View Single Post
Old 11-30-2012, 08:09 AM   #88 (permalink)
The Dirty330 Modder
Gealii's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North East Ohio, USA
Posts: 642

CruzeRS - '15 Chevy Cruze LT RS
90 day: 41.29 mpg (US)
Thanks: 10
Thanked 67 Times in 59 Posts
Originally Posted by Rex Hooligan View Post
I've quit reading the last half of the posts, just too many. Little crusty here an there as well. I'm not going to answer the OP question but only provide my experiences.

I'm new here. I've been trying to save fuel for a few months now. I'm driving a Matrix 2.5 auto. There are 2 sections in my daily drive where I have been bumping it into neutral (given fav traf cond) to coast. These are gradual down hills about a mile+ long. There is no question in my mind that if I bring my car up to 60 and coast in neutral I will go at least double or more the coasting distance than if I left my car in gear. If I can coast for an extended period I will take it out of gear but if not I'll leave it in neutral. I can see from my scangage that my trip milage is better for this. No hard data, just anecdotal observations. If I coast in gear then the engine drags my roll distance way down and I need to accelerate again to bring it up to speed for the other half of the section. It seems to me that the fuel I need to bring my car up to speed again to start another in gear coast is more the the whole out of gear coasting would take just at idle. min of idle VS and acceleration from 40 to 65mph. I'm guessing the one min of idle but I'm open to comments and suggestions.
do you happen to be using your torque converter when accelerating?
If not that would be why your not seeing much of an improvement. i do pulse and glide in my grand am autotrans and if i dont use my TC to accelerate i do see negative results. i do 45-63mph pulse and glides. My favorites are DFCO and the fact that my tranny switches into N when coasting in gear.

"The only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing."
- Henry Ford
  Reply With Quote