I wouldn't assume that. Happy TDI owner here (if that wasn't already obvious). The funny thing is the cars were never touted as being any cleaner than any other IC vehicle out there. "Clean diesel" is (was) just a moniker like "SkyActiv." It just happens that VW played the system and actual emissions are higher. Who has "meets current emissions regulations" as a purchasing criteria when it's accepted that every new car meets them? The only vehicles that make those claims are those that are hybrid or full electric.
Careful... Mazda by no means has a spotless record. While they've never committed anything this egregious there are past examples of overstating emissions, horsepower/torque, and fuel economy. Don't let the facts that this is a Mazda forum and you're a Mazda owner lead to bias. They're all corporations and will look for any loophole or edge that leads to more revenue.
Eh, I doubt it. Unless serious advances are made I don't see semi's moving to LPG or LNG anytime soon. Hybrid freight vehicles are a long ways off with today's battery technology. Not to mention, what about marine and off-road (e.g. construction) equipment? There'll be a market for diesel engines for a while yet.
I'm an owner and I'm not. It's already been discussed it will either be an ECM change (e.g. reflash) or a hardware change (e.g. exhaust treatment). The latter is by far the best option because it holds the only hope for maintaining the horsepower, torque, and fuel economy numbers. I'd like to think the clever German engineers could come up with a solution. Also, as previously discussed, if you live in an area without yearly safety inspections, or emissions testing (e.g. SW Ohio) there's nothing preventing owners from ignoring the recall altogether.
This is very interesting information. Thanks for posting! For those who don't want to read it basically says EPA fuel economy estimates are back-calculation from emissions read during testing. Therefore, reason stands to believe the EPA-rated fuel economy for TDI-equipped cars is under-predicting in the real world. So if a purely electronic solution were pursued, owners would see a drop in fuel economy but it would be more in-line with the EPA estimates, and therefore, no ground for a lawsuit. I can personally attest to the the TDI-powered MkV Jetta consistently getting better than the EPA estimate.
That's certainly possible. Perhaps that's what the $18+ billion in possible fines will go toward. I can see how tracking that with used/second hand cars would be difficult. Not to mention vehicles that have moved counties/states. If VW is going to handle the recall there are many questions that's need to be answered? How do you deal with people who've taken their cars to multiple dealerships, independent shops, or none at all. Will I get 4 recall notices because I've taken my car to four dealership services shops? Will I get none because I've never taken it to a service shop? What about people who've purchased cars from dealerships that no longer exist?
And you should read the article you referenced and its sources before making claims about cost-savings. That "hundreds of thousands of dollars" quoted does not include the cost of purchasing CNG/LPG-run vehicles (more than diesel or gas vehicles) or upgrading current vehicles to run on CNG/LPG (a $10,000+ per vehicle fee). The fuel savings also assume a "diesel gallon equivalent" of LPG. Since LPG has a much lower energy density than diesel this means more fuel and larger fuel storage tanks, which means less storage space and/or more weight. This means less towing capacity and less profit per haul. Assuming a constant fuel volume any savings are severely impacted by the relative cost of LPG to diesel fuel, which right now, is not in CNG/LPG's favor.
I can cite many examples of states with counties that do not require yearly emissions or safety inspections. You get a statement in the mail every year saying "pay up or your registration will expire" and that's it. Few of these I'd consider to be "backward."
