Why so much hate for MDS and auto stop/start?

[Ramjack]

It's been on other Ford vehicles as well and Toyota

Please verify. I believe the 5.0L in the F-150 is Ford's first use of cylinder deactivation. They are calling it VDE. Toyota does not yet use it.

 

[AdamChandler]

Both systems are in place to appease EPA regulations, not make the engine run better or last longer. They add expense and complication while doing little to nothing in terms of saving fuel

Which isn’t true:

I rarely post blunt statements but these systems don’t fail, they use less fuel and they’re better for the environment and, for now, you can disable them. In the future, you may not be able to so hold on to your truck as long as you can, I guess?

I thoroughly enjoy start/stop systems. I have, for the last 12 years spent at least 3 weeks in Europe every year in a rental car and the first 2 years, I disabled start stop then I stopped and realized how much less I was spending in fuel. Idling in a Renault diesel compact in Gent or Amsterdam for 1-2 hours a day was more painful when I had to fill up. These were 100 euro fill ups on a compact manual sedan. Saving fuel is a very good thing when you see how much Europeans are paying in gasoline / diesel.

I find a calm quiet in an engine that turns off at stop lights or in traffic and knowing it’s pulling less fuel means I’m saving money. I’m not a tree hugger but I don’t like wasting money. if start stop systems were failing at a rate people thought they were, automakers would have stopped deploying them at the rate they do. USA doesn’t require these systems but they do work and they don’t fail.

In heavy traffic, 4-9% savings at idle really adds up.

 

[Ramjack]

Toyota primarily uses 4 cylinder engines, no use for cylinder deactivation.

3.5L V6 in Tacoma, 4.0L V6 in 4Runner, 5.7L V8 in Sequoia, Tundra, and Land Cruiser; No start/stop or cylinder deactivation. Granted, the fuel mileage in these models is not competitive, which shows just how much Toyota was trying to avoid these technologies. They just commonly run for 400k miles.

Toyota is just now using start/stop in Highander 3.5L V6 and Rav4 (4-cyl).

 

[Ramjack]

You did, if readers got that far. You didn’t exclude eTorque in your first paragraph, so it sounded (at first pass) like an inaccurate generalization.

Thanks, I edited for clarification.

 

[Ramjack]

I'm very happy with the MDS. I wish it would stay on longer -- with cruise control on, going through a dip shuts it off. I'd be okay losing 1 mph to keep the engine chugging along showing 33 mpg instantaneous.

I don't have eTorque. I was wary of being the guinea pig on a new technology. Looks like I lost that bet.

I actually like that it does not stay on longer. I'm fine with MDS when coasting downhill. The engine is not under load so no shuddering. But my Honda Pilot would going into VCM (same as MDS) on flat stretches and would try to stay there even if you squeezed the accelerator a little. That's when the shuddering would start, when you put the slightest load on the engine.

 

[Richluck]

I specifically avoided eTorque and stop/start on my Hemi

1) payload cautious. Didn’t want the 90 lb reduction in payload

2) shutting off while waiting to turn left is dangerous

3) I plan to keep this truck past 80k and don’t want to potentially waste $1-2k on the 48V battery replacement.

All you have to do is slightly lift your foot off of the brake and it starts and doesn't stop again until you drive and stop. Anyway, I turn it off most of the time because of the AC shutting off. It does serve a purpose on downshifting as it up shifts using the etorque instead of the tranny. That was actually a feature I found out while watching a video explaining Etorque.

 

[Ramjack]

I rarely post blunt statements but these systems don’t fail,

You're right, that's a blunt statement. What you don't realize is that a lot of people like to keep their vehicles for 10+ years and 200k+ miles. The likelihood of having to replace starter (more than once) with a traditional start/stop vehicle (not eTorque) is much greater; just common sense. And the starters are more expensive. They my not fail in 3 years, but longer term, it's inevitable.

BTW, I can understand why you wouldn't want to sit around idling in a diesel, especially a Renault.

 

[Mirowpl]

For the purposes of this conversation, we were specifically speaking about the Ram etorque system, not everyone else's. The comment regarding the starter motor noise wasn’t germane to the conversation.

No it hasn't, there's been intermittent lifter failure but not widespread nor common.

ICE restarting multiple times a day is still ICE restarting, specifically what issues does this cause?

Toyota lacked a smooth operating system, that was the delay.
Toyota primarily uses 4 cylinder engines, no use for cylinder deactivation.

