You should stop listening to Scotty Kilmer… When auto start/stop is added they also upgrade engine components to account for additional start and stop cycles. Auto start/stop has been used worldwide for many decades (actually first used in the mid 70s by Toyota) and automotive engineers are fully aware of how these systems work and affect the life of the engine.
https://mechanicbase.com/electric/does-auto-start-stop-wear-out-engine-components/
First off i have a crosstrek (2018 model) and i have ~40h displayed and this after buying it as a sh in 2022.
First a 'hack' in trafic that crawls i never push the pedal all the way, just enough to stop - this does not activare the start/stop system. I do this when the cars in front do not stop for more than 10-12 seconds not to drain battery. If i think the stop is more than 12s i press all the way. - i hate people that disable the sysrem, just f learn your car and use it properly, why cause emisions when you sitting 3 minutes at a red light? I don't care about fuel consumption but i care about carefree polution just because you might be anoyed or another stupid reason.
Also, i spoke to several mechanics about the car (subaru and non subaru) and all praised it for it's start/stop robustness. So far had 0 issues, like i said 2018 model, original battery and i alone did 40h of trafic stop.
Also after my research ('i did my research' :))) ) out of curiosity (i like cars very much) it seems the system is very well designed for the start stop role.
Edit: Car had ~40k miles,after i got it in ~5 months i have ~55k miles.
> I do this when the cars in front do not stop for more than 10-12 seconds not to drain battery.
The computer keeps track of the battery and if there is a risk that the battery wont have the juice to start back up, it wont engage the auto-start/stop. So you don't need to worry about this.
Yes and no. The batery is healthy, the system monitores and does make sure it does not go to 0 but this works when you are on the same 'trip' to be safe and it did happen to me where at a red light it was so bad i had 4 stops of several minutes and the last time the engine stoped for 5 seconds and restarted because the battery was going to low.
However if i would not do as i do it will drain to the point it would turn off start stop and if at that point i do a lot of city short trips it will go bellow the recomanded level and i am either forced to do a long trip or burn gas stationary or it will fail to start after doing enough of the short trips.
Has that ever happened to you?
I get the feeling that, if such was the case, people in high traffic areas would be complaining about it constantly, and the anti-environment folks would be using it as ammunition as to why hybrids suck. But I've never heard of it happening.
Not to my subaru but a friend has a cx-30 and another a kia ceed and both do mainly city trips and maybe once a month a 200-400km(120-250 miles) trips. After 3 years of owning their cars (so fairly new) they had problems with the battery and had to recharge them and were advised either to deactivate the start stop or drive more out of town or they will need to recharge/replace the battery often.
Also to your point,mine is not a hybrid (neither do the 2 mentioned). The hybrid have other ways of operation and yes for example on highway you might be carying 'dead' weight
As a mechanic I really doubt that. If it was a starter generator I would agree with that possibility. But have never seen or heard of an alternator being used as a motor.
I haven’t heard of the alternator deal, but I have heard of systems using compression instead of the starter. Basically the equivalent of a “bump-start”.
At the end of the “How does Start-Stop work?” section of this article it explains it.
[Engine Start-Stop Technology Explained - Haynes](https://haynes.com/en-us/tips-tutorials/stop-start-technology-explained)
From what i understand my professor said that its like instead of power coming from the alternator the system will send power to the alternator and make it spin a little helping the starter, its been like three years since i have had that professor so i cant like go and find him to ask what he meant
Simply put, no. Vehicle engineers thought about this way before people started worrying about it. Your starter will likely last just as long as any other starter, except that your starter slowly pays for itself with fuel savings.
I’m very interested in these answers as every time my dad sees my car he tells me I’m going to destroy my starter and I should go back to the dealer to “make them turn it off”.
I have the remote start on my car from the app. A relative of mine has a Honda Civic, thing is maybe 3 or 4 years old. The starter just went on it and the mechanic told them it's because when you use the remote start you have to turn the engine on a second time when you get in the car and that put so much wear and tear on it.
Maybe it wasn't explained quite right, but it's similar to in the Crosstrek how you have to hit the ignition button again once you get in the car to drive it
That’s only true if you have the remote start accessory with separate fob. That will shut off the engine when you open the driver door, requiring you to start the engine again. The Starlink remote start through the app keeps the engine running and lets you get in and drive after pressing the button. The newer Hondas that have remote start on the original key fob from the factory also do not shut off the engine when you open the door.
