Have a 2.4L auto. When on a long hill and not using the accelerator the revs are much higher than if in neutral. Does putting it into neutral: save/use more gas? cause harm to anything (like if moving at speeds >60km/h)? Also do the answers differ if on flat vs downhill?

in neutral it has to idle. on a down hill and not pushing on the accelerator it isent useing any gas

wont harm anything but i doubt ur saving any gas our comps automatically compensates for the best possible fuel economy

how high the rpms are is not the only deciding factor. especially when you're letting off the gas. with an auto, there's not too many things to consider, but just leave it in gear and let off the gas pedal.

Are you trying to hypermile or something?

I know in NY it is illegal to coast in neutral because you wouldnt be able to power out of an accident if you saw one coming.

Are you trying to hypermile or something?

well, this is the hypermiling forum :lol:

ic, thx all

Today's cars have a "fuel cut-off". If, for example, you're driving 50mph, and you see a streetlight in the distance turn yellow, from the point you lift off of the throttle, regardless of RPM, the fuel injectors will turn off. Placing the car in neutral requires the car use fuel to keep the engine speed at idle, is potentially dangerous, and in most states illegal.

I have been driving in neutral a lot and when I do my MPG reading goes up a pretty good amount. Is the meter not very accurate or what? Should I stop doing this completely?

I have an automatic 08' Sport btw.

I've noticed my DIC on AVG. is off my 1 MPG or so. My actual is usually a little worse. Ive just filled up with Shell 98 octane and seem to be getting better milage. I'll have to see if its actually getting better by actually calulating my milage. I have a '08 2.2L

I've noticed my DIC on AVG. is off my 1 MPG or so. My actual is usually a little worse. Ive just filled up with Shell 98 octane and seem to be getting better milage. I'll have to see if its actually getting better by actually calulating my milage. I have a '08 2.2L

i'm assuming you meant 93 octane? if so, don't waste your money. you will not get any better mileage. may even be worse. it's all ricer myths that higher octane improves mileage. just use regular 87.

i'm assuming you meant 93 octane? if so, don't waste your money. you will not get any better mileage. may even be worse. it's all ricer myths that higher octane improves mileage. just use regular 87.

qft.

The higher octane just tells you that the gas is more resistive to detonation (aka, knock retard) If you're not boosted or have smaller pulleys stick to the 87 or 89.

"The octane rating is a measure of the resistance of gasoline and other fuels to detonation (engine knocking) in spark-ignition internal combustion engines. High-performance engines typically have higher compression ratios and are therefore more prone to detonation, so they require higher octane fuel. A lower-performance engine will not generally perform better with high-octane fuel, since the compression ratio is fixed by the engine design."

Thanks Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

I have been driving in neutral a lot and when I do my MPG reading goes up a pretty good amount. Is the meter not very accurate or what? Should I stop doing this completely?

I have an automatic 08' Sport btw.

When coasting in neutral, the engine will require fuel to keep it running. Leave it in gear and let off the gas, the engine uses ZERO fuel, the momentum of the car keeps the engine turning.

Not to mention that once you have "coasted" down you need to get back up to speed....put the dic on instantaneous mpg and watch what happens to your mileage then :thumbsdow. Much better to maintain a steady speed than coast, gas, coast, gas....

Big secret.....brakes use gas! Every time you step on the brake, the fuel you burned getting up to speed is turned directly into heat by the pads / rotors. If you can train yourself to be aware of not only what is right in front of you but what is farther down the road, you can let off the gas and come to a stop with almost no brake at all. Saves (a little) gas, saves brakes....of course, you want to be doing this where traffic allows, don't be an ass just for the sake of 0.05 mpg :)

Bottom line, drive like there are raw eggs taped to the pedals and you don't want to break them. Not really exciting (ok, not at all exciting) but if you are looking to squeeze every inch out of every gallon.......

Could you explain why the DIC reads a much higher mpg when u suddenly go to neutral if uses more fuel as you say? I am not doubting what you said but im just not clear about it. Ive found different results in different scenarios

1) If I am going down a steep hill, I get better mileage (based on DIC readout) by leaving it in 5th gear

2) but if i am just rolling up to a stop light in 3rd gear, the DIC says I get better mileage if I shift to neutral and coast up to the light as opposed to leaving it in gear until I stop.

Could you explain why the DIC reads a much higher mpg when u suddenly go to neutral if uses more fuel as you say? I am not doubting what you said but im just not clear about it. Ive found different results in different scenarios

1) If I am going down a steep hill, I get better mileage (based on DIC readout) by leaving it in 5th gear

2) but if i am just rolling up to a stop light in 3rd gear, the DIC says I get better mileage if I shift to neutral and coast up to the light as opposed to leaving it in gear until I stop.

the fuel cutoff is simple, and is explaines a bajillion times. basically if you're over like 18mph and 1500 rpms or something like that (rpms may be a little higher) and leave the car in gear, and let off the gas pedal, you are using ZERO gas. ZERO. if you throw it into gear, you are using gas to keep the engine idling.

you should never be in neutral while you're moving though. it's a bad habit that manual drivers pick up for some reason.

