View Single Post
Old 04-23-2018, 04:15 PM   #16 (permalink)
redpoint5
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,467

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - CBR600 - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - Dodge/Cummins - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)

Model Y - '24 Tesla Y LR AWD
Thanks: 4,213
Thanked 4,391 Times in 3,365 Posts
There isn't any difference between EOC and DFCO in terms of fuel use. Both methods stop fuel from being injected into the engine. In EOC, the engine is stopped, so it's not turning anymore. In DFCO, the engine is still being turned because it's still engaged by the transmission, yet no fuel is being injected. This is why downshifting slows the car down. If it were injecting fuel then it would produce power rather than absorb it.

The advantage of EOC is that it doesn't bleed speed by turning the engine, so you can coast at a higher speed up until the point you have to slow down or stop. With DFCO, the vehicle slows down sooner because it's wasting energy turning the engine.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote