[subliminalaudio]

Is this true ?

Turbo oil supply with engine shut down feature https://www.2addicts.com/forums/show....php?t=1521252

[AndrewC1989]

Even if it isn't true I wouldn't ever use the auto start/stop feature in either my 6MT M2 or my 8AT 328

1. It's annoying as fuck

2. It barely has any impact on fuel economy

and

3. It will (presumably) prematurely wear out your starter

[subliminalaudio]

Originally Posted by andrewc89

Even if it isn't true I wouldn't ever use the auto start/stop feature in either my 6MT M2 or my 8AT 328

1. It's annoying as fuck

2. It barely has any impact on fuel economy

and

3. It will (presumably) prematurely wear out your starter

I agree

[horsepower_and_hounds]

I think it is becoming part of mandated features on cars....lots of things changing globally

[pruettfan]

There is zero upside to activating or perhaps stated more properly no deactivating start stop on this or any other car. This is an EPA points grab, even when certain technologies don't provide a significant improvement in emissions or economy the EPA gives the manufacturers credit towards their corporate average fuel economy, if it wasn't for this none of these systems would exist. Mine will never be used.

[TMR013]

Originally Posted by pruettfan

There is zero upside to activating or perhaps stated more properly no deactivating start stop on this or any other car. This is an EPA points grab, even when certain technologies don't provide a significant improvement in emissions or economy the EPA gives the manufacturers credit towards their corporate average fuel economy, if it wasn't for this none of these systems would exist. Mine will never be used.

This. I'm just glad there is still the option to turn it off. One day that probably won't be the case.

[james33]

Do you have to turn it off every time you get in the car?

[DanG]

Originally Posted by james33

Do you have to turn it off every time you get in the car?

No. It stays in the last used position.

[Peasley]

Originally Posted by DanG

No. It stays in the last used position.

Mine definitely doesn't Turning it off is the first thing I do after starting her up.

[KevM2]

Originally Posted by Peasley

Mine definitely doesn't Turning it off is the first thing I do after starting her up.

Mine stays off.. pretty sure it's supposed to

[qnet]

I never use the start/stop function, and am glad it can be turned off. On my Focus RS, I had to disable it everytime I started the car.

[Nezil]

Originally Posted by Peasley

Mine definitely doesn't Turning it off is the first thing I do after starting her up.

It's a coding thing. UK, and maybe Europe cars always revert to switching Auto Start-Stop On. US, and probably Canada cars remember the last position.

Coding to the US behaviour is very easy if you're not happy with the UK behaviour...

[TheHaze]

Originally Posted by qnet

I never use the start/stop function, and am glad it can be turned off. On my Focus RS, I had to disable it everytime I started the car.

Yep, that was one of the most annoying features of my RS. The only way to get it to stay off for good was to tune it out.

[Pyrat 2]

Originally Posted by pruettfan

There is zero upside to activating or perhaps stated more properly no deactivating start stop on this or any other car. This is an EPA points grab, even when certain technologies don't provide a significant improvement in emissions or economy the EPA gives the manufacturers credit towards their corporate average fuel economy, if it wasn't for this none of these systems would exist. Mine will never be used.

Agree. I read somewhere that the start stop feature was introduced because it plays into the test cycle for epa fuel consumption measurements and makes a difference on that test cycle. In real world it makes negligible difference. Bottom line, only introduced to play the epa mileage game but no real world benefit.

[Free Spirit]

Originally Posted by andrewc89

Even if it isn't true I wouldn't ever use the auto start/stop feature in either my 6MT M2 or my 8AT 328

1. It's annoying as fuck

2. It barely has any impact on fuel economy

and

3. It will (presumably) prematurely wear out your starter

I only use it when I'm dangerously low on gas and I'm too lazy to stop..

I agree, it shows very little benefit except in my mind..

[Nezil]

Originally Posted by Pyrat 2

Agree. I read somewhere that the start stop feature was introduced because it plays into the test cycle for epa fuel consumption measurements and makes a difference on that test cycle. In real world it makes negligible difference. Bottom line, only introduced to play the epa mileage game but no real world benefit.