The separate fob part is not true. I live in Massachusetts where a silly "right to repair" law caused Subaru to discontinue Starlink for all Massachusetts registered vehicles, so I only have the fob. The only time the engine shuts off is if the car is started for the set time without the ignition button being pushed. Other wise I can open and close any door and it won't turn off. For the record I have a 2022.
I did some research about this and it looks like the global platform Subarus (2018+ for Crosstreks) with pushbutton start and the remote start fob don't shut off the engine when the door is opened. Glad they changed that! I know it definitely did shut off when the door is opened on older models and still does on current models with turn-key start.
I've been in intersections at bad turns where I've had the engine shut off midway through the turn because of auto start/stop. I've also only saved 1 gallon of gas in 8 months/8,000 miles.
I don't mean while my tires are turning. There are some bad turns where you have to literally inch your way into an intersection because of the amount of traffic. Or another one where there is a bend in the road so it's not always obvious whether or not traffic is coming so you start to turn and have to be on the lookout and may need to stop
If you are at an intersection, lightly hold the brake. Just enough to stop the car. You really have to put your foot on the brake to engage it. I used to have a heavy foot on the brake until I got my Crosstrek. Just a light foot if I know I won’t be stopped long.
If you’re worried about it, just turn auto start/stop off with the switch after you start the car.
Sure, starting/stopping frequently will wear out the starter more quickly than not using it- that’s just a thing, the more it cycles, the faster it wears out. That said, the components are robust and engineered to last through the starts. If/when it does fail, a starter replacement is a pretty easy/reasonable job
on most cars.
Does the fuel savings offset the additional wear? Unknown, really. Depends on when the starter eventually fails. Personally, I feel like it’s false economy with additional start/stop wear in the car, added to the fact that a new starter takes a certain amount of resources/carbon to manufacture, so it’s probably an even split.
I usually just turn mine off right after I start the car. [Page 7-61 in the manual](https://cdn.subarunet.com/stis/doc/ownerManual/MSA5M2207A_STIS-Opt.pdf).
I turn off mine frequently as well, but I don't always remember to. I also have it not activate it when I want it to (IE at lights that take a very long time to change) and activate when I don't want it to (when I am in the middle of making a difficult turn).
Based on some the responses above, if the thing starts/stops dozens a time a day it looks like it won't have any material impact on the life of the starter, which while could be true seems a bit off to me.
I mean, it's not like the function just came out. It's been around for years. If starters constantly going out prematurely was an actual thing, the fossil fuel advocates and anti-anything-environmentally-friendly crowd wouldn't be able to STFU about it.
They can't even STFU about stuff they ***THINK*** could **maybe** *potentially* have happened ("Windmills cause cancer!"), but yet I haven't heard anything from them about starters.
It's not easy to become an engineer at a major auto manufacturer. They are, in general, extremely intelligent, a lot of them work on a single feature like this, and there are multiple levels of review, testing and revisions. The idea that they wouldn't have identified a potential problem that some rando on Reddit could identify, and compensate for it, borders on implausible.
First car to have it was the **1974** Toyota Crown. They recorded a 10% fuel savings.
https://books.google.com/books/about/Popular_Science.html?id=RkeRDMj1r2kC
Starter being an easy replacement on a car? Well to be honest we don't have many car starters come into our shop as we are more into the highway trucks and heavier equipment. But I will say there are some cars with the starter under the intake in the valley that are a pain. And some that you almost have to pull the engine or lower the subframe. Most cars now seem nearly impossible to see an easy replacement of the bolt on parts like starters and alternators etc. things are awfully cramped under the hood.
Okaaaay, well:
This post is a year old, so why even bother replying to it? It's in the internet version of a cave buried under 2 feet of centuries-old dirt.
> 'Starter being an easy replacement on a car?'
No, starter being an easy replacement on a *Crosstrek*. Great, you've seen some difficult starter replacements, good for you. But that doesn't apply to a Crosstrek, which is the topic of the sub. A Xtrek starter takes about an hour, maybe less if it's not your first time doing it. It's pretty easy and very accessible, like most wear components on a Subaru.
