[green genie]

Not sure if the brake light goes out when in Stop/ Start situation as above, but probably will not investigate as I never use s/s/.

SURELY! (in my opinion) To repeatedly restart an engine without any existing oil pressure is not a good thing, and even worse when the oil will be 21000 miles old! It also then needs a second or so to spin up and begin the turbo pressure before giving power so to expect instant acceleration is a bit unrealistic and not really the fault of the gearbox .
Stop start was "Invented" to get better figures in the laboratory conditions that are used to give "comparative figures" and are not remotely accurate
as the recent V.W. revelations have shown. Any consideration to the long term effect on turbos and engine etc, were not relevant, so as the person who would be eventually paying for the worn components (unless L.R. and all others give a lifetime guarantee) I will continue to allow my engine to tickover
with oil pressure in readyness.

 

[depicus]

Engine Stop/Start has nothing to do with fuel consumption testing as the tests do not include this.

If you want to know more about the tests you can read all about them here

http://www.dft.gov.uk/vca/fcb/the-fuel-consumption-testing-scheme.asp

 

[green genie]

At a quick glance, (that"s all it deserves) I saw that "tickover" is included in the tests!

As there probably is" nothing in the rules" to prevent the use of Stop/ Start at the tickover stage provided that it was automatically initiated, that was the basis on which it was "invented", and therefore used within the test cycle at the" tickover stage." VW and others got up to multiple tricks, are we to assume that everyone else is squeeky clean. ok , one manufacturer did it first and they are all doing it now!

Do you really believe that All the manufacturers went to the expense and complication to add this to their cars if it in no way was allowed to improve economy and emissions figures for the test? and that they turn it off during testing? but fit it simply for the after test times. Also why it is not a delete option and initiates each and every time we start the car. Presumably if we could delete it then it would not be allowed.
Remember:
It requires a better Battery,more durable Starter motor (hopefully) and all the electrical complication to also monitor temperature, gear position, brake/clutch A/C etc, granted some of this is already in the system, but all for no gain, just out of their concern for the planet.

 

[green genie]

Please excuse my traditional term. Must be my age (and experience) by "tickover" of course I mean "idling"

 

[depicus]

At a quick glance, (that"s all it deserves) I saw that "tickover" is included in the tests!...

Then maybe read it and also try reading up on what tickover/idling means - it certainly doesn't mean start/stop. :roll:

 

[green genie]

I am fully aware of what tickover / idleing means, and also fully understand Stop/Start.

As I stated , Do you REALLY believe that having fitted this at great expense the manufacturers would turn it OFF when their vehicles were undergoing these tests.? and if instructed to do so I am sure they would be very active in their arguments. What is the point of fitting stop/start if it cannot be seen to improve the consumption and emission results, albeit if only under laboratory conditions.

Non of which has any bearing on my main point that whether used in the tests or not, it has little if any advantage in real time driving, probably contributes to lack of "instant Performance" and submits many of the cars components to undue wear, which in time the owner will be paying for.

 

[simon]

Best way round the auto stop at junctions I find is to raise your foot again slightly to re-start the engine but still apply enough pressure to stop the car creeping forwards. This way the car takes off faster (though can still hesitate a little).

 

[Barnsh]

My understanding of the purpose of stop start is to prevent the daily gassing of pedestrians when they walk past all the stationary traffic caused by councils stupid one way systems cluttered with hundreds of traffic lights.(Abingdon being a classic example)
It stops thousands of cars polluting by stopping their engines whilst in queues in town centres.

Ps in the Merc GLC you can turn this off once and it remains off! Luxury

I Turn mine off unless I forget , but being manual I don't have a problem with it, just I don't think it's good for the car .

I don't honestly think the little guff out of my exhaust compairs to what China pump out on an hourly basis.

 

[Mamil]

Best way round the auto stop at junctions I find is to raise your foot again slightly to re-start the engine but still apply enough pressure to stop the car creeping forwards. This way the car takes off faster (though can still hesitate a little).

Same here, if I want a quick getaway I take some pressure off the brake pedal and let the engine start a few seconds before I need it.

