Greetings, all:

After my scangauge was added to Ellie several months ago, I ran a series of tests to determine a "best MPG" driving technique/setup. I now use this as often as possible and average 31mpg long-term in the city and 29mpg long-term highway (70mph).

Keep in mind that this is 90% driving technique, 10% mods.

ELLIE: 2003 EX 4WD AT w /45k miles.
Intake: K&N, resonator removed.
Exhaust: 2.25" w/ turbo muffler after stock resonator.
HID headlamps/LED tail/stop/turn/park (keeps battery draw low when turning off at stoplights)
Deep cycle battery.
40psi stock-sized tires.

Heavy use of cruise control, especially on city roads with 40-45mph range.
Turn off A/C. (Sunroof open, outside air on. [Florida]) (~2-3mpg)
Turn key to accessory at long stoplights. (~2mpg)
Decelerate/coast in neutral. (huge difference here) (~4mpg)
Accelerate at 25%-30% throttle. (TPS reading on scanguage) (~2mpg)

This seems to allow for reasonable acceleration and stoppage without hypermiling and without pissing off other drivers... while saving a few $$$ for beer.


PS. BUY A SCANGUAGE! WHEN YOU CAN SEE THE $$$ GOING BYE-BYE YOUR LEAD FOOT WILL BE CURED!!!

You could just preface this with: I use hypermilling techniques.

Enjoy the people riding you for coasting in neutral. Not safe.

Frankly, all of this advice ignores the #1 technique of maximizing fuel economy: live in Florida. No hills to speak of, and warm temperatures.

People generally diminish the significance of ambient temperature as a big factor in fuel economy. My data shows a 15-20% difference between winter and summer mileage in the same vehicles, with variances accountable in ambients.

No, not gas formulation changes - fuel blends are not a factor since I live in a mandated 10% ethanol area. The seasonal volatiles compensation is very small now.

Greetings, all:
This seems to allow for reasonable acceleration and stoppage without hypermiling and without pissing off other drivers... while saving a few $$$ for beer.

Reminds me of a sign I saw on a local bar- Forget gas . . . buy beer! :roll:

average 31mpg long-term in the city and 29mpg long-term highway (70mph).

I'm sorry but.....this is very hard for me to believe, especially with an 4wd element....:rolleyes:

I've tried a little coasting where traffic permits. I'll usually choose a coast of at least 1/3 mile and not alot of traffic around and not down the mountains to the west of here (Blue Ridge). Might pick up 1 mpg.
I do keep a lite foot on the gas. When I accellerate away from a lite, the car in front of me usually gains about 50 yards and then holds that distance until the next lite. I've noticed less people accellerating hard these days as gas prices climb. Maybe the Suburban/Expedition drivers are starting to feel the pinch.
I usually get 23 city/26 highway.
se

Greetings, all:

After my scangauge was added to Ellie several months ago, I ran a series of tests to determine a "best MPG" driving technique/setup. I now use this as often as possible and average 31mpg long-term in the city and 29mpg long-term highway (70mph).

Did I read this correctly? You are getting better city (31) mileage than highway (29)?
Oh, I ordered a scangauge today, been thinking about it for awhile.

I've noticed less people accellerating hard these days as gas prices climb.

I've noticed this too, but mainly with the smaller cars and sedans. feeling the pinch

The Trucks and large SUVs are still gunning it and I'm doing my best to just stay out of their way!:shock:---have money and just care

Did I read this correctly? You are getting better city (31) mileage than highway (29)?
Oh, I ordered a scangauge today, been thinking about it for awhile.

Its easy when in the city there are more stoplights(more time with the engine off:rolleyes:)

Saab 93s in the 50s and 60s had freewheeling to prevent back firing from the 2 cycle engine on a trailing throttle. For some strange reason they continued the free wheeling feature with the 4 stroke Taunus 4 stroke engine in SAAB 96s and 95s. I used it for a while with my four stroke SAAB 96 and 95 because I could downshift without the clutch until I overheated the brakes ( front disc and rear drum) coming down a steep New Hampshire mountain road. It didn't really help gas mileage that much and was harder on the brakes so SAAB later dropped the free wheel feature.