I assume u meant to say if I throw it into neutral, it uses gas to keep idling. Yeah I understand what you are saying and Ive read lots about the fuel cutoff before.

But does this just mean that the DIC fails to account for this, since If i'm rolling in gear and off the gas pedal, I should be getting some ridiculously high MPG (higher than neutral at least)?

I assume u meant to say if I throw it into neutral, it uses gas to keep idling. Yeah I understand what you are saying and Ive read lots about the fuel cutoff before.

But does this just mean that the DIC fails to account for this, since If i'm rolling in gear and off the gas pedal, I should be getting some ridiculously high MPG (higher than neutral at least)?

if you're rolling in gear and meet the needs for dfco you will see 99 on the dic, which is as high as the dic displays. i've tried it in neutral, and get about 40 something usually

I hear what you are saying and I haven't rode in neutral since... But, when I was riding in neutral at any speed over 30mph and reset my MPG meter, it said 99.9 until i either put it into drive or slowed down to a stop.

Nonetheless, I am going to continue riding in Drive and never switching it into neutral.

I hear what you are saying and I haven't rode in neutral since... But, when I was riding in neutral at any speed over 30mph and reset my MPG meter, it said 99.9 until i either put it into drive or slowed down to a stop.

Nonetheless, I am going to continue riding in Drive and never switching it into neutral.

You are looking at the average mpg, kinda pointless for this discussion. Put it on inst mpg and you will see what we are talking about.

opps! kk i will do... waht does inst mean btw?

i'm assuming you meant 93 octane? if so, don't waste your money. you will not get any better mileage. may even be worse. it's all ricer myths that higher octane improves mileage. just use regular 87.

Not necessarily true, if an engine is designed to function at it's best with 93, it will not get as good of gas mileage on a lower octane.

But putting 93 in a 91 crx won't do shit...haha

Not necessarily true, if an engine is designed to function at it's best with 93, it will not get as good of gas mileage on a lower octane.

But putting 93 in a 91 crx won't do shit...haha

we were talking about a base model cobalt though. i should have been more specific i guess and said higher than tuned for.

opps! kk i will do... waht does inst mean btw?

Instantaneous (sp?), tells you what kind of mileage you are getting right at that moment. Average mpg just shows the average since the last time you reset it.

Walk on it in 1st or 2nd and you can get into single digits on the instantaneous mpg, rolling down a hill (in gear) with no throttle applied, it will go to 99mpg....only because it can't display infinity :)

For what it's worth, cruising at 160 kph (100 mph) gets me about 16 mpg out of my 2.4 manual, about the same as my boss gets in his F250 at 100 kph (60 mph) :lol:

In my 2008 G5 2lt With 2.2 automatic, if I cost in gear down a long hill if I am going fast enough the Instant DIC mileage will go to 99 if I put it in neutral it will hit 99 and stay there till I put it back in gear or come to a stop. Also if I am driving along a flat road by my house at 55mph and take my foot off the gas it will 99 for alittle bit in GEAR ( in neutral it will hit 99 almost right away and stay there even going about 25mph. Also in my 2007 Trailblazer SS if I cost in gear I will get maybe 45mpg on My aeroforce gauge and DIC if I put it in neutral I have gotten as High as 130MPG. So tell me that make any sense!

In my 2008 G5 2lt With 2.2 automatic, if I cost in gear down a long hill if I am going fast enough the Instant DIC mileage will go to 99 if I put it in neutral it will hit 99 and stay there till I put it back in gear or come to a stop. Also if I am driving along a flat road by my house at 55mph and take my foot off the gas it will 99 for alittle bit in GEAR ( in neutral it will hit 99 almost right away and stay there even going about 25mph. Also in my 2007 Trailblazer SS if I cost in gear I will get maybe 45mpg on My aeroforce gauge and DIC if I put it in neutral I have gotten as High as 130MPG. So tell me that make any sense!

what doesn't make sense is thinking it's a good idea to coast in neutral. if you want the ultimate mpg's, just shut the engine off. that's what the hardcore mpg'ers do.

When coasting in neutral, the engine will require fuel to keep it running. Leave it in gear and let off the gas, the engine uses ZERO fuel, the momentum of the car keeps the engine turning.

Not to mention that once you have "coasted" down you need to get back up to speed....put the dic on instantaneous mpg and watch what happens to your mileage then :thumbsdow. Much better to maintain a steady speed than coast, gas, coast, gas....

.......


how does one do this? put the dic on instantaneous mpg? or is this only on the new ones?

well in a automatic car, if u are going downhill and leaving it in gear, there is still power needed to run the transmission, weither it be due to gravity or the engine. and it will not pick up speed as fast. if u put it in neutral, it will break the direct link between the tires and engine causing less friction and accelerate faster, using less gas to go faster. that would be the only time i would put it in nutral to coast. any other time its not going to do much. correct me if i am wrong, but thats my thoughtas on it

when i drive out by work in a hilly city, i can put my silverado in neutral, and actually accel faster then the cars in front of me that have it in gear when going down hill.

how does one do this? put the dic on instantaneous mpg? or is this only on the new ones?

