Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog 44
I would suggest you get a scangauge to make it clearer in your daily driving.
One of your misconceptions is that driving slower (and therefore longer) going uphill wastes more fuel than keeping a constant and faster speed. Such is not the case. You are in fact easing the throttle to gain more mpg as you use momentum to crest the hill.
|
I don't have that misconception. I agree that easing the throttle will gain more MPG. It will under constant speed method too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog 44
For extended hill climbs you do want to maintain a minimum mph speed so you keep your engine and transmission in an efficient zone. For example, 40mph would be good. A constant 5mph going up a long hill is terrible! For smaller hills you can bleed more speed.
|
On any highway with traffic 40 MPH would be obnoxious. In my Sube that would be lugging. In my rav4 w AT it would shift down to 3rd
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog 44
Your second misconception is that the increased aerodynamic resistance going downhill is ENOUGH to NEGATE the benefits of the increased speed and kinetic energy. That is not the case until you get past 75-80mph depending on how aerodynamic your car is. Cresting a hill at 40mph, then reasonably accelerating downhill to 65mph doesn't increase aerodynamic resistance enough to be unbeneficial.
|
I fail to see your point. Energy is lost due to aero drag proportional to velocity squared. It makes more sense to coast and let gravity do it's thing.