Cummins $1.6 billion dollar fine!!!

06 Dodge · Jan 7, 2024

Bighorn18 said:
I've seen youtube video of guy that had it done and then test drove with pulling trailer with 9,000lb tracker up grades for 150 miles and found no change in power or milage. Some think it's just a software update, but the recall states it's an "upgraded calibration".

There has been a report of this update that caused driving problems when engine cold causing the engine to run rough/stumble

Bighorn18 · Jan 7, 2024

crash68 said:
I'm sure they word it as "defeat devices" is make it sound more dramatic. As mentioned it's not a physical part it's software that running the engine/emissions.

As far as we can assume. Unfortunately the recall doesn't state how the FCA US LLC came to the determination that requires the upgraded emissions control software according to Federal and California regulations/standards.

HEMIMANN · Jan 7, 2024

That would make sense, cause as I was leaving the biz in the mid-teens, EPA was after whatever microscopic emission reductions were left - basically because they had nothing left to do and wanted to keep their jobs.

I'm serious. I saw it for a decade.

Anyway, one of the things they proposed going after in the mid-teens was cold start warmup emissions. At that time, they only regulated "steady-state" emissions, then added transient load emissions shorty thereafter. But then they wanted the minuscule amount of emissions during the 2 minute warmup period allowed. JFC

This would mean they would not allow the cold start injection timing advance for easier starting because it would make more NOx, again presuming more than the SCR reactor could reduce, but the added CO and HC could be reduced by the DOC (Diesel Oxidation Catalyst) and PMF (Particulate Matter Filter).

Just makes me ill.

crash68 · Jan 7, 2024

Bighorn18 said:
As far as we can assume. Unfortunately the recall doesn't state how the FCA US LLC came to the determination that requires the upgraded emissions control software according to Federal and California regulations/standards.

The phrasing "defeat devices" has been used to describe what multiple manufacturers and even aftermarket tuners to describe emissions programming issues.
FCA didn't come to the determination that required these upgrades, the EPA went testing production vehicles to see if they meet the standards. They even sent out follow-up testing requests to owners for the EcoDiesel after AEM update was performed. I think offer was several hundred dollars(maybe a $1000) and a loaner vehicle to use while they test your vehicle for a week, it was noted there could be upwards of 500 miles driven.

MacAttack65 · Jan 8, 2024

Oh No! I Can’t Register My Ram HD Cummins Diesel Without Dealing with This Emissions Recall... Pt.2

( https://www.allTFL.com ) Check out our new spot to find ALL our TFLstudios content, from news to videos and our podcasts! Oh No - I Can’t Register my Ram H...

youtu.be

Fake-Account27 · Jan 9, 2024

Bighorn18 said:
Got the 67A recall letter couple days ago. Here's my concern. Cummins 1.6 billion fine alleges Cummins installed "types of devices to cheat federal environmental laws". Defeat devices are designed to "bypass, defeat, or render inoperative emissions controls such as emission sensors and onboard computers. So what does the 67A emission recall have to do with the alleged types of installation of defeat devices? It may just be the timing of the 67A emissions "PCM" update that people are thinking it's related to the Cummins 1.6 billion fine. If not, then the next question is what is coming later as far as mandates to removing said defeat devices? I saw on YouTube video of the guy that test drove and pulling his tractor on trailer after he had the 67A emissions recall done which only updated the PCM software and he had no change in truck performance of any kind. California residence must comply or will not be able to re-register their trucks. It's the only state so far I am aware of that has implemented such mandate. I suspect in order keep any vehicle warrantee good, one must comply with the 67A recall for emission update in order to show proper maintenance. My warrantee is over anyways so right now I'm on the fence about doing it, especially if there seems to be no change or effect on performance, until I hear more on how it affects others and what other mandates and or recalls may be coming. Besides, DEQ testing for registration in my town is exempt for all Heavy Duty Diesel trucks or GVWR > 8,500, so there is really no need for me to comply with the 67A emissions recall.

I find it somewhat hard to believe that the update has no effect on performance, if that were the case why did they not do it to start. There has to be a tradeoff somewhere.

