Auto start/stop rant

[wolf]

a good shot of Jack will cure that.

Nice looking bottle of jack

Sponsored

 

[Ehmsea]

Quite a show here...added to watched threads...

 

[txj2go]

Mine hasn't worked since I got the vehicle. I don't know whether to consider myself lucky or try to get it fixed. If I could just get the stupid notifications off of the dash panel maybe I would leave it like it is.

 

[Goin2drt]

Well, Mr.Ralph Nader/Michael Moore wannabe, i couldn't care any less, about wanting to "Redeem" myself in your eyes. I think your way of thinking, and the imposing(wishing to impose) your myopic views on reality, on others, are very harmful to what many people consider freedom.
Your Doe Eyed, and Narcissistic view of Humans ability to control the worlds environment is laughable, sophomoric, and ignorant.
Oh, a little fact for you. Your Wrangler is not eco friendly. It is a gas guzzler. In your own views, it is imposing harmful noxious chemical fumes on innocent people, unable to control your behavior.
My 2006 Dodge 2500 4x4 Diesel gets 18 mpg around town, and I tested and obtained 28.6 mpg on an over 300 mile trip. All the while putting out less harmful emissions than your Jeep.
Now, what kind of milage, true testes(I meant Test, but testes is funnier. You have to love auto correct) milage, does your Jeep get??

Love this. Always laugh at “global warmer police” coming onto a ICE car forum and berate those that complain about ESS. It is hilarious. Hey hypocrites, go buy a Prius then I will listen to and respect your side of the story.

 

[Gee-pah]

Love this. Always laugh at “global warmer police” coming onto a ICE car forum and berate those that complain about ESS. It is hilarious. Hey hypocrites, go buy a Prius then I will listen to and respect your side of the story.

Sounds like that could be me (not saying it's messaged directly at me) so I'll play along.

And you know what, hypocrites get under my skin too.

The thing of it is, I don't think I'm being a hypocrite even though I own and love my 3.6L JL.

Rather, here's the role I see myself in; a metaphor.

A bunch of us, myself included, are at a government meeting about ESS. The rest of the bunch is complaining mad to the panel on the dais about the limits that ESS imposes on them.

And all I'm saying to them, in quiet tones, is "shush....if you piss the committee off enough they'll do what you say alright, and eliminate ESS, but in its place triple the price of gasoline to pay the costs of cleaning up the air. Is that your preference?"

If I take issue with the ESS complainers it is because IMHO, it's easy to defeat, whether it's remembering to press the ESS button at the same time as the start button, or by numerous hacks, or a tech solution (albeit at cost).

Oh, and by the way, this is a Wrangler enthusiasts forum more than an ICE one: a vehicle yes, with a steep time honored ICE tradition, but one that is itself moving in the direction of being more carbon fuel efficient and less dependent.

People far more versed in mechanics than me, die hard off road enthusiasts, can talk at great lengths about the ability to much more precisely apply torque to overcome off road obstacles under an electric versus ICE power plant--all the ground pollution of burying old batteries and the hypocrisy of that (which we both don't like) duly noted.

 

[Gee-pah]

@TEXGOAT, you can only believe my metaphorical panel to be tyrants in their seeking to incentivize a move away from CO2 producing fuels and mandating those who use them (me too) to pay their fair share of the costs of cleaning up the CO2 their consumption produces if you 1) believe Global Warming to not be real or related to more CO2 in the environment, or 2) not caused by mankind, or 3) not able to remediated by mankind.

Pick 1 - 3 of the options. And that's your right, despite scientists worldwide, trained in evidence gathering skepticism to not categorically believe the findings of other researchers and follow the herd for the sheer sake of doing so, peer reviewing, critiquing and reproducing the experiments of others, gather their results, and seeing if they concur, without emotional attachment, to the original findings.

Are scientists humans and do they sometimes fall somewhat short of this objective: sure. See the part above about peer review.

And do I get that so many are barely scratching out a living right now that to triple their gasoline prices would bury them: you bet. And I do care. Good legislation should be sensitive to that.

That said, IMHO, maybe not that of others, you have sought in prose recently to do your best attempt at what seems to be some impersonation of the actor Christopher Lloyd in Taxi, that uses some difficult to follow metaphors and extremely outlandish scenarios to convey opposition to changes like ESS, via attempts at what I think are entertainment.