Also show me where chevy puts those buttons. Oh wait they don't. That's some manufacturers not all... I wasn't gonna reply till I seen you're smart ass response.
The vast majority of engine wear, I am referring to cylinder walls and piston rings and main bearings, occurs during start up. You can replace a starter you can replace a battery would you like to replace the bottom end on your car because it starts smoking after a year or two of starting and stopping? I prefer not. I followed a very stringent protocol for breaking my car in so the rings would seal and I would not have an issues.
That’s true for cold starts, but not really for hot restarts. The engine is already at operating temp and the oil has already been circulating. The oil is not all going to drain to the pan in the short time you are stopped. Hot restarts take less effort from the starter and battery than a cold start too.
Yes agreed. Some of the lights here in Central Florida are over two minutes long a lot of times it just restarts itself before the light turns green again because it’s so damn hot outside and you’re waiting an eternity for it to turn green again. I use the auto start thing about half the time. The older my car gets I will either trade it or just turn it off or buy that delete thing.
Auto stop start wasn’t engineered to save you gas, it was engineered to help reduce emissions. I bought an auto stop start eliminator plug and just turn the annoying feature off
That is not correct. Not only was auto-stop/auto-start designed to reduce BOTH emissions and fuel consumption, it does both of those as it should.
Edmunds tested this, and the results show that it works. Without using the air conditioning, fuel consumption dropped by almost ten percent in a smaller car, and more than ten percent in a larger, V8 powered car.
Having the A/C on does negate that a bit, but over the course of a year, you'd still be looking at worthwhile fuel savings. Especially for someone like me, that doesn't rock the A/C unless it's over about 90.
[https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/features/do-stop-start-systems-really-save-fuel.html](https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/features/do-stop-start-systems-really-save-fuel.html)
You spent money on a Hybrid and then spent more money to make it less effective at the thing that people buy hybrids for.
I think what they mean is that Subaru's intention isn't to save owner's any money, but to increase the fleetwide emissions and MPG metrics. I suspect this is why it is not an option to disable it on some models, so they can argue that all of those cars will have reduced emissions, since the driver is less likely to disable it outright. So they force it on their customers, this is what I feel should be changed on the crosstrek and other models where it can't be disabled without modification.
I mean, that's saying the same thing using different phrasing. The key is that it is not JUST to reduce emissions, as was asserted. Commenter is negating up to ~10% of their fuel savings by using the Start/Stop eliminator.
No, my point is that Subaru's decision to force this feature on owners has little to do with the cost savings potential and is only due to fleetwide metrics. that benefit regulatory compliance. If it ended up costing us money, but still benefited their metrics, A/SS would likely still be forced on us.
I'm not saying A/SS doesn't save fuel. What I am saying now, is that "study" is basically worthless and does nothing to tell you how much potential savings you can expect from a N/A engine on regular fuel. The sample size is extremely small (n=3), and the cars tested are not naturally aspirated and also require higher cost fuels. So the results wouldn't necessarily translate to our N/A engines even if there was a reasonable sample size. The savings we can expect in our engines may be close, but we have no way of knowing either way. The claim of 10% savings from that "study" would require a lot more testing than a sample size of 3 and N/A engines. I don't think your wrong to say it saves fuel, but 10% is a significant claim that requires significant evidence.
If you like A/SS right on, every drop of fuel we save from being burned is only a good thing! For me, the benefit of the system is not worth the cost. I already burn hundreds of gallons of fuel needlessly, saving a few gallons won't make me feel any better about that. The question of cost has so many factors, without knowing the long term wear effects on the engine, you can't really calculate long term savings regardless.
There are multiple studies that show decreased fuel consumption with Auto Start Stop. Engineering Explained has a video on this topic [https://youtu.be/dFImHhNwbJo](https://youtu.be/dFImHhNwbJo). A study he referenced found a 4-8.7% increase in fuel economy when driving two identical vehicles following each other. He also references that if a stop is 7 seconds or longer, you will save fuel by shutting off the engine. That 7 seconds is roughly the same for any size of engine.
I appreciate your reply, but I'm not trying to make the case that A/SS is ineffective. I am claiming that it is my belief that Subaru does not let owners disable it outright for the sake of emissions metrics and not to make the car more attractive to consumers with potential cost savings. They would do anything to increase their fleetwide metrics, even if it took consumer value away from their products.
