Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094588_will-ultracapacitors-save-start-stop-systems-from-consumer-wrath

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 3:55:10 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094588_will-ultracapacitors-save-start-stop-systems-from-consumer-wrath

My Audi A6 has the start-stop system on it. Fortunately, it also has a button that allows you to disable it, which I did. The article points out one reason, additional wear and tear on the battery. The second reason that they didn't point out is the wear on the starter and engine itself. With the type of driving I do the fuel savings would be insignificant anyway, and would never come close to paying for the added maintenance.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 8:04 AM, wrote:

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 3:55:10 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094588_will-ultracapacitors-save-start-stop-systems-from-consumer-wrath

My Audi A6 has the start-stop system on it. Fortunately, it also has a button that allows you to disable it, which I did. The article points out one reason, additional wear and tear on the battery. The second reason that they didn't point out is the wear on the starter and engine itself. With the type of driving I do the fuel savings would be insignificant anyway, and would never come close to paying for the added maintenance.



Yup. Unfortunately the automakers are being forced to employ any and
all means to meet increasing federal fuel economy requirements.
The article points out that very soon half or more cars sold in the USA
will be equipped with start-stop systems.

It's crazy in a way. Sometimes the efforts to meet required standards
simply produce new, more serious environmental problems like the safe
disposal of dangerous chemicals and, in this case, environmentally
unfriendly batteries that wear out faster than normal.

CFL light bulbs contain mercury. How many people actually follow the
disposal instructions when they go bad? How many people follow the
environmental hazard precautions when they dispose of lithium/ion
batteries? Not many, I'll bet.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 3:55 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094588_will-ultracapacitors-save-start-stop-systems-from-consumer-wrath

My neighbor had her Z4 stop dead on I75 in the middle of Atlanta. She
was terrified. This is the 4th BMW she has gotten rid of, in the past
year and a half, for various reasons. Technology seems to have ruined
the brand.

--
My sig file appears to be empty.
Howd dat happen?

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 8:04 AM, wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 3:55:10 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094588_will-ultracapacitors-save-start-stop-systems-from-consumer-wrath

My Audi A6 has the start-stop system on it. Fortunately, it also has a button that allows you to disable it, which I did. The article points out one reason, additional wear and tear on the battery. The second reason that they didn't point out is the wear on the starter and engine itself. With the type of driving I do the fuel savings would be insignificant anyway, and would never come close to paying for the added maintenance.


Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 9:21:33 AM UTC-5, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 1/17/2015 3:55 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094588_will-ultracapacitors-save-start-stop-systems-from-consumer-wrath

My neighbor had her Z4 stop dead on I75 in the middle of Atlanta. She
was terrified. This is the 4th BMW she has gotten rid of, in the past
year and a half, for various reasons. Technology seems to have ruined
the brand.

--
My sig file appears to be empty.
Howd dat happen?

Respectfully submitted by Justan

BMW's are great cars, but are notoriously unreliable compared to most other cars.

I have a 5 year, 100k mile warranty on the Audi. I probably won't keep it past that period. It's a great car, but extremely complex. I've seen one at the dealer with the dash torn apart. Multiple controllers, tons of wiring, and even fiber optic connections. The day of the shade tree mechanic is long gone.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.

He's probably thinking of the attempts to cut fuel and ignition to 2 or
more cylinders once a car had reached cruising speed. GM had a system
that cut an 8 cylinder back to 6 or 4 in the 1980's. Didn't really
work out very well.

Some modern engines have a system whereby if the engine starts to
overheat, a couple of cylinders will shut down and just pump air, adding
additional cooling. The engine in my truck is supposed to do that but
it has never had a reason to.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 9:21 AM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 1/17/2015 3:55 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094588_will-ultracapacitors-save-start-stop-systems-from-consumer-wrath


My neighbor had her Z4 stop dead on I75 in the middle of Atlanta. She
was terrified. This is the 4th BMW she has gotten rid of, in the past
year and a half, for various reasons. Technology seems to have ruined
the brand.



