When I go looking for new cars, I always look for something terrible on gas, I much rather spend gas $ on that Hemi than have a car that gets 40MPG and doesn't move.
Yeah that makes so much sense, why has nobody thought about that... Youre supposed to just rev it up to the fuel cutoff (redline) and you'll save fuel.
It makes sense, warns up for a few seconds at maybe 1,500 RPM to start, figure 4 seconds of startup with more fuel use is equivalent to twice that time at 800 rpm.
I cant really belive the amount he is holding in the beginning, when the average consumption of my cars while idling is around 0,9 to 1.5 liters this should be way less in 3 minutes, also you should factor in how harmfull starting your engine so often is to your car especially when its cold
I too wish, this generation should have learnt something from their parents, or grandparents.... My Grandpa always said "Knowledge not learnt is KNOWLEDGE LOST...."
@@swagger0im0lachskost The car cannot be that cold if it was running less than a minute ago. But I do worry about all the power this consumes especially if the car is being driven short distance and cannot recharge as fast as it loses power.
In India, red lights also have timer display, which shows time left in seconds for the light to turn green, so that a driver can decide if the red light is long enough to turn off the engine. In America, I haven't seen timer beside red lights for vehicles, so I try to estimate the same by looking at pedestrian crossing timer which some junctions have here.
As an Indian American who's visited India numerous times, I find this to be completely inaccurate as most drivers treat red lights over there as yield signs lol. But then again, I visited only a limited few areas of India. But still, the fact remains.
I've tried a similar experiment with my motorbike a few years ago. I found that I could save about 10% fuel by stopping the motor at red lights on my usual commute. But I'm not just worried about wearing out the starter motor, I also think that I'd drain the battery pretty quickly without longer stretches to recharge it.
Used to be a bike mechanic, we had some people doing this and they ran exactly into those issues, you shouldn't do it manually if the vehicle doesn't have a dedicated system.
I'll pick safety everytime, whether on my bike or in my car. I want my engine on so that if I do not like the speed at which the car behind me is coming in, I have the option to go, to move, to drive forward, to get out of the way. Regardless of the wear on the starter or the potential battery drain. My safety comes first. But I also drive very defensively. I often get funny looks at intersections because I will leave whole car lengths in front of me so that I have space cushions. I've always operated under the assumption that 30 seconds of idling would use about the same amount of fuel as stop starting the engine, but I don't care if I'm waiting for a 2 minute light. Safety first.
Well this video is not about old cars, it's all about the cars with auto stop function from factory. They are built for starting and stopping without wearing out
@@coflyer2949 alot of newer cars have this now. They are designed to start and stop automatically when you come to a stop. The engines are built to start and stop over and over again without wearing out quickly. It's a good feature and cuts down on unnecessary fuel consumption.
@@Josiahsutton1 its extremely jarring in luxury cars for it to start and stop. In Jaguars at the least if you move the wheel even 0.00001 inches it turns the engine on to run the hydraulic steering rack. These systems need refinement and the ability to be shut off. Some companies do not let you. All I want are options.
"It turns out engineers ARE capable of thinking about those things." As an engineer, I also know that many project managers are penny-pinchers and don't always listen to the engineers despite the data. Priorities.
That's because there's a triple constraint as a project manager that they are trying to stay within in order to meet all goals of the project. Staying within the planned cost and whatever buffers were included are fundamental to a project. You start letting all of the stakeholders have their way and the project as a whole will be a failure. What that problem sounds like to me is that the PM didn't do a good job of getting the necessary data during the planning phase in the first place.
My guess was 10 seconds. Most engines are somewhat bigger than 1.5 L, so I may have been pretty close to spot-on. It's shocking to hear that the average American's guess was 3.6 minutes. But I do see a lot of people just sitting in their cars with their engines idling for long periods of time in traffic, while waiting in line at a gas station, after just getting into the car, while waiting for a passenger, etc.
Sorry man I ain't shutting my car off in Arizona while still in it unless I absolutely have to. I do not need to simulate the conditions in my oven when broiling a steak.
I usually turn off my start-stop because it's more of a nuisance, almost always it shuts the engine by the exact time I have to move again. But I always shut the engine manually when I expect a longer wait, maybe except when I really want AC to keep running.
Also the AC is designed to handle the engine turning off, on a longer stop on a hot day the car will actually start back itself if the interior temperature starts to rise too much. Air circulation is still happening of course so it won't feel too bad.
Good information. I think a bigger waste than idling at stop lights is people accelerating like a bat out of hell towards those stop lights, slamming on the brakes, then flooring it to the next red light.
That's most people. U can roll into a red light hoping that it will turn green so a full stop isn't necessary but the person behind you will not care, maybe dart around u to the right and come to a full stop to go right.
Same. thats what i was hoping this would account for. Middle-aged cars that use standard 5W 30 or 10 W 30 oil probably depends on how long it takes a warm car to get oil flowing back up at the upper cylinder and valves.
Stop lights are the biggest waster of fuel. I jumped up +8mpg getting home on city streets the other night when I only hit a single stop light in 7 miles.
@@AndrewAMartin Unfortunately that's only beneficial if your city has competent people programming your traffic lights so you don't get stopped at every light going in a straight line.
I work in service at a dealership, the alternator and starter on an idle stop start car runs about 40% more expensive to replace, the arm battery costs twice as much. Even engineering the starter and alternator to be more robust they still fail at a faster rate than cars not equipped with this function. So bottom line you waste less fuel but more money for repairs.
If it's an automatic with all the computers and junk these days seems like it can take 15-20 seconds for it to be "ready" to move once you let go of the key...
@@nigratruo better? Newer ones seem much worse. Especially push button start type if you put it in gear too quickly after hitting the button it will stall not just be laggy. And many new ones make you wait a bit before they allow you to re-crank, the key or button seems to go thru the computer before the starter solenoid.
It would be interesting to see how quickly the oil pressure drops when an engine is shut off. And if the fluctuation in oil pressure due to constant stop starts effects engine wear? I have always wondered why auto manufacturers never considered an electric oil pump to pressurize the system before starting an engine to reduce wear. Also if the alternator and starter are one unit in a stop/ start system does that double the possibility for failure in the system and also increase the expense?
Probably because electric oil pumps would be much more prone to failure compared to those driven by the engine, which is a reason why BMW has so many problems with their water pumps failing over the years because they chose to make them electric.
Very fast actually, within 1-2 seconds pressure drops about 90%... at least if your car has 100'000miles... new engines i dont know, but it will still drain fast, because oil isnt compressable, so already a tiny leak will make pressure drop very fast...
My concern is not about the engineers designing a starter for more starts. It’s the fact that all the accountants care about is the starter lasting through warranty.
The price of replacing the starter far out weighs the cost of gas. Let alone when that sensor fails . And you have to pay to the mechanics shop to have it replaced How about when you lose you job from showing up late ,or not at all .
@@rtelles1127 And how many cars with stop/start have had the starter motor fail because of this? The savings you make on fuel will definitely outweigh the cost of a new starter motor if, like the vast majority of people, you don't wear out your starter motor and so you don't need to get a new one.
@@stevieinselby Maybe. But I highly doubt it. My starter went out on my Honda 100 miles out of the warranty. Luckily, Honda was willing to overlook the fact that it was only 100 miles outside of it and replaced it as if it was still under warranty, free of charge. It would've been 500 or more. It would be interesting to see how much on average an idle start/stop mechanism wears on the starter. I really can't see it being that much of a savings.
@@stevieinselby if the car was designed with a start/stop system, the starter is also designed to start many more times over it's life. i would buy a car with a start/stop system, but i wouldn't do it manually on a car not designed for that.
This is the exact sort of content I'd subbed your channel for and you haven't disappointed for the last 5 years! Not to mention, I like your sense of humour too! Keep up the good work!
A friend of mine used to leave his van idling when he'd stop by a friend's, or ran inside a store, because "it takes more gas to start it than it does to leave it idling". I said "Not when you leave it idling for half an hour it doesn't!"
This was more accurate with carburetors where you would need to choke them and dump an extra rich mixture in at the start which was often quite wasteful. Now with fuel injection it isn’t correct at all.
I'm Australian. I didn't know, but I tested it by deciding to stop the engine at my 8 stoplights in my town & it appeared to save fuel compared driving like a typical driver. 7 seconds is longer than I expected.
A big study was done in the UK by a big motoring organisation, all cars pollute, terribly, but came to the conclusion, taking in the huge amount of energy it takes to tool up and produce a car, is to keep the old ones going as long as possible. .i have a bullet proof mazda 6, 2003 that will probably run forever
I have a 2002 Lexus LS 430 with 221k miles. Going strong, with only one expense outside of routine maintenance that cost more than $200: wheel bearing and hub assembly. Other issues include trunk and hood struts/shocks ($15 a piece), and two power lock motors ($7 inner motor instead of the full lock assembly).
I have a 2004 Gran Marquis with over 300k miles and she Will. Not. Die. I got a new truck recently, so now it’s up to me to keep her in shape until she dies or I pass her down to my future kids in who knows how long
@@waqasusmans Same with my 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor. The only reason it needed rear wheel bearings is because of me backing it down boat ramps into salt water. It also needed a starter motor ($65 for a foreign knock-off which works great after three more expensive remanufactured OEM ones didn't work), a window motor (don't remember the cost), and an AC over-pressure valve ($10).
Then there's Mazda's i-stop, which works without using a starter motor. After the engine shuts off, the pistons are aligned ready for fuel injection and ignition, which could kick the engine back into life.
The ones that I have seen use the alternator as a motor to turn the engine over instead of using the starter. Much more gentle on the mechanical parts not having a gear slam into the flywheel ring gear every time.
@@louispoche4312 thats genius. Even better now you dont have to worry about replacing a starter. Alternators can already be repurposed as Brushless DC motors but often arent used for such purposes. This would be a good way to integrate it into a vehicle
@@aes0p895 You can crush a grape. How do you literally crush a gripe? Sounds pretty figurative to me! In addition...as is usually the case lately, there was no need to say literally to begin with! If you hadn't used it, you couldn't have misused it! Learn, or wallow in your ignorance. The choice is yours!
Start/Stop systems are mandatory by law in germany for like 7 years now. The system never shut off the car if its too hot outside so the AC is running or the other way when its way too cold. I think start/stop systems are engineered very good after having them around for 7 years now. My Audi is now 6 years old and I never had to change a thing which wasnt on the plan.
@@TheOne_p "So don't bother debating" is all I need to read to realise you have no actual argument or data to back up your claims. Also you think an entire country is bad because you don't like their automotive regulations? You honestly sound like an insufferable person to be around if this is how you talk to people
@@anantav51Other than the unpleasant idea of your car being able to shut itself off on its own, Modern engines are pretty well built for the most part but even with that fact cars with stop start systems will see increased wear and earlier failure in certain components, The most affected are your starter and battery. The constant drops in oil pressure really aren't doing your car any favors either.
[ commenting before i watch ] I've always had these questions. This is why this channel exists. Somebody once told me starting the engine (ignition) consumes more fuel than idling for 5 minutes.
I wonder what the numbers are for carbureted engines, which is probably when these statements first started being made. I dont see SAE running these tests on '69 camaros and chargers however,
Yeah, I think everybody has heard that, but I think that the myth behind this is when you compare it to starting a cold engine. when the engine is cold it takes a while before fuel consumption is normalized.
Also commenting before watching. If what you were told were true, I'd expect you'd see your fuel needle drop noticeably every time you turned your car's engine off and on.
And for carbureted engines there is the probability that it will not start quickly and you'd have to pump the gas a few times to get it to go. For my daily driver motorcycle, sometimes it don't even start hahahaha
I live in New Hampshire, we get cold winters. My neighbor has four pickup trucks, three of them Diesels, he has remote starters on them . Three of the trucks are driven by people in his house, they will start the engines and let them idle for 20-30 minutes when it is really cold. It's noisy and the exhaust fumes are obnoxious. Other than that he's a great neighbor.
If the light turns green and 8 people in front of me all have to turn their car back on and put it in gear first because of this video... I will find you EE
No, it`s not good for fuel companies. Illuminates eweriwhere ))))) P.S. In Odessa, Ukraine (my city) we optimize some lights fore speed 50-60km/h(35mph), but this give no results in heavy traffic hours, but it`s good for low traffic, when you even can use cruise and passing always at green light.
I’d personally like to see a study on how extra wear starting/stoping an engine often causes. I mean at the very least your putting extra wear on your starter and depending on the car the cost of replacing the starter more often may be more than your fuel savings
Starters are engineered to handle a ton of starts, usually you won't have more than one replacement in the vehicle's lifespan. They didn't just make a thing that will increase starter usage by many fold and think nah, that should be fine.
The starter motor including the solenoid that pushes the gear to engage the flywheel has been tested through a few hundred thousand cycles, no worries. Have you considered the extra wear on the engine from leaving it idling? Main bearings, conrods, pistons, cylinders, camshafts, cam followers, valves and guides...
Sometimes I will turn off the car instead of idling; most often in a drive-thru restaurant. Why I tend to idle in a traffic jam: because the ass behind me starts leaning on the mfking horn if I don't move up 0.000002 cm once the opportunity arises.
@acktually aintaddingup a lot of fast food locations are drive thru only since covid hit. It's more of a problem with too little staff because no one want to work anymore now tht unemployment and government checks pay more than actually working
@@sportagus3 overall profits are down, but we're hiring at $11 starting out. That's what it was before covid, but now we're understaffed. We maintain 17 hardee's locations and most of them are understaffed. There's been multiple times where they had to close the store for the day cause everyone called off or walked out. Getting money for sitting at your house doing nothing is a decent motivator for not getting an actual job
I used a lot my parent's car, which has a start/stop system. I have to say, I was pretty annoyed by it. A reason might be that the engine stopping is unfamiliar, so my brain registered it as something going wrong, and I thought that surely the car consumed so much fuel restarting the engine anyway. I'm glad you clarified this subject
I've driven plenty of cars that were old and were developing problems, so I'm actually somewhat familiar with my car stalling at a stoplight. The only thing that kept me from worrying (I knew the car had start/stop, but it still somehow surprised me) was the engine shutting off "cleanly", no chugging, no spikes then dips in rpm, just the engine shutting off.
the more you start the car the faster it will wear engine starter and car battery and it will cost you more than oil savings.. So at the end she will laugh
I'm in the UK and I recently changed to a Skoda DCT automatic, with start/stop system. The problem I have with it is that there's a delay of a couple of seconds from deciding to pull out of a junction to the car starting to move, and that's far too long when you're trying to pull into a gap in the traffic. Therefore I've been habitually turning it off when driving, and turning it on in situations where the delay won't matter. PS: A few years prior I hired a manual car with start/stop, and this worked really well. By the time I'd put it into gear from neutral, the engine was running at full power. I love everything about my new Skoda, except for the start/stop... :😞
It's videos like this that are the reason I subscribe to this channel. Like most self-styled "enthusiasts" I didn't like the start/stop system on my new GTI and thought mistakenly that any fuel efficiency advantages were probably cancelled by the fuel needed to restart the engine. But as an old professor of mine once said, "The thing about data is that it sure does cut the bulls**t." In the meantime, I discovered another benefit of the system. Each day I make a trip to the local Starbucks and wait in line in an enclosed "tunnel" outside the store. Typically, my engine shuts down when I pull into the tunnel and when I reach the window. The baristas at the window have thanked me on multiple occasions for shutting off my engine, noting that they have to breathe exhaust fumes all day long. It's not a big thing but it's worth noting that in addition to reducing fuel consumption to some degree, start/stop technology makes the air a bit more breathable for everyone, some more than others.
@@khargan27 I suggest you avoid these locations then. I have been driving for over 25 years never once been put into a situation where being able to pull off immediately would have saved damage to any car. Could you also elaborate on what happened, as I have yet to see when this could happen, I am not trolling, I am genuinely interested in being educated.
Khargan: Since you would "never own a vehicle with a start/stop system" I suspect you've never even driven one. I have. Several, in fact, including the two I own. Besides, the notion that less than a half second hesitation in your car's movement would avoid or even mitigate the impact of a vehicle bearing down on you at speed is ridiculous, especially since you would not be able to judge whether the vehicle was approaching too quickly until it was nearly on you. Furthermore, even if you make such a judgement accurately, you're probably better off bracing for a rear end collision than plowing into a vehicle in front of you or running a red light where cross traffic could well result in a far worse collision. Finally, do you really think a manufacturer would install a dangerously sluggish start/stop system in a vehicle sold to the public? If you can document any such system, feel free to cite it. I thought not. Rear end collisions are, indeed, a problem. But they nearly always result from vehicles following too closely, a situation that has nothing to do with a start/stop system. And thankfully, such collisions have been reduced significantly since vehicles were required to add a third high mounted brake light.
Your response would be more effective if you included any facts. You're correct that you didn't say "dangerously sluggish." What you did say was that a start/stop system would prevent you from avoiding a rear end collision. If you meant something other than "dangerously sluggish" feel free to clarify.
An interesting question would be whether the aircon uses all the power generated by the idling engine that would otherwise be wasted when the A/C is off. Because if all that wasted energy can be used to run the A/C instead, well then it's no longer wasted so you aren't losing anything by idling.
I would be curious to see engine wear over the life of a vehicle. I wonder if start stop that many times has any affect on cylinder walls or any other hard parts
@@megamiteexplosion I've been using Start/Stop system on my scooter and so far no problem with the engine, there was a problem where the battery dropped below 12,4V and shut off the engine
Just wait until your starter chews up all the teeth on your flywheel. Now you have to drop the transmission to replace it. Not to mention you might need a starter too. Now you have to spend a ton of money instead of just letting it run.
@@willjudice9560 actually i used to do that on a 20yo mazda with 180Mm, was able to get 5l/100km for ~10l. Did the start stop thing for maybe 10Mm. Car got scraped for being a rust bucket not worth investing into(the floor bord was litteral rust ). The starter was fine though.
Counterintuitively, You're actually potentially right. An engine is usually most efficient at peak torque, which is pretty much peak power. So it takes less fuel to get from 0-60mph if you keep the engine at peak torque (assuming no wheel spin or clutch slip) than slowly accelerating. BUT assuming your journeys are the same distance, you spend longer at that higher speed, and for a non zero length cruise time, you use more fuel than if you had accelerated slowly, because you spend longer at a higher speed, and wind resistance gets higher with speed. BUT it turns out there is a most efficient cruise speed, and it's something like 45mph. Any slower or faster uses more fuel. So this only applies if the top speed is over 45mph... So accelerate up to
This is a weird premise in general, I’ve never stopped to think if it takes gas or not to start an engine, I’ve never thought about stopping it. Why would I? It’s worth the money in gas to have the A/C and radio on at a stop light or if your just waiting for somone at a pick up or just chilling in your car for an hour. How much gas I’m using is never something that crosses my mind until I’m on the 1.5 hour interstate drive twice a week.
hamzterix well I know that a lot of manufacturers use an oil feed system that always allows oil to be sent to the major components within fractions of a second upon start up. With modern engines I'd assume not as much as you might think. But I'm also just an automotive tech and not an engineer lol
Ariel Casanueva That’s what I want to know, surely a starter motor that’s being used dozens of times for a long-ish journey compared to just once in initial startup of one without stop/start it would in theory cause a load more wear and premature failure?
The rule of thumb my father taught me was actually 7 seconds so it's good to know he wasn't misleading me. I don't usually stop my car any more though since I've had a few too many cases of old cars not starting again at a red light.
My car's generally pretty reliable for being 54 years old, once it's started and run for a bit, even after setting for a week or two or even longer, it does perfectly fine. There's nothing more satisfying than having an old car start turn-key like a modern car after pumping the gas pedal a few times. Especially now that I've had the electronic choke dialed in by someone who knows what they were doing with the carburetor and it's not stuck on constantly making the car run excessively rich and flooding itself all the time. Guy who put it on clearly rushed the job.
@@sgtpepper6379 Moreso the cars were just old. The one that gave us that problem was coming up on about 30 years old and it just didn't make sense financially to fix the issue.
never stop my car on red light but since I watched this video I feel very comfortable turning it off whenever is an accident on the road and I get stuck in the traffic jam for several minutes or when im waiting for someone I just shut off the engine and roll down a little bit the windows
I’m sure the start/stop system saves fuel over a conventional system. The loss of a/c at a stop light would be enough for me to not want the start/stop system. But, I’d like to see a cost comparison of fuel savings vs the cost of replacing that starter and the giant battery that system uses.
I’ve had a 2014 car with a start-stop system. Had to change the battery once, after about 7 years. The new AGM battery was roughly €120. I’ve never had issues with the starter after almost 10 years. So in my case, the car absolutely saved more fuel than the cost of a single new AGM battery in 10 years
@@bf3and4highlights83 The battery is being recharged when the engine is on, you know? Maybe turning the engine on and off multiple times in a few minutes doesn't really save money, but doing it when waiting at an occasional traffic light will very likely be benificial. Also why do you assume that starting an engine wears out any parts (apart from maybe battery, which isn't expensive)?
How Long are you leaving it off? A couple minutes off with a restart would make no difference even at -40 C/F temperature. Do you let your car idle overnight, so you don't have to start it in the morning?!? Get an engine block heater in that case!!
Maybe it's just because I've spent a lot of time in labs, but watching him drink that green liquid from the graduated cylinder while talking about gasoline made me feel physically ill.
0:04 I was told that it took the same amount to start an engine as it did to idle for 30 seconds. But I no longer believe this because newer cars seem to turn off and start up every time they come to a complete stop. And I believe that is for fuel efficiency. Which must mean any amount of idling uses more fuel than turning it on. Which kinda makes sense. Why would it require extra fuel to get started? Doesn't seem like it would. Then you'd have a fuel rich ignition and that's no good afaik... Now let's see if I'm right!
Engineers think about adding a longer lasting starter, while auto companies need parts to break to make money. Somewhere in the middle you find the actual starter life.
To save gas, I shut my car off in traffic jams whenever there's I hill I can slowly coast down. To go up the hill without turning on the engine, I just give the finger to the guy behind me.
@@paulmvn5431 It can go either way, but far more often in fleet maintenance, it's the flywheel missing its teeth in my experience. I maintain a fleet that does this kind of start and stop usage 6 days a week.
Poland has nice stop lights that tell you how long to wait before the light goes green. So you know easily if its worth shutting down. But a lot of places dont have those lights, so you might not think it's worth stopping./
I drove into Dallas a couple months back in my classic truck. I came to a stop light in traffic, and when the light turned green I was surrounded by an orchestra of starters
In England, the main purpose of stop/start systems is to get around our vehicle taxation, which is based on emissions test figures. The result of this is that a 2 litre BMW 3-seies with stop/start pays less tax than a 1 litre Toyota Aygo without it. The BMW owner will the disable the Stop/start system anyway because (1) it's irritating, and (2) "Eco-warriors" tend not to buy 3-Series beemers.
@@fransoto8343 It's not almost like that, it's like that. Here in Germany a car that consumes less fuel in relation to the mass of the vehicle gets a better pollution badge than a car that actually consumes less fuel. So an big SUV weighting two tons is "more entvironmetally friendly" than a small car
I remember hearing it was around 30 seconds of idling to start a bigger engine. I wouldn't be sold on a start/stop system though. I mean they work but in the end did you save enough to pay for the extra cost or maintenance? If the goal is to save money just buy a more efficient or smaller car to start with
I remember having watched a video a while back mentioning that Mercedes claims its start-stop-system is effective at slightly less than 1 second. As I live in Germany where most people still drive stick cars, this is about the time you need to press down the clutch pedal (you need to put your car in neutral and let go of the clutch pedal to engage the start-stop system). This would mean you save every time you use it. I personally drive a Mazda. Back when I bought it I watched a couple of videos. They have some restrictions for the start-stop system to engage. 1) The engine needs to be warmed up 2) the battery needs to be at at least 80% 3) the A/C needs to run at a low setting. This all has to do with the fact that they stop the cylinders in perfect position to start up the engine mostly with ignition. That is also the reason why the engine is stopped for only small periods of time, so that it does not cool too much for this approach to work. I guess most manufacturers put a lot of thought into this to actually make it work and beneficial. Fun fact: Mazda has a display how much you saved while using the start-stop system. According to the display in my car I stood still for over 600km by now 😉. Also, according to the display I’ve planted a couple of trees 🌳.
That's bs my friend, i'm sorry to say. Sure the cilinders are in the correct position. But there are parts of the car which have to be lubricated again and making the car start the whole process again while there are parts which are already warmed and lubbed. Sure, if you're owning a car at max like 10 years you wouldn't notice the effects, but only time will tell how much do these tings hold. Personally, I have it turned off, on my Focus ST-Line. The amount of fuel i save is so negligible that I prefer to have it turned off
@@jeffmercier7252 : What do you mean by "The engine seems to disconnect from the trans"? At a stop, with the engine running, it _has_ to be disconnected from the transmission in _some_ way.
@@jeffmercier7252 : Unfortunately that explanation isn't enough for me to diagnose your problem -- if in fact it *_is_* a problem. It looks like you're going to have to bring it into a repair shop for an in-person analysis.
Very interesting! I was always skeptical about the actual benefits of these sorts of systems, as the cons of wear and tear seemed more tangible than the promise of fuel saving, so it's neat to get a real sense for how much fuel is really consumed or saved. With that said though, I still think this is a bandaid fix when it comes to the overall issue of car infrastructure being inherently less efficient and sustainable than public transit, when it comes to city commuting at least, which is where start-stop technology is targetted. I still think it has its niche, but car manufacturers and lawmakers really do need to be prioritizing sustainable transportation more. Just my stance on the matter
It's not about fuel saving, it's about emissions standards for manufacturers. You are not getting that Euro 6 rating for your engine unless you turn it off every time the car stops.
If you are in a lot of stop start traffic every day, a hybrid probably makes more sense. Pure electric in the stop start and engine on to recharge or in open long distance traffic
Public transportation is not automatically more efficient. It's only more efficient in very specific situations. If the train/bus is carrying a lot of passengers, then it is somewhat more efficient than a car. But if the train/bus has very few passengers, then it will be wildly inefficient compared to cars. I lived in Europe for years, and the trains/busses are often close to empty. The only time they get full is during the morning and evening rush hour. The rest of the day they're horribly inefficient because they're traveling the same routes on the same schedules, but only carrying a small handful of passengers. Cars have the benefit that they're only used when they are needed, they aren't running on a set schedule, so cars can often be more efficient.
@@SchemingGoldberg First off, I appreciate you for taking the time to consider how car infrastructure compares to public transit. I do implore you, however, to look into NotJustBikes here on RUclips, particularly his Strong Towns series videos on the economics of cars and his anecdotal videos. The videos can be fairly clickbait-y, but I encourage you to give his arguments some proper consideration. In brief however: car dependency is, in actuality, expensive and unsustainable, inefficient and frustrating, and dangerous and stressful. Cars don't scale well leading to inevitable rush hour traffic, there's necessarily more expensive water and electricity infrastructure due to the lower density development, loss of life through poor safety and inherent human error, emissions and many other environmental concerns, increased social isolation, stress, noise and its impact on quality of life and productivity, etc etc etc Can public transit be done poorly? Absolutely. Can car transit be done well? Given the associated death rates and death tolls alone, absolutely not. When considering all the other drawbacks, you'd need to be misinformed and/or a morally ambiguous investor. With that said though, thank you for reading, and I do hope you can open your mind to the idea of doing away with car dependency. If I never have to sit through another 4 hours of bumper-to-bumper traffic, it'll be too soon.
My car tells me how much the start/stop has saved since i last reset my trip odo. I dont do a lot of around town driving and found that it only saved about 1/5th of a litre in 30-35L of driving. Would probably be significantly higher if i drove around town more but i would rather pay an extra $5-10 a tank just to not have start stop turned on
@@michalhudek In a turbocharged vehicle equipped with idle stop, manufacturers either fit an auxiliary oil pump to keep cooling the turbo, or they use a temperature sensor to prevent idle stop while the turbo is too hot. Honda is shipping their 1.5T in almost every car in their lineup now, as well as the 2.0T in Acura vehicles, and all are equipped with idle stop. Engineers know what they're doing.
mbrunnme he’s wrong when he thinks that 0.0003991403132% of the United States population is enough people to say “HEY GUYS AMERICANS DONT KNOW HOW MUCH FUEL IS USED WHEN THEIR CAR IS IDLING”
ABC123 basically a fancy word for assuming. If you really wanna go there, then every American is a drug addict. According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 21.5 million American adults (aged 12 and older) battled a substance use disorder in 2014.
In the 70’s during the Gas Crisis The Government told the Public that it took more to shut off and restart then to let it run! Typical Government BS !!!! Thanks for the Clarification!
Do we take into consideration other factors? - wearing the engine on starts, battery for example. - special parts required, battery again (AGM), starter you mentioned.
You don't need an AGM battery for the basic principle of turning the engine off if you're going to just park up for more than a few minutes lol. AGM batteries are for cars specifically designed to switch the engine off even if you're stopped for a few seconds. The problem are people who idle for ages doing nothing. Usually taxis at the train station or people sat in their cars pulled over on the phone, or sat in their cars in the parking lot with their engine running for half an hour.
Had a start stop car for 5 years, never had an issue. The starter is beefier and the ECU will have set conditions for the engine to meet before the start stop action can take place so that there is no extra wear. It works great.
@emosh73 well, if you had a start stop system in your escape and get 15 mpg on average, with varying 8-5 % reduction in fuel consumption as per the video you would have used about 500-800 gallons of fuel less. You do the math on how much money that is, depending on what fuel costs you.
spook It's as much about emissions as it is fuel savings. The EPA is constantly pushing manufacturers to have better emissions, the fuel savings are a byproduct of the manufacturer trying to meet the emissions regulations.
idk about other vw cars but mine has it in one of filter housing where you replace the filter inside and its fantastic and also located in the engine bay. highly recommend not laying under the car getting covered in oil
I have been thinking about this so much more lately. Just a 48V mild hybrid system would mitigate the losses of creature comforts entirely, through all of traffic.
considering all of the obvious advantages, and how old most of the involved technology really is, it's kind of astonishing how hybrids and EV's are such a rarity.
Valid point about fuel savings... HOWEVER, there is still going to be increased wear on the engine when it does the start/stop routine as the oil is going to drain back to the oil sump when the engine is not running. Also there is the issue of thermal shock that while small, it will have an effect over time. Or as the song goes, everything counts in large amounts! LOL!
It isn´t that easy. There is basicly no wear on any parts while starting the engine. The wear is not caused by startup but by a cold engine and the lack of oil-pressure. A cold engine wears a lot more than a warm engine. Especially the first few seconds without oil-pressure are a problem. But start-stop systems are designed to reduce this wear. Every single start-stop system I´ve seen so far wont shut down the engine before beeing warmed up. Moreover the oil-pressure won´t drop down while stopping. That is the reason why those systems will automaticly start the engine after a few minutes again. A warm engine with oil-pressure will probably wear less when starting up than idling for some minutes. Startermotors should´nt really wear out at all. A startermotor is basiclly just an electric motor therefore it could theoretically even drive the whole car and last for thousands of miles. So if a manufacture uses a good startermotor it shouldnt be affected at all . Batteries tend to fail more often in general nowadays due the high demand of electric power in cars in generall. Start-stop systems do redce the battery lifetinen but only in an unoticable way.
Apparently, it's also pretty difficult for Jason to not condescend. Obviously, that doesn't mean he isn't extremely knowledgeable, I do watch his videos, after all. It just means that, like many intellectuals, it sometimes seems hard for him not to talk down to viewers. Sorry, that's just my take.
+D LG; truly sorry that it may come across that way, as I'm really not trying to give the impression that I know more or know better. I have tons to learn and I make plenty of mistakes (in life, and in my videos). I try to point out corrections when that's the case. I do think sometimes my replies seem a bit harsh (since there's a bunch of them, I want to answer as many as I can, and often this means typing something quickly but coming off as a bit harsh or frank, which isn't the intention). I just enjoy learning and sharing that information, and learning from the comments as well. I appreciate your feedback!
Ive added Ignition security systems to my cars, and I can tell you there were days that my Crown Vic ran from dawn till dusk. Bought it with 4570 idle hours, sold it with close to 5000 in the couple years I owned it. Also not me but I owned a Interceptor Utility with 13800 total hours, and 8987 idle hours. Yes it was over 9000 when I sold it. Gotta say it was pretty nice in both hot and cold days to just keep it running the entire day.
To support this comment, can't say they are accounting for that in improved parts. My new truck came with the start stop feature, which I hated and disabled. Completely unrelated to that, the truck received a new engine at 13K miles due to catastrophic bearing failure. So, no, they are not building the engines any better than they were before.
Well said Kevin. I've owned multiple vehicles with the start-stop feature and have had plenty without. Though I have had no mechanical issues with any of the start-stop type Vehicles I've owned, I also really don't see a point for it. At the end of the day the manufacturers have to charge more to put in bigger batteries and more powerful starters, and there's absolutely no way that there can't be some wear and tear on the motor even if it's minut. All of this to save what, 5% Maybe? I don't think I'm that concerned about saving 5% on fuel. I'm more concerned about why every car has to cost 40 or 50 Grand now for a decent automobile. Why don't we make the car 30 grand and leave all this extra crap out of it that I don't need.
I was just going to say the same thing but thought, let me check the comments lol. Save a few bucks on gas or save thousands on engine repairs due to dry starts 🤔. A running engine is lubricated which wears less... Similar to how highway miles matter less than stop and go City driving...
It's leaving the engine running while going into the store that I never understood. Very wasteful as described here, but also puts a big sign on it: STEAL ME
I used to live in the Twin Cities (MPLS /St. Paul, MN) and had family in some smaller towns just over the boarder into WI. Whenever I'd go visit, I'd see that constantly at gas stations, coffee shops etc. I get it to an extent in the winter, as they can get brutal. However, being from "the city", you're just handing your keys over to thieves. All to at most, 90 more seconds before you're back to normal temp in the car. It happened so much, that after installing auto start for those brutal winters, I had come out to a cop behind my car in the mornings waiting to give me a ticket for leaving the keys in the ignition unattended (illegal). Happened several times. Then again this was in the early 2000's with a 92 Oldsmobile I guess. Not a common feature.
willy wayne: And in old cars, you could get duplicate keys made. Then you have a backup in case you leave a set in the trunk, etc. AND, you can lock the car while it is, say, warming up to melt a huge amount of ice, as I did at my apartment from 1981 to 2011, before I finally bought a house with a car port. It always amazes me how people think doing something very simple could ONLY be done via some new technology, vs. just a little common sense (and in the old days, perhaps a buck or two to get a key made that was as good as the original).
It is quite easy to see that, if you have a car with real time fuel usage display: start your car, let it idle, see what usage it shows (mine is around 0.9L/h). After a few minutes, start the A/C and see what it shows (mine usually is around 1.1L/h). The difference is how much your A/C is using (approximately).
@@carlcushmanhybels8159 guess that depends on the market and brands you know, but within Volkswagen groups cars sold in Europe after 2010, this is pretty much a standard feature :)
My only question is: what about the increased wear and tear on the engine due to starting. When stopped, the coolant pump stops, the oil pump stops, both creating thermal stresses, and the lack of oil circulation means reduced film thickness per each start... plus loads due to inertia and low frequency vibration... it's not just about the added stress on the starter. Is often said that 90% of engine wear occurs at start up--which may or may not be accurate, and may only apply when discussing cold starts. Nevertheless we are talking about increasing the number of starts by an order of magnitude or more. While it is easy to point out that the amount of gas used on the start versus idling for more than seven seconds may indicate a modest improvement in the scenarios tested, consider when you are also operating an air conditioner--and the actual percentage of time spent in traffic conditions where a minor fuel savings amounts to something useful, vs higher maintenance costs due to more frequent oil changes needed-consider that more raw fuel passes rings in the initial start revolutions than at operating rpm, degrading oil sooner. The reality is: driving style can easily amount to more than the 4-8% indicated. Driving gingerly vs driving with a lead foot can easily make a difference ±25% in MPG.
My only concern on the start stop system wasn't the starter but engine damage from oil draining back to the pan then starting up again, needless to say, I still use it because I figured the engineer thought of that and should be perfectly fine
For oil to drain back to pan will probably take much longer than usual stop light duration.. Because of viscosity oil will cling to the cylinder walls and other components..
Don't be so sure....Ford is having some significant issues with oil flow in their 3.5 EcoBoost truck engines with their Cam Phasers reaping the damage....to the point of a recall to replace them but still no fix...so just kicking the can down the road. There is a very real likelihood that this Cam Phaser issue is attributed to a lack of appropriate lubrication from the increased start/stop cycles this new system imposes on the Cam Phasers and wears them out DRAMATICALLY prematurely
Liam Sweeney He spelt it right, omelette is the British english spelling, omelet is the American english spelling. Surely you would know there are some diffrences in english by now.
Do you also think any spelling of color as 'color' is incorrect because there is a British English variant of that spelling? Way to dig the hole for yourself.
The visual comparison of the amounts of fuel near the beginning would have been more impressive using the same size containers. The narrower container for the starting makes it hard to compare. I'm sure you wanted people to be able to see the fluid but it would have even further emphasized your point if it was nearly invisible in the larger container.
@@no_peace i hope youre exaggerating, because the idling volume was very clearly much larger than the starting volume, even if the choice of container made it hard to precisely tell by how much. i think it was entirely fair of him to assume his audience could tell that a big thing was larger than a small thing lol
If starting an engine actually requires 6 seconds worth of idling fuel, there should be a logical explanation. You are missing a figure, like how many starts actually were equivalent to 90 minutes of idling. Well, dummies, all those starts added together in revolutions are like the engine running for 90 minutes because what you counted as “starting” actually included run time. So the actual equivalent run-time versus start time is probably closer to 1 second. You need to account for the energy lost drawing from and recharging the battery.
@@Vandallolwut clearly didn't watch the video or give this a second of thought. Obviously the starter is going to be built stronger to accomodate for the extra use.
@@ElderlyAnteateryou still have to start your engine multiple times if you are in stop and go traffic. No one is sitting there idling for 30 minutes saying that's more efficient than shutting it off. It's about constantly having the engine turn on and off just to save a little gas. I doubt car companies care about your future maintenance. Either way the way he presents the experiment is flawed. It does present a scenario that exists in every day commute.
It doesn't take much energy to restart a warm engine. The bearings have residual oil pressure. Plus the computer knows the the exact position of the crankshaft and it can "bump" the cylinders to start the engine spinning - this puts less stress on the starter motor and allows for almost immediate power on takeoff.
I take it that the engine has to be warmed up before the stop/start function begins, otherwise a lot of fuel would be wasted starting the engine from cold or slightly warm.
I own a mk7 golf R. The start stop feature does not work until the water temp reaches 90c. (It also restricts engine performance before the engine reaches oil temps of 90c)
@@RtGFuSiOn 90% of the time when the start stop feature is used you will have been driving long enough that the engine warms up. The obvious exception is if you're literally living in a suburban grid with traffic lights on every other corner, but even then it doesn't take long at all for the engine to warm up. Ideally all cars would have these sensors and this technology (or we just convert to battery/hydrogen vehicles that don't have this issue whatsoever), but for now I think it's safe to say that if you're going to be idling for more than 15-20 seconds you should certainly consider turning your engine off. If you really want to get your fuel economy down you could be more aggressive, but that could get tiring unless you have an automated system
pjf. All engines are different. & residual oil pressure ? , LOL An actual fuel injected engine will start faster than a throttle body injected engine because a throttle body type has to recharge the intake manifold before a restart can even happen . As for the computer knowing where the crank is is pure BS as the engine was still spinning when the engine including the computer were turned off. imo, you have read way too much and think you actually know something.
