Dear Umbra,
To cruise or not to cruise? That is the question. Is it more fuel efficient to use cruise control when driving, or does it use more gas to use the cruise?
Carrie
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Dearest Carrie,
Whether 'tis nobler to travel at constant speed -- that is indeed a question. And Edmunds.com, which has suffered the slings and arrows of tedious car testing, says an emphatic yes. The venerable car group found that using cruise control improved gas mileage by 7 to 14 percent, except in mountainous terrain. Cruise helps with several aspects of fuel efficiency, most particularly (and obviously) when it comes to maintaining one speed and smoothing your ride.
The need for constant speed.
Where you set the cruise helps, too. Driving at 50-60 mph keeps fuel consumption down, so if cruise helps you follow the speed limit, then it has an additional benefit (conscience does make cowards of us all).The government has estimated that each 5 mph over 60 costs you 26 cents per gallon.
Take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing, end them: Other fuel efficiency steps include the all-important mellow driving rule, not just while cruising on the highway, but while driving in stop-and-go situations. Accelerate at a leisurely pace: Don't stomp on the gas, or on the brake, for that matter. Anticipate stoplights and signs by calmly slowing in advance. Consumer Reports testers found they lost a couple miles per gallon when driving aggressively. They also found that a large roof carrier cost their test car six miles per gallon. So take off those roof racks when you're not using them, and while you're at it, remove other heavy objects (that mortal coil!) you're toting. And keep your tires inflated: It benefits both gas tank and the tires themselves.
Interestingly, today's consensus seems to be that the difference between the AC or open windows is negligible, and not, well, a driving concern. Isn't it nice to have one less thing to worry about? Isn't it great to end the heartache and the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to? Soft you now! The fair Ophelia!
Bardily,
Umbra
‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science
Capturing the massive social benefits of fuel efficiency requires regulation
Make the kids pay: The economic effects of climate change on future generations
Comments
View as Threaded
RichardWeirick Posted 11:32 pm
14 Sep 2008
Using the A/C will most assuredly reduce your mpg. It's simple physics. More resistance on the engine means more energy (fuel) required to overcome that resistance. But here again, make/model makes a huge difference.
My commute doesn't involve too many long unbroken stretches that enable a lot of cruise driving, so I have been forced to perfect my non-cruise driving skills....and now I can consistently get better mpg than what I could using cruise control, especially in hilly terrain.
Tips:
Pay attention to the road, not the cell phone. You will be better able to predict braking/coasting stretches, as well as adjust acceleration for short spaces between stops.
It may sound silly, but using the same logic that pilots use seems to make a big improvement on the mpg. And that is, accelerate to your maximum speed on a moderate stretch (up to 2 or 3 miles), then back off the gas just enough to SLOWLY lose speed until you need to brake.
My car has real time mpg data displayed on the console - so these techniques are proven.
Most of all be safe!
Permalink
Paul Lock Posted 3:24 am
15 Sep 2008
Permalink
sjg Posted 3:45 am
15 Sep 2008
I agree that the effectiveness of cruise
control depends on the driver and the car, but
I would also like to offer my own experience
driving in mountains with a Honda Civic Hybrid
and using cruise control almost all the time.
It really does save a lot of gas, even over
mountain passes. I average 51MPG, and I drive
Kenosha, Trout Creek and Poncha passes every
week on US 285 in Colorado. My car is a manual,
which means I need to select the right gear for
the terrain. With a tiny 1.3 liter engine I can
accelerate from 35 to 50 up a 7% grade using the
resume button on my cruise control. I have found
that I need to do this in third gear, but that's
fine, the engine doesn't redline until 6000 rpm.
It's quite possible that my battries buffer the
hills and make cruise control more effective. and
having a manual transmission means I can inform
the car about the terrain ahead even with cruise
control.
Cheers,
Susanna Gross
Permalink
Duggles Posted 4:09 am
15 Sep 2008
On a side note, it sure would be nice to have a car with A/C...
Permalink
bkrell Posted 5:42 am
15 Sep 2008
A/C vs. windows down is going to vary by car and speed. On my car, a/c is unquestionably less efficient than windows down, even at 75 mph. The previous posters comments on cruise are correct as well. On flat terrain, cruise is great. Once you get into uphill/downhill stretches, however, cruise controls preference for constant speed means it's going to increase engine load accordingly on uphill stretches to maintain that speed. It's much more efficient to slow down a tad on the uphill and then try to gain it back on the downhill if possible. I'm just scratching the surface here.....
Permalink
bkrell Posted 5:42 am
15 Sep 2008
A/C vs. windows down is going to vary by car and speed. On my car, a/c is unquestionably less efficient than windows down, even at 75 mph. The previous posters comments on cruise are correct as well. On flat terrain, cruise is great. Once you get into uphill/downhill stretches, however, cruise controls preference for constant speed means it's going to increase engine load accordingly on uphill stretches to maintain that speed. It's much more efficient to slow down a tad on the uphill and then try to gain it back on the downhill if possible. I'm just scratching the surface here.....
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 12:56 pm
15 Sep 2008
They are the legends.
The guy who bought Microsoft (MSFT) in the early 80s.
The woman who bought houses in Seattle in the 90s.
And now, I bring you: the dude who bought a fully loaded used SUV in 2007.
You, sir, I salute, as you invested in a gas guzzler while all the world cried "Peak Oil"!.
You followed your gut, and parked that leviathan in the garage...thinking someone must have to pay some debts to sell you the $35,000 excursion for a mere $7000.
But today, you dine in SHELL!
http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/commodities/energyprices ...
Permalink
stargazerjim Posted 5:41 am
19 Sep 2008
Most research seem to side with the AC being the lesser of two evils, but wait, there's more! As car have dramatically improved aerodynamically, opening the window can have a more profound effect, and the increased efficiency of the engines and AC units have also tipped the formula.
Our old '57 Chevys may be high in nostalgia, but they are a real drag, in a air resistance way. My Camry may lack drama, but it's slippery.
My solution? Around town, open the window to get what passes for fresh air these days. Hit the Highway? Go with the AC.
Bottom line: the color of your car has more effect than the above argument anyway. White cars are many degrees cooler than black ones. Heat in the winter is essentially free, from a gasoline mileage standpoint, so it doesn't matter. But in the summer, the AC is going to go into overdrive trying to cool off a dark colored car. So buy a light colored car, wear light clothing, and take the bus!
Permalink