I drove a Honda Insight through zipcar before I bought my TL a year and half ago and it had a pretty cool feature which did save a lot of gas in the city. When the ECO mode was enable anytime the car would come to a complete stop the engine would turn off and as soon as I released my foot from the brake it would start the engine in about .5 seconds. I was wondering is it possible to transfer this type of technology to our cars? Before I get hammered with comments on "why would you do that?" and "start/stop is stupid" I tried it doing it manually and was able to extend my tank an additional 3 days by doing this. I think this would be beneficial to to all of us if our cars became a little more efficient. I don't want to give up my car in a few years because gas becomes more expensive than diesel.

 

http://www.gizmag.com/bmw-m3-gets-au...rt-stop/14207/

 

well, you would need to figure out HOW the insight does it.
if its computer controlled or all mechanical.

without looking at how the insight works, I'm gonna say that its both mechanical and computer controlled.

so, you could NOT transfer that technology to the TL.

 

its a moot point if the TL's hardware and software cant do it.

 

How do you do burnouts if the engine shuts off with a foot on the brakes?

 

The technology only is active when you want it to be, that's why in the insight there was the ECON button.

 

my moms Mercedes has this and its retarded. whenever you go into a driveway at idle the engine turns off because you weren't moving than you have to gas it to turn the engine on and move.

 

M3 owners are not so enamored. I'm sure Honda would do a better job but nevertheless happy it is not a TL feature.

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=610281

 

different manufactures employ different versions or technology. If you really wanted to figure it out, you'd find out which manufacture employs a technology that would work with the TL.

but, it seems as if these cars are built with cylinder management/deactivation and are hardware based.

something the TL cant do, because of hardware limitation.

 

You can do anything if you have enough time, knowledge and money. I think adding stop/start on a car that didn't come with it would be difficult though.

From my understanding, this is how most stop start systems work:

It's basically all computer controlled. The computer takes info from various sensors. When it reads that the brake pedal is depressed (through the same brake pedal switch that activates the brake lights) and the vehicle speed is zero (trough the vehicle speed sensor), it cuts power to the engine. When it reads that the brake pedal has been released it returns power to the engine and cranks the starter until it reads that engine RPM is at idle speed (through the crankshaft position sensor). Also, I believe that most systems automatically shift the transmission into neutral when cranking, and then quickly back to drive once started, since cranking the engine in gear is difficult for the starter.

Also, I know that most vehicles equipped with stop/start have more robust starters that can crank the engine more quickly and also deal with the added stresses of frequent cranking.

So basically, the TL has all the sensors needed for stop/start. You would need a computer that could take the sensor input and control the proper components to make everything work though. That's the hard part. I hope this helps.

 

That was the most direct answer I could of hoped for. This technology is still pretty new but I don't think it's impossible for a independent manufacture to create a universal system.

 

This is more trouble than its worth

 

It is a pretty cool feature. My mom has a CRZ that also has the start/stop feature. I personally think it would cost way too much and not be worth the headache of trying to retrofit it into a TL.

 

Not worth it. It's worth it to manufacturers that sell millions of cars that are trying not to be penalized by the government to implement these features but not for the individual. Even the switch to 20wt oil which gives about .5% improvement in mpg was worth it to them bacause they sell so many cars and have CAFE to deal with but it's immeasurable for us, the consumers.

So many people talk about the most wear occurring when the engine is first started, I'm surprised anyone would want something that's going to increase the number of start ups by a factor of 10. While most wear really occurs during the warmup process, and not the startup process as many believe, I would still want an auxiliary oil pump to keep the crank floating in its bearings.

You've also got to think of what other benefits start stop might have for manufacturers like eliminating any idle NVH issues.

Our transmissions already take a long time to engage first gear, even with the pump running. Cut the engine off and you're stopped the hydraulic pump and added more time before the car will start moving again.

The '04-'06 TLs do not have the twist and let go start setup so more hardware would be needed.

Last, I'm paranoid. If someone is coming up behind me and is not going to stop, I want that immediate throttle response to punch it and move out of the way. I had that happen in my other car. The freeway stopped and I saw a car coming full speed behind me. I floored it for everything it was worth and still narrowly avoided getting hit. They took out 5 or 6 cars in that wreck.

I'm curious for more information on this test that was done. How many miles is "3 extra days"? Is the test repeatable? Was the same route followed with and without the start stop? Was the average mph close to the same in both tests (I know it's not possible for it to be exactly the same). How much total time was spent sitting still?

Even though it's not legal in a lot of states lll put my automatic into neutral if it's going to be a long light or at a drive through. The torque converter still puts a load on the engine even with your foot off the gas and it's still creating heat in the transmission. You can pop it into neutral and back into drive without touching the brakes. The downside is you're still wearing the forward clutches each time you put it back into drive.

