wemay
Site Donor 2023
Just conspicuous way of intersecting more tired, obnoxious, childish thick vs thin bunk in a thread that didn't ask for it.
Turbo shaft lubrication in auto start/stop systems
- Thread starter yagciogullari
- Start date
Right you are Pim but he rarely responds to criticism. Weird guy.
Sounds like the same deal as a VW VR6 engine - the auxiliary water pump is there to prevent hotspots from happening.
even the transmissions in a auto start/stop model are different - a electric oil pump or hydraulic accumulator is used to keep the oil circuits primed. That way, it can get into gear in milliseconds from a stop.
Last edited:
dnewton3
Staff member
In summary, if I understand the comments correctly ...
Auto s/s systems:
- add more cost due to having more components like extra cooling pumps, more transmission components, bigger starters, etc
- add more complexity in systems integration
- add more cost at time of replacement
- add more confusion for the average home-garage mechanic because there's more to troubleshoot when something goes wrong
I understand and agree these systems work well; they achieve their intended task. For vehicles which are driven every day in long operational patterns (deliveries, boring commutes in slow traffic, etc), I can understand where companies want the maximization of fuel economy and they frankly care little about the mindset of the driver, nor the long-term costs because they're likely to get rid of the vehicle before these systems have major failures.
But there's also things down the road which make some of us weary, including me. I'm ol' skool; I subscribe to the KISS theory (keep is simple, stupid).
And there's me, personally, who has worked from home since the pandemic hit, and I have put a whopping 2k miles on my car in 14 months (mostly highway driving which means very few stop/start opportunities). How much fuel would it save me to have these expensive, integrated systems in place when the car is sitting in the garage most of the time? How much fuel does it save me when 90% of my miles are extended steady-state operation?
Then there's the inconvenience issues. I've been in cars with auto s/s. When it's hot outside and humid, and having the a/c shut down, it's downright annoying and uncomfortable. Sure, you can defeat the auto s/s system by turning it off. But doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose???
Like many other things in life, auto s/s makes sense in some situations, but not all situations. Reminds me of the conversations surrounding EVs. They, too, have a good application in some situations, but not all situations.
Auto s/s is a band-aide for a wound I don't have. It doesn't save me any significant amount of money. It adds to my purchase costs and long-term complexity issues at repair time. It probably makes sense for some folks, and that's fine for them. But not for me.
Auto s/s systems:
- add more cost due to having more components like extra cooling pumps, more transmission components, bigger starters, etc
- add more complexity in systems integration
- add more cost at time of replacement
- add more confusion for the average home-garage mechanic because there's more to troubleshoot when something goes wrong
I understand and agree these systems work well; they achieve their intended task. For vehicles which are driven every day in long operational patterns (deliveries, boring commutes in slow traffic, etc), I can understand where companies want the maximization of fuel economy and they frankly care little about the mindset of the driver, nor the long-term costs because they're likely to get rid of the vehicle before these systems have major failures.
But there's also things down the road which make some of us weary, including me. I'm ol' skool; I subscribe to the KISS theory (keep is simple, stupid).
And there's me, personally, who has worked from home since the pandemic hit, and I have put a whopping 2k miles on my car in 14 months (mostly highway driving which means very few stop/start opportunities). How much fuel would it save me to have these expensive, integrated systems in place when the car is sitting in the garage most of the time? How much fuel does it save me when 90% of my miles are extended steady-state operation?
Then there's the inconvenience issues. I've been in cars with auto s/s. When it's hot outside and humid, and having the a/c shut down, it's downright annoying and uncomfortable. Sure, you can defeat the auto s/s system by turning it off. But doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose???
Like many other things in life, auto s/s makes sense in some situations, but not all situations. Reminds me of the conversations surrounding EVs. They, too, have a good application in some situations, but not all situations.
Auto s/s is a band-aide for a wound I don't have. It doesn't save me any significant amount of money. It adds to my purchase costs and long-term complexity issues at repair time. It probably makes sense for some folks, and that's fine for them. But not for me.
If I could counter your points:
The additional components do nothing but help increase the car's reliability, especially if you're so against S/S that you turn it off. Some components may be more robust. The added complexity is little more than some extra coding.