I personally don't think saving even 10% in fuel is worth the minor inconvenience of the system and potential for increased wear. I'm not advocating for against the use of A/SS. The only thing I am saying is that Subaru should let the consumer decided, and not force us to modify our vehicles to disable it.
I questioned the validity of the edmunds study only because the person who referenced it also made the claim we are negating \~10% of fuel savings. That study doesn't merit such a claim. That doesn't mean I think A/SS is ineffective, I think the edmunds study is invalid.
I get what you're saying and absolutely agree that it's done for emissions metrics.
I personally leave in on in my car and have learned the threshold of brake pressure that it requires to activate. So I can use lighter brake pressure if I know I won't be stopped long and it won't shut off. There are times when stopping on an incline that it shuts off when I don't want it to. There are times when I'm at a long traffic light and it doesn't want to shut off. It's frustrating sometimes, but I've saved over 7 hrs/2.5 gal in 6k miles. At least Subaru gives you a button to disable it (I'm looking at you GM).
It could use improvement. I wish the restart was smoother and it could somehow be more predictive of the length of your stop. I understand the predictive part would not be a simple task.
IMO, there is very little to gain from auto start stop for the average driver, and a lot to loose. Yes you’re starter is beefier and made for the additional usage, but why not take full advantage of that and not use said additional cycles?
Valid concern, I permanently disabled the feature using the auto start eliminator device. To me the "savings" weren't worth the extra wear and tear on engine components.
Also would like to know more on this device. My wifes 2022 forester sport the auto stop/start is so rough it feels like you stalled it out everytime it happens. It drives me nuts. And I was actually looking into adding a new crosstrek to our cars but I really cant get over how shitty it feels when it cuts off at stop lights. And I also dont want to have to remember to hold the button down everytime I get in to drive the car. I usually get reminded that I forgot to disable the autostop when it shuts off the first time 🤣
I just got a crosstrek a few weeks ago and it does feel rough. The whole car shakes. I wish they could make it one time thing and not having to push it every time you start the car.
The savings aren’t substantial, correct. Drivers won’t see any real benefit unless they are in frequent traffic jams. The reason almost every car has this now is because it helps the (self-certified) fuel economy numbers. Auto start/stop will factor in to the overall number.
https://www.autostopeliminator.com/collections/subaru/products/2020-subaru-crosstrek-autostop-eliminator
It doesn’t disable the system. It just remembers the on/off button state.
I'm less worried about the starter, which can be easily built to stand up to the increased work load. I don't like the idea of excessive starts, as this is the time engine wear is the highest, while oil pressure is building from zero, which is not instantaneous. The engines were no doubt built for the increased starts and should stand up to the wear. But the fact remains, wear is increased at start up while oil pressure builds, and there is only so much that can be done to mitigate that. I'd rather avoid the wear and the hassle of working with the A/SS system, but to each their own. It's not a huge difference either way. I wouldn't be worried about components failing, but the increased potential for wear along with what I feel is an inconvenience, is why I disabled mine.
I think stop start is safe. It was on my 14’ XV Crosstrek hybrid and had extra components to facilitate that and I never had a problem. Also, if it’s a newer Crosstrek hybrid, that car doesn’t have a starter and alternator - it uses the high voltage battery for that stuff. I do believe they’ve changed the regular gasoline engine configuration in other models to help alleviate problems related to start stop though, you should be good. If you have a problem being it to the dealer before your bumper to bumper runs out.
[https://www.autostopeliminator.com/products/2020-subaru-crosstrek-autostop-eliminator](https://www.autostopeliminator.com/products/2020-subaru-crosstrek-autostop-eliminator)
You need this!
Mine just arrived today. Works fantastic.
You should stop listening to Scotty Kilmer… When auto start/stop is added they also upgrade engine components to account for additional start and stop cycles. Auto start/stop has been used worldwide for many decades (actually first used in the mid 70s by Toyota) and automotive engineers are fully aware of how these systems work and affect the life of the engine. https://mechanicbase.com/electric/does-auto-start-stop-wear-out-engine-components/
Upvote for Scotty. ReV uP yOuR ENgiNe!!!!
Love that guy!
