View Single Post
Old 03-20-2010, 02:14 PM   #13 (permalink)
5speed5
EcoModding Apprentice
 
5speed5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Los Alamos, NM
Posts: 134

TBSS - '08 Chevrolet Trailblazer SS 2WD
90 day: 19.36 mpg (US)

Wife's car - '09 Chevrolet Impala SS
90 day: 22.96 mpg (US)

Big Blue Hippo - '06 Chevrolet HHR 2LT
90 day: 45.99 mpg (US)
Thanks: 8
Thanked 20 Times in 11 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by vtec-e View Post
MisterJeeves,

You say you get better mpg (than DFCO) in neutral. That sounds right. You will coast further in neutral than DFCO. You, with a 2.3 litre, would experience savage engine braking while DFCO'ing. This loss of speed would have to be made up at some point with the resultant loss of mpg. Coasting would use fuel while doing so but there would be a net saving over DFCO.
There's a big exception to this, however, on long hills. If a hill is long enough so that you need to brake while coasting (to avoid going out of control...or to avoid a speeding ticket), it's better to stay in gear and let the engine brake (i.e. DFCO). I have this exact case on my commute home from work. I have to go down a long hill (about 1 mile of 6-8% grade) with lots of curves. I just stay in gear and let the engine brake and then near the bottom of the hill I shift to neutral (to gain some extra kinetic energy) and coast as far as possible. I end up getting about 1 mile of no fuel use and almost another mile of very low fuel use (coasting). Of course, I pay for it in the morning on the way up to work...
__________________
Daily driver:
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to 5speed5 For This Useful Post:
vtec-e (03-20-2010)