Dec 28, 2023 at 1:19 PM
  1. TDRComm Staff Member

    THE HEADLINE FROM THE MEDIA READS:

    “CUMMINS AGREES TO PAY $1.67 BILLION TO SETTLE CLAIMS
    IT BYPASSED EMISSIONS TESTS"

    CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE

    Oh, boy. Here we go again.

    THE HEADLINE’S TIMING READS: DISTRACTION

    It has been a long time since the news on the Friday before Christmas. Was the timing of the news release intentional? Perhaps we would all be distracted by Cousin Eddie’s antics on the television (or Cousin Eddie himself), the long lines at the airport, the weather here and there, or the Christmas gift you gave that was just perfect!

    Yep: Distraction.

    THE REACTION TO THE HEADLINE: DISAPPOINTMENT, DECEIT AND DUMB

    In my review of the book about the Volkswagen Scandal (Issues 120 and 121), I was so disappointed by the actions of the VW group. I went so far as to say that effectively they killed the use of the diesel in passenger cars.

    Where does that leave me and you in our outlook on Cummins?

    Yep: Let’s use these three “D” words: disappointment, deceit, and dumb.

    THE HEADLINE FROM THE TDR READS: DEVOID

    Devoid, as in devoid of any logic. Boys and girls at Cummins and Ram—just how long have you been in business. Cummins: Did you not experience a similar situation in 1998? Did you not learn from the VW scandal.

    Yep: Devoid.

    THE HEADLINE PROJECTED FROM TDR/RAM/CUMMINS LOYALIST READS: DUPED

    Time will give us a clear answer to this dilemma. (Or perhaps a book like the one on the Volkswagen scandal?)

    How will this affect truck sales? Duh, down, until things cool off.

    How will this affect resale value? Duh, lower, until the reality of the lack of diesel-powered mid-size trucks becomes reality. Then the truck values will rebound.

    Yep: Duped.


    IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER TO DISCUSS?
    The two threads at our website, “Cummins in the News” and “How Does the Cummins Emission Fine Affect Us as Owners?” have developed into quite the discussions. I read TDR member comments and they provided keen insight. Thanks, again, TDR members for being a most discerning group.

    HYPE AND BULL-ONLY ON THE “INTERWEBS”
    Read and believe what you will. Recalls, buybacks, compensation for decreased value… And your local law group from “Dewey, Sueem and How” has not had a chance to digest the news. Those class-action, white-collar guys were still on Christmas vacation.

    SOMEBODY DO THE DECIPHERING

    Okay, that’s easy. Here is the data that we have:

    630,000 trucks from model years 2013-2018

    330,000 trucks from model years 2019-2023

    960,000 trucks

    $1,670,000,000 ÷ 960,000 units = $1740 per unit

    To put this into perspective, checkout TDR Issue 118, page 55, where the rough math on the Volkswagen scandal (a fine of 2 billion over 600,000 vehicles) showed an amount of $3,333 per vehicle.

    Are the above numbers fuzzy math? According to the official Cummins news website “Cummins expects a record charge of $2.04 billion in the fourth quarter of 2023 to resolve these and other related matters involving approximately one-million pickup truck applications in the US.” Okay, $2,040,000,000 ÷ 1,000,000 = $2040 per unit.

    The bigger picture: From Cummins’ own press release “Cummins earned 2.2 billion on sales of 28.1 billion in 2022.”

    So, in 2023 they effectively will earn nothing?


    HEADLINE: DECADES OF DECEIT, CHEATING EXAMPLES, AND THE BIG PICTURE: ISSUE 120, PAGE 29

    This Issue 120, page 29, analyzed the 1998 story about Cummins and other heavy duty engine manufacturers as they were involved in the “1 Billion Dollar Diesel Settlement.”

    There were six corporate entities that were involved: Caterpillar, Cummins, Detroit Diesel, Mack, Navistar and Volvo. Here is a brief summary of the Issue 120 story.

