2ndNewFordGuy

Turns out, there was a valid technical reason why, the JBL GTO 939's showed to my ears no noticeable bump up from the Pioneer TS-0690r's they replaced. The 3ohm GTO's SHOULD have sounded "MORE" than the 4 ohm Pioneers. But they didn't! BECAUSE: Freq response. The GTO's freq response is 45-21k HZ 45hz on the low side is "meh", just ok for bass. Poor for Sub woofer substitute . The TS-0690's on the other hand, must have been considerably PRICIER in their day, freq response, 25-32k Hz. 25 is super low for a "full-range" 3X. 25hz IS actually Sub-woofer territory. SO despite the OHM difference, (25% better in favor of the GTO's) because of the lower, much lower, frequency response the Pioneer's were utilizing more of the SUB-WOOFER-only freqs being sent to them. Which would, could, explain if the 3 ohm JBL's didn't seem better, or "more". SO REMINDER, 2 ohm speakers is what Ford had in there (rear deck) so if you're replacing them with 6X9 full-range's, really seek 2ohm. and really seek 35hz as a minimum, ideally lower, for the low end. OR 2 ohm actual sub-woofers, but they won't be 6X9's. They'll be 6.5" round and fitting them in might be tricky. - - - - and that's the bottom line - - - EOM

more mea-culpa. Turns out 6" round sub woofers don't exist. 6.5" is the smallest. But if the cut-out diameter is under six inch they should fit. I found, CT Sounds TROPO-6.5-D2 They're 2 OR 1ohm, which should come in handy if you're sticking with the factory amp. Cut-out diameter 5.83", topside diameter, 6.9' which means screw-holes might actually line up

If this is in your 2016 SE safe to assume it's in my 2017 SE sooo, more crow for me, there IS a separate sub-woofer amp, such as it is... Looking closely at the pic what caught my eye was the vacant row of speaker wire outputs under the ones in use, and, if they're not "vacant" inside the plug, what are they outputting? (frequency-wise/ohm-wise) I know those are the speaker-outs because the colors match the blue&white / Red&White, on the deck speakers.

Thanks. I'll see if I can re-create that. I've also noticed that if when you stop, you instantly, lift and then re-press the break, like a 'double-tap', it stays running. usually...

My obsessively well-maintained Fusion has no noticeable vibrations particularly at low idle. There is a very distinctive, shudder and sound when I tap the start button. It is ALMOST, but not quite identical to the sound and vibration I feel when the auto-start re-starts the car. The auto start is, by comparison, slightly muted and about a half second shorter. For the record, I've decided I'm going to stop looking for ways to kill it. I'll tap the button as often as I think of it but otherwise I can live with it. As they say in the military, not a hill to die on.

EXCELLENT post. and you even noted your source. ? You have for me successfully eliminated the starter from the chain of components potentially experiencing adverse-excess wear as a by-product of auto-stop-start. Good info. Very informative. Thank You

yes but at this point I'm talking only about stops of 2 seconds or less. If the start is generating enough energy that I can FEEL it, there's no way that's not more wear than idling for 1 second or even 2. respectfully.

Thanks man. Your answer is of reasonable comfort. I really just needed to know it wasn't a no-brainer. The mech also said Ford had issued a re-engineered part due to this problem, so it, supposedly then was a potential re-call, but the "frequency #" of Fusions experiencing the problem wasn't high enough, so, no free-fix for me. I definitely have my hard-copy manual. every scrap that came in that glove box is still there. Only the window sticker was relocated. So I will make sure I locate that emrg shift release button. Thanks again

Wasn't sure where to put this so apologies if this ain't it. ABOUT a year ago I came out of my local supermarket and started the car and then discovered the car was stuck in park. Nothing I did from behind the wheel helped. I called a guy, he brought a flat-bed and a rent-a-wreck for me. long story sort, he replaced (he said) "the shifter" itself, (right below the console shift-dial) (I assumed "below" since I could tell by looking at it the part I grab with my hand it wasn't new) and, he said, flashed the computer. about $900 in total. Is it true that simply pulling a battery cable waiting 30 seconds and putting it back on would have cleared this lock? did I get hosed?

better answer. If you're really worried about MPG and/or emissions and/or the environment, get an EV. In less than 10 years the only IC cars available will be used and gas stations will be like finding a charging station is now. (ok, maybe 12-13 years.) I have NO doubt my next new car will be an EV.

My fuel economy, according to the computer, since replacing the battery, and start stop coming back on, is not better. DOWN by at least 1 mpg. BUT the battery got replaced just as the weather was turning. So it's been almost all "winter driving" which typically means a slight drop in MPG. That said, before, 18 month avg, 28.5-29.0, so far, after, about 26-27mpg. I watch my tire pressure like a hawk and maintain the same feather-foot driving habit very consistently.

Mine stopped working to. I was glad at the time to see it go. Turned out it stops working like that when your battery falls below a certain level. It's really a nice canary in the coal mine. Mine started fine and seemed otherwise fine, for almost 2 years with stop start not working. The second warning is when the dash displays "shutting down to preserve batter life". Replaced the battery and Stop Start popped right back on.

I put up with it for 4 years before looking in to disabling it. The conclusion I've come to is I don't want to kill it. What I would pay $89 for is an "eliminator" thing that rather than kill it outright, simply added 3 or 4 second (ish) delay, as 90%+ of the stops are for less than that, that would eliminate 90% of the extra engine wear associated with starting, while at the same time KEEPING the more welcome-auto-shutdown stops of of more than 3-4 seconds. "All of the components are upgraded to handle the extra wear" that may be true, to a degree, but, exactly which components, exactly how, to what degree of effectiveness, not clear. What's NOT unclear, is the "extra wear" part.

Thanks! Good to know. You'll notice I DID say "supposed experts" in my original post. So I'm never locked in on whatever I want to believe or heard from "Bobs-not-my-uncle-on-FB". I DO still wonder though, why the decision was made to stop the engine after (what seems like) one second or less on the brake, rather than make it like a 3 or 4 second delay.? Of course the gold standard would have been to make it configurable in the settings with options for 2, 5 or 7 seconds...any 2 choices greater than 0.7 seconds Speaking of settings, why would there be a setting to "uncheck the box" and turn it off, if this isn't going to do anything different than tapping the switch on the console? Both reset-on when you start the car. To Be Clear I'm not challenging your numbers on the gas/idle-start/gulp. But, may I ask, how you know, ""0.6 seconds" ? thanks!

OK so I have a basic question now, about Stop-Start. I don't know if this warrants new thread or not. I have heard from more than one place, different supposed "experts" that when you start a car, any car, manually or auto-start, there's a "gulp" of gas, AND that gulp, depending on the car-age/technology all variables considered, that "gulp" of gas, is equivalent to, is the same amount of gas the engine needs to IDLE for, (depending the car), anywhere from, 3 to 10 minutes. SO IF true, then, let's shave another minute off that and say the 1.5L-EB is, conservatively, only "gulping" enough gas to idle for 2 minutes. That being the case, wouldn't it be safe to assume, that anytime, every time, stop-start stops the car for less than, (lets peal another minute off), and say, less than ONE minute, (which is 99% of the auto stops), it should actually be COSTING you gas. OFFICIALLY the line is it's for "FUEL-efficiency, and emissions". I call BS on the former and say this is 100% about the latter. Reducing emissions in URBAN, city stop and go driving. SO if this is really the case, whether or not, this feature is worth the extra wear and tear on your STARTER, and your EXPENSIVE "AGM" battery, on top of NOT saving you any gas.... becomes seriously debatable IMHO. Discuss.