Like I said, that's just my take. And I think it's the play of someone who to make his points in simpler honest words would risk them being shot down. Prove me wrong.

So instead, let me give you the hard cold facts you don't want to deal with.

1) The overwhelming consensus among apolitical brilliant scientists and experts in their field, with no allegiance to anything but truth, have presented overwhelming evidence that mankind is screwing up the planet in ways that each passing year of not doing enough, make it harder to remediate. Could other factors also be at play: you bet. Is it possible we can't control those other factors: you bet. Is it possible, much that we need to try, that if we were Carbon negative starting last year that it might prove to not be enough: sure.

2) People are resistant to change and selfish. Voluntary action won't work until it's too late. So laws have to be enacted to force people to adopt change, gradual at first (ESS with ability to bypass), through price incentives that not only make electric vehicle purchase relatively more attractive right now, but lower prices as greater demand produces economies of scale.

3) A government elected by the people may not always do what you and I wish, but watched over, will seek balances between the imagery that you seem to think radical greeners (I'm not one) want, and those who want to run their own untreated coal plants for propulsion seek.

Neither side will get the idealizations you describe, or the opposite of them you seem to seek.

It's not my forum of course. I speak and you can too, even if you want to do your best impression of the Eddie Sherman character in the Seinfeld The Fatigues episode.




But do me a favor, if you want to rebut this come with sensible dialogue. I'm sure you have reasonable arguments to make. You vivid imagery risks getting lost in translation (at least for me, I guess I'm not that smart) or being so outlandish that it misses its mark.

My 3 cents.

 

[Goin2drt]

Sounds like that could be me (not saying it's messaged directly at me) so I'll play along.

And you know what, hypocrites get under my skin too.

The thing of it is, I don't think I'm being a hypocrite even though I own and love my 3.6L JL.

Rather, here's the role I see myself in; a metaphor.

A bunch of us, myself included, are at a government meeting about ESS. The rest of the bunch is complaining mad to the panel on the dais about the limits that ESS imposes on them.

And all I'm saying to them, in quiet tones, is "shush....if you piss the committee off enough they'll do what you say alright, and eliminate ESS, but in its place triple the price of gasoline to pay the costs of cleaning up the air. Is that your preference?"

If I take issue with the ESS complainers it is because IMHO, it's easy to defeat, whether it's remembering to press the ESS button at the same time as the start button, or by numerous hacks, or a tech solution (albeit at cost).

Oh, and by the way, this is a Wrangler enthusiasts forum more than an ICE one: a vehicle yes, with a steep time honored ICE tradition, but one that is itself moving in the direction of being more carbon fuel efficient and less dependent.

People far more versed in mechanics than me, die hard off road enthusiasts, can talk at great lengths about the ability to much more precisely apply torque to overcome off road obstacles under an electric versus ICE power plant--all the ground pollution of burying old batteries and the hypocrisy of that (which we both don't like) duly noted.

First it wasn't directed at you per se. It was directed at any of the haters of the people like myself that have chosen to buy the Tazer to disable a stupid function. It doesnt stop there though it then pertains to those driving a 14MPG vehicle yet they come on here and perpetuate their "Al Gore" global warming BS.

Now let's address your hypothetical. You really think ESS is going to stop gas taxes. Have you not be awake lately. ESS is just the start. That same meeting in my mind goes like this. "Ok guys let's first get them on this ESS save the planet BS. Then we will start taxing the purchase of any vehicle that gets less than 15 MPG a "climate tax". Then when those stupid ass people are falling for that we will just keep raising that MPG by 5 every few years. "

Trust me if you said ESS was the end, you bet I am all in a small price to pay. Sadly your hypothetically is so wrong that these types of BS things will continue. Just look what the stupid governor did in Kalifornia yesterday. Instead people need to find a different solution because the small amount auto are putting in the air IS NOT the biggest fish to go get.

 

[DaltonGang]

San Francisco Liberals. You have to love them. They turned a beautiful city into cesspool of fecal matter, hypodermic needles, and junkies on their streets. All the while telling everyone else how they do things wrong. Talk about hypocrits, do as I say just not as I do. If someone here was so concerned with the environment, then they shouldn't be driving a wrangler, especially the 3.6 liter version.
ME, I am waiting for the 392 Hemi Wrangler.

