Stan H
Well-Known Member
Less gas burned is less emissions emitted . But with 2 catalytic converters how can it be emanating anythingNot that I’m in favor of the reasoning but isn’t the jive behind the ESS to lower emissions?
Sponsored
Less gas burned is less emissions emitted . But with 2 catalytic converters how can it be emanating anythingNot that I’m in favor of the reasoning but isn’t the jive behind the ESS to lower emissions?
Simply quantifies a ratio of those in a certain sector who have an opinion about the subject.LOL - real scientific. A forum where people come to complain about systems. Yup, real accurate and scientific.
Probably the same as most regulatory-induced choices we have to make.ZERO yes responses to would you pay $500 for ESS/ASS as an option.
<edit>
Oops, missed the one yes.
All designed to get through the EPA certification process. All contribute to making the required numbers on the tests, but of the three, only stop/start actually gives any real world results. You can get a noticeable increase in mileage with ESS, maybe, just maybe, a small increase with cylinder deactivation, but skip/shift.. I have only had it hang up on me two or three times in the past 15 years, but it makes me hate it just for those few times. I can live with the ESS and MDS, but skip/shift is an immediate, must disable it thing.ESS, Cylinder deactivation, skip shift...etc. Solutions looking for a problem
It’s a simple poll. Why get so worked up about it?And it's like asking people in a hospital how they feel.
How about asking forum members if they like Jeeps.
It's going to be totally skewed.
Proves zip, totally meaningless. Why bother?
I'd tell you, but then they would ban me and censor me so you wouldn't be able to read it anyway.For the jeep jl/jt. Is it favorable or unfavorable?
It's like asking people in a hospital how they feel. In the real world the numbers will be much different.It’s a simple poll. Why get so worked up about it?