For the EZ-Go golf carts, that’s a great feature. For my DD or hotrod, can’t stand it.

My BMW has that feature, but I have it turned off.  Not something I would ever consider on a Mustang.  Probably would have to hoard starters to keep the thing running. Plus, it is just annoying. I think I would consider full electric before I went that route. Maybe with a 1,000 watt stereo with two appropriately placed rear exterior speakers and a recording of 6sally6’s open exhaust for those special moments.

My wife is so tired of hearing my phone ring. It is the sound of a Mustang and a Camaro  accelerating through the gears at high rpm. It is funny to see people looking around to see where it is when it rings. The Mustang wins every time, if you were wondering.

The high compression isn't really a problem, Walt.  Most new cars are running 10 to 11 but the pot would not be happy.  Gotta have electronic engine management and fuel control.

Hey to you and Brenda.  Hope you had a good Christmas and a better 2022.
 

I will make two comments on the features of the "thing" (jeep fiat) that my wife drives.   

First, I absolutely hate that engine shut off feature.  Mainly because its just stupid saving pennies, but around these parts its going to get someone killed.  That delay...when I drive it I turn it off. But she won't listen. 

That said,  I think there would be great use of the electric emergency brake on these old cars.

In my Nautilus manual it states that the starter and battery have been upgraded to deal with the feature.
I hate it with a passion but my wife has no issues with it.

My biggest issue with the newer vehicles is that if not driven regularly the electronics  go into a battery saving mode that shuts down some of the cars features.
Pi$$ poor technology that requires a battery maintainer if the vehicle is not driven for a week or so.

Does the Mustang Mach-e have a lumpy cam? Asking for a friend from South Carolina...

TKOPerformance wrote:

Does anyone remember those old commercials when they said the worst thing you can do to an engine is start it, because most wear occurs during start up?  It can't be good long term to add thousands of start/shutoff cycles to an engine every year. 

Hot start, perfect fuel management. I doubt it has any real negative issues on the engine.  Slightly deeper cycling of the battery may even be better for it too.  But there has to be some delay and that would probably drive most of us gear heads nuts.  Cold start on the old cars was terrible as mixture control was nearly nonexistant.  EFI solved that problem as evidenced by all the 200k blocks with zero cylinder ledge.
 

First time I ever experienced that type of vehicle system was in Israel about four years ago. We rented a car (some small odd foreign make....?) in Tel Aviv and at the first stop waiting to enter traffic from a parking lot, the damned engine stopped. Didn't expect that. Thought the car had a problem. Pushed the gas pedal and it started right up. I figure that the starter would have a short life with a system like that, butt....I guess with the price of gas (petrol, benzene, or whatever they called it) by the liter being rather steep at the time - $1.80 USD/liter = ~ $7.20/ gal, saving as much gas as you could was necessary. Personally, if my car had it, I would turn it off and save the starter.

TKOPerformance wrote:

Bullet Bob wrote:

TKOPerformance wrote:

Does anyone remember those old commercials when they said the worst thing you can do to an engine is start it, because most wear occurs during start up?  It can't be good long term to add thousands of start/shutoff cycles to an engine every year. 

Hot start, perfect fuel management. I doubt it has any real negative issues on the engine.  Slightly deeper cycling of the battery may even be better for it too.  But there has to be some delay and that would probably drive most of us gear heads nuts.  Cold start on the old cars was terrible as mixture control was nearly nonexistant.  EFI solved that problem as evidenced by all the 200k blocks with zero cylinder ledge.
 

Its still cranking starting at zero oil pressure.  The pressure builds quickly, but there's still a brief period.  Newer engines with full synthetic oil and roller everything its probably not nearly as much of an issue as it could be, but we are also talking about tens of thousands more starts a year.

Also, if you leave in the morning while the vehicle isn't warm and come to various lights before it warms up fully you are still dumping unburned fuel even with EFI.  Its much more accurate than a carb, but you can't get around the need to richen the mixture when the engine's cold because all the fuel simply won't combust.  Keep in mind those 200k blocks with no wear didn't use this technology. 

What really bothers me is added complexity for a dubious gain.  If we really wanted better mileage we'd pull the 10% ethanol from the fuel and go back to straight gas.  That would benefit fuel economy MUCH more than some restart feature. 
 

Don't forget these corporations once told us all to buy in bulk because 9/10 of the cost of a product was its packaging.

Also, its not really about us saving pennies, its about the manufacturers getting tax credits for the overall lack of emissions their products create. 
 

Greg B wrote:

TKOPerformance wrote:

Bullet Bob wrote:

Hot start, perfect fuel management. I doubt it has any real negative issues on the engine.  Slightly deeper cycling of the battery may even be better for it too.  But there has to be some delay and that would probably drive most of us gear heads nuts.  Cold start on the old cars was terrible as mixture control was nearly nonexistant.  EFI solved that problem as evidenced by all the 200k blocks with zero cylinder ledge.
 

Its still cranking starting at zero oil pressure.  The pressure builds quickly, but there's still a brief period.  Newer engines with full synthetic oil and roller everything its probably not nearly as much of an issue as it could be, but we are also talking about tens of thousands more starts a year.

Also, if you leave in the morning while the vehicle isn't warm and come to various lights before it warms up fully you are still dumping unburned fuel even with EFI.  Its much more accurate than a carb, but you can't get around the need to richen the mixture when the engine's cold because all the fuel simply won't combust.  Keep in mind those 200k blocks with no wear didn't use this technology. 

What really bothers me is added complexity for a dubious gain.  If we really wanted better mileage we'd pull the 10% ethanol from the fuel and go back to straight gas.  That would benefit fuel economy MUCH more than some restart feature. 
 

Don't forget these corporations once told us all to buy in bulk because 9/10 of the cost of a product was its packaging.

Also, its not really about us saving pennies, its about the manufacturers getting tax credits for the overall lack of emissions their products create.
 

YES, so use their enormous lobby to beat back the corn lobby and get ethanol out of our gas!  That would improve mileage by 5-10% easily, or they can keep chasing 1/10% gains. 
 

pbrownrk wrote:

My 2018 F150 with the V8 had the start stop feature drove me crazy. Thankfully the 2021 Mustang GT doesn't.

Sounds like Ford researched their customer base on that one.

And again, there was nothing wrong with a multi position fan switch, a switch to control where the air was going, and a temperature knob.  Systems like that have worked just fine from the '60s through the '00s.  Most of what's wrong with vehicles today is they fixed things that weren't broken and improved things that needed no improvement.