    “Let’s Analyze the ‘1 Billion Dollar Diesel Settlement’ From the Truck Manufacturers in 1998

    “The big dollar fine was: 83.4 million divided by six corporate entities = 13.9 million each. There was a stipulation that $110 million be allocated towards research to develop technologies to reduce NOx. Do you want to bet that $110 million (÷6 is 18.3 million) ‘R&D’ was already in each of the corporate budget(s). The additional 806 million, that’s roughly $141 million per company, another line item in the corporate budget(s).

    “In retrospect, this was a mere slap on the hand. Again, folklore has it that the EPA was understanding of the drive cycle conditions/adjustments that the truck engine OEMs were making. (NOx controls “on” in city driving cycles, “off” on steady state highway conditions.) Likely we will never know ‘the rest of the story.’”

    Further, our Issue 120 book review of “Faster, Higher, Farther” had several examples of emissions defeat devices used by vehicle OEMs to disable emissions controls. For a refresher, pull out your old TDR and turn to page 27. This “game” is nothing new.

    What is new? The dim-witted judgement used by Cummins from years 2013-2023.

    Robert Patton
    TDR Staff

    -- SIDEBAR --
    THE D-WORD: DISCUSSION
    As you’ve read, the news from Cummins (and, by association, Ram) is a dumpster fire of despair.
    (Why is it that D-words keep showing up in this text? Perhaps because “D” is so descriptive?)

    As a digression, I’ll offer you this bit of amusement and diversion.

    Last holiday season you likely had a chance to visit with Grandma and Grandpa. More often than not, the conversation at the dinner table would take a turn to the negative. There is a hidden-meaning descriptive for these conversations: It is called the “D-word discussion.” For example, does the topic at-the-table go to any of those descriptives?

    • Debt
    • Dying
    • Death
    • Divorce
    • Despair
    • Disease
    • Diarrhea
    • Diphtheria
    • Damage
    • Distress
    • Deceit
    • Distraught
    • Dysfunctional
    • Dreadful
    • Draconian
    • Disagree
    • Disloyalty
    • Drama
    Yep, it’s called the D-word discussion. If you happen to encounter this kind of conversation, I suggest (as tactfully as you can) that you change the subject.
     
    TDRComm , Dec 28, 2023
    #1

Comments

Discussion in 'Articles' started by TDRComm, Dec 28, 2023.

    1. endoscott
      endoscott
      Damn! Another useful D-word as it were.....
    2. TDRGuy
      TDRGuy
      Thanks, endoscott. At a minimum you are now aware of the "D-word" game.

      Be careful not to participate at the next family or friend gathering.

      RP
      Diesel85 likes this.
    3. RedD250
      RedD250
      Diesels are dirty by nature. It is not possible to make them clean. Let em be dirty. If I had to guess, every single company that makes diesel engines is cooking the books on their smog numbers. They just haven't been caught yet. I completely disagree with this fine. I disagreed with the VW one too. And I disagree with all future fines. While there should certainly be SOME emissions requirements for diesels, they need to be sensible. The engine manufacturers need to help the clueless EPA understand what is possible and what is not, and the EPA needs to accept their viewpoints. The main requirements of a diesel engine are durability and efficiency. Everyting else is a distant third. If they can clean them up without sacrificing in those 2 areas, that's great. I'm all for it. But any sacrifices in reliability and economy are completely unacceptable to me. Give cummins back their money. And VW too. With interest.
    4. Motorhead
      Motorhead
      I was a victim of VW's Dieselgate. We had a nice 2013 Jetta TDI wagon that I sold back to VW. It was too bad because it performed well. Does this mean that my 2007, 5.9 doesn't really pass emissions?
      Diesel85 likes this.
    5. SnoKing
      SnoKing
      This is the "Team Allied" fine of steroids!
      Diesel85 likes this.
    6. Dl5treez
      Dl5treez
      Depressing destruction of diesels delights, discouraging demand of dependable Dodges.
      promisedland, Mike Ellis and Diesel85 like this.
    7. bighammer
      bighammer
      Disproportionate disbursement demanded of dirty diesels.
      Mike Ellis and Diesel85 like this.
    8. Diesel85
      Diesel85
      Disappointing to diesels.
      Mike Ellis likes this.
    9. drsnook
      drsnook
      what! all this "D-word" stuff and no DELETE?
      Diesel85 likes this.
    10. Extreme1
    11. PacificNorthwestRVers
      PacificNorthwestRVers
      I have a number of concerns about this.

