Ford Expanding Start/Stop To Non Hybrids

[ANTAUS]

My link

[tjl]

It should have an effect on city fuel economy (EPA and real world). 18% of the EPA city fuel economy cycle is spent stopped.

[FordBuyer]

Ford, IMO, should make it an option only the first few years. All it would take is some teenager, 80 year old, Zombie driver getting into a collision because they tried to restart car with ignition instead of just pressing gas pedal. It will take many awhile to get used to and for that reason make it an option to cut down collisions and resulting lawsuits. Many drivers still haven't even figured out ABS yet let alone ESC and now start stop technology. Drivers last few years have had a lot of technology thrown at them and there is a learning curve. Throw in smart phones and drivers have their mind on everything but driving. I would bet Ford's big fear is some Zombie driver in middle of intersection on smart phone panicking and trying to restart "stalled" vehicle instead of hitting accelerator and getting T-boned as a result.

[GapBoyPCS]

I welcome the addition, as a good chunk of my commute is stop-and-go.

 

In some ways, Ford's press release is a bit cryptic. I'm trying to figure out when it will get onto the 2012 Focus -- either at the launch (which I'm surprised there wasn't any mention of it earlier), or whether it will be introduced later in the year).

[mettech]

Will they have two batteries installed?

[junior2777]

It seems like you have more of a concern of implementing technology vs realizing that the American population as a whole needs to just be freakin' educated. How about turning off dancing with the stars and opening a book, or closing bejeweled on freaking facebook and looking up something of interest. I think this country is going to miss the boat on a lot of things just because people are too afraid that the "average Joe" doesn't understand.

[RichardJensen]

EPA test charts:

 

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

 

there's a fair amount of dead time on the AC test.

[MKII]

Has the EPA reconsidered city test numbers , to give stop/start equipped vehicles a better city rating.

Edited December 27, 2010 by MKII

[RichardJensen]

Has the EPA reconsidered city test numbers , to give stop/start equipped vehicles a better city rating.

Why would they do that?

[MKII]

Why would they do that?

 

The EPA city-mode test cycle includes only one complete vehicle stop, so stop-start technology registers only a 0.1- or 0.2-mpg improvement, which is most likely the reason why this feature offered in many European and Japanese vehicles was not offered in internal combustion engine vehicles in North America. Zero benefits shown in the EPA test=zero value to the consumer to spend for this feature.

The EPA test cycle hid the real world improvements of 7 to 9 percent fuel economy gains.

 

Makes sense that EPA did or will make changes since the CAFE regs in April 2010 it appears now that many of the automakers will offer Start/Stop tech in the near future in internal combustion engine vehicles in North America.

Edited December 27, 2010 by MKII

[Pioneer]

My link

 

How dare you put a Ford topic in the Ford Discussion Forum. :busted:

[RichardJensen]

The EPA city-mode test cycle includes only one complete vehicle stop, so stop-start technology registers only a 0.1- or 0.2-mpg improvement, which is most likely the reason why this feature offered in many European and Japanese vehicles was not offered in internal combustion engine vehicles in North America. Zero benefits shown in the EPA test=zero value to the consumer to spend for this feature.

The EPA test cycle hid the real world improvements of 7 to 9 percent fuel economy gains.

 

Makes sense that EPA did or will make changes since the CAFE regs in April 2010 it appears now that many of the automakers will offer Start/Stop tech in the near future in internal combustion engine vehicles in North America.

1) The EU city cycle is essentially the same as the old EPA cycle. It too has only one stop. The correcting factor applied to US EPA figures from 1985 to 2007 is not applied to EU figures.

 

2) The EPA city cycle consists of the test you refer to, the same test done at significantly colder temps, and a third test done at high temps, with the car brought to ambient temp, and consists of extended idling.

 

3) The current EPA cycle has 5 tests. Three constitute the city component (the old city cycle, the cold city cycle and the hot cycle). Two tests are included in the highway cycle. The old test and the new "high speed" test. Two of those tests--the old city and the old highway tests--are combined to calculate the CAFE value.

 

4) In point of fact, the new EPA city cycle has MORE full stops than the EU city cycle.

 

----

 

Your errors:

 

- The EPA city cycles are far more rigorous than the EU city cycle test which is basically the old EPA test, uncorrected.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_automobiles#Europe

 

- The new EPA ratings regime is only tangentially connected with CAFE.

 

- The feature in its earliest implementations was fairly dirty. But it passed muster given the weaker emissions regs in Europe as compared to the US generally and California in particular.

