Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > DIY / How-to
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-05-2016, 07:58 AM   #51 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 3,306

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,253
Thanked 1,357 Times in 875 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf_Tm View Post
why do you have to go downhill in Neutral and not gear in?
Engine braking. Unless you want something to slow you down, get out of gear.

__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 02-05-2016, 08:17 AM   #52 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Parma - Italy
Posts: 29
Thanks: 5
Thanked 6 Times in 3 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Charlie View Post
Engine braking. Unless you want something to slow you down, get out of gear.

So are we talking about downhills you're going to do in Neutral and control the speed with brakes?
__________________
Wolf_Tm250 [Silat-Kali] - Parma (Italy)
Suzuki Gsx-R 600 naked
Toyota Rav4.1 Torsen: 240hp 3SGTE swap in progress
Toyota Celica Gt-Four ST205 Snowy White [2.34kg/hp - 600Nm@4950rpm]
EFI University Advanced Tuner
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2016, 08:43 AM   #53 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,495

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 23.93 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
90 day: 40.97 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,285
Thanked 1,426 Times in 905 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf_Tm View Post
So are we talking about downhills you're going to do in Neutral and control the speed with brakes?
If you need to use brakes, you might as well coast in gear to control speed, because you can slow down while using zero fuel by coasting in gear. However, any time you can coast, but don't need to use your brakes, you're better off coasting in neutral.

For a shallow hill, I'll coast in neutral down the other side.

For approaching a redlight or a steep hill, where I'll end up significantly over the speed limit, I'll use coasting in gear and take advantage of DFCO and engine braking.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2016, 08:47 AM   #54 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 3,306

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,253
Thanked 1,357 Times in 875 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf_Tm View Post
So are we talking about downhills you're going to do in Neutral and control the speed with brakes?
No,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Charlie View Post
Engine braking. Unless you want something to slow you down, get out of gear.
And if you do want something to slow you down, stay in gear to use the engine as a brake. The normal brakes are really your last pick.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2016, 09:01 AM   #55 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Parma - Italy
Posts: 29
Thanks: 5
Thanked 6 Times in 3 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecky View Post
If you need to use brakes, you might as well coast in gear to control speed, because you can slow down while using zero fuel by coasting in gear. However, any time you can coast, but don't need to use your brakes, you're better off coasting in neutral.

For a shallow hill, I'll coast in neutral down the other side.

For approaching a redlight or a steep hill, where I'll end up significantly over the speed limit, I'll use coasting in gear and take advantage of DFCO and engine braking.

Exactly what I was asking myself, why don't use a long enough gear a use the decel fuel cut.
Ok so you are talking about some very rare (here) situations of a loooong shallow hill.
Thanks
__________________
Wolf_Tm250 [Silat-Kali] - Parma (Italy)
Suzuki Gsx-R 600 naked
Toyota Rav4.1 Torsen: 240hp 3SGTE swap in progress
Toyota Celica Gt-Four ST205 Snowy White [2.34kg/hp - 600Nm@4950rpm]
EFI University Advanced Tuner
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2016, 09:33 AM   #56 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 3,306

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,253
Thanked 1,357 Times in 875 Posts
I live in New Hampshire. We've got a couple of mountains here, and engine braking gives me all I need.

But I don't need it on most downhills.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2016, 01:55 PM   #57 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: waterloo, Ontario
Posts: 22
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Charlie View Post
Engine braking. Unless you want something to slow you down, get out of gear.
Not only that, there is a very significant fuel savings and the name of this group is "eco modder"
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2016, 12:38 PM   #58 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: New Brunswick
Posts: 4

Loosey - '04 Chev Optra LS
90 day: 24.44 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
With the TPS showing "closed" the IAC valve is most responsible for high idling, not increased injector output. It would have to get very lean before the O2 sensor would tell the ECU add fuel. I notice other cars not returning to idle. Did anybody check fuel rate or injection while encountering that condition, because I still wonder what all the ECU does for outputs in that condition..?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2016, 01:31 PM   #59 (permalink)
Calibration Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 86

Subie - '00 Subaru Impreza STi JDM
90 day: 22.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 17 Times in 14 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaysittinback View Post
With the TPS showing "closed" the IAC valve is most responsible for high idling, not increased injector output. It would have to get very lean before the O2 sensor would tell the ECU add fuel. I notice other cars not returning to idle. Did anybody check fuel rate or injection while encountering that condition, because I still wonder what all the ECU does for outputs in that condition..?
The majority of new cars have electronic throttle control (ETC). This means there is no IACV so when the accelerator position sensor (APS) reads full off the throttle controls idle. Some cars control the throttle position based on the bottom 5% or so of APS travel. So if you hit decel fuel cut (DFCO) but are still on the pedal a bit it opens the throttle a bit more and reduces engine braking while using no fuel.

Modern PCMs are not perfect but manufacturers have done a _LOT_ to improve fuel economy in the last 5 years. Many of the ideas I see floating around here are based on incomplete understanding and ultimately result in significantly increased emissions.

As for the quoted post above, fuel follows torque. So if you are at high idle the ECU must request more torque to achieve the higher idle speed. More RPM also means more injections per minute. More fuel used. It will not go significantly lean before the closed loop control (O2 sensor) triggers addition of fuel. This is necessary as a lean mixture is going to put like 5-10x more pollution out the pipe.

The days of sluggish slow responding O2 control are gone in the late 1990's and they would never pass modern emissions standards.

-Michael

__________________

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to hackish For This Useful Post:
jaysittinback (02-19-2016)
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com