Quote:
Originally Posted by Xist
You describe having DFCO while in neutral, which does not sound possible. I am not doubting you regarding the 0.6 GPH in idle, but my Forester only uses 0.25.
It really depends on what you are doing. If you are a light-timing genius, you should never need to coast in-gear or use your brakes, while DCFO uses no gas and neutral uses a little, how much do you use accelerating back up to speed?
If you have a stop sign, would you prefer to drive at your city mileage and then DFCO, or coast in neutral for a much longer distance? That is, unless you have people behind you. I always do, all hours of day and night.
If you have a very gradual hill and you can roughly maintain your speed in neutral, that makes more sense than keeping it in drive and getting 40-45 MPG, because you could get 91.67 at 55 MPH.
If you have a steeper hill, you need to stay in-gear for engine braking, and sometimes you need to downshift.
My ex-girlfriend complained that the transmission was rough shifting between neutral and drive and then she replaced her transmission mounts. She is my ex-girlfriend, I try to avoid her and definitely not to help her think through her problems anymore, but I did try to explain that some repairs are not worth the money, and how terrible an idea it is to pay for things when it puts your account in overdraft.
|
No, I never said I had DFCO while in Neutral. It's only in Drive.
My apologies, I meant to type .25 GPH, not .35 GPH...(I'm using a mobile phone to type so my fingers keep missing the correct buttons.)
Whether I use Neutral or Drive to slow down to stop, I will still have to get back up to speed, so I am at a slight loss either way.
I guess I will need to try one tank on neutral coasting alone and another on DFCO. I just really don't want to risk having to replace my transmission for $3,000+...