That is the question...

I ran my last few tanks without using cruise control at all.

The tanks are as follows:
1) 4.9 gallons, 85 miles
2) 1.5 gallons, 36 miles(was furious about the previous tank, so I wanted to see what the next few gallons were doing.

The next I actually used the gas cubby app, so I'll just post the actual mileage:

3)35mpg
4)26mpg


Now I just filled up again this morning and decided to use the next few tanks with as much Cruise Control as possible. So far, from the short trip I made this morning(about 15 miles) it's estimating 38mpg.


What do you guys think? What do you use? CC or not?
I'm driving a '10 Fit Sport.

 

I don't worry that much about the mileage I'm getting. I use cruise often but only on the highway in very light traffic. I consider cruise a convenience item, not a fuel saving item.

 

The only reason I even pay attention is because I am trying to stick to my fuel budget I had with my 06 civic and I was averaging 29-32 mpg with that. I'd like to stay there with that.

 

You cannot get accurate estimates using such small amounts. WHen you fill up it is not always to the exact same spot. Do your mileage check over 3-4 tanks at least.

 

I use it extensively on my 35 mile trip to the office and on the 35 mile return trip. Mine is brand new and got only 28mpg out of the first tank, and the last one went up to 31.5mpg.

Yesterday I read a post about using the S mode in the FIT Sport to encourage better shift points and keep it in 5th gear while on the Highway. Simply by doing this my avg MPG on the gage went from 28 to 32.3 by the time I got home. Looking forward to seeing what another few days of driving in S mode makes.

HTH,

Carl B

 

I have a manual Sport, and I only use cruise on interstate highways, where I can actually maintain a constant speed. Ironically, I find I can get better fuel economy WITHOUT cruise control than I can with it. I find I get 1-2 MPG better when I'm controlling the throttle rather than the computer. as they say, YMMV. I guess I'm a smoother driver than I thought.

 

If you want more MPG, what really matters is your driving technique, how well maintained your car is and traffic conditions. I don't touch my cruise control around these congested parts. Maybe I would if Honda put the more costlier adaptive cruise controls on the Fit.

 

It's funny. Well to me it is.

I find Cruise Control to be representitive of the battle between my rapidly fading youth and age.

I like having cruise control and it's obviously "nice" for what it's designed for, which is cruising on open highways. But whenever I use it, I find my youthful self really wanting to keep it turned off and maintain personal control and the ability to accelarate at will. While the approaching "old man" in me, want's to leave it on and simply cruise on down the highway. Right now, vs Opportunity to use Cruise Control, I would say I use it about 50% of the time.

I have no testing, other than having driven a car with cruise control for the past 10 years, but I would say if MPG's are your goal, then I've found that if you are paying attention to your gas pedal I can achieve higher MPG's with the cruise control off. It might vary from driver to driver, but here is my theory. The cruise control is simply a machine computer input device designed #1 to maintain a cruising speed. Thus it reacts to gradations in slope either up or down by either applying more gas, in the case of uphill slopes, or applying brakes in the case of down hill grades. This is nice, if you just want to cruise, however if you want best MPG? Then I like the freedom to gain speed or coast when the incline is downhill. If I'm paying attention to what I'm doing I can get better gas mileage controling this myself by maintaining speed and/or gaining speed when the incline is sloped downwards, where if Cruise Control is engaged it will apply brakes to keep me at the set cruising speed. If I'm NOT paying attention to my gas pedal inputs? Then Cruise Control's auto pilot can outperform me.

So my advice? If MPG's are your goal, then pay attention and do not engage Cruise Control. If MPG's are your goal, but your tired and don't feel like paying attention? Engage Cruise Control. If MPG's are not your goal, and you just want to get from point A to point B, ....stay awake and engage your Cruise Control. If you want to risk getting a speeding ticket and use the agile quick acceleration capabilities of The Fit...do not engage cruise control. Cruise Control is just an optional tool, ultimately it's still the skills and desires of The Driver that will translate most primarily into the driving results.

 

I've used both my Fits extensively and have calculated every tank of fuel usage. You really need a number of tanks to do good calculations, so it will be tough to evaluate unless you take long trips with consistent driving. From all my long trips, I found that I got a slightly better gas mileage without the cruise control, but suffered more tired ankles and fatigue. The mileage differences were only 1 - 2 mpg range. I recommend using cruise control for relaxation, and no cruise control for heavy traffic. But, I personally don't think the mileage difference is all that great.

