Auto Start Stop = Extra Wear and Tear?

[drgmt]

Originally Posted by Railgun

Genius...guess what...self absorbed thinking is the exact problem.

Now, I don't know where you are exactly, but let's take London as an example, where traffic is utter shit and you can get through town at a good average of about 13mph. Stop and go traffic is shit for emissions. And London's air quality is apparently pretty crap. Now, if you think just a little bit...if EVERYONE had this feature and used it, guess how many cars no longer sit idling away in traffic.

But keep thinking of no one but yourself.

I love that no one can give a single ounce of legitimate reasoning for turning it off. You guys are a special breed.

Here is a reason - the implementation is not smooth. Particularly on a hill.

Plus I don't see the rationale. If climate change/global warming/fear mongering/flawed science/population control were true - the small fuel emission savings are probably exactly offset by premature wear on parts and the carbon cost of manufacturing or replacing these.

I'm not selfish at all. Climate change is pure science fiction. 100 years ago it was an ice age that would ruin the planet. Now we are getting to hot. Rewind hit play. It's ground hog day.

Perhaps you should worry about the poor sweatshop workers that die every day to produce your clothes, mobile phones and m performance parts - sorry I forgot. We can let that slide. People in glass houses.......

You wouldn't know the first thing about me keyboard warrior. So your hypocrisy in calling me selfish without knowing me is all the more amusing.

[bimmerfrk]

Originally Posted by Railgun

So your reasoning is fake news, and that I buy child labor products?




Keyboard warrior is usually a moniker reserved for those who can't hold their own in person. For calling me a hypocrite immediately after claiming I don't know you is hilarious.

Fake news right? \/

That's LA smog by the way. Caused by what?

That's not smog that's just regular fog. Stop scaring us you tree hugging hippie ;-)

[GnoiXiaK]

Originally Posted by Railgun

Says the guy in NY. Ever even been to LA?

Just keep on making excuses.

Agreed...100% smog. Life long LA guy. Not commenting on any else, but that's smog. How we know is that it is significantly heavier Monday-Friday...almost like there's some causation at play unless the weather takes weekends off...

[backagain]

If we are all serious about saving the earth, why haven't we all traded in our F80s for electrical cars?

[Prossx]

Originally Posted by backagain

If we are all serious about saving the earth, why haven't we all traded in our F80s for electrical cars?

Cause of this...(excepted from Wired article)

The math gets trickier, though, when you include other forms of environmental damage. Electric cars need to be light, which means they include a lot of high-performing metals. The lithium in the batteries, for example, is super light and conductive—that’s how you get a lot of energy without adding a lot of weight. Other, rare metals are sprinkled throughout the car, mostly in the magnets that are in everything from the headlights to the on-board electronics.

But those rare metals come from somewhere—often, from environmentally destructive mines. It’s not just Tesla, of course. All electric vehicles rely on parts with similar environmental issues. Even solar panels depend on rare metals that have to be dug out of the earth and processed in less-than-green ways, says David Abraham, author of the book The Elements of Power. (Disclosure: I helped edit some chapters of the book.)

[aerostar]

Originally Posted by Railgun

So your reasoning is fake news, and that I buy child labor products?




Keyboard warrior is usually a moniker reserved for those who can't hold their own in person. For calling me a hypocrite immediately after claiming I don't know you is hilarious.

Fake news right? \/

That's LA smog by the way. Caused by what?

That's humidity caused by all the mouth breathers that suck at video games ruining it for the rest of us.

[backagain]

Originally Posted by Prossx

Cause of this...(excepted from Wired article)

The math gets trickier, though, when you include other forms of environmental damage. Electric cars need to be light, which means they include a lot of high-performing metals. The lithium in the batteries, for example, is super light and conductive—that’s how you get a lot of energy without adding a lot of weight. Other, rare metals are sprinkled throughout the car, mostly in the magnets that are in everything from the headlights to the on-board electronics.

But those rare metals come from somewhere—often, from environmentally destructive mines. It’s not just Tesla, of course. All electric vehicles rely on parts with similar environmental issues. Even solar panels depend on rare metals that have to be dug out of the earth and processed in less-than-green ways, says David Abraham, author of the book The Elements of Power. (Disclosure: I helped edit some chapters of the book.)

