the swift we now drive doesn't use the starter to restart from a standstill, it uses the hybrid motor. Saves lots of potential issues.

Octy will not stop-start if it's been started within the last few minutes; it won't stop if temp is set to "hi"; it won't stop until water temp is over 60 or so. All of which indicate that a) the engine's thoroughly warmed through before it will kick in and b) if there's a demand that you have, then it will generally look after that first. 

 

If I remember correctly, one of the first production cars with it was the Lupo 3L and the A2 3L, and they were launched back in 1999. I think you'll find that there are no heightened examples of problems with starters, engine mounts or excessive engine wear, or you wouldn't be seeing them on sale for quite so much with 500000km on the clock. Doesn't mean the tech is perfect and I suspect WLTP will kill it on small city cars (as it won't make much sense).

 

 - Bret

8 minutes ago, brettikivi said:

 

Octy will not stop-start if it's been started within the last few minutes; it won't stop if temp is set to "hi";

Mine stop starts with the temp set to Hi. Being a cold-blooded wuss, its permanently on Hi and stop start still kicks in when the engine is warm enough.

2 hours ago, briskoda1 said:

 

Oh how much we rely on the web these days...

 

I find it quicker and easier than looking it up in Britannica. 

 

I did make it pretty clear that it was a google search of a few seconds and that there were dozens of results. I picked that particular one because it was near the top. 

 

And jimust because something was written by a journalist, it doesn’t automatically mean it is wrong and/or lies. 

 

1 hour ago, briskoda1 said:

Bit more reliable:

 

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fc16/33b1e2edc2acb996aa8792e2c1a607c65e7b.pdf

 

habe a look at findings and conclusion. 

 

I did have a look and read this:

 

”These findings may have implications for the use of ... start-stop engine cycles, although further work is required to establish the long term effects over vehicle lifetimes.”

 

It’s hardly damning of start-stop systems, is it?

 

^^^ The Autocar article by Jesse Crosse is 'almost an advertising article' for an Oil / Additive Producer.   But then so is so much in Autocar near to the line between information and promotion.

Just some are tagged as 'Advertising'. 

 

Edited 16 January, 20197 yr by Skoffski

Its an academc paper, its not sensationalist writing or attention grabbing (unlike journalism). The paper concluded that start-stop increases wear rate vs not. Pretty simple to understand I think. 

 

The second part of the sentence is normal for an academic paper as it says more funding is needed for research so they get more grants. 

 

 

 

Then again, If the engine is not running, its not wearing out parts either....

Kinda counteracts any marginal increase in wear from constant restarts so overall, probably not worth worrying about over the designed life of the vehicle.

11 minutes ago, briskoda1 said:

Its an academc paper, its not sensationalist writing or attention grabbing (unlike journalism). The paper concluded that start-stop increases wear rate vs not. Pretty simple to understand I think. 

 

The second part of the sentence is normal for an academic paper as it says more funding is needed for research so they get more grants. 

 

 

 

Yes it does conclude there is more wear, and I don’t think anyone here is, or has, suggested that it doesn’t cause more wear to the engine. It doesn’t, however, come to any conclusions about whether the extra wear is a problem for the modified parts. So it shows more or less diddly squat. (In fact it actually concludes there “may [be] implications” not “there are”). 

 

Journalistic articles may sometimes be attention-seeking and sensationalist, after all they’re in the business of selling copies. That doesn’t mean every piece of journalism is automatically wrong or untrue (as I previously said). 

No it won’t. That’s not the purpose of the test. Its stating wear occurs more vs non stop start. So I think we’ve concluded more wear occurs on an engine with stop start...

 

How do you modify a part so that when two contact surfaces wear more than normal are then still able to maintain the same tolerance? I’d be interested to know. 

 

I guess we’re saying they won’t? Ok - so are we then saying that as the engine will wear quicker there is a wider acceptable operating tolerance on the components over their life? Thinking about the basics of how an engine works (maintaining pressures) and how operating tolerances can impact efficiency, I would prefer to have an engine as close as possible to the tolerances of when it came out of the factory. Others may not be so fussed and that’s fine. As I said before if I was offered a choice between an engine that had gone through its life with stop start vs one that hadn’t i know which one I would choose.

 

Unlike britannica journalism does not need to prove its evidence base nor does it need to be peer reviewed. I don’t recall saying every piece of journalism is untrue just I wouldn’t use it immediately after stating ‘everything here is hearsay’ 

 

 

 

 

Hi guys,

looks like I have started a little storm  Just please don't make it personal!  We are all friends over here.

 

After reading trough all this thread what I am thinking about and what concerns I have.

Sure I don't care much if my car will last for 500 000km or 450 000km, or in matter of years it will be 20 or 17 years. Perhaps then we'll have flying cars with anti gravity engines. 

 

What is my concerns, earlier cars where made to last, so it is normal to see Audi made in nineteen's running. Now days engineers and even more guys in production is looking for about five years (or so) lifecycle of car, and don't care about longer period. They have enough head ache with ecology standarts. manufacture costs should be reduced too perhaps enough things I don't know - high pressure and it ends with many compromises. Of course any part of car can be replaced and car can be running further, but then there is question about running costs. 

Maybe I'm wrong, actually I hope I am.

 

 

 

 

I googled "stop start engines" and looked at the Wikipedia entry, quote...

 "For non-electric vehicles fuel economy gains from this technology are typically in the range of 3-10 percent, potentially as high as 12 percent.[2] In the United States, idling wastes approximately 3.9 billion gallons of gasoline per year.[3]". Look up the article for the references.

Look at it from the world's point of  view and that is a massive saving in oil and CO2 emissions. I don't think there is an argument against start/stop.

 

@Scot5

*Stopped automatically in 60 seconds.*

& in less than 60 feet from starting cold.  So the 60*oC coolant temp required for Stop / Start to function as some say is actual nonsense or maybe applies to their engine.

(but if they turn down the heating setting so not a difference between the outside temp is not 16*oC or more  Stop /start might work or the demand on the battery is not too high.)

easy enough to try in different cars in different weathers.

 

 

A lovely fresh cloudless morning, dry air & soon the sun will be out.   Time to get the Fat Mans Fat Bike out...

 

Edited 17 January, 20197 yr by Skoffski

On 16/01/2019 at 16:56, NikTheGeek said:

 

I was thinking about engine wear. When the engine is up to temp and stop/start kicks in and stops the engine, the oil drains back down and when it restarts the oil has to recirculate again. This will be one of the reasons it only kicks in when the engine is warm. But does that put extra wear on the engine? Or does the oil not drain back down for the few minutes it might be stopped?

In warm weather my SS will work almost immediately.

On 16/01/2019 at 19:13, Skoffski said:

^^^^  Best do some more research then on the Euro 6 TDI or TSI, google / search engines will be your friend.

 

eg Taken just now.

Car not turned a wheel,

Stop / Start enabled,  car / engine stone cold, just started and stop / start functions because ambient temp and heater setting are not 16*oC different.

So, you're saying that you've started the engine, released the brake pedal, pressed it again & SS has kicked in?

Yes, 

& I am also saying that you can start it and put in gear and Autohold comes on and Stop / Start can stop the engine.

Or you can go into D or S and move and brake and stop and stop / start can stop the engine.

Either press 'Stop / Start' to off and fire it up, or maybe press the A/c button, or turn up the heat setting to 22 or 23 degrees if the temp is as on the above picture.

Or just touch the accelerator or turn the steering wheel and it starts, but Stop / Start is still enabled.

Edited 17 January, 20197 yr by Skoffski

6 minutes ago, Skoffski said:

Yes, 

& I am also saying that you can start it and put in gear and Autohold comes on and Stop / Start can stop the engine.

Or you can go into D or S and move and brake and stop and stop / start can stop the engine.

Either press 'Stop / Start' to off and fire it up, or maybe press the A/c button, or turn up the heat setting to 23 degrees if the temp is as on the above picture.

Or just touch the accelerator or turn the steering wheel and it starts, but Stop / Start is still enabled.

Interesting

19 hours ago, briskoda1 said:

No it won’t. That’s not the purpose of the test. Its stating wear occurs more vs non stop start. So I think we’ve concluded more wear occurs on an engine with stop start...

That's a moot point because that wasn't ever in question. The question is, given that regular engine re-starts will cause more wear, is this a problem? As yet I have seen no evidence to support that the extra wear is a problem.

 

19 hours ago, briskoda1 said:

How do you modify a part so that when two contact surfaces wear more than normal are then still able to maintain the same tolerance? I’d be interested to know. 

By using dry lubricants for the parts, or to coat the parts. And by using oils engineered to sit on surfaces for longer, and so take longer to drain off.

 

19 hours ago, briskoda1 said:

I guess we’re saying they won’t? Ok - so are we then saying that as the engine will wear quicker there is a wider acceptable operating tolerance on the components over their life? Thinking about the basics of how an engine works (maintaining pressures) and how operating tolerances can impact efficiency, I would prefer to have an engine as close as possible to the tolerances of when it came out of the factory. Others may not be so fussed and that’s fine. As I said before if I was offered a choice between an engine that had gone through its life with stop start vs one that hadn’t i know which one I would choose.

You may be saying they won't, I'm saying I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that long term use of stop-start has any negative impact on the longevity of the engine. 

 

19 hours ago, briskoda1 said:

Unlike britannica journalism does not need to prove its evidence base nor does it need to be peer reviewed. I don’t recall saying every piece of journalism is untrue just I wouldn’t use it immediately after stating ‘everything here is hearsay’ 

Like I said, I was pretty clear that I searched very quickly and found dozens of links. I picked one, almost at random. I never claimed it was scientific fact or even rigorous. I was just pointing out that there was lots of to-ing and fro-ing without anyone doing the obvious and researching. 

Stop/start engines are designed and engineered to do just that, Stop/Start,battery,ring gear,starter motor,modern oils all engineered to cope,if the manufacturers who spent millions on research are not to be trusted there is also a disable switch which I use every time I use the car  

20 minutes ago, maffyou said:

That's a moot point because that wasn't ever in question. The question is, given that regular engine re-starts will cause more wear, is this a problem? As yet I have seen no evidence to support that the extra wear is a problem.

 

Evidence provided to show it causes wear. Original OP question:

 

“As perhaps, many people, I have few concerns about life expectancy of some parts of vehicle if started something 20 or more times per day. 

 

Maybe any comments on that?”

 

 

20 minutes ago, maffyou said:

By using dry lubricants for the parts, or to coat the parts. And by using oils engineered to sit on surfaces for longer, and so take longer to drain off.

 

Lubrication avoids wear.

 

20 minutes ago, maffyou said:

You may be saying they won't, I'm saying I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that long term use of stop-start has any negative impact on the longevity of the engine. 

 

The evidence is there to show acceleated wear happens, the evidence is there to show how an engine works You should be able to come to a conclusion?

 

Its a bit like you don’t need the world to flooe before saying climate change is happening (unless you’re Trump of course).

 

 

 

20 minutes ago, maffyou said:

Like I said, I was pretty clear that I searched very quickly and found dozens of links. I picked one, almost at random. I never claimed it was scientific fact or even rigorous. I was just pointing out that there was lots of to-ing and fro-ing without anyone doing the obvious and researching. 

 

Just pointing out that you can’t really say ‘hearsay’ and then just find a web link. You can provide a weblink and say ‘i believe what it says’! 

I think we’ll just have to live with a difference of opinion around whether we like, and use, Stop / Start in our cars - or we don’t.

 

Some do. Some don’t. While we have a button in the car, we have a choice. We ain’t voting on it.

 

Along with colour, trim, essential extras, etc, etc.

 

Next question?

22 minutes ago, BoxerBoy said:

 

 

Next question?

 

Deal or No Deal ?

On a lighter note. Has anyone with a new Octavia noticed that in a traffic queue the Stop/Start disengages if the car in front moves forward?

On 17/01/2019 at 08:02, NikTheGeek said:

Mine stop starts with the temp set to Hi. Being a cold-blooded wuss, its permanently on Hi and stop start still kicks in when the engine is warm enough.

 

Where is this setting?

7 hours ago, SkodaAsh said:

 

Where is this setting?

 

If you were in the UK, you’d know where it was 

Edited 20 January, 20197 yr by classic

On 15/01/2019 at 17:00, PetrolDave said:

Sadly those stats don't match with my 40+ years experience of car ownership. The maximum life I have ever got out of a car battery is 6 years - owned from new so I know it wasn't abused or suffered deep discharge. The vast majority of batteries have only lasted between 3 and 5 years before being unable to provide enough cold starting current for a winter start - even an AGM battery that was massively over-rated (cold climate diesel battery fitted to a petrol variant) only lasted 4 years in my other car (a Citroen C1) - which doesn't have stop-start.

Wow. You seem to have been very unfortunate. I've only ever needed to replace two batteries: My Focus needed its first battery change at 13 years old, the one in my wife's Punto lasted only 8 years because it went virtually unused for a good couple of months after a caesarian section (being a cheap Fiat may also have had something to do with it). The battery in my parents' 1984 Peugeot 505 definitely lasted longer than 6 years too - it was about 15 years old by the time they got rid of it.

12 hours ago, Rodge said:

Wow. You seem to have been very unfortunate. I've only ever needed to replace two batteries: My Focus needed its first battery change at 13 years old, the one in my wife's Punto lasted only 8 years because it went virtually unused for a good couple of months after a caesarian section (being a cheap Fiat may also have had something to do with it). The battery in my parents' 1984 Peugeot 505 definitely lasted longer than 6 years too - it was about 15 years old by the time they got rid of it.

Were those cars garaged? I've never been able to garage my cars, which may be a factor?