I ditched the two BMW M5's for the same reason. German engineering is
great except for the software. Both M5's had issues with the "red cog
of death" whereby nothing works. Can't shift, can't do anything other
than call a flatbed and haul it back to the dealership for re-programming.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.


We weren't sure how it was gonna' work, that's why we are not rich :) I
am just telling you where the industry was back then in the beginning of
computer controlled cars...

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 10:07 AM, wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 9:21:33 AM UTC-5, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 1/17/2015 3:55 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094588_will-ultracapacitors-save-start-stop-systems-from-consumer-wrath

My neighbor had her Z4 stop dead on I75 in the middle of Atlanta. She
was terrified. This is the 4th BMW she has gotten rid of, in the past
year and a half, for various reasons. Technology seems to have ruined
the brand.

--
My sig file appears to be empty.
Howd dat happen?

Respectfully submitted by Justan

BMW's are great cars, but are notoriously unreliable compared to most other cars.

I have a 5 year, 100k mile warranty on the Audi. I probably won't keep it past that period. It's a great car, but extremely complex. I've seen one at the dealer with the dash torn apart. Multiple controllers, tons of wiring, and even fiber optic connections. The day of the shade tree mechanic is long gone.



When we were in Florida for the winters my wife had a BMW X5. It was
less than a year old when the A/C stopped working properly. I figured
it had a leak in the system and just needed to be fixed and recharged,
but n-o-o-o-o-o-o. It was something to do with the control system that
mixes hot and cold air that was screwed up. They had to completely
disassemble the dash to get to whatever was bad.

Sometimes things are made too complicated.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.

Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?

He's probably thinking of the attempts to cut fuel and ignition to 2 or
more cylinders once a car had reached cruising speed. GM had a system
that cut an 8 cylinder back to 6 or 4 in the 1980's. Didn't really
work out very well.

Some modern engines have a system whereby if the engine starts to
overheat, a couple of cylinders will shut down and just pump air, adding
additional cooling. The engine in my truck is supposed to do that but
it has never had a reason to.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

.... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 8:04:11 AM UTC-5, wrote:

My Audi A6 has the start-stop system on it.

Someone else has developed krauses lying ability.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

I assume everybody but you, harry, and don...

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 2:35 PM, KC wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next
cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

I assume everybody but you, harry, and don...
Me too

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

KC wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

I assume everybody but you, harry, and don...

The Flux Capacitor on my car serves my needs and I don't have to insult
other posters here.
--
Sent from my iPhone 6+

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 2:46 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
KC wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

I assume everybody but you, harry, and don...

The Flux Capacitor on my car serves my needs and I don't have to insult
other posters here.

I suppose Doctor Emmett Brown told you all about flux capacitors when
you dined with him at Micky Dee's

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 2:42 PM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:35 PM, KC wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now
there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next
cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the
"next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at
stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed
again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

I assume everybody but you, harry, and don...
Me too


Not at all unexpected... guess that's what happens when you trim off the
meat of the conversation. Oh well...

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

In article ,
says...

On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

He said no starter motor. I had no trouble conceptualizing it. And
googling confirms somebody was working on it. No idea if it's viable.
http://www.etas.com/data/RealTimes.....6_01_34_en.pdf

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 3:20 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

He said no starter motor. I had no trouble conceptualizing it. And
googling confirms somebody was working on it. No idea if it's viable.
http://www.etas.com/data/RealTimes.....6_01_34_en.pdf


Some here are more interested in creating entertainment than discussion...

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

In article ,
says...


Here's a link that works.

http://tinyurl.com/njrwkpk

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 12:39:11 PM UTC-8, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...


Here's a link that works.

http://tinyurl.com/njrwkpk


Exactly. In the early 90's there were several experimental Buick's running around for testing. They neither had a starter or alternator on them. The idea of no starter was that the crank position sensor would know which piston had just gone over TDC and when you hit the key would inject bit of fuel and spark turning the engine over then typical ignition would occur.

Now how they got away from a standard belt driven alternator was they took lessons off of Ford at the turn of the last century, (or a common Briggs engine) and they mounted magnets on the transmissions torque converter which swung by a high energy rectifier, regulator pac. putting out approx 140 amp at 15 volts.

From what I understand, or don't was that it was a fairly fool proof idea but was too costly to promote, and there was a concern of safety of the engine running in high or flood waters causing high ac voltage to turn loose on the occupants so it was tabled.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 11:11:34 AM UTC-8, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

Scott was right Richard. BOA posted a link that I was aware of several years ago.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 5:04:11 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 3:55:10 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094588_will-ultracapacitors-save-start-stop-systems-from-consumer-wrath

My Audi A6 has the start-stop system on it. Fortunately, it also has a button that allows you to disable it, which I did. The article points out one reason, additional wear and tear on the battery. The second reason that they didn't point out is the wear on the starter and engine itself. With the type of driving I do the fuel savings would be insignificant anyway, and would never come close to paying for the added maintenance.
................

Interesting it's on the Audi. Volkswagen was toying with the idea back in the early 70's when they were going over to liquid cooled engine. There idea was to cut the ignition at a full stop, You put the car (manual) into neutral then press the accelerator and it would crank and start the motor. Back into gear you went until the next stop.

Thank goodness it never went through then.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 4:52 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 12:39:11 PM UTC-8, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...


Here's a link that works.

http://tinyurl.com/njrwkpk


Exactly. In the early 90's there were several experimental Buick's running around for testing. They neither had a starter or alternator on them. The idea of no starter was that the crank position sensor would know which piston had just gone over TDC and when you hit the key would inject bit of fuel and spark turning the engine over then typical ignition would occur.

Now how they got away from a standard belt driven alternator was they took lessons off of Ford at the turn of the last century, (or a common Briggs engine) and they mounted magnets on the transmissions torque converter which swung by a high energy rectifier, regulator pac. putting out approx 140 amp at 15 volts.

From what I understand, or don't was that it was a fairly fool proof idea but was too costly to promote, and there was a concern of safety of the engine running in high or flood waters causing high ac voltage to turn loose on the occupants so it was tabled.


The Mercruiser 3.7L engine was such an animal.

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 4:52 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 12:39:11 PM UTC-8, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...


Here's a link that works.

http://tinyurl.com/njrwkpk


Exactly. In the early 90's there were several experimental Buick's running around for testing. They neither had a starter or alternator on them. The idea of no starter was that the crank position sensor would know which piston had just gone over TDC and when you hit the key would inject bit of fuel and spark turning the engine over then typical ignition would occur.

Now how they got away from a standard belt driven alternator was they took lessons off of Ford at the turn of the last century, (or a common Briggs engine) and they mounted magnets on the transmissions torque converter which swung by a high energy rectifier, regulator pac. putting out approx 140 amp at 15 volts.

From what I understand, or don't was that it was a fairly fool proof idea but was too costly to promote, and there was a concern of safety of the engine running in high or flood waters causing high ac voltage to turn loose on the occupants so it was tabled.


Yup... :)

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 5:02:45 PM UTC-5, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 5:04:11 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 3:55:10 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094588_will-ultracapacitors-save-start-stop-systems-from-consumer-wrath

My Audi A6 has the start-stop system on it. Fortunately, it also has a button that allows you to disable it, which I did. The article points out one reason, additional wear and tear on the battery. The second reason that they didn't point out is the wear on the starter and engine itself. With the type of driving I do the fuel savings would be insignificant anyway, and would never come close to paying for the added maintenance.
...............

Interesting it's on the Audi. Volkswagen was toying with the idea back in the early 70's when they were going over to liquid cooled engine. There idea was to cut the ignition at a full stop, You put the car (manual) into neutral then press the accelerator and it would crank and start the motor. Back into gear you went until the next stop.

Thank goodness it never went through then.

Audi is VW. It's come back, but with a bit more finesse.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 4:55:55 PM UTC-5, Tim wrote:

Scott was right Richard. BOA posted a link that I was aware of several years ago.

But Richard, the ever arrogant asswipe, wont appologise.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 3:20 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

He said no starter motor. I had no trouble conceptualizing it. And
googling confirms somebody was working on it. No idea if it's viable.
http://www.etas.com/data/RealTimes.....6_01_34_en.pdf


In Jr. High School you learn that successful written communications
requires the author to express his/her thoughts in a clear
manner, understandable to the intended reader. I sometimes have
difficulty parsing some of Scott's posts. They often seem to be a
partial expression of some random, disconnected thoughts rolling around
in his head.

Maybe it's me.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 4:55 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 11:11:34 AM UTC-8, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

Scott was right Richard. BOA posted a link that I was aware of several years ago.



My apologies to Scott then. I couldn't figure out what he was talking
about.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 4:32:20 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 13:52:47 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 12:39:11 PM UTC-8, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...


Here's a link that works.

http://tinyurl.com/njrwkpk


Exactly. In the early 90's there were several experimental Buick's running around for testing. They neither had a starter or alternator on them. The idea of no starter was that the crank position sensor would know which piston had just gone over TDC and when you hit the key would inject bit of fuel and spark turning the engine over then typical ignition would occur.

You still need compression.

Now how they got away from a standard belt driven alternator was they took lessons off of Ford at the turn of the last century, (or a common Briggs engine) and they mounted magnets on the transmissions torque converter which swung by a high energy rectifier, regulator pac. putting out approx 140 amp at 15 volts.

We outboard folks are familiar with that. It is how outboard charging
systems generally work.

From what I understand, or don't was that it was a fairly fool proof idea but was too costly to promote, and there was a concern of safety of the engine running in high or flood waters causing high ac voltage to turn loose on the occupants so it was tabled.

Any more than a regular alternator?

Greg I believe so. There was a fear of leaks in the high energy coil. The thing was to put out some kind of extremely high AC in which the rectifier would DC it. I really think being designed properly it would have been alright but they didn't ask my opinion.

But removing the standard alternator, would have freed up more space and been one less wheel to turn which would also increase fuel efficiency for the application..

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 14:39:13 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


Here's a link that works.

http://tinyurl.com/njrwkpk

This is far more complex than a starter motor with little added value.

That's irrelevant. You asked how it could be done. That's one way.
The OHC and fuel injection were once thought of as "too complex."
There are many "improvements" to modern cars that are of questionable
value. I don't need power seats or windows, for instance.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 8:30 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 14:39:13 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


Here's a link that works.

http://tinyurl.com/njrwkpk

This is far more complex than a starter motor with little added value.

That's irrelevant. You asked how it could be done. That's one way.
The OHC and fuel injection were once thought of as "too complex."
There are many "improvements" to modern cars that are of questionable
value. I don't need power seats or windows, for instance.



In the case of power windows, they are reported to be cheaper for the
manufacturer to use than the old fashioned crank type.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 7:09 PM, wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 4:55:55 PM UTC-5, Tim wrote:

Scott was right Richard. BOA posted a link that I was aware of several years ago.

But Richard, the ever arrogant asswipe, wont appologise.


It's not his fault.. I think he looks at my posts, like a bull looks at
a matador... :) When you let your emotion cloud your understanding...
um, forget it :)

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 9:37 PM, KC wrote:
On 1/17/2015 7:09 PM, wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 4:55:55 PM UTC-5, Tim wrote:

Scott was right Richard. BOA posted a link that I was aware of
several years ago.

But Richard, the ever arrogant asswipe, wont appologise.


It's not his fault.. I think he looks at my posts, like a bull looks at
a matador... :) When you let your emotion cloud your understanding...
um, forget it :)


Thanks. That *was* funny.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On 1/17/2015 7:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 13:42:37 -0500, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.


We weren't sure how it was gonna' work, that's why we are not rich :) I
am just telling you where the industry was back then in the beginning of
computer controlled cars..

