OnPoint

The issue to me is it's a sports car. And it already has more nannies in it than I prefer. And as a sports car it represents a miniscule fraction of miles driven/fuel used relative to the broader fleet.

The fuel economy of my two vettes would have to go down by a very significant amount before it would ever become an issue with me. I didn't buy them for their fuel economy (altho given their performance, I think they do quite well).

Given all of this, I'd frankly like to have the market freedom to buy a sports car that simply doesn't have a device such as auto start/stop on the engine. Whether it can be disabled or not.

Just as I wouldn't want it to start up running only on 4 cylinders, even if such could be disabled. Or start up limited to sub X,000 rpm, even if such could be disabled. Or start up limited in hp, even if it could be disabled. Or start up limited in any capability, even if it could be disabled. Or start up and send a signal to my bank to make an automatic deposit to the EPA's panel studying how the agency might actually comply with its regulatory cost/benefit analysis duty, . . even if it could be disabled.

Jinx

And me without my tinfoil hat.

OnPoint

It might surprise you, but this has nothing to do with "tinfoil hat" thinking, and everything to do with market choice.

I tell you what, my friend, if you are so desirous of having a device on your new C7 like an auto start/stop on the engine, I would willingly - indeed actively - support you having the ability to get such a device as a stand-alone option on your car, by affirmatively checking a separate option box on the order form.

I would even be willing, as one who doesn't want that on my sports car, to pay the amortized, incremental cost on mine, so that when you and the 3 or 4 other C7 customers when presented with the option of either having this device on their new vette or not, and who actually want an engine auto start/stop on their new vette and are willing to check that box to get it, can get it as a no-cost option.

That way, we can both be happy customers, getting the product we want, through free market choice.

TBIRD57

they are ending the wankel at least here from what i read.

TBIRD57

on the first two c7 years until the bugs are worked out

SCM_Crash

Uhg...


I guess many of you don't know it yet, but GM's been using cylinder deactivation for a while. It was in the V8 G8s first I believe. It was also added to trucks.

It doesn't come on when you're driving in the city. It comes on when you're cruising on the freeway. When you're on the freeway, you generally don't need more than 30HP to maintain 70MPH. When you run all 8 cylinders at 70MPH, you're wasting energy because you're producing closer to 60-70HP in full over-drive. So cylinder deactivation drops you down to either 6 or 4 cylinders (depending on power needs) to reduce the amount of wasted energy.

As for turning it off, tuners have known how to turn it off for many years now. I was talking to Mike Haddad from Haddad Motorsports and he said that the guys coming in with the variable displacement wanted it turned off almost every time because they didn't like the sound the car made. (They didn't care about the power or anything, just the sound.) So he did tune it out.

I figure if you're not asking for the power, why should the car give it to you anyway? If the new Vette comes with variable displacement, I'd be happy to have it. I love sports cars just as much as I love efficiency.

The reason the LS3 Vettes didn't have variable displacement was because there were problems with the torque tube shaking really bad. However, I've heard that GM may have solved that issue and variable displacement may be available on the C7. (Don't ask me about my sources since I don't recall. But that could have been rumor too.)

Vettes have always had more options than other GM cars. And those options are almost always dealt with through the DIC. It would be cool to have the option to turn variable displacement on and off through the DIC so if I wanted to drive to Vegas, I could simply turn it on and get 35+MPG all the way there. Right now I get about 26-27MPG going to Vegas. I didn't buy my car for fuel economy, but the drive to Vegas is riddled with cops now, so there's no point in having full power "always on".


BTW, I don't recall any C4 Zr1 guys b!tching about having the ability to turn full power on and off. And from the pictures I've seen, I could tell that they all didn't just keep their cars in full power mode.

OnPoint

That's completely different from the engine auto start/stop feature we're talking about. The auto start/stop feature shuts off you're engine when you come to a stop in traffic, and then re-starts your engine when you're off the brake/back on throttle.

Completely different issue.

As to DoD GM was going to put that on the C6. Then engines already have the bosses necessary in the castings to accomodate it. They couldn't work out the negative harmonics created by the DoD given the vette's front engine, rear transmission layout. Perhaps they'll be able to fix that for the C7. If they can, I don't see that as nearly the negative as the engine auto/start feature, and it might even be something worth having, assuming they can rid the driveline of the negative harmonics that kept it from being deployed on the C6.

Nonetheless, that's a completely different animal than engine auto start/stop.

dboz

He just likes to argue with everyone regardless of facts. He hates AWD and turbo engines also, but now he suddenly likes this new feature on a Corvette. If the flow is downstream, he is going up stream. West coaster you know, they don't wear tin foil hats, they wear hats with twirlers on top waiting for the aliens to come. It has something to due with the magnetic anomaly that is created by that massive fault line out there. Just watch the nightly news, you will get a sense of how the country of California thinks, you know, "medical marijuana" and stuff like that. All the rest of us are forced to buy ultra low emissions cars due to CARB regulations, so for the westies, this probably makes sense, they are used to being told what, when and how they can drive. The rest of the FREE people like choices that we make, not the ones given us by tin foil hat wearers in the state house.

They should all just be allowed to buy hybrids only out there. No reason to waste a good V8 rumble at the stop light. Why be able to rev your Borla exhaust while sitting there. What fun would that be?

bleeper

the only difference is a partial shutdown when driving vs a full shutdown when stopped and mazda's version can be restarted in 0.35 seconds.

OnPoint

And in my book that's a big difference.

But hey, if you want one on your car, like I mentioned above in another reponse, I'd be happy to support you having the ability to request such a device on your car as a no cost stand-alone option.

Personally, I don't want auto start/stop on my vette, and I sure hope the C7 doesn't include it.

tuxnharley

Hey - at least we can drive our Corvettes year round out here - and don't need AWD to get thru snow! I think you're just jealous........

Where did I put that foil hat anyway - oh yeah, I forgot, I put it out in the recycling bin

Redvetta

then it should be an option, I don't believe it would save any fuel, how much fuel does a car burn sitting idle? how much fuel does a car use starting up? How long will a starter last starting an engine 20 times a day? How does the ac work with the engine off?

Why do I have to pay extra becuase gm spent millions to get the exhaust note to sound a certian way, then they make the car turn off at idle?

whitesmokels1

Booo!!! No auto shutoff. It's not a golf cart. Plus how does the a/c cycle without the engine turning?

My favorite part about my car is listening to that cam lope at a redlight.

BLAP BLAP BLAP!

bleeper

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Start-stop_system

simple and effective technology for reducing air pollution from idling hopefully it becomes a standard feature.

SCM_Crash

OH! I didn't realize they wanted to start/stop the engine completely. That doesn't sound like a good idea.

Sounds like more strain on the engine and starter to name a few issues. At idle you're really not using a lot of fuel. And how much of the time we're driving do we actually sit at stop lights?

Personally, I hardly ever see stop lights because I'm always driving on the freeway and most of the lights here are computer controlled so I'm not sitting at them very long when I do get to them.

This is an all-around dumb idea, IMHO. If they're worried about the amount of energy they're losing at idle, they could put in a second battery that charges only at idle, then when the car starts going, it stops pulling power from the alternator and uses the power from the 2nd battery until nearly depleted before going back to using the alternator.

v26278

The 2012 911 allows the driver to disable auto/stop/start. I can't imagine the Corvette wouldn't allow that as well. It ain't a prius. There's no way you're going to get as fast a launch from a turned off engine than you do from one that is running.

OnPoint

My thoughts re ability to disable are noted above.

The feature simply shouldn't be - and hopefully won't be - on the C7.

Jinx

Stunning, coming from you.

Thanks for completely misrepresenting me in your handy-dandy summary/smear post/personal attack. Fortunately, most people who've been here can read and understand my posts. You and your post merit no further attention.

.Jinx

Streetk14

The issue is that most of these systems default to "on" every time you start the car. In order for it to count in the EPA driving cycle, it has to (from what I know). I know the latest BMW Automatic start/stop systems work this way - at least on standard models, not ///M cars. I don't know about you, but I don't want to have to push that button every time I start the car.

And I've actually experienced these systems first hand. The 2011+ M3's all have this standard. The first time it happened to me, it was startling. Then it just became annoying, especially in a car with a nice sounding engine that is always noticeable otherwise. The M3 seems to remember if you had the feature turned off - and keeps it that way. Good thing since it's a driver's car.

And yeah, a lot of extra technology/cost goes into these systems. Re-reinforced starters, neutral sensors for manual transmissions, "storage evaporators" for the A/C system, brake booster pressure sensor, additional battery monitor module, hydraulic pressure accumulator (for automatic transmissions), etc.

But it appears the future is that these systems will be "active" at every engine start unless you manually turn it off every time. I know BMW wouldn't do it that way if they had a choice. Government regulations usually win, though.

Reciprocal

I agree with that ugly sounding theory but I think it's prudent. Quad cams and 32 valves are nice but taller. I don't think the C7 is being retooled for that.