Nissan Confesses to Falsified Testing Data for Japanese Vehicles

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky
We’re committed to finding, researching, and recommending the best products. We earn commissions from purchases you make using links in our articles. Learn more here
nissan confesses to falsified testing data for japanese vehicles

After Volkswagen’s diesel emissions scandal came under public scrutiny, numerous industry analysts prophesied it would not be an isolated incident. Cheating had been done in the past, and would likely continue into the future. In fact, numerous experts claimed every major automotive manufacturer probably engaged in illicit behavior to some degree. With so many laws and employees who may be interested in shirking them, it’s bound to happen time and time again.

On Monday, Nissan Motor Co. admitted it improperly measured exhaust emissions and fuel economy for 19 vehicle models sold in Japan. Late last year, Nissan and Subaru both confessed that they had allowed uncertified technicians to conduct finial vehicle inspections. Initially, the issue seemed like a harmless oversight, but in some cases the failing went unnoticed for decades, resulting in falsified data as a way to cut corners. Both Mitsubishi Motors and Suzuki admitted in 2016 that they exaggerated the fuel economy of their vehicles by cheating on tests.

While Germany is currently the nation under the most scrutiny for underhanded automotive action, Japan is no stranger to industrial misdeeds. However, before we start licking the rest of the industry’s boots, let’s remind ourselves that practically every large automaker has been accused of (or caught) breaking the rules over the past decade.

Tampering has simply become a bigger issue in Japan than initially believed, tarnishing the region’s rather enviable reputation. According to Reuters, Nissan said it found that sample test environments for emissions and fuel economy in final vehicle inspections at most of its factories in Japan were not in line with domestic standards.

“This is a deep and serious issue for our company,” COO Yasuhiro Yamauchi told reporters in a meeting. “We realize that our compliance awareness remains lacking.”

Nissan intends to conduct an internal investigation to determine the cause, which it expects will take at least a month to compete. It’s highly similar to the rhetoric following the realization that it failed to adhere to the proper final inspection process, ultimately leading to the recall of 1.2 million vehicles.

It was the earlier investigation that led to the realization that vehicle information had been fabricated. During voluntary compliance checks, roughly 2,200 sample tests performed at six plants producing Nissan vehicles yielded 1,200 examples of falsified data at five locations — which makes for a pretty horrendous scorecard.

The company previously noted that final inspections had overstated mileage data. While this was initially presumed to be a way to streamline the process or the result of laziness, it was later suspected that supervisors pressured some employees to make fuel economy estimates appear more favorable.

Nissan later discovered incidents where vehicle driving speeds and durations, along with external temperatures, were not in line with Japanese emissions testing regulations. Likewise, the applicable testing equipment had not been properly calibrated. While this doesn’t guarantee intentional tampering, it is highly suspicious when compounded.

Based on the information presently available, the tampering incidents date back to 2013 and are claimed to involve only 10 Nissan employees. But Yamauchi said it was entirely possible that older data may reveal the problem goes back further.

The automaker has been very careful to point out that these issues do not affect automobiles manufactured outside of Japan, nor do they impact vehicle safety — something we’re inclined to believe. While Japan mandates that final inspection procedures be the domain of officially sanctioned experts, other regions are not subjected to it. Still, it represents a significant failing at Nissan.

Cutting corners is just bad practice, regardless of the company or product, as it can allow difficult-to-spot faults to slip through unnoticed. Perhaps something like an airbag inflator that’s reliant on unstable chemicals and ultimately proves extremely dangerous to customers. While that’s a less pertinent example, every time an automaker is caught bungling something, you begin to wonder where else mistakes may have been made.

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

Consumer advocate tracking industry trends, regulation, and the bitter-sweet nature of modern automotive tech. Research focused and gut driven.

More by Matt Posky

Join the conversation
  • TW5 TW5 on Jul 09, 2018

    Cheating is the inevitable consequence of companies caught between the pincers of government regulation and consumer demand. Governments are effectively mandating that the price of vehicles rise, while the public tends to be price sensitive. Margins decline and cheating is inevitable, particularly when fuel economy targets are pie-in-the-sky political propaganda. Cheating a fuel economy tests is about as "egregious" as screen-peeking during a multiplayer first-person-shooter. Fuel efficiency regulations have reached maximum marginal benefit. Fuel economy regulations function best as a fail safe. We learned this in the United States after decades of leaving them unchanged, during which time, most fleets evolved to maximize customer utility while achieving the minimum fuel economy requirement. The market will probably always function that way, absent of extreme oil price volatility on the upside. Create some sort of incentives for the market to create fuel efficient technologies so they are present when the regulatory minimums need to be raised, but don't outlaw vehicles and turn fuel efficiency regs into political treatises and virtue-signaling games. Cheating will be the result. Just like all of those sales people living paycheck to paycheck with unserviceable debt, simply to maintain the appearance of success.

    • See 4 previous
    • Sub-600 Sub-600 on Jul 09, 2018

      @Art Vandelay flagged for incessant complaining

  • Tassos Unlike Tim, I don't use this space as a wastebasket for ANYTHING BUT a proper used car.If you seriously need a car AND you are as destitute as Tim's finds imply, HERE IS A PROPER ONE FOR YOUR NEEDS:You can probably get it for only $4k, WITH Leather, Factory Navigation, plenty of room and a V6. even considered getting it myself as an extra reliable car.
  • Jeff Of all the EV trucks I like the Rivian the best but I am still years away if ever from buying an EV.
  • Kwik_Shift I definitely like the looks of the newest 300s over the Chargers.
  • SCE to AUX "Should car companies shack up with tech giants in order to produce legible infotainment systems and the like? Or should they go it alone?"Great question(s).The River Rouge days are gone, where Ford produced whole cars out of raw materials entering the plant at the other end. Nearly everything is outsourced these days - sometimes well, sometimes disastrously.But the problem with infotainment systems is that they are integrated with the car's operation. VW has delayed entire products for issues with infotainment.For me, the question boils down to a contractual arrangement - who owns and maintains the code forever? Since more and more of the car's function is tied to the infotainment system, I'd argue that the car mfr needs to own it - especially the larger ones.Do mfrs really want to share intellectual property with Huawei just to fast-track some code they've managed themselves in the past?
  • Kwi65728132 I always did like the styling of the 300C and it was on my short list for a new (to me) rear wheel drive, naturally aspirated V8 luxury sedan but I found a Hyundai Equus that was better optioned than any 300C I could find and for several grand less.