Simple question, on my manual 4x4 is it more economical to use cruise control on a long run up the motorway or not?
Cruise Control
- Thread starter C_374479958
- Start date
Hi Klarky
I do not understand your logic,cruise control only uses enough throttle as required. I checked with Honda regarding my CR-V and CC is more economical
I do not understand your logic,cruise control only uses enough throttle as required. I checked with Honda regarding my CR-V and CC is more economical
On a perfectly flat road CC will be at least as economical. However, there aren't many roads that are perfectly flat, and the problem with CC is that it can't anticipate hills (either up or down). Very much depends upon your style of driving too. If you anticipate, and have a steady right foot, and can maintain a constant spped, then you'll probably better CC. However if you can't do all of the above, (and you can tell how erratic people are if you use CC, as they will keep catching you up, and then slowing down etc), then CC will probably be more economical.
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
CC does not anticipate gradients in the main, perhaps those at the high end do.
While a thinking driver might increase his approach speed, be fore the gradient is reached CC does not, nor will it change a manuel gear shift down if required, so i cant see how CC can be more fuel efficient.
I very rarly use my CC, its not worth the hassle.
While a thinking driver might increase his approach speed, be fore the gradient is reached CC does not, nor will it change a manuel gear shift down if required, so i cant see how CC can be more fuel efficient.
I very rarly use my CC, its not worth the hassle.
- Jul 15, 2008
- 3,876
- 1,053
- 20,935
..you can get your answer by observing large HGV's.
They all run at their optimum speed taking into consideration safety, fuel consumption and covering the miles in a reasonable time
They achieve this by being limited to a maximum speed (56mph) and maintaining this speed by cruise control.
Their drivers are often set mpg targets and receive bonuses if they achieve them.
They all run at their optimum speed taking into consideration safety, fuel consumption and covering the miles in a reasonable time
They achieve this by being limited to a maximum speed (56mph) and maintaining this speed by cruise control.
Their drivers are often set mpg targets and receive bonuses if they achieve them.
having used c.c.and also discussed it,a very large percentage of people agree its less economical,especially on our roads,and certainly pulling a van.
I think cc is great and use it whenever i can which to be honest travelling at 60 mph on motorway is quite easy to do,speeds over that and you do yo yo.
The cc on my car will do the same speed downhill as it applies the brakes,as for mpg ive used it from day 1 so cant really comment get around 22mpg
The cc on my car will do the same speed downhill as it applies the brakes,as for mpg ive used it from day 1 so cant really comment get around 22mpg
Well it applies something as it doesnt downshift and still sticks to 60 going downhill,you can feel something holding the car back
hi,
yes adaptive or autonomous control does,you never mentioned that........high end of the car market though....not many people will have that compared to the lowly c.c.
- Mar 14, 2005
- 19,015
- 4,242
- 50,935
Hello C
Cruise control is not primarily designed to offer an economy function, It is about maintaining as near as possible a constant speed once set.
Economy is about minimising the usage of resources for a given journey, most usually concentrating on fuel consumption. Optimum efficiency varies a lot depending on the cars loading and road conditions so it can change second by second.
Thus running at a constant speed and optimum efficiency rarely occur mutually.
Modern CC is staggering good at maintaining very close control on a vehicles speed, +/- 0.5MPH is not uncommon. A driver would have to concentrate very hard to match that level of speed control.
So CC wins hand down at maintaining speed, and under that criteria the smaller and quicker throttle control the CC manages will also return better fuel economy than a driver trying to maintain a constant speed manually. This will become more marked the longer the journey and especially where motorways are involved.
Maximum efficiency is not best served by constant speed (except on a perfectly flat road) as others have said, their ability to read the road ahead, and to use the throttle to best advantage over hills and descents will most likely yield better economy than using CC, but as noted above drives will have increasing difficulty to maintain the heightened degree of concentration required to maximise economy, leading to unnecessary use of throttle and brakes to correct small mistakes as the journey times increase.
It is my belief that on motorways where hills have relatively small gradients that CC is likely to offer better economy than driving manually. It certainly helps to protect your licence by controlling your speed and avoiding speeding.
On other roads it is less clear on the fuel economy, but again it can help to avoid speeding.
Cruise control is not primarily designed to offer an economy function, It is about maintaining as near as possible a constant speed once set.