 

-- A more significant underlying assumption is the notion that any US environmental measure is, prima fascie, inferior to a comparable EU endeavor.

Edited December 27, 2010 by RichardJensen

[ANTAUS]

So will we also be seeing cylinder deactivation from Ford as well? At higher speeds that is.... I mean, this way they are taking care of lower end MPG, any plans for highway upper end MPGs?

[Noah Harbinger]

Ford, IMO, should make it an option only the first few years. All it would take is some teenager, 80 year old, Zombie driver getting into a collision because they tried to restart car with ignition instead of just pressing gas pedal. It will take many awhile to get used to and for that reason make it an option to cut down collisions and resulting lawsuits. Many drivers still haven't even figured out ABS yet let alone ESC and now start stop technology. Drivers last few years have had a lot of technology thrown at them and there is a learning curve. Throw in smart phones and drivers have their mind on everything but driving. I would bet Ford's big fear is some Zombie driver in middle of intersection on smart phone panicking and trying to restart "stalled" vehicle instead of hitting accelerator and getting T-boned as a result.

 

I think you're overstating the complexity and risk. Why would someone be "stalled" in an intersection if the engine only shuts off when you're stopped waiting at a light? Why would someone even think the car had stalled? Even if they had, so they turn the key and drive off - since they're coming from a dead start, the difference in position will be negligible. And it seems like the default "panic" action would be to hit the gas.

 

 

My though was that I hope it has a good rollback hold mechanism... I like to take my foot off the brake and let the idling engine and gravity hold me in equilibrium.

[tjl]

The EPA city-mode test cycle includes only one complete vehicle stop,

 

According to the EPA test cycle descriptions, the EPA city test has 23 stops, with 18% of the time spent stopped. The air conditioning and cold weather tests also have 19% and 18% of their time stopped.

 

The EPA highway test has only one stop, at the end of the test. The high speed test has 4 stops with 7% of the time spent stopped.

[MKII]

In point of fact, the new EPA city cycle has MORE full stops than the EU city cycle..

 

So the answer to my question is yes.

 

I only asked because I remembered reading an article where a Mazda spokesperson was blaming the EPA city cycle test method as the reason why they and some other auto makers where

not offering Start/Stop feature in their non-hybrid vehicles.

 

Was not looking to compare other countries fuel testing methods.

 

 

EDIT......found the article - You can add head Mazda engineer Robert Davis to the list of those who think stop/start should spread throughout the States and according to Automotive News, and he's got a theory as to why it hasn't: the Environmental Protection Agency's fuel economy testing procedures. Naturally, an engine needs a chance to idle for the stop/start-equipped car's computer to switch it off, and the EPA's current test cycle only allows that to happen one single time.`

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/28/report-stop-start-tech-saves-fuel-so-why-cant-we-get-it-in-th/

 

 

I know nothing about any countries city cycle test methods, just asking only for the reason that it appears that Start/Stop feature will show up on a few companies new offerings with internal combustion engines in North America so I assumed the EPA made some changes thats all. :shades:

Edited December 27, 2010 by MKII

[RichardJensen]

So the answer to my question is yes.

What? No!

 

Your question:

 

Has the EPA reconsidered city test numbers , to give stop/start equipped vehicles a better city rating.

 

was based on an article posted to AutoBlog two years after the EPA launched its new city and highway test regime, and well over ten years after the agency began developing these tests.

[RichardJensen]

Was not looking to compare other countries fuel testing methods.

like heck you weren't.

 

Your clear implication is that the EPA needs to mimic standards elsewhere to spur adoption of this innovation, as seen here:

 

The EPA test cycle hid the real world improvements of 7 to 9 percent fuel economy gains.

[akirby]

So the answer to my question is yes.

 

I only asked because I remembered reading an article where a Mazda spokesperson was blaming the EPA city cycle test method as the reason why they and some other auto makers where

not offering Start/Stop feature in their non-hybrid vehicles.

 

Was not looking to compare other countries fuel testing methods.

 

 

EDIT......found the article - You can add head Mazda engineer Robert Davis to the list of those who think stop/start should spread throughout the States and according to Automotive News, and he's got a theory as to why it hasn't: the Environmental Protection Agency's fuel economy testing procedures. Naturally, an engine needs a chance to idle for the stop/start-equipped car's computer to switch it off, and the EPA's current test cycle only allows that to happen one single time.`

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/28/report-stop-start-tech-saves-fuel-so-why-cant-we-get-it-in-th/

 

 

I know nothing about any countries city cycle test methods, just asking only for the reason that it appears that Start/Stop feature will show up on a few companies new offerings with internal combustion engines in North America so I assumed the EPA made some changes thats all. :shades:

 

The Mazda engineer appears to be wrong. Here are the idle times in the EPA city test (reader comment #43 in the autoblog article):

 

The engine idles for 20 seconds at the start.

