Stop / start engines

[Smokersmith]

24 minutes ago, strimmer_13 said:

But pain in the *** 

Why? 

[strimmer_13]

13 minutes ago, Smokersmith said:

Why? 

Because I used to drive for hertz delivering about a half dozen different vehicles a day. After a few years it starts to annoy you every vechiles characteristic of when it wants to start stop. They are not all the same. Only one i liked was golf automatics 

[WinchesterDave]

Yep, I leave mine on. Never switch it off. Don't see the need to.. it's there for a reason and I don't notice it! 

 

Dave

[B391]

Quick exit from side road across a busy fast road.....the start delay can cause a concern if it slows your exit. That is the main reason I keep mine turned off

[Smokersmith]

35 minutes ago, strimmer_13 said:

After a few years it starts to annoy you every vechiles characteristic of when it wants to start stop. They are not all the same.

Fair enough 👍

[Hamster]

4 hours ago, B391 said:

Quick exit from side road across a busy fast road.....the start delay can cause a concern if it slows your exit. That is the main reason I keep mine turned off

Sorry but that just doesn't make sense, unless it's Raiders of the Lost Ark danger levels (in which case it's simply too risky and you should find an alternative route anyway),  stop/start is no different to a normal car. YOU are in complete control of the engine, in situations such as you describe you simply have to glance at incoming traffic and lift your foot off the brake (or engage 1st in manuals) a nano second before you intend to move. 

 

5 hours ago, ShootingEgg said:

To start the engine uses more fuel, it also uses the starter more and wears it out, so in all its not as great as some say or think. 

Both points are correct in isolation but neither is enough to prevent stop/start from being a benefit when seen in context and the overall effect it has when multiplied by millions of users per day. A warm engine re-starting with suitably beefed up starter motors does not use more fuel than it would have done had the vehicle been left to run for what can sometimes be minutes. 

Edited April 10, 2019 by Hamster

[B391]

1 minute ago, Hamster said:

Sorry but that just doesn't make sense, unless it's Raiders of the Lost Ark danger levels (in which case it's simply too risky and you should find an alternative route anyway),  stop/start is no different to a normal car. YOU are in complete control of the engine, in situations such as you describe you simply have to glance at incoming traffic and lift your foot off the brake (or engage 1st in manuals) a nano second before you intend to move. 

 

I actually agree with you and it is also probably a head thing, a nano second is a long time and I do do as you suggest, mine is an auto and I let it creep an inch or so to make sure the engine is running.  My 16 plate auto diesel takes longer to get moving after a stop than my 18 plate petrol auto.  I choose to err on the side of caution and switch the system off thus removing any doubt.......or risk however slight 

[Budice]

1 hour ago, Hamster said:

 a nano second before you intend to move. 

 

 

It probably it little longer than a nano second lol, but the engine has to restart within 120 degrees of rotation

[Hamster]

4 minutes ago, Budice said:

It probably it little longer than a nano second lol, but the engine has to restart within 120 degrees of rotation

The point is the driver has to react and prepare for the move by observing the flow of traffic, the actual time it takes for the brain to send the signal to foot and for the engine to start is not going to be the cause of an incident. 

[McSpredder]

2 hours ago, Hamster said:

A warm engine re-starting with suitably beefed up starter motors does not use more fuel than it would have done had the vehicle been left to run for what can sometimes be minutes. 

Few would dispute that leaving the engine running for minutes uses more fuel than switching it off.  

But rush hour driving in slow-moving traffic is perhaps more likely to involve stopping for just a few seconds and re-starting 20 times within one mile, using extra fuel and puffing out 20 extra-high doses of pollutants.  

[Hamster]

6 hours ago, McSpredder said:

Few would dispute that leaving the engine running for minutes uses more fuel than switching it off.  

But rush hour driving in slow-moving traffic is perhaps more likely to involve stopping for just a few seconds and re-starting 20 times within one mile, using extra fuel and puffing out 20 extra-high doses of pollutants.  

I will personally reserve judgement till I see figures for savings of fuel and pollutants versus seconds, I don't doubt that there is a "futile duration" but as I keep saying these things have to be seen in context of the overall aims and benefits. 

[lancer425]

I do not like the stop start the wife had a courtesy car had it a couple of months when her car was hit when parked by a bus. ( wrote it off)

Car was a Mercedes B180 diesel a 14 plate had blue motion or blue something it said in the wing had selectable stop start, if you were moving up trafic at a junction it would be stopping all the time was unnerving  and if you had to aim for a gap in busy traffic waiting for it to wake up (START! ) was hopeless.so turned it off .

This Mercedes was only a 1700 / 1800cc 110 BHP but man did it drink diesel was hard to better 47MPG uphill down hill or down a mine shaft it liked to drink.  Due to this played around with stop start on or off and it seemed to make MPG drop with the stop start on, so it stayed off for this reason too.

Horrible car that B180 run flat low profile tyres harsh ride **** tacky interior rubbish IMHO.

[Farmboy91]

I get 65/70 miles more to  a tank using the stop start in my golf. 