And no, the gd Germans got nothin' to do with it.

i can’t help myself.....

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=video&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiH38bHkdjwAhXUSTABHYceDU4QtwIwAXoECAIQAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DcyWVPHoFGJA&usg=AOvVaw2bP4-d2W2iDCYlJqKnZzc2

 

[Scram1500]

Which isn’t true:

I rarely post blunt statements but these systems don’t fail, they use less fuel and they’re better for the environment and, for now, you can disable them. In the future, you may not be able to so hold on to your truck as long as you can, I guess?

I thoroughly enjoy start/stop systems. I have, for the last 12 years spent at least 3 weeks in Europe every year in a rental car and the first 2 years, I disabled start stop then I stopped and realized how much less I was spending in fuel. Idling in a Renault diesel compact in Gent or Amsterdam for 1-2 hours a day was more painful when I had to fill up. These were 100 euro fill ups on a compact manual sedan. Saving fuel is a very good thing when you see how much Europeans are paying in gasoline / diesel.

I find a calm quiet in an engine that turns off at stop lights or in traffic and knowing it’s pulling less fuel means I’m saving money. I’m not a tree hugger but I don’t like wasting money. if start stop systems were failing at a rate people thought they were, automakers would have stopped deploying them at the rate they do. USA doesn’t require these systems but they do work and they don’t fail.

In heavy traffic, 4-9% savings at idle really adds up.

MDS and start/stop failure isn't the concern. There have been concerns of lifter/cam failure in the past, which seem to have been addressed, but cast a long shadow. It's the long term effects of starting and stopping an ICE engine many times during a trip. At some point there is a diminishing return. It's a 400 hp 5.7 liter motor pushing around 2.5 tons, not a Renault compact diesel. If this really was about saving fuel they would make the truck lighter, more aerodynamic, give it less displacement and hp. They could also raise the final drive, lower the rpm and lug the engine, it might only last 75K but get 30 mpg. There is always a trade off

 

[IvoryHemi]

Toyota is just now using start/stop in Highander 3.5L V6 and Rav4 (4-cyl).

Highlander’s 3.5L didn’t just start using stop/start, it was added back in 2016 for the 2017 MY

 

[Ramjack]

Highlander’s 3.5L didn’t just start using stop/start, it was added back in 2016 for the 2017 MY

Ok, but that's still only one vehicle and that is very late adoption by Toyota for that technology. Toyota isn't stupid. They weren't avoiding it because they couldn't make it work. It likely wasn't working to their own quality standards.

 

[IvoryHemi]

Ok, but that's still only one vehicle and that is very late adoption by Toyota for that technology. Toyota isn't stupid. They weren't avoiding it because they couldn't make it work. It likely wasn't working to their own quality standards.

I don’t disagree. Same could be said for Toyota’s use of direct injection.

 

[AdamChandler]

You're right, that's a blunt statement. What you don't realize is that a lot of people like to keep their vehicles for 10+ years and 200k+ miles. The likelihood of having to replace starter (more than once) with a traditional start/stop vehicle (not eTorque) is much greater; just common sense. And the starters are more expensive. They my not fail in 3 years, but longer term, it's inevitable.

BTW, I can understand why you wouldn't want to sit around idling in a diesel, especially a Renault.

On an infinite timeline, everything fails and on an infinite timeline, everything is more expensive. I'm pretty confident starters would cost double what they did in the 80s today with or without start/stop technology and eventually, everything will fail anyway.

..but I'm going to have to start asking the folks here against start/stop for hard numbers. 'common sense' isn't going to work for me. Do you have any data to back up that start/stop systems fail faster than a traditional starter? and by traditional, I mean manufactured in the last decade but not going through the extra thousands of cycles that are being added to a car with the start stop function?

I would be willing to bet $5 there are some automotive engineers from Bosch/Denso/etc who would take great offense to people here saying the requirements they engineered their starters to accounting for stop/start aren't good enough and they shipped you an inferior product that costs more and lasts less time. I tend to trust the engineers. They did the complex math that ensures these things last.

Speaking for myself, I have no issue with start/stop systems. I enjoy the quiet cabin they provide and If it saves $150 a year in fuel, that's even better. If I was a tree-hugger, I'd jump to the impact idling has on the ozone layer...idling that offers nothing but exhaust and a colder AC system but no propulsion since we're just sitting still in traffic. It's wasted energy to idle and these system eliminate that wasted energy. If the by-product is replacing a starter every 10 years instead of 15, I consider that a fine trade-off.

