Stop Start Technology

[securespark]

See 3:03

 

[Brigadier]

Didn't they fit a button on the handbrake lever?
See 3:46

 

[securespark]

Interesting, though.

Most people don't know it was introduced so early.

 

[fillyboy]

Most people don't know it was introduced so early.

I didn't.

 

[Brigadier]

It would have been less of a faff to just turn it off the old way, then turn it back on again

 

[Ihavenojob]

Does it save fuel ? Who here turns lights on and off as they enter/leave rooms ?

 

[Doug99]

Aim of Stop/Start now is to reduce CO2 not fuel consumption.

 

[motorbiking]

Pretty good fuel economy for back then. My 1.3l escort of the same period could only manage about 30mpg

 

[Ihavenojob]

Aim of Stop/Start now is to reduce CO2 not fuel consumption.

And how do they reduce CO2? Reducing fuel consumption is the main way.

 

[securespark]

Does it save fuel ? Who here turns lights on and off as they enter/leave rooms ?

Me. Usually turning off the lights three useless teenagers keep leaving on....

 

[empip]

You'll have your work cut out to actually notice any reduction in fuel consumption.
This being one of the reasons I had switched it off.
I do try to utilise the 'beneficial' stuff in the modern car - But I am not a fan boy - am trying to see the reality.
Such as brim to brim measuring of fuel consumption results jotted onto receipt chits, showing quite consistent difference between reality and computer stated MPG.
Spent a year or so with 'Eco mode' on, 'Idle stop' on, 'Smart charging' operative.
Recently with all switched off or disabled - SFA measurable change in fuel consumption - One gain is battery charging in a conventional manner, thus better charge state at all times.

Misuse of statistics - Probably more dangerous than most sh.t.
-0-

 

[motorbiking]

Zoom has been the biggest fuel saver for me.

 

[Munroast]

You'll have your work cut out to actually notice any reduction in fuel consumption.
This being one of the reasons I had switched it off.
I do try to utilise the 'beneficial' stuff in the modern car - But I am not a fan boy - am trying to see the reality.
Such as brim to brim measuring of fuel consumption results jotted onto receipt chits, showing quite consistent difference between reality and computer stated MPG.
Spent a year or so with 'Eco mode' on, 'Idle stop' on, 'Smart charging' operative.
Recently with all switched off or disabled - SFA measurable change in fuel consumption - One gain is battery charging in a conventional manner, thus better charge state at all times.

Misuse of statistics - Probably more dangerous than most sh.t.
-0-

and then if you factor in your mileometer also over states distance - you have to reduce that mpg even further.

We have a Yeti, over a tank full the computer will be showing around 49, but the brim to brim calc will be more like 45 - factor in true distance and it will be down to 44.5 (which isn't any better than the talbot in the video)

Pretty good fuel economy for back then. My 1.3l escort of the same period could only manage about 30mpg

we recently drove a Land rover evoque on a test drive and didn't get much above 30 - shameful economy.

 

[Doug99]

And how do they reduce CO2? Reducing fuel consumption is the main way.

The sales pitch in today's PC world is save the planet by reducing CO2, the use of less fuel is a secondary issue.

 

[JohnD]

The sales pitch in today's PC world

Eh?