• May 10, 2006

DaimlerChrysler is on the receiving end of some flack from Germany's own Federal Emissions Agency, which is accusing the automaker of inadequate pollution controls on the European-market Chrysler PT Cruiser.

The debate centers on the function of the PT's catalytic converter at high rates of speed. According to the agency, heavy acceleration above 72 MPH (and any acceleration in a PT at that speed probably counts as "heavy") results in excessive carbon monoxide emissions. A spokesperson for Chrysler claimed that such a scenario was not part of the emissions certification process, but the environmental agency rejects this claim and states that the pollution limits apply to any part of the drive cycle. It would seem that the agency is ignoring the fundamentals of engine management; heavy acceleration calls for fuel enrichment to avoid engine damage, and that will cause CO emissions given a sufficiently long application of wide-open throttle.

[Source: Reuters]



I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 10 Comments
      Corey Leland
      • 8 Years Ago
      http://trinitydavidcreative.blogspot.com/ IS THE CORRECT LINK FOR MICHAEL DAVID!!!! HE IS TAKING THE MUSIC WORLD BY STORM AND YOU CAN CHECK HIM OUT AT: http://trinitydavidcreative.blogspot.com/ BE OUR GUEST!
      • 8 Years Ago
      Chances that there will also be chances of littering, from all the parts that will be falling off at that excessive, untested rate of speed.

      Speed kills. Save Lives... Drive a PT Cruiser.
      • 8 Years Ago
      I don't know whether the Germans are complaining about the gas (benzine/petrol) or diesel version of the car sold there, but I can say this.

      When I lived in the UK about 14 years ago, the Europeans and Brits finally started to get around to adding catalytic convertors to gasoline cars (and they bitch at us Americans for being polluters - we've had catalysts since the autumn of 1974).

      When bozos in their brand new fancy catalyst cars would blow by me on the Motorways in the UK going 90 or more, we'd be "treated" to the most God-awful stench.

      The catalysts couldn't handle the load. It's a simple matter of not having enough platinum/palladium/rhodium to do the job.

      If the Euros want to go fast, they need to pay another 1000 Euros or 500 Pounds for bigger catalysts, I think.

      • 8 Years Ago
      Yeah... see, they need to make it look like the bloated apparatus of our federal environment agency actually does important work and justifies the millions of euros pumped into it... and all the jobs of the people working there ;)
      • 8 Years Ago
      My wife has one of these. We drove it from Michigan to Arkansas and back last summer. We includes three kids. I didn't think this would work out well.

      Turns out the PT does very well on the highway. Good driving position and seats for driving straight for hours at a time. Plenty of room in the back--41 inches of rear legroom.

      Acceleration is adequate for highway use. I would want more power if doing a lot of passing on 55 MPH two-lanes, though.
      • 8 Years Ago
      One more reason NOT to drive a PT Cruiser at speeds you wouldn't drive a typical American car.
      The European Cruiser has a 2.2 liter diesel engine in some models, I wonder which engine fails the high speed portion of the German pollution tests?
      • 8 Years Ago
      One thing that I notice is missing:
      NUMBERS.

      Give us numbers for the PT, give us numbers for other vehicles in its class. What are the numbers for vehicles in other classes?

      Which engine are they talking about?

      Bert... WTF are you talking about? Tuck in your skirt, your bias is showing.
      • 8 Years Ago
      "It would seem that the agency is ignoring the fundamentals of engine management; heavy acceleration calls for fuel enrichment to avoid engine damage, and that will cause CO emissions given a sufficiently long application of wide-open throttle."

      The fact that they're singling out the PT Cruiser would seem to imply that other cars don't have this problem, so I think that chalking it up to an emissions testing agency that doesn't understand how emissions are produced is a bit daft.
      • 8 Years Ago
      The problem is Chrysler and their cheapness.

      It is a BS excuse that the engine can't run at stoichometric ratio at full load. Engines can. Their oil/cooling would probably fail at the thermal load.


      Does emission testing take into account all the oil chrysler engines burn? I am sick of one quart every 2000 miles.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Actually, from what I read this is a general problem with the German certification process. In Germany, emissions are only checked until 120kph (I think), and everything above that is a gray area. I read a report about VW before, and they have the same problem that the emissions go way up above 120kph (about 75mph):

      "A spokesperson for Chrysler claimed that such a scenario was not part of the emissions certification process, but the environmental agency rejects this claim and states that the pollution limits apply to any part of the drive cycle."