Driving in neutral/Fuel Economy.

[Frozzy]

Usually when I drive in my manual I go at the 2000RPM mark. However, if I am going down a hill, or coming to an stop or an intersection, and I put the gear in neutral, does this save fuel?

By the sounds of the engine it is doing less RPM, so by that theory it should save fuel.

Does it?

[Qilue]

Not really since in both cases you've already released the accelerator and the engine is effectively idling.

[Cort Haus]

Usually when I drive in my manual I go at the 2000RPM mark. However, if I am going down a hill, or coming to an stop or an intersection, and I put the gear in neutral, does this save fuel?

Yes, I believe so, as engine at idling revs in neutral is burning less fuel.

[Spiffor]

Driving in neutral downhill is dangerous. The only way you can control your speed is the brake, whereas you could have the engine regulate how fast your wheels go.

Generally speaking, You should be in neutral only when the car is stopped, or when it's almost stopped. Otherwise, you may have much less control over your car.

[VetLegion]

What Spiffor said, it's dangerous, don't do it.

Also consider that going down in neutral you are wearing your brakes more, and the cost of new brakes can offset any savings you achieve in fuel consumption.

Neutral is below 1000 rpm in most cars, so you do spend less fuel than when you drive at 2000 rpm. Modern cars have computers that regulate the fuel/air mixture, so who knows how much exactly you are saving.

[snoopy369]

On an empty, straight highway with a relatively small grade, it's probably safe ... but with any of the above detail changing, bad idea. It certainly doesn't save enough fuel to justify unless you're doing it for like 50 km or something ...

[Cort Haus]

At a pinch, it's less good to run out of fuel in a remote spot than to use up a bit of brake pad when the fuel is very low and you need to squeeze out a little more from the tank.

There was a fuel crisis in the UK a few years ago, and everyone was 'driving' around in neutral to save what little they had. I don't recall hearing of any surge in the accident stats. Usually any rise in any accident stat gets a weeks news these days, followed by panic legislation.

[Bkeela]

I've been switching off my engine at lights lately to save fuel. When the light turns green, I have ample time to restart, for Australian drivers are incredibly dim, and only move off when the person infront has started to move.

I wish they could learn to all slowly move forward when the blasted light turns green. Dummies.

[Jon Miller]

I am remember my dad changing to neutral to save gas when we were almost out...

JM

[Qilue]

Wouldn't stopping and starting the engine at lights burn more fuel than just leaivng it running?

[Qilue]

If you wanted to save money, wouldn't public transport be a cheaper alternative?

[Ecthy]

I often go neutral before stopping or slowing down, going brakes only. I do this to save me the hassle of switching gears every 3 seconds.

[VetLegion]

Originally posted by Qilue
Wouldn't stopping and starting the engine at lights burn more fuel than just leaivng it running?

It wouldn't. Some cars do it automatically to save fuel.

[Ecthy]

In 90% of cases it would. Depending on how long you stay at the red light, but normally it isn't a wait long enough to stop the engine.

[VetLegion]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
There was a fuel crisis in the UK a few years ago, and everyone was 'driving' around in neutral to save what little they had. I don't recall hearing of any surge in the accident stats. Usually any rise in any accident stat gets a weeks news these days, followed by panic legislation.

What fuel crisis? That one day strike to protest price increases or something else?

Anyway, it's not easy to prove that car involved in an accident had been driving in neutral when it happened, at least I don't know how you'd do it.

BTW., my argument is not based on statistics, I just consider bad practice to rely only on the brakes to control the car. Brakes can and do fail. Also, in some tight situations accelerating quickly can be a smarter move than decelerating.