In praise (or not) of ESS? **NO POLITICS**

[RCH]

I have the 45v ESS in my 2.0 and it is almost seamless. I like the pennies I save. I shut it off in summer heat (no AC) and I shut it off during cold weather warm ups where the heat is blowing on my hands and face. Other than that, it has stayed on.

I like my ESS in my 2018 JL RUBI 2 Door.

v/r rch

Sponsored

 

[aprez27]

I have the 45v ESS in my 2.0 and it is almost seamless. I like the pennies I save. I shut it off in summer heat (no AC) and I shut it off during cold weather warm ups where the heat is blowing on my hands and face. Other than that, it has stayed on.

I like my ESS in my 2018 JL RUBI 2 Door.

v/r rch

You'll be surprised, the heat stays nice a warm for a while after it shuts off.

 

[Andras]

If we reduce global emissions and things don't change, it would certainly suggest that man's role in this is irrelevant or moot.

We can't falsify it or else we'd try. We'd set up to labs, one with CO2 excesses, one without, and run controlled experiments. We can imitate but not reproduce the environment around us. I wish we could. Then we could better establish what's causing Global warming.



Our climate, drought, flood: it's getting worse. That we cannot disagree on. What we can disagree on is what's causing it and what if anything we can do to prevent, stop, mitigate or reverse it.

I get how people feel the "in 10 years promise," said 10 years later dilutes its legitimacy. Alternatively, we can't wait until we're near extinct or on such an irreversible course as a race to prove we were right (or wrong) here.



There should be no issue with this. Maybe we find that other things, instead of or in addition to CO2 levels are causing climate change. Nobody said global warming caused by CO2 was fact, but theory near the level of fact. Maybe we find we can't control it. Maybe we find we're controlling it incorrectly or inefficiently. Maybe we find ways to better trap CO2 if is in fact the culprit.

This is tha nature of science. Once, it was theorized that Lithium would help with mood disorders (no..I don't have one.) People were treated and died of Lithium toxicity. The scientists didn't give up. They did further testing and found their theories needing tweaking and that the right (smaller) dosage addressed the problem for many. Lives were improved.

And sure, plenty of science went wrong and was abandoned. Wasted money? Well we figured out what didn't work which helps us understand better where we need to look. Anybody can play "Monday morning quarterback" on things.




This is the, "but teacher, they did it worse," argument. The noose needs to be tightened on all polluters. At least when more advanced countries did this 60 years ago they had less scientific consensus that CO2 and global warming might bear a relationship.

And do we help these countries? Not to rearrange wealth but in mutually beneficially interest. We help them grow sustainable economies that benefit everyone.

(And I am not blind to the idea that you need gasoline to transport food. I'm a green capitalist, not granola.)



Data proves this. Disagree on cause or whether we can
Peace.

Warning: long post ahead. If that offends you somehow feel free to skip it. I do eventually bring it around to ESS though, promise

Since the cat is removed from the bag, let’s go there. Problems I have with global warming:

1. It’s not falsifiable. Well it is, but you’ll have to wait 20 years to falsify it. But they said that 20 years ago... so you’ll actually have to wait 20 more years. Then 10 more. Then 10 more. The

3. All the changes made by the USA, Europe, Japan, Canada and Australia are dwarfed and negated by the harm done by the billions of people in the developing world, China, and Russia. And I don’t blame them... we used fossil fuels to get ahead and improve our lives, why shouldn’t they? It’s easy to wag our fingers from our comfy lifestyles at the dirty developing world because we’re affluent enough to buy solar panels and windmills. Deny them fossil fuels and it has a much larger human impact than it does in, say, Scandinavia.

Warning: long post ahead. If that offends you somehow feel free to skip it. I do eventually bring it around to ESS though, promise

Since the cat is removed from the bag, let’s go there. Problems I have with global warming:

1. It’s not falsifiable. Well it is, but you’ll have to wait 20 years to falsify it. But they said that 20 years ago... so you’ll actually have to wait 20 more years. Then 10 more. Then 10 more. The impending doom is always impending and it can be postponed as necessary.

