View Single Post
Old 07-07-2008, 04:54 PM   #10 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
Join Date: May 2008
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 117

GMC Sonoma - '94 GMC Sonoma
90 day: 36.97 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by MazdaMatt View Post
No, I don't htink so. Correct me if i'm wrong as I am new here, but i believe that in P&G, the time taken the accelerate should be the same as the time taken to coast. A hard accel is just a huge fuel dump with little efficiency.
I understand this, but I thought a big part of the FE gain in P&G was the fact that the motor is running at its peak efficiency, with regard to power generated vs. fuel consumed, at a 2/3 to 3/4 throttle opening (pulse mode).

Slow accel and decel never operates the motor in its peak power/fuel efficiency range.

Having said all this, I do indeed accel and decel gradually and I know I get better mileage for it. I guess my main question is, how is it that P&G can be so FE effective since it goes so contrary to slow accel/decel ?

Put another way, why wouldn't it be best of all to use a 'slow accel then glide' since slow accel is better than hard accel?

Last edited by Gregte; 07-07-2008 at 05:06 PM..
  Reply With Quote