Start Stop System

[WilliamH]

Right. The payback of even hybrids isn't in cost savings usually but rather in helping to reduce the amount of oil we have to import as a country. (I read that if you filled a water bottle 1/3 of the way full with oil, you'll see how much oil went into making that water bottle so maybe that is where we should be starting)

Ford says it costs about $400 to install a start/stop system in a vehicle. 5% increase in overall mileage (5%-10% is the number I see most) would take you... 84* 5% = 4.2mpg difference... $400 cost of system / $2.25 gal = 177 gallons you'd have to save to pay for the system.

if you save 5%, you'd save $2.25*.05 = $.1125 per 84 miles. $400/$.1125 = 3,555.55 times you'd have to save that $.1125 which equates to 3,555.55 * 84 miles = 298,666 miles to break even on a start/stop system. So, no. You most likely won't benefit from the system. Nor would I. But, someone in a ... no. No one will benefit. But, politicians will love hearing about it "New mandate saves drivers 5% on fuel costs. New tax immanent"

Your assumption appears to ignore that 84 is highway. That isn't where you get the 5% to 10% or anywhere close.
As an example.........
I went to my cardiologist's office this morning.
212 miles round trip.
possible stops going ----
One 30 second stop at our electric security gate
One stop sign.
One possible stop light getting off I10.
possible stops returning ----
Two Stop signs
One Yield sign
Two possible stop lights getting on I10.
Four possible stop lights getting and one stop sign getting off and on I10 for gas.
One 30 second stop at our electric security gate
The rest of the trip was at between 75 and 85 MPH.
I'm not seeing the 5% or even .05 percent in that trip.

 

[Lil4X]

It's sorta the same quandary with a diesel or a hybrid. While there are significant savings to be had, the numbers just don't add up. The premium price for a diesel or hybrid requires far to long to reach even the break-even point before savings can begin to accrue. A friend who just purchased a new top-of-the-line Ram was asked why he opted for the Hemi over the new V6 diesel.

His answer was simple: he's a highly-rated diesel mechanic and understands the costs associated with that engine. Exhaust fluid isn't cheap if you're driving long distances, oil changes are huge, and similarly expensive, and when you do maintenance, parts and labor are sky-high. In case you haven't noticed, diesel is selling at prices over premium gas, so by the time you draw the bottom line, the savings of a diesel have withered considerably. Better to run with a big V8 gas engine he says, especially if you aren't towing or using the vehicle daily in heavy-duty service - that's where the diesel comes into its own. That's probably the best solution for most of us "civilians" who use our vehicles primarily for commuting or family outings.

Of course, there's the Elio, that by light weight, aerodynamics, and an engine designed from the ground up for economy, should return a whole flock of advantages over either diesel or hybrid vehicles by using well known and fully-sorted technologies to obtain rather spectacular levels of economy.

 

[outsydthebox]

Right. The payback of even hybrids isn't in cost savings usually but rather in helping to reduce the amount of oil we have to import as a country. (I read that if you filled a water bottle 1/3 of the way full with oil, you'll see how much oil went into making that water bottle so maybe that is where we should be starting)

Ford says it costs about $400 to install a start/stop system in a vehicle. 5% increase in overall mileage (5%-10% is the number I see most) would take you... 84* 5% = 4.2mpg difference... $400 cost of system / $2.25 gal = 177 gallons you'd have to save to pay for the system.

if you save 5%, you'd save $2.25*.05 = $.1125 per 84 miles. $400/$.1125 = 3,555.55 times you'd have to save that $.1125 which equates to 3,555.55 * 84 miles = 298,666 miles to break even on a start/stop system. So, no. You most likely won't benefit from the system. Nor would I. But, someone in a ... no. No one will benefit. But, politicians will love hearing about it "New mandate saves drivers 5% on fuel costs. New tax immanent"

Thanks for doing the math. Oh, we also need to figure what the "manufacturers mark-up" will be on that $400. That could bring the "end users" cost somewhere between $500 and $800 (guessing).

 

[RKing]

Right. The payback of even hybrids isn't in cost savings usually but rather in helping to reduce the amount of oil we have to import as a country. (I read that if you filled a water bottle 1/3 of the way full with oil, you'll see how much oil went into making that water bottle so maybe that is where we should be starting)

Ford says it costs about $400 to install a start/stop system in a vehicle. 5% increase in overall mileage (5%-10% is the number I see most) would take you... 84* 5% = 4.2mpg difference... $400 cost of system / $2.25 gal = 177 gallons you'd have to save to pay for the system.

if you save 5%, you'd save $2.25*.05 = $.1125 per 84 miles. $400/$.1125 = 3,555.55 times you'd have to save that $.1125 which equates to 3,555.55 * 84 miles = 298,666 miles to break even on a start/stop system. So, no. You most likely won't benefit from the system. Nor would I. But, someone in a ... no. No one will benefit. But, politicians will love hearing about it "New mandate saves drivers 5% on fuel costs. New tax immanent"

Little off topic, but can you point us to a reference, If that is even close there won't be another of those in my house! Like lots of things in life we often waste a dollar frettin a penny!

 

[Ty]

Little off topic, but can you point us to a reference, If that is even close there won't be another of those in my house! Like lots of things in life we often waste a dollar frettin a penny!

Reference for what? Ford's cost. Actually, I found another article where Ford says you can get Start/Stop for $295. At that price, it'll only take you 220,227 miles to break even... $2.25 per gallon * .05 = $0.1125 saved per gallon. One gallon will let you travel 84 miles... $295 for the system / $0.1125 = 2,622.22 times you'd have to repeat the cycle to pay for the system. 2,622.22 * 84 = 220,227 miles

IF your Elio averaged 60MPG because you do a lot of Starting and Stopping, we could argue you'd save up to 10% by having the system installed.
Same math, different numbers -

$2.25 per gallon * .10 = $0.225 saved per gallon. One gallon will let you travel 60 miles... $295 for the system / $0.225 = 1,311.11 times you'd have to repeat the cycle to pay for the system. 1,311.11 * 84 = 78,667 miles to pay for the system.

Now, to play a little...
Gas goes up to $3.00 per gallon. Reasonable assumption, right?

$3.00 per gallon * .10 = $0.30 saved per gallon. One gallon will let you travel 60 miles... $295 for the system / $0.1125 = 983.33 times you'd have to repeat the cycle to pay for the system. 983.33* 60 = 59,000 miles

Suddenly, it looks like this system might just be worth it. It comes down to 3 things.
1. Do you think gas prices will go up?
2. Do you think you'll put 59,000 miles on your Elio?
3. Would you actually use the system?
I'll add one more - 4. Do you think it will affect the resale value of your Elio?



http://www.autoblog.com/2012/09/16/ford-s-auto-stop-start-offers-hope-to-foot-heavy-drivers/

For the 59 percent who are not willing to slow down to save on gasoline consumption, Ford asks how about stop-start technology? The 2013 Ford Fusion is offering EcoBoost with Auto Start-Stop technology, along with EcoBoost only and hybrid and plug-in hybrid offerings. For those taking the survey, they're willing to pay more upfront for green products to save money over time, and Auto Start-Stop adds $295 to the purchase price.

 

[RKing]

Sorry TY, I was refering to the amount of oil to make a plastic water bottle. But thanks for re evaluating the start stop. We all know gas will eventually go back up and 59K miles is 2 years for me!

 

['lio]

Your assumption appears to ignore that 84 is highway. That isn't where you get the 5% to 10% or anywhere close.
As an example.........
I went to my cardiologist's office this morning.
212 miles round trip.
possible stops going ----
One 30 second stop at our electric security gate
One stop sign.
One possible stop light getting off I10.
possible stops returning ----
Two Stop signs
One Yield sign
Two possible stop lights getting on I10.
Four possible stop lights getting and one stop sign getting off and on I10 for gas.
One 30 second stop at our electric security gate
The rest of the trip was at between 75 and 85 MPH.
I'm not seeing the 5% or even .05 percent in that trip.

Right, the savings with any start/stop technology come of the city mileage, at 49mpg, that's 4.9 miles extra per gallon in city traffic, that is in a worst case 10% savings scenario, since most people (with plenty stop lights on their trips) will see a bigger saving (many user reports and studies conclude that), which can be 15% or more. Remember that over 75% of people in the US live in urban areas (see link somewhere above).

