i sometimes let the car idle for 45 mins after getting back, to allow my daughter a nap. in what ways could this be bad for the car ? not worried about fuel consumption. Kodiaq RS 

At 46 minutes the car will start to smoke and catch fire 

It it's a TDI, then potentially DPF problems.

I can't think it does a TSI any good, but I have no info on whether GPFs can be clogged up by extended idling.

I get the logic that:-

Getting kiddo to sleep for an extra 45 min > possibility of car trouble that someone else is going to fix

I remember those days...

2 hours ago, chrisluciofg said:

in what ways could this be bad for the car ?

 

You'll be doing your kid a lot more good in the long run if you stop polluting the atmosphere with exhaust emissions just so she can get a nap now.

 

And if she gets so used to only napping whilst the car engine is running, you're potentially storing up trouble for yourself later on.

Should be able to sleep just as well with windows half open and engine off.

You don’t have to ruin the environment for her.

 

How about carrying her to her bed and settling her down, what are you some lazy parent that doesn’t like settling your own child down.

 

And as a parent (daughter now 19), you have to do those tough weeks of settling at some stage, and will be lot longer and harder if you leave it until they are older.

 

4 hours ago, chrisluciofg said:

i sometimes let the car idle for 45 mins after getting back, to allow my daughter a nap. in what ways could this be bad for the car ? not worried about fuel consumption. Kodiaq RS 

Is global warming passing you by over there ? How do you breathe with your head so far down in the sand ??

5 hours ago, chrisluciofg said:

in what ways could this be bad for the car ?

Engine bore wash, overheating, strain on a modern charge system that probably doesn't run the alternator at idle, risk of theft...

I’m assuming you’re talking about a young child in a car seat if they’re sleeping and you’re too scared to wake them. In which case, as well as damaging the environment you’re also risking damaging their spine if you leave them in a car seat for extended periods. Better to get them out and let them sleep somewhere more suitable:

 

https://www.leedsth.nhs.uk/a-z-of-services/leeds-maternity-care/news/2017/08/18/useful-advice-on-baby-seats

I'd be surprised if extended idling causes damage to the engine.

However if the DPF does go into regen mode then the revs will rise and fuel pumped into the catalyst to raise the temperature to over 400 deg C to burn off the accumulated carbon.

There may may well be a smell in the cabin and if you have parked on dry grass then there is the risk of fire from the hot exhaust.

 

May sound spectacularly alarmist but it happened to a BMW diesel police car here in Australia. They had stopped a speeding car and left their engine running having pulled over off the road while they 'interviewed' the speedster and then looked back to see their A$150k car in flames and eventually gutted.

 

I tend to agree that what you are doing sounds hardly best parenting practice. Then again I was useless at it but my wife was brilliant at bringing up our two  

Suggest you try out an alternative sleeping technique. 45 mins of spewing out emissions are not helping the environment either. 

From the car's perspective, unnecessary wear tear of piston heads? 

For info if sprog fell asleep on our way home we were usually able  to park up and switch of the engine and she'd carry on sleeping.   yours might be the same??

bloody busses roaring past . 2 passengers in 50 seat behemoths - they're the real polluters

On 11/08/2021 at 18:03, ZacDaMan72 said:

At 46 minutes the car will start to smoke and catch fire 

 

oh crap. won't be able to eke out 400,000 kms then

10 hours ago, chrisluciofg said:

bloody busses roaring past . 2 passengers in 50 seat behemoths - they're the real polluters

What a pathetic excuse, that's all I have to say.

Quote

bloody busses roaring past . 2 passengers in 50 seat behemoths - they're the real polluters

 

So two wrongs make a right in your world then .

You should quit now before you make yourself look any dafter than you do already.

38 minutes ago, olderman1 said:

 

So two wrongs make a right in your world then .

You should quit now before you make yourself look any dafter than you do already.

The guy does just about have a point; 2 passengers will mean about 25 passenger miles per gallon.

2 hours ago, KenONeill said:

The guy does just about have a point; 2 passengers will mean about 25 passenger miles per gallon.

For that journey, yes.  For the whole month of journeys, something considerably better.  We could say “let’s not have such buses”  … and encourage more cars.

 

Or we could say, “let’s have buses, but better buses”.  That’s where the effort is needed.

 

The point which the OP was making, and which you strangely seek to recognise, was that “since other problems exist, I’ll happily add mine”.  That’s offensive not just to society and the environment, but also, and directly, to the people on this forum.

5 hours ago, DaveMiller said:

For that journey, yes.

And, indeed, the vast majority of off-peak bus journeys. Based on this computer having been in a window over-looking a bus stop for the last 6 months.

 

Now, if we reduce the size of the bus to something that will carry 4 passengers, and then allow for the fact such a sized vehicle has only been allowed to carry people from 1 household for the last 18 months, so it that will about half the passenger mpg it could have done, which reduces them to about 15 passenger mpg...

ok - i promise to do better by the earth -

 

aircon - does the battery (in the boot, Kodiaq RS), have any 'self-awareness' ? ie auto-shutoff when charge levels drop to a preset threshold ?