2. Any results which don’t fit in with what’s expected in predictive models can be (and often are) explained by ad-hoc modifying statements to the original hypothesis. There is no shortage of these.

3. All the changes made by the USA, Europe, Japan, Canada and Australia are dwarfed and negated by the harm done by the billions of people in the developing world, China, and Russia. And I don’t blame them... we used fossil fuels to get ahead and improve our lives, why shouldn’t they? It’s easy to wag our fingers from our comfy lifestyles at the dirty developing world because we’re affluent enough to buy solar panels and windmills. Deny them fossil fuels and it has a much larger human impact than it does in, say, Scandinavia.

4. In order to convince me that we need to take action about climate change you need to convince me of four things:
i. Global warming is happening
ii. It is caused by humans
iii. Me changing my lifestyle will make a measurable difference (in the face of #3 above)
iv. If we don’t make changes it will lead to catastrophe
You can convince me of i. and maybe ii. but iii. is doubtful. I sure as hell don’t believe iv.

5. Look at my language here, too: “believe.” There’s a huge element of faith to all this because of the whole forward-looking element. I don’t like it when people implement policy based on faith, whether it’s religious faith or “scientific” faith for lack of a better term.

1. and 2. above are characteristics of pseudosciences. I could be more eloquent about the nature of scientific theories and the philosophical problems with distant-future-predicting ones, but I would have to break out Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and this post would change from an essay to a small novel.

Points 1. through 5. above are why I get bent out of shape when the government coerces FCA to implement ESS and to make the computer forget my choice to disable it. Because of my obsessive-compulsive nature I can’t just let it go, so I’ll end up buying a tool to disable it through software. So thanks for that, CAFE. Sure, this is a personal failing of mine... I can’t let things go that annoy me.

Anyway, we can usually all agree on one thing: saving money and fuel is a good thing. Maybe you’re okay with using ESS to that end; maybe I’m not. My version of saving fuel may be running 35’s and a small lift instead of 40’s and a huge lift. Maybe you couldn’t care less about saving money or fuel. Who cares? Jeeps are awesome because we can make them our own. Just let me do that without having to press an extra button every time I drive.

Please google co2 emission per capital by country. US/Canada/Australia are double compared to most European countries or China. And 10X compared to India.

Back to ESS.

I end up turning it off because my commute is a lot of stop-and-go traffic where it turns the engine off sub-second hundreds of time.

In general I view this useful though. It is one of the hundreds of innovations modern engines have compared to engines in the 70s. (Port injections, direct injections, turbos, better tires, aero dynamics, EGR).

All of these make today's cars much more fuel efficient, much more complex (and reduce engine life in general)

 

[JeepU4IA]

Here is my take. If the engine stops for just a few seconds, then I dislike ESS. If the engine stops for a longer period of time (more than 15 seconds or so), then I like ESS. The Tazer I have installed automatically disables ESS every time the engine starts. When I want the engine to stop (i.e. when I come to a red light that just turned red), I press the button to activate the ESS and thereby stopping the engine. Then, when the engine starts, the Tazer automatically disables the ESS again. This way I have complete control of ESS and I have the best of both worlds.

Unfortunately, the latest software on the Tazer now remembers your last ESS setting so in my situation I'd have to turn ESS on and off each time I want to use it. I've avoided updating the software because of this.

Look, Ma, no politics!!!

 

[Sean L]

Here is my take. If the engine stops for just a few seconds, then I dislike ESS. If the engine stops for a longer period of time (more than 15 seconds or so), then I like ESS. The Tazer I have installed automatically disables ESS every time the engine starts. When I want the engine to stop (i.e. when I come to a red light that just turned red), I press the button to activate the ESS and thereby stopping the engine. Then, when the engine starts, the Tazer automatically disables the ESS again. This way I have complete control of ESS and I have the best of both worlds.

Unfortunately, the latest software on the Tazer now remembers your last ESS setting so in my situation I'd have to turn ESS on and off each time I want to use it. I've avoided updating the software because of this.

