Automatic shut off of new vehicles upon idle?

[Jimmy_Russells]

You might want to try driving one. Stellantis cites a 400 millisecond restart time for the engine and I'm inclined to agree. During ESS operation, engine restarts using the MGU.

The 2019 Ram 1500 eTorque Proves That Electrification Won't Ruin Pickup Trucks

Diehard truck people: Don't worry, the Ram 1500 eTorque is not a Prius.

jalopnik.com

Subaru actually uses a second starter for the S/S system because a typical bendix starter can't mesh with a spinning flywheel in case the vehicle needs to re-start again quickly. So they use a second starter that is constantly geared to the flywheel. The re-start can be a little as .2 seconds.

 

[K.Aoi]

It's just another "solution" to what is basically a non existent problem. It most likely raises the cost of the vehicle more than you are going to save on gas.

Especially when you consider all the engineering and manufacturing time of all the parts. Plus the added complexity, assembly, and testing. Not to mention the cost of repairing it down the road after the warranty is long gone.

In my case, most everywhere I could possibly drive within the confines of my town, my car isn't going to burn a cup of gas idling. And even with people who drive in a lot of stop and go urban traffic, they would save far more if they planned their excursions more wisely, and drove a bit less by doing it.

This is just more "feel good" nonsense, to make "green people" along with the government, think we're "doing more" for the environment. A bit like banning gas stoves. Along with the whole silly EV craze that is consuming people today.

It's one thing to like all of that crap. And there is nothing wrong with liking unnecessarily complex technology..... Even if it doesn't really improve anything. Just stop trying to sell all of this junk as some type of obscure, "improvement".

I live in a fairly typical American southern sprawl-type city, in the suburbs, and work in the closer to downtown but really just more suburbs area. My commute is 10 miles each way on typical stroads/business highways. Today, it took me 35 minutes to make that drive, and literally fully half of that was spent stopped at traffic lights. That's a very not-insignificant amount of fuel saved over the course of weeks/months/years.

It's so fast on my VW and my parent's Grand Cherokee L 3.6 that by the time you move your foot from the brake to the gas the engine is already running and ready to go.

People keep saying "it'll cost a fortune to fix the starter that wears out more quickly!!!!!"

Someone, ANYONE provide me statistics demonstrating that ESS has resulted in a huge uptick in starter failures since it became more common 10 ish years ago. Because I have not seen nor heard of some huge pandemic. You can moan and groan about it and go off on crazy tangents about the edge case among edge cases (a situation where you need to immediately hit the gas and accelerate to get out of a collision where someone is rocketing toward you, AND your starter doesn't work. I mean, come on really?) but there is, as far as I can find no evidence substantiating these claims which are repeated ad-nauseum here and on other sites.

They say where there's smoke there's fire, but I can't smell or see any smoke that isn't coming out of peoples ears.

 

[Dave Sherman]

The eTorque on the 3.6 and 5.7 uses the motor/generator that's engaged to the serpentine belt for the start/stop. Starting cold I can hear the conventional starter cranking, but restarting from the auto stop there's no crank, it just bursts to life. Does it add complexity? No doubt. What vehicle today isn't complex? So far, my only gripe with the start/stop is the heater cools off noticeably while it's stopped at a light. I wouldn't doubt the air conditioning has the opposite problem, but there's also a little button on the dash that can alleviate that.

My concern about longevity isn't so much the motor, since I suspect its brushless and there are no gears to engage as in the conventional starter. I'm more concerned about the 48 volt battery that runs it. I gather it's a $2000 repair if it dies, but I don't know if it can be swapped like the 12 volt battery (possible DIY if you can buy a replacement) or if you need some calibration or initialization to take place.

 

[nthach]

Now if they bought a Chevy volt they’d hate EVs and start stop less.

As much as I hate start stop in a “regular” vehicle because it always seems jerky (at least in a newer Equinox I’ve driven) the Volt has a fantastic, seamless, smooth implementation of start stop.

That’s because the Volt is not really an EV, not really a full hybrid(most Lexus hybrid or even a Camry/RAV4 Hybrid or a HiHy can spin the ICE up smoothly except a Prius/Corolla Hybrid/CT200h which aren’t refined on a NVH level - being Corolla based). It’s a range-extended EV, like a BMW i3 REx but with an actual engine and bigger fuel tank unlike the scooter engine in the i3. In this case, a Volt can drive in pure EV mode in town, but fire up the gas engine on the freeway or to “top off” the batteries. Different than a Toyota hybrid where the gas engine is still the main motive source.