So, then by the rules of the Internet, I deduct 50% from your figures and end up with...16mpg and 15mpg. That seems low, but just as possible as 31/29.

Anyways, FWIW, you burn more fuel coasting in neutral rather than just coasting in gear. Modern ECUs FTW.

I'm not really concerned with whom believes my mileage numbers or not. I understand metrology (not meteorology, I mean the study of measurements) and have thusly been careful in my data recording. I do not hypermile- I simply adjust my throttle inputs to match the conditions that the scangauge reports offer best economy, and attempt to do them all in the same instance while balancing with traffic. Pilots call this ****pit management- doing a lot of things at once to fly the plane efficiently.

As for the neutral coasting, it's never done with other vehicles in the immediate proximity. It ABSOLUTELY is far more efficient than coasting in gear, which forces your engine rpm to keep up, even if you're burning leaner via ECU adjustments. I had a few honda hybrids before this element that did a similar slow-down trick, but again, neutral was always more efficient.

Also, non-fly-by-wire Hondas do a pretty good job of allowing you to move the steering and operate the brakes quite easily through the linkages even without the engine being on. (now that would be hypermiling)

Remember, I'm not a random experimenter talking out of my a$$. I'm an engineer that pays serious attention to the scientific method. Please gimme a break- I'm just trying to save myself some bucks here, and since I've had success, encourage others to give it a shot. At very least use the cruise control when you can, kids- when speed stabilizes you can watch your honda slowly auto-lean the mixture and adjust the timing to save you that beer money ;)

this by far will save gas :-o

As for the neutral coasting, it's never done with other vehicles in the immediate proximity. It ABSOLUTELY is far more efficient than coasting in gear, which forces your engine rpm to keep up, even if you're burning leaner via ECU adjustments. I had a few honda hybrids before this element that did a similar slow-down trick, but again, neutral was always more efficient.


No, its not.

When you coast in-gear, you're not having to burn fuel to turn the engine. Movement does that for you. When you put your car in neutral, your engine is forced to burn fuel to keep it turning.

Counter intuitive, perhaps..but that's the way of it.

this by far will save gas :-o

Or just not driving! :rolleyes:

No, its not.

When you coast in-gear, you're not having to burn fuel to turn the engine. Movement does that for you. When you put your car in neutral, your engine is forced to burn fuel to keep it turning.


What? Like the engine shuts off and the drive train forces the engine to spin? Thus keeping the hydraulics pressurized, maintain acceptable vaccum, and the electrics charged?!:confused:

If that's your angle please pass the pipe.:cool:


Thanks for sharing your observations hooptey, I've been thinking of getting a scanner too.

What? Like the engine shuts off and the drive train forces the engine to spin? Thus keeping the hydraulics pressurized, maintain acceptable vaccum, and the electrics charged?!:confused:

If that's your angle please pass the pipe.:cool:
Hmm. I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

The debate (which I have with myself frequently!) is whether putting it in neutral and letting it coast longer nets more distance per fuel used versus trailing-throttle deceleration, which uses zero fuel (ECU shuts it off completely until a certain minimum RPM) but you are off-throttle and in a zero-fuel state for a much shorter distance. If we were talking carbureted and older EFI engines it would definitely be the former because the idle bypass is fixed and consumption would be roughly the same regardless of loading.

He makes it sound better than I do, but either way you want to hear it: Less fuel to coast in-gear than neutral.

I've logged about 15-19% better economy coasting than allowing Ellie to slow herself in gear. FWIW, I think it's very possible that in theory everyone is correct:

The honda ECU uses very little fuel to maintain combustion while decelerating. It most certainly gets better mileage over the same distance as coasting. However, when you coast, you are using slightly less energy because you keep rolling forward longer- you're not using up the energy in the rotational inertia of the engine at higher speeds. (engine braking)

So, if you normalize the experimental data with two Elements traveling, say, .1 miles, keeping the car in gear wins every time in the fuel consumption game. If you normalize the experimental data to energy usage, at the end of the .1 miles, the Element in neutral is going faster and carrying more kinetic energy- so it goes longer and the statistics for MPG a little further down the road then overtake those of the in-gear Element, which has to step on the gas pedal to catch up again.

