Why not?

>still have a stick to change "gears"
You realize an automatic also has multiple gears right? Other than a cvt anyway

then why call it an "automatic"

Your engine already turns itself off on downhills, the wheels keep it moving through the transmission

>wasting money on buying, insuring and taxing a car instead of saving thousands and taking the bus or train

>not turning it in reverse for faster deceleration

my taxi driver to the bar on saturday was shifting his camry from L - 2 - 3 all the way there

Did he think it was a manuel?

Even in a CVT you're still going to have park and reverse in addition to drive,

...

Because it “automatically” fucks your mom up the ass

maybe he was trying to maximize mpgs? pretty stupid to do in a camry. could be he was just bored

Maybe he's so used to fucked valve bodies on older shitboxes that he thinks he has to shift manually? Really hasn't been in issue in nearly 40 years

Was talking to a my mechanic the other week about random shit and he said he use to have a helper who while driving a manual put it into reverse at 40 mph on a test ride and destroyed the entire transmission on a customer's car

That's bullshit, the transmission won't even engage assuming it didn't have a lockout

Bullshit.

Aside from the oftentimes mechanical lockout, the force required to do that would be immense.

>roll into underground parking garage
>roll past machine
>reverse to get back to machine
>get my ticket
>let car roll forward because the incline is free acceleration
>about to just let off the clutch when my retard prevention system kicks in and toss the car into 1st

Explain so you can be mocked!

Explain.

Cars with EFI will kill fuel to the engine when it detects that it's going downhill, the energy from gravity pulling the car down the hill will keep the engine spinning through the wheels and transmission

How are you guys on an automotive enthusiast's board and yet are this clueless about cars?

>automotive enthusiast's board
>not realizing he's in a martian extraterrestrials spotting forum

That's the story the mechanic said his assistant gave him, either way he did something to destroy the transmission, it was an older manual transmission. I honestly don't know to much about how cars prevent you from going into reverse I know the new ones won't let you

I've never owned an autotragic so I wouldn't know anything about this. Does the car become silent too or does it still make that groaning sound?

Manual cars do this too as long as you're in gear

You still hear the engine spinning, you know the valve train and and it pumping air and stuff

>not putting it in reverse to generate fuel

>Family member had fairly modern car.
>Would "coast" down hill in neutral for years.
>Told them that's fucking stupid for multiple reasons including trans overheating/no lubrication, and injectors shut off when car is in DRIVE going down hill.
>Somehow car still works at like 220,000+ miles, but trans shifts like shit and slips

one time i forgot to plug in one of the sensors on my transmission and it let me put it into reverse while driving, obviously i didnt let go of the clutch and grenade it though, just did it out of curiosity

People do this in autos? I mean, I do it in my jeep unless I think the lights gonna change, but never in an auto. Seems pointless.

No you didn't. No moving 2mph forward isn't driving

I watch some guy literally do this on the highway once in his ford exploder doing 90kph. Saw reverse lights and he locked the back wheels into a skid and almost took out the car on his left.
Pretty damn sure he fucked something up good as he had to pull off to the side of the highway.

>not just hiking your sorry ass every-fucking-where

Next time I find a good hill, I'll test this by rolling at just over idle RPM and push in the clutch quickly. If you're correct, it should drop significantly or kill the engine.

But it may not work for me anyway because I don't drive some newfangled smartphone on wheels.

How is the transmission not getting lubrication and overheating by going down a hill in neutral?

The transmission is connected to the wheels

Wrong. The engine at idle supplys the trans with all the necessary lubrication the trans needs. In addition to that the trans is connected to neither the engine nor wheels since there is no pressure activating clutches allowing the input and output shafts to essentially free wheel. Took an auto trans class at the community college. Pic related

>The engine supplies the necessary lubrication the trans needs
>The trans is connected to neither engine nor wheels

Think you need to take that class again buddy.

It'll only drop it to idle, that's where the engine is trying to get to anyways when you coast downhill like that

I do that in my car and my motorcycle.
In my car it is for efficieny, in my motorrcycle it is for the 2-smoke engine.

Car is 5 speed claw shifted synchronised transmission
Bike is draw key transmission

That makes sense now.

It's physically impossible, especially at 90kph. The gears won't mesh up and you'll just end up grinding them instead of engaging them

If you disconnect the engine from the wheels the ECU will go back to injecting fuel into the engine to keep it spinning

This isn't new fangled smartphone technology, this shit's been around since before you were born

You don't need to do it for your car if you drive anything made in the last 30 years
see You're creating a more dangerous situation for yourself for no reason

He probably thinks he is saving on brake wear.
Also it isn't the valve bodies in an auto that get fucked by this kind of treatment, it's the brake bands that hold the planetaries that get worn out after being engaged at high speed. The valve bodies will actuate until the fluid becomes full of brake band particles, THEN they fail.

My injection system does not shut down when coasting in gear and the internal friction of the engine lows me down when coasting.

Engine off coasting is more efficient and not dangerous at all.

it actually is physically possible, as there are transmissions with synchronized reverse. It is also possible on worn out old transmissions where the reverse idler has play.
The reverse idler is engaged all the time to at least one shaft and the rest of the gears are of course engaged to each other all the time so all you are doing is putting geartooth to geartooth, but if there's a gap it'll go in reverse and then the instant you come off the clutch the transmission fucking explodes.

>coast in gear with your 2-stroke user
Yea, great idea...

>in your car
I didn't mention his bike, now did I?

Jesus Christ I hope the person who gave you your license gets fired

It won't go in because the gears are spinning in the opposite fucking directions. This isn't hard to understand

>It's physically impossible, especially at 90kph. The gears won't mesh up and you'll just end up grinding them instead of engaging them

This, mythbusters had a segment where Tori tried this and all that happened was that the gears kept grinding leaving the wheels effectively in neutral

m.youtube.com/watch?v=hakNxO5pME4

>Jesus Christ I hope the person who gave you your license gets fired
Why?
All systems of my car, except for the engine, work just fine.

All systems except for the shit driver who thinks turning off his engine while driving is a good idea

What do you think is bad about turning off the engine when it is not required?

>asshole suddenly cuts you off
>you try mashing the brakes
>pedal is rock hard because lol no power
>rear end him and end up getting charged for rear ending him and for unsafe operation of a motor vehicle

Not to mention that constantly starting the engine puts more wear on it and the starter while using more fuel to start it in the first place

>>you try mashing the brakes
>>pedal is rock hard because lol no power
That is wrong, the brake booster has vaccum for about 3-5 brake activations after shutdown.
The brakes still operate sufficiantly without the brake booster on my car anyway.
> starting the engine puts more wear on it
Cold starts indeed, warm starts not so much.
>starter
I don´t use the starter to restart the engine, I use the inertia of my car to start the engine.
>wasting fuel
Actualy I save quite some fuel with that, it is popular among hypermilers

If your car is so old and stupid that it doesn't kill fuel while coasting downhill, it's still gonna engage the starter motor when starting the car while moving

When you crash, please don't kill anyone besides yourself

Hyper milers are all morons like you

>go to turn
>steering wheel lock engages

You have to turn the key all the way off and remove it for that to happen. Even on the recalled GM's.

>it's still gonna engage the starter motor when starting the car while moving
My car only activates the starter motor when I turn the key to the starting position.
To start it while moving I don´t turn the key to that position, I have it in Ignition position during coasting and put it in 5 th gear to start it.
I don´t leave the key in a position where the lock engages.

If they are all morons, how come that you can not beat them in fuel efficiency?

How do you know your engine doesn't cut off fuel? The most basic fuel delivery systems can do those to prevent engines from over revving
You're being stupid for the sake of being stupid

Because gas is cheap and I have a stable job. Hyper miling is just a game for them, and the best way to wind that game is to drive a first gen Insight with cardboard strapped to it

>How do you know your engine doesn't cut off fuel?
OBDII readout

...

Just admit that you can´t hypermile.

