Don't even go there. Most women drive with the brakes as much as they do the steering wheel. If you've been a road dog as long as I have, you can tell the age, sex, andrace of someone driving in front of you...... and thier shoe size.... and what they had for breakfast.

 

Just curious why you shift into neutral at long lights. I tried this out and it didn't affect my RPMs. Also, I thought having the specified tire pressure in your tires would give you the better mpg's, thought lowering it was for comfort purposes.

 

wind resistance or not, my truck gets its best mileage at 72 mph. at 55-65, it feels as if the engine is using more fuel to keep itself moving. at 72 mph, i can get about 18 mpg depending on terrain. on long trips, draft a semi. believe it or not, i have gotten over 20 mpg this way. I can make my frequent drive to San Jose, CA from San Diego, CA on a tank of gas. figure that one out.

 

I didn't read all the pages on this subject......I wonder how manyof you were driving during the oil situation of the 70's.........I was......

 

I wasn't quite there, but I remember learning some new words from the old man over that mess while sitting in line. Hopefully, opec will continue to love money more than they hate ****.

 

Mine is the same. IMO if you use a simple model, sure 55 yields the best mileage, but there also has to be a balance between throttle and rpm that depends on a lot of things. Not the least of which being aerodynamics and gearing. To your point; with my setup, I get the best mileage around 2000-2100rpms.That probably works out to about 69-71mph. I can maintain that speed on flat ground by just resting my foot on the throttle.

 

Something new I am trying actually. I read that at long lights the engine turns the transmission in drive.This made sense to me because on ice you can still get torque at a standstill with your foot on the break. That ponitac in my avatar actually used to slide me sideways and I had to put it in neutral. When I did I could feel it relax.

Some of the hypermiling things are not forme like drafting off of a truck. This is mainly because I don't like rocks and chipped paint. Watch a truck the next time it rains. It looks like a lot of wind is coming out under the truck.

 

Read this http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/26/auto...ersion=2008032

It is a good article.

 

From the article:

Every 10 mph faster reduces fuel economy by about 4 mpg, a figure that remains fairly constant regardless of vehicle size, Clark said. (It might seem that a larger vehicle, with more aerodynamic drag, would see more of an impact. But larger vehicles also tend to have larger, more powerful engines that can more easily cope with the added load.)

So if I'm getting 17 at 70, I'm going to get 21 at 60. I'm a little skeptical. I wonder if "low pressure hole" applies to p/u's with no tunneau (sp.) or cap.

 

speed will kill mileage... like others have said each truck/car will have it's sweet spot, you just have to find it. I believe it's tied to the torque peak... when doing this testing https://dodgeforum.com/m_1037052/tm.htm I'd experimented with several different setups and was able to see which setup gave me more low end torque, ultimately turning up the power on the truck and driving the same gave me the best mileage at 18.8 mpg... the all time best on my truck was 19.0 so I was not too far off of that, and the power settings were different then as well.

someone made a reference to getting a rice burner for fuel savings... well i have another option which you'll probably like better... VW 1.8t equipped (golf, jetta, passat, audi a4)... there are a ton of upgrade go fast goodies for that motor and it's pretty bullet proof from what I can tell. 200+ whp (modded of course) and 28+ mpg when you need it... I have a 2001 jetta for commuting (still 170 mi/day) and in doing so I managed to save over $1100 bux in fuel in the 8 weeks that I've owned it.

and yes I have the data to show for it...