Economy is about minimising the usage of resources for a given journey, most usually concentrating on fuel consumption. Optimum efficiency varies a lot depending on the cars loading and road conditions so it can change second by second.
Thus running at a constant speed and optimum efficiency rarely occur mutually.
Modern CC is staggering good at maintaining very close control on a vehicles speed, +/- 0.5MPH is not uncommon. A driver would have to concentrate very hard to match that level of speed control.
So CC wins hand down at maintaining speed, and under that criteria the smaller and quicker throttle control the CC manages will also return better fuel economy than a driver trying to maintain a constant speed manually. This will become more marked the longer the journey and especially where motorways are involved.
Maximum efficiency is not best served by constant speed (except on a perfectly flat road) as others have said, their ability to read the road ahead, and to use the throttle to best advantage over hills and descents will most likely yield better economy than using CC, but as noted above drives will have increasing difficulty to maintain the heightened degree of concentration required to maximise economy, leading to unnecessary use of throttle and brakes to correct small mistakes as the journey times increase.
It is my belief that on motorways where hills have relatively small gradients that CC is likely to offer better economy than driving manually. It certainly helps to protect your licence by controlling your speed and avoiding speeding.
On other roads it is less clear on the fuel economy, but again it can help to avoid speeding.
- Jun 20, 2005
- 19,822
- 5,175
- 50,935
CC imo is a great tool for tugging on motorways and fairly straight clear roads where a constant speed is desirable. My CC opens and closes the throttle to maintain a chosen speed.
Yes, there are times when a gear change becomes necessary but overall I consider CC does give better mpg and if nothing else makes for a far more relaxed long haul motorway journey.It certainly saves the right paw.
On heavy traffic A roads I don't bother.
I'd hate a car without it!
Cheers
Dustydog
Yes, there are times when a gear change becomes necessary but overall I consider CC does give better mpg and if nothing else makes for a far more relaxed long haul motorway journey.It certainly saves the right paw.
On heavy traffic A roads I don't bother.
I'd hate a car without it!
Cheers
Dustydog
I must be old fashioned, but I prefer to have control of my vehicle myself.
Cruise control lull's many people into false senses of security and does use more fuel than a good driver can on journey's because it cannot react to what an alert driver see's.
I've driven both cars and trucks and without cruise control I tend to get 10% better fuel consumption on a run.
It is right to say that truck drivers are bonus lead, but that is more focussed on delivery of goods on time and then cost (economy) next.
Cruise control can be equated to the simlar senareo of manul gearboxes verses auto boxes, where in certain conditions auto boxes change up and down un-necessarily thus wasteing fuel.
What a good driver has to do is evaluate road conditions and decide in advance if they should just squirt the throttle more, or change down a gear to negotiate a hill etc.
I could write volumes on good driver Vs fuel economy techniques but sufice to say, I get 40Mpg solo and just under 30Mpg towing with my 2 Litre Laguna with 200K on the clock. All this is achieved without cruise control, but by being an anticipative driver and planning ahead every few seconds of my drive.
Cruise control lull's many people into false senses of security and does use more fuel than a good driver can on journey's because it cannot react to what an alert driver see's.
I've driven both cars and trucks and without cruise control I tend to get 10% better fuel consumption on a run.
It is right to say that truck drivers are bonus lead, but that is more focussed on delivery of goods on time and then cost (economy) next.
Cruise control can be equated to the simlar senareo of manul gearboxes verses auto boxes, where in certain conditions auto boxes change up and down un-necessarily thus wasteing fuel.
What a good driver has to do is evaluate road conditions and decide in advance if they should just squirt the throttle more, or change down a gear to negotiate a hill etc.
I could write volumes on good driver Vs fuel economy techniques but sufice to say, I get 40Mpg solo and just under 30Mpg towing with my 2 Litre Laguna with 200K on the clock. All this is achieved without cruise control, but by being an anticipative driver and planning ahead every few seconds of my drive.
I think cruise is a case of love or hate a bit like auto.
Cruise i think is great for endless miles on English and French motorways
Cruise i think is great for endless miles on English and French motorways
I use it up & down all motorways keeping me at 55mph,avarage 32 mpg with van on the back.excellent piece of kit
Thank you all for your replies, obviously the jury is still out regarding its use on our roads, I noticed in the USA everyone seemed to be on CC on their interstates, but distances are longer and fines seemed higher.
