[chevrasaki]

I know the auto stop/start technology is controversial, and I want to know what everyone thinks about it. I'm personally quite skeptical of the technology and would still prefer that my vehicles didn't have stop/start. I'm always weary of new technology until it's been tested extensively by the general population and all of the possible negatives have been discovered and the bugs have been worked out. Like what happens if your battery is dead and you had to pop-start it? How does it affect vehicle reliability, and other components like the turbo and starter? I'm a huge fan of simplicity, the less stuff, especially electronic stuff, the less likely something is to go wrong 10-20 years down the road.

What do you think about auto stop/start systems?

 

[chevrasaki]

Stop/start just seems like a lot of extra parts and programming for not a lot of benefit. Especially on an engine so tiny like the 1.4T which turns over at barely 700 rpm at idle.

 

[Tomko]

A wonderous thing when applied properly.

Don't care for the vibration it causes in the cabin of the gen 2 Cruze.

Want to try it in the '17 lacrosse, where they've made valve timing adjustments to the engine to lower the vibration upon activation.

 

[chevrasaki]

A wonderous thing when applied properly.

Don't care for the vibration it causes in the cabin of the gen 2 Cruze.

Want to try it in the '17 lacrosse, where they've made valve timing adjustments to the engine to lower the vibration upon activation.

I'm sure as time goes on the technology will improve.

There should at least be a button to disable it in case you're trying to recharge your battery, if your starter isn't working, or any other reasons you may not want it activated at the moment.

 

[sparkman]

I'm sure as time goes on the technology will improve.

There should at least be a button to disable it in case you're trying to recharge your battery, if your starter isn't working, or any other reasons you may not want it activated at the moment.

I completely agree. If you enjoy that technology and want to use it, by all means have it enabled. But for those of us who don't care to use it and hate it, we would love a switch.

Deal breaker for me in buying a new Cruze/Malibu/etc.

Having one of these switches would help end the debate of this crap. I read about it all the time on other forums and it's almost as bad as the AMD vs. Intel debate, lol.

 

[Greggul8r]

I have had my Cruze for almost 6 months now and i honestly don't even notice it 85% of the time. the max it is going to shut the car off for is 2 minutes and if you have the ac on it is even shorter and most of the traffic lights here are about 2 minutes long it seams like it starts back up a second before you are going to need it so take offs are rarely an issue.

what happens if your battery is dead and you had to pop-start it?

the auto/stop feature is not on the manual transmissions that i know of so pop starting isn't an option if you have this new technology.

if any one has questions about this technology being i work at a dealer i have access to info on it that may be harder to find elsewhere and i can give my real life 6 month experience as it is my daily driver and i use it for Uber so i am in it a lot. you are welcome to pm if you want but if you have a question someone here might too.

 

[Camcruse]

I've got it my 2017 Impala loaner.

Car shakes a little when starting...don't like it.

Would like to see the damage to the engine some years down the road.

 

[guitargain]

I have the Trifecta Tune for my 2016 Cruze and with the performance tune on (Cruise Control off) it disables it. I know most would prefer a way to disable being built in but the tune is a good alternative way to disable it. Truthfully I don't have a problem with it and like others have said after a week or so you don't really notice it anymore.

 

[UpstateNYBill]

Ask me again in 5 years? lol

For now, anything that saves me money in gas is good. How much will it save me over 200,000 miles vs. how much the technology cost me to buy? I have no idea.

 

[obermd]

The Cruze Premier I drove in Detroit had start/stop technology. Even when I knew it was active I couldn't tell except by watching the tach.

 

[jsusanka]

The owner of the car should be able to turn it off. Period end of story. Still have doubts about the money you save on gas versus the wear and tear it will cause.

You can keep push button start too. I see no benefit to push button start. Just something more expensive to fix. Love the remote start though. Will always try to have a car with remote start. I even like the back up cameras too. I just cannot for the life of me think of a benefit of the push button start.

 

[dhpnet]

No, thank you!!!

The more components you add to anything, the more likely something will break. Start-stop adds a lot of components, and a lot of wear. The probability of failure increases, and there is not enough information to know how much yet. Why not offer it as an option? Then, those who want it can have it, and those who don't can choose to not to have it. And, why not let me turn it off?

There seems to be a lot of people today who think they must force everyone else to live according to their will. That is the most anti-American philosophy ever. Free will is critical for a free society. Stop trying to force me to live the way you want. I realize that start-stop is a product choice, but it still feels wrong to force consumers to accept it. I am sick of companies doing this. Like Apple telling me that I no longer need an earphone jack. Or Windows telling me that I cannot turn off automatic updates anymore. These things are so annoying. Let me choose what I want and stop telling me that I just have to accept your way.

 

[Rudeboy13668]

Unless there's something I'm not understanding, how does stop/start add a lot of components and wear and tear? A chip, a couple sensors and a heavy duty starter. I didn't know that starting a car causes a lot of wear and tear on the engine.