Regardless, I agree with what you have said. I have no issue getting the update and I want to do my part to help the environment, but I also do not want the truck to flag an emissions code and leave me on the side of the road in a year either. I will wait a year and see if there is any negative news about the update out there.

06 Dodge · Jan 9, 2024

My self the last place I will/would go to get any type of reliable information is You Tube, I trust YT about much as someone who claims they can pee into a 100 MPH wind and not get any on them

Docwagon1776 · Jan 10, 2024

Fake-Account27 said:
I find it somewhat hard to believe that the update has no effect on performance, if that were the case why did they not do it to start. There has to be a tradeoff somewhere.

Understand this is a guess, but I'll explain my reasoning. I bet it's related to cold starts and initial operation. The allegation is NOx emissions were out of compliance. NOx emissions are, by far, highest when the engine is cold. It's entirely possible the new coding leaves "at temperature" operation completely untouched but modifies the start and warm up period.

Given it was a settlement and not a court case, I don't know that we'll ever know for sure, but I think it's a solid possibility.

BossHogg · Jan 10, 2024

Docwagon1776 said:
Understand this is a guess, but I'll explain my reasoning. I bet it's related to cold starts and initial operation. The allegation is NOx emissions were out of compliance. NOx emissions are, by far, highest when the engine is cold. It's entirely possible the new coding leaves "at temperature" operation completely untouched but modifies the start and warm up period.

Given it was a settlement and not a court case, I don't know that we'll ever know for sure, but I think it's a solid possibility.

There are a few YT videos making it around that theorize the issue is with a cold engine but nothing authoritative.

It seems to me RAM/Cummins should come out and offer an explanation of what the change is/does. It doesn't have to be technically drenched verbiage but at least give us owners a sense of what to expect or not to expect with our trucks as we use them. Their silence is what keeps many from getting the recall done, myself included.

I've got a 2015 rock-solid, reliable, and well-performing RAM Cummins combination that is out of warranty coverage. I will not expose my vehicle to anything I can't understand. What if there is a long-term issue with the update and it causes unintentional issue(s) I can't afford to repair? I can only guess others may be pondering the same.

nlambert182 · Jan 10, 2024

BossHogg said:
There are a few YT videos making it around that theorize the issue is with a cold engine but nothing authoritative.

It seems to me RAM/Cummins should come out and offer an explanation of what the change is/does. It doesn't have to be technically drenched verbiage but at least give us owners a sense of what to expect or not to expect with our trucks as we use them. Their silence is what keeps many from getting the recall done, myself included.

I've got a 2015 rock-solid, reliable, and well-performing RAM Cummins combination that is out of warranty coverage. I will not expose my vehicle to anything I can't understand. What if there is a long-term issue with the update and it causes unintentional issue(s) I can't afford to repair? I can only guess others may be pondering the same.

Spot on. My motto - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Docwagon1776 · Jan 10, 2024

BossHogg said:
There are a few YT videos making it around that theorize the issue is with a cold engine but nothing authoritative.

It seems to me RAM/Cummins should come out and offer an explanation of what the change is/does. It doesn't have to be technically drenched verbiage but at least give us owners a sense of what to expect or not to expect with our trucks as we use them. Their silence is what keeps many from getting the recall done, myself included.

Maybe they should, but I highly doubt they do. Neither care if you do the recall or not. Profit motive would rather you didn't, since recall work is unpaid. Remember Cummins settled but did not admit any wrong doing. It doesn't benefit them in the slightest to bring any more attention to it, to admit what the issue was with the old coding, etc.

If it went to court. Since it's a settlement, we won't. Which is almost certainly a large part of why a settlement in the first place.

HEMIMANN · Jan 10, 2024

Just think about whether you ever plan to sell the vehicle rather than run it into the ground. Likely you have laws that prevent resale without all recall work performed.

Jus' saying.

BossHogg · Jan 11, 2024

HEMIMANN said:
Just think about whether you ever plan to sell the vehicle rather than run it into the ground. Likely you have laws that prevent resale without all recall work performed.