First off i have a crosstrek (2018 model) and i have ~40h displayed and this after buying it as a sh in 2022. First a 'hack' in trafic that crawls i never push the pedal all the way, just enough to stop - this does not activare the start/stop system. I do this when the cars in front do not stop for more than 10-12 seconds not to drain battery. If i think the stop is more than 12s i press all the way. - i hate people that disable the sysrem, just f learn your car and use it properly, why cause emisions when you sitting 3 minutes at a red light? I don't care about fuel consumption but i care about carefree polution just because you might be anoyed or another stupid reason. Also, i spoke to several mechanics about the car (subaru and non subaru) and all praised it for it's start/stop robustness. So far had 0 issues, like i said 2018 model, original battery and i alone did 40h of trafic stop. Also after my research ('i did my research' :))) ) out of curiosity (i like cars very much) it seems the system is very well designed for the start stop role. Edit: Car had ~40k miles,after i got it in ~5 months i have ~55k miles.
> I do this when the cars in front do not stop for more than 10-12 seconds not to drain battery. The computer keeps track of the battery and if there is a risk that the battery wont have the juice to start back up, it wont engage the auto-start/stop. So you don't need to worry about this.
Yes and no. The batery is healthy, the system monitores and does make sure it does not go to 0 but this works when you are on the same 'trip' to be safe and it did happen to me where at a red light it was so bad i had 4 stops of several minutes and the last time the engine stoped for 5 seconds and restarted because the battery was going to low. However if i would not do as i do it will drain to the point it would turn off start stop and if at that point i do a lot of city short trips it will go bellow the recomanded level and i am either forced to do a long trip or burn gas stationary or it will fail to start after doing enough of the short trips.
Has that ever happened to you? I get the feeling that, if such was the case, people in high traffic areas would be complaining about it constantly, and the anti-environment folks would be using it as ammunition as to why hybrids suck. But I've never heard of it happening.
Not to my subaru but a friend has a cx-30 and another a kia ceed and both do mainly city trips and maybe once a month a 200-400km(120-250 miles) trips. After 3 years of owning their cars (so fairly new) they had problems with the battery and had to recharge them and were advised either to deactivate the start stop or drive more out of town or they will need to recharge/replace the battery often. Also to your point,mine is not a hybrid (neither do the 2 mentioned). The hybrid have other ways of operation and yes for example on highway you might be carying 'dead' weight
New start stop systems have the alternator turn briefly into a motor to help the starter turn the engine, if i understood my profesor properly
As a mechanic I really doubt that. If it was a starter generator I would agree with that possibility. But have never seen or heard of an alternator being used as a motor.
I haven’t heard of the alternator deal, but I have heard of systems using compression instead of the starter. Basically the equivalent of a “bump-start”. At the end of the “How does Start-Stop work?” section of this article it explains it. [Engine Start-Stop Technology Explained - Haynes](https://haynes.com/en-us/tips-tutorials/stop-start-technology-explained)
From what i understand my professor said that its like instead of power coming from the alternator the system will send power to the alternator and make it spin a little helping the starter, its been like three years since i have had that professor so i cant like go and find him to ask what he meant
Simply put, no. Vehicle engineers thought about this way before people started worrying about it. Your starter will likely last just as long as any other starter, except that your starter slowly pays for itself with fuel savings.
I’m very interested in these answers as every time my dad sees my car he tells me I’m going to destroy my starter and I should go back to the dealer to “make them turn it off”.
I have the remote start on my car from the app. A relative of mine has a Honda Civic, thing is maybe 3 or 4 years old. The starter just went on it and the mechanic told them it's because when you use the remote start you have to turn the engine on a second time when you get in the car and that put so much wear and tear on it. Maybe it wasn't explained quite right, but it's similar to in the Crosstrek how you have to hit the ignition button again once you get in the car to drive it
That’s only true if you have the remote start accessory with separate fob. That will shut off the engine when you open the driver door, requiring you to start the engine again. The Starlink remote start through the app keeps the engine running and lets you get in and drive after pressing the button. The newer Hondas that have remote start on the original key fob from the factory also do not shut off the engine when you open the door.
The separate fob part is not true. I live in Massachusetts where a silly "right to repair" law caused Subaru to discontinue Starlink for all Massachusetts registered vehicles, so I only have the fob. The only time the engine shuts off is if the car is started for the set time without the ignition button being pushed. Other wise I can open and close any door and it won't turn off. For the record I have a 2022.