Just hit the "info" button until the display shpws xx.x MPG INST. Should be the next one after xx.x MPG AVG.

Works on my 08, not sure about earlier model years.

well in a automatic car, if u are going downhill and leaving it in gear, there is still power needed to run the transmission, weither it be due to gravity or the engine. and it will not pick up speed as fast. if u put it in neutral, it will break the direct link between the tires and engine causing less friction and accelerate faster, using less gas to go faster. that would be the only time i would put it in nutral to coast. any other time its not going to do much. correct me if i am wrong, but thats my thoughtas on it

when i drive out by work in a hilly city, i can put my silverado in neutral, and actually accel faster then the cars in front of me that have it in gear when going down hill.

Neutral coasting = no engine braking. Service brakes get very hot. Hot brakes fade. Truck with brakes fried right out of it falls of cliff.

If you really need that extra .01 mpg so bad that you would ever consider neutral coasting (or worse, Engine off coasting) then you would be better off walking.

1. Free wheeling or coasting your car in neutral is not exactly the safest practice. And for anyone who has had to swerve and avoid you'll know what I'm talking about.

2. There are no fuel savings by coasting in Neutral. If you have done it and actually looked at your rolling idle it's actually higher than your parked idle. Not to mention that when using engine breaking your injectors are actually cut off completely at certain points. IE closed throttle @ 2500+ RPM engine breaking = no fuel/injector cut.

Ive tried the N deal.
I hate it, especially since the gears aren't gated.

I used to do it in my Man. Saab, I find that with my Auto I forget that it's in N and rev like a jackass.
Too much hassle IMO, Autos should already have max fuel economy with in D as is.

Today's cars have a "fuel cut-off". If, for example, you're driving 50mph, and you see a streetlight in the distance turn yellow, from the point you lift off of the throttle, regardless of RPM, the fuel injectors will turn off. Placing the car in neutral requires the car use fuel to keep the engine speed at idle, is potentially dangerous, and in most states illegal.

hes got it exactly. car uses no fuel at regular idle RMP while in gear, u put it in nuetral, normal idle RPM is lower, but car must use more gas to maintain that idle and not stall in a sence...

i'm assuming you meant 93 octane? if so, don't waste your money. you will not get any better mileage. may even be worse. it's all ricer myths that higher octane improves mileage. just use regular 87.

Actually

:lol:

On our cars(and most GMs) there is a high and low octane table.

Always looks for the most timing, once it knocks enough(nothing crazy, more consistent than high amounts of knock) it will switch to the lower octane table.

Things like mid grade(in my personally experience and HPT scans) are like the worst thing you can do to these cars :lol:

Also DFCO takes a couple of seconds to kick in and you will get better mileage coasting to a red light using only the brakes to slow you down versus engine braking. Same goes for tuned, and a lot of times certain tunes(Mopar stage tunes are a perfect example) of turning off DFCO to make it pop while decelerating.

DFCO fuel injection works better than carbs which suck the most fuel when they are pulling full vacuum(completely off the gas)...but you use so little gas to idle.

hes got it exactly. car uses no fuel at regular idle RMP while in gear, u put it in nuetral, normal idle RPM is lower, but car must use more gas to maintain that idle and not stall in a sence...

DFCO only comes on after a programmed RPM, if you are below that RPM while coasting, you will spray fuel and 9 times outta ten it is more than idle.

Idling uses like NO gas.

Putting the trans in neutral while moving is NOT good for it. You're doing more damage than you can imagine. I'm not going to explain because I tend to ramble and go off on a tangent when it comes to the mechanical engineering aspect of an automobile. But I found this great, simply-stated explanation on another forum:
The tranny hydraulic pump is driven by the input shaft from the torque convertor. Therefore if the output shaft is spinning at 50mph and the engine is idling it won't be delivering the required pressure to the tranny. It's the same as running your engine at 3000rpm with an oil pump delivering 1000rpm of oil pressure. The result is increased wear, burnt tranny fluid and a premature visit to the tranny shop.

Plus it's dangerous, vehicle dynamics are balanced around an on load system, when you unload that system - coasting in neutral, the vehicle is inherently unstable. Try a sharp turn in neutral sometime and you'll get the idea.

The tranny hydraulic pump is driven by the input shaft from the torque convertor. Therefore if the output shaft is spinning at 50mph and the engine is idling it won't be delivering the required pressure to the tranny. It's the same as running your engine at 3000rpm with an oil pump delivering 1000rpm of oil pressure. The result is increased wear, burnt tranny fluid and a premature visit to the tranny shop.

Plus it's dangerous, vehicle dynamics are balanced around an on load system, when you unload that system - coasting in neutral, the vehicle is inherently unstable. Try a sharp turn in neutral sometime and you'll get the idea.


