<travisgod@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:85f0b9db-a9d9-4ce4-bba8-8613beab28ba@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On modern cars, its LESS than idling. They typically shut fuel flow OFF
>> on deceleration until the engine speed drops down to idle speed. So
>> going downhill (in gear) uses zero fuel. Going downhill in neutral
>> requires the engine to idle, so that would in fact use MORE fuel than
>> coasting in gear.
>
> Your stupidity doesn't QUIT, does it?
>
> What if gravity is insufficient to overcome compression losses?
Then you wouldn't be coasting, you would be decelerating ! You have
asked
this question two or three times now, what part of it doen't YOU
understand ?
The conversation was about fuel usage during coasting down hill. One must
assume all the criteria are met to allow the car to coast down hill.
Nobody is
questioning the steepness of the hill, whether or not the car will coast,
what
gear the car is in, and which direction it is traveling. You keep coming
up
with so much bull**** that doesn't even pertain to the question being
asked !
The question was: What uses more fuel, coasting down a hill in gear or
coasting down a hill in neutral ?
The awnswer was (and still is) : Coasting in gear uses less fuel because
the
ECM is programmed to SHUT OFF THE FUEL INJECTORS in that situation. IF you
are
coasting IN NEUTRAL the FUEL INJECTORS ARE ON, suppling fuel to the
engine.
Now it should be EASY, even for you, to be able to figure out which one
uses
more fuel !
Now the irrelevant information you keep rattling on about is, well,
irrelevant ! It doesn't matter how steep the hill is as long as the car
is
able to coast. It doesn't matter whether the car has an automatic
transmission
or a standard trans. It doesn't matter that one car is using Sunoco gas
and
the other is using Shell. DO you get it yet ????? It doesn't matter if
the
torque converter stays locked or is unlocked. It doesn't matter if they
are
travelling north or south, they just have to be travelling DOWN HILL. It's
a
simple question which also has a simple answer.
>
> In THAT CASE, you are better off ****fting to neutral and letting the
> engine consume at idle.
>
> The engine speed will NOT DROP TO IDLE SPEED, you freakin moron,
> because the engine is DIRECTLY coupled to the driveline via either the
> clutch in a manual or the converter lockup (another clutch) in an
> automatic.
>
> Try THIS.
>
> Put your car in automanual mode. Put it in FIRST GEAR. Evaluate the
> decleration rate on a LEVEL road from any given speed versus first or
> second if you do NOT understand engine braking! You will find that
> RPMs typical of highway speeds in top gear involve actually fairly
> HIGH levels of engine braking.
>
> You should immediately notice DECREASED compression braking when you
> put the car into 2nd versus 1st. This is WHY you down****ft to slow
> down.
>
> GD, I do this thing every fking day I drive the kids to school. I put
> the VW into 3rd on a particular decline and let it engine brake to max
> at <40mph so the cops with lasers at the bottom won't tag me. If I
> let the transmission select a higher gear or I did so myself, I would
> exceed the speed limit.
>
> The car MAXES out on this decline around 38mph in 3rd gear. If I
> desire to go FASTER, I MUST use fuel! If I ****ft to 4th, RPMs drop,
> compression braking lessens and I can roll to a higher terminal speed
> at which, if I desire to go faster, I must EITHER increase
> acceleration or decrease deceleration. That could be accomplished by
> up****fting OR pressing on the accelerator.
>
> EITHER WAY, gravity is competing against engine compression and drag.
>
> Do you people even drive cars or are you just idiots? YES, there ARE
> hills in which drag + engine compression > gravity, therefore you MUST
> use fuel or ELSE you remove engine compression as a decelerative load!
>
> Trav
|