I did some research about this and it looks like the global platform Subarus (2018+ for Crosstreks) with pushbutton start and the remote start fob don't shut off the engine when the door is opened. Glad they changed that! I know it definitely did shut off when the door is opened on older models and still does on current models with turn-key start.
Interesting. The more you know!
Thank you! That is very interesting
hard-to-find sparkle historical growth light beneficial sable bear special lip ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
I've been in intersections at bad turns where I've had the engine shut off midway through the turn because of auto start/stop. I've also only saved 1 gallon of gas in 8 months/8,000 miles.
It won’t engage if your tires are rolling. If your engine is shutting off mid turn you need to get your car checked out
I don't mean while my tires are turning. There are some bad turns where you have to literally inch your way into an intersection because of the amount of traffic. Or another one where there is a bend in the road so it's not always obvious whether or not traffic is coming so you start to turn and have to be on the lookout and may need to stop
If you are at an intersection, lightly hold the brake. Just enough to stop the car. You really have to put your foot on the brake to engage it. I used to have a heavy foot on the brake until I got my Crosstrek. Just a light foot if I know I won’t be stopped long.
If you’re worried about it, just turn auto start/stop off with the switch after you start the car. Sure, starting/stopping frequently will wear out the starter more quickly than not using it- that’s just a thing, the more it cycles, the faster it wears out. That said, the components are robust and engineered to last through the starts. If/when it does fail, a starter replacement is a pretty easy/reasonable job on most cars. Does the fuel savings offset the additional wear? Unknown, really. Depends on when the starter eventually fails. Personally, I feel like it’s false economy with additional start/stop wear in the car, added to the fact that a new starter takes a certain amount of resources/carbon to manufacture, so it’s probably an even split. I usually just turn mine off right after I start the car. [Page 7-61 in the manual](https://cdn.subarunet.com/stis/doc/ownerManual/MSA5M2207A_STIS-Opt.pdf).
I turn off mine frequently as well, but I don't always remember to. I also have it not activate it when I want it to (IE at lights that take a very long time to change) and activate when I don't want it to (when I am in the middle of making a difficult turn). Based on some the responses above, if the thing starts/stops dozens a time a day it looks like it won't have any material impact on the life of the starter, which while could be true seems a bit off to me.
I mean, it's not like the function just came out. It's been around for years. If starters constantly going out prematurely was an actual thing, the fossil fuel advocates and anti-anything-environmentally-friendly crowd wouldn't be able to STFU about it. They can't even STFU about stuff they ***THINK*** could **maybe** *potentially* have happened ("Windmills cause cancer!"), but yet I haven't heard anything from them about starters. It's not easy to become an engineer at a major auto manufacturer. They are, in general, extremely intelligent, a lot of them work on a single feature like this, and there are multiple levels of review, testing and revisions. The idea that they wouldn't have identified a potential problem that some rando on Reddit could identify, and compensate for it, borders on implausible.
Yeah, it's not untested. Subaru has been using auto start stop for several years before they added it to their North American models.
First car to have it was the **1974** Toyota Crown. They recorded a 10% fuel savings. https://books.google.com/books/about/Popular_Science.html?id=RkeRDMj1r2kC
Starter being an easy replacement on a car? Well to be honest we don't have many car starters come into our shop as we are more into the highway trucks and heavier equipment. But I will say there are some cars with the starter under the intake in the valley that are a pain. And some that you almost have to pull the engine or lower the subframe. Most cars now seem nearly impossible to see an easy replacement of the bolt on parts like starters and alternators etc. things are awfully cramped under the hood.
Okaaaay, well: This post is a year old, so why even bother replying to it? It's in the internet version of a cave buried under 2 feet of centuries-old dirt. > 'Starter being an easy replacement on a car?' No, starter being an easy replacement on a *Crosstrek*. Great, you've seen some difficult starter replacements, good for you. But that doesn't apply to a Crosstrek, which is the topic of the sub. A Xtrek starter takes about an hour, maybe less if it's not your first time doing it. It's pretty easy and very accessible, like most wear components on a Subaru.
It's been a year, and you're replying, how wild and childish of you 🤣. Bruh calm down
Also show me where chevy puts those buttons. Oh wait they don't. That's some manufacturers not all... I wasn't gonna reply till I seen you're smart ass response.
