Mercedes Diesel software update.

[LostKiwi]

Yes I understand it can do, but the information published on the NHTSA site you promoted is a US governmental site providing specific guidance to the US domestic market, nothing to do particularly with MB global policies, the current Emissions Update rollout in the UK or the EU Real Driving Emissions legislation that triggered it in 2016. Global announcements I would expect to emanate from Germany.

And the California EPA laws are even tighter than EU laws ergo the same update will almost certainly appear there.

 

[js190d]

this is all in this or the other post already...

As far as I know even with the full might of the anti competition factions within California's EPA they still haven't worked out how BMW are cheating the system and getting their diesel cars to pass emission testing.

However, we do know VW wanted their diesel car's to drive nicely, so they decided the most technically efficient way to do this economically, was to work around a flaw when undergoing laboratory testing for emissions. When the steering wheel sensor (used for the ESP) is not recording any movement - run in legal map mode, otherwise always use the nice to drive illegal engine map.

GM and Mercedes Benz found a different way. This is now very well known. During the laboratory emission testing phase "room temperature" is very carefully controlled. When a Mercedes notices these stable temperature conditions are met for an extended period, it always runs using its original legal map. Unfortunately outside these specific temperatures conditions (i.e. all of the time) an unknown "bug" in the engine management software "accidentally" forces the car to operate exclusively using a cold start engine map. Had it been using this "cold start" map during emission testing it would have failed.

That last point is why many have been using the term "illegal" and why "its immoral not to get the car updated ASAP"

EU emissions standards only require compliance by running the engine on a test cycle. They could have made the test real world driving but chose not to.

Considerable responsibility needs to be placed on the EU for allowing manufacturers to be compliant to there emissions standards which are based on laboratory test conditions.

Bit rich of them to fine car manufacturers at all imho seeing as real driving did not factor in there tests until September 2017.

That's 25 years of mickey mouse lab tests since the Euro 1 standard appeared in July 1992.

I think the population of Europe need to fine THEM for their incompetence.

https://ec.europa.eu/growth/content...issions-tests-become-mandatory-1-september_en

 

[Tony Dyson]

And the California EPA laws are even tighter than EU laws ergo the same update will almost certainly appear there.

I never allow assumptions get in the way of factual information and the only relevant factual information on the subject was provided by @Grandpaw from the MB German Language website that stated the Emissions Update was Voluntary not Mandatory, that in itself is a telling story.

 

[LostKiwi]

I never allow assumptions get in the way of factual information and the only relevant factual information on the subject was provided by @Grandpaw from the MB German Language website that stated the Emissions Update was Voluntary not Mandatory, that in itself is a telling story.

In Germany the update is mandatory for some vehicles.

 

[Tony Dyson]

In Germany the update is mandatory for some vehicles.

Then I would suspect if mandated, it would include some additional unspecified possibly safety related components relevant to that particular model ? Whatever the case, I firmly believe their customers deserve a more open policy from MB and what exactly they propose to change in the current owners cars. It would end all this speculation and uncertainty.

 

[Botus]

EU emissions standards only require compliance by running the engine on a test cycle. They could have made the test real world driving but chose not to.

Considerable responsibility needs to be placed on the EU for allowing manufacturers to be compliant to there emissions standards which are based on laboratory test conditions.

Bit rich of them to fine car manufacturers at all imho seeing as real driving did not factor in there tests until September 2017.

That's 25 years of mickey mouse lab tests since the Euro 1 standard appeared in July 1992.

I think the population of Europe need to fine THEM for their incompetence.

https://ec.europa.eu/growth/content...issions-tests-become-mandatory-1-september_en

its easy to say today they got it wrong, at the time they needed a repeatable standard all cars could follow.... those that have now been found to be cheating were doing just that cheating.... many Mercedes still can't pass that flawed standard until the software and or other mods have been applied.

technology has moved light years in this timeframe, the world of computing and measuring is nothing like it was. Driving on a road would be no use as you can't replicate the same conditions every time. The new wlpt standard will have glaring holes but they'll be smaller and its a better test.

https://www.wltpfacts.eu/what-is-wltp-how-will-it-work/

meanwhile Turbo's are an issue, downsized engines with a turbo can get good lab scores, they can also get good real road use scores... But only when driven appropriately.

Lots of lazy drivers, lacking a basic understanding of physics and how a car works are getting terrible MPG, riding on the massive wave of torque modern cars can produce. But in doing so they are causing a lot needless pollution as well... and getting an avenge speed in the low 20s

 

[LostKiwi]

EU emissions standards only require compliance by running the engine on a test cycle. They could have made the test real world driving but chose not to.

Considerable responsibility needs to be placed on the EU for allowing manufacturers to be compliant to there emissions standards which are based on laboratory test conditions.

Bit rich of them to fine car manufacturers at all imho seeing as real driving did not factor in there tests until September 2017.

That's 25 years of mickey mouse lab tests since the Euro 1 standard appeared in July 1992.

I think the population of Europe need to fine THEM for their incompetence.

https://ec.europa.eu/growth/content...issions-tests-become-mandatory-1-september_en

Never let anti EU bias get in the way of facts eh?
Like Botus said any test needs to be repeatable and that means a lab environment.
No driver drives the same way as any other driver so just what driving profile would you use to be 'real world'?

Any testing will be compromised but the new test hopefully less compromised than the old.

 

[LostKiwi]

Then I would suspect if mandated, it would include some additional unspecified possibly safety related components relevant to that particular model ? Whatever the case, I firmly believe their customers deserve a more open policy from MB and what exactly they propose to change in the current owners cars. It would end all this speculation and uncertainty.

Safety as in cleaning up the emissions that have been proven harmful to health and which would mean the vehicles would never have passed the standards without a cheat in place?
Mandatory recalls can be regulatory as well as safety related. If MB were faced with a massive fine if they don't fit the update to a certain percentage of the cars produced you can be damned sure they won't be making the update voluntary.

Personally I think it should be legally compulsory in this country. No update, not roadworthy.

 

[Blobcat]

Safety as in cleaning up the emissions that have been proven harmful to health and which would mean the vehicles would never have passed the standards without a cheat in place?
Mandatory recalls can be regulatory as well as safety related. If MB were faced with a massive fine if they don't fit the update to a certain percentage of the cars produced you can be damned sure they won't be making the update voluntary.

Personally I think it should be legally compulsory in this country. No update, not roadworthy.

Probably shouldn’t remove any form of exhaust emissions equipment either whilst ensuring software all up to date...

 

[LostKiwi]

Probably shouldn’t remove any form of exhaust emissions equipment either whilst ensuring software all up to date...

I can see a time not too far away when such things will be checked as part of the MOT.

 

[Tony Dyson]

Safety as in cleaning up the emissions that have been proven harmful to health and which would mean the vehicles would never have passed the standards without a cheat in place?
Mandatory recalls can be regulatory as well as safety related. If MB were faced with a massive fine if they don't fit the update to a certain percentage of the cars produced you can be damned sure they won't be making the update voluntary.

Personally I think it should be legally compulsory in this country. No update, not roadworthy.

More speculation, you have no idea what savings, if any, the update has on any of the vehicle's emissions, no-one has because MB don't have anything to say about it, and until they do, I for one will be running update free and driving with moral and legal integrity.

 

[js190d]

Never let anti EU bias get in the way of facts eh?
Like Botus said any test needs to be repeatable and that means a lab environment.
No driver drives the same way as any other driver so just what driving profile would you use to be 'real world'?

Any testing will be compromised but the new test hopefully less compromised than the old.

The EU emissions standards originated from EU commision directives.

That is FACT not bias.

If this does not concur with your world view then who do you think devised the standards?

 

[LostKiwi]

More speculation, you have no idea what savings, if any, the update has on any of the vehicle's emissions, no-one has because MB don't have anything to say about it, and until they do, I for one will be running update free and driving with moral and legal integrity.

So glad you know better than MB.

 

[Tony Dyson]

So glad you know better than MB.

And where did I ever claim that?

 

[LostKiwi]

The EU emissions standards originated from EU commision directives.

That is FACT not bias. If this does not concur with your world view then who do you think devised the standards?

Yes they did originate in the EU.
All credit to the EU for actually trying to do something (as opposed to nothing like so many other places). You can bet the UK wouldn't have done anything unless pushed by the EU.
The only time the UK does anything it's either poorly thought out (CO2 emissions based taxation) or half hearted (decimalisation of currency and fuel but miles, feet and inches) and needs a taxation benefit.

 

[LostKiwi]

And where did I ever claim that?

By opting not to fit an upgrade MB clearly deem as required.

 

[js190d]

Yes they did originate in the EU.
All credit to the EU for actually trying to do something (as opposed to nothing like so many other places). You can bet the UK wouldn't have done anything unless pushed by the EU.
The only time the UK does anything it's either poorly thought out (CO2 emissions based taxation) or half hearted (decimalisation of currency and fuel but miles, feet and inches) and needs a taxation benefit.

Never let anti UK bias get in the way of facts

 

[Tony Dyson]

By opting not to fit an upgrade MB clearly deem as required.

Required? you need to re-read the thread, it's optional.

 

[LostKiwi]

Required? you need to re-read the thread, it's optional.

Mandatory in Germany.

So...
MB (who write the software) says it's recommended/required/mandatory (semantics).
You who don't know what's in the update or how it works says "No I don't need it/want it".

Ergo you with no information say you know better than MB.

 

[LostKiwi]

Never let anti UK bias get in the way of facts

Bias? What part of that was not fact?