My wife has just bought a Mini that has an auto stop/start function. Does anybody know if using this system will have any effect on the car long term. I personally find it irritating at the moment, but that just because its different!!!
Automatic Stop/Start
- Thread starter leefaz1797
- Start date
Start/Stop has been around for a good many years. I can remember the first car that I had with it was back in the mid 70's soon after the first petrol crisis, urging car manufacturers put their thinking hats on to find ways of saving fuel. The system has therefore had enough time to prove itself.
It was an 'Eco' version of the Opel Kadett. I don't know whether it or its Vauxhall equivalent was ever on sale in the UK, though.
ps: I believe that at about the same time VW had a similar 'Eco' version of the Polo also with automatic Stop/Start.
Works very well on a nearly new car, but what about when the starter starts to get a bit slow. I had a Kia Venga as a loan car and found it very aggravating after a while.
Steve W
Steve W
By 'starter starting to get slow' I presume you mean when the battery has got past its prime. Then the problem will be first thing in the morning when the engine is still cold, but the 'Start/Stop' function doesn't usually operate before you're already in heavy traffic and the engine is already warm. So, if the battery is weak, you'll notice it well before the 'Start/Stop' does its job. Then it's time to get a new battery.
The starter itself is not the problem. That's made to take care of lots of stop/starts when used in delivery vans, for example.
The starter itself is not the problem. That's made to take care of lots of stop/starts when used in delivery vans, for example.
I have a new BMW 320d Touring with stop/start on it. You are able to turn it off if you wish. You could keep the clutch in but that is even more wear.
I find it ok and helps to get 53 mpg, don't like the cost of the towbar and larger fan to be fitted though!!!
HTH
I find it ok and helps to get 53 mpg, don't like the cost of the towbar and larger fan to be fitted though!!!
HTH
They usually give me one of these Minis when my BMW goes in for a service. The novelty soon wears off! I think you may be able to switch the function off if you don't like it. It might be the dealer can reprogram it or you may even be able to do it yourself by reading the manual. If I recall if you keep the clutch pedal down when at this lights etc it wont switch off. Having said that it does what it says on the tin so to speak and in some European cities you must switch off at lights so its a useful tool for our continental cousins.
Hi Lutz.
As I was a motor mechanic for 45yrs, maybe you could explain why I have changed hundreds of starter motors, if as you say they are not the problem, If I had meant a run down battery, I would have said a run down battery. In my expeirence, the starter motor is usually the weak point in these auto start systems. I replaced several on the VW polos that were fitted with this system and from what I have seen of more modern starters, they seem more shoddy than ever.
Steve W
As I was a motor mechanic for 45yrs, maybe you could explain why I have changed hundreds of starter motors, if as you say they are not the problem, If I had meant a run down battery, I would have said a run down battery. In my expeirence, the starter motor is usually the weak point in these auto start systems. I replaced several on the VW polos that were fitted with this system and from what I have seen of more modern starters, they seem more shoddy than ever.
Steve W
All I know was that we had 2 suppliers for starter motors. During a period where price was more important than quality, one of them cut corners and produced substandard components. It was not a matter of the specification not being adequate for a Stop/Start system, but poor quality. This could have been the case with the VW Polos that you refer to, too. The problem would have been equally present even without Stop/Start.
My BIL has just had one as a hire car and thought it was a pain in the a... Personally, I do not see any advantage to be gained by this, and a lot of extra problems. Firstly the amount of fuel you are supposed to be saving will be outweighed by the extra fuel used to keep the battery charged up. The energy has to come from somewhere. Also you will need a larger battery to cope with the xtra demand and the extra weight will again increase your fuel comsumption. Not by much but again the savings are not that much at the end of the day.
As for vans stopping and starting, they are fitted with big heavy duty batteries and there is a big question as to whether they are fuel efficient to begin with.
If you modify your driving philosophy then you will achieve fuel savings far in excess of what this might give you.
Personally I think it is a sales gimmick which will soon be dropped.
If you are really concerned about fuel costs and saving the planet then get an electric car for about town, or take the bus.
As for vans stopping and starting, they are fitted with big heavy duty batteries and there is a big question as to whether they are fuel efficient to begin with.
If you modify your driving philosophy then you will achieve fuel savings far in excess of what this might give you.
Personally I think it is a sales gimmick which will soon be dropped.
If you are really concerned about fuel costs and saving the planet then get an electric car for about town, or take the bus.
As the Kia Venga I had was a loan car, there was no manual in the car, so I could not switch the system off. On a trip across Birmingham in the rush hour, ( could not avoid the timimng )
the thing must have cut out at least 100 times if not more. Once it was up to normal temperature, it cut out every time you took your foot of the clutch while stationery, unless you have leg muscles like big Arnie Swartzeneger, you soon get fed up with holding the clutch in all the time.
Steve W
the thing must have cut out at least 100 times if not more. Once it was up to normal temperature, it cut out every time you took your foot of the clutch while stationery, unless you have leg muscles like big Arnie Swartzeneger, you soon get fed up with holding the clutch in all the time.
Steve W
My car's an automatic and has Stop/Start. I can't say that I even notice the engine starting again when moving off and, of course, it's quieter when standing at traffic lights.
Unless I'm mistaken, the Mini had to have automatic Start/Stop to achieve the target fuel consumption figures.
The engine standing still for at least 30 seconds outweighs the extra fuel consumption due to a restart.
Unless I'm mistaken, the Mini had to have automatic Start/Stop to achieve the target fuel consumption figures.
The engine standing still for at least 30 seconds outweighs the extra fuel consumption due to a restart.
That I would have to question. Any car when idling is using the least possible fuel so 30 seconds probably amounts to a cc if you are lucky.
It is a gimmick to try and sell cars to the gullible.
It is a gimmick to try and sell cars to the gullible.
I certainly is not a gimmick even if it may sound so. It is one measure that car manufacturers are adopting in order to fulfil their exhaust emissions targets.
The 30 seconds that I referred to above are not my figure, but one from the industry.
The 30 seconds that I referred to above are not my figure, but one from the industry.
Not that we should believe everything written in the papers, but here is an extract from a Sept. 08 Daily Mail article on the subject :
A car engine is at its most inefficient when it is idling, the AA said last night, but turning off the engine is not necessarily an improvement.
A spokesman explained: 'In terms of emissions, the catalytic converter only works properly when it's hot, and it cools down when idling.
'This means emission levels of gases and hydrocarbons will rise.
'Our own fuel consumption tests showed that a car uses somewhere between 0.36 and 0.78 litres an hour when idling - so that's no miles per litre, but plenty of carbon dioxide and more toxic emissions.'
An hour of idling can produce around 2.36kg of carbon dioxide - the 'greenhouse gas' blamed by scientists for global warming.
But switching an engine off is not necessarily a better option, the AA warns.
A burst of fuel is needed to start an engine, so switching it off and then on again seconds later actually uses more fuel than idling and produces more emissions.
The AA said: 'For less than a minute it is not fuel efficient to switch off because you will use more fuel starting up than you will save. It only becomes fuel efficient to switch off if you are going to be stopped for a minute or more.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1056633/Drivers-face-20-fine-leaving-engines-running-traffic-jams.html#ixzz0lzm2Kjko
So if we take 0.5 litre as the fuel consumption per hour when idling, that gives 8.3 cc per min, or 4.15cc per 30 seconds.
A car engine is at its most inefficient when it is idling, the AA said last night, but turning off the engine is not necessarily an improvement.
A spokesman explained: 'In terms of emissions, the catalytic converter only works properly when it's hot, and it cools down when idling.
'This means emission levels of gases and hydrocarbons will rise.
'Our own fuel consumption tests showed that a car uses somewhere between 0.36 and 0.78 litres an hour when idling - so that's no miles per litre, but plenty of carbon dioxide and more toxic emissions.'
An hour of idling can produce around 2.36kg of carbon dioxide - the 'greenhouse gas' blamed by scientists for global warming.
But switching an engine off is not necessarily a better option, the AA warns.
A burst of fuel is needed to start an engine, so switching it off and then on again seconds later actually uses more fuel than idling and produces more emissions.
The AA said: 'For less than a minute it is not fuel efficient to switch off because you will use more fuel starting up than you will save. It only becomes fuel efficient to switch off if you are going to be stopped for a minute or more.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1056633/Drivers-face-20-fine-leaving-engines-running-traffic-jams.html#ixzz0lzm2Kjko
So if we take 0.5 litre as the fuel consumption per hour when idling, that gives 8.3 cc per min, or 4.15cc per 30 seconds.
My mate works for the Post Office. There New Vans run these new automatic stop/starts. One there costing more in fuel to run and Two there having big problems with starter motor problems fly wheel ring wear/bendix jaming.
Facebook
Twitter