This reminds me of people who use to say “it takes more electricity to turn the lights on than the lights actually uses when on, so you shouldn’t turn the lights off in a room if you plan on going back into the room later.”
Which _was_ true for some very old neon light fixtures. Those things had such inefficient starters that it in fact used less power to running them for a few minutes, than turning them off and on again. But certainly couldn't be more wrong for your standard light bulbs. Nowadays the starters are much more efficient, but there also isn't really a reason not to use LEDs instead...
I would make a wager that stoplights on the whole waste more fuel than starting / stopping an engine. If the EPA really wanted to cut emissions, it would find a way to time all lights to minimize braking (the literal conversion of momentum into entropy, ie waste) for the bulk of traffic, esp on the heaviest traversed roads.
If only there was such an invention like junction without stoplights where could just drive round. It would really ease traffic, be quicker and all that stuff. I think they should give it some cool futuristic name like Roundabout.
Unfortunately, on some roads, like the majority of which in southern Maine (mainly speaking Portland area), this would be near impossible without immense changes to the road system. Our rush hour jams are simply a result of overcrowding for what the roadway is designed for. For example, it is rare to find two laned roads unless it's by the mall where they had heavy traffic in mind. Most of our traffic comes from commuters going to and from Portland (major city for the area) to small towns in the surrounding area. However, it is all single laned roads, which clog going to Portland between 7:30AM and 9:00AM, as well as from Portland from 4:00PM to 6:00PM.
This is a great idea in theory, but my mother-in-law's, Ford Fusion turns off at horrible times. I was doing a 3 point turn and it decided to stop. Because the engine was no longer on it was essentially in neutral (It's an Automatic (gross, I know)) and my gentle reverse turned into almost rolling back into the ditch. Some car do it way better though, but definitely not Ford.
The climate is cold there so the AC doesn't need to cool the cabin anymore. They can do that. But it's difficult to keep shutting the engine in a desert or tropical region.
My friends do that too, then they’re out complaining about gas... I don’t want to tell them just to see how long it takes for them to think about “changing the gas tank” 😂
On a daily commute you have a good idea of how long the light will stay red. I'm a switcher-offer and I've been working on ten seconds plus minus. Manufacturers (except Lucas of course) test starter motors through tens and hundreds of thousands of cycles, so that isn't going to be a problem. Thank you Jason you have no idea how long I've been waiting for someone to back up commonsense with engineering sense.
My Dodge Hemi gets 5 gas stations to the mile.
ET Don sounds accurate.
When I go looking for new cars, I always look for something terrible on gas, I much rather spend gas $ on that Hemi than have a car that gets 40MPG and doesn't move.
I gotcha beat on that. My Tundra automatically beeps and gives me a warning light every time I pass a gas station.
@@jasoncentore1830 huh?
My mule gets about 5 handfulls of grass to the mile.
I don’t turn my engine off at stop lights, I redline it while I’m waiting
Beat it like a rented mule! :-)
if your gonna waste fuel while idling, might as well waste more while redlining.
Just sitting there BRAAAABAAAABAAAAAAA lol
Yeah that makes so much sense, why has nobody thought about that... Youre supposed to just rev it up to the fuel cutoff (redline) and you'll save fuel.
power move
About 25 years ago my dad said "8 seconds" worth of idle to a car start. Amazed was so on the nose.
It makes sense, warns up for a few seconds at maybe 1,500 RPM to start, figure 4 seconds of startup with more fuel use is equivalent to twice that time at 800 rpm.
I cant really belive the amount he is holding in the beginning, when the average consumption of my cars while idling is around 0,9 to 1.5 liters this should be way less in 3 minutes, also you should factor in how harmfull starting your engine so often is to your car especially when its cold
I too wish, this generation should have learnt something from their parents, or grandparents....
My Grandpa always said "Knowledge not learnt is KNOWLEDGE LOST...."
@@swagger0im0lachskost start/stop systems don't work unless the engine is at the optimal temperature
@@swagger0im0lachskost The car cannot be that cold if it was running less than a minute ago. But I do worry about all the power this consumes especially if the car is being driven short distance and cannot recharge as fast as it loses power.
In India, red lights also have timer display, which shows time left in seconds for the light to turn green, so that a driver can decide if the red light is long enough to turn off the engine. In America, I haven't seen timer beside red lights for vehicles, so I try to estimate the same by looking at pedestrian crossing timer which some junctions have here.
Cap. There are no traffic lights in India.
@@nabotftp41 In the cities there are
That’s because most lights in America are sensor-based and not on a timer.
Come on why would you turn off the engine when the heat in India is unbearable?
As an Indian American who's visited India numerous times, I find this to be completely inaccurate as most drivers treat red lights over there as yield signs lol. But then again, I visited only a limited few areas of India. But still, the fact remains.
There’s a special place in heaven for people that use both imperial and metric
Gio Damn canadians
My work does because we have customers all over the world and blueprints are given by them lol
But the dimensions are all wonky because they kept screwing up the conversions.
So pretty much all of the UK?
or you could grow up and join the rest of the world
I've tried a similar experiment with my motorbike a few years ago. I found that I could save about 10% fuel by stopping the motor at red lights on my usual commute. But I'm not just worried about wearing out the starter motor, I also think that I'd drain the battery pretty quickly without longer stretches to recharge it.
Used to be a bike mechanic, we had some people doing this and they ran exactly into those issues, you shouldn't do it manually if the vehicle doesn't have a dedicated system.
I'd also advise against it on safety grounds, as thinking about when to start/stop the engine might distract you from what's going on in traffic.
@@lucashira337 Yep. Definitely don't do this in urban America; especially after dark.
I'll pick safety everytime, whether on my bike or in my car. I want my engine on so that if I do not like the speed at which the car behind me is coming in, I have the option to go, to move, to drive forward, to get out of the way. Regardless of the wear on the starter or the potential battery drain. My safety comes first. But I also drive very defensively. I often get funny looks at intersections because I will leave whole car lengths in front of me so that I have space cushions.
I've always operated under the assumption that 30 seconds of idling would use about the same amount of fuel as stop starting the engine, but I don't care if I'm waiting for a 2 minute light. Safety first.
You could push start the bike if it is possible on yours
But you might look silly doing it
It's a miracle when my car starts, I'm not about to turn it off!
Well this video is not about old cars, it's all about the cars with auto stop function from factory. They are built for starting and stopping without wearing out
😂😂😂😂 ahhh! I know that feeling not everyone can afford a new car and sometimes its a miracle for some these new cars to start
@@Simon-cb4bq its gonna put more stress on the engine and not last nearly as long.
@@coflyer2949 alot of newer cars have this now. They are designed to start and stop automatically when you come to a stop. The engines are built to start and stop over and over again without wearing out quickly. It's a good feature and cuts down on unnecessary fuel consumption.
@@Josiahsutton1 its extremely jarring in luxury cars for it to start and stop. In Jaguars at the least if you move the wheel even 0.00001 inches it turns the engine on to run the hydraulic steering rack. These systems need refinement and the ability to be shut off. Some companies do not let you. All I want are options.
this is why i love hybrids because those batteries come in clutch to saving gas when you’re in traffic or just stopped in general
This video is nonsense because it wasn't explained on a whiteboard.
It didn't include any formulas either, so his statements can't be considered credible. Lol
David Manivanh I 😅
Lol i was waiting for the white board too
David Manivanh but the videoquality is superior.
The reasoning / explanation didn't require anything to be written down, maybe that's why he didn't include it.
"It turns out engineers ARE capable of thinking about those things." As an engineer, I also know that many project managers are penny-pinchers and don't always listen to the engineers despite the data. Priorities.
Know that feeling.
Reminds me of that Chernobyl show on hbo lmao. Every business and company is trying to save money.
That's because there's a triple constraint as a project manager that they are trying to stay within in order to meet all goals of the project. Staying within the planned cost and whatever buffers were included are fundamental to a project. You start letting all of the stakeholders have their way and the project as a whole will be a failure. What that problem sounds like to me is that the PM didn't do a good job of getting the necessary data during the planning phase in the first place.
@@80s_Gamr and yet there are tens of nuclear reactions running for years with only 1 or 2 major incidents
@@catinthehat5140 I wasn't talking about Chernobyl or nuclear reactors.
I'm just happy when I can get my car to start in general.
MitchManEXE 😂😂😂😂
Same
Haha maybe a starter motor or new battery will solve your problem
Me too haha
😂
My guess was 10 seconds. Most engines are somewhat bigger than 1.5 L, so I may have been pretty close to spot-on. It's shocking to hear that the average American's guess was 3.6 minutes. But I do see a lot of people just sitting in their cars with their engines idling for long periods of time in traffic, while waiting in line at a gas station, after just getting into the car, while waiting for a passenger, etc.
Sorry man I ain't shutting my car off in Arizona while still in it unless I absolutely have to. I do not need to simulate the conditions in my oven when broiling a steak.
@@Demonslayer20111did you know that the windows in cars can go up and down?
@@runed0s86 when it’s 102 degrees outside, rolling the windows down isn’t exactly going to cool you off
I usually turn off my start-stop because it's more of a nuisance, almost always it shuts the engine by the exact time I have to move again. But I always shut the engine manually when I expect a longer wait, maybe except when I really want AC to keep running.
Where I live turning off the car in summer is a death sentence.
In a Phoenix summer if I turn off my car off for 7 seconds I use about 2 gallons of sweat.
Alternative fuel XD
Also the AC is designed to handle the engine turning off, on a longer stop on a hot day the car will actually start back itself if the interior temperature starts to rise too much. Air circulation is still happening of course so it won't feel too bad.
You need to install a water misting system in front of the AC condenser to increase its efficiency.
I was actually thinking about this because I also live in Phoenix lol
@@gunnergrant12 same
now do one explaining that using your turn signal doesn’t wear out the battery
A common misconception among Mercedes and BMW drivers, apparently 😂
I asked a cop a few years back how much money the department saves by ordering their cruisers without turn indicators...he wasn't impressed.
@@1966johnnywayne how much time did you do for that stunt??
@@brucemorris3830 Audi drivers .....
@@TheXanderGrim Audi drivers are RAPIDLY coming into their own as the new worst of the worst, agreed!!!!!!!!!!!! 🙄
Good information. I think a bigger waste than idling at stop lights is people accelerating like a bat out of hell towards those stop lights, slamming on the brakes, then flooring it to the next red light.
Yea but to fix that, you have to tighten the nut that holds the steering wheel.
Sitting alone in the car is the real killer - makes all the math.. meh..
That's most people. U can roll into a red light hoping that it will turn green so a full stop isn't necessary but the person behind you will not care, maybe dart around u to the right and come to a full stop to go right.
Andy Holtz 😁good stuff!
@@Chavezoid It is worse in Poland…
I always heard as a kid it was more about the wear and tear on the engine components then fuel consumption.
But once an engine has been running and oil has been pumped around, starting is far less of an issue.
Same. thats what i was hoping this would account for. Middle-aged cars that use standard 5W 30 or 10 W 30 oil probably depends on how long it takes a warm car to get oil flowing back up at the upper cylinder and valves.
I just made a comment about the same topic
@1:27 Now we know why EE has greyed so early: fuel consumption.
hahaha, most grey hair comments are lame, but this one is choice.
LMAO. I mostly blame my 8 year old.
Maybe EE needs to install a start/stop system to reduce his fuel consumption. :)
@prabal34 Not a start-stop system. He needs a stop-stop system!
But why he look so young lol
Wait let me get this straight... The car uses less fuel when it's not running???
That math checks out.
Weird, huh? Haha
Justin Jones It's amazing, however, the number of people who will try to argue otherwise.
Stop lights are the biggest waster of fuel. I jumped up +8mpg getting home on city streets the other night when I only hit a single stop light in 7 miles.
Fuel savings was the big driver of 'Right Turn On Red' laws -- allowing drivers to turn instead of waiting for the light to change.
@@AndrewAMartin Unfortunately that's only beneficial if your city has competent people programming your traffic lights so you don't get stopped at every light going in a straight line.
“Wait, I’m an American” *proceeds to drink gasoline with a disappointed look* that had me dying lmao
I'm sure it was just water with added colored flavor.
Yeah that had me dying too lol
it wasn't high octane
OMG, that was so unexpected. I am ROTFLMAO!
So many hidden gems in those few frames 😅
I work in service at a dealership, the alternator and starter on an idle stop start car runs about 40% more expensive to replace, the arm battery costs twice as much. Even engineering the starter and alternator to be more robust they still fail at a faster rate than cars not equipped with this function. So bottom line you waste less fuel but more money for repairs.
When you think about it, your car gets 0 mpg when it’s idling
Dane Taylor broooo
I dont think you have to think about it
You could just think of it as hours per gallon, which makes a bit more sense in our non freedom units since it's the other way round (l/100km -> l/h)
sooooo using european measure l/100km in gas usage it's infinite
Exactly, the lower the mpg the higher the consumption.
What if I told you... My car takes more than 7 seconds to start😂😂😂
If it's an automatic with all the computers and junk these days seems like it can take 15-20 seconds for it to be "ready" to move once you let go of the key...
Get a better car ;-)
@@nigratruo better? Newer ones seem much worse. Especially push button start type if you put it in gear too quickly after hitting the button it will stall not just be laggy. And many new ones make you wait a bit before they allow you to re-crank, the key or button seems to go thru the computer before the starter solenoid.
LMAOOOO
I think you need new spark plugs, a stater, and maybe a battery.
Did RUclips recommend me this because I just sat in my car watching RUclips for 30minutes before walking 10 feet into my house.
Xavier Kane it depends. Were you idling? Lol
30mins? Lol
hahahahha
Was your wife inside the house?
Most relatable comment I’ve ever seen
It would be interesting to see how quickly the oil pressure drops when an engine is shut off. And if the fluctuation in oil pressure due to constant stop starts effects engine wear? I have always wondered why auto manufacturers never considered an electric oil pump to pressurize the system before starting an engine to reduce wear. Also if the alternator and starter are one unit in a stop/ start system does that double the possibility for failure in the system and also increase the expense?
Probably because electric oil pumps would be much more prone to failure compared to those driven by the engine, which is a reason why BMW has so many problems with their water pumps failing over the years because they chose to make them electric.
Majority of engine makers now are using coated bearings so an extra layer of protection.
Very fast actually, within 1-2 seconds pressure drops about 90%... at least if your car has 100'000miles... new engines i dont know, but it will still drain fast, because oil isnt compressable, so already a tiny leak will make pressure drop very fast...
My concern is not about the engineers designing a starter for more starts. It’s the fact that all the accountants care about is the starter lasting through warranty.
Yes, but you could say that about _any_ components, the starter motor isn't any different from that point of view.
The price of replacing the starter far out weighs the cost of gas.
Let alone when that sensor fails .
And you have to pay to the mechanics shop to have it replaced
How about when you lose you job from showing up late ,or not at all .
@@rtelles1127 And how many cars with stop/start have had the starter motor fail because of this? The savings you make on fuel will definitely outweigh the cost of a new starter motor if, like the vast majority of people, you don't wear out your starter motor and so you don't need to get a new one.
@@stevieinselby Maybe. But I highly doubt it. My starter went out on my Honda 100 miles out of the warranty. Luckily, Honda was willing to overlook the fact that it was only 100 miles outside of it and replaced it as if it was still under warranty, free of charge. It would've been 500 or more. It would be interesting to see how much on average an idle start/stop mechanism wears on the starter. I really can't see it being that much of a savings.
@@stevieinselby if the car was designed with a start/stop system, the starter is also designed to start many more times over it's life.
i would buy a car with a start/stop system, but i wouldn't do it manually on a car not designed for that.
This is the exact sort of content I'd subbed your channel for and you haven't disappointed for the last 5 years! Not to mention, I like your sense of humour too!
Keep up the good work!
I appreciate the kind words, thanks for watching all this time! :)
A friend of mine used to leave his van idling when he'd stop by a friend's, or ran inside a store, because "it takes more gas to start it than it does to leave it idling". I said "Not when you leave it idling for half an hour it doesn't!"
This was more accurate with carburetors where you would need to choke them and dump an extra rich mixture in at the start which was often quite wasteful. Now with fuel injection it isn’t correct at all.
@@hugegamer5988 exactly. And his van was a late 80s Chevy G20 conversion van. Which had TBI.
Easy to steal as well
I'm Australian. I didn't know, but I tested it by deciding to stop the engine at my 8 stoplights in my town & it appeared to save fuel compared driving like a typical driver. 7 seconds is longer than I expected.
A big study was done in the UK by a big motoring organisation, all cars pollute, terribly, but came to the conclusion, taking in the huge amount of energy it takes to tool up and produce a car, is to keep the old ones going as long as possible. .i have a bullet proof mazda 6, 2003 that will probably run forever
Amen my 2003 Toyota takes a licking and keeps on ticking.
I have a bullet proof police interceptor. We shall reign supreme during the apocalypse
I have a 2002 Lexus LS 430 with 221k miles. Going strong, with only one expense outside of routine maintenance that cost more than $200: wheel bearing and hub assembly. Other issues include trunk and hood struts/shocks ($15 a piece), and two power lock motors ($7 inner motor instead of the full lock assembly).
I have a 2004 Gran Marquis with over 300k miles and she Will. Not. Die.
I got a new truck recently, so now it’s up to me to keep her in shape until she dies or I pass her down to my future kids in who knows how long
@@waqasusmans Same with my 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor. The only reason it needed rear wheel bearings is because of me backing it down boat ramps into salt water. It also needed a starter motor ($65 for a foreign knock-off which works great after three more expensive remanufactured OEM ones didn't work), a window motor (don't remember the cost), and an AC over-pressure valve ($10).
Do a video on start-stop starters, and how they are different from regular starters...
I like this idea!
Then there's Mazda's i-stop, which works without using a starter motor. After the engine shuts off, the pistons are aligned ready for fuel injection and ignition, which could kick the engine back into life.
The ones that I have seen use the alternator as a motor to turn the engine over instead of using the starter. Much more gentle on the mechanical parts not having a gear slam into the flywheel ring gear every time.
@@louispoche4312 thats genius. Even better now you dont have to worry about replacing a starter. Alternators can already be repurposed as Brushless DC motors but often arent used for such purposes. This would be a good way to integrate it into a vehicle
@@OtherDalfite so alternators will become 600 bucks are more... no thanks.
And that's why I stop the engine at each Red Light.
(Ok, I do, but not for that reason, it's because it fails at idle rpms and stops anyway).
That's not a flaw, it's a feature. :D
Smart car maybe ?
Have you checked or replaced your idle position sensor or throttle position sensor yet?
Just pat the dash and say "Clever girl...."
Replace your headlight fluid
literally all my gripes about the start/stop systems have been completely crushed by this video lmao. well done, sir.
Great! Now, learn when to use the word "literally".
@@carlwilliams6977 I used it the way it is meant to be used. As in 'not figuratively'.
@@carlwilliams6977 literally crushed his statement with that, man.
Damn, I literally wouldn't of known D:
@@aes0p895 You can crush a grape. How do you literally crush a gripe? Sounds pretty figurative to me! In addition...as is usually the case lately, there was no need to say literally to begin with! If you hadn't used it, you couldn't have misused it! Learn, or wallow in your ignorance. The choice is yours!
Start/Stop systems are mandatory by law in germany for like 7 years now. The system never shut off the car if its too hot outside so the AC is running or the other way when its way too cold. I think start/stop systems are engineered very good after having them around for 7 years now.
My Audi is now 6 years old and I never had to change a thing which wasnt on the plan.
They wear more on the engine and cause oil circulation issues, this isn’t debatable so don’t bother debating. Germany is bad
@@TheOne_p how do they wear more on the engine?
@@TheOne_p "So don't bother debating" is all I need to read to realise you have no actual argument or data to back up your claims. Also you think an entire country is bad because you don't like their automotive regulations? You honestly sound like an insufferable person to be around if this is how you talk to people
@@TheOne_p compared to what is Germany bad?
@@anantav51Other than the unpleasant idea of your car being able to shut itself off on its own, Modern engines are pretty well built for the most part but even with that fact cars with stop start systems will see increased wear and earlier failure in certain components, The most affected are your starter and battery.
The constant drops in oil pressure really aren't doing your car any favors either.
[ commenting before i watch ] I've always had these questions. This is why this channel exists. Somebody once told me starting the engine (ignition) consumes more fuel than idling for 5 minutes.
I wonder what the numbers are for carbureted engines, which is probably when these statements first started being made. I dont see SAE running these tests on '69 camaros and chargers however,
Yeah, I think everybody has heard that, but I think that the myth behind this is when you compare it to starting a cold engine. when the engine is cold it takes a while before fuel consumption is normalized.
Also commenting before watching. If what you were told were true, I'd expect you'd see your fuel needle drop noticeably every time you turned your car's engine off and on.
And for carbureted engines there is the probability that it will not start quickly and you'd have to pump the gas a few times to get it to go. For my daily driver motorcycle, sometimes it don't even start hahahaha
maybe for a jet engine. i thought the same thing though.
"wait im american" drinks antifreeze. solid gold on so many levels. give the man an Emmy
benz merc You seem mad would you like a popsicle to calm down?
benz merc it's summer here. Do you want a popsicle?
@benz merc Ya you're definitely mad
or give the man a hemi? 🤔
@benz merc dog ur pissed
I live in New Hampshire, we get cold winters. My neighbor has four pickup trucks, three of them Diesels, he has remote starters on them . Three of the trucks are driven by people in his house, they will start the engines and let them idle for 20-30 minutes when it is really cold. It's noisy and the exhaust fumes are obnoxious. Other than that he's a great neighbor.
If the light turns green and 8 people in front of me all have to turn their car back on and put it in gear first because of this video... I will find you EE
😂😂😂
Hence automation
Takes less than a second - no time if you're lazy and drive an auto
Whats the problem with waiting like 3 seconds more?
Lag, which means 3 less cars getting through the traffic.
How about we synchronize traffic lights to reduce unnecessary idling in the first place. Then we can save fuel, time, AND starter motors!
No, it`s not good for fuel companies. Illuminates eweriwhere )))))
P.S. In Odessa, Ukraine (my city) we optimize some lights fore speed 50-60km/h(35mph), but this give no results in heavy traffic hours, but it`s good for low traffic, when you even can use cruise and passing always at green light.
Traffic lights are already synchronized but that can only be done to a certain extend
How about getting rid of traffic lights altogether and finally stop driving ourselves and let computers do it.
What we need is an app for the smartphone that not only gives you directions but turns the lights green as you get to the intersection.
Timon Schneider
No newer
I like to drive myself
If you ride a horse, you will actually be making gas as the horse idols.
🤯
But if it turns off, it gets even more gas
@@gabe8168 it will completely, totally, destroy the horse if you shut it off.
@@gabe8168 But if it turns off you'll have to jumpstart it with CPR and I find that it is quite a hassle
*idles
I’d personally like to see a study on how extra wear starting/stoping an engine often causes. I mean at the very least your putting extra wear on your starter and depending on the car the cost of replacing the starter more often may be more than your fuel savings
He talked about the issue with starter in the video
Starters are engineered to handle a ton of starts, usually you won't have more than one replacement in the vehicle's lifespan. They didn't just make a thing that will increase starter usage by many fold and think nah, that should be fine.
plus all the shifting around of the transmission
The starter motor including the solenoid that pushes the gear to engage the flywheel has been tested through a few hundred thousand cycles, no worries. Have you considered the extra wear on the engine from leaving it idling? Main bearings, conrods, pistons, cylinders, camshafts, cam followers, valves and guides...
Sometimes I will turn off the car instead of idling; most often in a drive-thru restaurant. Why I tend to idle in a traffic jam: because the ass behind me starts leaning on the mfking horn if I don't move up 0.000002 cm once the opportunity arises.
@acktually aintaddingup a lot of fast food locations are drive thru only since covid hit. It's more of a problem with too little staff because no one want to work anymore now tht unemployment and government checks pay more than actually working
Autonomous cars being ubiquitous should help those kinds of drivers calm down a lot a bit
@@lasercat538 Uh no. That's the employer cutting the budget because their overall profits are down.
@@sportagus3 overall profits are down, but we're hiring at $11 starting out. That's what it was before covid, but now we're understaffed. We maintain 17 hardee's locations and most of them are understaffed. There's been multiple times where they had to close the store for the day cause everyone called off or walked out. Getting money for sitting at your house doing nothing is a decent motivator for not getting an actual job
@@lasercat538 then improve the conditions for the workers
I used a lot my parent's car, which has a start/stop system. I have to say, I was pretty annoyed by it. A reason might be that the engine stopping is unfamiliar, so my brain registered it as something going wrong, and I thought that surely the car consumed so much fuel restarting the engine anyway.
I'm glad you clarified this subject
Yes, it takes some getting used to. I hated start stop systems but I got used to it after a short while.
The trick is to let go of the brake lightly 1 or 2 seconds before you want to go so the engine is started right when you want to go.
I've driven plenty of cars that were old and were developing problems, so I'm actually somewhat familiar with my car stalling at a stoplight. The only thing that kept me from worrying (I knew the car had start/stop, but it still somehow surprised me) was the engine shutting off "cleanly", no chugging, no spikes then dips in rpm, just the engine shutting off.
The newer systems are dramatically better than the ones of only a few years ago. I too was very annoyed by the original start-stop systems.
They tend to turn off way too quickly. As opposed to the 7 seconds mentioned in this video, a lot of the time, the engine will turn off at a stop sign
I’ve always turned my truck off at railroad tracks when I know I’ll be idling for a while...fiancé laughs at me...who’s laughing now 😬😬😬
greenpeace?
Her, cus her engine will last longer
You I guess, but unless you show her this, she wouldn't care.
@@Hans-gb4mv Yeah but it's not good for your engine to constantly turn it off and on.
the more you start the car the faster it will wear engine starter and car battery and it will cost you more than oil savings.. So at the end she will laugh
I'm in the UK and I recently changed to a Skoda DCT automatic, with start/stop system. The problem I have with it is that there's a delay of a couple of seconds from deciding to pull out of a junction to the car starting to move, and that's far too long when you're trying to pull into a gap in the traffic. Therefore I've been habitually turning it off when driving, and turning it on in situations where the delay won't matter.
PS: A few years prior I hired a manual car with start/stop, and this worked really well. By the time I'd put it into gear from neutral, the engine was running at full power. I love everything about my new Skoda, except for the start/stop... :😞
I learned that green kool-aid can power car engines.
I learned in the Navy that Grape Kool-aid is really good for stripping wax off the floors.
Bruh
Plot twist. It was antifreeze.
Jeffrey Lebowski damn lol
Don't drink the coolaid
It's videos like this that are the reason I subscribe to this channel. Like most self-styled "enthusiasts" I didn't like the start/stop system on my new GTI and thought mistakenly that any fuel efficiency advantages were probably cancelled by the fuel needed to restart the engine. But as an old professor of mine once said, "The thing about data is that it sure does cut the bulls**t."
In the meantime, I discovered another benefit of the system. Each day I make a trip to the local Starbucks and wait in line in an enclosed "tunnel" outside the store. Typically, my engine shuts down when I pull into the tunnel and when I reach the window. The baristas at the window have thanked me on multiple occasions for shutting off my engine, noting that they have to breathe exhaust fumes all day long. It's not a big thing but it's worth noting that in addition to reducing fuel consumption to some degree, start/stop technology makes the air a bit more breathable for everyone, some more than others.
For the baristas!
@@khargan27 I suggest you avoid these locations then. I have been driving for over 25 years never once been put into a situation where being able to pull off immediately would have saved damage to any car. Could you also elaborate on what happened, as I have yet to see when this could happen, I am not trolling, I am genuinely interested in being educated.
Khargan: Since you would "never own a vehicle with a start/stop system" I suspect you've never even driven one. I have. Several, in fact, including the two I own. Besides, the notion that less than a half second hesitation in your car's movement would avoid or even mitigate the impact of a vehicle bearing down on you at speed is ridiculous, especially since you would not be able to judge whether the vehicle was approaching too quickly until it was nearly on you. Furthermore, even if you make such a judgement accurately, you're probably better off bracing for a rear end collision than plowing into a vehicle in front of you or running a red light where cross traffic could well result in a far worse collision. Finally, do you really think a manufacturer would install a dangerously sluggish start/stop system in a vehicle sold to the public? If you can document any such system, feel free to cite it. I thought not.
Rear end collisions are, indeed, a problem. But they nearly always result from vehicles following too closely, a situation that has nothing to do with a start/stop system. And thankfully, such collisions have been reduced significantly since vehicles were required to add a third high mounted brake light.
Your response would be more effective if you included any facts. You're correct that you didn't say "dangerously sluggish." What you did say was that a start/stop system would prevent you from avoiding a rear end collision. If you meant something other than "dangerously sluggish" feel free to clarify.
I'll leave it to others to determine who has provided facts and logic in this discussion.
Engine idling with air conditioning on for one hour in Arizona = Worth whatever it costs.
An interesting question would be whether the aircon uses all the power generated by the idling engine that would otherwise be wasted when the A/C is off. Because if all that wasted energy can be used to run the A/C instead, well then it's no longer wasted so you aren't losing anything by idling.
@@Berkeloid0 It would deffo use more fuel than just idling without ac on, how much would be interresting to know though
Just keep the windows close when using your air conditioning, otherwise the ambient temperature in Arizona will decrease.
Yup! Especially when the local 5-0 closes a busy highway due to a minor fender bender, and you're stuck in the middle lane. Gotta love Oro Valley.
^^
I would be curious to see engine wear over the life of a vehicle. I wonder if start stop that many times has any affect on cylinder walls or any other hard parts
Tears up the starter, with newer engines it causes excessive wear on the valvetrain.
@@megamiteexplosion
I've been using Start/Stop system on my scooter and so far no problem with the engine, there was a problem where the battery dropped below 12,4V and shut off the engine
@@megamiteexplosion or your brain lol. Cars with start/stop have re-designed starters and engine to support such workload.
@@megamiteexplosion starter on my coworkers truck went out after only 9 months
I wonder if leaving the engine idling causes any wear on cylinder walls or any other hard parts.
Me: starts looking at comments
Jason: "Now I see your mind wandering"
Me: "SORRY SORRY!"
I was literally reading your comment when he said it
@Zachzedzach why does this seem to be way to common- I'm scared it happened to me as well
Same lmao. Makes sense, main info is over about 1min before we get to your comment 🤷♂️
Turn off your engine at the traffic light, floor it when it turns green. Saving fuel 😉
Just wait until your starter chews up all the teeth on your flywheel. Now you have to drop the transmission to replace it. Not to mention you might need a starter too. Now you have to spend a ton of money instead of just letting it run.
@@willjudice9560 actually i used to do that on a 20yo mazda with 180Mm, was able to get 5l/100km for ~10l. Did the start stop thing for maybe 10Mm. Car got scraped for being a rust bucket not worth investing into(the floor bord was litteral rust ). The starter was fine though.
Will Judice my car doesnt use starter motor to start itself
Counterintuitively, You're actually potentially right. An engine is usually most efficient at peak torque, which is pretty much peak power. So it takes less fuel to get from 0-60mph if you keep the engine at peak torque (assuming no wheel spin or clutch slip) than slowly accelerating. BUT assuming your journeys are the same distance, you spend longer at that higher speed, and for a non zero length cruise time, you use more fuel than if you had accelerated slowly, because you spend longer at a higher speed, and wind resistance gets higher with speed. BUT it turns out there is a most efficient cruise speed, and it's something like 45mph. Any slower or faster uses more fuel. So this only applies if the top speed is over 45mph... So accelerate up to
No, no, no the starter is "special" (bulshit)..
"Stopping the engine when coming to a stop"
*Doesn't use clutch pedal when stopping*
*Engine stalls*
*Clutch savings*
*Fuel savings*
*Ka ching*
ez
Aaaand no brakes then you crash into car in front of you...
@@shahs.7910 It's better to save your brake pads for a real emergency!
Wait, do you really need to press the clutch in when braking?
@@danield8528 depends on how much your revs will drop, if you are going to stop then yes
This is a weird premise in general, I’ve never stopped to think if it takes gas or not to start an engine, I’ve never thought about stopping it. Why would I? It’s worth the money in gas to have the A/C and radio on at a stop light or if your just waiting for somone at a pick up or just chilling in your car for an hour. How much gas I’m using is never something that crosses my mind until I’m on the 1.5 hour interstate drive twice a week.
Next video :
"does starting/stopping wears your engine off?"
hamzterix well I know that a lot of manufacturers use an oil feed system that always allows oil to be sent to the major components within fractions of a second upon start up. With modern engines I'd assume not as much as you might think. But I'm also just an automotive tech and not an engineer lol
Yes i need this video.
Does it at least wear the starter motor off?? I would assume so.
Ariel Casanueva That’s what I want to know, surely a starter motor that’s being used dozens of times for a long-ish journey compared to just once in initial startup of one without stop/start it would in theory cause a load more wear and premature failure?
Starting your motor causes wear and tear period
The rule of thumb my father taught me was actually 7 seconds so it's good to know he wasn't misleading me.
I don't usually stop my car any more though since I've had a few too many cases of old cars not starting again at a red light.
My car's generally pretty reliable for being 54 years old, once it's started and run for a bit, even after setting for a week or two or even longer, it does perfectly fine. There's nothing more satisfying than having an old car start turn-key like a modern car after pumping the gas pedal a few times. Especially now that I've had the electronic choke dialed in by someone who knows what they were doing with the carburetor and it's not stuck on constantly making the car run excessively rich and flooding itself all the time. Guy who put it on clearly rushed the job.
Probably cuz you used your starter motor 20× more than necessary
@@sgtpepper6379 Moreso the cars were just old. The one that gave us that problem was coming up on about 30 years old and it just didn't make sense financially to fix the issue.
@@tempest_dawn You can fix those issues easily on 80's cars, but 90's cars have fuel injection so that's a different story.
never stop my car on red light but since I watched this video I feel very comfortable turning it off whenever is an accident on the road and I get stuck in the traffic jam for several minutes or when im waiting for someone I just shut off the engine and roll down a little bit the windows
What I got out of this is that if I'm feeling thirsty I can just drink my car fuel.
@Taylor Wang Funny guy. Apparently they don't have humor in your country. I'm sad for you, Wang.
@@xiradioI think you're the one that didn't understand the joke
@@xiradio just sit down.
I’m sure the start/stop system saves fuel over a conventional system. The loss of a/c at a stop light would be enough for me to not want the start/stop system. But, I’d like to see a cost comparison of fuel savings vs the cost of replacing that starter and the giant battery that system uses.
I’ve had a 2014 car with a start-stop system. Had to change the battery once, after about 7 years. The new AGM battery was roughly €120. I’ve never had issues with the starter after almost 10 years.
So in my case, the car absolutely saved more fuel than the cost of a single new AGM battery in 10 years
The fuel consumption is not what worries me. I'm worried about the unnecessary wear on my engine and components
My first thought too.
From idling or from repeated stop-starts?
The latter I guess, and if so, agree on.
Hot starts aren’t going to cause much engine wear. Your concern is unnecessary.
@@bf3and4highlights83 wont that 8 percent of saved money fuel be more than enough to replace the battery and have a bunch left?
@@bf3and4highlights83 The battery is being recharged when the engine is on, you know? Maybe turning the engine on and off multiple times in a few minutes doesn't really save money, but doing it when waiting at an occasional traffic light will very likely be benificial. Also why do you assume that starting an engine wears out any parts (apart from maybe battery, which isn't expensive)?
I the more northern regions, we would like to save fuel by turning the car off, but there is no guarantee that it will start up again.
yeah and you can save another fuel by just pushing the car, and be healthy too -- free exercise;)
Yup... if you turn it off while idling your car might turn into an ice cube.
My car in the winter hates me she don't like cold. I always apologize to her and I feel bad when I gotta use her in winter
How Long are you leaving it off? A couple minutes off with a restart would make no difference even at -40 C/F temperature.
Do you let your car idle overnight, so you don't have to start it in the morning?!? Get an engine block heater in that case!!
Buy old japanese, mercedes or volvo.
Wait... I'm an american! *drinks 'fuel'* lmao smart and entertaining good job man.
Next, it'll be tide pods or something...
I thought if it as drinking the koolaid lol
Maybe it's just because I've spent a lot of time in labs, but watching him drink that green liquid from the graduated cylinder while talking about gasoline made me feel physically ill.
Crushenator500 Yeah, it's funny to think about, but of course, it's almost certainly just colored water.
Josh Foster Definitely green apple sour puss
0:04 I was told that it took the same amount to start an engine as it did to idle for 30 seconds. But I no longer believe this because newer cars seem to turn off and start up every time they come to a complete stop. And I believe that is for fuel efficiency. Which must mean any amount of idling uses more fuel than turning it on. Which kinda makes sense. Why would it require extra fuel to get started? Doesn't seem like it would. Then you'd have a fuel rich ignition and that's no good afaik... Now let's see if I'm right!
Engineers think about adding a longer lasting starter, while auto companies need parts to break to make money. Somewhere in the middle you find the actual starter life.
Busi Xnesse overengineered obsolescence pog
Most stop start systems dont use the starter, they prime the cylinder and just ignite it to restart the engine.
Never mind starter life, how about engine life with start/stop systems?
@@EdmontonRails one thing is for certain: they will last less
@@EdmontonRails This is what I want to know....
To save gas, I shut my car off in traffic jams whenever there's I hill I can slowly coast down. To go up the hill without turning on the engine, I just give the finger to the guy behind me.
Dbf Crell ahahaa
Lol!
I tried to do that put you loose the power brakes, so yeah pretty unsafe
Tosser! Going downhill in gear uses no fuel, but you keep servo-assistance for your brakes and don't die.
Pretty sure that's essentially riding the clutch, that give you 3 points on your licence and a hefty fine if you done that where I live.
*shuts off engine at every stoplight*
End of week: *calls tow truck because the starter ate your flywheel*
wanted to like this but i couldnt ruin the 69
The flywheel would eat the starter. Don't ask how I know.
@@paulmvn5431 It can go either way, but far more often in fleet maintenance, it's the flywheel missing its teeth in my experience. I maintain a fleet that does this kind of start and stop usage 6 days a week.
@@CapitalWorksPro weird. I've destroyed 3 starters within 50k miles on my Econoline van.
@@paulmvn5431 it's highly likely that your flywheel is a bit beefier than ours lol
Poland has nice stop lights that tell you how long to wait before the light goes green. So you know easily if its worth shutting down. But a lot of places dont have those lights, so you might not think it's worth stopping./
"I don't really care what you do" - love it
@Fawexx No correlation whatsoever.
I drove into Dallas a couple months back in my classic truck. I came to a stop light in traffic, and when the light turned green I was surrounded by an orchestra of starters
In England, the main purpose of stop/start systems is to get around our vehicle taxation, which is based on emissions test figures. The result of this is that a 2 litre BMW 3-seies with stop/start pays less tax than a 1 litre Toyota Aygo without it. The BMW owner will the disable the Stop/start system anyway because (1) it's irritating, and (2) "Eco-warriors" tend not to buy 3-Series beemers.
