Engine Braking & Neutral Coasting: Gas Mileage Tested

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

randay

Lifer
May 30, 2006
11,018
216
106
Originally posted by: VIAN
I've read Neutral Coasting is bad, illegal, unsafe... and that it doesn't save you gas. I agree that it is unsafe, but does it really not save any gas? I've also read that Engine Braking doesn't have an effect on gas mileage. I'll be testing both theories to try and give people some concrete data.

The car I used for the tests is my 2003 Toyota Corolla S. The gas mileage was attained by dividing the mileage at the point the gas light comes on by ten gallons. Whenever I fill up the car when the light comes on, I only fill up about ten. It's not a perfect system, but the results should be within the ballpark. As far as driving conditions go: I've been driving through many different conditions every day before these test and I always used to get similar gas mileage.

My normal driving habits:

City Acceleration <= 3000 rpm
City Cruise <= 2000 rpm

Highway Acceleration <= 3000 rpm, sometimes, though, I go all the way to 6000 rpm for fun
Highway Cruise <= 3000 rpm

Engine braking <= 2000 rpm

Driving with these limits I get 28.5 mpg. This will be the reference gas mileage.


Neutral Coasting + low rpm acceleration driving habits:

City Acceleration <= 2000 rpm
City Cruise <= 2000 rpm

Highway Acceleration <= 3000 rpm
Highway Cruise <= 3000 rpm

Engine Braking = 0

Driving with these limits I get 35 mpg. That's a 23% increase over the reference. Bascially, if I'm not accelerating, the car is in neutral. It saves a lot of gas, but it requires a lot of shifting and takes the fun out of driving; as well as being less safe.


High rpm engine braking driving habits:

City Accleration <= 3000 rpm
City Cruise = 1600 - 2600 rpm, (arbitrary number that previously had importance, but no longer)

Highway Acceleration <= 3000 rpm, sometimes though I go all the way to 6000 rpm for fun
Highway Acceleration <= 3000 rpm

Engine Braking <= 3000 rpm, and sometimes at <= 4000 rpm

Driving with these limits I get 27.5 mpg. That's a 3.5% decrease in gas mileage over the reference. However, it's probably attributed more to the city cruise rpms being higher than in my normal driving habits. So, engine braking uses negligible gas, if any.

I think you may have left out the most important peice of information... how fast was the treadmill going? and in what direction?
 

CFster

Golden Member
Oct 16, 1999
1,903
0
76
Originally posted by: dug777
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: CFster
There's no such thing as proper engine braking.

What you described earlier was a method to be in the correct gear for anticipated acceleration. The same goes for racing. I don't call that engine braking.

Downshifting into a lower gear earlier than necessary thereby causing drag from the decelerating engine to slow the car is not only wasteful, but a strain on other parts of the car as well.

This method can in no way safely outperform the brakes, therefore is a complete and utter waste of time.
The purpose of engine braking and downshifting is not to outperform the brakes, but to ensure that that car is in the proper gear at all times. No one here was ever arguing anything differently.

And I would love to hear how using the engine to decelerate (when done properly) could possibly be more of a "strain" than using the engine to accelerate.

Amen, i tried to point this out about 300 posts earlier. Which goes to prove that nobody actually reads anything on the internet ;)

On the contrary, most people here get ALL their info on the internet - vs. living it like some of us.

There's far too many people posting erronous info on this board (as an example) for me take anything anybody says seriously.

All I can say for myself is I've got 20yrs under my belt as an ASE tech, and currently run a repair shop that's part of a much larger wholesale entity.

Do I have documentation to prove that excessive engine braking causes undue wear? Nope. Just my experiences over the years - and gut belief.

Believe what you will.







 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,512
21
81
Originally posted by: CFster
Downshifting into a lower gear earlier than necessary thereby causing drag from the decelerating engine to slow the car is not only wasteful, but a strain on other parts of the car as well.

This method can in no way safely outperform the brakes, therefore is a complete and utter waste of time.
First of all, bullsh*t on engine braking straining componants. You might as well say that moving the car strains your wheel bearings so you should just leave the car sit. Or that opening the door strains your hinges so you should never open the doors to your car. I engine brake all the time and my last clutch lasted 150,000 miles. As long as the revs are matched, there's no meaningful wear on the clutch or drivetrain.

The point is not to outperform the brakes. You'd have to be a complete and utter moron to think that was the reason for engine braking. It's simply a way to bleed off speed gradually when you would otherwise only be barely touching the brakes. For example, when you're getting onto one freeway from another freeway you can either downshift from 5th to 4th and coast in gear around the exit loop or ride the brakes the whole way. The first is engine braking. Engine braking should NEVER be used to being the car to a stop.