 

[Merc6]

Unless there's something I'm not understanding, how does stop/start add a lot of components and wear and tear? A chip, a couple sensors and a heavy duty starter. I didn't know that starting a car causes a lot of wear and tear on the engine.

Heavy duty starter doesn't mean it's 2 times the longevity of the normal starter. Plenty of us have racked 60k 70k.......*cough* 200k 300k on our cars in a fairly small window. You also have to add that this brand new non turn off technology is tossed in with the 100k warranty gone unless you have the vehicle marked fleet. I had all kinds of stuff break at 50-60-70k that's well into the price of the extended warranty at the signing of the loan not counting loaners hourly tech rate and misc shop materials.

 

[_MerF_]

A lot of complaints are "I don't like technology that's new, it's scary." or futurecasting that "it will cause wear and tear damage". Those are both irrational emotive thoughts. Your evidence that it is bad is either based on how you feel, or that the lack of any evidence is somehow evidence to your feelings.

Is it a gimmick? Yeah, I think it might be. I haven't personally seen a study that convinces me it's the next great thing in fuel efficiency. However, there also isn't anything that proves that it's harmful or worse for the engine.

Great example is merc6's post right above this (sorry for singling you out). His "evidence" that the starter will wear out quicker on S&S cars is that people rack up enormous miles in short amounts of time. Logic dictates that in order to do that (and not live in your car 18 hours a day) you would have to be driving long-haul highway miles...which would be using the starter....none...because you're traveling above 0. So it's an irrational argument that lacks logic.

Anyway, my $0.02.

 

[dhpnet]

Unless there's something I'm not understanding, how does stop/start add a lot of components and wear and tear? A chip, a couple sensors and a heavy duty starter. I didn't know that starting a car causes a lot of wear and tear on the engine.

I think it is good for people on the forum to learn the facts about start-stop technology. It is not just as simple as turning off the car and then restarting it when you're ready to go. The technology is similar to what is used in hybrid cars.

To incorporate start-stop, the car must have a special battery (a normal battery will overheat), a more robust alternator, a special and larger starter motor and additional charging components. All of these will cost you more money when they do fail because you can't just get a standard battery or alternator anymore. Think about at least doubling the cost when your battery dies.

The car must also have additional sensors, switches and electronics to run, monitor and control the starting and charging system. And the battery is in the trunk, so when your battery cable has problems, it's not just as simple as unscrewing the old one and putting in a new one. It has to be rerouted through the body of the car.

You also need to keep the engine coolant circulating, especially now that the Cruze has an aluminum block and turbo. This requires an electric water pump with additional hoses, sensors and circuitry to make it work.

And, you need to maintain hydraulic pressure in the transmission, so you have an electric transmission fluid pump, along with all the additional hoses, sensors and circuitry.

And, people like to have heating and air conditioning while stopped at a light. This means that you now need electric HVAC components with all the switches, sensors, hoses and circuitry required. And, you expect that the radio and other systems don't reset every time the engine starts, which requires additional components.

On top of all of that, the engine requires additional or stronger mechanical parts. For example, it requires stronger pistons, stronger crank shaft bearings and additional sensors and circuitry so that it stops at the right time and starts quickly.

I am not saying that any of these things are bad or scary. I am actually sick of hearing people talk about being afraid of new technologies or afraid of the future. That is not the case. These things can be great if you can afford them. If you can afford a new Cadillac or Mercedes then you can afford start-stop. However, if you bought an economy car because you want to save money, then all of these things increase the probability of failure and the cost of repairs with only a very small decrease in the amount of fuel used. I Googled it, and one site estimates that your fuel savings will be between $285 and $1600 over 10 years. That won't even come close to the cost of your first repair on this system. But, GM is OK with that.

 

[guitargain]

From what i understand, soon ALL cars will have this. It's what the manufacturers have to do to conform to new standard of emissions and whatnot.

 

[IndyDiesel]

If I buy a car with it it will get trashed and disabled. I don't like and see zero benefit for me, if something aggravates me and it is an expensive item I should have the choice to use it or not. I could give two craps about saving a dollar a fill up if it is even that.

 

[beaurrr]

I don't really care, so long as a) it works well, and b) I can disable it if I feel like it.

 

[NickD]

You mean when the vehicle comes to a complete stop, the engine dies, hit the gas, and it starts up again?

What about a city street where there is a stop sign on every block, do a quick check for traffic, start up again. Is there a delay? Or does the engine stop instantly, if it does, sounds stupid, every time the engine needs to start, the injectors have to enrich the fuel, and with a cold cat, would certainly increase emissions. If the fuel is not enriched, the engine won't start.

Warm up time will be slower, bad enough have to put up with this stupid oxygenated winter gas, fuel economy is terrible, just because the idiots at the EPA think this is better. What about a 300 mile trip? And the price at the pump is the same if not more. Even in cold weather, may only take a minute or so to warm up to operating temperature.

The way you become head of the EPA is to help the president become elected, so not only have an idiot for president, but another idiot that doesn't know crap about automotive.