Originally Posted by ard
I've got to say, if I was BMW I'd say- let's just wait until the government comes at us and forces us- any acknowledgement of the problem will increase the odds of a government action.
But I'd still pony up $100 into the kitty to retain someone, and mine doesn't have the problem.
I thought the reason it was US only is that only the US emissions checks secondardy air flow and, if it fails, sets an emissions light. It might be happened OUS but just not setting to code? I prolly have this wrong...
Yeah, but I'm thinking when a company is presented with a complaint, evidence, and a cohort of potential plaintiffs, they might just as well conclude the best way to deal with it might be to keep it out of the courts. Agreeing to cover a problem that does not affect the large majority of vehicles might not be a stretch, and it would nullify any Fed risk. As compared with costly recall campaigns, this issue might not be such a big apple.
My worry remains what happens as we all approach 100k mile and beyond.
We really need a cost-effective way of addressing this.
You're right about the non-US cars, though I believe this is really just our speculation here on the board. I don't think we know for a fact why non-US cars don't have a problem. My introduction of this in the above responses was a clumsy attempt to try and get at a possible solution for high-mileage folks. We probably don't have much of a leg to stand on, but I'm fantasizing about disabling the air flow monitoring on high mileage cars in which the secondary emissions system has already demonstratably failed. To do this, we might benefit from some knowledge of what to disable/re-program, ala non-US cars.
It would be interesting to have a legal opinion on when does the car-owners responsibility for upkeep of the manufacturers emissions systems reasonably end
? One would think that the responsibility would be defined by state-level requirements. If your car fails an emissions test, you are responsible to get the car in condition to pass the test. In Illinois, we don't have a cold-start emission requirement. So is it reasonable that I should pay $8,000 to repair a cold-start emission system in Illinois on an aging car (ie, beyond the FCAA period of 80,000 miles)?
If we are NOT responsible for upkeep of an emissions system that does not apply to our state requirements, it seems to me that it should not be illegal to disable an air sensor on an already broken system. The bottom line is that the car still passes the required emissions tests. Thus, if we can demonstrate that the system has already failed, and that the system does not apply to our state's emissions requirements, BMW should be able to disable the sensor