Posted On: Saturday - May 24th 2025 10:08AM MST
In Topics: Trump Cars Artificial Stupidity US Feral Government
It's a minor piece of news, as generally Peak Stupidity readers would be the type to avoid this annoyance to begin with. If you are a buyer of new or fairly-new cars, you might just be glad to hear that the start/stop bug, errrr, feature is something you'll be less likely to have to base a purchasing decision on. This is the system in which ... well, let me put it the way Trump's EPA Chief Lee Zeldin did, as excerpted in this Gateway Pundit article:
Start/stop technology: where your car dies at every red light so companies get a climate participation trophy. EPA approved it, and everyone hates it, so we’re fixing it.ZeroHedge has the story here, with, as usual, a generally funnier and savvier set of commenters. (The ZH story comes from The Epoch Times.)
With our most recently acquired 30 y/o Jeep being the 2nd newest vehicle in the fleet, this newest piece of complicated artificial stupidity is not something your PS blogger will EVER have to deal with personally. That is, unless the '28 Cortez Administration will mandate retrofit for all extant motor vehicles per Motor Law - Phase I* ... ugggh, after that visit to the porcelain goddess, I'm fit to type some more... I drive with the windows down a lot - A/C (not AOC!) is not so prevalent in the fleet - and I am still always a little surprised to hear an engine start next to me at the stoplight. You've got to be old-school to have that initial reaction "whewww, good thing he got it going again!"
Why? Why cut off the engine and restart it so damn often? Well, it's the planet... or virtue signaling, or to be more understanding, people wanting to save a few bucks yearly at the gas pump. No, really, if drivers wanted this feature so much, it would not have to have been incentivized by the EPA, as it is. Per GP:
The EPA does not require stop-start technology, but automakers that adopt it are given extra fuel economy credits.My appreciation for Lee Zeldin notwithstanding, there should by no incentives by the EPA, better yet, no EPA period. Per ZH:
The feature became increasingly common under fuel efficiency rules implemented during the Obama administration, expanding from fewer than 1 percent of new vehicles in 2012 to about 45 percent in model year 2021, according to EPA data. The agency notes on its website that start-stop systems can improve fuel economy by up to 5 percent, with the biggest benefits under stop-and-go city driving.45% have it! GP says it's 65% for '23 models, so that's just one more reason not to buy new, ever. I'm not sure if it'd be like one of the old options - could you save money by purchasing a car without it? Then, that 5% - hell, I save WAY more than that by driving efficiently, including not incurring inefficient acceleration gas wastage at damn 3-way stop signs.** Oh, wait, but also:
An Obama-era regulatory impact analysis from 2012 estimated that start-stop systems can reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 1.8 percent to 2.4 percent, depending on vehicle type and size, compared with baseline models.Ahhaa, that Climate Calamity™ card can be used for anything. I'm glad to see that Mr. Zeldin actually cares a little bit about keeping the stupidity level slightly lower for us American who "see the stupidity inherent in the system. [/Monty Python***]
Here's some of that stupidity. I know, these starter motors (and mechanisms) are not your Daddy's starters. They are obviously made for 20 x the normal number of cycles. That's a guess, depending on your type of driving. Or, to be cynical here, are they made for only a little bit higher duty, but you'll have to replace yours quite often, like, say, each time you change the oil?
OK, mechanical quality aside, what about the effect on the engine of this many more starts and stops? Engines of all sorts, right on up to big power plant turbines, are made to run steady-state. Things work optimally then. Not having coolant and/or lubricant in all the right places for a spell upon start-up and shut-down means extra wear, out of proportion to normal running time. Hmmm, I also wonder how emissions, maybe even ACTUAL pollution, changes during these non-steady-state phases of engine life.
Then there's the additional complication, as If 21st century vehicles aren't already! I'm pretty sure I've driven at least one rent-a-car with this engine start/stop feature, and the reader may have too. The very slight push on the gas pedal, as detected by the (now) electric throttle, will kick on the starter. The, call it "anticipation", feature in which the starter kicks in when one's foot is taken off the brake - or I believe even enough to drop the pressure somewhat - takes sensors and wiring. There's a timer to begin with, to initially "shut her down" All of this is taken well care of using digital logic, so there's yet another (of dozens or hundreds!) computer - the start/stop computer. No refunds on electronic parts! ("We've told you that. See, now you have a spare $300 start/stop computer, in case ...")
More features mean more expensive repairs at 100,000 miles. I have half a mind that believes that this is just another "feature", like automatic windshield wipers, that was designed just because IT CAN BE. We have the sensors, and any decision-making you can think of can be easily programmed onto a chip. It's cool to be able to do his, so let's do it.