Jus' saying.

Initially, I was planing on replacing the 2015 with a 2023, which is when the 8-year MaxCare ran out. Inflation and the MSRPs of a new tow vehicle made that dream unreachable. Looks like I'm going to drive the 2015 until one of us gives out.

jejb · Jan 11, 2024

Some more official information was released yesterday. Looks like only the 13-19's actually get recalled.

United States and California Announce Diesel Engine Manufacturer Cummins Inc. Agrees to Pay a Record $1.675 Billion Civil Penalty in Vehicle Test Cheating Settlement

The Justice Department, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), California Air Resources Board (CARB) and California Attorney General’s Office released the details of a proposed settlement with diesel engine maker Cummins Inc. for alleged violations of the Clean Air Act and California law. Beyond...

www.justice.gov

https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/cummins-settlement-nationwide-recall-program-overview

tacomak22 · Jan 11, 2024

X interesting to read that … Cummins will offer an extended warranty on parts … for the recall ,

It’s buried in that latest release

Also - it’s clearly bs US emissions only because trucks are good to go if they were original Canada imports and stay there but as soon as you cross that imaginary line with a Canadian truck for export the truck is eligible lol

lpennock · Jan 11, 2024

Not surprising. The Recall is to meet US EPA requirements and the US EPA has no jurisdiction in Canada.

HEMIMANN · Jan 11, 2024

It still doesn't explicitly state what the recall is. Just some mealy mouthed wording around software and hardware.
Nobody's admitting anything publicly.
Consumer be damned, per usual.

18CrewDually · Jan 11, 2024

HEMIMANN said:
It still doesn't explicitly state what the recall is. Just some mealy mouthed wording around software and hardware.
Nobody's admitting anything publicly.
Consumer be damned, per usual.

The totality of all the clues given in the FAQ section of the article and elsewhere, point to higher NoX levels due to the PCM isn't taking into consideration and treating it with DEF & SCR event activation. It's not clear "when" these high levels were taking place. I get the impression on a cold engine .
It's all too new yet but I'd expect to see increase in DEF after the "update" if you so volunteer. Their are folks monitoring DEF usage since the update but I haven't see any reports yet.

HEMIMANN · Jan 11, 2024

18CrewDually said:
The totality of all the clues given in the FAQ section of the article and elsewhere, point to higher NoX levels due to the PCM isn't taking into consideration and treating it with DEF & SCR event activation. It's not clear "when" these high levels were taking place. I get the impression on a cold engine .
It's all too new yet but I'd expect to see increase in DEF after the "update" if you so volunteer. Their are folks monitoring DEF usage since the update but I haven't see any reports yet.

Yup - I read the same, esp. since I was with Cummins during their 1st EPA consent decree in the late 90's for the exact same thing. Back then, it was called "STC" = Step Timing Control, meaning there were only a couple of fuel injection timing settings.

Same deal - when sensors told ECM engine was running on-highway, injection timing was advanced to normal, producing normal NOx. When engine rpm varied often, it sent signal to back off timing, reducing NOx, power, and mileage.

EPA claimed they intended full time, Cummins claim EPA stated reduced NOx only in urban areas. Cummins signed a consent decree with EPA then, too, paid a fine, and admitted no culpuability.

This was the N14 truck engine.

Notably, we haven't heard anything about the modern truck engine, whatever they call it today - was the ISX15. It has the same architecture as the pickup truck B engine. Why would they defeat NOx limit on pickups and not semi engines? Makes no sense to me.

06 Dodge · Jan 11, 2024

Here is one report about the 67a recall and its not all roses, { note not word for word but you get what he's talking about} ( noticed since getting it is that it has some rough idle spells when the engine is cold, it didn't have before, I've noticed that lifting off of the throttle at slow speeds mostly when it's cold, truck's forward momentum just absolutely dies, like driving into sand or something, where before it would glide an I'm not going fast enough for the e-brake to engage.)

Cummins $1.6 billion dollar fine!!!

Senior Member

Junior Member

Senior Member

ACME product engineer

Junior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Military

Junior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Forum statistics

Share this page