We're arguing over a function that saves about 30 gallons of fuel per year per average city-dwelling American per a 2009 study over a part that costs $150 - https://shop.advanceautoparts.com/find/dodge-ram-1500-starter
https://www.vanderbilt.edu/sustainability/wp-content/uploads/sites/69/carrico_costlymyths.pdf

its okay to not like start/stop because of the shudder / weaker AC cold air coming out / delay in starting the car when the light turns green / the noise, etc. Most people who are riding my car ask me to turn it off because they find the engine start vibration annoying & distracting..it takes about 5-7 start-stop actions when we're siting in traffic for them (friends/family) to go "please turn that off, it's annoying" or "why is your car doing that?" I believe most people just don't like it from the experience sort of like after a car-alarm has been going off for a minute, people start vacating the area or yelling 'turn it off' it's like fight or flight kicks in.

For people who don't mind start/stop, there's no denying the benefits outweigh the cost. The system adds about $200 to the sticker and saves 4-9% of your fuel usage annually.

Like most internet arguments, I'm not going to continue going back and forth. I've spoken my case here. I wouldn't not buy a car because 'in 10 years", a feature is going to stop working because getting 10 years out of blind spot monitoring or back up camera or carPlay before the thing breaks is okay for me. Starters aren't that expensive and Stellantis being a European company now, they are shipping 70-90% of their vehicles with this technology in it and they're as big or bigger than VW group. I would just find it impossible to believe their engineers didn't account for a feature that comes on nearly every vehicle they make.

It's okay for people here to just not like the feature because the shuddering / delay is annoying but to argue reliability and cost without numbers means we're all just going to be going around in circles and end up exactly where we started.

 

[Scap]

On an infinite timeline, everything fails and on an infinite timeline, everything is more expensive. I'm pretty confident starters would cost double what they did in the 80s today with or without start/stop technology and eventually, everything will fail anyway.

..but I'm going to have to start asking the folks here against start/stop for hard numbers. 'common sense' isn't going to work for me. Do you have any data to back up that start/stop systems fail faster than a traditional starter? and by traditional, I mean manufactured in the last decade but not going through the extra thousands of cycles that are being added to a car with the start stop function?

I would be willing to bet $5 there are some automotive engineers from Bosch/Denso/etc who would take great offense to people here saying the requirements they engineered their starters to accounting for stop/start aren't good enough and they shipped you an inferior product that costs more and lasts less time. I tend to trust the engineers. They did the complex math that ensures these things last.

Speaking for myself, I have no issue with start/stop systems. I enjoy the quiet cabin they provide and If it saves $150 a year in fuel, that's even better. If I was a tree-hugger, I'd jump to the impact idling has on the ozone layer...idling that offers nothing but exhaust and a colder AC system but no propulsion since we're just sitting still in traffic. It's wasted energy to idle and these system eliminate that wasted energy. If the by-product is replacing a starter every 10 years instead of 15, I consider that a fine trade-off.

We're arguing over a function that saves about 30 gallons of fuel per year per average city-dwelling American per a 2009 study over a part that costs $150 - https://shop.advanceautoparts.com/find/dodge-ram-1500-starter
https://www.vanderbilt.edu/sustainability/wp-content/uploads/sites/69/carrico_costlymyths.pdf

its okay to not like start/stop because of the shudder / weaker AC cold air coming out / delay in starting the car when the light turns green / the noise, etc. Most people who are riding my car ask me to turn it off because they find the engine start vibration annoying & distracting..it takes about 5-7 start-stop actions when we're siting in traffic for them (friends/family) to go "please turn that off, it's annoying" or "why is your car doing that?" I believe most people just don't like it from the experience sort of like after a car-alarm has been going off for a minute, people start vacating the area or yelling 'turn it off' it's like fight or flight kicks in.

For people who don't mind start/stop, there's no denying the benefits outweigh the cost. The system adds about $200 to the sticker and saves 4-9% of your fuel usage annually.

Like most internet arguments, I'm not going to continue going back and forth. I've spoken my case here. I wouldn't not buy a car because 'in 10 years", a feature is going to stop working because getting 10 years out of blind spot monitoring or back up camera or carPlay before the thing breaks is okay for me. Starters aren't that expensive and Stellantis being a European company now, they are shipping 70-90% of their vehicles with this technology in it and they're as big or bigger than VW group. I would just find it impossible to believe their engineers didn't account for a feature that comes on nearly every vehicle they make.

