View Single Post
Old 11-07-2014, 09:48 PM   #26 (permalink)
oldtamiyaphile
Master EcoModder
 
oldtamiyaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,510

UFI - '12 Fiat 500 Twinair
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 40.3 mpg (US)

Jeep - '05 Jeep Wrangler Renegade
90 day: 18.09 mpg (US)

R32 - '89 Nissan Skyline

STiG - '16 Renault Trafic 140dCi Energy
90 day: 30.12 mpg (US)

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
90 day: 50.25 mpg (US)

Premodded - '49 Ford Freighter
90 day: 13.48 mpg (US)

F-117 - '10 Proton Arena GLSi
Pickups
Mitsubishi
90 day: 37.82 mpg (US)

Ralica - '85 Toyota Celica ST
90 day: 25.23 mpg (US)

Sx4 - '07 Suzuki Sx4
90 day: 32.21 mpg (US)

F-117 (2) - '03 Citroen Xsara VTS
90 day: 30.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 325
Thanked 452 Times in 319 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlvs2run View Post
That's exactly what I do, except dfco uphills because there's not enough time to keep shifting, and steep downhills, and eonc on the flat and moderate downhills. I'm planning to use a kill switch and eofc my next trip and see what happens. I still compare dwl up hills sometimes and feel that p&dfco gives me better results, keeping in mind my civic has a relatively high rpm.
I have a feeling this is wrong. The reason P&G works is it maintains momentum, whereas DFCO doesn't. Keep in mind that OBD instrumentation is woefully inaccurate most of the time. When I first got my TDI which has virtually no engine braking (you can barely tell if it's in gear or neutral - simular effect to turning on the A/C while DFOC'ing a normal car), I tried P&G in DFCO for the first tanks, but P&G in neutral (EOnC) netted clearly better tank to tank results, even though SGII showed the opposite effect.
__________________







Last edited by oldtamiyaphile; 11-07-2014 at 11:08 PM..
  Reply With Quote