I think this is true no matter what country you live in!
@@fransoto8343
It's not almost like that, it's like that. Here in Germany a car that consumes less fuel in relation to the mass of the vehicle gets a better pollution badge than a car that actually consumes less fuel. So an big SUV weighting two tons is "more entvironmetally friendly" than a small car
A beemer is a bmw motorbike, a 3 series (BMW car )is a bimmer
get some stainless valves and exhaust system, vitrile fuel gaskets and run e85 then NO TAX, as water vapor is produced
Anton B his comment was sarcasm by the way. Just to let you know.
I remember hearing it was around 30 seconds of idling to start a bigger engine. I wouldn't be sold on a start/stop system though. I mean they work but in the end did you save enough to pay for the extra cost or maintenance? If the goal is to save money just buy a more efficient or smaller car to start with
But if people cared about fuel economy they wouldn’t drive 7.2 liter v12 gasoline engines
Sums it up nicely. What manufactures think, what governments think, and what 'people' think. Disconnect.
um they don't...
Now I have seen a Lamborghini LM002 on the road, but I'm not exactly tripping over them. Do see my fair share of 4cyl powered cars though.
How many people actually drive one of those every day?...
I want one, btw.
The Dueling Beard
same goes for anyone giving a damn about the planet.
In Germany you actually have to shut off your engine if you hold at a train cross. But a lot of people don't know that.
In the Netherlands, it's the same. I always shut off my engine whenever I have to wait at a level crossing and a draw bridge
Two cucked nations.
@@bjthedjdutchdude1992 I think I actually never saw a draw bridge here. But I guess they are rather common in the Netherlands
@@tcode3564 where is "here?"
@@bjthedjdutchdude1992
Probably germany, though they definitely exist over smaller rivers or near bigger mooring (?) places for boats.
I remember having watched a video a while back mentioning that Mercedes claims its start-stop-system is effective at slightly
less than 1 second. As I live in Germany where most people still drive stick cars, this is about the time you need to press down the clutch pedal (you need to put your car in neutral and let go of the clutch pedal to engage the start-stop system). This would mean you save every time you use it.
I personally drive a Mazda. Back when I bought it I watched a couple of videos. They have some restrictions for the start-stop system to engage. 1) The engine needs to be warmed up 2) the battery needs to be at at least 80% 3) the A/C needs to run at a low setting. This all has to do with the fact that they stop the cylinders in perfect position to start up the engine mostly with ignition. That is also the reason why the engine is stopped for only small periods of time, so that it does not cool too much for this approach to work. I guess most manufacturers put a lot of thought into this to actually make it work and beneficial.
Fun fact: Mazda has a display how much you saved while using the start-stop system. According to the display in my car I stood still for over 600km by now 😉. Also, according to the display I’ve planted a couple of trees 🌳.
That's bs my friend, i'm sorry to say. Sure the cilinders are in the correct position. But there are parts of the car which have to be lubricated again and making the car start the whole process again while there are parts which are already warmed and lubbed. Sure, if you're owning a car at max like 10 years you wouldn't notice the effects, but only time will tell how much do these tings hold. Personally, I have it turned off, on my Focus ST-Line. The amount of fuel i save is so negligible that I prefer to have it turned off
We have a 2016 mazda 6 with a 2.5 L auto. The engine seems to disconnect from the trans. while at a stop
Whom can explain this ?
@@jeffmercier7252 : What do you mean by "The engine seems to disconnect from the trans"? At a stop, with the engine running, it _has_ to be disconnected from the transmission in _some_ way.
@@Milesco the engine revs down a lil then when I release the brake the engine seems to re engage to.the transmission is all I feel while driving
@@jeffmercier7252 : Unfortunately that explanation isn't enough for me to diagnose your problem -- if in fact it *_is_* a problem. It looks like you're going to have to bring it into a repair shop for an in-person analysis.
Very interesting! I was always skeptical about the actual benefits of these sorts of systems, as the cons of wear and tear seemed more tangible than the promise of fuel saving, so it's neat to get a real sense for how much fuel is really consumed or saved. With that said though, I still think this is a bandaid fix when it comes to the overall issue of car infrastructure being inherently less efficient and sustainable than public transit, when it comes to city commuting at least, which is where start-stop technology is targetted. I still think it has its niche, but car manufacturers and lawmakers really do need to be prioritizing sustainable transportation more. Just my stance on the matter
It's not about fuel saving, it's about emissions standards for manufacturers. You are not getting that Euro 6 rating for your engine unless you turn it off every time the car stops.
If you are in a lot of stop start traffic every day, a hybrid probably makes more sense. Pure electric in the stop start and engine on to recharge or in open long distance traffic
Public transportation is not automatically more efficient. It's only more efficient in very specific situations. If the train/bus is carrying a lot of passengers, then it is somewhat more efficient than a car. But if the train/bus has very few passengers, then it will be wildly inefficient compared to cars. I lived in Europe for years, and the trains/busses are often close to empty. The only time they get full is during the morning and evening rush hour. The rest of the day they're horribly inefficient because they're traveling the same routes on the same schedules, but only carrying a small handful of passengers. Cars have the benefit that they're only used when they are needed, they aren't running on a set schedule, so cars can often be more efficient.
@@SchemingGoldberg First off, I appreciate you for taking the time to consider how car infrastructure compares to public transit. I do implore you, however, to look into NotJustBikes here on RUclips, particularly his Strong Towns series videos on the economics of cars and his anecdotal videos. The videos can be fairly clickbait-y, but I encourage you to give his arguments some proper consideration.
In brief however: car dependency is, in actuality, expensive and unsustainable, inefficient and frustrating, and dangerous and stressful. Cars don't scale well leading to inevitable rush hour traffic, there's necessarily more expensive water and electricity infrastructure due to the lower density development, loss of life through poor safety and inherent human error, emissions and many other environmental concerns, increased social isolation, stress, noise and its impact on quality of life and productivity, etc etc etc
Can public transit be done poorly? Absolutely. Can car transit be done well? Given the associated death rates and death tolls alone, absolutely not. When considering all the other drawbacks, you'd need to be misinformed and/or a morally ambiguous investor.
With that said though, thank you for reading, and I do hope you can open your mind to the idea of doing away with car dependency. If I never have to sit through another 4 hours of bumper-to-bumper traffic, it'll be too soon.
My car tells me how much the start/stop has saved since i last reset my trip odo. I dont do a lot of around town driving and found that it only saved about 1/5th of a litre in 30-35L of driving. Would probably be significantly higher if i drove around town more but i would rather pay an extra $5-10 a tank just to not have start stop turned on
It would be nice to see a follow-up study designed to measure engine wear in idle vs start-stop conditions.
Not much, because the engines are still pretty hot when they restart, so the usual cold start engine wear isn't really happening.
Honda G1 insight engines last around 300-400k miles... so pretty good I guess. Not much different than other honda engines.
As your turbo charger can be superhot its not good idea to shut engine right when you stop
@@michalhudek In a turbocharged vehicle equipped with idle stop, manufacturers either fit an auxiliary oil pump to keep cooling the turbo, or they use a temperature sensor to prevent idle stop while the turbo is too hot. Honda is shipping their 1.5T in almost every car in their lineup now, as well as the 2.0T in Acura vehicles, and all are equipped with idle stop. Engineers know what they're doing.
Not good for the life of the starter motor.. F auto stop start!
Rule #1 of Science: NEVER drink experiments
Kiraro The Kitsune but isn’t cooking a Science
What if you're a food scientist?
It's...it's not *always* drink experiments...? I think I might need some ipecac. Next you're going to tell me not to induce vomiting!
Rule #2 of Science: Unless it turns out to be an artificial sweetener.
@@theshadetreewelder3523Not, it's magick
I love it when you assume all of your viewer gonna argue with you. Relax, we're here to learn.
Haha, not all of them! Thanks for being kind. :)
So you're saying he's wrong?
mbrunnme he’s wrong when he thinks that 0.0003991403132% of the United States population is enough people to say “HEY GUYS AMERICANS DONT KNOW HOW MUCH FUEL IS USED WHEN THEIR CAR IS IDLING”
Top Ramen do you know how extrapolation works?
ABC123 basically a fancy word for assuming.
If you really wanna go there, then every American is a drug addict. According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 21.5 million American adults (aged 12 and older) battled a substance use disorder in 2014.
In the 70’s during the Gas Crisis The Government told the Public that it took more to shut off and restart then to let it run! Typical Government BS !!!! Thanks for the Clarification!
1:27 drank the Kool-Aid.
Start sniffing E85
That wasn't Kool-Aid. It was blinker fluid.
Pretty sure he's got a Crème de menthe addiction ;)
SicknessClips It wasn't blinker fluid. It was Clorox bleach.
Shoulda used watered down apple juice instead of the green fluid ... woulda freaked out more people.
Do we take into consideration other factors?
- wearing the engine on starts, battery for example.
- special parts required, battery again (AGM), starter you mentioned.
You don't need an AGM battery for the basic principle of turning the engine off if you're going to just park up for more than a few minutes lol. AGM batteries are for cars specifically designed to switch the engine off even if you're stopped for a few seconds.
The problem are people who idle for ages doing nothing. Usually taxis at the train station or people sat in their cars pulled over on the phone, or sat in their cars in the parking lot with their engine running for half an hour.
Had a start stop car for 5 years, never had an issue. The starter is beefier and the ECU will have set conditions for the engine to meet before the start stop action can take place so that there is no extra wear. It works great.
@emosh73 you won't wear out your starter though. They are made to handle it and I have first hand experience.
@emosh73 well, if you had a start stop system in your escape and get 15 mpg on average, with varying 8-5 % reduction in fuel consumption as per the video you would have used about 500-800 gallons of fuel less. You do the math on how much money that is, depending on what fuel costs you.
spook
It's as much about emissions as it is fuel savings. The EPA is constantly pushing manufacturers to have better emissions, the fuel savings are a byproduct of the manufacturer trying to meet the emissions regulations.
Really jealous of that Oil filter location
So accessible on the subarus
Me splashing oil on my face every time I have to get under my lancer to change the oil filter.
yeah but then you cant prefill the filter right?
idk about other vw cars but mine has it in one of filter housing where you replace the filter inside and its fantastic and also located in the engine bay. highly recommend not laying under the car getting covered in oil
But why doesn't the base match the diameter of the filter? Mine Subaru's like that, too. Makes it look I went cheap on the filter.
😀Man ! the combo "Wait, I am American" / "proceed to drink fuel" was so perfectly timed it deserves its own thumbs up !
I have been thinking about this so much more lately. Just a 48V mild hybrid system would mitigate the losses of creature comforts entirely, through all of traffic.
But hybrid systems have other advantages, like regenerative braking, which makes a big difference for stop-start driving
considering all of the obvious advantages, and how old most of the involved technology really is, it's kind of astonishing how hybrids and EV's are such a rarity.
@D R What advantage would you lost by choosing the 2.0L hybrid?
@D R the XV with the hybrid boxer is designed towards performance, not fuel economy.
@D R So you mean the advantage of a cheaper 1.6L engine with an almost negible difference in fuel economy, right?
Valid point about fuel savings... HOWEVER, there is still going to be increased wear on the engine when it does the start/stop routine as the oil is going to drain back to the oil sump when the engine is not running. Also there is the issue of thermal shock that while small, it will have an effect over time. Or as the song goes, everything counts in large amounts! LOL!
agreed also the wear and tear on the battery and the starter. There is only so many starts on a starter and the stress on a battery is even worse.
If the car is designed for stop start then it’ll be ok on most cases.
It isn´t that easy. There is basicly no wear on any parts while starting the engine. The wear is not caused by startup but by a cold engine and the lack of oil-pressure.
A cold engine wears a lot more than a warm engine. Especially the first few seconds without oil-pressure are a problem.
But start-stop systems are designed to reduce this wear. Every single start-stop system I´ve seen so far wont shut down the engine before beeing warmed up. Moreover the oil-pressure won´t drop down while stopping. That is the reason why those systems will automaticly start the engine after a few minutes again. A warm engine with oil-pressure will probably wear less when starting up than idling for some minutes.
Startermotors should´nt really wear out at all. A startermotor is basiclly just an electric motor therefore it could theoretically even drive the whole car and last for thousands of miles. So if a manufacture uses a good startermotor it shouldnt be affected at all .
Batteries tend to fail more often in general nowadays due the high demand of electric power in cars in generall. Start-stop systems do redce the battery lifetinen but only in an unoticable way.
Don't forget about the battery too
@@lukas_ls Starter motors are replaced on cars a lot.
3:50 trying not to offend anyone in 2018 is kinda hard, isn't it?
WTF DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?!
😉
Matthew H x
Tougher than anyone think. For realz...
Apparently, it's also pretty difficult for Jason to not condescend. Obviously, that doesn't mean he isn't extremely knowledgeable, I do watch his videos, after all. It just means that, like many intellectuals, it sometimes seems hard for him not to talk down to viewers. Sorry, that's just my take.
+D LG; truly sorry that it may come across that way, as I'm really not trying to give the impression that I know more or know better. I have tons to learn and I make plenty of mistakes (in life, and in my videos). I try to point out corrections when that's the case. I do think sometimes my replies seem a bit harsh (since there's a bunch of them, I want to answer as many as I can, and often this means typing something quickly but coming off as a bit harsh or frank, which isn't the intention). I just enjoy learning and sharing that information, and learning from the comments as well. I appreciate your feedback!
