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.
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.
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.
That's a gross understatement.OnlyForNow said:
It is a GROSS over simplification
OnlyForNow said:
I also think they have to use it and/or can't disable it; but I'm not sure on that.
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?
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".
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?
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.
RK said:
I generally trust the engineers designing the engines than any slap-d's on this thread.
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?