i was wondering if you get better or worse gas mileage with CC?

 

Better.

 

really?

cause i would figure that you wouldnt
hmmm

 

I have always heard that is worsens gas mileage. but could someone please provide some solid info as to why?

 

it worsens your gas mileage, because your using electronics and more mechanics than simply the throttle. on the other hand if your one of those drivers who cant keep a steady pace without the cruise control than it probably is better for you.

 

It keeps your RPMs more consistant. It definitly increases MPG.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Nors &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It keeps your RPMs more consistant. It definitly increases MPG.</TD></TR></TABLE>

^^^^

Here's what Edmunds says:

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Edmunds &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Using cruise control can improve your gas mileage by helping you maintain a steady speed, but only if you are driving on mostly flat roads. If you are driving in hilly terrain, using cruise control typically causes your vehicle to speed up faster (to maintain the preset speed) than it would if you were operating the accelerator yourself. Before you push that cruise control button, think about the terrain ahead.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Also, they tested it, and found:

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Edmunds &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Test #3 Use Cruise Control

Result: Surprisingly effective way to save gas

Cold Hard Facts: Up to 14-percent savings, average savings of 7 percent

Recommendation: If you've got it, use it.

Cruise Control: Read the entire test

(test results copied from link)

Using cruise control is a bit of gas-saving advice frequently on tips lists. We have always agreed with this tip in theory but we hadn't expected such significant results. First, it smoothes out the driver's accelerator input by preventing nervous "surging." Second, it makes the driver take the long view of the road rather than reacting to every change in the traffic around them.

Method: We did this test twice with four different cars each time driving the 55-mile loop. The first time we set cruise control to 70 mph. The second time, with the cruise control off, we varied our speed between 65 mph and 75 mph. We tried to mimic the driving style of a person who is in moderate freeway traffic.

One thing that's important to note: if you are in a mountainous area you should turn off cruise. It will try to keep you up to the speed you've set and will use a lot of extra gas downshifting to lower gears to accomplish this.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Google the phrase "cruise control fuel economy" and you'll see a bunch more links, all saying that cruise control results in better fuel economy...

 

Yeah I use my CC whenever I can, because my foot gets tired sometimes, especially when driving while wearing my Nike Shox shoes (odd-shaped heel with those springy things).

It definitely increases MPG because if you're controlling the throttle with your foot all the time, it's physically impossible to keep a steady speed all the time. Sometimes you will go lower than your intended speed, which means you have to open the throttle to speed back up to your intended speed, thus using more gas.

CC makes much faster, smaller adjustments to throttle opening than you can make by yourself, and so is more efficient.

 

cool guys thanks for clarifying it.

i figured that cc was better on more flat roads but i wasnt sure on more uphill area's.

thanks.

 

it's good for hilly roads, too, because as I said it will keep your speed closer to constant (slightly more fluctuations) than you can do by modulating the throttle by yourself.

 

It's best to gain speed going downhill, and coast uphill. Cruise control would try to keep a constant speed all the time, getting off the throttle downhill, and downshifting uphill to keep the speed. So on hilly roads, its best to not use CC (unless the hills are really small).

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Nors &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It keeps your RPMs more consistant. It definitly increases MPG.</TD></TR></TABLE>

x2

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 02 accord &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's best to gain speed going downhill, and coast uphill. Cruise control would try to keep a constant speed all the time, getting off the throttle downhill, and downshifting uphill to keep the speed. So on hilly roads, its best to not use CC (unless the hills are really small).</TD></TR></TABLE>

nope, any significant change in throttle opening is going to decrease fuel economy. It's always best to keep it as constant as possible.

 

someone had recently posted http://www.cargens.com/ about how to save gas and one of the parts in it says:

"All electronics will also hurt your fuel economy such as defrosters, heated seats, the heater, and cruise control. However, don’t forget to keep safety in mind, if you need the defrosters, use them. Luckily, the radio doesn’t use much electricity at all, so it is fine to use it and relax your mind from the stress due to all the concentration required. However, be warned, that surveys show that fast aggressive music leads to an iron foot."

I always thought it was better to use cc... i guess everyone is going to have a different opinion. There were some other interesting facts on that site though.

 

The current used by the cruise control is miniscule compared to the gas it saves by minimizing large speed fluctuations.

After reading that site, some if it I agree with, yet some of it is pretty laughable.

Yes you should shift to neutral at a stop, because it saves wear on your clutch throwout bearing. But taking your foot off the brakes is dumb, even when the surface is flat. What about that person who comes up behind you and maybe isn't paying attention and taps the back of your car (perhaps because he didn't see brake lights on)? Then you go sailing into the back of the car in front of you. If you had your foot on the brakes, it could save that from ever happening, or at least from the front of your car taking on damage. It's also not going to affect brake disc or even pad life one miniscule bit, unless you were just hot lapping an autocross or road course, in which case holding the brake pads on the very hot rotors in a stationary location could possibly cause slight rotor warpage.

And this is why cruise control is a good thing. It keeps speed even and minimized the amount the throttle plate must open and close.

