If someone wants to turn it on and save a thimbleful of gas per tank, great.
But the feds increase the mileage that a manufacturer can claim if they make it auto opt in.
Thatâs the rationale? Saving gas?
It costs way more gas to stop at a light than to go through it. You sit at idle for a while (0 mpg) then have to accelerate again.
Whoever said this feature would save gas has a big wet blob of shit where their brain should be. 
How much gas do you save compared to replacing a prematurely worn out starter?
Which uses more gas - a car running a red light so they donât have to stop, or a car sitting at a red light with itâs engine off?
The second one. It has to accelerate again, which kills gas mileage, as I explained in brief, plain English above.
But lefties donât want to do that, they want everyone else to have deal with their car automatically starting and stopping constantly. My 2017 Ford Fusion Fusion has it, after putting on my seatbelt and pushing the start button the first thing I do is turn off the Auto Start/Stop. I replaced the battery last year, $250 instead of under $150 because itâs a larger, heavier duty battery because of the Auto Start/Stop.
Iâm seeing it more clearly now. The tech turns off the engine while already stopped.
So yes my argument about accelerating is wrong/inapplicable @kcflyer
Duh. Sorry everyone for being a retard.
In this case it does save gas. But those of us living in hot ass climates might not appreciate our cars creeping up in temperature, as the compressor will not run with the engine off.
And what if you have to flee an unstable road raging asshole that gets out of his car and comes at you?
Still 100 reasons terrible idea.
1 Like
SorryâŚI interpreted your plain English to mean one guy stopped for the light and his engibne stopped and the other guy went thru it,.
It really does use more gas to stop at a light. Think about it:
Scenario A: Speed up and continue through. Say youâre doing 60 mph and holding 30 mpg at that speed. Speeding up to 70 will decrease your mpg for a few seconds, maybe down to 22 mpg, and then you slow back down to 60 when through the light. The impact on your total mpg is minimal.
Scenario B: You hit the brakes at 60 mph, stop at the light, and your engine turns off. Yes your mpg increases during the stop, and then pauses altogether sitting still. But youâre going to pay for that slight increase when you accelerate again from 0 mph back up to 60 mph. Your engine will rev up through several gears in the 20+ seconds it takes you to accelerate. This will totally negate the savings you had by stopping.
This scenario doesnât much matter anyway, as the tech doesnât force you to stop at a light (which was my dumb mistake initially). It only turns off your engine when youâre stopped.
BINGO!
there is a long list of dumb things automakers are doing.
This one you might save a few bucks in gas at the price of a $500 starter + $300 battery. I hate it on my truck. One of these days it will stop at a intersection and not restart.
And that will be at a time when you need to take off fast because of someone else driving bad.
It comes after Mr Trump vowed to âunleash prosperity through deregulationâ, with one of his executive orders in January stipulating that agencies such as the EPA must now scrap at least 10 regulations for every new one they introduce.
Heâs got a LONG way to go and only 3 1/2 years to work with. Better get started.
95% of all auto regulations passed since Obama needs to be scrapped.
2 Likes
Will MAGA accept the reduction in fuel economy? Or will automakers ignore the rollback since they already do that and most customers seem to like it. I did a google search on regulations since 2000 and there are a lot that happened after Clinton but before Obama..Things like Electronic Stability Control (2007), Tire pressure monitoring (2007), Dual Air Bags (1999), Blind Spot detection and lane departure warnings (early 2000âs), Tier 2 emission standards (2004). The onerous Obama regulations concerned fuel economy and I think many folksâŚeven MAGA folks wouldnât want to see a reduction in fuel economy. And Backup Cameras were in 2018. So there are a lot of things that I think MAGA might miss if we rolled them back.
My wifeâs 2019 twin turbo F150 with aluminum body and 10 speed transmission get an average of 14.2 MPG. For the extra $30K in cost to make it, it is not saving any money compared to an older carburetor truck that gets 12 MPG.
NOwâŚfor the person driving a 2019 SUV or Sedan and not a monster truck, would they notice.
My 2008 Avalon is putting down nearly 30 MPG. Its got V6, no turbo, no modern regulations. The only thing I am going to add is aftermarket radio with backup camera and android auto. Thats about $250 in upgrades.
But most of those fuel economy regs were in place before that.
Yes
1 Like