It's okay for people here to just not like the feature because the shuddering / delay is annoying but to argue reliability and cost without numbers means we're all just going to be going around in circles and end up exactly where we started.

So, how do you really feel about it????

Lol

I do wish my AC compressor was electric so that it would still cool during an auto stop.

 

[mikeru82]

So, how do you really feel about it????

Lol

I do wish my AC compressor was electric so that it would still cool during an auto stop.

^This! My main reason for disabling it was for the issue with the AC compressor not running. When the weather is cool enough to not need AC I usually don't disable stop/start.

As for fuel savings, unless I travel to a more populated area, any fuel savings I see is negligible. I might have to stop for one traffic light on my daily 30 mile commute. And that light is usually green for me. It stays red for maybe 30 seconds at the most if I do have to stop for it. It would take a long time for me to see any kind of accumulated savings. But I can see how it would be beneficial for people who do a lot of city driving.

 

[Mountain Whiskey]

You guys and the technicalities of conversations crack me up.

Heck Ford has been using start stop technology for a long time. Back in the 80s I had a pinto that had this. Everytime I came to a stop it stalled out and had to be restarted to go again. Perhaps it was because it was a POS?

Yea, I opted for no "green" s/s and eTorque option. The planet will certainly outlive me. Plus I didn't want to poison the environment with all those lithium batteries that people will be trying to dispose of in years to come. I guess they can blast more holes in the desert to dump them in beside the spent reactor rods.

 

[Drewster]

For people who don't mind start/stop, there's no denying the benefits outweigh the cost. The system adds about $200 to the sticker and saves 4-9% of your fuel usage annually.

Dude, every other thread on this forum has some inaccurate or blatantly false statement about MDS or eTorque to the effect of "it doesn't do anything".

You can sum up forum members here in one of two camps. Either
"I bought this truck because it's comfortable and advanced - I like not guzzling gas"
Or
"I insist on having a big V8 in 'mah truuck, and I want it to be 8 cylinders all the time so I can think about mah big V8" And they will brush off advancements like eTorque and MDS as worthless EPA gub'ment riff raff.. with zero actual facts or math, ignoring actual science until the day they die.

I just don't get how that crowd isn't driving a Toyota, personally - if you want a reliable 5.7L that guzzles gas, and a truck that will hold up over decades.. that's pretty much Toyota's current offering in a nutshell.

 

[Appyfan]

^This! My main reason for disabling it was for the issue with the AC compressor not running. When the weather is cool enough to not need AC I usually don't disable stop/start.

As for fuel savings, unless I travel to a more populated area, any fuel savings I see is negligible. I might have to stop for one traffic light on my daily 30 mile commute. And that light is usually green for me. It stays red for maybe 30 seconds at the most if I do have to stop for it. It would take a long time for me to see any kind of accumulated savings. But I can see how it would be beneficial for people who do a lot of city driving.

I haven’t had mine that long, but so far it hasn’t kicked in with the AC running-probably because my climate setting is at 62, LOL.

Twice in the same day it started the engine while I was sitting at a light with my foot on the brake. Made the truck lurch a bit. That was about 2 weeks ago and it hasn’t happened again. Not sure what was up with that. I’m assuming it was related to cabin cooling, but not sure.

 

[SpeedyV]

I just don't get how that crowd isn't driving a Toyota, personally - if you want a reliable 5.7L that guzzles gas, and a truck that will hold up over decades.. that's pretty much Toyota's current offering in a nutshell.

In that sense, I suppose the Toyota's engine is a spiritual descendent of GM's nearly-ubiquitous 5.7L V8.

 

[Scram1500]

Dude, every other thread on this forum has some inaccurate or blatantly false statement about MDS or eTorque to the effect of "it doesn't do anything".

You can sum up forum members here in one of two camps. Either
"I bought this truck because it's comfortable and advanced - I like not guzzling gas"
Or
"I insist on having a big V8 in 'mah truuck, and I want it to be 8 cylinders all the time so I can think about mah big V8" And they will brush off advancements like eTorque and MDS as worthless EPA gub'ment riff raff.. with zero actual facts or math, ignoring actual science until the day they die.

I just don't get how that crowd isn't driving a Toyota, personally - if you want a reliable 5.7L that guzzles gas, and a truck that will hold up over decades.. that's pretty much Toyota's current offering in a nutshell.

Bruh, it's like you know me, aside from the Toyota thing