      1. The announcement was made on a Friday. The government has a well established policy of releasing news in its favor on Mondays and new that it would rather be buried on Friday. Since this was released on a Friday, I have to believe that the government wanted to minimize the discussion. Why? My gut says it is because it might not stand up to scrutiny.

      2. The "Justice Department accuses Cummins of installing defeat devices — which can bypass or defeat emissions controls." I don't recall any unusual devices on my 2019 Ram 6.7L CGI engine.

      3. Theoretically, the accused are innocent until proven guilty in this country. At least, that the way the law is supposed to work.

      4. I haven't heard any details regarding how this "device" was supposed to work. Or how it is somehow supposedly illegal.

      5. The fine amounts to $1,740/unit for an engine that costs far more than the VW diesel, that received a fine of $3,333/unit. After adjusting for inflation, the VW fine was $4,379 in today's dollars. It seems to me that IF Cummins was truly dirty in this, that the Govt would have hit them much harder. Why not? Well, maybe what Cummins allegedly did was actually more of a non-issue and perhaps the EPA was responsible in part for some reason.

      6. Considering the current administrations weaponization of the EPA and DOJ, I suspect that Cummins is much less at fault - legitimately at fault - that the government.

      YMMV
    12. AndyMorgan
      AndyMorgan
      100% agreed. Definitely something fishy here.
    13. Diesel85
      Diesel85
      I completely agree too.

      What also bothers me, is why doesn't Ford and GM get scrutinized like this? I can't imagine Ford and GM products being perfect. FCA has gotten beaten up over the EcoD and now Cummins.

      As what other folks have said, I see it as a direct attack on diesel engines. They know that the diesel engine is the best engine for leading towards net zero by using bio fuels such as bio diesel and renewable diesel. However, they don't want that to happen because it is against their "agenda".

      I've been putting my tinfoil hat on enough, but some of these strange ideas I've been thinking about, are coming to light in the actual news. Ain't good folks, ain't good at all.

      I was just reading some rather new articles last evening about how some farmers are making their own biodiesel to run their trucks and tractors right on site and the positivity. A lot of farmers are finding out that it's cheaper to buy the processing equipment than it is to buy one new tractor. This also puts the farmer in control, without relying on the government to produce power for an electric tractor.

      At the end of the day, it's insane to think that EVs or something even more dangerous like hydrogen will replace a safely fueled diesel engine.

      Three reasons I like diesel: Power, economy, and safety. Diesel does all three.
    14. Gebert
      Gebert
      What I find interesting is the difference in years stated by the DOJ and Cummins. The Cummins press release states 2013-2019 only. I would imagine teams of lawyers and accountants (for SEC purposes) reviewed the press release very carefully. A couple questions that come to mind:

      1). Why are 2020+ model years excluded from the Cummins press release?

      2). I believe this "issue" was discovered in 2019. Does this mean it was fixed from the factory for year 2020+?

      3). Assuming it was fixed from the factory for 2020+ model years and the 1,075lb-ft power increase happened in 2021, does the upcoming "fix" not result in power reduction?

      4). Myself (and I'm sure many here) started seeing emissions recall notices on social media weeks ago up to model year 2018. Why wouldn't the "fix" have gone out to all model years, including 2020+?

      I have a 2022 HO so of course I'm reading this and stating the items above in hope I won't be affected.