In a 4-wheel drive, is the rear powered through the transmission? They caution not to tow it on 2 wheels. I wonder if coasting for small intervals, but frequently, could cause the same problems.

Just a thought.

I see what you're saying... I believe the 4wd is the same setup the CR-V's get, which is a driveshaft/rear that's powered as needed by the transmission. I would think that no damage would be had unless you suddenly decided to coast when the ECU thinks it's a good time to be driving those 2 rear wheels, and then applied pedal pressure again as it was switching off.

So I guess what I'm saying is that it shouldn't be a big deal unless you're in the habit of beating the truck up on a daily basis. I'm pretty sure the two driving techniques we're talking about are opposites of one another.

hooptey- have you calibrated your scangauge? When I got mine I checked it against the actual gas consumption and found it to be around 7% high during my "normal" driving cycle. I corrected it and then found that it was still another 3-4% high when driving on a long road trip consisting of virtually all highway miles. I'm not sure, but I think that it might use manifold vacuum to calculate the fuel consumption. (When I bought it I was thinking that it would use the time intervals when the injectors fire to calculate fuel consumption.)

That said, I LOVE the scangauge! I try not to watch it when I drive, but I always look at the "daily" gas mileage and compare it to the mileage for the "tank" (which I usually only reset when I change the oil). I'm basically trying to see if that day was better or worse than my "long term" average. I was able to see a significant upward trend the last time I changed my air filter. I was right on schedule (~10k miles), but the thing was FILTHY!

Regarding the 4wd issue: my understanding of the "realtime 4wd" system is that the ECU doesn't have anything to do with it. It is a strictly mechanical system that is engaged by a couple of pumps that only work when there is a significant difference in the speed of the front and rear shafts. Nothing electronic here, and as long as all 4 wheels are turning at roughly the same speed (which would certainly be the case when you are coasting!) the 4wd will not engage.

Hmm. I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

The debate (which I have with myself frequently!) is whether putting it in neutral and letting it coast longer nets more distance per fuel used versus trailing-throttle deceleration, which uses zero fuel (ECU shuts it off completely until a certain minimum RPM) but you are off-throttle and in a zero-fuel state for a much shorter distance. If we were talking carbureted and older EFI engines it would definitely be the former because the idle bypass is fixed and consumption would be roughly the same regardless of loading.


I beg to differ, the engine needs fuel to run, zero fuel or no fuel you would stall, then you would have to restart, I don't think that happens when you coast in gear now. There is always fuel going into the cylinders when the car is running, I don't care if you are coasting or accelerating.

I see what you're saying... I believe the 4wd is the same setup the CR-V's get, which is a driveshaft/rear that's powered as needed by the transmission. I would think that no damage would be had unless you suddenly decided to coast when the ECU thinks it's a good time to be driving those 2 rear wheels, and then applied pedal pressure again as it was switching off.
We're overanalyzing it. The only reason for the "don't tow on two wheels" warning is the automatic RT4WD function - the clutch engages when there's a speed difference between the rears and the fronts. This operation is 100% mechanical - the ECU doesn't even know the rear drivetrain exists.

When the rotational speed of the wheels match front-to-back, the only function of the 4WD system is to add dead weight.

I beg to differ, the engine needs fuel to run, zero fuel or no fuel you would stall, then you would have to restart, I don't think that happens when you coast in gear now. There is always fuel going into the cylinders when the car is running, I don't care if you are coasting or accelerating.

The TRUTH about saving fuel is there is only 3 ways to do so. (1) DO NOT buy it, (2) Buy a Scooter, and (3) get your own oil pumps like the man in Ohio!!!
I'm buying my own station!! We're going old school. We will be pumping it for you at the same price as the competition that isn't pumping it for you.

Hmm. I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

The debate (which I have with myself frequently!) is whether putting it in neutral and letting it coast longer nets more distance per fuel used versus trailing-throttle deceleration, which uses zero fuel (ECU shuts it off completely until a certain minimum RPM) but you are off-throttle and in a zero-fuel state for a much shorter distance. If we were talking carbureted and older EFI engines it would definitely be the former because the idle bypass is fixed and consumption would be roughly the same regardless of loading.