Don't see the issue with having it on, it's like second nature now. 

 

[team tractor]

2 hours ago, lancer425 said:

I do not like the stop start the wife had a courtesy car had it a couple of months when her car was hit when parked by a bus. ( wrote it off)

Car was a Mercedes B180 diesel a 14 plate had blue motion or blue something it said in the wing had selectable stop start, if you were moving up trafic at a junction it would be stopping all the time was unnerving  and if you had to aim for a gap in busy traffic waiting for it to wake up (START! ) was hopeless.so turned it off .

This Mercedes was only a 1700 / 1800cc 110 BHP but man did it drink diesel was hard to better 47MPG uphill down hill or down a mine shaft it liked to drink.  Due to this played around with stop start on or off and it seemed to make MPG drop with the stop start on, so it stayed off for this reason too.

Horrible car that B180 run flat low profile tyres harsh ride **** tacky interior rubbish IMHO.

47 mpg .. I’d love that 

[norfolk dumpling]

I work for a rental company and always turn it off. Some of these systems are ok but other carp - particularly some French cars where the hesitancy seems excessive and makes me feel uncomfortable. A couple of buddies with Ford Focus have had to have new batteries which were ahead of normal usage and twice the cost - the reason given being stop start!

[lancer425]

6 hours ago, team tractor said:

47 mpg .. I’d love that 

Modern diesels will do this with ease if driven right.  For a 1.7 litre relatively small body diesel it was not good.  bi used to get 45  MPG out of my old X trail on the scotland runs My volvo XC70 2.4 4x4 will do 45 on a run i dont think that Mercedes was very good at all. 

[team tractor]

30 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

Modern diesels will do this with ease if driven right.  For a 1.7 litre relatively small body diesel it was not good.  bi used to get 45  MPG out of my old X trail on the scotland runs My volvo XC70 2.4 4x4 will do 45 on a run i dont think that Mercedes was very good at all. 

I average 30-32 in my year old van 

[Walker570]

My Landie often does it but I have to turn the key again that's one reason I have the tick over a bit higher also for off road work.  I think I would have it switched off permanently  like as I don't fully trust a mechanical/electrical thingy to start again when I'm stuck in a line of traffic.

Edited April 11, 2019 by Walker570

[lancer425]

12 minutes ago, team tractor said:

I average 30-32 in my year old van 

Mercedes B180 2014 1.7 sport would be an improvement on that then.

[team tractor]

9 hours ago, lancer425 said:

Mercedes B180 2014 1.7 sport would be an improvement on that then.

The c63 bi turbo might be better  

[Vince Green]

On ‎09‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 20:31, Westward said:

Over the years I've replaced or refurbed a number of starter motors and/or the pinions and even ring gears. The more they're used the more wear and tear and the sooner they'll need to be repaired or replaced. My car doesn't have the option to turn it off permanently so I try to remember to press the cancel button as soon as I start up.

I don't find it annoying in use but I doubt the saving in fuel comes anywhere near meeting the cost of a new starter motor.

this^^^^^ it knackers the starter motor and eventually the ring gear which is an engine out job costing four figures on most modern cars.

That's if you can find a mechanic capable/willing to do the replacement these days 

[Vince Green]

12 hours ago, team tractor said:

I average 30-32 in my year old van 

My 11 year old 1.6 HDI van does 55-60 mpg on its regular run to Wales, or now Cornwall. That's why I have kept it so long.

I can get 30mpg out of my 5.5 litre V8 Mercedes SL55 on the same run if I don't misbehave. They have a very high top gear, engine is barely over tickover at 70 .

Edited April 12, 2019 by Vince Green

[Westward]

1 hour ago, Vince Green said:

this^^^^^ it knackers the starter motor and eventually the ring gear which is an engine out job costing four figures on most modern cars.

That's if you can find a mechanic capable/willing to do the replacement these days 

Indeed. No one would replace a ring gear these days they'd just bung on a new flywheel.

It's all very well hoping the makers beef up their starter motors but it will always be a high stress, high wear unit and it's lifespan is determined by how many times the engine is started.

My sons and their partners buy new cars on 3 year PLPs. Therefore the cars are always in warranty and whilst a failed starter might be inconvenient it gets fixed for free. I buy cars outright at 2-3 years old and I reserve the right to cancel stop/start on economic grounds, even if it means a little extra pollution.

As I said above, if the road planners wanted to, they could cut down hugely on the number of times vehicles have to stop and that would be of vastly greater environmental benefit than turning off an engine for 20 seconds.

[bornfree]

Ian not sure which manufacture does it but at least one uses a combined starter and alternator driven by a heavy duty belt. No ring gear.

[Vince Green]

4 hours ago, Westward said:

My sons and their partners buy new cars on 3 year PLPs. Therefore the cars are always in warranty and whilst a failed starter might be inconvenient it gets fixed for free. 

That is not a get out of jail free arrangement. The risk increases the depreciation rate and the lease reflects it. Getting a new car on a PLP is crazy expensive unless you are offsetting it against a higher rate of income tax.  My step daughter does it and I just get too cross to talk to her about it.