Pulse and Glide driving technique - the forum says NO! ;)

movilogo

Either earn more or travel less on your car

Nowadays we seem to see a sprout of techniques which claim to reduce fuel consumption. While many of them are good in theory either difficult to implement or dangerous for other road users!

Instead of these circus tricks, get a smaller and more fuel efficient car.

Every time you glide, your car is working against road friction, which will reduce its speed, so you need to accelerate - more frequently you accelerate, more fuel you'll use. Least fuel is used during cruising. That's why many cars have cruise control.

There should a minimum speed limit on motorways! I'm sick of people doing 50 mph on middle lane or doing 70 mph on fast lane. Sometimes time is more precious than a drop of fuel.

tinkerbell84

movilogo wrote: »

Either earn more or travel less on your car

Nowadays we seem to see a sprout of techniques which claim to reduce fuel consumption. While many of them are good in theory either difficult to implement or dangerous for other road users!

Instead of these circus tricks, get a smaller and more fuel efficient car.

Every time you glide, your car is working against road friction, which will reduce its speed, so you need to accelerate - more frequently you accelerate, more fuel you'll use. Least fuel is used during cruising. That's why many cars have cruise control.

There should a minimum speed limit on motorways! I'm sick of people doing 50 mph on middle lane or doing 70 mph on fast lane. Sometimes time is more precious than a drop of fuel.

And I bet the majority are carrying a load of junk that they don't need and have their air con on full blast too :rolleyes:

I thought cruise control used more fuel

AdrianHi

tinkerbell84 wrote: »

I thought cruise control used more fuel

If your first priority is maintaining a constant speed cruise control will save you a little and will always save fuel on the flat. Cruise control will pile the power on up hill to maintain speed which is where going "manual" and slowing up the hill and using the downhill stretch to accelerate will be more fuel efficient.

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

I bet the sort of person who drives like this is also the sort of person who never buys a round at the bar.

Tojo_Ralph

tinkerbell84 wrote: »

And I bet the majority are carrying a load of junk that they don't need and have their air con on full blast too :rolleyes:

Here's some top tips from another thread.

Cut fuel consumption by a third by turning the radio off? :rolleyes:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=7971219&postcount=73

Cut fuel consumption by replacing the spare tyre with a can of tyre weld? :eek:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=10645217&postcount=129

pault123

Edited the OP It has been an interesting discussion anyhow

tinkerbell84

Tojo_Ralph wrote: »

Here's some top tips from another thread.

Cut fuel consumption by a third by turning the radio off? :rolleyes:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=7971219&postcount=73

Cut fuel consumption by replacing the spare tyre with a can of tyre weld? :eek:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=10645217&postcount=129

One of my cars doesn't have a spare wheel - there isn't even space for one in the boot! You get a tyre inflator and a can of tyre weld instead :rotfl:

tomstickland

darich wrote: »

Surely the only people interested in annoying other drivers this way would be the ones driving the smallest engines since they're the most economical?
I mean what's the point in buying a 3.0 then trying get another 3-4mpg out of it? Why not just buy a cheaper car?

And to claim that "3mph isn't as notcieable as you think" - think about this - when a truck pulls out to overtake another and it's only doing 3mph more, it takes ages to pass - proobably close to a mile.
That 3mph difference doesn't bother you when there's a rolling road block caused by two trucks?

Smallest engines are not always the most economical at motorway speeds. And there's very little correlation between engine size and car sale price on second hard cars.

Your second paragraph agrees with the statement though - the difference is so small that it takes ages for the lorry to overtake.

tomstickland

If your first priority is maintaining a constant speed cruise control will save you a little and will always save fuel on the flat. Cruise control will pile the power on up hill to maintain speed which is where going "manual" and slowing up the hill and using the downhill stretch to accelerate will be more fuel efficient.

I agree with this.
Cruise control isn't magic. Anyone who pays attention should be able to manually hold the speed within +/-1mph on a motorway journey. Just learn to feel whether the car is picking up or losing speed and look at the speedo every few seconds or whatever interval suits you.

I also believe from what I've read that it is more efficient to allow the vehicle to lose some speed on the uphill section and regain that on the downhill section.

However, regarding the OP, whilst I agree that P&G might be very annoying on a busy road, I haven't seen any evidence either way in this thread for or against it in terms of fuel efficiency.

I would guess that most people would be better served by starting on the basics. ie: avoid accelerating up to a stop, don't drive bungee style down the motorway. I remember trying to follow someone I know down the motorway. They had a 2.0 Granada and I was in a hired 1.0 L Micra. The Micra was capable of doing 75mph, but the way they sped up and slowed down all the time I had no chance of keeping up.

tinkerbell84

tomstickland wrote: »

I would guess that most people would be better served by starting on the basics. ie: avoid accelerating up to a stop, don't drive bungee style down the motorway. I remember trying to follow someone I know down the motorway. They had a 2.0 Granada and I was in a hired 1.0 L Micra. The Micra was capable of doing 75mph, but the way they sped up and slowed down all the time I had no chance of keeping up.

My OH's dad's car doesn't have an accelerator. Either that or he has no right foot. Whenever he has to follow me, I deliberately don't go nuts accelerating. However, taking 30 seconds to get to 60 miles an hour is ridiculous.

I'll be doing 70 (or whatever speed the traffic is doing) to join the motorway, and he'll be a good 8 cars behind me by the time he joins.

So then I have 2 choices. Let him get lost, or slow to about 50mph and incur the wrath of all behind me to let him catch me up.

:mad: