Let me ask you this: My CRZ had auto stop/start. Do you think the starter on it is more or less worn than a comparable car without auto stop/start?Ok Phy got it ? Scotty Kilmer and I are both idiots and we know nothing about cars no problem ?
If I recall, the CRZ and other Honda hybrids using the IMA system do not have a traditional starter motor connected to the flywheel via a pinion gear. Instead, the flywheel itself contains a sort of pancake motor that also functions as the starter motor, which makes it much more robust for auto start/stop.Let me ask you this: My CRZ had auto stop/start. Do you think the starter on it is more or less worn than a comparable car without auto stop/start?
Correct. But the point is, idle stop isn't "creating more wear and tear". I'm not claiming to be smarter than Scotty, but the engineers working on idle stop systems are definitely smarter than Scotty.If I recall, the CRZ and other Honda hybrids using the IMA system do not have a traditional starter motor connected to the flywheel via a pinion gear. Instead, the flywheel itself contains a sort of pancake motor that also functions as the starter motor, which makes it much more robust for auto start/stop.
What I mean is that the goal of stop idle and cylinder deactivation technologies is to have more efficiency but not necessary a better reliability because car manufacturers are under pressure from governments to reduce mpg figures... that’s a fact ?Correct. But the point is, idle stop isn't "creating more wear and tear". I'm not claiming to be smarter than Scotty, but the engineers working on idle stop systems are definitely smarter than Scotty.
If you just don't personally like your car stopping on its own, fine, but lets drop the myth about "excessive wear and tear".
You're saying that idle stop systems hurt reliability. I'm saying it doesn't and there's no evidence it does, only "opinions".What I mean is that the goal of stop idle and cylinder deactivation technologies is to have more efficiency but not necessary a better reliability because car manufacturers are under pressure from governments to reduce mpg figures... that’s a fact ?
"Once the driver puts pressure on the accelerator, then the engine turns back on. It’s simple, and some say it can save between 3-5% of gas in stop-and-go traffic."Everybody thinks it hurts long term reliability, but only have their opinions as evidence. My opinion is, most people that hate it, have never used it long term, and the company wouldn't spend the time, money, or resources on something that made the car worse. Idle stop has been around for more than 10 years now, they've got enough data to see if it's worth doing.
The turn-down exhaust on non sport models.Wanted to see what was the biggest thing you hate about your 10th gen civic ?
I would have to say mine is the double spoiler. I think it looks kinda strange.
Thanks VTECR ?That's literally your "opinion" too and you're providing no evidence to back it up.
My personal feelings on it - I spent years as a tech for Honda, BMW and a couple of others and I too dislike these systems. I know there's more wear on the starters because I've seen it with my own peepers. Whether or not you believe that is entirely up to you.
I know the batteries are a lot more expensive and that they work harder than regular lead acid ones. EFB and AGM batteries typically cost 3 times that of a traditional lead acid battery so you're literally paying for an expensive battery to run a system that's unnecessarily cranking your starter every time you stop.
This function exists for no reason other than to allow manufacturers to scrape some emissions off the top, just like cylinder deactivation, exhaust recirculation etc etc.
I'm pretty surprised that anyone would be defensive of this. It's pretty universally disliked in my experience.
That's the goal of such a Forum: to share opinions I still disagree with you about stop idle reliability on a long term but I respect your opinion ? Have a good day Phy ? NickYou're saying that idle stop systems hurt reliability. I'm saying it doesn't and there's no evidence it does, only "opinions".
From my limited and occasional experience driving vehicles with it, I would have used the word disconcerting. The same would be true if cars had always worked Start/Stop and some started adopting Never Stop. I'm sure this technology adds to the cost of the vehicle. I'm less persuaded that it makes them less durable in the long haul or less reliable in the short haul.I don't drive a car that has it but I have been passenger in a car that has it and I'd say it is uncomfortable until you are used to it.