      Screenshot_20231226_112456_Chrome.jpg
      Diesel85 likes this.
    15. Mike Ellis
      Mike Ellis
      Dealers devastated as diesel developers dupe Da Man during demissions test by de-tuning dengine with dastardly deceptive digital dimwittery

      If Cummins had to cheat to pass emissions at the horsepower/torque levels the engines were delivered with, will the affected trucks have to be de-tuned to meet the required emissions levels for those model years? "Dear Owner - please present your truck to your local Ram dealer by COB Jan 31, 2024 for a free software update that will have no effect on your truck's performance except for a completely unnoticeable reduction of 50 hp and 250 lb-ft of torque in some driving conditions."
      Units, brucejohnson and Diesel85 like this.
    16. Tarheel Cummins 428
      Tarheel Cummins 428
      Is there a single Ram Cummins owner who believes anyone at Ram or FCE will pay $1.00 of this fine, I think not!
      Everyone of us knows Full-Well who will pay these fines… it will all be paid by us, the loyal Ram Cummins owners!
      Maybe we should all sue to get new trucks, at least that way we would get something for how much all this is going to cost us!
      Tarheel
      JRone and Diesel85 like this.
    17. Ozymandias
      Ozymandias
      And who will pay the trucks then?
      Diesel85 likes this.
    18. Tuesdak
      Tuesdak
      You left off the cost of VW having to buy back the vehicles. You left off the actual small emissions numbers and cold performance shown by at least one halfway informative video posted in one of these threads. Be careful of drinking the Kool Aid Cummins blame propaganda simply because as shown with the Ecodiesel Mess The EPA can be like "Nice try on emissions there. Be a shame if we don't certify the next model year 6.7L for sale as compliant while you fight our unlimited resources over past years."

      Cummins already went first to try and meet emissions laws early without the use of DEF and their reputation suffered. I suspect it's one of the undeniable examples of "not realistic" the EPA was forced to allow the use of DEF.

      Our Government doesn't have the equipment or ability to Fully Emissions Certify a diesel engine at this time as the VW Cheat showed them. Or is this Reto-Law changing the rules after it's certified? The complaint that a catalyst isn't lasting/performing as long as required is a tough one but warranty/recall. Go ahead and explain the current emissions certification process to us and why it's not a Done Deal the day it's certified by the EPA. I am sure I would learn something if not buried alive in the paperwork presented first.

      At some point the actual EPA needs to be held responsible for allowing this kind of thing to get past them as part of their certification process. In other words you the EPA/CARB signed off on this it's a done deal not subject to retro laws. I have experienced CA's commercial vehicle Retro Laws firsthand and as a result turned down commercial hauling jobs into CA with the non-DPF diesel I had at the time.

      I suggest we demand an additional line on vehicle window stickers:
      R&D spent on emissions.
      Cost of emissions equipment.
      CAFE Tax
      Electric Vehicle Emissions credits Tax paid to Tesla, etc.

      Compare the emissions standards of old forgotten high sulfur fueled diesels to those ULSD engines of today and realize it's not just splitting hairs: It's Splitting ATOMS! From the Smoke Belching Olds 5.7L to the modern DEF DPF costing thousands per vehicle including massive R&D from the automaker and engine OEM and it still isn't good (clean) enough for some Glowing Government Report Writer.

      Some on here have suggested gasoline engines are dirtier. This is a "Divided We Fall" tactic. No doubt they are next on the Hit List with the ICE engine bans already put in place. I would say in motion, but, when ICE goes away I suspect many things will actually not be in motion.

      Meanwhile Wildfires this year alone blocked out the sun far longer than any old Olds 5.7 diesel (if you can find one that hasn't blown up) or illegally hopped up black smoke belching diesel engine ever can. In the past and present States are rewarded for this kind of forest wildfire mismanagement behavior with Disaster Area Federal Funds. Yet we are making inflation worse via the cost of shipping that takes Diesel Power via insanely strict emissions. Not just your Grocery toting RV hauling diesel affected here.