 

I'm only 1600M into my 2010 Storm Silver MT but 900 of those have been on open freeway and most of that w/ cruise on. What I like is cruise coupled with the drive-by-wire accelerator. With everything being managed electrically is runs a whole lot smoother than any other cruise control I've ever driven.

I've found that the wheel mounted controls allow precise speed control both up and down. Now mine is a manual tranny, but I can only imagine that the auto runs real smooth and would only compliment the cruise economy as well.

So much depends on road profile/conditions, traffic, weather, alignment of stars . . . as others have noted, but I find it very economical as well as relaxing to use on the open road. I'm seeing 38+MPG average [gauged/measured] in my suburban/rural/open road neighborhood. I'm lovin' it! K_C_

 

I use cruise on long trips so my foot doesn't get tired. The cruise on the 2010 manual is ridiculously good. Fuel cutoff hits early (mpg pegged at 80) and it actually maintains the desired speed. Coming from a GM car I'm loving it.

First tank traveling around 70mph on the highway 35.25 MPG with about 1/3 of it city driving, coming from a 22mpg truck I'm loving it! Hoping to hit on my 400 mile trip this weekend will be using cruise the whole way.

 

I always use cruise control whenever it is possible.

 

In the flats and on long and steady drives the CC does a better job than my foot unless I constantly watch the instant economy meter.

 

Your car applies the brakes going downhill?!!

 

Im a cruise control wh0re...... and I was thinking this would get me better mileage. hmmm. I do 50/50 city/highway. i was getting 32.00, and a couple weeks after I got my intake Im getting like 33.50/34.00.
I shall try no cruise on my next tank and see what i get

 

I net better mileage when not on the cruise. It tends to do micro-like acceleration and deceleration only visible on an iFCD and a steady foot can cure that.

That's how the Tundra going 70 mph will average 17 mpg on the cruise but I can get 19 mpg on my foot on the same roads. The mileage meter really helps me out there.

 

I'm in the middle of doing a non-cruise control test for a "daily driving" tank. So far, the mpg indicator on my '09 seems to be 2-3 mpg higher. I'll fill everyone in on the results.

 

I prefer to use cruise for two reasons:

1. Those long highway drives are that much more relaxing with it on.

2. It's good insurance against speeding tickets.

Seems I rarely get nabbed, and those couple times I have been ticketed over the last decade came during those non-cruise control moments when I was either gaining speed on a downhill or accelerating on an incline--- both subtle and subconcious maneuvers to better use the car's momentum for better efficiency.

Both times I was clocked at a paltry 15 kms per hour over the posted limit--- the kind of ticket that only gets written by those few busy-body cops who, unlike the rest of the force, spent their childhoods pulling the wings off flies and chasing ants with a magnifying glass in the afternoon sun.

With cruise on I typically travel at no more than 10 kms over, and I've never been written up for that. So while it's *possible* to get better mpg without cruise, the very slight difference with it on is cheap insurance against an ever-increasingly greedy and predatory beaurocracy.

 

But yes, I do believe my car applies brakes when going downhill. Cruise control is designed to maintain a constant speed. Thus the terms "cruise" and "control".

When you have cruise control engaged and a constant speed set, your automobile is going to follow the rules of physics and gravity and when met with a downward grade it is going to naturally gain momentum. Since this is counter to maintaining a constant speed, your cruise control is going to brake to keep the vehicle at or near the selected speed.

Am I wrong? But I believe the slowing is accomplished through use of the braking system, and not just subtle throttle fuel application and/or engine/transmission. I don't think the system is sophisticated enough to operate much beyond the parameters of increasing throttle to increase speed, and using brake to decrease speed. But if I'm wrong? Let me know.

Technology is improving, I know more expensive automobiles now come with radar assisted cruise controls that will automatically slow or increase speed given feedback from vehicles infront but for The Fit? We are still dealing with a cruise control designed to maintain a set speed using primarily throttle and brake.

 

Cruise Control only uses throttle to control speed and it disengages when the brakes are touched. This is the only connection between it and the brakes.

Downhill is cuts the throttle. The engine is 'braking' the car.

Being Drive By Wire I do believe it's one of the most sensitive CC I've driven. Certain types of roads are not suitable to any cruise control. 200 miles of expressway is.