> Hybrids likely have more engineering around the start-stop cycles than full ICEs with start-stop bolted on to meet emissions requirements.

What evidence is there for this? The Prius was around for 12 years before Toyota brought their first production start-stop ICE to market, surely they (and other mfgs whose hybrids predate start-stop) didn't just throw away all of that knowledge to haphazardly "bolt on" a start-stop system. They didn't, which is why start-stop equipped card have things like low-friction coatings on their crankshaft bearings.

> The prius style dual motor/generator planetary gear arangment avoids concerns about starter motor longevity

Redesigned starter motors with improved longevity also avoid these concerns. In start-stop systems, the starter motor is a safety critical item and they are engineered to a much higher standard. As far as I can find, there's only one start-stop starter related recall in the US (Honda) and it wasn't even a mechanical issue.

> From my experience with a couple rental cars a year, on user experience, start-stop is all over the map from really annoying to noticable but unobtrusive ... I imagine how design challenges around lubrication are met is also all over the map.

I think this captures exactly why people fixate on these systems. They assume that because they can be janky to use (they often can be), that they must be jankily designed. I can't prove a negative, but I just haven't ever seen meaningful evidence that start-stop cars fail faster or fail in the ways critics suggest they should. Surely we would see some evidence of the extra spun bearings, sparkly oil, and premature starter replacements that this almost 20 year old tech has has wrought by now, right? The only evidence I've seen are slightly more expensive batteries needing to be replaced slightly more often.