Ive added Ignition security systems to my cars, and I can tell you there were days that my Crown Vic ran from dawn till dusk. Bought it with 4570 idle hours, sold it with close to 5000 in the couple years I owned it. Also not me but I owned a Interceptor Utility with 13800 total hours, and 8987 idle hours. Yes it was over 9000 when I sold it. Gotta say it was pretty nice in both hot and cold days to just keep it running the entire day.
It might save fuel but has anyone looked into the wear and tear that stopping and starting the engine does as compared idling?
To support this comment, can't say they are accounting for that in improved parts. My new truck came with the start stop feature, which I hated and disabled. Completely unrelated to that, the truck received a new engine at 13K miles due to catastrophic bearing failure. So, no, they are not building the engines any better than they were before.
Well said Kevin. I've owned multiple vehicles with the start-stop feature and have had plenty without. Though I have had no mechanical issues with any of the start-stop type Vehicles I've owned, I also really don't see a point for it. At the end of the day the manufacturers have to charge more to put in bigger batteries and more powerful starters, and there's absolutely no way that there can't be some wear and tear on the motor even if it's minut. All of this to save what, 5% Maybe? I don't think I'm that concerned about saving 5% on fuel. I'm more concerned about why every car has to cost 40 or 50 Grand now for a decent automobile. Why don't we make the car 30 grand and leave all this extra crap out of it that I don't need.
Ashes 2 Ashes basically, what’s cheaper, a gal of gas, or a starter , that’s a no brainer
I was just going to say the same thing but thought, let me check the comments lol. Save a few bucks on gas or save thousands on engine repairs due to dry starts 🤔. A running engine is lubricated which wears less... Similar to how highway miles matter less than stop and go City driving...
mason technically the engine would be somewhat lubricated because itll only be shut off for a couple minutes max.
It's leaving the engine running while going into the store that I never understood. Very wasteful as described here, but also puts a big sign on it: STEAL ME
I used to live in the Twin Cities (MPLS /St. Paul, MN) and had family in some smaller towns just over the boarder into WI. Whenever I'd go visit, I'd see that constantly at gas stations, coffee shops etc. I get it to an extent in the winter, as they can get brutal. However, being from "the city", you're just handing your keys over to thieves. All to at most, 90 more seconds before you're back to normal temp in the car.
It happened so much, that after installing auto start for those brutal winters, I had come out to a cop behind my car in the mornings waiting to give me a ticket for leaving the keys in the ignition unattended (illegal). Happened several times. Then again this was in the early 2000's with a 92 Oldsmobile I guess. Not a common feature.
New cars have faub that let's you leave car running but locked!!
willy wayne: And in old cars, you could get duplicate keys made. Then you have a backup in case you leave a set in the trunk, etc. AND, you can lock the car while it is, say, warming up to melt a huge amount of ice, as I did at my apartment from 1981 to 2011, before I finally bought a house with a car port.
It always amazes me how people think doing something very simple could ONLY be done via some new technology, vs. just a little common sense (and in the old days, perhaps a buck or two to get a key made that was as good as the original).
Turbo timer ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
a lot of new keys just stay in your pocket so the thief won't get far anyway
3:56 I NEED MY AC 😂😂 can we talk about how much more fuel it uses to run an a/c than to not run it?
It is quite easy to see that, if you have a car with real time fuel usage display: start your car, let it idle, see what usage it shows (mine is around 0.9L/h). After a few minutes, start the A/C and see what it shows (mine usually is around 1.1L/h). The difference is how much your A/C is using (approximately).
@@mbardos Most cars I know of have no such detailed fuel usage readout or display.
Or the difference between the AC usage for same temperature, but different colors. Full black vs Full white.
@@carlcushmanhybels8159 guess that depends on the market and brands you know, but within Volkswagen groups cars sold in Europe after 2010, this is pretty much a standard feature :)
It depends. In my case (VW PASSAT B5.5 1.9 TDI) it takes 0.1-0.2 l/h (3.4-6.8 oz/h). But I like braking with engine and I can recognize if A/C is on.
My only question is: what about the increased wear and tear on the engine due to starting. When stopped, the coolant pump stops, the oil pump stops, both creating thermal stresses, and the lack of oil circulation means reduced film thickness per each start... plus loads due to inertia and low frequency vibration... it's not just about the added stress on the starter.
Is often said that 90% of engine wear occurs at start up--which may or may not be accurate, and may only apply when discussing cold starts. Nevertheless we are talking about increasing the number of starts by an order of magnitude or more.
While it is easy to point out that the amount of gas used on the start versus idling for more than seven seconds may indicate a modest improvement in the scenarios tested, consider when you are also operating an air conditioner--and the actual percentage of time spent in traffic conditions where a minor fuel savings amounts to something useful, vs higher maintenance costs due to more frequent oil changes needed-consider that more raw fuel passes rings in the initial start revolutions than at operating rpm, degrading oil sooner.
The reality is: driving style can easily amount to more than the 4-8% indicated. Driving gingerly vs driving with a lead foot can easily make a difference ±25% in MPG.
I have a Prius that starts and stops ALL the time. 200,000 miles and engine runs like it's new.
My only concern on the start stop system wasn't the starter but engine damage from oil draining back to the pan then starting up again, needless to say, I still use it because I figured the engineer thought of that and should be perfectly fine
For oil to drain back to pan will probably take much longer than usual stop light duration.. Because of viscosity oil will cling to the cylinder walls and other components..
@@juchou2983 less than 10 seconds about 4-6 but exactly there is always some oil there because it's nature to stick
Because engineers never make mistakes 😅
@@divinecomedian2 i learned that from Dilbert
Don't be so sure....Ford is having some significant issues with oil flow in their 3.5 EcoBoost truck engines with their Cam Phasers reaping the damage....to the point of a recall to replace them but still no fix...so just kicking the can down the road. There is a very real likelihood that this Cam Phaser issue is attributed to a lack of appropriate lubrication from the increased start/stop cycles this new system imposes on the Cam Phasers and wears them out DRAMATICALLY prematurely
American here, my brain turned into an omelet watching this.
Bacon? Mushrooms? Surely cheese? Delicious.
This is your brain. This is EE. This is your brain on EE. Partnership for An EE-educated America.
Better than your brain being scrambled
Liam Sweeney He spelt it right, omelette is the British english spelling, omelet is the American english spelling. Surely you would know there are some diffrences in english by now.
Do you also think any spelling of color as 'color' is incorrect because there is a British English variant of that spelling? Way to dig the hole for yourself.
The visual comparison of the amounts of fuel near the beginning would have been more impressive using the same size containers. The narrower container for the starting makes it hard to compare. I'm sure you wanted people to be able to see the fluid but it would have even further emphasized your point if it was nearly invisible in the larger container.
yeah I had a really hard time telling which one used more
@@no_peace i hope youre exaggerating, because the idling volume was very clearly much larger than the starting volume, even if the choice of container made it hard to precisely tell by how much. i think it was entirely fair of him to assume his audience could tell that a big thing was larger than a small thing lol
@@jotch_7627 he made a joke, it's obvious which consumed more
If starting an engine actually requires 6 seconds worth of idling fuel, there should be a logical explanation.
You are missing a figure, like how many starts actually were equivalent to 90 minutes of idling.
Well, dummies, all those starts added together in revolutions are like the engine running for 90 minutes because what you counted as “starting” actually included run time.
So the actual equivalent run-time versus start time is probably closer to 1 second.
You need to account for the energy lost drawing from and recharging the battery.
My last car had an auto-off feature. I had looked up its fuel consumption for startup vs idle, and my concern shifted to starter durability.
If it makes u feel better depending on the car the starter isn’t as expensive as the money you’d save long term on gas
Spending over 1500 on a starter and the downtime to save .10 of a gallon at a read light..... yea no thanks.
@@Vandallolwut clearly didn't watch the video or give this a second of thought. Obviously the starter is going to be built stronger to accomodate for the extra use.
@@ElderlyAnteateryou still have to start your engine multiple times if you are in stop and go traffic. No one is sitting there idling for 30 minutes saying that's more efficient than shutting it off. It's about constantly having the engine turn on and off just to save a little gas. I doubt car companies care about your future maintenance. Either way the way he presents the experiment is flawed. It does present a scenario that exists in every day commute.
@@Vandallolwutsay a red light is 3 minutes long, it’s actually .008 of a gallon 😂
It doesn't take much energy to restart a warm engine. The bearings have residual oil pressure. Plus the computer knows the the exact position of the crankshaft and it can "bump" the cylinders to start the engine spinning - this puts less stress on the starter motor and allows for almost immediate power on takeoff.
only good comment in this entire section
I take it that the engine has to be warmed up before the stop/start function begins, otherwise a lot of fuel would be wasted starting the engine from cold or slightly warm.
I own a mk7 golf R. The start stop feature does not work until the water temp reaches 90c.
(It also restricts engine performance before the engine reaches oil temps of 90c)
@@RtGFuSiOn 90% of the time when the start stop feature is used you will have been driving long enough that the engine warms up. The obvious exception is if you're literally living in a suburban grid with traffic lights on every other corner, but even then it doesn't take long at all for the engine to warm up. Ideally all cars would have these sensors and this technology (or we just convert to battery/hydrogen vehicles that don't have this issue whatsoever), but for now I think it's safe to say that if you're going to be idling for more than 15-20 seconds you should certainly consider turning your engine off. If you really want to get your fuel economy down you could be more aggressive, but that could get tiring unless you have an automated system
pjf.
All engines are different.
& residual oil pressure ? , LOL
An actual fuel injected engine will start faster than a throttle body injected engine because a throttle body type has to recharge the intake manifold before a restart can even happen .
As for the computer knowing where the crank is is pure BS as the engine was still spinning when the engine including the computer were turned off.
imo, you have read way too much and think you actually know something.
This reminds me of people who use to say “it takes more electricity to turn the lights on than the lights actually uses when on, so you shouldn’t turn the lights off in a room if you plan on going back into the room later.”
Which _was_ true for some very old neon light fixtures. Those things had such inefficient starters that it in fact used less power to running them for a few minutes, than turning them off and on again.
But certainly couldn't be more wrong for your standard light bulbs.
Nowadays the starters are much more efficient, but there also isn't really a reason not to use LEDs instead...
@@LRM12o8 It also was sort of true with incandescent bulbs, but because the filament would burn out faster so you would be replacing bulbs more often.
For sodium lights there’s an element of truth to it. But not many rooms have those.
Yes, indeed !! I remember those people !!
We called 'em idiots !!
Sure but it helps the room stay warmer … 🤔
I would make a wager that stoplights on the whole waste more fuel than starting / stopping an engine. If the EPA really wanted to cut emissions, it would find a way to time all lights to minimize braking (the literal conversion of momentum into entropy, ie waste) for the bulk of traffic, esp on the heaviest traversed roads.
traffic lights are overrated anyways.
Get rid of traffic lights and stop signs all together.
Use roundabouts instead.
If only there was such an invention like junction without stoplights where could just drive round. It would really ease traffic, be quicker and all that stuff. I think they should give it some cool futuristic name like Roundabout.
AH4600 then everyone who’s used to stop lights would find a way to complain about roundabouts
Unfortunately, on some roads, like the majority of which in southern Maine (mainly speaking Portland area), this would be near impossible without immense changes to the road system. Our rush hour jams are simply a result of overcrowding for what the roadway is designed for. For example, it is rare to find two laned roads unless it's by the mall where they had heavy traffic in mind. Most of our traffic comes from commuters going to and from Portland (major city for the area) to small towns in the surrounding area. However, it is all single laned roads, which clog going to Portland between 7:30AM and 9:00AM, as well as from Portland from 4:00PM to 6:00PM.
This is a great idea in theory, but my mother-in-law's, Ford Fusion turns off at horrible times. I was doing a 3 point turn and it decided to stop. Because the engine was no longer on it was essentially in neutral (It's an Automatic (gross, I know)) and my gentle reverse turned into almost rolling back into the ditch. Some car do it way better though, but definitely not Ford.
Gets a like just for that outro 🤣🤣
Thirty years ago I was working in Switzerland. Drivers there would shut off their cars at red lights.
The climate is cold there so the AC doesn't need to cool the cabin anymore. They can do that. But it's difficult to keep shutting the engine in a desert or tropical region.
Mach ech ned. Well im Sommer esches mer z warm :D
You could shut off the engine and still keep the AC going.
@@shrimpflea Yes, but then it'll drain your battery 🔋 real quick.
Of course, but you still could do it.
Meanwhile my entire school spends their Friday nights at a local drive in burger joint with all their cars idling for hours at a time
Based.
My friends do that too, then they’re out complaining about gas... I don’t want to tell them just to see how long it takes for them to think about “changing the gas tank” 😂
There's so much America in that one sentence!
sounds very american to me
On a daily commute you have a good idea of how long the light will stay red. I'm a switcher-offer and I've been working on ten seconds plus minus. Manufacturers (except Lucas of course) test starter motors through tens and hundreds of thousands of cycles, so that isn't going to be a problem. Thank you Jason you have no idea how long I've been waiting for someone to back up commonsense with engineering sense.