messing with my gas.
#1
Revin 9500k
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Orange County
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
messing with my gas.
i just filled up my car and i have been cruising on 3rd the whole day, im trying to see if chillin at 4000-5000k will change my gas issue. 3-4th gear at around 30-50 mph, this is of course city driving, in the freeway i stay at 4 maybe 5th....ill see in 3 days if my gas is any better =) lighter gear = less load on the motor
Last edited by xxdevilzeroxx; 10-27-2004 at 10:23 AM.
#2
I read that if you drive in 1st, 3rd, and 5th, skipping gears 2 and 4, you'd save more gas. I think in our cases we could go to 6 too, but I was always afraid to do this to my cars....
#3
RX8 RX8!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 1,189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by shaolin
I read that if you drive in 1st, 3rd, and 5th, skipping gears 2 and 4, you'd save more gas. I think in our cases we could go to 6 too, but I was always afraid to do this to my cars....
Sometimes, I skip 5 th. Does anyone know if this (or skipping gears in general) is good/bad/indifferent?
#4
Follower of CHRIST!!!!!!!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, the company that brought this out...as far as I know, was Chevy. They made you force an upshift in the Camaro/Firebird in some type of order like you listed. 1-3-5 or 1-4-5-6, but anyway...the reason they did it was to save gas.
The owners of those cars really did not like it, but Chevy forced the upshifts to save gas. Now the question is...was the cars ECU ready for something like that? If you do it by yourself, I've done it in my Probe GT, would it help? Is it dangerous the rotary to upshift in that manner?
Only testing will tell...
PS. I've done it, but never really done it long enough to test it out...maybe I should considering my old Prob has alot of miles on it and no one will indanger their RX-8
The owners of those cars really did not like it, but Chevy forced the upshifts to save gas. Now the question is...was the cars ECU ready for something like that? If you do it by yourself, I've done it in my Probe GT, would it help? Is it dangerous the rotary to upshift in that manner?
Only testing will tell...
PS. I've done it, but never really done it long enough to test it out...maybe I should considering my old Prob has alot of miles on it and no one will indanger their RX-8
#6
Mmmmm... Rotary Donut
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lake in the Hills, IL (NW Chicago Burbs)
Posts: 2,376
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by czr
Sometimes, I skip 5 th. Does anyone know if this (or skipping gears in general) is good/bad/indifferent?
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Plano, Tx
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GM did that in the Camaro/TransAm/Firebird in the late 90's models. It actually only forced a shift from one to three, skipping second gear, and only when the RPM were under 3000, or similiar (can't remember the exact RPM). You're right, it was a gas saving measure. I don't think the ECU was tuned to expect this, as the mechanical piece was just a solonoid lockout on second gear in the transmission, much like the reverse lockout solonoid found on most manual transmissions. There were even companies that provided a "Skip-Shift Eliminator" for those cars. It was just a resistor that changed the voltage to the solonoid, so it thought it was never shifting to second gear, thus eliminating the lockout.
#8
Follower of CHRIST!!!!!!!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly...thanks for the further explanation. In my Probe, I do a 1-3-5 shift and it works without a problem. Now, again...I have not tested this for fuel savings so I can't say anything more.
I wish a Chevy guy could explain in detail how much fuel savings this gives a car, heck or anyone else.
Note: The basic idea is simple, keep the RPM's as low as you can and you will save gas. Now, shouldn't that work in any car...??? It makes sense...
I wish a Chevy guy could explain in detail how much fuel savings this gives a car, heck or anyone else.
Note: The basic idea is simple, keep the RPM's as low as you can and you will save gas. Now, shouldn't that work in any car...??? It makes sense...
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Plano, Tx
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, it worked for the GM V8's, as they have as much torque at 2krpm as we do at peak, so the effect may be quite different with the RENESIS. I'm speaking in terms of which RPM to shift at. Just because GM picked 3k doesn't mean that's the magic RPM for fuel savings on all cars.
I doubt you'll find any GM guy that still has that in effect on his car Most of the ones I know had it removed, because with a 5.6l V8, who cares about fuel consumption?
I doubt you'll find any GM guy that still has that in effect on his car Most of the ones I know had it removed, because with a 5.6l V8, who cares about fuel consumption?
#10
Originally Posted by merlin00gt
GM did that in the Camaro/TransAm/Firebird in the late 90's models. It actually only forced a shift from one to three, skipping second gear, and only when the RPM were under 3000, or similiar (can't remember the exact RPM). You're right, it was a gas saving measure. I don't think the ECU was tuned to expect this, as the mechanical piece was just a solonoid lockout on second gear in the transmission, much like the reverse lockout solonoid found on most manual transmissions. There were even companies that provided a "Skip-Shift Eliminator" for those cars. It was just a resistor that changed the voltage to the solonoid, so it thought it was never shifting to second gear, thus eliminating the lockout.
~ Matt
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Plano, Tx
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, maybe it was first to fourth. As of 2003, the vette had it, but the rpm was rediculously low. Too low to notice; something like 2000 rpm. I know, as I had one before the 8. I mean, who shifts out of first that low?!
Thanks for the clarification.
Thanks for the clarification.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
fc2se
NE For Sale/Wanted
2
06-01-2016 08:55 PM
LMURailsplitter02
New Member Forum
1
09-06-2015 10:56 PM