Cummins Fined $1.6B for Diesel Defeat Devices in 630K RAM Trucks
Cummins’ $1.6 billion settlement over “defeat devices” in hundreds of thousands of Ram diesel pickups has reignited scrutiny of how automakers cheat emissions rules and what penalties actually deter corporate misconduct. Commenters debate whether scandals like this and Volkswagen’s have truly damaged brand loyalty, with some arguing consumers largely ignore emissions issues while others say trust and market share are eroding. The thread also broadens into concerns about air pollution, coal-rolling culture, weak enforcement, and whether current diesel standards are technologically realistic or simply invite widespread cheating.
Brand reputation and consumer response
- Some argue VW, Cummins and similar brands have “destroyed” their reputations through systemic fraud; others say sales and market share (especially VW Group in Europe) show public largely doesn’t care.
- Data cited: VW brand market share has fallen modestly in US and EU, but VW Group remains one of the largest global manufacturers.
- Multiple diesel truck owners say this scandal will personally change their purchasing behavior; others say most of the core market either doesn’t care or even sees cheating as “giving customers what they want.”
- Several note that Ram/Cummins trucks still hold value very well and that buyers often prioritize power, durability, and towing over emissions.
Technical nature and purpose of defeat devices
- Consensus: defeat devices let engines run “clean” during tests and “dirty” in real-world conditions, yielding better performance, fuel economy, or durability by avoiding the energy/complexity cost of full NOx control.
- Past VW behavior is referenced (test-detection logic), but Cummins’ specific method remains unclear; commenters request details and speculate it’s software-based.
- One participant familiar with truck electronics says all vehicles they see have functioning DEF/particulate systems and can’t yet reconcile that with the allegations.
Rolling coal and emissions tampering culture
- “Rolling coal” is explained as intentional diesel modification to emit large soot clouds, often used to target cyclists, pedestrians, or hybrid drivers.
- Widely condemned as anti-environmental and sometimes characterized as politically motivated harassment; some urge treating it as assault.
- Others note emissions deletes are often done for cost, reliability, and fuel-economy reasons once warranties expire, not just for show.
Health, environment, and regulation
- Several connect cheating and tampering to broader air-pollution harms; examples given of severe smog and corrupt or lax enforcement in various countries.
- Others argue modern diesel controls are overly complex, expensive, and degrade fuel economy and power, suggesting regulations overshoot what diesel tech can realistically meet.
Legal accountability, penalties, and justice
- Many view the ~$1.6–2B settlement as a mild “cost of doing business” compared to profits; anger that no executives face jail and the company calls it “no bad faith” and “no wrongdoing.”
- Some call for harsher corporate and individual liability (including shareholders in extreme proposals), stronger enforcement against modification shops, or even vehicle seizure.
- Others worry about overreach (e.g., civil asset forfeiture, criminalizing owners) and argue for more targeted or proportionate penalties.
Unclear / open issues
- Exact nature of Cummins’ defeat device, how it was implemented, and how much customers versus the manufacturer are at fault remain unresolved in the discussion.