I have a few problems with this logic. This person does not fully understand the workings of an automatic transmission, and some of this info doesn't pertain to our cars in particular. First of all, the pump is not driven by the input shaft from the TC. It's driven by the actual housing. The housing is directly connected to the flexplate, so it can never disconnected from the pump. Secondly, when you are coasting in neutral, the insides of the transmission are essential not moving. They are moving a small amount just because of friction from the axles, but it is getting the adequate amount of lubrication for the amount of load that it's under. There is not increased wear from coasting in neutral. An transmission works on very different principals from an engine, so comparing the two is not accurate.

As for being unsafe because of maneuvering while in neutral, what aspect are you referring to? I would venture to say steering for the most part, because the other aspects of vehicle dynamics will be the same regardless of being in gear or not. Our steering is electric. It's not dependent on engine speed as traditional hydraulically assisted units are. It basis the amount of steering assist on calculations of the VSS (vehicle speed sensors), which will be the same regardless of being in neutral or not.

As for why I don't coast in gear and I coast in neutral; I go down a very long (read 15 mile) very steep stretch of freeway. If I leave it in gear, I can only travel a third of the way down before having to accelerate back up to speed. If I coast in neutral I can travel 95% of the way without giving any throttle input. It's good for a 3 mpg increase on the same round trip in the same traffic and weather conditions. For my particular situation, it makes sense. I'm not saying everyone should do it all the time, but in certain conditions it's advantageous.

Just hit the "info" button until the display shpws xx.x MPG INST. Should be the next one after xx.x MPG AVG.

Works on my 08, not sure about earlier model years.

Only 08+ has this. The reading right after resetting your average will net the same effect for us.

i can actually feel my car when i left off the gas (that it shuts off the injectors)...and the DIC goes 99 MPG

pretty handy economical feature

my last automatic vehicle was a 2001 ford escape. If I was stopped with the car in gear the rpm's were lower if I had the car in neutral the rpm's were higher. Just leave the car in gear with an auto. And yes in many states it is illegal to be driving a car in neutral and if you get in an accident while the car was in neutral you will be considered at fault by the insurance company (cops don't decide fault just the facts that you are the idiot with you car in neutral going down a hill).

I do know some things about law being a law enforcement officer and all.

I know in NY it is illegal to coast in neutral because you wouldnt be able to power out of an accident if you saw one coming.
It's illegal to coast in a lot of states. I'd be willing to bet all states have a similar statute on it.

OP-Not being a jerk, but if gas is that much of a concern, why not lessen how much you drive? I know with the LNF's/LSJ's they have a deceleration fuel cut ott. So you actually get better gas mileage leaving the car in gear. However, I don't know if it's different for auotmatics as well as the 2.2's or 2.4's.

my last automatic vehicle was a 2001 ford escape. If I was stopped with the car in gear the rpm's were lower if I had the car in neutral the rpm's were higher. Just leave the car in gear with an auto. And yes in many states it is illegal to be driving a car in neutral and if you get in an accident while the car was in neutral you will be considered at fault by the insurance company (cops don't decide fault just the facts that you are the idiot with you car in neutral going down a hill).

I do know some things about law being a law enforcement officer and all.

That's because there was a load on it. More load = more fuel consumption. Everyone keeps saying the injectors cut off if you leave it in neutral, but nobody addresses the fact that you can't coast as far in gear as out of gear.

That's because there was a load on it. More load = more fuel consumption. Everyone keeps saying the injectors cut off if you leave it in neutral, but nobody addresses the fact that you can't coast as far in gear as out of gear.

Neutral = idling with injectors on

In Gear = Engine speed controlled by trans (up until a slow speed) with injectors off

Neutral = idling with injectors on

In Gear = Engine speed controlled by trans (up until a slow speed) with injectors off


How does that answer my question? The trans controlling engine speed will reduce the overall amount you can coast because it causes more friction. There is also less harm to an auto than a manual when shifting into neutral. Since autos are hydraulically coupled rather than mechanically coupled, there isn't the extra stress on the main bearings of the crankshaft.

How does that answer my question? The trans controlling engine speed will reduce the overall amount you can coast because it causes more friction. There is also less harm to an auto than a manual when shifting into neutral. Since autos are hydraulically coupled rather than mechanically coupled, there isn't the extra stress on the main bearings of the crankshaft.

true but when you are coasting in gear (auto) its in overdrive so theres really no difference than if it was in neutral

and i think your over thinking this...

please dont try and "shift" your atuo. Thats just gay and useless on soo many levels.

Just drive her in OD all the time and youll be all set.

1. Free wheeling or coasting your car in neutral is not exactly the safest practice. And for anyone who has had to swerve and avoid you'll know what I'm talking about.

2. There are no fuel savings by coasting in Neutral. If you have done it and actually looked at your rolling idle it's actually higher than your parked idle. Not to mention that when using engine breaking your injectors are actually cut off completely at certain points. IE closed throttle @ 2500+ RPM engine breaking = no fuel/injector cut.

