Motorway driving hints for fuel efficiency

kavanafl

Hi,

Thought there would be plenty of these posts up, but cant seem to find too many specific to my questions.

Recently changed jobs which now sees me traveling over 80km each way on a motorway, and 20km through lesser roads but not city.

My 07 Ford Galaxy 1.8 5 speed is getting around 850km per tank of diesel (approx 67 liter fills) which the trip computer says is 5.9 ltrs/100km. I am a bit disappointed in this and thought I would get a full week on a full tank, but am only getting 4 days really. I know its a heavy car but I thought it would be better that this.

My drive habits are pop it up to 120km (or slightly over) and put on the cruise control. I never have to turn it off or brake for the full motorway spin. I recently got the car serviced but very little difference here.

Any hints or tips in hitting that 5 day per tank target either on driving methods or new car suggestions. That extra day means somewhere in the region of €80 a month with the cost of diesel at the moment.

Thanks for the read.

roosterman71

Drive slower
Don't use cruise control
Take out all crap you don't need out of the car

Scirocco

Hi there,

You could try setting your cruise control to 100kmh as cars will use more fuel going faster.

If you can afford to change your and you dont need the 7 seats then maybe a smaller diesel car would suit you.

Inbox

Simple just drop your speed. Remove any unneeded weight and pump up your tyres

Tails142

The faster you get to where you're going, the less fuel you use

No seriously, re: the post above, I thought cruise control would be better for fuel efficiency.

pajor

Don't use lead feet getting to 120
Shift up gears ASAP
'Do I really need to overtake the car in front?'
and DON'T use cruise control (as previously stated)

Mr.David

In addition to the above, turn off air con when not needed and of course check your tyre pressures weekly. If your commute is all on well surfaced roads you could try increasing the pressures slightly over the manufacturer recommended for 'normal' conditions and see what its like. Higher pressure means less rolling resistance, but too high means greater tyre wear and harsh ride. Its a balance!

peasant

850 km to a 67 liter fill equals 7.88l/100 km ...your trip computer is wrong

coolbeans

Why does cruise control at say a constant 110kph use more fuel? News to me. I call BS!

JJJJNR

Your not going to get much better than that with such a big car and a medium sized engine, I think the 1.8TDci is about 115bhp? which isn't really going to struggle up hills but this is down to load on the engine which is burning fuel.

Using the cruise control is actually the worst thing you can do, I find switching off and using my foot much more efficient. Hills are the killer here so use your foot on the way up and cruise on the way down, works for me but I've a smaller car and a bigger engine.

Other things to consider are getting rid of the rubbish in the car than might add weight, golf clubs and baby seats etc, make sure the tires are at the proper levels, and are a good size, no use having 18's.

Yeah and lowering your speed is going to be the biggest fuel saver here 120 is just too fast.

I can see less than 3.6 ltrs/100km if I'm careful and 4.7 if I'm not.

Mr.Boots

Get behiend a truck and stay about 6'' of his bumper....you will save a fortune.....and maybe die.

Just slow down to 100...makes a big difference in my yoke.

rcdk1

Tails142 wrote: »

No seriously, re: the post above, I thought cruise control would be better for fuel efficiency.

coolbeans wrote: »

Why does cruise control at say a constant 110kph use more fuel? News to me. I call BS!

On flat terrain cruise control will help efficiency by maintaining a steady speed. However, as soon as you come to a hill, the cruise control will accelerate the car to maintain the set speed going up the hill and this reduces fuel efficiency.

MOBILVETTA

When Driving Your Car
• Driving at high speed (over 50 mph and especially over 60mph) uses more fuel and causes more pollution. Your fuel consumption and pollution increase in comparison to an economic norm of 50mph.

Vs a Norm of 50 mph Fuel Consumption increases
At 60 mph 17%
At 70 mph 29%

Atlantic Dawn

100kmh is usually the ideal speed for the motorway in the highest gear you have to save fuel.

Henry Ford III

If they are not needed, remove some seats. Weight is a big factor.

challengemaster

rcdk1 wrote: »

On flat terrain cruise control will help efficiency by maintaining a steady speed. However, as soon as you come to a hill, the cruise control will accelerate the car to maintain the set speed going up the hill and this reduces fuel efficiency.

Not trying to be smart here, but he's on about motorways? I don't think I've come across one yet that's hilly....

antodeco

I get 9.7l/100km

antodeco

challengemaster wrote: »

Not trying to be smart here, but he's on about motorways? I don't think I've come across one yet that's hilly....

M50 from tallaght to Sandyford. Alot of the M8!

anotherlostie

Is there anyone who actually drives at 100kph on a 120kph limit motorway for this reason? I drive on the M7 every day and don't see much evidence of it.

Jagle

challengemaster wrote: »

Not trying to be smart here, but he's on about motorways? I don't think I've come across one yet that's hilly....

round limerick none of them are level, forever going up and down hills

Mr.Boots

anotherlostie wrote: »

Is there anyone who actually drives at 100kph on a 120kph limit motorway for this reason? I drive on the M7 every day and don't see much evidence of it.

