Stuff I learned today

[Mikexike]

I have an older car so it doesn't have that feature but I was wondering if that constant starting wears out starter motors as well. And does this feature really save gas or pollute less? I suppose it does but is it substantial?

Its bad for the starter and battery, You are not saving much if any gas...As a lot has said... just another dumb Climate control BS to please law makers.

 

[nobody]

It's a newer feature, where the engine shuts down when you stop, then starts again when you (presumably) put your foot back on the accelerator. It's supposed to save gas, but it wears out your starter...and my patience.

My dad taught me many years ago when I was younger that it took more fuel starting a car in that situation than leaving it idling. I guess that's not the case anymore?

 

[Mikexike]

My dad taught me many years ago when I was younger that it took more fuel starting a car in that situation than leaving it idling. I guess that's not the case anymore?

Now days you pay for more expensive repairs especially on the starter and agm batteries that are required for these Idle stop cars.. They are prone to fail and cause major headaches especially being stranded at an intersection or stop sign.

 

[rags747]

Seems that this may be going the way of the dodo bird. New boss man calling a different game! Yep that’s one big skirt right there. Thx…

 

[triplets_93]

I'm gonna speculate that this fire started with an EV . . .
https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2025/05/16/live-fire-breaks-out-in-airport-parking-garage/

 

[Creeper]

My dad taught me many years ago when I was younger that it took more fuel starting a car in that situation than leaving it idling. I guess that's not the case anymore?

That may have been true in the "old days". I am not certain it is true today. In the old days it was pump the gas peddle and turn the ignition. Now, with computer technology and fuel injection they can start the car with only an idle mixture which is clearly a save. How much of a save? If it is just stop and go traffic, or a stop sign, or stop light, I can't imagine it is a significant saving, although with 100 million cars on the road, maybe it adds up to something. I would guess the same is true with emissions although it depends on how efficient the initial ignition is.

I think the stop/restart feature really stresses the starter motor and battery. It could also stress other parts that come to a stop and then restart. I hate the feature, although I don't have it in my car. I suspect if I buy a new car I may have to deal with it. It reminds me of the feature some manufacturers put in their cares in the 1970s where you have to engage the seatbelt of the car wouldn't start. I think some companies also put governors on their cars to prevent them from going faster than 65 MPH. These are annoyances that address minor problems.

 

[Mikexike]

That may have been true in the "old days". I am not certain it is true today. In the old days it was pump the gas peddle and turn the ignition. Now, with computer technology and fuel injection they can start the car with only an idle mixture which is clearly a save. How much of a save? If it is just stop and go traffic, or a stop sign, or stop light, I can't imagine it is a significant saving, although with 100 million cars on the road, maybe it adds up to something. I would guess the same is true with emissions although it depends on how efficient the initial ignition is.

I think the stop/restart feature really stresses the starter motor and battery. It could also stress other parts that come to a stop and then restart. I hate the feature, although I don't have it in my car. I suspect if I buy a new car I may have to deal with it. It reminds me of the feature some manufacturers put in their cares in the 1970s where you have to engage the seatbelt of the car wouldn't start. I think some companies also put governors on their cars to prevent them from going faster than 65 MPH. These are annoyances that address minor problems.

The moment nhra throws a top fuel drag race event, you can throw all that emission savings out the window.

 

[rags747]

That may have been true in the "old days". I am not certain it is true today. In the old days it was pump the gas peddle and turn the ignition. Now, with computer technology and fuel injection they can start the car with only an idle mixture which is clearly a save. How much of a save? If it is just stop and go traffic, or a stop sign, or stop light, I can't imagine it is a significant saving, although with 100 million cars on the road, maybe it adds up to something. I would guess the same is true with emissions although it depends on how efficient the initial ignition is.

I think the stop/restart feature really stresses the starter motor and battery. It could also stress other parts that come to a stop and then restart. I hate the feature, although I don't have it in my car. I suspect if I buy a new car I may have to deal with it. It reminds me of the feature some manufacturers put in their cares in the 1970s where you have to engage the seatbelt of the car wouldn't start. I think some companies also put governors on their cars to prevent them from going faster than 65 MPH. These are annoyances that address minor problems.

Per Grok,
Stop-start technology in cars typically saves 3-10% on fuel, with estimates ranging up to 26.4% in heavy city driving, according to studies from AAA, Edmunds, and the Society of Automotive Engineers. For a 20-mpg car driven 15,000 miles annually, this translates to roughly 25-75 gallons saved per year, or $87-$262 at $3.50 per gallon. Savings are higher in urban settings with frequent idling and lower on highways where the system rarely activates.

 

[Creeper]

Per Grok,
Stop-start technology in cars typically saves 3-10% on fuel, with estimates ranging up to 26.4% in heavy city driving, according to studies from AAA, Edmunds, and the Society of Automotive Engineers. For a 20-mpg car driven 15,000 miles annually, this translates to roughly 25-75 gallons saved per year, or $87-$262 at $3.50 per gallon. Savings are higher in urban settings with frequent idling and lower on highways where the system rarely activates.

I'd have to read the study to see how it was conducted. I don't doubt there is a fuel save, but10%? I have a hard time buying that. Even 3% seems high. But, I'd have to read the study.

In any case saving 3% on fuel doesn't make up for the annoyance. Kelly Blue Book estimates the cost of a starter motor repair is $728 - $820, plus the annoyance of having to have the car towed to a shop and the motor replaced, how ever long that takes.

 

[Runwildboys]

I'd have to read the study to see how it was conducted. I don't doubt there is a fuel save, but10%? I have a hard time buying that. Even 3% seems high. But, I'd have to read the study.

In any case saving 3% on fuel doesn't make up for the annoyance. Kelly Blue Book estimates the cost of a starter motor repair is $728 - $820, plus the annoyance of having to have the car towed to a shop and the motor replaced, how ever long that takes.

I can see people in Manhattan saving 10%, with all the lights and traffic, and short drives.