Also agree with Green Genie that start/stop must put extra strain on starter motor, transmission, alternator, battery, and engine for what must be very little benefit in economy. It's another of those features, like EGR, and decreasing displacement but increasing turbocharging to compensate, that car manufacturers are forced to introduce to meet increasingly more stringent emissions/economy regulations but which have negative effects on the maintenance and longevity of our vehicles

Have to add though, that while start/stop annoyed me intensely at first, I've now got so used to it that it's my other car that doesn't have it which annoys me now

 

[simon]

I would imagine the Ingenium was designed to cater for any strains stop/start might cause TBH...

 

[disco-disco-bob]

It should have been designed so as to only work if N selected and the handbrake on and leave in the lurch with a dead engine at a T junction or roundabout. It's rollocks.

 

[depicus]

Do you REALLY believe that having fitted this at great expense the manufacturers would turn it OFF when their vehicles were undergoing these tests.?

You are aware there is a button where you can turn it off yourself, and that the tests are done by The Department of Transport who buy the cars blind from dealers and also have the ability to read the manual and turn it off themselves.

I don't honestly think the little guff out of my exhaust compairs to what China pump out on an hourly basis.

Correct but it's about stopping particulates from causing cancer and other diseases on your local high street and that does affect you.

Also agree with Green Genie that start/stop must put extra strain on starter motor, transmission, alternator, battery, and engine for what must be very little benefit in economy..

Yes but new parts offset that http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/stop-start-long-term-impact-your-car-s-engine is a good read but for those unable to read all of it the conclusion is that we should be fine but still to early to tell.

 

[Mamil]

I would imagine the Ingenium was designed to cater for any strains stop/start might cause TBH...

Any engine design is a compromise, as the manufacturer has to balance competing demands of performance, weight, longevity, maintenance, cost, emissions, economy, noise, vibration etc etc.

And unfortunately for us, the greatest pressures on manufacturers and therefore their priorities in terms of development are from regulators/governments to meet emissions/economy standards, and large fleet/corporate buyers in terms of low running costs over the few years that they own the vehicle. Therefore, we can't assume that a manufacturer has our interests, or even the objective of producing the 'best' engine they can, as a priority. I'll expand on the three examples I gave above to illustrate my point...

Exhaust gas recirculation EGR is terrible for an engine. Re-introducing sooty exhaust gas into the cylinders has a detrimental effect on the wear and therefore life of the engine, and is done purely to meet emissions requirements. That's why there's a thriving aftermarket trade in blocking off the EGR ports!

The Ingenium has a reduced displacement over the engine it replaced. Why? Because smaller displacement engines perform better in the unrealistic laboratory tests where low load scenarios are over-represented. But, they need greater turbocharging to get the same power output from a smaller displacement, and so in real world driving conditions the engines are being pushed harder and paradoxically produce more emissions because the engine management system has to inject surplus fuel (and therefore produce greater emissions) to prevent them running too hot! In fact, the move to real world testing in the wake of the VW Dieselgate scandal is expected to see a reversal of this trend and we'll see diesel engines increasing in displacement again, which just proves the old adage in the diesel engine industry that "there's no replacement for displacement".

The Ingenium has increased service intervals. It's been suggested by industry insiders that the stretching of new car service intervals has more to do with reducing cost of ownership for the first two years in the very competitive fleet/corporate market than a revolutionary leap forwards in the technology of the engine or oil that's used. And you have to ask yourself is it the best for the engine, or does it just pass problems and increased maintenance costs onto subsequent owners when the car is already out of warranty?

So, excuse my cynicism that the Ingenium has somehow been designed to nullify the extra strain introduced by start/stop technology.

 

[depicus]

It's been suggested by industry insiders that the stretching of new car service intervals has more to do with reducing cost of ownership for the first two years in the very competitive fleet/corporate market than a revolutionary leap forwards in the technology of the engine or oil that's used....

....or maybe that is just a byproduct and technology has actually moved on in the last 40 years. If we're speculating then I'd suggest dealers would be unhappy with losing their yearly service costs and that probably far out ways fleet buyers. Maybe....

 

[simon]

As far as I can tell the new Ingenium has less CO2 output and better fuel consumption than the larger engines its replacing. Look at the numbers comparing the outgoing 3L TDV6 in the D4 with the 2L Ingenium that matches it performance wise but aces it for emissions and fuel consumption... so I don't get what you mean by small engines producing more emissions.

 

[Mamil]

....or maybe that is just a byproduct and technology has actually moved on in the last 40 years.

I'm not denying that engines and oils have improved, but I'm just worried that at the same time we're...

- making the displacement smaller and pushing them harder to get the same power output
- re-injecting sooty exhaust gas into the cylinders
- start/stop is putting the engine through ten times (from the article above) the number of start cycles, and
- we're doubling the interval between oil changes

I think on balance I'd be increasing the frequency of oil changes :lol:

In fact, that's exactly what I intend to do, and will be changing my oil every six months, as I think it's the easiest and cheapest preventative maintenance you can do, and then hopefully this car will last for at least ten years and 300,000kms like my last one

 

[green genie]

Oh dear, depicus
Taken from the first page of the site that you referred me to in relation to the fuel consumption / emmissions results. Perhaps you should take a look yourself before attempting and failing to be clever!

I Quote;
WHO DOES THE TESTING?
THE TESTS ARE CARRIED OUT EITHER BY INDEPENDENT TEST ORGANISATIONS, OR BY THE VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS THEMSELVES, USUALLY AT THEIR OWN TEST FACILITIES.

Why on earth did you think that they would purchase cars and do these tests themselves???

 

[Mamil]

As far as I can tell the new Ingenium has less CO2 output and better fuel consumption than the larger engines its replacing. Look at the numbers comparing the outgoing 3L TDV6 in the D4 with the 2L Ingenium that matches it performance wise but aces it for emissions and fuel consumption... so I don't get what you mean by small engines producing more emissions.

The point is that the published figures are under the current test cycle conditions which as I said feature much more low load driving than typical real world scenarios. Under low load driving a smaller displacement diesel engine will produce lower emissions and better economy than a larger one, but this reverses under high load (read - real world) conditions as the smaller engine has to work harder (read - turbo) to produce the same power, so it runs hotter, which produces more Co2 and Nox, and so the response of the engine management software is to make the fuel mixture richer to keep engine temps under control, which results in more particulate emissions as well.

So, yes, in the manufacturers published figures, which are based on the current laboratory testing regime, the Ingenium claims to produce lower emissions. However, in real world driving conditions it could actually be producing more, but the fact is we don't know until the figures are published. This is just one of the perverse results of our current testing regime, and the reason it's important we move towards more realistic scenarios.

Edit: Here's a Reuters article that explains it better than I can... http://www.reuters.com/article/us-autoshow-paris-engines-exclusive-idUSKBN12E11K

 

[simon]

@Mamil - Interesting. But isn't this low load / high load argument somewhat offset by the new multi speed gear boxes that tend to run in higher gear ranges unless demands on the accelerator are made by the driver. At cruise the DS is generally just ticking over so the engine is not under high load. Only pulling away, over taking etc would the engine enter a high load state ?

 

[depicus]

Oh dear, depicus
Taken from the first page of the site that you referred me to in relation to the fuel consumption / emmissions results. Perhaps you should take a look yourself before attempting and failing to be clever!

I Quote;
WHO DOES THE TESTING?
THE TESTS ARE CARRIED OUT EITHER BY INDEPENDENT TEST ORGANISATIONS, OR BY THE VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS THEMSELVES, USUALLY AT THEIR OWN TEST FACILITIES.

Why on earth did you think that they would purchase cars and do these tests themselves???

Ok partly wrong my apologies but doesn't detract from the fact start/stop has nothing to do with fuel figures.

I was thinking of the NCAP

Where Does Euro NCAP Get the Cars for Testing ?

Up to 4 cars are needed for an assessment by Euro NCAP. If a car model is already on sale, Euro NCAP will generally buy cars from dealers, in the same way that consumers do. Cars are bought anonymously, either from a single dealer or from several. Once the cars are at the test laboratory, the manufacturer is informed of the vehicle identification numbers (VINs) and are asked to confirm the specification.

http://www.euroncap.com/en/about-euro-ncap/the-car-selection-explained/