i used to work/race as a motorcycle technician and i saw numerous times scouring of the cylinder walls, fouled spark plugs, broken valves and rods from bump starting on a four stroke engine. the two stroke engines were better for bump starting because the oil is in the gas and it doesnt have to rely on an oil pump that uses suction from the cranking of the engine.

 

no it isnt. its just like driving your car from a stoplight.

 

And this personal experience of yours somehow outclasses hundreds if not tens of thousands of instances where vehicle owners gently popped the clutches on their vehicles and restarted them with no repercussions? I'm going to repeat what evidence do you have?

 

i have visual experience with seeing the inside of four stroke engines that have been bump started numerous times. its alright to do it a few times but not at every opportunity you get to do it. your engine will run without oil, but the damage it does to it is detrimental.

im not trying to pick a fight with anyone, i am just approaching this from a technical standpoint. these are valid issues that need to be addressed about this modification.

 

mmmmm, makes me wonder if there was harm done to the engine(s) you have seen from other processes(not bump starting). I personally have not seen evidence of the harm it can or can not do. I have relied on others experience(hopefully a good choice)

A video of P&G by me(it rhymed) this is crappy blackberry video sorry:

YouTube - P&G

YouTube - FAS


Oh, I like the FAS switch on the shift knob. The stock knob is huge so the switch doesn't get in the way.

 

I'm sorry if I seemed aggressive (forgot to take my ritalin). In most experiments there is a "control group" to see what would have happened had you done nothing. They're testing for the placebo effect. Anyway are you sure the damage you saw inside these engines was actually caused by roll starting? The damage might have been caused by multiple factors. I'm arguing that "roll starting" has occurred virtually since internal combustion engine vehicles with MTs have existed. Roll starting will obviously hurt the clutch but it will hurt it in a way clutches were made to absorb. IT'S WHAT CLUTCHES DO! By the way All the new cars I've ever owned were MTs and I've never had to replace a clutch yet. I have a saying about clutches "IN OR OUT" make up your mind. Choose your gear and be firm (not crazy fast) about your your choices.

To kelsodeez I'm sorry if I appeared as if I want to pick a fight, I don't! Roll starting has been happening since WAAY! before I was born and I'm 47. I'm just a skeptic to a fault perhaps.

 

I have to say I am loving my ghetto set up. The switch on the knob is ideal for me and no problems of accidentally hitting it, besides if I were to accidentally hit it the fuel pump doesn't instantly cut off, one must hold it in place for at least 0.5-1.5 seconds.

 

are people seeing real results from this?
I think this is a very interesting idea,
but if you are rolling down a hill with your foot off the accelerator, the engine already cuts the fuel, i understand that using this FAS switch will 'extend' the time interval that your are not using fuel, but does it really add up?

i wonder if its really worth all the starting and stopping of the engine,
engine starts are where most of engine wear occurs.

 

Let me clarify this little contraption. The FAS switch, for me, was created for convenience and to help get an accurate mpg. I do not expect to "truly" increase my mpg by a significant amount(I would call significant 3-5mpg increase). The switch is only good if you use FAS and/or P&G. The mentioned techniques must be applied appropriately to gain full advantage of them. The switch will ONLY eliminate the turning of the key from off to on, eliminate that time lag, eliminate the possibility of loosing power steering, AND eliminate the odometer down time when it CAN'T clock mileage since the car is off. So, my mpg should only increase since I am able to track the mileage better(not really increasing per say) and I have eliminated maybe 1-2 seconds of fuel usage(insignificant consumption).

-It works.
-Will it increase your mpg, NOT REALLY
-Is it for you..............only if you FAS and P&G.

The choice is yours......choose wisely.

 

It's called BUMP START

In the right gear just bump the clutch in and out very fast and not all the way released. Looking at the tach you'll see it start. When started match RPMS as normal and drive. I have done this 1000's of times and if you sat next to me you would not feel anything at all. It's takes some practice to do it well

Shawn, Why to you post over here. You clearly know what will happen from most of the kids that are on here
Eco on here is nothing more than a place for non-Eco Fit users that are totally clueless to bash those that have one as an economy car.

 

Oh,
gotcha,


i still think turning the engine on and off is not worth the wear, but i understand your quest for super high mileage.

 

I have hope that some one here may actually use this information for what it is intended for. They may be scared to lurk at cleanmpg or not know the truth.

 

the reverend is in tha haa

im curious what about bump start could be dangerous though?

kelsodeez, are you implying that pressures and/or frictions would be greater than during normal operation? the oil pump is surely turning.

 

I'm intrigued but I'm a very mild hypermiler and am reluctant to whip out the dremel. My fit's interior is absolutely perfect. I'm still pondering the lower left tray location for the switch. I "lurk" and even post at cleanmpg and ecomodder and have been following the FAS threads as well as the front air dam block thread. I'm "in" to getting MPGs but not as "in" as you are. I appreciate the effort you're putting forth. Thank You!

 

I am with you there as far as the interior is concerned. I would not have hacked up the shift knob if I didn't have a spare. I have not permanently altered anything else. I want this as stock as possible or in a state such that stock can be easily be regained. I am still not sure about the WAI, but I will see in a few tanks.

 

Are you referring to the plexiglas (I think) blocks on the lower end of the fit's front air dam? That interests me but I'm worried about long term life of the engine. I'm interested in seeing your results.

 

Um, no.
Your hopes are well founded. I have limited time, so I'm reluctant to join YAIF (Yet Another Internet Forum) when I can find excellent information specific to my Fit on this one. What works for one car may not work for another. (For example, I switched from 87 to 91 octane in my Saturn L300, also a 10:1 compression engine. 10%+ better mileage for 6-7% increase in price, with no change in any other driving habits. That doesn't work for all cars.) I'm more interested in finding model-specific information than trying to infer it from people talking about many different vehicles.

Paul, I recognize and respect that the haters you have encountered here have soured your attitude, but please don't generalize and prejudge us *all* based on that.

--Barry

 

No, the WAI is a Warm Air Intake or a short ram intake:
This will be my first tank with all my new hopefully improvements. After this tank I plan on installing the stock air box to see if I can achieve the same mpg and then I will go back to the WAI to compare again. After the that tank then I will hopefully decide which is better.

 

Sorry Present company is accepted.

 

So how do you wire up an gas switch do I need a special switch or is it all a diy setup?