Yes and no.


The way it was presented earlier makes it sound like the engine free-wheels when there is no throttle input and that makes no sense to me. Even when I'm coasting in gear the driveline drag forces the engine to an RPM above idle, even if it does lean significantly my thought that there is more fuel being used than if the engine is idling without a load. Besides I'd rather use the kinetic energy to roll rather than waste it dragging the wheels around.:neutral:

I could be wrong but I don't really care either way. I drive like shat.

I beg to differ, the engine needs fuel to run, zero fuel or no fuel you would stall, then you would have to restart, I don't think that happens when you coast in gear now. There is always fuel going into the cylinders when the car is running, I don't care if you are coasting or accelerating.

Mike is correct. What keeps the engine from stalling when the fuel shuts off is the torque converter staying locked up if you have an automatic, or clutch engaged if you have a stick. Even my old 87 Jeep has the fuel shut off when coasting above a certain rpm.

Mike is correct. What keeps the engine from stalling when the fuel shuts off is the torque converter staying locked up if you have an automatic, or clutch engaged if you have a stick. Even my old 87 Jeep has the fuel shut off when coasting above a certain rpm.

:confused: No fuel what so ever? Ok, I'm not a mechanic, I'll have to believe you.

Here's my average mpg for my commute to work. 75% back roads at 48mph,
25% highway at 80mph when I can!

The one thing that people are forgetting is that there is no flow meter output on the Element's OBD2 port. I recall Ramblerdan talking about this when someone asked and him mentioning that these are only guesstimates made by the scanguage. Don't get me wrong, I am planning on buying the scanguage eventually, but the only true way to track your mileage is still pen and paper (or spreadsheet, as it were).

No prob. I verified the mpg old school. I'm going to go through my scangauge.
I could swear I had a reading of my fuel consumption rate displayed in gallons per minute.

What's a good place to purchase a scanguage?
What's a good price range?
Thanks gang.

You could just preface this with: I use hypermilling techniques.

Enjoy the people riding you for coasting in neutral. Not safe.

I coast all the time and usually they are the ones holding me up!! I live around a lot of hills and nothing pisses me off more than someone cruising at 45mph down a hill keeping their RPMs at 2000 when I could be coasting at 60-65 getting with my RPMs at 800!!! Dont know anything about this fuel shut off stuff but I would have to say if the engine is firing is firing something!!
Just filled up today
275.1 miles
10.3 gallons of gas
26.7mpg

Ill keep coasting cuz when i didnt i was getting 24mpg.

Coasting is one thing.

Coasting in neutral is another.

Don't exceed 65 mph -- your mileage will increase. I used to drive 75 mph, and now drive 65 mph and my mileage has increased from 27 to 29.5. Every little bit helps.

Don't exceed 65 mph -- your mileage will increase. I used to drive 75 mph, and now drive 65 mph and my mileage has increased from 27 to 29.5. Every little bit helps.

Ok trying not to risking falling into the neutral debate. I can coast (in neutral) 4 miles down hill every day on my way to work reaching 65mph. not letting it go below 45. If I leave it in gear and coast im back on the gas in a half mile or so. So Ill leave everyone else to debate the neutral vs. in gear coasting but you cant get the kinetic energy to go 65 in gear and definitely cant coast for 4 miles without falling below 45mph. Ive noticed an increase in my mileage last fuel up was 275.1 miles on 10.3 gallons of gas. 70% in town 30% (my commute) highway/downhill coast. 26.7 mpg.

I totally agree. I get a heck of alot more distance coasting in neutral than when I do in gear. I talked to my mechanic and he says that slipping the vehicle into neutral does no damage to the car. I've been hypermiling now for two weeks and I can already see the difference in my gas gauge and miles driven. I'll post my mpg when I finally get around to filling up again. Seeing that I'm knew to hypermiling and driving this vehicle, I'm not expecting a big difference in mpg but I'm hoping to be rewarded later after a bit of practice.

I totally agree. I get a heck of alot more distance coasting in neutral than when I do in gear. I talked to my mechanic and he says that slipping the vehicle into neutral does no damage to the car. I've been hypermiling now for two weeks and I can already see the difference in my gas gauge and miles driven. I'll post my mpg when I finally get around to filling up again. Seeing that I'm knew to hypermiling and driving this vehicle, I'm not expecting a big difference in mpg but I'm hoping to be rewarded later after a bit of practice.

Good luck with the coasting. And welcome to the forum. I've tried coasting more in my last couple of tanks and I'm hoping to get 475miles out of this tanks. Got about 40miles to go til I hit that.

And about going over a certain speed while coasting -- I think it applies more to when you're using the car to power it up and beyond a certain speed. But when it's gravity doing the work, just let it do it's thing. It's "free" anyways. Even though aerodynamic drag grows exponentially stronger as you go higher in speed, it's not like it's cost you that fuel to get up that speed. I guess hypothetically, you could use a brake regeneration unit that kicks in and stores energy above a certain speed so you could reuse it later and increase the efficiency of gravity helping your car.

Good luck with the coasting. And welcome to the forum. I've tried coasting more in my last couple of tanks and I'm hoping to get 475miles out of this tanks. Got about 40miles to go til I hit that.

And about going over a certain speed while coasting -- I think it applies more to when you're using the car to power it up and beyond a certain speed. But when it's gravity doing the work, just let it do it's thing. It's "free" anyways. Even though aerodynamic drag grows exponentially stronger as you go higher in speed, it's not like it's cost you that fuel to get up that speed. I guess hypothetically, you could use a brake regeneration unit that kicks in and stores energy above a certain speed so you could reuse it later and increase the efficiency of gravity helping your car.

I finally filled up and I'm happy to report that my El jumped up to 24 from 18 mpg's. I also gained an additional 75 miles off of this last gas tank. I drive 100% in the city so I guess that's why I'm not seeing big numbers like some of you. My question for you Suziederkins is how the heck are you getting your numbers? Do you have a lot of mountains or hills? Is it mostly highway driving? What state are you in? Do you use your air conditioner? Am I doing something wrong? I know that my El is a toaster on wheels when it comes to air dynamics and that I shouldn't expect better from it but I can't help but want more when I see what others are acheiveing. I've cut back my a/c usage by half, I've air up my tires, I'v changed the air filter, I'm coasting and avoiding stops, so I think I've done all I can do without going overboard. Does anyone else have any other helpful hints? Thanks.

24MPG is quite good already. Especially in the city. I've been trying to improve my mileage for over a month and a half now. I do have plenty of opportunity to practice. Last month I drove about 2200miles. So don't fret. You'll get better with time.

To answer your questions, it's about 50% highway and 50% city. The last tank (yesterday) was just a trial to see how much I could get out of one tank (see the 600mile tank challenge thread). I'm actually located in the same city you are. I just updated my profile a bit. No a/c. I just crack the windows bout 1-2inches on the highway. Otherwise in-town I'll let it down more as it doesn't affect the mileage as much. My girlfriend hates it. So I drive her around in her car on the weekends LOL. You've got all the techniques that I use down. Just keep refining and practicing them. Figure out your traffic patterns even better. I go down hillcrest quite often during rush hour and know that the lights will always stop at alpha, spring valley and beltline, etc, so i tend to hang back and by the time i get there either the light's green or i've already coasted down to 20mph. I also turn off my engine when I know I'm gonna stop for longer than 10seconds. That's not something I advocate doing yet. I get my engine oil analyzed every change, so I'm monitoring how that affects the wear. Plus when I got the car, it was used with 3K miles and it was Honda certified so the power train warranty got extended to 100K which gives me better peace of mind. You've actually got a good advantage with the auto on the highway (when you do drive on it) since the final drive ratio on the auto is much higher (read lower rpm's at speed) vs the manual.

Good luck!
-aaron

love that quagmire btw

Thanks for the input. I'm gonna keep on trying and see if I get better with practice. BTW, YOU'RE NUTS not using the a/c in Dallas. How do you keep from passing out!!! I just figured out you're secret though....by not running the a/c you're sweating off half your weight and your El is coasting further than mine!!! I don't have the luxury (if that's what you want to call it) of shutting off my a/c since I'm usually carrying my 5 year old and 3 month old with me. Thanks again. I'll be looking for you on the road. I'm sure you'll be easy to spot....you'll be the sweaty driver behind the wheel of the El who's getting (I'm gonna kill you) looks from the gal in the passenger seat!!!

lol. yea, i broke down and told her i'd drive with the a/c when she's riding with me. she got really annoyed at me the one time i tried pulse and glide on the tollway. (i forgot to mention that one - it's where you vary between a upper and lower speed - say 50 and 60mph. you keep it in a high gear and gas it quite hard, bout 80% throttle or so (pulse) to get it to your upper limit, and then coast (glide) in neutral back down to your lower limit). lather, rinse and repeat :D. that's a more extreme technique which you may not want to do if you're nauseous. the theory behind it is if you "floor" your vehicle, that's when the engine's the most efficient since the throttle body is open and the pumping losses (engine vacuum) is at it's lowest. your mileage is bad when you open the throttle that much, but then you take advantage of the coasting in neutral, where your mileage goes way way up. when you average that, it'll be better than when you stay fixed at say 55 mph. Your average speed of course will not be 55mph if your limits are 50mph and 60mph since your car will slow down faster at 60mph than it will at 55mph due to aerodynamics, etc. it'll be more like 52 or 53mph.

i used to have an old 325 and I was too poor/cheap to fix it. So I went 4 years in that car without a/c in the texas heat. let's just say it was hard on my dates back then haha. i got used to having the windows down and i guess it's burned into my brain and i feel kind of wasteful using the a/c. especially in the element's 4-banger, i can feel the power drain each time the compressor cycles. when i first got the car, i used it all the time, but now i've defaulted back and rarely use it except when the girl's in the car.

definitely keep using the a/c with the kids. i was an eighties baby and back then my dad had a civic with no a/c. one time i passed out in the back as an infant during the sweltering heat waves. they had to take me to an air conditioned sears to "revive me". suffice it to say, by the next week, i was rolling around with the luxury of a/c :D

Welcome suzie and coast master -
Judging from Coast Master General's avatar -he'll fit in just fine here!:confused: :rolleyes:

I've found the best way to increase my MPG is to let someone else drive !

It looks like everyone's tips are paying off. I just filled up with 14.5 gallons and I logged 385 miles on this tank. That's 26.5 mpg's!!! I love it. I changed my driving a bit this time as well. I kept my city driving under 40 mph and I did more highway driving when traffic looked good. I figured out that I get better fuel efficiency when I'm driving 51 mph on the highway. My tach is sitting right around 1500 rpm's when doing this. I can't wait to see how I do with my next tank. BTW, I only drive with the a/c on during my morning drive. The rest of the day I try to cycle it. I am also making more of an effort to shut my engine off at stop lights. My wife's Murano has a fuel efficiency display on it and I get a kick out of driving it. I noticed the other day while sitting at a traffic light that my fuel efficiency dropped from 24 mpg's to 23.7 mpg's!!! Sitting at lights truly does take it's toll on your overall mpg's. Again, thanks to all for all of your helpful hints, ideas, and information.

congrats! that's a great improvement!

I just got my wife a 2009 SC with an Auto trans.

I drove it ~70 miles at 61 mph on a two lane country highway, and between 50-60 on a four lane urban highway, along with some stop and go city.

I used the cruise whenever possible.

I got 31.27 mpg, brand new car with about 70 mile on the odometer when I started.

I do have Honda Insight and Civic hybrids, so I know how to make a vehicle sip the gas, but I don't think I did anything special besides not stepping into very heavy; I did pass a guy though.

Mike G.

Good job Mike! Those hybrids really help give the driver feedback on their efficiency habits and it looks like it paid off well. 31mpg is superb! Now try doing it back to back for 2 tanks :) I don't know if I'd have the patience. I'm satisfied now with ~23-24 in the summer w/ AC and 25-26 in the winter w/out AC. Plus the manual transmission doesn't help as much with that higher final gear vs the auto.