 

[dogememe]

That’s because the Volt is not really an EV, not really a full hybrid(most Lexus hybrid or even a Camry/RAV4 Hybrid or a HiHy can spin the ICE up smoothly except a Prius/Corolla Hybrid/CT200h which aren’t refined on a NVH level - being Corolla based). It’s a range-extended EV, like a BMW i3 REx but with an actual engine and bigger fuel tank unlike the scooter engine in the i3. In this case, a Volt can drive in pure EV mode in town, but fire up the gas engine on the freeway or to “top off” the batteries. Different than a Toyota hybrid where the gas engine is still the main motive source.

I understand, I own one Your explanation is good. I simply think they did such a great job isolating the engine starting and stopping other manufacturers should learn from it.

 

[PimTac]

Subaru actually uses a second starter for the S/S system because a typical bendix starter can't mesh with a spinning flywheel in case the vehicle needs to re-start again quickly. So they use a second starter that is constantly geared to the flywheel. The re-start can be a little as .2 seconds.

Some systems don’t even use the starter.

 

[Falcon_LS]

This is certainly a "to each, their own" situation, but I absolutely despise auto stop/start for a multitude of reasons. First and foremost, and this applies to any vehicle, when the ambient is over 125°F and I'm stuck in traffic, the very last thing I care about is fuel economy. In fact, it never crosses my mind at all because I desperately rely on air conditioning. I would much rather the effort that goes into designing such a useless feature go towards a beefed up cooling system that will actually be beneficial, instead of straining both the already heat-soaked starter and battery.

Secondly, I love my big cars and the next vehicle to join the fleet will be of the Suburban/Yukon XL variety. Taking sheer size into consideration, this is not a vehicle one would purchase with fuel economy in mind. If it gets 18 MPG combined, it gets 18 MPG combined and no matter the technology, you cannot defy the laws of physics; a 6.2L V8 is a 6.2L V8 in a 6,000 lb vehicle. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction; all you have to do is look at the circus show caused by AFM/DFM or whatever alphabet soup the General chooses to trademark their cylinder deactivation technology. If the vehicle can be special ordered with an AFM/DFM delete, even at additional cost, that is most certainly what I will opt for. If it can be ordered with an auto stop/start delete, then that box will be ticked as well. The electronic parking brake, on the other hand, is rather unfortunate and brings back sour memories with a B6 Passat that was in the family.

 

[CKN]

This is certainly a "to each, their own" situation, but I absolutely despise auto stop/start for a multitude of reasons. First and foremost, and this applies to any vehicle, when the ambient is over 125°F and I'm stuck in traffic, the very last thing I care about is fuel economy. In fact, it never crosses my mind at all because I desperately rely on air conditioning. I would much rather the effort that goes into designing such a useless feature go towards a beefed up cooling system that will actually be beneficial, instead of straining both the already heat-soaked starter and battery.

Secondly, I love my big cars and the next vehicle to join the fleet will be of the Suburban/Yukon XL variety. Taking sheer size into consideration, this is not a vehicle one would purchase with fuel economy in mind. If it gets 18 MPG combined, it gets 18 MPG combined and no matter the technology, you cannot defy the laws of physics; a 6.2L V8 is a 6.2L V8 in a 6,000 lb vehicle. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction; all you have to do is look at the circus show caused by AFM/DFM or whatever alphabet soup the General chooses to trademark their cylinder deactivation technology. If the vehicle can be special ordered with an AFM/DFM delete, even at additional cost, that is most certainly what I will opt for. If it can be ordered with an auto stop/start delete, then that box will be ticked as well. The electronic parking brake, on the other hand, is rather unfortunate and brings back sour memories with a B6 Passat that was in the family.

Your air conditioner will function for a duration of a stoplight-
Your air conditioning, accessories will still run

But using a stop/start system doesn’t mean you’ll be unable to stay comfortable on a hot or cold day. Thanks to modern air conditioning compressors -- which run off electricity rather than a mechanical drive from the car’s engine -- many stop/start equipped cars will continue to provide cool air for a short while even if the engine is turned off.

Once the engine has reached operating temperature, heating shouldn't be a problem either, with the residual heat in the car’s engine and cooling system enough to keep the cabin warm in all but the most extreme of cold.

In a similar vein, accessories like lights, power windows, and on-board entertainment systems will continue to function, even with the engine switched off.