ZV
 

SophalotJack

Banned
Jan 6, 2006
1,252
0
0
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: SophalotJack
Anyone else point out that given the fact that the OP gets ~28 mpg means he has a cheapo shat car anyhows and this thread is pointless?

Get a real car and do your "experiments" on it, OP. You might actually have some valuable info at that point... you know, for real cars that benefit from engine braking and such.


P.S. you are a cheapass.... I just noticed your sig.... cheapass

While 28 mpg is a strange figure, hovering between a true economy car at mid-30s and a sporty sedan at low 20s, there are certainly decent cars that get such mileage.

As for cheap, I AM a cheapass and I can tell you that 15% is NOT below the cheapass line. 10% is standard IMHO;)[/q]

That's all I am pointing out... I respect the fact that you know you are a cheapass.

Altough the industry standard for even getting server outside your home is %15... I'll just fall back on my cheapass comment and leave it at that ;)
 

VIAN

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2003
6,575
1
0
Originally posted by: SophalotJack
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: SophalotJack
Anyone else point out that given the fact that the OP gets ~28 mpg means he has a cheapo shat car anyhows and this thread is pointless?

Get a real car and do your "experiments" on it, OP. You might actually have some valuable info at that point... you know, for real cars that benefit from engine braking and such.


P.S. you are a cheapass.... I just noticed your sig.... cheapass

While 28 mpg is a strange figure, hovering between a true economy car at mid-30s and a sporty sedan at low 20s, there are certainly decent cars that get such mileage.

As for cheap, I AM a cheapass and I can tell you that 15% is NOT below the cheapass line. 10% is standard IMHO;)[/q]

That's all I am pointing out... I respect the fact that you know you are a cheapass.

Altough the industry standard for even getting server outside your home is %15... I'll just fall back on my cheapass comment and leave it at that ;)

******, I don't care if I'm a cheapass. Say what you will about my spending habits, but I think that first, not every service is worth 15%, cause most of it is mediocre, and second, 10% is a lot. How would you like to get taxed 10% on everything. NY is almost there, and they hate it. Imagine buying a 3000 TV and then getting charged 300 bucks on just taxes. Damn taxman, how about learning how to balance your budget?!

And where do you get off calling me a cheapass, you're a spoiled man with too much money up your ass. 15% may be the standard, but I don't like to conform.
 

Cephyr13

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2013
1
0
0
I know you guys had 200+ pages of this recently, and somehow determined that coasting in neutral uses more gas than not, but any of the hypermilers will argue with you and show you real-world results.

Go to the hypermiler forum at TDIclub.com. They'll educate you in how to hypermile, and they'll show you their results. In fact, they use a website online to track their gas mileage at each fill up. Some of these guys compete in hypermiler competitions. I know one guy who's won it a few years in a row with an old Passat TDI that gets some ungodly gas mileage. They even use hilly routes so they can use them to coast. One guy ran in a competition and got over 100 mpg, severely beating everyone else, and he did so on a hilly route. However, he misunderstood the rules. He turned the engine off completely on downhill coasts. Some cars nowadays turn the engine off when coasting. But it wasn't allowed in that competition, so he was disqualified. According to some of the posts I read, "no fuel" is used when driving in gear without your foot on the gas in some vehicles. That would only be true on the cars that do engine shutdown when coasting in gear.

I've been able to pick up a few mpg just by coasting up to stop signs and lights and down hills (and sometimes up small ones). It works pretty well, but you don't pick up just a ton of MPG from it unless you're constantly doing it.

When a stick is in neutral, the car puts just enough gas into the engine to move the pistons. Nothing more. That's the tiniest amount of gas one can use. When it's in gear, driving down a hill, the engine still puts gas in the engine, but the engine is at a much higher RPM, so it uses more gas. It's very simple. With variable valve timing cars, at idle, the valves are barely opening, so the fuel usage is minimal. Same goes for driving down a hill in gear--it uses as little fuel as it can, but it's at a higher RPM, so it wastes more gas.

Personally, I don't care about saving money by hypermiling. But I used to have to pull high MPG numbers out of Jetta TDIs, so I'm pretty good at it. And it's just sad when there's misinformation out there.

If there's some magical way that cars don't use gas when coasting in gear, please enlighten me.

---

Hi,

Welcome to AnandTech Forums. I locked the thread because the last previous reply was over seven years ago.

Our members refer to such posts as "necro" posts, and some of them tend to post replies ranging from sarcastic to hostile, including possible accusations of spamming, whether warranted or not.

You are welcome to continue posting on our forums. Thanks for understanding. We hope you enjoy yourself on our forums. :)

Harvey
Senior AnandTech Moderator/Administrator
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.