Well crap, the A7 has had it for a while now along with probably all the other candidates for the next Mrs Fife's car. I guess start/stop that leaves the A/C on will become another thing to shop around for.
Start/Stop engines
11,499 Views |
93 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by suburban cowboy
MILs jag has it as does FILs Audi, in CA. Not sure if BILs BMW has it, but I think there it's a state reg. That all new cars have to have it.
It sucks, but of those 3 he jag is the worst about lurching. Plus MIL is a pretty terrible driver so it doesn't help.
It sucks, but of those 3 he jag is the worst about lurching. Plus MIL is a pretty terrible driver so it doesn't help.
This is just a lot of unnecessary strain on the car for little to no gain in fuel economy. Thanks again big government.
How much of a strain is it, really? We fully expect our two ton brick to hurtle down the road at 80 MPH for hours on end, but starting the engine is too much strain? I think engineers can crack this challenge in a reliable way. Engines are smaller displacement and engineered much better than decades ago, not as much required to turn these modern engines over when compared to cars of the 70's. Studies have shown a 5-7% gain in economy for commuting type drives (obviously more start/stop so I would take this as best case gain). I guess it is accurate to say it is a "little" gain, but it's measurable and when added up across millions of cars it makes a difference in consumption.TSUAggie said:
This is just a lot of unnecessary strain on the car for little to no gain in fuel economy. Thanks again big government.
Again, I am not a fan, and don't plan to own one if avoidable, but the only legit complaint I could think of was if the A/C was impacted - can't have that here in Texas. Otherwise my dislike is all based on "i'm not used to it".
Take a paper clip and use it normally for a week.
Take another paper clip out of the same box and bend it in half 10 times in one day every day for a week.
Let me know when the paper clip breaks.
It is a GROSS over simplification of starting an engine, but it's the same idea.
Take another paper clip out of the same box and bend it in half 10 times in one day every day for a week.
Let me know when the paper clip breaks.
It is a GROSS over simplification of starting an engine, but it's the same idea.
The "feature" is easily disabled in most of the higher end cars. As someone said earlier, BMW has an Auto start/stop on/off button right below the start button. Push it once and it's disabled until you push it again or switch to eco driving mode. It's a complete non-issue, and if my memory serves from a test drive Audi is similar.
OnlyForNow said:
MILs jag has it as does FILs Audi, in CA. Not sure if BILs BMW has it, but I think there it's a state reg. That all new cars have to have it.
It sucks, but of those 3 he jag is the worst about lurching. Plus MIL is a pretty terrible driver so it doesn't help.
BMW's 3 and 5 series have had it for some time, and that's in Texas.
I also think they have to use it and/or can't disable it; but I'm not sure on that.
That's a gross understatement.OnlyForNow said:
It is a GROSS over simplification
Again - we have multiple moving mechanical parts and controlled explosions spinning the driveshaft along at thousands of RPM's for 100,000 miles - but cant figure out a way to start the car without snapping something? What is the bending object in the starting scenario - solenoid spring? It's an electric motor spinning the engine, something that spins much faster once running, up. And that's assuming we just stick to past technology, I am sure tweaks and improvements have been made and will continue to be made to make this work. It's been around in fairly heavy volumes up to 8-10 years in other world areas, surely there are cars out there hitting 100K miles with this technology - I haven't looked, but are there reports of multiple starter failures? Other components?
OnlyForNow said:
I also think they have to use it and/or can't disable it; but I'm not sure on that.
Setup should be as FTaco mentioned. There's traditionally been a button either above/below the push button start to disable it. Mercedes has a similar setup.
Ok you're right.
I'm just pointing out that it's an unnecessary burden on parts that in the past didn't have the same number of interaction sequences in them.
I'm sure they did tests on these and the starters and what not will last through millions of on/offs, but do we need it?
I'm just pointing out that it's an unnecessary burden on parts that in the past didn't have the same number of interaction sequences in them.
I'm sure they did tests on these and the starters and what not will last through millions of on/offs, but do we need it?
Need it as much as any number of other "improvements" - heads up displays, turbos, iceboxes, cylinder deactivation. None needed, cars did their jobs without them, but they improve efficiency or ergonomics or performance and also introduce new parts that can fail. I am all for making cars as efficient as possible for future generations, so it seems like this fits in even if I don't want to own one myself. I'm old enough to consider driving fun, and cars cool toys, but I can see how self drive cars, and maybe to a lesser extent electric motors, will just continue to push cars to be more of a tool to future generations. It gets you around, but doesn't need to be fun. So if you can't rev your v8 when stopped at a light, no big deal. But I'll be an avoider or late, forced adopter.OnlyForNow said:
Ok you're right.
I'm just pointing out that it's an unnecessary burden on parts that in the past didn't have the same number of interaction sequences in them.
I'm sure they did tests on these and the starters and what not will last through millions of on/offs, but do we need it?
OnlyForNow said:
Ok you're right.
I'm just pointing out that it's an unnecessary burden on parts that in the past didn't have the same number of interaction sequences in them.
I'm sure they did tests on these and the starters and what not will last through millions of on/offs, but do we need it?
Besides the starter, the alternator is used by some as a motor to spin it up without engaging gear teeth. There is also the direct injection and fire last known cylinder after top dead center as previously mentioned.
if all the people who aren't into cars had it and it caused the car and consumables to last longer think about the reduction in waste from both manufacturing it and operating it.
And the whole save money thing and breathe. clean air bullet points too
I just hope they aren't the cause of me sitting for 30 seconds at a green light before moving behind a sea of paper plate hyundais
Our 2016 Honda Pilot has it and I override it most of the time I drive it (rib's car). As other's have said, override it EVERY TIME YOU START THE CAR.
That's the most annoying this about it...the override doesn't carry over from start to start.
It makes me nervous when in a turning lane or turning left on an un-protected green light. I'll always override it in those cases b/c I don't want it cutting out right as I'm ready to punch it to get through the intersection
That's the most annoying this about it...the override doesn't carry over from start to start.
It makes me nervous when in a turning lane or turning left on an un-protected green light. I'll always override it in those cases b/c I don't want it cutting out right as I'm ready to punch it to get through the intersection
There's now a plug and play dongle (OBD port) for the V6 Jeeps (non-wranglers) that eliminates the need to hit the button every drive.
There might be one for the vehicles your interested in.
There might be one for the vehicles your interested in.
Have it on my '16 F150, bugged me for about a week and don't even notice it now.
My buddy's AMG GTS has this and it is loud as **** when it starts back up. The only way to disable it is by putting it in track mode, which makes the ride unbearable on the street.
No Bueno if you have a car with the newer DCT.Obi Wan Ginobili said:TSUAggie said:
Do they not give the option to disable it?
My 2015 F150 has start/stop. There is a button above the Nav screen that will turn it off, but you have to remember to press it every single time you start the engine. So, if you are running a bunch of errands, and you stop at 4-5 places, that's 4-5 times you have to get back in your car, start it up, and remember to turn the function off.
Personally, I hate the function. The A/C stays on, but it turns the fan down. On 100 degree days, you start to feel it pretty quick. When it just starts to get uncomfortable, it automatically turns back on and the A/C cranks back up. It's obnoxious. Call it millennial whining, but my personal preference is for the engine/AC/radio/etc to just stay on and at the setting I picked.
There are two ways around it, and neither is very appealing. The first is to "lightly" sit on the brake. The auto start/stop won't activate if you don't push the brake all the way down. There is a sweet spot where the truck will stay put, but you're not pressing down on it hard enough to activate the function.
The other option is to pull the dash apart and get it disabled. I don't know **** about how to do it, and I'm not about to pay someone a bunch of money to possibly screw up electrical work inside the dash.
You understand that starting/stopping is when engines see the most wear, right?Complete Idiot said:How much of a strain is it, really? We fully expect our two ton brick to hurtle down the road at 80 MPH for hours on end, but starting the engine is too much strain? I think engineers can crack this challenge in a reliable way. Engines are smaller displacement and engineered much better than decades ago, not as much required to turn these modern engines over when compared to cars of the 70's. Studies have shown a 5-7% gain in economy for commuting type drives (obviously more start/stop so I would take this as best case gain). I guess it is accurate to say it is a "little" gain, but it's measurable and when added up across millions of cars it makes a difference in consumption.TSUAggie said:
This is just a lot of unnecessary strain on the car for little to no gain in fuel economy. Thanks again big government.
Again, I am not a fan, and don't plan to own one if avoidable, but the only legit complaint I could think of was if the A/C was impacted - can't have that here in Texas. Otherwise my dislike is all based on "i'm not used to it".
agracer said:You understand that starting/stopping is when engines see the most wear, right?Complete Idiot said:How much of a strain is it, really? We fully expect our two ton brick to hurtle down the road at 80 MPH for hours on end, but starting the engine is too much strain? I think engineers can crack this challenge in a reliable way. Engines are smaller displacement and engineered much better than decades ago, not as much required to turn these modern engines over when compared to cars of the 70's. Studies have shown a 5-7% gain in economy for commuting type drives (obviously more start/stop so I would take this as best case gain). I guess it is accurate to say it is a "little" gain, but it's measurable and when added up across millions of cars it makes a difference in consumption.TSUAggie said:
This is just a lot of unnecessary strain on the car for little to no gain in fuel economy. Thanks again big government.
Again, I am not a fan, and don't plan to own one if avoidable, but the only legit complaint I could think of was if the A/C was impacted - can't have that here in Texas. Otherwise my dislike is all based on "i'm not used to it".