Finally, this is the curmudgeonry coming out here - I don't care how many dummies have lived through testing, I don't trust the system. I don't like that the car is not ready to go unless some unnecessary complicated digital system does what it's supposed to do, every time, maybe in the middle of an intersection. No, no thanks.
To be fair, from ZH (I didn't know this regarding the rent-a-car(s) I'd driven):
... In most vehicles, drivers must press a button to turn the feature off each time they start the car.It'd be 2nd nature after a month to mash that button upon getting on the road, but why should I pay for it?
Thanks, Lee Zeldin, and President Trump too, for the small favors. What I resent is that we have to hope for just the right people to stop the unConstitutional Feral Gov't edicts that introduce these minor annoyances in our lives.
Anyway, next time, let's get serious and go after the California Air Resource Board - motto: Making life more difficult and miserable, one edict at a time.
* Old Rush reference - please listen just for great the sound, if nothing else.
** If I get pulled where my wife did - not likely because I know what these guys drive - I may bring up that "I'm just tryin'a save the planet, man!!" (Would it help to weep about Mother Earth in front of him? Probably depends on the cop ... but, no... I'm also afraid that sort of thing might bring forth the drug dogs.)
*** Instapundit loves to use that line in various ways. We agree.
Comments:
Moderator
Monday - May 26th 2025 7:35AM MST
PS: M, there's no way the cops would put up with sitting on their asses in their "units" without A/C. They could always roll the windows down and shut down their motors in the vehicles without this "feature", but no way. Taxpayer gas is free. The environment - I'm guessing most cops, being fairly good at detecting lies, don't believe the Climate Calamity™ hoax anyway.
Regarding your 2nd point, I saw that ".. up to..." bit too, but forgot or found it too cumbersome to make a remark. Yeah, there can be lots of assumptions built in and maybe on average you save 1%?
Regarding your 2nd point, I saw that ".. up to..." bit too, but forgot or found it too cumbersome to make a remark. Yeah, there can be lots of assumptions built in and maybe on average you save 1%?
M
Monday - May 26th 2025 2:58AM MST
PS
I will note that most likely the vehicles where the most fuel would be saved via this feature, namely police cars, will also be the ones where it likely will be disabled by law due to safety.
Also: "up to 5% fuel savings". Which could mean 0% or even negative savings without a provable lie. I wonder if the studies showing this saving are calculated like the official consumption figures for every car - you won't ever get that mileage in the real world.
I will note that most likely the vehicles where the most fuel would be saved via this feature, namely police cars, will also be the ones where it likely will be disabled by law due to safety.
Also: "up to 5% fuel savings". Which could mean 0% or even negative savings without a provable lie. I wonder if the studies showing this saving are calculated like the official consumption figures for every car - you won't ever get that mileage in the real world.
Moderator
Sunday - May 25th 2025 4:05PM MST
PS: "There are plug and play solutions to this problem. Probably worth $ 100 or so to rid yourself of the aggravation." Definitely worth it. However, I doubt I'll ever have one of those new machines anyway.
Possumman
Sunday - May 25th 2025 3:46PM MST
PS. There are plug and play solutions to this problem. Probably worth $ 100 or so to rid yourself of the aggravation.
Moderator
Sunday - May 25th 2025 9:11AM MST
PS: That was "battery", of course.
WRT the jeep, I like your joke, but this is one of the 2 vehicles that DOES have A/C. My friend that got it in shape for me* (rebuilt tranny, new double timing chain, triple-bank radiator, etc.) is not the type to go without A/C.
I do drive with the windows down anyway, because I like it and think it's safer too. Unlike these new vehicles with the bigger, more rounded side mirrors, this one doesn't buffet with the windows down at 60 mph. These new vehicles, crossovers and SUVs, from my experience, are NOT meant to be driven with the windows down. The buffeting is disconcerting and likely to give some people a freaking seizure!
* He's a bit fanatical, as in "I need to still get that ashtray light working. too, come to think of ..." No, man, if it's running good never mind the ashtray light. NO, I don't want to pay for 3. new rims to match the other that is newer - it's an old Jeep!
WRT the jeep, I like your joke, but this is one of the 2 vehicles that DOES have A/C. My friend that got it in shape for me* (rebuilt tranny, new double timing chain, triple-bank radiator, etc.) is not the type to go without A/C.
I do drive with the windows down anyway, because I like it and think it's safer too. Unlike these new vehicles with the bigger, more rounded side mirrors, this one doesn't buffet with the windows down at 60 mph. These new vehicles, crossovers and SUVs, from my experience, are NOT meant to be driven with the windows down. The buffeting is disconcerting and likely to give some people a freaking seizure!
* He's a bit fanatical, as in "I need to still get that ashtray light working. too, come to think of ..." No, man, if it's running good never mind the ashtray light. NO, I don't want to pay for 3. new rims to match the other that is newer - it's an old Jeep!
Moderator
Sunday - May 25th 2025 9:04AM MST
PS: I see, Alarmist, on the 1st point. I guess the motor could stay off for as much as 3 minutes at some looong frustrating stoplights. I guess the engineers have looked into this... maybe ...
I didn't even think about the batter until I read this from you. Again, some engineers that understand the charging/discharging cycle would be able to tell us whether these drains for 30s to some minutes are OK or will ruin battery life. As I've written before, batteries used to last me 10 years - I'm glad to get 5 out of one now.
What ABOUT the A/C though, with the engine shut down. Do they have an electric compressor - is that what you are getting at? I would have figured the A/C quits putting out, but then most people wouldn't stand for that.
The article said that these vehicles have a button (who knows? touch screen maybe?) that will turn the system off for a trip, but it implied that in others one can turn it off for longer - hopefully for good until for some reason you want all this.
I didn't even think about the batter until I read this from you. Again, some engineers that understand the charging/discharging cycle would be able to tell us whether these drains for 30s to some minutes are OK or will ruin battery life. As I've written before, batteries used to last me 10 years - I'm glad to get 5 out of one now.
What ABOUT the A/C though, with the engine shut down. Do they have an electric compressor - is that what you are getting at? I would have figured the A/C quits putting out, but then most people wouldn't stand for that.
The article said that these vehicles have a button (who knows? touch screen maybe?) that will turn the system off for a trip, but it implied that in others one can turn it off for longer - hopefully for good until for some reason you want all this.
The Alarmist
Sunday - May 25th 2025 4:52AM MST
PS
The “experts” say that since the auto start/stop feature only engages when the motor is warm, the cycle of restarting does minimal damage to the engine, since it is warm and well lubricated. In their opinion. YMMV.
Yep, the starters are allegedly beefed up to give a couple hundred thousand starts rather than the 100k your daddy’s started gave.
Sure, they save roughly 5% to 10% of fuel... YMMV. And sure, they reduce some of the carbon that might otherwise feed the plants. But there is a secondary filter that catches the emmissions of unburned fuel, and its replacement cost outweighs by far the savings of fuel not wasted.
Nobody ever talks about the battery drain when the motor is off at a light. What with A/C, radio, fan, lights, etc., it is not a small thing.
If my SUV had one of these systems, I would wire some logic circuit into it to keep it always off.
BTW, your jeep has 220 AC. Two windows at 20mph or better.
🕉
The “experts” say that since the auto start/stop feature only engages when the motor is warm, the cycle of restarting does minimal damage to the engine, since it is warm and well lubricated. In their opinion. YMMV.
Yep, the starters are allegedly beefed up to give a couple hundred thousand starts rather than the 100k your daddy’s started gave.
Sure, they save roughly 5% to 10% of fuel... YMMV. And sure, they reduce some of the carbon that might otherwise feed the plants. But there is a secondary filter that catches the emmissions of unburned fuel, and its replacement cost outweighs by far the savings of fuel not wasted.
Nobody ever talks about the battery drain when the motor is off at a light. What with A/C, radio, fan, lights, etc., it is not a small thing.
If my SUV had one of these systems, I would wire some logic circuit into it to keep it always off.
BTW, your jeep has 220 AC. Two windows at 20mph or better.
🕉
Great topic. Sorry, I've been out of town and missed some of these good discussions. My wife's 2023 Subaru stops and starts at intersections, and like Achmed said, that function can be turned off, but there are some futuristic features that can't be disengaged. At the time she bought her car, Subaru was providing all buyers a several hour workshop to learn how to navigate the complicated touch screen controls.
Customers apparently hated the complexity; a Subaru info channel says those types of controls are being scaled way back for the 2026 model year, at least for the Outback. In some ways, my 2014 Explorer has an even less intuitive touchscreen than her 2023 Outback, so the industry seems to be moving in the right direction.
Oh, and here's an interesting retro feature you wouldn't expect from a car maker most people haven't heard of: Jeff Bezos is introducing a line of small EV trucks under the "Slate" brand name in 2026, and they're available with old school hand crank windows! The base price is supposed to be $20k (but we've heard that before with the Ford Maverick, so I wouldn't hold your breath.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCTGX8XkOvQ