Wait I'm confused. Are you saying if I'm engine braking, and its past 2500rpm then the injectors are NOT cut off? Only below 2500 they get cut off?

Wait I'm confused. Are you saying if I'm engine braking, and its past 2500rpm then the injectors are NOT cut off? Only below 2500 they get cut off?

no no no...i would say for the SS/SC they turn off till you kill it or until you push the clutch in to make it idle again

I did a test. I put instant mpg on and it went to 99 only under 2500k

true but when you are coasting in gear (auto) its in overdrive so theres really no difference than if it was in neutral

and i think your over thinking this...

I'm certainly not over thinking this. I've based my statements off of my own personal real world tests. And if you think being in OD is the same is being in neutral, then you should consider putting the crack pipe down. At freeway speeds, the TCC locks up and the torque converter is locked to the trans making it a 1:1 ratio. It neutral, it's not connected at all so there is a significant loss of friction.

I did a test. I put instant mpg on and it went to 99 only under 2500k

See, here's the other problem, at freeway speeds, coasting down a hill, the injectors wouldn't cut off because it's over 2,500 RPM.

please dont try and "shift" your atuo. Thats just gay and useless on soo many levels.

Just drive her in OD all the time and youll be all set.


I don't shift my auto. Whenever I am driving, I let it do it's job. When I coast down the freeway however, I put it in neutral. It's quite different that actually "shifting". Thanks for over reading my posts.

hmm...i thought OD was always less than 1?

ill check tomorrow on my own car (09 G5)

and anyway you will decrease the life of the trans because of the fact when it engages and disengages it slips the bands and clutches

I don't shift my auto. Whenever I am driving, I let it do it's job. When I coast down the freeway however, I put it in neutral. It's quite different that actually "shifting". Thanks for over reading my posts.

that is SHIFTING the car. Youre SHIFTING it out of GEAR into NEUTRAL.

Then you have to SHIFT it BACK INTO GEAR when you need to ACCELERATE again.

So yes, youre SHIFTING your AUTOMATIC transmission.

that is SHIFTING the car. Youre SHIFTING it out of GEAR into NEUTRAL.

Then you have to SHIFT it BACK INTO GEAR when you need to ACCELERATE again.

So yes, youre SHIFTING your AUTOMATIC transmission.

:twothumbs

and i went 90 mph today and the instant economy went 99 mpg...and why wouldnt the injectors cut off at a higher speed?

hmm...i thought OD was always less than 1?

ill check tomorrow on my own car (09 G5)

and anyway you will decrease the life of the trans because of the fact when it engages and disengages it slips the bands and clutches

I don't mean the gear ratio in the transmission is 1:1. I mean the coupling ratio of the torque converter.

that is SHIFTING the car. Youre SHIFTING it out of GEAR into NEUTRAL.

Then you have to SHIFT it BACK INTO GEAR when you need to ACCELERATE again.

So yes, youre SHIFTING your AUTOMATIC transmission.


Shifting infers moving it through the gears. Neutral isn't a gear. Moving the shift lever to neutral disengages the transmission, it doesn't shift it between gears, calm down.

Shifting infers moving it through the gears. Neutral isn't a gear. Moving the shift lever to neutral disengages the transmission, it doesn't shift it between gears, calm down.

No shit dummy. WTF do u think youre doing when you pop it out of gear then back into gear. If you go from 3rd to neutral back into third youre shifting in and out of third. Holy shit, its not rocket science. If you go from OD ( or w/e goofy ass automatic gear your shifting from ) to neutral back into OD, youre shifting in and out of OD.

Of course I wouldnt expect you to actually know what shifting is considering u drive an auto. Just dont do it. The car is designed to maximize fuel efficiency from the factory. Shifting in and out of gear, or shifting an auto to begin with is just retarded.

No shit dummy. WTF do u think youre doing when you pop it out of gear then back into gear. If you go from 3rd to neutral back into third youre shifting in and out of third. Holy shit, its not rocket science. If you go from OD ( or w/e goofy ass automatic gear your shifting from ) to neutral back into OD, youre shifting in and out of OD.

Of course I wouldnt expect you to actually know what shifting is considering u drive an auto. Just dont do it. The car is designed to maximize fuel efficiency from the factory. Shifting in and out of gear, or shifting an auto to begin with is just retarded.

Alright, you crossed a line now. First of all, I stand by my statement that you are disengaging the transmission, not shifting it, but at this point that seems to be purely semantics. Where you went wrong is making a personal attack on me. Wtf dude? This is a discussion that contains peoples opinions. We are all entitled. Why did you get all pissed of? Saying I don't know what shifting is because I drive an automatic currently is both ignorant and uniformed. My first car, 1970 Mustang Mach 1, had a Top loader 4 speed. My second car, a 1992 Thunderbird SC, had a 5 speed. My third car, a 2001 SVT Focus, had a 6 speed. My fourth car, a 1991 Integra, had a 5 speed. My fifth vehicle, a 1989 Taurus SHO, had a 5 speed. My sixth vehicle, a 2006 Toyota Tacoma Prerunner, was a 5 speed. My car previous to the G5, a 1962 Corvair, was a 5 speed. So yes, you must be correct, I have no knowledge of shifting a manual transmission. What a knob. Lastly, you sir are the most incorrect when you say that the car is designed, from the factory, to maximize fuel economy. Aside from guys increasing MPG by simply getting the car tuned, there is an XFE model than gets better mileage with the exact same car! So how is mine tuned for maximum efficiency. You are the retard here.

and anyway you will decrease the life of the trans because of the fact when it engages and disengages it slips the bands and clutches

:thumbsdow

Alright, you crossed a line now. First of all, I stand by my statement that you are disengaging the transmission, not shifting it, but at this point that seems to be purely semantics. Where you went wrong is making a personal attack on me. Wtf dude? This is a discussion that contains peoples opinions. We are all entitled. Why did you get all pissed of? Saying I don't know what shifting is because I drive an automatic currently is both ignorant and uniformed. My first car, 1970 Mustang Mach 1, had a Top loader 4 speed. My second car, a 1992 Thunderbird SC, had a 5 speed. My third car, a 2001 SVT Focus, had a 6 speed. My fourth car, a 1991 Integra, had a 5 speed. My fifth vehicle, a 1989 Taurus SHO, had a 5 speed. My sixth vehicle, a 2006 Toyota Tacoma Prerunner, was a 5 speed. My car previous to the G5, a 1962 Corvair, was a 5 speed. So yes, you must be correct, I have no knowledge of shifting a manual transmission. What a knob. Lastly, you sir are the most incorrect when you say that the car is designed, from the factory, to maximize fuel economy. Aside from guys increasing MPG by simply getting the car tuned, there is an XFE model than gets better mileage with the exact same car! So how is mine tuned for maximum efficiency. You are the retard here.

You obviously dont know what shifting is if youre attempting to shift an automatic to get better gas milage which is fucking retarded. IDC how many cars you have owned.

As for fuel efficiency, I will hold to my original statment:

The cobalt is an ECONOMY car which is designed from the factory to maximize your gas milage based on OEM parts. DRIVING IT LIKE A RETARD WILL NOT INCREASE YOUR GAS MILAGE.

And, as for the tuning to get better gas milage, youre wrong there again. Techinically if you want the BEST gas milage a TURBO is the best route. The best gas economy comes from a turbo application, not a NA application.

But, go ahead and keep shifting your auto. Keep telling yourself its working.

You obviously dont know what shifting is if youre attempting to shift an automatic to get better gas milage which is fucking retarded. IDC how many cars you have owned.

As for fuel efficiency, I will hold to my original statment:

The cobalt is an ECONOMY car which is designed from the factory to maximize your gas milage based on OEM parts. DRIVING IT LIKE A RETARD WILL NOT INCREASE YOUR GAS MILAGE.

And, as for the tuning to get better gas milage, youre wrong there again. Techinically if you want the BEST gas milage a TURBO is the best route. The best gas economy comes from a turbo application, not a NA application.

But, go ahead and keep shifting your auto. Keep telling yourself its working.


There you go contradicting yourself. Tuning WILL increase MPG. I never said it was the BEST route, just one possible way. So, tuning will give me better mpg, and turbo will give me even better mpg. i just have to say it more than once because you don't seem to get it the first time. I don't have to tell myself it's working. I've tested it, repeatedly. It does work. There is really no discussion in this matter. I'm the one that pays for the gas in my car, not you. I'm the one that calculates it, not you. And, like I said, the car is not maximized for fuel economy, the XFE is. If mine were already as good as it could be for mpg, there would be no XFE.

There you go contradicting yourself. Tuning WILL increase MPG. I never said it was the BEST route, just one possible way. So, tuning will give me better mpg, and turbo will give me even better mpg. i just have to say it more than once because you don't seem to get it the first time. I don't have to tell myself it's working. I've tested it, repeatedly. It does work. There is really no discussion in this matter. I'm the one that pays for the gas in my car, not you. I'm the one that calculates it, not you. And, like I said, the car is not maximized for fuel economy, the XFE is. If mine were already as good as it could be for mpg, there would be no XFE.

ur an idiot. There is any mpg difference between the two. The XFE is NOT tuned differently than the lt or the ls. I dont know how the hell u came to this conclusion.

For ’09, the Cobalt’s 2.2-liter four-cylinder engine gains variable valve timing and output rises to 155 horsepower. The XFE remains a manual-only proposition, but the tweaks are now standard on Cobalt LS and 1LT trim levels. An even taller (3.63:1) final-drive ratio is another change on the 2009 model that helps it bump highway fuel economy up to 37 mpg. In our hands, the ’09 Cobalt XFE returned 29 mpg combined in mostly city driving. In our 2005 test of an automatic-transmission equipped 2.2-liter Cobalt LS, we managed 27 mpg.