Five Things You Need To Know About Stop/Start Systems

You’re probably already familiar with the effect that a hybrid drivetrain has on fuel economy, but now one of the key concepts of a hybrid drivetrain -- the ability for the engine to turn off and on automatically at stoplights -- is being introduced in conventional gasoline-engined cars. Called...

www.greencarreports.com

 

[missingcurlybracket]

Your air conditioner will function for a duration of a stoplight-
Your air conditioning, accessories will still run

But using a stop/start system doesn’t mean you’ll be unable to stay comfortable on a hot or cold day. Thanks to modern air conditioning compressors -- which run off electricity rather than a mechanical drive from the car’s engine -- many stop/start equipped cars will continue to provide cool air for a short while even if the engine is turned off.

Once the engine has reached operating temperature, heating shouldn't be a problem either, with the residual heat in the car’s engine and cooling system enough to keep the cabin warm in all but the most extreme of cold.

In a similar vein, accessories like lights, power windows, and on-board entertainment systems will continue to function, even with the engine switched off.

Five Things You Need To Know About Stop/Start Systems

You’re probably already familiar with the effect that a hybrid drivetrain has on fuel economy, but now one of the key concepts of a hybrid drivetrain -- the ability for the engine to turn off and on automatically at stoplights -- is being introduced in conventional gasoline-engined cars. Called...

www.greencarreports.com

That is very vehicle-specific, if the compressor is still belt-driven it won’t be compressing if the engine stops. Sometimes you get programming that triggers a restart of cabin temperature increases by some amount but again it’ll vary widely.

 

[The Critic]

Your air conditioner will function for a duration of a stoplight-
Your air conditioning, accessories will still run

But using a stop/start system doesn’t mean you’ll be unable to stay comfortable on a hot or cold day. Thanks to modern air conditioning compressors -- which run off electricity rather than a mechanical drive from the car’s engine -- many stop/start equipped cars will continue to provide cool air for a short while even if the engine is turned off.

Once the engine has reached operating temperature, heating shouldn't be a problem either, with the residual heat in the car’s engine and cooling system enough to keep the cabin warm in all but the most extreme of cold.

In a similar vein, accessories like lights, power windows, and on-board entertainment systems will continue to function, even with the engine switched off.

Five Things You Need To Know About Stop/Start Systems

You’re probably already familiar with the effect that a hybrid drivetrain has on fuel economy, but now one of the key concepts of a hybrid drivetrain -- the ability for the engine to turn off and on automatically at stoplights -- is being introduced in conventional gasoline-engined cars. Called...

www.greencarreports.com

Very few ESS applications use a high voltage A/C compressor. Your A/C compressor is often off when the vehicle is at a stoplight, but the blower will still run.

 

[2heeldrive]

What little $$ saved by stalling the engine at every stop is erased by the increased cost of maintenance. Starters, batteries, engines, etc are all going to wear at an increased rate. In some cars, these components are built stronger to handle the increased load... but that increases the cost of the car (and the cost to replace the component), negating any savings from fuel. Thankfully, it can be deactivated in some cars.

It's not about saving you money. It's all about meeting the CAFE standard.

 

[CKN]

What little $$ saved by stalling the engine at every stop is erased by the increased cost of maintenance. Starters, batteries, engines, etc are all going to wear at an increased rate. In some cars, these components are built stronger to handle the increased load... but that increases the cost of the car (and the cost to replace the component), negating any savings from fuel. Thankfully, it can be deactivated in some cars.

It's not about saving you money. It's all about meeting the CAFE standard.

It will save fuel-and create less pollution. A motor not running pollutes less and uses less fuel than a motor that IS RUNNING. There is no argument there.

The best case study for increased maintenance/costs is the Ford F150. The start/stop system has been around for about a decade-and none of the concern items you mentioned has turned out to be the case. And the volume of that vehicle sold is massive. The starter is built to handle the load. IT IS NOT A CONVENTIONAL STARTER. It is not treated like a cold start. Your point(s) is again more Internet nonsense that isn't true.

 

[leadcounsel]

It will save fuel-and create less pollution. A motor not running pollutes less and uses less fuel than a motor that IS RUNNING. There is no argument there.

This is the false economy "tail pipe pollution" argument. There's no doubt that the stop/start feature must require most costs, more parts, possibly a different 2nd battery, possibly a longevity reduction in some parts, etc.

Let's take the costs. Let's say a vehicle costs $500 with this feature, than without. The buyer, then, might have to work a separate 2nd job for a few extra weeks, to pay for this. Should we not factor his extra commuting, his extra use of hot water for extra showers, and the macro-economic and energy impacts of earning and paying for that added feature?

How about if this feature adds 1% parts, equipment, to the design. All those parts have to be harvested from raw materials and energy, designed, built, requisitioned, shipped, and installed. Shall we not factor all those costs? How about if it does need replacement sooner? What of those environmental and economic costs?

What if 1 car fails to start at an intersection, and due to this it causes a fatal accident and the destruction of 2 vehicles, that otherwise could have been avoided if the car were running and the vehicle could move out of the way of a negligent driver and otherwise avoid an accident. This isn't fiction, similar high tech devices designed to lower emissions (such as self driving EVs) contribute to accidents all the time. So what of those economic and environmental costs?

People really should understand the totality of economic environmental decisions, rather than just the tailpipe arguments.

 

[CKN]

This is the false economy "tail pipe pollution" argument. There's no doubt that the stop/start feature must require most costs, more parts, possibly a different 2nd battery, possibly a longevity reduction in some parts, etc.

Let's take the costs. Let's say a vehicle costs $500 with this feature, than without. The buyer, then, might have to work a separate 2nd job for a few extra weeks, to pay for this. Should we not factor his extra commuting, his extra use of hot water for extra showers, and the macro-economic and energy impacts of earning and paying for that added feature?

How about if this feature adds 1% parts, equipment, to the design. All those parts have to be harvested from raw materials and energy, designed, built, requisitioned, shipped, and installed. Shall we not factor all those costs? How about if it does need replacement sooner? What of those environmental and economic costs?

What if 1 car fails to start at an intersection, and due to this it causes a fatal accident and the destruction of 2 vehicles, that otherwise could have been avoided if the car were running and the vehicle could move out of the way of a negligent driver and otherwise avoid an accident. This isn't fiction, similar high tech devices designed to lower emissions (such as self driving EVs) contribute to accidents all the time. So what of those economic and environmental costs?

People really should understand the totality of economic environmental decisions, rather than just the tailpipe arguments.

Respectfully- your post is all "How about" and " What ifs".Not good! Come back with " real world" not " what ifs".

 

[leadcounsel]

Respectfully- your post is all "How about" and " What ifs".Not good! Come back with " real world" not " what ifs".

So in your view, if a company builds and delivers a car, no pollution has occurred. Got it.

 

[userfriendly]

This is the false economy "tail pipe pollution" argument. There's no doubt that the stop/start feature must require most costs, more parts, possibly a different 2nd battery, possibly a longevity reduction in some parts, etc.

Let's take the costs. Let's say a vehicle costs $500 with this feature, than without. The buyer, then, might have to work a separate 2nd job for a few extra weeks, to pay for this. Should we not factor his extra commuting, his extra use of hot water for extra showers, and the macro-economic and energy impacts of earning and paying for that added feature?

How about if this feature adds 1% parts, equipment, to the design. All those parts have to be harvested from raw materials and energy, designed, built, requisitioned, shipped, and installed. Shall we not factor all those costs? How about if it does need replacement sooner? What of those environmental and economic costs?

What if 1 car fails to start at an intersection, and due to this it causes a fatal accident and the destruction of 2 vehicles, that otherwise could have been avoided if the car were running and the vehicle could move out of the way of a negligent driver and otherwise avoid an accident. This isn't fiction, similar high tech devices designed to lower emissions (such as self driving EVs) contribute to accidents all the time. So what of those economic and environmental costs?

People really should understand the totality of economic environmental decisions, rather than just the tailpipe arguments.

You forgot to add the cost of CAFE testing, the fuel used in the testing, the extra employee hours and government employees whose sole job it is to fine or reward CAFE credits. Those government employees should be raking asphalt, cleaning up after weather events or removing the excess fuel in forests instead.

Canada put a carbon tax on sales tax, because of the carbon footprint of collecting tax.

 

[missingcurlybracket]

So in your view, if a company builds and delivers a car, no pollution has occurred. Got it.

lmao what? That’s not what they’re saying and you know it.

Your post was genuinely speculation at best. Yes, some your concerns are in the realm of possibility, but are they significant enough to outweigh fuel savings? Are stop/start systems statistically creating unsafe turns and creating more rear ending? Would they be attributable to a significant chunk of those types of accidents?

you’re noting “self driving EVs” as a danger and I agree but the powertrain makes no difference here. Self-driving is not an emissions device.

If you want to talk about the hypothetical scenario where an engine idling is the difference between being rear ended or not, you should be pushing for EV’s or hybrids then - the instant peak torque will handily outperform any idling gas engine!

Stop/start has been around for a while, we aren’t seeing “second batteries”, widespread starter failure - in fact, it’s the additional computer gadgets, driver assists, features pushing pricier AGM batteries forward, not stop/start. My Sorento specs an AGM battery most likely due to features found in upper trims but has no stop/start functionality.

 

[PF52]

This is the false economy "tail pipe pollution" argument. There's no doubt that the stop/start feature must require most costs, more parts, possibly a different 2nd battery, possibly a longevity reduction in some parts, etc.

Let's take the costs. Let's say a vehicle costs $500 with this feature, than without. The buyer, then, might have to work a separate 2nd job for a few extra weeks, to pay for this. Should we not factor his extra commuting, his extra use of hot water for extra showers, and the macro-economic and energy impacts of earning and paying for that added feature?

How about if this feature adds 1% parts, equipment, to the design. All those parts have to be harvested from raw materials and energy, designed, built, requisitioned, shipped, and installed. Shall we not factor all those costs? How about if it does need replacement sooner? What of those environmental and economic costs?

What if 1 car fails to start at an intersection, and due to this it causes a fatal accident and the destruction of 2 vehicles, that otherwise could have been avoided if the car were running and the vehicle could move out of the way of a negligent driver and otherwise avoid an accident. This isn't fiction, similar high tech devices designed to lower emissions (such as self driving EVs) contribute to accidents all the time. So what of those economic and environmental costs?

People really should understand the totality of economic environmental decisions, rather than just the tailpipe arguments.

We wouldn't be having ANY of those problems if we were still living in caves! Fred Flintstone did just fine in his foot-powered "car".

 

[CKN]

We wouldn't be having ANY of those problems if we were still living in caves! Fred Flintstone did just fine in his foot-powered "car".

Not only that...how many would not pay (as an option) for safety features that make cars inherently safer if they had the option not to do so on this forum? PLENTY!

 

[leadcounsel]

lmao what? That’s not what they’re saying and you know it.

Your post was genuinely speculation at best. Yes, some your concerns are in the realm of possibility, but are they significant enough to outweigh fuel savings?

I've read pages of experts who state any perceived savings are trivial. Actual driving habits will probably save more fuel, than the expensive complex start/stop. There are also pages of youtubers who instruct on how to turn off the annoying feature. There are also pages and pages on the internet on how to FIX these broken systems. Which, would be moot if not forced on consumers.

Costs. Requires either a more robust starter, and/or a 2nd battery, alternator, and/or other complex expensive parts. They aren't giving these away for free. There is additional wear on starting parts and bearings so there is going to be higher costs either up front or on maintenance, or both. The typical savings might be around 3% fuel, which is nothing over the life of the vehicle and that can be achieved by better driving habits and proper air in tires. That's around 1mpg better for a typical commuter car. No thanks. Not for the added costs and complexities.

Start/Stop creates layers and layers of added problems. Starters, extra batteries, heat that needs cooling so radiator redesigns, and so forth. More complexity = more costs and more than can fail.

None of that is speculative.

This video self professed car expert states there is practically no real world savings.

Just more CAFE propaganda and book-cooking schemes by auto makers.

Then our favorite Scottie Kilmer, advises against it.
* His main takeaway as a mechanic is he is now seeing expensive repair bills that cost far more than any fuel money saved.

Here's a class action lawsuit against Ford for the faulty start/stop in F150s. I suppose that's not going to cost anyone any money, nor anyone got hurt, etc. It's all just free, right??!! Riiiggghhhtttt???? "It’s been reported that the Ford F-150’s auto start/stop feature – which is supposed to turn off the truck’s engine when stopped and turn it back on when the driver releases the brake pedal – sometimes fails to work properly and can cause the vehicle to stall, shut off or completely lose power."

Attorneys Look into Ford F-150 Auto Start/Stop Stalling Issues

Attorneys are investigating whether a class action can be filed over reported stalling issues with certain Ford F-150 vehicles equipped with auto start/stop.

www.classaction.org

BMW has irate customers over faulty start/stop systems.

2022 BMW X5 Problems and Top Complaints - Is Your Car A Lemon?

Reported issues for the 2022 BMW X5 include powertrain and brake problems. Is your car a lemon? Lemberg Law can help you get justice!

lemberglaw.com

Or Honda - more than 200 reports of the start/stop feature failing and stranding drivers because it won't restart. That could be extremely dangerous in busy intersections, dangerous parts of a city, rural areas with no reception, etc. Probably an expensive recall involved.

Honda Pilot investigated for engines that won't restart - Autoblog

Honda and NHTSA are investigating an issue that can lead to vehicles stalling and failing to restart.

www.autoblog.com

But yeah, I imagining all this. Good grief. Only time until someone gets blasted at an intersection b/c their vehicle won't restart.