It idles for 38 seconds 125 seconds in.

It idles for 13 seconds 333 seconds in.

It idles for 6 seconds 397 seconds in.

It idles for 18 seconds 429 seconds in.

It idles for 6 seconds 505 seconds in.

It idles for 16 seconds 528 seconds in.

It idles for 26 seconds 620 seconds in.

It idles for 31 seconds 1022 seconds in.

It idles for 16 seconds 1153 seconds in.

It idles for 10 seconds 1187 seconds in.

It idles for 8 seconds 1244 seconds in.

It idles for 25 seconds 1313 seconds in.

It idles for 3 seconds 1367 seconds in.

[MKII]

like heck you weren't.

 

Your clear implication is that the EPA needs to mimic standards elsewhere to spur adoption of this innovation, as seen here:

 

If it makes you feel better ....OK

[MKII]

The Mazda engineer appears to be wrong. Here are the idle times in the EPA city test (reader comment #43 in the autoblog article):

 

The engine idles for 20 seconds at the start.

It idles for 38 seconds 125 seconds in.

It idles for 13 seconds 333 seconds in.

It idles for 6 seconds 397 seconds in.

It idles for 18 seconds 429 seconds in.

It idles for 6 seconds 505 seconds in.

It idles for 16 seconds 528 seconds in.

It idles for 26 seconds 620 seconds in.

It idles for 31 seconds 1022 seconds in.

It idles for 16 seconds 1153 seconds in.

It idles for 10 seconds 1187 seconds in.

It idles for 8 seconds 1244 seconds in.

It idles for 25 seconds 1313 seconds in.

It idles for 3 seconds 1367 seconds in.

 

Good detailed info sir......so why would the Mazda guy make an excuse like that, and also if a car maker could make his fuel economy ratings look 3-4 mpg better with the Start/Stop feature

then why has it not been offered in non hybrid vehicles in North America. As far as what I have read quite a few Asian car markers are selling this feature in cars in Asia markets and same in Europe. Which makes me think that these car makers would be interested in adding this to their North American offerings just for the benefit of glossing up the fuel economy numbers.

[Biker16]

So will we also be seeing cylinder deactivation from Ford as well? At higher speeds that is.... I mean, this way they are taking care of lower end MPG, any plans for highway upper end MPGs?

cylinder deactivation is also known as "displacement on demand".

 

We already have a far more efficient technology called ECOBOOST...... remember it allows an I-4 or a V6 to replace a larger engine. Cylinder deactivation is no substitute for a smaller engine.

 

the idea is to use less fuel while producing less power.

 

TIVCT and direct injection combined with a smaller engine = great Economy.

this allows power output to be reduced, without closing the butterfly valve known as the throttle.

 

DI squirts inert Exhaust gases back into the combustion chamber, effectively reducing the available displacement of the engine, while the smaller amount of fuel is mixed with a smaller amount of air directly in the cylinder, to maintain combustion.

 

with TIVCT, the engine can also run on an Atkinson cycle, which reduces power and torque when not needed, while not reducing the engine's mechanical efficiency.

[Biker16]

double post.

Edited December 27, 2010 by Biker16

[Biker16]

Good detailed info sir......so why would the Mazda guy make an excuse like that, and also if a car maker could make his fuel economy ratings look 3-4 mpg better with the Start/Stop feature

then why has it not been offered in non hybrid vehicles in North America. As far as what I have read quite a few Asian car markers are selling this feature in cars in Asia markets and same in Europe. Which makes me think that these car makers would be interested in adding this to their North American offerings just for the benefit of glossing up the fuel economy numbers.

 

Because Start-stop does not operate when the engine is cold.

 

the engine will not stop until the engine is up to operating temperature. for Emissions, economy and Interior comfort.

[RichardJensen]

If it makes you feel better ....OK

Or, I dunno, you could admit that you lacked information on how the EPA tests work, when they were changed, how they were changed, how they're used to calculate CAFE, that they were the starting point for the lightly modified EU fuel economy tests, that they EU fuel economy tests don't include the correction factor that was applied to EPA test results for 22 years, and so on and so forth.