If you could get a properly mixed and compressed charge in a cylinder
or two, it would work. Some old airplanes (maybe even newer ones) used
to use a shotgun shell like charge to kick them over..


Maybe only one cylinder is fitted with a seperate injector and when the
engine stops a small electric motor turns it to that cylinder just
slightly past TDC. Inject pressurized mix, and fire it?

I think the biggest problem though with that might be building that
pressure in the cylinder without compressing it with the cylinder itself.

Then I think of the problem of getting enough out of that one boom to
move the next cylinder compressed when you consider the opposing force
of the fly wheel, etc...

So then I think of our Suzuki 250 which has a centrifugal compression
release. There is a part in the exhaust cam that holds the exhaust port
open till the rpms come up enough to close it off. That makes it so a
105 pound girl can consistently start a 250 cc, one cylinder, 4 stroke.

Yeah, I am sure all of these have been considered but all in all,
personally I think the old starter, solenoid, alternator and battery do
a great job and are a lot simpler to work on that any of the other
setups we may be considering here....

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 4:32:20 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 13:52:47 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 12:39:11 PM UTC-8, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...


Here's a link that works.

http://tinyurl.com/njrwkpk


Exactly. In the early 90's there were several experimental Buick's running around for testing. They neither had a starter or alternator on them. The idea of no starter was that the crank position sensor would know which piston had just gone over TDC and when you hit the key would inject bit of fuel and spark turning the engine over then typical ignition would occur.

You still need compression.


true, but not really much. even with a low compression it was thought that there would be enough 'blow' to roll the engine over to catch another - like you were saying about the shotgun shell rolling over a large radial .

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 1/17/2015 8:30 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 14:39:13 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


Here's a link that works.

http://tinyurl.com/njrwkpk

This is far more complex than a starter motor with little added value.

That's irrelevant. You asked how it could be done. That's one way.
The OHC and fuel injection were once thought of as "too complex."
There are many "improvements" to modern cars that are of questionable
value. I don't need power seats or windows, for instance.



In the case of power windows, they are reported to be cheaper for the
manufacturer to use than the old fashioned crank type.

I like power windows. So you can open the other sides windows easily. 2
years ago, talking to a,game warden in Utah at Flaming Gorge, they had
crank windows. Seemed unsafe for a LEO to not be able to roll down the
passenger side window in their pickup.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

Tim wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 11:11:34 AM UTC-8, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

Scott was right Richard. BOA posted a link that I was aware of several years ago.

But like the Saturn Hybrid. The generator was also a driving motor from
what I remember. May have been able to be used as a starter.

Speaking of Ultracapacitors ....
 

On Sunday, January 18, 2015 at 7:18:33 PM UTC-8, Califbill wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 11:11:34 AM UTC-8, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 2:01 PM, KC wrote:

On 1/17/2015 1:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2015 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 10:06:02 -0500, KC wrote:

Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work...

How would that work? To start an engine you need fuel, air, spark and
compression. If the car had sat more than a minute, there would be no
compression and most injected engines cut the fuel off before the
engine stops spinning these days to mitigate "making oil" so the "next
cylinder" would be dry.



I don't think Scott understands what "start-stop" is.



Is there a particular dictionary definition, or do I have to join a
secret club to know? I think of start stop as the engine cutting at stop
signs or even down hills.. then starting back up when it's needed again.
Am I close professor?


When you write ....

"Back in the 80's when we were discussing this we assumed by now there
would be no starters... The computer would just fire the next cylinder
in line is how we thought it would work... "

... who knows what the hell you are talking about?

Scott was right Richard. BOA posted a link that I was aware of several years ago.

But like the Saturn Hybrid. The generator was also a driving motor from
what I remember. May have been able to be used as a starter.

Bill, I don't think the Toyota Prius has a starter. The generator back flushes to start the engine.

But these Buicks I mentioned weren't hybrids. just a conventional looking car with a single lead//acid battery. I imagine that if you had trouble on the road, the HQ boys were all over it.