I would be willing to bet putting the car in neutral will give at least half the gains of start stop plus you don't lose your AC when you're stopped.

Cylinder deactivation is a joke. Most truck owners can't tell a difference in mpg. You're deactivating cylinders but you still have the moving mass and friction of all cylinders. It's better the way they do it these days with compression relief but it's still not good. Ever hear a vehicle with loud exhaust on the freeway when it's in deactivation mode?

 

I don't know why you'd want something like this on a non-hybrid car. Just seems like almost all downsides.

 

No, what does it sound like? Would the v6 8th gen accord with VCM count?

Also, most ppl have said what needs to be said in this thread, but I didnt see any comment about the cranking part. I think it would sound really weird to have it crank everytime you start moving again, some ppl may think something is wrong with your car. I was checking out my friend's CRZ and I noticed when the engine turns back on there is no crank so its almost undetectable when it comes back on. I think that's the only way to do it right, having the engine crank back on after every stop light is just stupid IMO, and we all know the TL's crank isnt very quiet/smooth

 

I feel like this type of technology is not something you could just "mod" into the car.

 

The other reason it's not worth it is because with today's engines (especially Honda's), the amount of fuel consumption at idle is very very low. I mean very low. I've done my own experiments whereby I've shut the engine off at each light when I know I'll be sitting for more than 30 seconds or so. I still do this on occasion when I know I'll be sitting at a light for a while. After doing this over and over again with multiple tanks and comparing fuel economy differences (literally over years), I've been unable to attribute even 1mpg to shutting the engine off during idle.

It could be different in some situations such as waiting at a toll booth, restaurant drive through or waiting for your kid to get out of school. But for 1-2 minute lights it's practically worthless. If you want to save gas, don't race up to lights that are already red only to have to slam on your brakes. Don't tail people, causing you to have to hit your brakes every 30 seconds, and don't drive like a bat out of hell all the time. That will have a hundred times more impact than shutting off your engine at lights. The government doesn't understand physics. They tell us to turn off our engines when idling but then they time and sensor traffic lights like morons, giving way too much right-of-way to side streets and low traffic roads. It takes WAY more fuel to get a 3500lb piece of metal moving 0-50mph than it does to keep 30lbs. of metal rotating in a circular motion. Simple physics.

 

Stupid idea for a TL. Can you imagine heating the starter kick in every time you want to begin moving? Not only that but this rc takes a couple seconds to start. Imagine having that delay ALL the time? Not only that, but what about AC or heat when your engine is off. Just one if those things that is ado little not worth even thinking of on a car that did not come that way from the factory. Get it out of your mind now ;-)

 

Biggest issue might be reworking the OEM starter to handle all the extra starts without wearing out quickly.

 

Exactly, most starters in TL's go at about 120k from what I hear. So if you have a super short commute, and only stop 5 times each way, then your starter works 10 more times that day, 12 in total rather than 2. that means you will get only about 10k out of the starter, with a small commute! Imagine if you stop 10 times a day in total, that means youll get 5k out of the starter!

 

^I see what you're getting at but I highly doubt it'll actually wear that fast lol a lot of ppl start their car at least 5x a day, I know I do. Running at 137k miles with a perfect starter

 

Imagine having to hear your car crank over every time you start going. Imagine being in stop and go traffic!!! LOL. People would be laughing seeing some Acura TL cranking its engine every 10 seconds. The way these cars come from the factory with start/stop is different than your standard car. First off you don't hear them cranking over 5 times then starting. The system in those must be different because you don't even hear them crank and it's a much quicker process. It would NOT work in a TL, the car is simply not designed to do it. It amazes me how much people on this forum with a car that is already reasonable efficient for what it is, think of goofy things like this. If the car is not efficient enough for you then simply buy a different car. Or if fuel is costing you too much then you probably shouldn't be driving this particular car anyway.

 

If you want better mileage, get out of the TL.

 

I wonder if the new startup technology where fuel is injected to any cylinder on its power stroke and a spark plug is fired to get things started has ever made it to production. That would be perfectly quiet. My friends CL65 is extremely quiet when starting. It almost sounds pneumatic. I've been meaning to look it up for years.

 

would have prefered seeing the keyless push button start on the 3G than having the auto start/stop. in my opinion an auto start/stop system is useless though suppose to save some fuel. put would like to see the possibility of adding a push button start system on the 3G

 

 

mazda has an interesting technology for this:
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/maz...-more-car-news

 

adapt the v6 accord hybrid to work with the tl