Originally posted by: fleabag
Um, it has actually been tested that coasting in neutral saves more fuel than coasting in gear despite the fact that coasting in gear can mean DFCO. The only real benefit to DFCO is when you're going down a hill and don't want to use your brakes. However I don't coast in neutral because I drive an automatic and the switching between neutral and drive can put unknown amounts of wear on the transmission so the technique works best and is safest (for the tranny) on a manual transmission. There is arguing over whether or not going from neutral to drive and back and forth puts a lot more wear on the transmission and there is at this time no definitive answer because there hasn't been enough testing. With that aside, there has been definitive proof that coasting for long periods of time in neutral will save more gas EVEN with the engine running than coasting in gear. In fact, sometimes when you're coasting in gear, some transmissions will go into neutral without you even knowing it, so you'll definitely not be doing DFCO but will get the benefit of coasting! I've generally found that with those transmissions that seemingly coast in neutral despite being in drive are only able to do this if the torque converter is NOT locked up, once it locks up, it WILL engage the DFCO assuming it's above the threshold for enabling DFCO.
To summarize, if you can maintain or exceed desired coasting speed while doing DFCO, great, do it, otherwise coasting while in neutral or in a neutral like state which the transmission ITSELF has initiated is going to be the way to get better fuel economy. (Engine cut off, coasting in neutral will yield even better gains, but that's more hard core and impractical)