Sponsored

Auto start/stop rant

Status
Not open for further replies.

wolf

Well-Known Member
First Name
Rick
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Threads
38
Messages
849
Reaction score
885
Location
florida
Vehicle(s)
On my third Rubicon(2dr's 2020, 2015 jetta diesel/2013 mb
Occupation
retired
a good shot of Jack will cure that.
Sponsored

 

PatrickR

Well-Known Member
First Name
Patrick
Joined
Jan 8, 2020
Threads
4
Messages
159
Reaction score
136
Location
North Carolina
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLU
Having the 6-speed manual If I just keep the clutch pedal pushed to the firewall ESS will not engage. I generally hit the button to turn it off when I come to a stop the first time. I will be purchasing a Tazer to deal with TPMS when off-roading, circumference when I go to 35" tires, and a multitude of other things. I have noticed that the estimated mileage at idle is north of 50 mpg. I guess if I don't go anywhere I can really make a tank last.
I find having the 6 speed makes the ESS a whole lot less intrusive. It auto shuts off the jeep when I'm parking (no big deal), and if it does stop it in traffic, it starts as soon as I depress the clutch (so it's ready as soon as I need to go). I can see how it would be obnoxious with the auto, but when it's keyed to the clutch rather than the brake, it's fairly invisible.
 

Beer

Active Member
First Name
John
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Threads
0
Messages
32
Reaction score
32
Location
Long Island N.Y.
Vehicle(s)
2020 f250 Lariat, 2019 Corvette Z06
I just got my 2021 Rubicon and in the 159 miles I drove it I've been waiting for ESS to kick in, it never has. I thought I might have a problem but when scrolling thru the menu I saw this on the dash. So does this mean that if the air or heat is on it is disabled? The other thing that I found is if your door is open or you don't have your seatbelt on it won't go into gear, it says Auto Park Engaged. Are these new features or have they been around? This is my first modern Jeep, last one was a 1971 Jeepster Commando decades ago.

IMG_2654.JPG


IMG_2656.JPG
 

_olllllllo_

Well-Known Member
First Name
William
Joined
Jul 18, 2018
Threads
6
Messages
1,129
Reaction score
1,953
Location
The Wild Wild West in AZ
Vehicle(s)
2019 Hellayella JLU Rubicon 6-speed
I just got my 2021 Rubicon and in the 159 miles I drove it I've been waiting for ESS to kick in, it never has. I thought I might have a problem but when scrolling thru the menu I saw this on the dash. So does this mean that if the air or heat is on it is disabled? The other thing that I found is if your door is open or you don't have your seatbelt on it won't go into gear, it says Auto Park Engaged. Are these new features or have they been around? This is my first modern Jeep, last one was a 1971 Jeepster Commando decades ago.

Jeep Wrangler JL Auto start/stop rant IMG_2656.JPG


Jeep Wrangler JL Auto start/stop rant IMG_2656.JPG
That was enacted after the Star Trek actor was run over by his Jeep Cherokee. If you have a manual, these do not apply. We can have no seat belt on, door open and go in reverse and the system can't stop you. With the manual you are the "Master of your domain".

 

Sponsored

mxincanada

Member
First Name
Ugo
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
6
Reaction score
2
Location
Montreal
Vehicle(s)
Jeepssss & LR
ESS on my 2LTurbo e-torque works like a charm. I tried letting go the brakes and touching the gas pedal B4 restart and ESS is faster. Way slower on my PentastarV6
 

DaltonGang

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2018
Threads
74
Messages
2,791
Reaction score
3,909
Location
Houston, Tx
Vehicle(s)
2018 Wrangler JLU Sport S, Rubicon Suspension, Tires, and Rims. Firecracker Red
Sure, I get the sarcasm here @TEXGOAT, and know while I don't agree that government is being overburdensome on reducing carbon emissions--in fact that they haven't and aren't doing enough fast enough, I respect your right to feel differently.

Here's the thing I don't get about people who feel that their freedoms are being restricted by such policies: I agree, protect every freedom you possibly can from the tyranny of government, except those freedoms that impinge upon other people's freedom.

That's fair right--I mean if we're suppose to be an equal society then my freedom is no more important than yours or anyone else's, right, and vice versa?

