Kimosabe wrote:It is said that flooring (in each gear if you have a car with a manual gearbox designed by victorians) it upto the speed limit and then maintaining that speed for as long as possible is a more fuel efficient method than slowly reaching the desired speed and therefore holding it for less time over the same route or distance.
Gareth wrote:If you want to compare like for like, you'd need to make the journey time the same
Kimosabe wrote:over the same route or distance.
Kevin wrote:Is not Kimosabe asking about fuel consumption over a given route or distance?
Gareth wrote:Kevin wrote:Is not Kimosabe asking about fuel consumption over a given route or distance?
He could be but where do you draw the line? With slow enough acceleration a journey could take much much longer - would there be any point to the comparison?
Kimosabe wrote:It is said that flooring (in each gear if you have a car with a manual gearbox designed by victorians) it upto the speed limit and then maintaining that speed for as long as possible is a more fuel efficient method than slowly reaching the desired speed and therefore holding it for less time over the same route or distance.
I would like to see the evidence compared for each model of hare/tortoise driving and also to consider the wear on the engine, gearbox, tyres etc.
http://www.efficient-mileage.com/acceleration-test.html
Tesla cars and free solar charging: https://medium.com/editors-picks/32eeaacc207a
trashbat wrote:Brake specific fuel consumption is part of the answer: http://www.autospeed.com/cms/article.html?&A=112611
TR4ffic wrote:I have recently achieved 70.1 mpg over nearly 400 miles (ave speed 38 mph) on my daily commute. Sorry – Didn’t want to be an mpg bore
Kimosabe wrote:I'm so glad everyone missed my reference to manual gearboxes being made by 'The Victorians'.
Return to Advanced Driving Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests