I didn't mean that you never go over 3,000 RPM, such as merging with traffic on a freeway. Modern engines don't have to be revved up to clean out the carbon, which was true when all cars had carburetors.

 

fuel economy isn't JUST rpm. it's more-so dictated by throttle position.

 

If you increase the throttle angle, the result is higher engine RPM. If the car came equipped with a fuel flow gauge, then you would see the direct relationship between increasing RPM and increasing Fuel Flow. Small piston engine aircraft have fuel flow indicators and tachometers. As the RPM is increased the fuel flow follows. Brake Horsepower, at the crankshaft, is a function of RPM. Therefore, reducing RPM will reduce horsepower and fuel flow. That will result in better milage.

 

do you have a scangauge? if not, get one. it's the single best "mod" to increase fuel economy.

i don't feel like explaining it again, but you aren't entirely correct

 

All engines have a minimum fuel consumption point on the hp curve. Porsche is the only manufacturer who published that in ther owner's manual. Typically, most manufacturers engineer their cars to provide the least gas consumption at power levels expected when the car is running on flat level ground at highway speeds of 55 to 65 mph. Just reducing rpm is not necessarily mor economical.
Witness the truck driver who flummoxed EPA by getting better mpg at 65 than 55. EPA accused him of all kinds of cheating but all the truck drivers just laughed. EPA still does things without knowledge. Just read the editors column in this month's C&D.

 

It's dangerous only if you take your hands off the steering wheel or can't get it back in gear. Most just drop the clutch in and release when car speed matches up with rpm you synchonize with throttle. And of course fail to use brakes if needed.

On fuel injected cars there is much to be said for just releasing the throttle downhill but even then there are friction losses in automatic transmission and piston rings.

 

He means if you close the windows there is less aero drag than with the windows open (MIT reports said so) but turning on the A/C does decrease mpg. Canadians have the luck this time of year.

 

Kill people, no. But if what you say is all true how come showroom stock racers and autocrossers do maximize pressure? And they get a lot closer to the limit than street drivers (should, anyway)
And yes you will wear out the center tread quicker. I would have debated which is more costly, better mpg or tire cost, until the latest round of tire prices due to crude prices. Get you tires now. The $200 tire is not far away.

 

Now there is a real debate. The consenus in my crowd is cruise control works best on level interstates with little traffic. The momrent traffic and hills are in play manual throttle control is best.
I can't prove it, it just seems to work that way. And that was not my promotion either; I thought manual throttle controlwas always best if you tended to it very very carefully (which few of us do it seems).
good question.

 

well put my friend!

 

woot woot!!!

 

Since this is not in the Eco forum I don't feel bad saying stop worrying about MPG and just drive the damn car. Even driving the shit out of the Fit I can get low 30s for MPG which is better than nearly 99% of other cars on the road. Is it worth it to kill the enjoyment of driving to save some money, you save like $6 between 34 mpg and 40.

 

I just wanted to comment about this - we don't max out the PSI when auto-x'ing. I was at 40f/42r, which gave me the best results (give or take a couple PSI). It was higher than normal, but definitely not maxed out. I believe the max tire pressure was in the low 50's.