@TEXGOAT : a scenario I hope never comes to pass because despite holding different philosophies than you I like you. You're entertaining here:

Say your doctor says, "@TEXGOAT , if you don't take this heart medication you'll die in 6 months."

..and you choose not to.... I could try with all logic to sway your decision but I respect it. It's your body and you not taking the meds has no bearing on other people's health.

But things like global warming and wearing COVID masks (sorry to get a bit off topic) impacts others. It's ok in such cases to reduce your (my) freedom to increase the collective levels of freedom for others.

I know--you're not on the Global Warming bandwagon like me--a stance I take because apolitical scientists across the board concur on this.

Look at the bright side, with a year of crazy levels of forest fires and storms, if global warming is true or false, storm surge should knock out any forest fires in your locale.
I think we can all agree that despite whether Global Warming is real, and if so, that we have the power to stop, dare I say reverse it, that no single action alone is enough to effect meaningful change..

...not ESS, electric vehicles, solar power, etc. So thumbing one's nose at a single step (e.g. ESS) because it isn't the magic bullet is not the point. ESS is designed to simply be a transition that reduces CO2 production and incentivizes electric vehicles, where economies of scale bring price down and innovation up.

I'll tell you what scares me. While selfishness is a necessary part of survival, like pretty much anything, in excess it can cause problems. People not willing to say that "climate is my problem," motivated by the lack of others willing to do their part can be infectious.

Naturally, I routed for Neo in The Matrix. And yet, this speech, despite the film being pure fiction, made me take pause:



It's not that other mammals develop a natural equilibrium with their environment though, so much as well, humans lack animals higher in the food chain to keep us in check...except ourselves.
Fair, Right, we can all agree??? No, I dont think so!! You seem to think impinging on peoples rights is acceptable. Is Infringing on the Rights of Americans a good thing, as long as you agree with the infringements? Marxism and Socialism is not a good thing.
Just for you, I'm going to fire up my Dodge Diesel pickup, pre-Emissions controlled, drive it around, and stomp on the Go-Pedal a few time, and see what comes out.
"Greenie Weenies" can just break down and sob. I dont give a rip.
I feel the same about PETA and Vegans.
 
Last edited:

Gee-pah

Banned
Banned
Banned
First Name
Andy
Joined
Nov 19, 2019
Threads
59
Messages
1,658
Reaction score
1,264
Location
SanFrancisco
Vehicle(s)
JL Wrangler
Fair, Right, we can all agree??? No, I dont think so!! You seem to think impinging on peoples is acceptable. Is Infringing on the Rights of Americans a good thing, as long as you agree with the infringements? Marxism and Socialism is not a good thing.
Just for you, I'm going to fire up my Dodge Diesel pickup, pre-Emissions controlled, drive it aroumd, and stomp on the Go-Pedal a few time, and see what comes out.
"Greenie Weenies" can just break down and sob. I dont give a rip.
I feel the same about PETA and Vegans.
I don't think that impinging on people's (rights?) is acceptable, I know so--but only, as stated, in cases where those freedoms are impinging on other people's freedoms and the violator isn't paying their way.

There's a term for this. Economists call it negative externalities. It's when some entity (person/company) causes damages that they aren't paying for. That gasoline which you're about to waste doesn't nearly costs what it should when factoring in the costs of cleaning up its effects.

Mr. Dalton, perhaps you don't believe in global warming (being caused by the actions of man.) Perhaps if you do you feel that there is nothing we can do about it. I pray you're wrong if you feel this way, but who knows... maybe you're right. And I completely appreciate how what I and others sometims see as fair, you and others sometimes see as not so.

The thing of it is that there is global consensus of scientists, of all political affiliations, ideologies, backgrounds, etc., with nothing to personally gain financially by warning of global warming (well, maybe those who invent remediation tech--we should be so lucky) all raising alarms.

And it may be your legal right (at least for now) to deliberately drive in non gasoline conserving ways your "gallons to the mile" rig, but if I can concede that all these scientists *might* be wrong, I would hope you could concede that these smart people might just be right--in fact have a lot more likely probability of being so.

Is it possible that your slant is such because you're resistant, like we all are to some degree, to change? Wouldn't you rather save money on gasoline even if you think that running your ICE engine was beneficial to the environment, even adjusting for the current upfront cost of purchasing cleaner tech--which will go down in price because of the very government incentive structure, warts and all, you seem to despise?