Let's assume conservatively a 15% fuel savings with start/stop only, no regeneration or other technology. That would be an extra 7.35 miles per gallon for someone living in a major city with stop and go traffic at red lights. Let's assume the same price for fuel at $2.25 as above and the same price of installation (Ford is way overpriced in that regard): $400 with about 179 gallons of fuel needed to pay for the system. By the way: fuel in many major cities is more expensive right now. If you save 15% of $2.25 for one gallon, that is .34 cents per each 49 miles or per one gallon driven in city traffic. That comes out to 1176 gallons needed to break even for installation. 1176 gallons at 49mpg will be 57,624 miles to break even. Even if you assume that only part of your mileage is in city traffic that is a considerable savings, given that the average price for a gallon of regular fuel in the US as of today is around $2.40 and we are at a low price level right now that might not stay that way, also prices usually increase as the summer driving season starts. If you do the math at $3.50 a gallon you can see that the savings would accumulate so much faster.

All this does not take into account that you will have saved a very significant amount of green house gases and wear on your engine (idling just isn't beneficial for engine life). If you live in the suburbs or even a rural area, your savings are less, even though even the most low-ball estimates come up with an average 5% to 10% in fuel savings with simple start/stop technology for the average driver. In addition you get a more robust battery which will have four times the life expectancy of regular lead acid batteries and perform better in extreme situations. The starter and alternator in most installations with start stop systems are also more efficient and will also save fuel during highway driving. By the way at $400, Ford should be making a profit as well, which of course as someone that wants to see Elio go into production, sound pretty good. The business model anyway appears to offer a very well priced car and many options for upgrades, that will increase the profit margin. Otherwise why would the marshalling centers be even needed if it weren't for adding the options?

Here is the problem: unless internal combustion engines get cleaner and use less fuel, they will be replaced with battery driven cars in the near future. Not that much of an issue if you don't drive long distances or live in areas where charging your battery driven car is easy, for others that will be a problem and even US car companies, such as Ford predict that they will have to include advanced technologies such as start./stop on all cars in the very near future.

One can delay, in the way that the US companies do over here, but that severely cuts into your (Elio's) export chances, since fuel is more expensive in most other countries, and major markets (i.e. Japan and Europe) have buyers and tax systems that favor fuel sipping cars. Both Ford and GM produce much of the cars they sell in overseas markets in those countries themselves, as most US models would gather dust on the dealer lots. Look at the 75mpg combined (3.1 L/100 KM) Opel Corsa that GM started offering in Germany this month, do you really expect the Elio to compete with that four-seater with many amenities on price alone? 84mpg is the anticipated Elio highway mileage, in mixed traffic it will statistically sink to the mid sixties, that's a lot less than the Opel Corsa at 75mpg and that is where start/stop can make a difference in emissions and fuel savings. In Europe for example, producing more emissions is more expensive in yearly vehicle taxes paid by owners as well as taxes levied on the manufacturers.

It seems to me, if selling in overseas markets is part of the strategy, you need to be as fuel efficient as can be. Keep in mind that shipping an Elio to let's say England, would raise the prices through transport and tariffs, that shrinks any cost advantage that you may have had by a lot. It would be great if the Elio sells as well as expected in the US, but a long term strategy will likely mean sales to other markets. Not many car companies (unless they are located in China or India), can exist without offering their vehicles in as many international markets as possible). The other option of course is selling an expensive car or motorcycle, which the Elio isn't.

 

[Ty]

Sorry TY, I was refering to the amount of oil to make a plastic water bottle. But thanks for re evaluating the start stop. We all know gas will eventually go back up and 59K miles is 2 years for me!

Yeah. The first article I read, Ford said $400 but that was back in 2010. This last article was more recent and the price had dropped significantly. I'd pay $300-$400 for a Start/Stop system. It'd be nice if it included coasting shut down. There's a mile and a half where I'm basically coasting down hill on my way to work.
Here's a water bottle reference... Don't know now
http://www.answers.com/Q/How_much_oil_is_used_to_make_one_plastic_bottle

This segment is from a better source...
In 2007, US consumers purchased more than 33 billion liters of bottled water, or 110 liters (30 gallons) per person. The total energy required to produce 33 billion liters is equivalent to 32-54 million barrels of oil (although not all the energy used comes from oil). Energy to produce bottled water accounts for about one-third of one percent of total US energy consumption
http://phys.org/news156506896.html

 

[Ty]

Right, the savings with any start/stop technology come of the city mileage, at 49mpg, that's 4.9 miles extra per gallon in city traffic, that is in a worst case 10% savings scenario, since most people (with plenty stop lights on their trips) will see a bigger saving (many user reports and studies conclude that), which can be 15% or more. Remember that over 75% of people in the US live in urban areas (see link somewhere above).