The 2.2l engine in the ls and lt are both rated at 37 mpg. Just like the xfe trim:

http://www.chevrolet.com/vehicles/2009/cobaltsedan/features.do

http://www.chevrolet.com/vehicles/2009/cobaltsedan/features.do

The XFE is the lightest trim and also has no features standard. No power locks, ABS, etc. Hmmm... Seems like MAYBE it gets good gas milage because its lighter?

Do you have any idea how much weight ur auto tranny adds? And do you have any idea that a manual tranny gets better gas milage than an automatic? Hmmm, I guess not huh?

I didnt contradict anything, you just dont have a clue about ur own engine and car. You said tuning was the best option. I told you a turbo is, which it is.

And Ill bet your probly looking at your MPG meter correct? Are you acutally keeping track of the miles and how many gallons ur putting in to ACTAULLY calculate the gas milage? Probly not. Because the computer in the car is 100% accurate right? :lol: :lol:

LOL, why the hell did u get an auto if u wanted better gas milage? You obviously dont know the difference between the different transmissions otherwise you would have gotten a stick.

FAIL

ur an idiot. There is any mpg difference between the two. The XFE is NOT tuned differently than the lt or the ls. I dont know how the hell u came to this conclusion.

For ’09, the Cobalt’s 2.2-liter four-cylinder engine gains variable valve timing and output rises to 155 horsepower. The XFE remains a manual-only proposition, but the tweaks are now standard on Cobalt LS and 1LT trim levels. An even taller (3.63:1) final-drive ratio is another change on the 2009 model that helps it bump highway fuel economy up to 37 mpg. In our hands, the ’09 Cobalt XFE returned 29 mpg combined in mostly city driving. In our 2005 test of an automatic-transmission equipped 2.2-liter Cobalt LS, we managed 27 mpg.

The 2.2l engine in the ls and lt are both rated at 37 mpg. Just like the xfe trim:

http://www.chevrolet.com/vehicles/2009/cobaltsedan/features.do

http://www.chevrolet.com/vehicles/2009/cobaltsedan/features.do

The XFE is the lightest trim and also has no features standard. No power locks, ABS, etc. Hmmm... Seems like MAYBE it gets good gas milage because its lighter?

Do you have any idea how much weight ur auto tranny adds? And do you have any idea that a manual tranny gets better gas milage than an automatic? Hmmm, I guess not huh?

I didnt contradict anything, you just dont have a clue about ur own engine and car. You said tuning was the best option. I told you a turbo is, which it is.

And Ill bet your probly looking at your MPG meter correct? Are you acutally keeping track of the miles and how many gallons ur putting in to ACTAULLY calculate the gas milage? Probly not. Because the computer in the car is 100% accurate right? :lol: :lol:

LOL, why the hell did u get an auto if u wanted better gas milage? You obviously dont know the difference between the different transmissions otherwise you would have gotten a stick.

FAIL


Fail, I think not sir. You really need to read my post better. I never said that tuning was the best. I only stated it was AN option. Read the post again. I never used the word best. As for the XFE mpg being standard now, that's fine for the 09's, but I don't have an 09. Nice try there. I am also aware of the fact that a manual gets better mileage, it's a 5 speed rather than a 4 speed. Jeez dude. I bought it used because it was cheap and had low miles and got much better mileage than my Corvair. And when I said I calculated my mileage, I meant I calculated it, not the on board calculator. Give me a freaking break dude. I took gas receipts and odometer readings to reach my conclusions. You know what happens when you assume things?

Fail, I think not sir. You really need to read my post better. I never said that tuning was the best. I only stated it was AN option. Read the post again. I never used the word best. As for the XFE mpg being standard now, that's fine for the 09's, but I don't have an 09. Nice try there. I am also aware of the fact that a manual gets better mileage, it's a 5 speed rather than a 4 speed. Jeez dude. I bought it used because it was cheap and had low miles and got much better mileage than my Corvair. And when I said I calculated my mileage, I meant I calculated it, not the on board calculator. Give me a freaking break dude. I took gas receipts and odometer readings to reach my conclusions. You know what happens when you assume things?

You said a tune, as in the xfe was tuned differently, when it IS NOT. The ls and lt have the same exact "tune". Honestly, youre referring to the xfe as if its a different model, when ITS NOT.

SO, ur argument with the tune has no validity because there is no tune. There is nothing, theyre the same car. If you want, u can convert ur car to a stick, get rid of all the extras, slap an xfe badge on it and PRESTO! Theres ur xfe.

And again, why would u buy an auto? Why not look for a stick if u wanted the best milage? Im not assuming anything, youre making it blatently obvious as to what you wanted out of your car vs what u actually bought. U should have gotten a stick.

http://cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?t=111696&highlight=xfe


I always assumed revised engine calibration meant a tune...(?)

You said a tune, as in the xfe was tuned differently, when it IS NOT. The ls and lt have the same exact "tune". Honestly, youre referring to the xfe as if its a different model, when ITS NOT.

SO, ur argument with the tune has no validity because there is no tune. There is nothing, theyre the same car. If you want, u can convert ur car to a stick, get rid of all the extras, slap an xfe badge on it and PRESTO! Theres ur xfe.

And again, why would u buy an auto? Why not look for a stick if u wanted the best milage? Im not assuming anything, youre making it blatently obvious as to what you wanted out of your car vs what u actually bought. U should have gotten a stick.

I needed a car right away. I had a very short time line, so I could only choose what was available, I couldn't wait. I looked all around our local area for something to commute to work in. At that point any economy car was acceptable because I had been driving a 1962 Corvair. If I was only interested in MPG, I could have bought a Hybrid Civic that I found. However, the G5 was the best deal considering miles on the car and the MPG. See, assuming. There is more to everyone's life than what's on the internet.

I needed a car right away. I had a very short time line, so I could only choose what was available, I couldn't wait. I looked all around our local area for something to commute to work in. At that point any economy car was acceptable because I had been driving a 1962 Corvair. If I was only interested in MPG, I could have bought a Hybrid Civic that I found. However, the G5 was the best deal considering miles on the car and the MPG. See, assuming. There is more to everyone's life than what's on the internet.

If youre shifting your auto to get better gas milage then youre not happy with the gas milage youre getting by just driving it. So why didnt you just buy the hybrid? Where do you live that u couldnt find a stick cobalt?

I found 34 used cobalts with a manual tranny within driving range on cars.com.

http://cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?t=111696&highlight=xfe


I always assumed revised engine calibration meant a tune...(?)

and magically the ls and lt get the same gas milage because theyre tuned differently?

Riiiight....

why is this still going on? If you think you get better gas mileage by going to neutral, you're an idiot. It's like trying to justify starting in 3rd gear by saying you'll go faster because you shift less. It just doesn't make sense. With all the available information, I don't see how anyone can even attempt to argue this without looking like an idiot. It's not an opinion, it's a fact that you will not get better mileage going to neutral.

Well here is another fact for you foke. When I drove my parents 04 chevy venture (yes a fuckin mini-van) as my learning car I would shift to neutral when coming to a stop and when droping down hils (which was fun because the van weighs like 5 tons ((not really)) and it drops like a rock.) The outcome, no better fuel millage AND the auto tranny is fked with only 80k on it. So, the 0.02 cents you THINK you save while putting it in N ends up costing 2500 for a new tranny. It does not equate to being a idea worth doing at all. Now as for my first car which is a 08 balt sedan lt, the only time I put it in N is waiting at a light, which is mainly because i like to rev it up to scare the old lady crossing the street =).

Simple conclusion, dont EVER shift, or move the stick with an auto while moving EVERZ because if you do, in the long run you will save 200$ on gas, and have a tranny thats dead as a door nail.

EDIT: And to stop the hating before it starts Ive driven my friends 09 mustang stick better then he does. I didn't get a stick because I didn't pay for it, thus I can't complain. I am very impressed with the cobalt, and will get a ss coupe stick or a camero as my first i paid for it car xD.

lol I just put it in nuetral going down large hill when the ac is on because it causes a slight surging... does it in both the 08 sport autos we have. Its annoying so I throw the auto in nuetral down big hills :lol:

Well here is another fact for you foke. When I drove my parents 04 chevy venture (yes a fuckin mini-van) as my learning car I would shift to neutral when coming to a stop and when droping down hils (which was fun because the van weighs like 5 tons ((not really)) and it drops like a rock.) The outcome, no better fuel millage AND the auto tranny is fked with only 80k on it. So, the 0.02 cents you THINK you save while putting it in N ends up costing 2500 for a new tranny. It does not equate to being a idea worth doing at all. Now as for my first car which is a 08 balt sedan lt, the only time I put it in N is waiting at a light, which is mainly because i like to rev it up to scare the old lady crossing the street =).

Simple conclusion, dont EVER shift, or move the stick with an auto while moving EVERZ because if you do, in the long run you will save 200$ on gas, and have a tranny thats dead as a door nail.

EDIT: And to stop the hating before it starts Ive driven my friends 09 mustang stick better then he does. I didn't get a stick because I didn't pay for it, thus I can't complain. I am very impressed with the cobalt, and will get a ss coupe stick or a camero as my first i paid for it car xD.

The manual for my 06 ls says you shouln't shift from n to a drive gear/selection while the car is moving because it may cause damage. It does provide examples when its acceptable to use the I or intermediate gearbut doesnt say anything about moving or not. It does explain that if you select "L" (while driving) it wont shift until its at the correct speed.

L or low is "first gear" so it will only engage under 25 ish. Its purpose is if you have a heavy load or towing something to give better torque from a dead stop. I is for going up a hill when you have a heave load. You can switch into I when driving, but I wouldn't recommend going into L unless from a dead stop, and you will only accelerate to the top of the gear 20-25 and no further as its not in D so it wont go into its further auto shifts.

let him keep on fucking up his tranny. Hes been warned.