Hypermiling...anyone tried it?

noone_of_consequence (who regularly gets 1,100 mile tanks) recommends that TDis be accellerated up slopes and coasted downhill. The reason is that the engine spends longer in it's sweet spots using that method. See the '1100/1200 mile club' thread for more.

dan30thz28 said:

Hello,
Has anyone tried it? Let me know your results, and if you really think it's worth it. Thanks, and I look forward to your responses.

Sincerely,

Click to expand...

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Hi Dan, I´ll tell you that it´s worth and also is fun for me, although this month I´ve made some high speed runs just to keep sanity. Results? current highest MPG tanks here. Lately I´m loosing enthusiasm ´cause there is very little competition in that field and I don´t see HOE I can get 75+ MPG any time soon.[/FONT]

There are many things to try out, but in every case you have to be a responsible grownup. FYI I don´t key off or draft semis, that is too difficult - dangerous - non-elegant for me. I´ve patience but I´ll not drive steady at 35 MPH, that is too slow. P&G seems reasonable for my driving conditions, you can drive faster, ≈ 55 MPH, and still get awesome FE.

There is a lot of information in this forum, you have to read it and make your own interpretations as there are no clear cut recommendations in many cases and in some others you have to dig out the goodies from littered threads like this one.

Cheers,

I hypermiled the last tank. I didn't push start the car and I didn't turn off the engine to coast.
I did push in the clutch and coasted down hills. When I started to lose speed, I re-engaged the clutch.
I slowed down (55-65).
I accelerated slowly and upshifted rapidly.
I anticipated stops and tried to keep rolling as much as possible.
I kept my speed as consistent as possible and tried to use momentum on the uphills...like semis do and never used cruise control.
I usually kept the windows up and rarely used the AC...only when my girlfriend was in the car...she's such a baby... but, when it got hot, I didn't sit and sweat for the sake of a mpg or two.
I got rid of any excess weight out of the trunk.
I turned off the engine on stoplights I knew took a long time to cycle.

Now, after all that freakin' work, I go to fill up and enjoy the rewards...and the #$%^ autostop freezes and I shoot diesel fuel out of the tank...effectively negating the test.
However, based on the total fuel on the pump, the amount I can squeeze into the tank after the nozzle clicks off the first time (which is where I always stop) and an estimate of how much shot out of the tank, I can pretty confidently state that my mileage should have been around 53 to 55 mpg (and that's conservative)...versus a normal 44-45. I was on a quarter tank at 568 miles and I'm usually way below a quarter tank at those miles.
My best prior tank was 49+ driving continuously at 65-70 with the AC on.
The point is that you can practice a few hypermile techniques and get great results without going to the extreme and the biggest gain is just slowing down. If you only do that, you'll get great results.
The things I did weren't any real extra effort and yielded me some nice gains. I'll keep hypermiling and the next time, I'll go to my normal pump...which has never malfunctioned...and get better stats.

I have a 35 mile commute with speed limits between 45 and 55. It has a couple of traffic circles and 3 or 4 lights and stop signs.

I've been trying to coast to the lights or stop signs as much as possible and coast down long hills in "N." Also been trying to avoid having to use the brakes.

Does anyone know if shifting an auto trans into "N" when stopped will save fuel? Not sure if the stress of additional shifting is worth any fuel savings.

I got 49 MPG last tank.

all yalls can save more fuel if you coast in gear as opposed to coasting in neutral - zero fuel is used if you stay in gear! it will cost you some momentum compared to coasting in neutral, but it's a good tradeoff for mpg especially considering what you are going to have to do with the momentum anyway, such as coasting to a stop.
regarding original question about hypermiling, i think there is a whole forum here devoted to it, with 700, 800, 900, 1000 mile tank clubs ! those TDI peeps were hypermiling long before that honda gasser guy made it cool.

no one of conseqence, does your car read in kph or mph? those numbers seem really out there if truly in miles and miles per gallon. reason I say that is, I drive a jetta in Canada and do well to get a tank of 1100 kms.

boots said:

no one of conseqence, does your car read in kph or mph? those numbers seem really out there if truly in miles and miles per gallon. reason I say that is, I drive a jetta in Canada and do well to get a tank of 1100 kms.

Click to expand...

No offense, my high tanks are +1750 km, I take care to convert km into miles and liters into gallons; there is a handy applet in this forum. I remember putting a "1200 km to go" banner in my screen saver, it wasn´t overnight but eventually it did happened.

PS the ODO is working fine and reads about 1 km less per tank compared to SG and GPS.

eli said:

all yalls can save more fuel if you coast in gear as opposed to coasting in neutral - zero fuel is used if you stay in gear! it will cost you some momentum compared to coasting in neutral, but it's a good tradeoff for mpg especially considering what you are going to have to do with the momentum anyway, such as coasting to a stop.
regarding original question about hypermiling, i think there is a whole forum here devoted to it, with 700, 800, 900, 1000 mile tank clubs ! those TDI peeps were hypermiling long before that honda gasser guy made it cool.

Click to expand...

I disagree with you eli,
If you are slowing down for a stop sign, light or traffic, then yes, staying in gear cuts off the fuel flow to the engine...BUT if you're coasting down a hill, the drag the engine provides slows the car down so much so that (unless its a really steep hill) you come out ahead by not having to mash down the gas peddle as soon. You'd be only burning a slight amount of fuel to keep the motor running down hill, vs having to muscle your way up hill a longer way by keeping it in gear

It's not black and white to say...... Coast in gear or in neutral.
Depends on the terrain, I use both methods.

Example - Coming up to stop lights
a) I use neutral, unless I'm coasting too fast to the lights, so I put it in gear, use 0 fuel and slow down.
b) I coast in gear and end up slowing down too much that I would need to accelerate to get to the lights. I'll just put it in neutral and coast to the lights.

Going down hills
a) Coast in gear, use 0 fuel and near the bottom will have to accelerate (basiclly Pulse and Glide)
b) Coast in neutral will go alot further, and alot faster before friction starts to slow you down
c) Coast in neutral, then you find yourself coasting faster than the other person in front which means you have to slow down - Back in gear and coast in gear.

Using both methods will help you achieve the same result.

Now a question for when there is no coasting. What is better according to Scangage, driving 80 km/h in fifth gear and about 1700 rpm or below the highest torque, or driving 80 km/h in fourth gear at 2000 rpm at maximum torque?
Last tank I got 21.0 km/liter, some city, mostly highway on a 50 km commute each way in a Jetta 2001 standard.

rodejetta said:

Now a question for when there is no coasting. What is better according to Scangage, driving 80 km/h in fifth gear and about 1700 rpm or below the highest torque, or driving 80 km/h in fourth gear at 2000 rpm at maximum torque?
Last tank I got 21.0 km/liter, some city, mostly highway on a 50 km commute each way in a Jetta 2001 standard.

Click to expand...

The way I like to think about it (and I might be wrong) is if your RPM's are lower, you are providing less fuel than if they were high. Ergo it's more efficient to run your RPM's as low as possible. It may not generate max torque but you don't need max torque to keep your car at speed. Just my thoughts, now let the light of experience shine down!