Where does this wear occur in the engine, and why is more wear occuring during the few seconds spent starting compared to running at a thousand plus rpms for minutes/hours? Are you talking about cold starts - which aren't really impacted by start/stop, they occur when engine is warm - or do you think all starts are equal?
oil not flowing = friction = wear...even when hot if its off for 10-15s, there is a lot of wear on start up. As much as cold, no. But more than when it's running and not stopped.Complete Idiot said:agracer said:You understand that starting/stopping is when engines see the most wear, right?Complete Idiot said:How much of a strain is it, really? We fully expect our two ton brick to hurtle down the road at 80 MPH for hours on end, but starting the engine is too much strain? I think engineers can crack this challenge in a reliable way. Engines are smaller displacement and engineered much better than decades ago, not as much required to turn these modern engines over when compared to cars of the 70's. Studies have shown a 5-7% gain in economy for commuting type drives (obviously more start/stop so I would take this as best case gain). I guess it is accurate to say it is a "little" gain, but it's measurable and when added up across millions of cars it makes a difference in consumption.TSUAggie said:
This is just a lot of unnecessary strain on the car for little to no gain in fuel economy. Thanks again big government.
Again, I am not a fan, and don't plan to own one if avoidable, but the only legit complaint I could think of was if the A/C was impacted - can't have that here in Texas. Otherwise my dislike is all based on "i'm not used to it".
Where does this wear occur in the engine, and why is more wear occuring during the few seconds spent starting compared to running at a thousand plus rpms for minutes/hours? Are you talking about cold starts - which aren't really impacted by start/stop, they occur when engine is warm - or do you think all starts are equal?
Engines that run for long periods (like large trucks) show less wear than your average daily driver on the liners, bearings, cams, etc..
Engines have changed a lot, as have oils. Restrictions to oil flow within the block greatly decreased, ability to flow in oils improved. Computer won't spark unless oil pressure reaches certain psi and you'll notice these engines start nearly instantaneously, unlike old engines. Maybe you think this is an engineering challenge that can't be overcome and these engines we'll all fail below 200k miles. Won't be the first time people think we can't engineer something based on past data when start stop wasn't a goal. We'll see.
I generally trust the engineers designing the engines than any slap-d's on this thread. I'm guessing start/stop doesn't make much of a diff on engine wear. If it does, you're wife will be making you buy her a new car before then anyway so it doesn't matter.
Eh, we have a whole history of not discovering long-term issues until later. That goes for cars, medication, pesticides, and many, many other products we consume. So we'll see how this one holds up.
Engines go far longer than 90% of users ever "need(?). Even a fractional reduction in longevity will impact few users.
That said, I can't imagine the fuel savings make a sh*t of difference either.
That said, I can't imagine the fuel savings make a sh*t of difference either.
I hate these cars also. Sometimes there is a perfkrmance or sport mode that turns that BS off.Ol Jock 99 said:I haven't found it yet in the rental. The linked article suggested that at least some do.TSUAggie said:
Do they not give the option to disable it?
Engineers also came up with two piece spark plugs...RK said:
I generally trust the engineers designing the engines than any slap-d's on this thread. I'm guessing start/stop doesn't make much of a diff on engine wear. If it does, you're wife will be making you buy her a new car before then anyway so it doesn't matter.
RK said:
I generally trust the engineers designing the engines than any slap-d's on this thread. I'm guessing start/stop doesn't make much of a diff on engine wear. If it does, you're wife will be making you buy her a new car before then anyway so it doesn't matter.
I don't fully trust engineers who spend all their time in a lab running tests. I trust real life applications.
RK said:
I generally trust the engineers designing the engines than any slap-d's on this thread.
Engineers that developed engines like BMW's N20 (timing chain failures) and N63 (look up the customer care that was done for these) engines? Both which had very quiet totally not a recall type of service done to them? Those same type of engineers?
I certainly wouldn't trust any of the Honda engine engineers that have been working on their F1 engine.
Which slap-d on this thread would you trust over one?
Even if it is GREAT for gas mileage and causes no undue damage to engine it's still damn annoying.RK said:
Which slap-d on this thread would you trust over one?
TXAGFAN said:Even if it is GREAT for gas mileage and causes no undue damage to engine it's still damn annoying.RK said:
Which slap-d on this thread would you trust over one?
RK may accuse you of being a slap-d for holding that opinion. Unless you are an automotive engineer.
RK
Joined:
Jul 7, 2004
Posts:
73,209
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As long as the a.c. keeps blowing cold, I don't think it would bother me. My question is, what turns the a.c. compressor when the engine is off? Does it use an electric motor?
I only shut down my truck if I'm going to be out of it for more than 10 minutes otherwise it gets too damn hot.
I only shut down my truck if I'm going to be out of it for more than 10 minutes otherwise it gets too damn hot.
Featured Stories
See All
31:49
1d ago
5.3k
Elko & Co. remain busy even during a traditional recruiting respite
by Ryan Brauninger
11:09
3h ago
1.0k
Baseball Thoughts: Inside Texas A&M's uncharacteristic series at LSU
by Ryan Brauninger
9:21
4h ago
646
Cowboy Curtis
Props to our collective. Keeping all 3 QB's was a massive win.
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
92
Orlando Ayala Cant Read
Dabo Has Brought in Zero Transfers (Yet Again)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
85
ConfidentAg
Props to our collective. Keeping all 3 QB's was a massive win.
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
32