Quote:
Originally Posted by Tcoat
Do you think there is just one maximum allowed limit that applies across the board to all cars? There is a max that is set but that doesn't mean that each and every model is permitted to go to that max. It just means they can not build anything that goes over. Each individual model has it's own approved range and it can not exceed that. Exceeding the approved range is what VW was caught doing. They didn't even come close to meeting the overall max but were well over what they claimed to be and were approved to sell.
|
I understand that the numbers are blended. You're still missing my point. Subaru could have added these parts, but it would have would have cost them money. What VW did is in another league. I'm not saying Subaru should have added these parts and tried to skirt recertification.
Quote:
Originally Posted by venturaII
This thread clearly shows a fundamental lack of understanding of how vehicles are tested for emissions compliance and how that compliance standard translates to different results from different vehicles, despite all meeting the standard.
|
It's all a matter of perspective. I'd say it's more indicative of how debates get out of hand when reading comprehension is lacking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tcoat
There is a business case that they are not going to share with us and based on what we do know that case is based around emissions.
|
Right, a business case, which is money, which I don't disagree with and never did (see posts mentioning "administrative"). There's not a limitation in the actual emissions requirements that would have prevented the intake tract, they just didn't want to take the financial hit. That is the very first point I made about emissions ITT.