>his car has OBD2
>somehow doesn't cut off fuel when it's not needed
The fuck do you drive? Must be a no car making shit up to justify being wrong

Don't need to, I'm not poor

My car has no mass air flow sensor, it uses a manifold pressure sensor only and has mechanical throttle with no throttle position sensor.
It can only adjust injection based on:
1. Manifold pressure
2. RPM
3. exaust oxygen

Therefore the ECU doesn´t have sufficient informations for a fuel cutoff when coasting.
That feature was added in the next facelift.

An ECU can easily tell if a car is coasting using the crank position sensor and some math alone
>revs start increasing but fuel rate is at idle
>"wowzers better cut off fuel to bring the engine speed down"

You still didn't tell us what you drive mr. hyper miler

When ever I come to a stop, I always put the clutch in before I even press the brake.

>revs start increasing but fuel rate is at idle
To do that the ECU would require additional information:
>idle fuel rate
>throttle position

Without throttle position it can not accurately determine if the driver is actualy using a little throttle or not.
It can only assume it with a certain margin of error.

Said car is a 1st generation Aygo with the 1KR-FE engine, it recived the fuel cutoff in the 2009 model.

No it wouldn't, the ECU is the thing controlling the injectors and knows exactly how much fuel it wants to be putting out

>it recived the fuel cutoff in the 2009 model.
Have a source on that? Hard to believe that a tiny, fuel efficient economy car wouldn't have one of the most basic and virtually cost free features that can save fuel

>source
de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Aygo
>106 anstelle vormals 109 g/km CO2 ausstößt. Erreicht wurde dies durch die Verwendung eines reibungsmindernden Motoröls und einer Schubabschaltung
>emits 106 instead of 109 g/km CO2. It was archived due to the use of low friction engine oil and a fuel thrust cutoff

That's fucking pathetic. The only other EFI cars I've dealt with that didn't cut off fuel were 80s Dodges and the likes, and even then you could enable fuel cutoff by messing with the ECU

Go buy a proper car instead of justifying your special snowflake case when people are trying to give advice that applies for just about every modern car sold

It gets Insight like fuel consumption anyway: 3,77L/100 km or 78 mpg is what I got on a tank combined

And Insight does that without hyper miling. With hyper miling people have squeezed 100mpg out of it

This thread is embarrassing.

>Cars with EFI will kill fuel to the engine when it detects that it's going downhill.
I don't know why people perpetuate this myth, shits cringeworthy man. I've datalogged countless cars, none (zero) of them shut fuel all the way off except a prius, and only then under certain circumstances.

How are you on an automotive enthusiast's board and yet this clueless about cars?

>I've datalogged countless cars
No you haven't

>And Insight does that without hyper miling
No, that is better than the average Insight (wich includes many hypermilers since basicly all insights that post their mpg are driven by hypermilers)
spritmonitor.de/de/uebersicht/18-Honda/1111-Insight.html?powerunit=2
spritmonitor.de/de/uebersicht/18-Honda/1111-Insight.html?constyear_e=2006&powerunit=2

Apply yourself
youtube.com/watch?v=b3BXdNz1QRE

>highway driving
>at 44-55 mph
>using much battery power
Yea, totaly not hypermiling at all...

Yes, I'm sure you know from across the internet. You must be a psychic.

Just point out that with basic hyper miling it gets way better mileage than the ayylmaogo

Whatever, this discussion isn't even relevant to the topic at hand. You car is an exception not the rule

Literally every other source online contradicts your claims. Who am I going to believe, dozens of other people or some random user?

Well, the aygo has a less efficient engine, higher drag coefficient and is not a hybrid...

Doesn't really matter to me who you believe. I don't have to rely on reading things other people have done when I do them for myself.

Must be doing them wrong then

Imagine being this wrong
popularmechanics.com/cars/hybrid-electric/a5977/coasting-in-neutral-fuel-economy/

If I were your boss I'd fire you

Read your injector duty cycles. If it's not 0, it's on dumbass.

Didn't even click. Hybrid electric. What did I say, a prius under the right conditions.

>makes up his mind despite not reading the article
Afraid it'll prove you wrong?