authorities claimed that Audi and Toyota had inflated fuel economy claims on two models — the Audi A6sedan and the Toyota Prius gas-electric hybrid — by over 10 percent. The two automakers have denied the accusations.

The South Korean government’s Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport had already accused G.M.’s Korean subsidiary, GM Korea, of inflating the mileage claims on the Chevrolet Cruze, forcing the automaker to revise its stated mileage last year and to draft a plan to compensate Cruze owners.

Software gives automakers a new advantage. Modern cars can sense collisions and start braking before drivers do and are even on the verge of driving themselves. So perhaps it is no surprise they can also sense when they are in a laboratory and, knowing that, put their best foot forward.

The advent of the computerized car and the use of software to dupe regulators have been years in the making. General Motors paid $45 million in 1995 and recalled nearly half a million Cadillacs that were equipped with a chip that shut off emissions control systems while the air-conditioner was being used, to improve the car’s performance.

In 1998, the E.P.A. announced a settlement of nearly $1 billion against long-haul truck engine manufacturers for violations similar to Volkswagen’s — using software to optimize the performance of diesel engines during laboratory testing.

Some believe that using software to cheat on laboratory results goes beyond Volkswagen.

While officially stated fuel efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions figures have steadily improved over the years, real-world tests showed no corresponding improvement, according to the European Federation for Transport and Environment, an advocacy group based in Brussels. In fact, the group’s testing found that the average diesel car was producing emissions five times as high as what was permitted. Some vehicles from BMW and Opel emitted 10 times as much pollution on the road as in the lab.

The difference between the lab and real-world results swelled to 40 percent last year, on average, from 8 percent in 2002, the group also found.

“We call it the tip of the iceberg,” said Jos Dings, the director of Transport and Environment. “We don’t think this will be limited to Volkswagen. If you look at the testing numbers for the other manufacturers, they are just as bad.”

He said the group had found gaps in both emissions of pollutants and overall fuel efficiency.

Greg Archer, another official at the group and a former director at Britain’s renewable fuels regulator, said, “There is something very suspicious about the way in which these tests are being passed, and it strongly suggests that companies are using defeat devices in the laboratory.”

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which represents the industry, referred questions to Volkswagen and called the matter “a company-specific issue about their products.”

In a statement on Tuesday, Volkswagen said it did “not tolerate any kind of violation of laws whatsoever.”

“It is and remains the top priority of the Board of Management,” the company added, “to win back lost trust and to avert damage to our customers.”

Winning back trust could prove difficult, especially while the company is doing damage control. In recent days, Volkswagen has been taking downcopies of its pro-diesel ads from YouTube.

Dan Becker, director of the safe climate campaign at the Center for Auto Safety, said that in 2011 he was among a group of environmental lawyers and engineers that traveled to Germany to hear automakers make a pitch for diesel cars. He said that while BMW and Daimler had taken the group’s concerns seriously, Volkswagen officials had not.

“They talked down to us,” he said of the company. “They would definitely win an Academy Award for most egregious automaker. And this is one of the companies that tried desperately to get Americans to buy diesel. I think they just sank that ship.”

[aGENT]

Germany's Federal Motor Transport Authority, KBA sets deadline for VW.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/27/german_regulator_sets_vw_deadline/

Germany's Federal Motor Transport Authority, KBA, has lost patience with scandal-plagued Volkswagen and has given it a deadline.

By October 7, the regulator says, Volkswagen has to submit its plan for bringing its cars into line with European emissions regulation – and this time, no cheating.

That's going to be a tough ask for VW: while the software that cheated on emissions tests will be easily patched, it can only be done with a big hit to the performance of cars on the road.

German tabloid Bild am Sonntag says the KBA says it's obliged “to call for the necessary measures to ensure that the manufactured vehicles are brought into line” with what's been approved for sale.

If KBA withdraws approval for the affected cars, they can neither be sold nor driven in Germany.

VW's brand chief Herbert Diess is cited in a company media release as saying the company is “working at full speed” on a technical solution.

During the weekend, allegations emerged that VW had been warned in 2007 and 2011 about its emissions practices.

The scandal, in which management software detected when cars using the EA 189 motor were undergoing an emission test and put the engines into a low-emission mode, has already cost VW boss Martin Winterkorn his job, leaving him struggling with a €3.2 million severance payment and a €1 million annual pension.

http://media.vw.com/release/1076/

DR. HERBERT DIESS, CEO OF THE VOLKSWAGEN PASSENGER CARS BRAND, EXPLAINS: "WE ARE WORKING AT FULL SPEED ON A SOLUTION."

Sep 25, 2015

In the press release dated September 22, 2015, the Volkswagen Group announced that Volkswagen Group vehicles worldwide are affected by the current issues regarding emissions.

The internal evaluation revealed that approximately five million Volkswagen Passenger Cars brand vehicles are affected worldwide. Certain models and model years of these vehicles (such as the sixth generation Volkswagen Golf, the seventh generation Volkswagen Passat and the first generation Volkswagen Tiguan) are equipped exclusively with type EA 189 diesel engines.

As previously announced, all new Volkswagen Passenger Car brand vehicles that fulfill the EU6 norm valid throughout Europe are not affected. This therefore also includes the current Golf, Passat and Touran models.

Dr. Herbert Diess, CEO of the Volkswagen Passenger Cars brand stressed: "We are working at full speed on a technical solution that we will present to partners, to our customers and to the public as swiftly as possible. Our aim is to inform our customers as quickly as possible, so that their vehicles comply fully with regulations. I assure you that Volkswagen will do everything humanly possible to win back the trust of our customers, the dealerships and the public."

The Volkswagen Passenger Cars brand will inform all markets worldwide how many of vehicles are affected locally. We are working intensively on remedial measures in close coordination with the certification authorities. The vehicles are and remain technically safe and roadworthy.

VW launches web page with updates, information etc for customers:

http://www.vwemissionsinfo.ca/customers/

[Ghostsof1915]

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/162582-bmw-i3-will-bmws-new-ev-finally-be-the-breakthrough-for-carbon-fiber-cars