Auto Start/Stop 2.0 vs 3.6

[koallinbear]

When I test drove and compared the 2 engines the 3.6 felt awful and took way to long to start up. The 2.0 was smooth and barely noticeable.

Sponsored

 

[Rhinebeck01]

When I test drove and compared the 2 engines the 3.6 felt awful and took way to long to start up. The 2.0 was smooth and barely noticeable.

@koallinbear

Geeez, when I drove a 2.0 and compared it to the ESS on a 3.6, I thought both seemed similar. ESS ... the feel, sucked in regard to both... 8-)

 

[ormandj]

@koallinbear

Geeez, when I drove a 2.0 and compared it to the ESS on a 3.6, I thought both seemed similar. ESS ... the feel, sucked in regard to both... 8-)

The 2.0 start/stop was night and day better than the 3.6 when we tested them. Not even close.

 

[Jebiruph]

Some where I read that theoretically you don't even need a starter on a direct injection engine since the fuel is injected into the cylinder. As it is on the 2.0, it just has to crank enough to finish off the current compression stroke, squirt gas, spark and started. I would expect the engine to always stop as one cylinder starts to compress, so maybe crank a quarter of a turn. For the 3.6, you need an intake stroke and a compression stroke, so at least 1 full revolution. Also, the belt start of the 2.0 should be smoother than the operation of the starter motor on the 3.6.

Sponsored