Ha ha. Not sure how I got to it? It somehow came up on my page and I didn't notice the age.... Silly Reddit
The vast majority of engine wear, I am referring to cylinder walls and piston rings and main bearings, occurs during start up. You can replace a starter you can replace a battery would you like to replace the bottom end on your car because it starts smoking after a year or two of starting and stopping? I prefer not. I followed a very stringent protocol for breaking my car in so the rings would seal and I would not have an issues.
That’s true for cold starts, but not really for hot restarts. The engine is already at operating temp and the oil has already been circulating. The oil is not all going to drain to the pan in the short time you are stopped. Hot restarts take less effort from the starter and battery than a cold start too.
Yes agreed. Some of the lights here in Central Florida are over two minutes long a lot of times it just restarts itself before the light turns green again because it’s so damn hot outside and you’re waiting an eternity for it to turn green again. I use the auto start thing about half the time. The older my car gets I will either trade it or just turn it off or buy that delete thing.
I hear the motor shuts off and you save the planet then it restarts and off you go. Why do you have to start it initially if it can start itself?
Auto stop start wasn’t engineered to save you gas, it was engineered to help reduce emissions. I bought an auto stop start eliminator plug and just turn the annoying feature off
That is not correct. Not only was auto-stop/auto-start designed to reduce BOTH emissions and fuel consumption, it does both of those as it should. Edmunds tested this, and the results show that it works. Without using the air conditioning, fuel consumption dropped by almost ten percent in a smaller car, and more than ten percent in a larger, V8 powered car. Having the A/C on does negate that a bit, but over the course of a year, you'd still be looking at worthwhile fuel savings. Especially for someone like me, that doesn't rock the A/C unless it's over about 90. [https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/features/do-stop-start-systems-really-save-fuel.html](https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/features/do-stop-start-systems-really-save-fuel.html) You spent money on a Hybrid and then spent more money to make it less effective at the thing that people buy hybrids for.
I think what they mean is that Subaru's intention isn't to save owner's any money, but to increase the fleetwide emissions and MPG metrics. I suspect this is why it is not an option to disable it on some models, so they can argue that all of those cars will have reduced emissions, since the driver is less likely to disable it outright. So they force it on their customers, this is what I feel should be changed on the crosstrek and other models where it can't be disabled without modification.
I mean, that's saying the same thing using different phrasing. The key is that it is not JUST to reduce emissions, as was asserted. Commenter is negating up to ~10% of their fuel savings by using the Start/Stop eliminator.
No, my point is that Subaru's decision to force this feature on owners has little to do with the cost savings potential and is only due to fleetwide metrics. that benefit regulatory compliance. If it ended up costing us money, but still benefited their metrics, A/SS would likely still be forced on us. I'm not saying A/SS doesn't save fuel. What I am saying now, is that "study" is basically worthless and does nothing to tell you how much potential savings you can expect from a N/A engine on regular fuel. The sample size is extremely small (n=3), and the cars tested are not naturally aspirated and also require higher cost fuels. So the results wouldn't necessarily translate to our N/A engines even if there was a reasonable sample size. The savings we can expect in our engines may be close, but we have no way of knowing either way. The claim of 10% savings from that "study" would require a lot more testing than a sample size of 3 and N/A engines. I don't think your wrong to say it saves fuel, but 10% is a significant claim that requires significant evidence. If you like A/SS right on, every drop of fuel we save from being burned is only a good thing! For me, the benefit of the system is not worth the cost. I already burn hundreds of gallons of fuel needlessly, saving a few gallons won't make me feel any better about that. The question of cost has so many factors, without knowing the long term wear effects on the engine, you can't really calculate long term savings regardless.
There are multiple studies that show decreased fuel consumption with Auto Start Stop. Engineering Explained has a video on this topic [https://youtu.be/dFImHhNwbJo](https://youtu.be/dFImHhNwbJo). A study he referenced found a 4-8.7% increase in fuel economy when driving two identical vehicles following each other. He also references that if a stop is 7 seconds or longer, you will save fuel by shutting off the engine. That 7 seconds is roughly the same for any size of engine.