      The USA is the #1 oil producer in the world. I will say the campaign against one of our own sources of worldwide wealth has been very successful. Soon we will not be able to afford to be the world's police force and be ignored as a bankrupt example of clean emissions as our global competitors ignore and do not subject their country to the same standards. Cue excuses like 3rd world etc.
      Last edited: Dec 31, 2023
      Units, brucejohnson and Diesel85 like this.
    19. Diesel85
      Diesel85
      The way I see it, gasoline engines right now are dirtier than our emissions laden 2007.5 and higher diesel trucks. Look at the tail pipes of gas powered cars/trucks -- especially the turbo charged cars/trucks. The Ford EcoBoost 3.5l is notorious for puffing out black smoke with sooty exhaust systems, and even people complain about it on forums!

      How is it OK for a modern gasoline car/truck to have filthy, sooty, tail pipe, but our modern turbo diesel trucks aren't allowed to have that happen? Where's the EPA to deal with this? I don't see them fining Ford. (And I don't mean to bash Ford, I own one, I'm just using them as an example.)

      Speaking of wildfires. I live in Central NY (not NYC area, I'm talking Adirondacks!), and never once in my lifetime, or my parents lifetime did we ever have to deal with Canadian Wildfire smoke as we did earlier this year. Yet driving my little modern turbo diesel EcoD is actually CLEANING the wildfire smoke by sending it through the combustion processes and insanely complex exhaust after treatment filtration and actually doing the air a huge favor.

      Due to the cost of trucks (not just ours), I'm talking Class 8 trucks, there has been a lot of truckers getting out of trucking because they can't afford to upgrade or maintain their current emissions-laden truck. Or they are sick and tired of dealing with it. All the truckers I've talked to when I bring up EV trucks, it's like a very, very nasty word. I hate to say it, the harder the governments keep on pressing us to give up our diesel trucks or adding more emissions complications, the more folks are going to feel it paycheck to paycheck (more expensive for shipping!), and the slower things will get (less drivers!). Except for the rich. They will take their jet fueled Learjet to get whatever they want, right now.

      To put it in perspective: Look around your house, look at everything you got, if you got it, a diesel truck brought it! Those diesel trucks bring all your crap you want... your couches, your chairs, your clothes.. all your other crap... your house you live in... a diesel truck brought the material to your site where you are living so the framers could build it, the brick layers could lay the brick, it was all brought on a diesel truck! What do you think they did? Carry it on their back, or put it all in the trunk of their little EV when they came to work everyday??

      Governments are supposed to be there to create jobs, help people, and keep the economy going. These people in power are trying to kill jobs, put many people out of work, drag the economy down doing this. Look at the government spending... if you spent like that in your household, would you be bankrupt, would you be broke by now? Could you ask yourself for a raise? Nope, unless you are the government, they get all the raises they want.

      Again, I'm not 100% against EVs. They have a purpose for short commutes where a user doesn't want to deal with a gas/diesel engine. For where most of us live, and what we do with our vehicles, EVs will never meet that requirement. I could make the argument for as something a dumb as golf carts. Electric versus gas golf carts. They have their purpose and pros and cons.

      There's a guy on YouTube, John Stossel, he did a two part series on EVs with some PhD in battery and EV technology. Even the doctor said it's not feasible for what the government is trying to do with electrification, and eluding to how doing too much electrification can actually hurt the environment more and be a negative direction.

      Flipping back to the diesel side, all these regulations that keep hampering us from doing our jobs with our trucks efficiently is going to eventually bite them. Hopefully it doesn't get that far to actually happen.

      In any event, I've been reading a lot on all of this, even though I don't personally own a Cummins right now, I drive one for work almost every day, I like to stay up on it, because it's interesting.
      Last edited: Jan 1, 2024
      Units, Tuesdak and endoscott like this.

Share This Page