The problem is that when people see you and others like you acting environmentally recklessly, and announce it no less, those who could possibly still be swayed into adopting these changes voluntarily won't be as motivated to, which is why the freedom reducing laws you cite are needed to force people to this in the first place.

You don't give a rip? Just do me a fair favor. If you ever own property with a beautiful stream on it, and your neighbor (homeowner or firm alike) dumps their biohazard in it in ways that aren't illegal, that you're a good sport about cleaning out the dead fish in on, otherwise on your lot. Live in a city...? take that as a metaphor then for some other action by others, which negatively affects you, that decency, if not also law, is something that violates "do on to other principles."

I'm curious. Do you think the same way about individual freedom reducing face coverings too, which increase the freedom of the collective more than any 1 person's sacrifice in the most important freedom we know...? the right to live?

Let me guess. Of course not. Because that, unlike Global Warming, has science backing it, right?

I'm not perfect. There are more efficient vehicles than my Wrangler. I am trying though to make my miles count.
 

DaltonGang

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2018
Threads
74
Messages
2,791
Reaction score
3,909
Location
Houston, Tx
Vehicle(s)
2018 Wrangler JLU Sport S, Rubicon Suspension, Tires, and Rims. Firecracker Red
I don't think that impinging on people's (rights?) is acceptable, I know so--but only, as stated, in cases where those freedoms are impinging on other people's freedoms and the violator isn't paying their way.

There's a term for this. Economists call it negative externalities. It's when some entity (person/company) causes damages that they aren't paying for. That gasoline which you're about to waste doesn't nearly costs what it should when factoring in the costs of cleaning up its effects.

Mr. Dalton, perhaps you don't believe in global warming (being caused by the actions of man.) Perhaps if you do you feel that there is nothing we can do about it. I pray you're wrong if you feel this way, but who knows... maybe you're right. And I completely appreciate how what I and others sometims see as fair, you and others sometimes see as not so.

The thing of it is that there is global consensus of scientists, of all political affiliations, ideologies, backgrounds, etc., with nothing to personally gain financially by warning of global warming (well, maybe those who invent remediation tech--we should be so lucky) all raising alarms.

And it may be your legal right (at least for now) to deliberately drive in non gasoline conserving ways your "gallons to the mile" rig, but if I can concede that all these scientists *might* be wrong, I would hope you could concede that these smart people might just be right--in fact have a lot more likely probability of being so.

Is it possible that your slant is such because you're resistant, like we all are to some degree, to change? Wouldn't you rather save money on gasoline even if you think that running your ICE engine was beneficial to the environment, even adjusting for the current upfront cost of purchasing cleaner tech--which will go down in price because of the very government incentive structure, warts and all, you seem to despise?

The problem is that when people see you and others like you acting environmentally recklessly, and announce it no less, those who could possibly still be swayed into adopting these changes voluntarily won't be as motivated to, which is why the freedom reducing laws you cite are needed to force people to this in the first place.

You don't give a rip? Just do me a fair favor. If you ever own property with a beautiful stream on it, and your neighbor (homeowner or firm alike) dumps their biohazard in it in ways that aren't illegal, that you're a good sport about cleaning out the dead fish in on, otherwise on your lot. Live in a city...? take that as a metaphor then for some other action by others, which negatively affects you, that decency, if not also law, is something that violates "do on to other principles."

I'm curious. Do you think the same way about individual freedom reducing face coverings too, which increase the freedom of the collective more than any 1 person's sacrifice in the most important freedom we know...? the right to live?

Let me guess. Of course not. Because that, unlike Global Warming, has science backing it, right?

I'm not perfect. There are more efficient vehicles than my Wrangler. I am trying though to make my miles count.
I drove my truck to the Gym, stomped .on the "Go Pedal", and thought of you, as it belched out a big puff of black sooty smoke. :rock:


..
 

DaltonGang

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2018
Threads
74
Messages
2,791
Reaction score
3,909
Location
Houston, Tx
Vehicle(s)
2018 Wrangler JLU Sport S, Rubicon Suspension, Tires, and Rims. Firecracker Red
Status
Not open for further replies.
 



Top