Let's assume conservatively a 15% fuel savings with start/stop only, no regeneration or other technology. That would be an extra 7.35 miles per gallon for someone living in a major city with stop and go traffic at red lights. Let's assume the same price for fuel at $2.25 as above and the same price of installation (Ford is way overpriced in that regard): $400 with about 179 gallons of fuel needed to pay for the system. By the way: fuel in many major cities is more expensive right now. If you save 15% of $2.25 for one gallon, that is .34 cents per each 49 miles or per one gallon driven in city traffic. That comes out to 1176 gallons needed to break even for installation. 1176 gallons at 49mpg will be 57,624 miles to break even. Even if you assume that only part of your mileage is in city traffic that is a considerable savings, given that the average price for a gallon of regular fuel in the US as of today is around $2.40 and we are at a low price level right now that might not stay that way, also prices usually increase as the summer driving season starts. If you do the math at $3.50 a gallon you can see that the savings would accumulate so much faster.

All this does not take into account that you will have saved a very significant amount of green house gases and wear on your engine (idling just isn't beneficial for engine life). If you live in the suburbs or even a rural area, your savings are less, even though even the most low-ball estimates come up with an average 5% to 10% in fuel savings with simple start/stop technology for the average driver. In addition you get a more robust battery which will have four times the life expectancy of regular lead acid batteries and perform better in extreme situations. The starter and alternator in most installations with start stop systems are also more efficient and will also save fuel during highway driving. By the way at $400, Ford should be making a profit as well, which of course as someone that wants to see Elio go into production, sound pretty good. The business model anyway appears to offer a very well priced car and many options for upgrades, that will increase the profit margin. Otherwise why would the marshalling centers be even needed if it weren't for adding the options?

Here is the problem: unless internal combustion engines get cleaner and use less fuel, they will be replaced with battery driven cars in the near future. Not that much of an issue if you don't drive long distances or live in areas where charging your battery driven car is easy, for others that will be a problem and even US car companies, such as Ford predict that they will have to include advanced technologies such as start./stop on all cars in the very near future.

One can delay, in the way that the US companies do over here, but that severely cuts into your (Elio's) export chances, since fuel is more expensive in most other countries, and major markets (i.e. Japan and Europe) have buyers and tax systems that favor fuel sipping cars. Both Ford and GM produce much of the cars they sell in overseas markets in those countries themselves, as most US models would gather dust on the dealer lots. Look at the 75mpg combined (3.1 L/100 KM) Opel Corsa that GM started offering in Germany this month, do you really expect the Elio to compete with that four-seater with many amenities on price alone? 84mpg is the anticipated Elio highway mileage, in mixed traffic it will statistically sink to the mid sixties, that's a lot less than the Opel Corsa at 75mpg and that is where start/stop can make a difference in emissions and fuel savings. In Europe for example, producing more emissions is more expensive in yearly vehicle taxes paid by owners as well as taxes levied on the manufacturers.

It seems to me, if selling in overseas markets is part of the strategy, you need to be as fuel efficient as can be. Keep in mind that shipping an Elio to let's say England, would raise the prices through transport and tariffs, that shrinks any cost advantage that you may have had by a lot. It would be great if the Elio sells as well as expected in the US, but a long term strategy will likely mean sales to other markets. Not many car companies (unless they are located in China or India), can exist without offering their vehicles in as many international markets as possible). The other option of course is selling an expensive car or motorcycle, which the Elio isn't.

It's kind of funny that our replies overlapped but made about the same point. If gas goes up (That'll never happen, right?), it won't take long for a Start/Stop system to pay for itself. If you added a mild (could be very low hp) assist motor - think either robust starter or alternator that acts as a traction motor on startup, you could save much more also. I'd most likely pay for the option if Elio offered it - not because I'd necessarily save money on gas but I'd be doing my part to help get the US off of oil. (I wouldn't mind taking away a major funding source from our enemies abroad...)

 

[WilliamH]

Right, the savings with any start/stop technology come of the city mileage, at 49mpg, that's 4.9 miles extra per gallon in city traffic, that is in a worst case 10% savings scenario, since most people (with plenty stop lights on their trips) will see a bigger saving (many user reports and studies conclude that), which can be 15% or more. Remember that over 75% of people in the US live in urban areas (see link somewhere above).