I mainly use my CC on the endless miles of 'average cameras' roads, don't want to pay another tax to HM Government.
I mainly use my CC on the endless miles of 'average cameras' roads, don't want to pay another tax to HM Government.
- Jul 15, 2008
- 3,876
- 1,053
- 20,935
...to get the best from CC the driver has to know how to operate it to best effect.
The best systems can be overridden by use of the accelerator pedal to anticipate hills with an automatic return to the pre-set speed.
They also have an instant 'off' when using the brake and or clutch on manual gearchange vehicles.
The very best have manual push button 'off' which can be used to anticipate for example roundabouts on dual- carriageways.
I do agree they work best with vehicles fitted with high torque diesel engines that undertake relatively longer journeys at constant speeds.
Constant speed is important in terms of fuel economy because the aerodynamics of a caravan are such that trying to accelerate it is very wasteful of fuel.
The best you can achieve is maintaining you speed wherever possible, and that is where CC helps.
The best systems can be overridden by use of the accelerator pedal to anticipate hills with an automatic return to the pre-set speed.
They also have an instant 'off' when using the brake and or clutch on manual gearchange vehicles.
The very best have manual push button 'off' which can be used to anticipate for example roundabouts on dual- carriageways.
I do agree they work best with vehicles fitted with high torque diesel engines that undertake relatively longer journeys at constant speeds.
Constant speed is important in terms of fuel economy because the aerodynamics of a caravan are such that trying to accelerate it is very wasteful of fuel.
The best you can achieve is maintaining you speed wherever possible, and that is where CC helps.
steve in leo, what are you like.LOL.
CC in most cases DOES offer a match or better MPG than relying on your right foot,its ok saying "a good driver"bla bla bla, but people still pull out on you or do silly things,you cannot anticipate everything no matter how good a driver you think you are.
and as I have drove 14 and 18 tonne with and without the CC on, fill ups don't lie.....for one thing modern diesels don't use fuel when the throttle is shut,and as we are talking about keeping a constant speed up, otherwise why mention CC, the CC will do this far better than you anticipating thinks after all, i know a fare few sections of m/way that look like you are driving on the flat, but are indeed on a long incline or vice versa, the CC will pick up on this quicker than you seeing your speed go down or up.
ps 40 mpg out of a 2.0l petrol is not as impressive as you may think, used to get that out of my r reg 2.0l mondeo on a run and more, with or without the CC.
CC in most cases DOES offer a match or better MPG than relying on your right foot,its ok saying "a good driver"bla bla bla, but people still pull out on you or do silly things,you cannot anticipate everything no matter how good a driver you think you are.
and as I have drove 14 and 18 tonne with and without the CC on, fill ups don't lie.....for one thing modern diesels don't use fuel when the throttle is shut,and as we are talking about keeping a constant speed up, otherwise why mention CC, the CC will do this far better than you anticipating thinks after all, i know a fare few sections of m/way that look like you are driving on the flat, but are indeed on a long incline or vice versa, the CC will pick up on this quicker than you seeing your speed go down or up.
ps 40 mpg out of a 2.0l petrol is not as impressive as you may think, used to get that out of my r reg 2.0l mondeo on a run and more, with or without the CC.
Klarky
Erm.....certian makes DO apply the brakes, Audi for 1 & if you take into account adaptive CC, yes they most definately do!
I use CC as much as possible when towing and dont think it makes any difference either way regarding economy, I think incorrect use of the resume function is what causes it to be uneconomical. This is only my opionion and no doubt I`ll be shot down
We've had our current car for 3+ years now and it is the first with CC, it took some getting used to and I "played" with it constantly, can't say that I saw much difference in consumption but we do a lot of long distance driving and having CC makes driving much less tiring, I would not consider a car without it now.
Economy is one thing, safety another.
thrice I have had a tyre go down when towing on cruise control, when it throttles on, or in my case changes down(being Auto) when it should not you know you have a probleb before it becomes a disaster.
geo
thrice I have had a tyre go down when towing on cruise control, when it throttles on, or in my case changes down(being Auto) when it should not you know you have a probleb before it becomes a disaster.
geo
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Newbie to Caravan life after trying some 33 years ago with small children
- Started by Rich9308
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter