Cleaner air, who can be against that?

[DnAuK]

It's almost like the people who designed the stop/start actually know what they're doing.

 

I know. Amazing isn't it...?

[Obelix]

Depends on who programmed the computer to say that though, the car doesn't actually know how much CO2 it's throwing out, the lambda sensor isn't that accurate.

 

The lambda sensor isn't used for that though.

 

The car meters the incoming fuel and can derive the CO2 content from that very accurately.

 

---------- Post added 14-12-2015 at 15:30 ----------

 

The stop/start system doesn't work until the engine has warmed up. And has already been said here, tends to automatically start the engine again after a minute or so whether you're stationary or not. So I'm guessing there are some sensors on the battery and cat which do this to prevent things running too low / cold.

 

The original thread though wasn't about that though. It was about making people turn engines off whilst idling - so you would be expected to override the start stop and actually turn off. Hence the wear issues, and the potential increase in NOx and CO

 

---------- Post added 14-12-2015 at 15:30 ----------

 

It's almost like the people who designed the stop/start actually know what they're doing.

 

It's a shame people debating on here don't know what they are doing though....

[Nagel]

Except for perhaps the extra weight and/or resources from increasing the spec on the battery and the starter.

 

My car has a heavier duty battery and it's installed in the boot where the spare wheel would have been. There's no spare.

 

Since the car is rear wheel drive it helps to have a little bit of extra weight at the back.

 

---------- Post added 14-12-2015 at 16:11 ----------

 

It's almost like the people who designed the stop/start actually know what they're doing.

 

It's almost as if they know more about engines than people on Sheffield Forum.

[unbeliever]

My car has a heavier duty battery and it's installed in the boot where the spare wheel would have been. There's no spare.

 

Since the car is rear wheel drive it helps to have a little bit of extra weight at the back.

 

I can see how extra weight at the back would improve the performance in terms of cornering and acceleration. I don't see how it helps the efficiency.

Clearly a correction is called for in terms of the stop/start emissions saving as it is at least partly offset by the extra weight in the battery.

 

It's almost as if they know more about engines than people on Sheffield Forum.

 

Read up on the Volkswagen ECU emissions cheating scandal and then say that again.

[Obelix]

Read up on the Volkswagen ECU emissions cheating scandal and then say that again.

 

You are making a strawman...

[JFKvsNixon]

I can see how extra weight at the back would improve the performance in terms of cornering and acceleration. I don't see how it helps the efficiency.

Clearly a correction is called for in terms of the stop/start emissions saving as it is at least partly offset by the extra weight in the battery.

 

 

 

Read up on the Volkswagen ECU emissions cheating scandal and then say that again.

 

I don't think that the VW scandal was an act of ignorance, I think that VW knew exactly what they was doing.

[Nagel]

Read up on the Volkswagen ECU emissions cheating scandal and then say that again.

 

It's almost as if they know more about engines than people on Sheffield Forum.

[unbeliever]

I don't think that the VW scandal was an act of ignorance, I think that VW knew exactly what they was doing.

 

You are making a strawman...

 

It's almost as if they know more about engines than people on Sheffield Forum.

 

I'm merely countering the case which has been made here that if stop/start was not useful in terms of overall efficiency, cars would not have it. The Volkswagen scandal showed that car manufacturers are not above gimmicks or cheats to make the customers and the regulators think they're improving efficiency when they're not.

[El Cid]

I'm merely countering the case which has been made here that if stop/start was not useful in terms of overall efficiency, cars would not have it. The Volkswagen scandal showed that car manufacturers are not above gimmicks or cheats to make the customers and the regulators think they're improving efficiency when they're not.

 

By all means, chat among yourselves, but the thread is about -

 

Motorists outside school gates, on shopping runs or waiting to pick people up at stations are likely to be hit by the ‘draconian’ clampdown, which is aimed at those who leave their engines idling after pulling over rather than motorists stuck in traffic or at red lights.

 

not stop/start technology.

[JFKvsNixon]

I'm merely countering the case which has been made here that if stop/start was not useful in terms of overall efficiency, cars would not have it. The Volkswagen scandal showed that car manufacturers are not above gimmicks or cheats to make the customers and the regulators think they're improving efficiency when they're not.

 

There is always risk that manufactures won't build cars to spec to save money, but that is a world of difference from suggesting that manufacturers haven't considered the basic problems that any change in design would bring about.