Let's assume conservatively a 15% fuel savings with start/stop only, no regeneration or other technology. That would be an extra 7.35 miles per gallon for someone living in a major city with stop and go traffic at red lights. Let's assume the same price for fuel at $2.25 as above and the same price of installation (Ford is way overpriced in that regard): $400 with about 179 gallons of fuel needed to pay for the system. By the way: fuel in many major cities is more expensive right now. If you save 15% of $2.25 for one gallon, that is .34 cents per each 49 miles or per one gallon driven in city traffic. That comes out to 1176 gallons needed to break even for installation. 1176 gallons at 49mpg will be 57,624 miles to break even. Even if you assume that only part of your mileage is in city traffic that is a considerable savings, given that the average price for a gallon of regular fuel in the US as of today is around $2.40 and we are at a low price level right now that might not stay that way, also prices usually increase as the summer driving season starts. If you do the math at $3.50 a gallon you can see that the savings would accumulate so much faster.

All this does not take into account that you will have saved a very significant amount of green house gases and wear on your engine (idling just isn't beneficial for engine life). If you live in the suburbs or even a rural area, your savings are less, even though even the most low-ball estimates come up with an average 5% to 10% in fuel savings with simple start/stop technology for the average driver. In addition you get a more robust battery which will have four times the life expectancy of regular lead acid batteries and perform better in extreme situations. The starter and alternator in most installations with start stop systems are also more efficient and will also save fuel during highway driving. By the way at $400, Ford should be making a profit as well, which of course as someone that wants to see Elio go into production, sound pretty good. The business model anyway appears to offer a very well priced car and many options for upgrades, that will increase the profit margin. Otherwise why would the marshalling centers be even needed if it weren't for adding the options?

Here is the problem: unless internal combustion engines get cleaner and use less fuel, they will be replaced with battery driven cars in the near future. Not that much of an issue if you don't drive long distances or live in areas where charging your battery driven car is easy, for others that will be a problem and even US car companies, such as Ford predict that they will have to include advanced technologies such as start./stop on all cars in the very near future.

One can delay, in the way that the US companies do over here, but that severely cuts into your (Elio's) export chances, since fuel is more expensive in most other countries, and major markets (i.e. Japan and Europe) have buyers and tax systems that favor fuel sipping cars. Both Ford and GM produce much of the cars they sell in overseas markets in those countries themselves, as most US models would gather dust on the dealer lots. Look at the 75mpg combined (3.1 L/100 KM) Opel Corsa that GM started offering in Germany this month, do you really expect the Elio to compete with that four-seater with many amenities on price alone? 84mpg is the anticipated Elio highway mileage, in mixed traffic it will statistically sink to the mid sixties, that's a lot less than the Opel Corsa at 75mpg and that is where start/stop can make a difference in emissions and fuel savings. In Europe for example, producing more emissions is more expensive in yearly vehicle taxes paid by owners as well as taxes levied on the manufacturers.

It seems to me, if selling in overseas markets is part of the strategy, you need to be as fuel efficient as can be. Keep in mind that shipping an Elio to let's say England, would raise the prices through transport and tariffs, that shrinks any cost advantage that you may have had by a lot. It would be great if the Elio sells as well as expected in the US, but a long term strategy will likely mean sales to other markets. Not many car companies (unless they are located in China or India), can exist without offering their vehicles in as many international markets as possible). The other option of course is selling an expensive car or motorcycle, which the Elio isn't.

You would do a poor job in sales.
You started your exposition by throwing a lot of facts(?) out that are nothing but a rehash of what you already said.
( Baffling with your BS)
You denigrated my way of life because I don't happen to live in an overpopulated ant farm.
( My definition of all cities.)
You continued by saying that my opinion didn't matter because I would be forced to do it your way anyway.
With no facts in evidence you said that European mileage measurements showed their cars are more fuel efficient than American.
( Incidentally, 1 Imperial Gallon = a little more than 1.2 US gallons. Does the EU measure MPG in US or Imperial in their tests? )
The last discussion you insisted that the "wiki" was outdated based on one note in the first two or three paragraphs when there was abundant information that it had been updated. Like information that the 2015 F150 2.7L would have S/S tech.
You really need to lighten up.
S/S is probably advantageous in urban areas, but anyone that thinks the first release of a new, too many times delayed, product should be delayed to add technology that isn't essential in getting version 1 out of the door has as much sense as the southern end of a north bound horse.
You will never win an argument or sell someone a product by denigrating them or their way of life.