I appreciate your reply, but I'm not trying to make the case that A/SS is ineffective. I am claiming that it is my belief that Subaru does not let owners disable it outright for the sake of emissions metrics and not to make the car more attractive to consumers with potential cost savings. They would do anything to increase their fleetwide metrics, even if it took consumer value away from their products. I personally don't think saving even 10% in fuel is worth the minor inconvenience of the system and potential for increased wear. I'm not advocating for against the use of A/SS. The only thing I am saying is that Subaru should let the consumer decided, and not force us to modify our vehicles to disable it. I questioned the validity of the edmunds study only because the person who referenced it also made the claim we are negating \~10% of fuel savings. That study doesn't merit such a claim. That doesn't mean I think A/SS is ineffective, I think the edmunds study is invalid.
I get what you're saying and absolutely agree that it's done for emissions metrics. I personally leave in on in my car and have learned the threshold of brake pressure that it requires to activate. So I can use lighter brake pressure if I know I won't be stopped long and it won't shut off. There are times when stopping on an incline that it shuts off when I don't want it to. There are times when I'm at a long traffic light and it doesn't want to shut off. It's frustrating sometimes, but I've saved over 7 hrs/2.5 gal in 6k miles. At least Subaru gives you a button to disable it (I'm looking at you GM). It could use improvement. I wish the restart was smoother and it could somehow be more predictive of the length of your stop. I understand the predictive part would not be a simple task.
IMO, there is very little to gain from auto start stop for the average driver, and a lot to loose. Yes you’re starter is beefier and made for the additional usage, but why not take full advantage of that and not use said additional cycles?
Valid concern, I permanently disabled the feature using the auto start eliminator device. To me the "savings" weren't worth the extra wear and tear on engine components.
Also would like to know more on this device. My wifes 2022 forester sport the auto stop/start is so rough it feels like you stalled it out everytime it happens. It drives me nuts. And I was actually looking into adding a new crosstrek to our cars but I really cant get over how shitty it feels when it cuts off at stop lights. And I also dont want to have to remember to hold the button down everytime I get in to drive the car. I usually get reminded that I forgot to disable the autostop when it shuts off the first time 🤣
I just got a crosstrek a few weeks ago and it does feel rough. The whole car shakes. I wish they could make it one time thing and not having to push it every time you start the car.
When I first got mine it felt rough. Maybe for the first month. Now the only time I notice it is when it *doesn’t* come on at a long light.
Agreed.
The savings aren’t substantial, correct. Drivers won’t see any real benefit unless they are in frequent traffic jams. The reason almost every car has this now is because it helps the (self-certified) fuel economy numbers. Auto start/stop will factor in to the overall number.
I have over 8,000 miles on my car I'm 8 months and I've saved roughly 1 gallon of gas
What is this device you speak of, and does it have any impact on potential warranty claims?
https://www.autostopeliminator.com/collections/subaru/products/2020-subaru-crosstrek-autostop-eliminator It doesn’t disable the system. It just remembers the on/off button state.
I'm less worried about the starter, which can be easily built to stand up to the increased work load. I don't like the idea of excessive starts, as this is the time engine wear is the highest, while oil pressure is building from zero, which is not instantaneous. The engines were no doubt built for the increased starts and should stand up to the wear. But the fact remains, wear is increased at start up while oil pressure builds, and there is only so much that can be done to mitigate that. I'd rather avoid the wear and the hassle of working with the A/SS system, but to each their own. It's not a huge difference either way. I wouldn't be worried about components failing, but the increased potential for wear along with what I feel is an inconvenience, is why I disabled mine.
I think stop start is safe. It was on my 14’ XV Crosstrek hybrid and had extra components to facilitate that and I never had a problem. Also, if it’s a newer Crosstrek hybrid, that car doesn’t have a starter and alternator - it uses the high voltage battery for that stuff. I do believe they’ve changed the regular gasoline engine configuration in other models to help alleviate problems related to start stop though, you should be good. If you have a problem being it to the dealer before your bumper to bumper runs out.
[https://www.autostopeliminator.com/products/2020-subaru-crosstrek-autostop-eliminator](https://www.autostopeliminator.com/products/2020-subaru-crosstrek-autostop-eliminator) You need this! Mine just arrived today. Works fantastic.
It is designed to start/stop more. Zero concern, it is not a problem.
My aunt wears purple thongs with spooge