Look, Ma, no politics!!!

Normally I just roll my eyes at people bringing up the Tazer to disable ESS but...

I think you and I almost see eye to eye on the ESS. Good for stoplights, and not for stop signs.

 

[KrispyKotex]

If the ESS could have a longer delay until it activates, I’d be totally onboard with it. Activating when I pull into a parking spot shifting from drive to park is ridiculous. Talked with dealer about adding a delay; answer is they can’t. So, I chalk it up to a design flaw, and hit the disable button each time I start my engine.

 

[Sean L]

If the ESS could have a longer delay until it activates, I’d be totally onboard with it. Activating when I pull into a parking spot shifting from drive to park is ridiculous. Talked with dealer about adding a delay; answer is they can’t. So, I chalk it up to a design flaw, and hit the disable button each time I start my engine.

I've found its pretty easy to just shift into neutral as I'm stopping to prevent an autostop in this situation. Then I go into park when I'm fully stopped.

 

[ThirtyOne]

If the ESS could have a longer delay until it activates, I’d be totally onboard with it. Activating when I pull into a parking spot shifting from drive to park is ridiculous. Talked with dealer about adding a delay; answer is they can’t. So, I chalk it up to a design flaw, and hit the disable button each time I start my engine.

You can remove your seatbelt as you pull in and it won't activate.

 

[MLBRINES]

Only had my 2019 Sahara 4 door for 4 months now. I don't really have an argument for leaving ESS on or disabling it. All I know is I TRY to remember to turn it off after starting the jeep.....if I forget, I'll be reminded when the engine shuts down. Just for grins, I've relatively figured out how to apply the brakes a bit easier and keep the ESS from shutting the engine off......in a way, leaving ESS enabled helps you master a better stopping habit.....easy on the brakes....less brake pad/rotor wear....downshifting with my manual also helps with slowing down too. So, there ya go....no politickin either ! Hahahahahaha

 

[aprez27]

Only thing I don't like with the manual transmission is when you get home and the jeep stops running, if you don't power it off the jeep starts back up when I open the door.

 

[Onyx Dragon]

Only thing I don't like with the manual transmission is when you get home and the jeep stops running, if you don't power it off the jeep starts back up when I open the door.

What? What conditions are causing that? I've never had that happen.

 

[Granni44]

I am kind of indifferent, except that it randomly craps out, throws an error code, and then disables my cruise control.

For CAFE standards, I am sure it improves the overall gas mileage in the lab. In the real world, likely no benefit.

Finally, I've been through 13 pages of this thread hoping someone else had this issue. Of course the times I take it to the dealer, its not in its crapped out state. So of course the dealer can't replicate the problem and the dealer says just drive it here when it is crapped out. Of course that's convenient....not..... I was hoping someone has a dealer who was able to diagnose this issue. Anyone?! Anyone?!

 

[ThirtyOne]

What? What conditions are causing that? I've never had that happen.

I think this happens if you park, put it in neutral, and release the clutch. Then it will go into ESS mode and you have to restart it to power it off. But it is easy to forget to power it off and then when you open the door it starts back up.

This doesn't happen to me because I power it off before I release the clutch (and I always park in gear).

 

[Onyx Dragon]

I think this happens if you park, put it in neutral, and release the clutch. Then it will go into ESS mode and you have to restart it to power it off. But it is easy to forget to power it off and then when you open the door it starts back up.

This doesn't happen to me because I power it off before I release the clutch (and I always park in gear).

Yeah, I park the same way

 

[mrhumble1]

I think this happens if you park, put it in neutral, and release the clutch. Then it will go into ESS mode and you have to restart it to power it off. But it is easy to forget to power it off and then when you open the door it starts back up.

This doesn't happen to me because I power it off before I release the clutch (and I always park in gear).

Yup this is exactly what is happening. It happens to me because I leave the gear in neutral when I park and just pull the e-brake. The engine shuts down when I stop (because the car thinks I am just stopping, not parking) and I still have to push the button to turn it off.

It's a little weird but it doesn't bother me.

Sponsored