Does anyone actually like start-stop

[Rockreid]

What’s funny is back when I was a teen with no money I would start/stop hypermile my manual trans car all the time. Killing the engine before or at stop lights was a regular thing. I could make a tank of gas last a month lol. Now the Jeep does it for me. What comes around...

Sponsored

 

[WXman]

I heard that dropping your tire pressure makes you feel alright about the ESS feature.



Seriously though... not pissing dollar bills into the wind while sitting still at a red light, traffic jam, drive-thru, etc. is a win for the owner of the vehicle and for the environment. I don't understand why this is difficult to understand.

 

[Jolonghorn]

Don't mind the ESS at all. I have the 6spd since February with 10k miles and it works just fine. Don't mind saving a few pennies on gas and helping to reduce emissions along they way.

 

[Wanderingwheelz]

If you live in an area that has a lot of thick, bumper-to-bumper traffic, and someone told you they knew a way for you to instantly save $500 a year on gas, would you be open to trying something new?

One of the top three reasons I waited for a JL rather than buying a JK is for ESS. If you’re inching in traffic a lot then the fuel savings is huge. I already have a Porsche that has ESS so I knew it’s benefits. Porsche also takes the additional step of decoupling the engine and transmission when you coast, dropping your RPMs down to basically nothing.

Not a widely known tip: Make sure you reach 5 mph in your Jeep between start and the next stop for ESS to work it’s magic. Otherwise it won’t stop the engine. Done smartly you can get 20-21 mpg in bumper-to-bumper traffic if you let the car in front of you get away a bit before you let your foot off the brake. I do it all the time. That’s even better than the 18 city mpg figure on the window sticker.

None of this makes any difference if you live in the sticks.

 

[Jeepers!]

I don't have a JL yet but I love it on my Chevy. I definitely miss it when driving my other car.

 

[WranglerMan]

Can’t stand this feature, if I wanted to save $$$ on gas I would have purchased a Prius. I honestly did try to force myself to embrace new technology but just can’t do it, I have a hard enough time wrapping my head around two batteries, if using two batteries at least make them easy to get to.

 

[JIMBOX]

I don't drive in traffic/I don't need better gas mileage/I drive off-road--

My jeep doesn't have ESS any more !

I like blonds and stainless steel

W.E.

JIMBO

 

[TheWingman]

I like the stop/start feature just because I like gadgets and new tech. However, after factoring in the cost of the extra equipment, second battery, and R&D, I'm not certain that I will end up breaking even with the modest savings in gasoline. And that is assuming there is no long term impact on component longevity. As for the environment, there are now 2 lead acid batteries that have to be manufactured per new vehicle, and per scheduled maintenance. Not sure how environmentally conscious that is.
Basically, I paid for an expensive game that I can play on my dashboard to see how high of a score I can get...
The most environmental thing to do in regards to an automobile, is buy a 3rd hand honda civic for $3k and drive that.

 

[ToolMan514]

I (unfortunately) do a lot of city driving. In the summer with the windows down or top off, it's nice to reduce the engine noise and vibrations when stopped at a light. So in that respect, I like it.

However, I also drive in manual mode a lot, which turns it off, and I have had several times in heavy highway traffic where it comes to a complete stop for 2 seconds, and the ESS thinks that would be a good time to stop.

I think there should be a configurable timeout on how long the vehicle is stopped for before the ESS kicks in. That would allow the people who don't like it to set it high so it never kicks in, and people like me who don't mind to have it at a few seconds.

 

[S2k Chris]

Seriously though... not pissing dollar bills into the wind while sitting still at a red light, traffic jam, drive-thru, etc. is a win for the owner of the vehicle and for the environment. I don't understand why this is difficult to understand.

A vehicle at idle is using a tiny, tiny amount of gas (which translates to a tiny tiny amount of polution). So to save some thimble full of gas every month, we have to deal with the weirdness of the shutdown, the lack of smoothness, the potential effect on longevity, and the complexity of the system.

It's a bad tradeoff.

 

[TheWingman]

Agree with all the points above. Just sucks that the gov has forced manufacturers into a corner to find ways like this to cheat the emissions testing and get past the increasing regulatory stranglehold. Otherwise they would likely never develop the tech, or if they did, make it part of an optional package for those that need or want it.
At the end of the day, if FCA wanted to develop a new wrangler, I am pretty confident that some sacrifices had to be made just to get it to market, and we as a whole have to pay the price for it. Sucks. But then again I was able to get a new wrangler, so I'm not too upset.
Direct your frustration to the automotive regulators, they are the ones responsible for free market manipulation.

 

[Sean L]

A vehicle at idle is using a tiny, tiny amount of gas (which translates to a tiny tiny amount of polution). So to save some thimble full of gas every month, we have to deal with the weirdness of the shutdown, the lack of smoothness, the potential effect on longevity, and the complexity of the system.

It's a bad tradeoff.

It uses more fuel at idle than you think. It still has to turn all of the accessories on the belt (Alternator, A/C compressor, Power Steering Pump, coolant pump, ect...) Basically using fuel to power things that don't need to be powered while the vehicle is stopped. Whats the point in using all that when you're not moving?

 

[S2k Chris]

It uses more fuel at idle than you think.

The estimated fuel consumption of an idling engine is 0.6 litres / hr per litre of engine displacement. This means that an idling 3.5 litre engine consumes more than 2 litres of gas per hour.

1

2 litres is a half gallon. Per HOUR. So if I sit idle for 10 minutes out of an hour (high for me), that's .08 gallons I've saved. That's tiny.





1 https://www.google.com/search?q=amo...rome..69i57.6423j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[TheWingman]

It uses more fuel at idle than you think. It still has to turn all of the accessories on the belt (Alternator, A/C compressor, Power Steering Pump, coolant pump, ect...) Basically using fuel to power things that don't need to be powered while the vehicle is stopped. Whats the point in using all that when you're not moving?

To keep the whiny human occupants comfortable when the temps are in the triple digits. lol
Seriously, I understand the concept and do appreciate the engineering challenge for what it is.

 

[Sean L]

1

2 litres is a half gallon. Per HOUR. So if I sit idle for 10 minutes out of an hour (high for me), that's .08 gallons I've saved. That's tiny.





1 https://www.google.com/search?q=amo...rome..69i57.6423j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

So if you're driving your vehicle one hour per day and idle for 10 minutes of that hour, thats about 2.5 gallons in a month. 150 Gallons over 5 years, 500/600 bucks of gas or so, depending on prices.

Sponsored