At least it would mitigate the smog problem in LA? No?

Actually you missed my point, which is not about gas cars vs electrical ones. It just seems interesting that we all consciously chose to drive cars with not so stellar gas mileage, yet advocate the environmental benefit of this feature.

[backagain]

Originally Posted by Railgun

How the hell do you draw a parallel of a vehicle in motion, to a vehicle stopped?

'cause it is the same car.

Seems like you are the one who can't hold an argument, and has to resort to name calling and foul language.

[HoldenMI]

Originally Posted by drgmt

Here is a reason - the implementation is not smooth. Particularly on a hill.

Plus I don't see the rationale. If climate change/global warming/fear mongering/flawed science/population control were true - the small fuel emission savings are probably exactly offset by premature wear on parts and the carbon cost of manufacturing or replacing these.

I'm not selfish at all. Climate change is pure science fiction. 100 years ago it was an ice age that would ruin the planet. Now we are getting to hot. Rewind hit play. It's ground hog day.

Perhaps you should worry about the poor sweatshop workers that die every day to produce your clothes, mobile phones and m performance parts - sorry I forgot. We can let that slide. People in glass houses.......

You wouldn't know the first thing about me keyboard warrior. So your hypocrisy in calling me selfish without knowing me is all the more amusing.

I'm impressed that there's an individual on this site who is more knowledgeable about climate science than 90-something percent of climate scientist. That's why I come here for answers...

[Fuller]

Originally Posted by Railgun

It's not even about that. I'm not actively doing anything to be environmentally friendly. But I'm not actively avoiding it either. If there's something that exists that I either already have, or would buy that has something to facilitate that, then sure, no problem.

How the hell do you draw a parallel of a vehicle in motion, to a vehicle stopped?


The rest is not directed to you specifically...

What is BMW doing to the MY19 M4 vehicles? You think that it will get any better? Do you think that, say, 10-15 years ago, if this tech was available in most vehicles in major cities, the new emissions laws that hinder certain aspects of performance would still be enacted? Do you think that a lack of stricter emissions requirements would have caused the VW cluster? Do you think that if everyone gave just a little shit, we wouldn't have to worry about vehicles we would want in the future getting neutered because of even more strict emissions requirements?

But no...instead, everyone resorts to being six year olds and can't make a valid argument other than "Who doesn't want to hear it idle." Or "I don't care about my carbon footprint." Or "The starter will die early, though I'm just speculating because it hasn't happened yet." Or "It's a kill joy."

Humans, generally speaking, are stupid. Only thinking of numero uno it seems, and can't see 2mm in front of their own face. It's this small ass thinking that will kill us all some day. Maybe not the environment...maybe it will be. It's one of those the whole is greater than the sum of its parts kind of things. One, or a few people will do it...just imagine if everyone did. It's not convenient only because you made up a reason for it not to be just to suit you. Fuck everyone else eh? I expect nothing but arguments because those folks simply have no idea about anything outside of those said 2mm in front of their faces. Instead of thinking outside that box just for a second, I'm some hippie tree hugger. Now THAT'S fucking funny.


/rant

Yes, but by making the decision to drive a high powered luxury sports car, you've also prioritized your own satisfaction over the common good. Driving an M* and lecturing others about turning off the stop/start feature is analogous to critiquing your neighbor for leaving the lights on in his house, meanwhile you have your air conditioner set to 60F.

People buy luxury cars for their own satisfaction. If we can't turn off a feature we find intolerable, then why buy a premium car. That makes for a good segue into my next point, imo bmw did a poor job implementing the stop/start feature in the f* generation cars. I'd recently had the opportunity to drive a Japanese brand cross-over with start/stop, and it functioned beautifully. I barely even realized it was working, so I left it on. I've actually tried to acclimate myself to the stop/start feature in my bmw, and it still felt intrusive and distracting. I tried using it for increasing durations everyday, thinking I'd eventually grow accustomed to it, and unfortunately, this wasn't the case. The last thing I need in high traffic situations is to be constantly distracted beyond what the situation already warrants. Hence my view is, when bmw succeeds in implementing this feature in a way that's not distracting (which can, and has been done by other manufacturers) I'll use it.

[NickyC]

Originally Posted by HoldenMI

I'm impressed that there's an individual on this site who is more knowledgeable about climate science than 90-something percent of climate scientist. That's why I come here for answers...

How many of those, ahem 90 percent rely on bogus data in the first place? Out of the remaining, ahem 90 percent, how many are driven strictly by ideological reasons and are thus as unreliable as the bogus data itself?

Where is all the doom and gloom and death that's been promised due to Global warming, ahem man made climate change, ahem climate change?

https://science.house.gov/news/press...limate-records

It's the sunspots, we have zero control over the planet's climate. The fact of the matter is there was little warming from the period between 1998-2013. It was a complete lie that was being peddled about GW, and the historical data was fabricated to make it look like a warming trend had taken place. These chumps, these dear scientists that so many people put their full faith into were shown to be nothing but ego maniacal liars who instead of accepting they were wrong, phonied up the data. So that, ahem 90 percent number the chicken littles love to cling to is based entirely on bullshit.

Any one who believes in the GW sham is sheep dipped, there's no other way to say it.

[HoldenMI]

Originally Posted by NickyC

How many of those, ahem 90 percent rely on bogus data in the first place? Out of the remaining, ahem 90 percent, how many are driven strictly by ideological reasons and are thus as unreliable as the bogus data itself?

Where is all the doom and gloom and death that's been promised due to Global warming, ahem man made climate change, ahem climate change?

https://science.house.gov/news/press...limate-records

It's the sunspots, we have zero control over the planet's climate. The fact of the matter is there was little warming from the period between 1998-2013. It was a complete lie that was being peddled about GW, and the historical data was fabricated to make it look like a warming trend had taken place. These chumps, these dear scientists that so many people put their full faith into were shown to be nothing but ego maniacal liars who instead of accepting they were wrong, phonied up the data. So that, ahem 90 percent number the chicken littles love to cling to is based entirely on bullshit.

Any one who believes in the GW sham is sheep dipped, there's no other way to say it.

I stand corrected. Two people on this site know better than ninety something percent of climate scientists. Wow. You can even judge the quality of their data better than they can. We're living in interesting times where the value of scientific method and rigor is disputed. It's the dawning of a new dark age...maybe that intellectual darkness can be used to combat global warming.

[Aaaaaaaaa]

Originally Posted by Railgun

I love that no one can give a single ounce of legitimate reasoning for turning it off. You guys are a special breed.

Did you miss my "I drive in Sport+ DSC OFF 100% time" comment?

[Aaaaaaaaa]

Originally Posted by Railgun

That doesn't disable it. What's your point?

Doesn't it? I dunno I've been even touched that button since I took delivery

[drgmt]

Amusing as always

[drgmt]

Originally Posted by pheerIx

Doesn't it? I dunno I've been even touched that button since I took delivery

Was your car new - maybe someone coded it off before you purchased it

[Phatcat]

I didn't read through the whole thread but I have read a news article said that the main purpose of this function is to pass the emission test.

Emission test mostly mimic city traffic thus a lot of idling, so automotive manufacturers decided they can game the test by shut off the engine during the idling period to further lower the car's emission.

[Thescout13]

Originally Posted by drgmt

Was your car new - maybe someone coded it off before you purchased it

I'm confused. If he only drives the car in Sport + with DSC off, the Auto Start Stop will not engage in that setting. So if he has never driven outside those modes, he has never experienced it. Therefore, he has had it "disabled" since day one. Maybe I'm misunderstanding everyone else's confusion. If the person above has auto start stop engaging in Sport + with DSC off should he have the problem?

[Wills2]

Originally Posted by backagain

If we are all serious about saving the earth, why haven't we all traded in our F80s for electrical cars?

If we were serious about saving the planet we'd ditch personal transport entirely but we're not so we carry on with our cars whether electrical or not they cost the planet at some point of the supply chain.