 

[Gee-pah]

First it wasn't directed at you per se.

Noted. : - )

It was directed at any of the haters of the people like myself that have chosen to buy the Tazer to disable a stupid function.

Again, noted. I don't like them either...tell you why. I believe where underlying market forces are not in need of dire correction by policy that free markets are best. If an inventor is smart enough to develop a tool to disable something that by no means is against the law to disable.....(ESS, not catalytic converters) and people are willing to pay the prevailing price--that's their right.

In fact its the prevalence of such tech, along with hacks and simply pressing the ESS button that has me not like complainers--having no issue with people like yourself that silently choose to remedy that you don't like with a purchase.

It doesn't stop there though it then pertains to those driving a 14MPG vehicle yet they come on here and perpetuate their "Al Gore" global warming BS.

I'm not sure if you categorically don't buy into consumers doing anything about CO2 emissions, or having government force them to, or you simply take issue with the most extreme green fringes, that I don't like either, that would have us walk 20 miles to work.

Now let's address your hypothetical. You really think ESS is going to stop gas taxes.

I don't sir. I've expressly said that ESS is merely the starter phase of every more stringent requirements for the U.S. to transition off of CO2 producing fuels. I've written above that ESS is merely a temporary stop gap measure where CAFE standards seek to incentivize purchase of less CO2 producing fuel vehicles, which when produce in larger scale will hopefully experience economies of scale and reduction in price.

Have you not be awake lately. ESS is just the start.

Independent of whether either of us can agree that restrictions beyond ESS are or aren't a good thing, know that I am in complete agreement with you here. ESS is phase I of many further restrictive phases to come.

That same meeting in my mind goes like this. "Ok guys let's first get them on this ESS save the planet BS. Then we will start taxing the purchase of any vehicle that gets less than 15 MPG a "climate tax". Then when those stupid ass people are falling for that we will just keep raising that MPG by 5 every few years. "

I'd be a fool to disagree with you. Your scenario is I believe spot on. Government will further close the carbon fuel spigot over time. Where I think we disagree is on whether that's a good or perhaps better described necessary thing. I believe it is. I gather you don't.

Trust me if you said ESS was the end, you bet I am all in a small price to pay. Sadly your hypothetically is so wrong that these types of BS things will continue.

I think your missing something, and maybe it's my fault for not making it clear (no joke.) My hypothetical meeting, I so concede to you was phase I. If I felt the restrictions stopped there (I don't--I agree with your scenario) I would be forced to conclude you absolute right and me naive/wrong.

My point--made clear in prior posts--is to provide perspective for ESS complainers and tell them "look, it's a hell of lot better pressing that button than paying 3 times as much (at least right now) for gasoline."

Just look what the stupid governor did in Kalifornia yesterday.

I am assuming, I hope correctly, you mean this:

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/09/24/g...strengthening-californias-climate-leadership/

Instead people need to find a different solution because the small amount auto are putting in the air IS NOT the biggest fish to go get.

First, if you're a disbeliever in man caused or possibly man solved CO2 problems (I just don't know) then the issue of who is being restricted on fossil fuel use is bogus regardless of who is penalized.

Second, the fact that some class of polluters may not make the top of the list is cause for not singling them out, and even going after the worst offenders first if not offset by bigger problems. But is not justification to let the smaller fish escape such restrictions.

 

[Gee-pah]

San Francisco Liberals. You have to love them. They turned a beautiful city into cesspool of fecal matter, hypodermic needles, and junkies on their streets. All the while telling everyone else how they do things wrong. Talk about hypocrits, do as I say just not as I do. If someone here was so concerned with the environment, then they shouldn't be driving a wrangler, especially the 3.6 liter version.
ME, I am waiting for the 392 Hemi Wrangler.

Let me adjust that. If someone here was so concerned with the environment then they shouldn't be driving a Wrangler, especially the 3.6 version unless they are willing to pay their fair share of green taxes to do so.

Again, me: 1/4 tank since last March....bet I got lousy gas mileage with that nearby errand driving too--but is was across 4 gallons of fuel.

Sponsored