rpm's
#9
RE: rpm's
ORIGINAL: mazda69
So 4000 rpms is normal then
Doesn't that suck more gas then
Going 3000?
So 4000 rpms is normal then
Doesn't that suck more gas then
Going 3000?
If your actual question is "Is a manual at 4000 more fuel efficient than an automatic at 3000?", the short answer is yes. The manual is not losing energy to the torque converter, nor is it downshifting on a regular basis like the automatic. My manual spends most of its time on cruise control at 80mph (4000 rpm), and I challenge any automatic to beat my 31mpg.
Mark in MA
#10
RE: rpm's
now i would like to know what kind of gas milage your manual would be getting at 65mph while you are still above the 3krpm vtec whil mine being an auto is below that vtec setting, wich makes it use less gas....
that would be interesting, when your car is running in the vtec it runs 1k more rpm than mine but uses less energy to get better gas milage.
but if i was running slower out of the vtec, and you were going the same speed in the vtec i wonder wich would do better...
anyone ever try this.
i know when i run with traffic (70-80mph) in my auto i get 27.79 mpg
when i run at 65mph i get 33.23 mpg these are all three tank averages
thats almost 6mpg better running out of that first vtec setting
since the manual is only rated at 2 or 3 mpg better than the auto i wonder if its true even at 65
that would be interesting, when your car is running in the vtec it runs 1k more rpm than mine but uses less energy to get better gas milage.
but if i was running slower out of the vtec, and you were going the same speed in the vtec i wonder wich would do better...
anyone ever try this.
i know when i run with traffic (70-80mph) in my auto i get 27.79 mpg
when i run at 65mph i get 33.23 mpg these are all three tank averages
thats almost 6mpg better running out of that first vtec setting
since the manual is only rated at 2 or 3 mpg better than the auto i wonder if its true even at 65