[i90east]

I've read a number of posts on here over the years in my efforts to learn the best possible way to drive my stick-shift 2010 Hyundai Accent. I figured out a good routine for suburban driving without having any experience on the highway. Lately circumstances have changed and now I'm on the highway a lot. So I had to relearn how to get optimal MPG.

I did pulse & glides throughout a tank, pulses to 70 MPH (a little more when on a hill to reach the top) coasting down to 55 repeatedly on the highway and pulses to whatever I could get up to in town in order to coast down to 0-20 before applying brakes for lights or traffic. This tank got 36 MPG overall.

On the next tank I removed the pulses and most of the glides except for significant downhills and when slowing for lights and traffic. Instead I stayed in 5th gear, keeping my throttle % at a point that maintained 55-65 MPH on the highway and the speed limit in town. This tank got 43 MPG overall, a very significant improvement.

On the first tank I was getting 20 MPG during highway pulses and 250 MPG on highway coasts but the pulses would take a while due to my car's weak engine. It had me wondering if pulse & glide is better suited for cars with more powerful engines that could go from 55 to 70 MPH more quickly. With the throttle position held steady on the highway holding 55-65 MPH the MPG reads 39-42.

I've gotten the impression from what I've read on here that pulse & glide is always better than staying in gear at a steady speed but I don't seem to be reaping the benefits of that somehow. I know engine-off coasting is a bit more effective than leaving the engine on but I'm concerned about the extra wear and tear. Perhaps staying in gear is better in some cases.