This guy apparently doesn't know that the air/fuel mixture goes totally rich when you close the throttle plate. Now I'm not saying it's the best thing to do (it's actually not very safe) but it would save more gas if you were to shift to neutral and use the brakes than just using engine braking. I don't do that, however, because you should always stay in gear until you're almost to a stop for safety reasons. In neutral = not in control of vehicle, which is a bad thing when on public roads.

This whole paragraph is completely laughable. "While in neutral the car burns a small amount of fuel to keep your car from stalling.... modern cars can use the momentum of the gears to keep your engine going, and use no gas at all" ummm what? As long as the engine is running, gasoling is being burned. duhhh And as I said above, closing the throttle (engine braking) makes the A/F ratio go rich.

hahaha what? The fuel pump is running all the time.

A/C hurts fuel economy because it puts major drag on the engine to run the compressor, not because of the electrical power used.

Actually, I don't think electrical load would make any significant difference to a car's fuel economy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the engine is always turning the alternator, which is always generating current based on the speed of the engine. The voltage regulator and other circuitry in the alternator serve to charge the battery based on electrical load at any given time, but the alternator is always going to produce whatever current it produces, and should not affect fuel economy at all.

 

Quote, originally posted by cargens.com »
What you should do is coast into the stopping point. During my research, there has been much conflict regarding the advice to coast in neutral, or stay in gear. So out on our track, we were able to conduct the necessary testing. Our results were astonishing. For most newer cars, staying in gear actually turned out to be more fuel efficient than going into neutral. Because, while in neutral, the car burns a small amount of fuel to keep your car from ticking over and stalling, conversely, modern cars can use the momentum of the gears to keep your engine going, and use no gas at all! However, there are two things to consider on this note. First of all, you have to keep in mind that staying in gear will slow your car down much quicker than being in neutral. So if you surf up to 80 mph and then cruise in gear, you may only be able to cruise for 1000 ft before you have to put your foot down again, versus the 1700 ft you can cruise in neutral. So for long sails at high speeds, go into neutral, and for short cruises to the stoplight, stay in gear. Secondly, keep in mind this only applies to newer cars, and my best guess from the experiments would be 2004 and up. For all the rest of us, neutral is still your best friend.

Actually while being poorly written it is true to a point. Injectors pulse width is zero when rpms are above a certian point (I can't rember it for honda but its ussually around 1750 rpms) and the throttle plate is closed. So say you are going down a hill and take foot off the throttle, no gas is going into the engine. The class I learned this in (I go to a school for automotive technology) had alot of trouble grasping this concept and frankly didn't believe my teacher. But it is true and I believe I read about it in a service manual for preludes. I am going to find more information related to Hondas since its understandable if you don't believe it/me. (also that thing about minscule fuel to keep engine from stalling is crap)

 

So at a certain RPM the engine is running 100% lean?? That sounds very bad to me.

 

Never truely thought of this just got tierd of holdin my foot on the pedal so I would pop it on when on the freeway. Freeway is when I mainly use it cause it is normal for a long amount of time that i'm on there, but always thought CC saved ya more gas!!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by PatrickGSR94 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">After reading that site, some if it I agree with, yet some of it is pretty laughable.</TD></TR></TABLE>

^^^^^

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by PatrickGSR94 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So at a certain RPM the engine is running 100% lean?? That sounds very bad to me.</TD></TR></TABLE>

There is no fuel when the car can stay above a certian rpm with the throttle plate closed (tps voltage below .8volts) this ussually occurs on large hills.

I will be posting a picture for you in a minute or two from the service manual (PAGE 11-41).

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Js2GEN &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Never truely thought of this just got tierd of holdin my foot on the pedal so I would pop it on when on the freeway. Freeway is when I mainly use it cause it is normal for a long amount of time that i'm on there, but always thought CC saved ya more gas!!</TD></TR></TABLE>

And you would be correct. Highway is the typical place to use CC, or otherwise when you know you're going a fair distance w/o having to stop and traffic is light.

Never knew about the fuel cutoff, learn something every day. That guy was like "newer models only" but my 94 Helms manual says that too! Props to Honda hehehe

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Nors &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It keeps your RPMs more consistant. It definitly increases MPG.</TD></TR></TABLE>

couldn't of said it any better

 

Driver With A Brain &gt; Cruise Control &gt; Idiot Driver

Looks like most of you are idiots.

One smart person in this thread; Cost up hills, accelerate down; It's not rocket science.

Also, off throttle is very lean, not rich. Even without this so-called cutoff, take a look at any standard fuel maps and you'll see that the injector width is tiny.

RPM consistency means nothing.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by string &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Looks like most of you are idiots.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Speak for yourself.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by string &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">One smart person in this thread; Cost up hills, accelerate down</TD></TR></TABLE>

That's the stupidest thing posted in this entire topic. You can't coast (that's how it's spelled, BTW) up hills; when you're driving uphill, if you don't have the throttle in, you're going to slow down, which wastes fuel. And if you accelerate down the hills, you're going to be going faster and faster; not only does that also waste fuel, but it's also more unsafe to drive faster when you're going downhill (since your stopping distances are greater).

 

for normal highway driving, cc will increas gas mileage. up and down hills, no.