Yea i do, Im not often in a rush and i prefer to cruise along in the inside lane and let everyone pass by, i find if your doing 120 your canstantly moving from lane to lane to pass slower cars (like me)
All that moving around uses alot more fuel and is just a pain in the arse

Voodoomelon

rcdk1 wrote: »

On flat terrain cruise control will help efficiency by maintaining a steady speed. However, as soon as you come to a hill, the cruise control will accelerate the car to maintain the set speed going up the hill and this reduces fuel efficiency.

Cruise control isn't any more or less fuel effecient than regular driving.
The example you have given makes cc sound less effecient because drivers are unable to maintain a fixed speed.

People here are suggesting "stick to 100kph" or whatever, what they're effectively saying is do as close to 100kph as you can manage and when you come to a hill your speed drops off.

If you actually managed to maintain 100kph solidly by yourself with no cc and absolutely no deviation, then how could cc be any less fuel effecient?

If anything cc is better because it keeps the speed rock solid, no going over using more fuel, and no going under and then accelerating to get back uo to speed as a driver would be doing. Like an autobox it will do it better than a human can, assuming its not a seriously steep motorway.

peasant

Voodoomelon wrote: »

If anything cc is better because it keeps the speed rock solid, no going over using more fuel, and no going under and then accelerating to get back uo to speed as a driver would be doing. Like an autobox it will do it better than a human can, assuming its not a seriously steep motorway.

The most fuel efficient way to climb an incline is to build up speed on the flat, only feather the throttle on the climb and perhaps let speed fall off a bit just before the brow and let momentum carry you over.

CC would do the exact opposite. It would cruise on the flat and then lay on the gas on the climb to the top only to slow down again once over the brow.

Also cc is incapable of finding the "sweet spot" of best torque. Depending on engine characteristics and gearing on any given hill a certain car might pull better (i.e be more fuel efficient) slightly over or under the target speed. The driver can adjust this by ear/feel ...the cc just sticks to the programmed mark, no matter what.

But I agree that on the flat cc is better than any human input.

JJJJNR

challengemaster wrote: »

Not trying to be smart here, but he's on about motorways? I don't think I've come across one yet that's hilly....

The N11 is up and down the whole way to the m50 merge and that is all up hill till about Sandyford and again to Tallaght.

Mr. Manager

Could someone please explain to me how using CC will waste more fuel? This does not happen to me.

I was of the impression that CC would take out the human element of fluctuation. Personally, I get better mileage using CC. Do a 50km trip to work everyday and have tested (more than once) whether or not I get more with or without it.

JJJJNR

Because..... as peasant has already explained.

Buffman

OP, if travel time is not an issue, I'd say dropping down to 100kph is the only realistic way to get the 5 days out of 1 tank, and even that may not work.

zilog_jones

- Don't brake, i.e. plan ahead if you need to slow down, use engine braking, drop down a gear, etc. Unless you're driving a Prius or something else with regenerative braking you are wasting energy by using brakes.
- Don't open windows - the drag caused by this actually makes it worse than using aircon once you're going over about 80 km/h
- As others said, don't use CC and slow down to 100 km/h if you have the time and patience. I actually find it a lot more relaxing to drive on motorways at this speed, but I am in a much smaller car

Topper Harley

Henry Ford III wrote: »

If they are not needed, remove some seats. Weight is a big factor.

Yeah and while you're at it OP, remove yourself too. Every little helps.;)

Voodoomelon

peasant wrote: »

The most fuel efficient way to climb an incline is to build up speed on the flat, only feather the throttle on the climb and perhaps let speed fall off a bit just before the brow and let momentum carry you over.

CC would do the exact opposite. It would cruise on the flat and then lay on the gas on the climb to the top only to slow down again once over the brow.

Also cc is incapable of finding the "sweet spot" of best torque. Depending on engine characteristics and gearing on any given hill a certain car might pull better (i.e be more fuel efficient) slightly over or under the target speed. The driver can adjust this by ear/feel ...the cc just sticks to the programmed mark, no matter what.

But I agree that on the flat cc is better than any human input.

Obviously if the car suddenly comes across a steep incline it will start flooring it to maintain the chosen speed, whereas a driver can see the incline ahead and adjust their speed in advance saving fuel.

But it has to be the most of out place hill on a motorway where not using cc has its advantages. My point is with regular motorways, even ones with slopes/hills, cc is just as good if not better. As long as the slope/hill is gradual and not sudden, which most are on motorways then cc is better in my view, not just on the flat. Perhaps it differs from car to car, I always watch the MPG needle and i've always achieved best economy in cruise control.

Mr Benevolent

kavanafl wrote: »

My drive habits are pop it up to 120km (or slightly over) and put on the cruise control

And there's your problem. You're driving too fast for proper fuel efficiency. 100kph would give you about 20% better km per tank. Keep the cruise control on, too.