The intended task of S/S is to reduce the fuel wasted by sitting, and that's all it is. If S/S activates, you were wasting fuel. Perhaps some MFGs implement it poorly, but I have never owned a S/S car that left me hot or humid - they all facilitate passenger comfort by monitoring inside/outside temps.
The goal of S/S is not to necessarily save the owner money (even though it does) - it is to save the emissions generated when millions upon millions of cars sit idly, wasting fuel.
The additional components do nothing but help increase the car's reliability, especially if you're so against S/S that you turn it off. Some components may be more robust. The added complexity is little more than some extra coding.
The intended task of S/S is to reduce the fuel wasted by sitting, and that's all it is. If S/S activates, you were wasting fuel. Perhaps some MFGs implement it poorly, but I have never owned a S/S car that left me hot or humid - they all facilitate passenger comfort by monitoring inside/outside temps.
The goal of S/S is not to necessarily save the owner money (even though it does) - it is to save the emissions generated when millions upon millions of cars sit idly, wasting fuel.
My son and his wife have a Stinger twin turbo, which has start/stop. Riding around with him I asked if he ever used the s/s defeat button on the console, he said "Why? I like the silence at red lights, and it saves a bit of fuel".
I told him I would use that defeat button every time I got in the car, and we then agreed to disagree.
I told him I would use that defeat button every time I got in the car, and we then agreed to disagree.
What is your reasoning? Do you think the additional 20 or 30 starts a day might cause additional wear compared to 2 to 4 ?
What is wearing?
I am not disagreeing with you here, I just want to see if my thoughts are the same as yours
-Ken
What is your reasoning? Do you think the additional 20 or 30 starts a day might cause additional wear compared to 2 to 4 ?
What is wearing?
I am not disagreeing with you here, I just want to see if my thoughts are the same as yours
-Ken
#1 for me is that when waiting for a break in oncoming traffic to turn left, I worry that a delay in acceleration might result in an accident. I guess I don't completely trust those systems in a situation like that.
#2 is that it is just plain annoying in parking lots, or if traffic is creeping along. Multiple start/stops in the space of a few minutes is annoying.
#3 for me is that I believe it does increase engine wear. I drive gently while the engine is warming up, generally try to drive smoothly, obsess (somewhat) over which oil I should use and oil change intervals, open the hood more frequently than is really necessary to 'check things over', in general a bit obsessive. So start/stop seems to me to be a step backwards in engine care.
Last edited:
I recall reading about a study Ford did in conjunction with a university (I don't recall the university's name), where engine parts were separately exposed to different types of radiation. The radiation was used to measure wear of various components. One of the findings was that there was more wear on hot starts, than on cold starts.
I probably saw that article here on BITOG, maybe someone here can recall it?
I probably saw that article here on BITOG, maybe someone here can recall it?
A 15 second delay between stopping and shutting the engine off would mostly solve this.
I agree. They should lengthen the delay before this activates.
The one thing i really hated about our Regal TourX was the auto start stop thing. It was very frustrating and i did worry about the turbo not getting oil circulation. You would have to move the shifter to the left into sport mode to keep it running at a stop. Then you would either have to shift yourself (dumb, its an automatic) or move it back to drive. Every single time. You could round up all the drops of gas it might have saved and i would have rather purchased 100x that amount to not have it.
nope.
only later generations of s&s received water cooled turbo. mostly because of oil "roasting" and turbo damage/customer complaints...
many systems are way too agressive, they activate too soon. to start a engine, you need more fuel and effort (than just shortly waiting on red light).
this defeats the purpose...
Not if you inject fuel into one cylinder and fire it in a millisecond. The computer makes sure one cylinder is ready to go by having the piston in the ideal position for this type of restart.
That is a intelligent start stop system.
I'm also not sure why starter/gens aren't making their way to more modern cars. Eliminate the flywheel starter completely.
BMW all have an electric pump that keeps coolant circulating when the engine is shut off. This isn’t the 70’s anymore.
BMW is starting to do that with a 42V starter/generator. Only used after the vehicle has warmed up though. Cold starts are still done with a traditional starter motor.