I've posted above about this... On my busy commute to the office in the morning, I get ~19mpg with Start/Stop on, and ~14mpg with it off. This is a saving in fuel. It's not huge, but it is a saving in real world driving.

If your journey is not full of start and stop traffic, I can see that only stopping the engine a few times on a journey would save you nothing at all.

To be clear, I'm not saying that it isn't designed to improve the EPA test results, but keep in mind that the EPA test is different from the tests in Europe, and the feature is the same. Just because it gives a good improvement and is somewhat optimised for the EPA tests, doesn't mean it won't provide a benefit in the real world. Perhaps not as much benefit, but a benefit nonetheless.

The EPA result for the 6MT M2 is 18 / 26 / 21. I've never seen anything close to 26, but I will get 21 on a journey to San Francisco and back (mostly highway, bit of city, ~100miles total). Our cars are thirsty as it is... every little helps!

I can totally see why it would be a lot more annoying in a DCT car, but in a manual we have a lot more control over if we want it on or not. If I'm sat at the lights and don't want to be slowed down, you can just press in the clutch briefly, and it will start up again. It's really not intrusive at all with a manual car.

[DanG]

Hmm, I just drove to Montana and back. 1200 miles total and averaged over 26 mpg.

[Nezil]

Originally Posted by DanG

Hmm, I just drove to Montana and back. 1200 miles total and averaged over 26 mpg.

I think CA has had a lot to do with it. I got less than that before I started adding E85 every tank. CA gas is so bad, you get timing pull and I believe extra fuel injected to prevent knock, so adding E85, which should increase fuel consumption, actually decreased it!

[DanG]

Originally Posted by Nezil

I think CA has had a lot to do with it. I got less than that before I started adding E85 every tank. CA gas is so bad, you get timing pull and I believe extra fuel injected to prevent knock, so adding E85, which should increase fuel consumption, actually decreased it!

I was surprised that Montana gas was only 91 oct. but was ethanol free. Washington gas is 92 oct. but may have up to 10% ethanol.

[akkando]

Originally Posted by Nezil

I think CA has had a lot to do with it. I got less than that before I started adding E85 every tank. CA gas is so bad, you get timing pull and I believe extra fuel injected to prevent knock, so adding E85, which should increase fuel consumption, actually decreased it!

Yeah dude my gas milage is ridiculously bad here wtf! I guess the idea is it burns cleaner even though you use more of it? So annoying.

[chris719]

Gasoline that is 10% ethanol has around 98% of the total energy of gas without it. E85 contains even less, around 72%.

CA gas is going to be 91 octane for premium, but I highly doubt anti-knock measures reduce fuel economy by almost 30%, which is what it would take to make it equivalent to E85.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoli...lon_equivalent

[Nezil]

Originally Posted by chris719

Gasoline that is 10% ethanol has around 98% of the total energy of gas without it. E85 contains even less, around 72%.

CA gas is going to be 91 octane for premium, but I highly doubt anti-knock measures reduce fuel economy by almost 30%, which is what it would take to make it equivalent to E85.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoli...lon_equivalent

I didn't say I was using pure E85, I said I added some E85. I'm targeting E20, so if I fill up 10 gallons when the first fuel reserve light comes on, that's about 1.3 gallons of E85. It's not much, but it makes a difference as I said.

I believe the base fuel in CA is 89 AKI with 10% ethanol added, which works out at 90.6 AKI if I remember correctly, enough to round up to sell as 91, but not be actually 91, and not be very good.

AKI is also an average of MON and RON, with MON being more important for our engines, but never reported on. I suspect that the CA 89 base fuel has a slightly higher RON that other regions, and a slightly lower RON. This still averages out to 89 AKI, but again, contributes to the poor performance.

Several well regarded tuners have looked at logs I've taken on the stock M2 map, and told me it looks like CA 91 is equivalent to the rest of the world's 88 AKI! Adding my additional E85 (to make E20) is getting me performance close to rest of the world 91 AKI, and, as I said improving fuel consumption slightly.