Why is my car so bad at coasting

[christofoo]

Originally Posted by jayliu1984

I have a short youtube clip showing how "hard" it is to turn my front wheel.

The car is jacked up one side and is in neutrual.

As you can see, the wheel is stiff, but I checked the brakes, they are not hot at all when I drove around.

And to the person above, yeah I like the short commutes, it only takes me 10 minutes to get to work. However, I still can't stop thinking how much money I would have saved if I have gotten a different car. I had no idea this accord uses this much fuel. The EPA rating is 21MPG city, and I am only getting 18.6, while being laughed at by my coworkers the way I drive (too granny).

I just like rule out any possible causes for bad fuel comsumption. If I can be SURE that this car is all good and this IS how much gas Honda Accord drinks, it helps me to make decision if I want to sell the car when the lease is up or keep it. There is nothing I would complaint about the car except the fuel comsuption.

...

Is this car old enough to have had any tranny work done on it, or has the tranny fluid been changed? At the risk of comparing apples to oranges (manual to auto), your symptoms really remind me of the overly thick gear oil I previously had in my old manual Corolla. I believe the viscosity of the fluid in the differential is critical to rolling resistance. I upgraded to Honda MTF and was cured. The problem was noticeable in cold weather (<40F), although the car coasted a lot easier after about 5-7 miles even in cold weather, presumably because the transmission oil warmed up. I'm no expert on ATF, but if the wrong fluid is in there... (Maybe someone can correct me if ATF is not in the differential, or if this is moot on an auto for some reason...)

Others have given you great advice as well:

• Grille blocking would be a definite win. (Parking under cover / Block heater too, if practical.)
• A gauge is worth the money, look at trip averages to hone your brisk acceleration and P&G and make sure braking isn't a problem.
• (I didn't notice whether this applies to you) key off, no idling at stop lights.

I think life is easier with even smaller cars with even smaller engines, but the Accord can do more. Cheers.

[christofoo]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

...

8 miles * 235 days = 1880 miles
1880 miles / 18.6 mpg (your mpg) = 101 gal
1880 miles / 21 mpg (EPA mpg) = 90 gal

...

My instincts (and browsing the ecomodder garage for Accords), make me think that 25-30mpg should be doable, even with the short commute, cold weather, and auto transmission, although it hinges critically on the amount of effort expended on eco-driving.

1880 miles / 25 mpg = 75 gal
26 gal * $3.7 = $96 saving per year

1880 miles / 30 mpg = 63 gal
38 gal * $3.7 = $141 saving per year

Either way, I do agree with redpoint that probably isn't enough money on the table to make or break your budget. There's probably a lot more money you could squeeze out of capital equipment (an older car). (As a rule of thumb I say a shorter commute always favors an older car unless you need it for something else; this is the economics of depreciation against maintenance.)

If you do start cycling (which I love!) do consider the effects of slick weather. Some folks will ride studded ice tires; I'm not one of them. But cold weather is fine by me, skiers have all the answers for that.

[jayliu1984]

Originally Posted by christofoo

My instincts (and browsing the ecomodder garage for Accords), make me think that 25-30mpg should be doable, even with the short commute, cold weather, and auto transmission, although it hinges critically on the amount of effort expended on eco-driving.

1880 miles / 25 mpg = 75 gal
26 gal * $3.7 = $96 saving per year

1880 miles / 30 mpg = 63 gal
38 gal * $3.7 = $141 saving per year

Either way, I do agree with redpoint that probably isn't enough money on the table to make or break your budget. There's probably a lot more money you could squeeze out of capital equipment (an older car). (As a rule of thumb I say a shorter commute always favors an older car unless you need it for something else; this is the economics of depreciation against maintenance.)

If you do start cycling (which I love!) do consider the effects of slick weather. Some folks will ride studded ice tires; I'm not one of them. But cold weather is fine by me, skiers have all the answers for that.

Guys guys, by no means I am really that desperate about saving some money. But why am I so concerned about this issue is that...

First of all, I want to find out if there IS a problem at all with the car. It has nothing to do with saving money, I just want a trouble free car.

Secondly, it's not so simple as 4 mile trip. Being in a family that has only 1 car, we do drive anywhere between 6k to 12k a year.

Thirdly, I like to keep the car until it dies (at least that's my plan), I am pretty sure the gas price will break $8/gallon in 5 years.

Fourthly, riding a bike is not an option because I drive my wife to work too. Yes, if I am just driving myself it would be a 3 mile trip LOL. But, I do take in consideration that we will change job some time down the road and it will likely be in 15-20km range.

I am sure most people here have the financial means to NOT hypermile, but I imagine many people are doing it for many other reasons. To me, since I drive AT, I want to occupy myself with Hypermilling techniques while drving so I don't get bored.

[wobombat]

Originally Posted by jayliu1984

Guys guys, by no means I am really that desperate about saving some money. But why am I so concerned about this issue is that...

First of all, I want to find out if there IS a problem at all with the car. It has nothing to do with saving money, I just want a trouble free car.

I am sure most people here have the financial means to NOT hypermile, but I imagine many people are doing it for many other reasons. To me, since I drive AT, I want to occupy myself with Hypermilling techniques while drving so I don't get bored.

Well if saving money is no object here, and you really want to find out if there is any problem with the car, then take it to a mechanic. Explain the situation and have them do one of those 100 point inspections or whatever it is, and end your worries of a faulty car there.

I absolutely agree with you. Hypermiling/Ecomodding is way more fun than sportsy driving. What's the challenge in that? But with hypermiling, what could possibly me more challenging? If you're going to end up driving for many hours a week, might as well kill two birds with one stone and make it your hobby too.

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

Of course the technique doesn't work as well with a conventional automatic transmission because you have torque converter losses, and you can't control RPM (and therefore load) as well as you can with a manual.

Low RPM/high load acceleration is half the reason why the "Pulse and Glide" technique returns astronomical fuel economy numbers with a manual transmission, when done right. Look that one up too.

Metro, are you implying that P&G doesn't work with automatic transmissions? I know I've tried it before in an auto and never managed to get better numbers than steady speed driving, but I never saw anything (until now) implying it is a manual game only. Of course, if you're doing P&G with EOC, then its manual only.

[Gealii]

Originally Posted by wobombat

Metro, are you implying that P&G doesn't work with automatic transmissions? I know I've tried it before in an auto and never managed to get better numbers than steady speed driving, but I never saw anything (until now) implying it is a manual game only. Of course, if you're doing P&G with EOC, then its manual only.

Granted P&G is better with a manual tranny it does work with auto trannys. i pulse using the torque converter then use DFCO to coast down (my car coasts the same in Drive as it does in Neutral) and repeat its good for anywhere from 3-6mpg over steady speed in my car, and now its muscle memory so i don't even think about it to do it

btw metro said it doesnt work as well and this is for multiple reasons

-when in a manual you can efficiently P&G anytime, while in an auto the TC doesnt like to lock up when the fluids are cold and DFCO doesn't like to kick in til everything is warm as well, where in a manual you can EOC.

-manuals dont jump in rpms like autos. as metro said to make the technique efficient you need low rpm/high load. which can be achieved in an auto with the TC functioning