Is coasting in neutral bad

Discussion in 'Experienced Truckers' Advice' started by PermanentTourist, Feb 18, 2017.

  1. MACK E-6

    MACK E-6 Moderator Staff Member

    48,246
    220,726
    Sep 19, 2005
    Baltimore, MD
    0
    ...And God willing that "one" won't lead to anyone getting killed.
     
    MrEd Thanks this.
  2. Truckers Report Jobs

    Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds

    Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.

  3. Moosetek13

    Moosetek13 Road Train Member

    14,585
    18,184
    Nov 1, 2010
    Burnsville, MN
    0
    I'll let you know in the years to come.
    This is my first truck with the auto, and with the radar.
    So far the radar is more problematic than the auto.

    I will be in this truck for the next 4 years or so, so I will get a good idea of how reliable they are over the long term.
     
  4. AModelCat

    AModelCat Road Train Member

    28,957
    155,616
    Jul 7, 2015
    Canuckistan
    0
    So that right there basically says there is no fuel saving benefit to coasting in neutral if I'm reading what you wrote correctly.
     
  5. scottied67

    scottied67 Road Train Member

    10,818
    12,621
    Mar 14, 2010
    california norte
    0
    I have the same setup as Moosetek DD15/DT12. Got unloaded at a dock other night, the air was low from them running the forklift in and out and told me to move off. Normal truck/manual tranny you can move as soon as brakes are released. Not so with the DT12. Must build full air or the tranny will not go into gear. "Just another few minutes sir"
     
  6. PermanentTourist

    PermanentTourist Heavy Load Member

    749
    881
    Nov 9, 2016
    48 states + Canada
    0
    As somebody pointed out earlier, it's not a matter of the truck using more fuel in gear versus idle. It's a matter of maintaining momentum by letting the truck gain more speed freewheeling downhill not encumbered by the transmission, and using that momentum to get higher up the next hill before the engine starts exerting effort.

    And I understand I'm not going to get an extra two MPG doing it, but even a marginal percentage point fuel saving is nice, especially considering it's kind of fun to do on gentle rolling hills, so it's not like I'm suffering and wasting effort.

    The one concern I have is that the wear and tear from extra clutch activation cycles will outweigh in the long term the couple of bucks per fill up I might save
     
  7. PermanentTourist

    PermanentTourist Heavy Load Member

    749
    881
    Nov 9, 2016
    48 states + Canada
    0
    Consider the enclosed picture I took earlier today in Mississippi. (As a bonus, check out that pretty sky). I am talking about this kind of Hill, more of a dip really. Going down it in gear with 43000 pounds I was slowly losing speed without pressing the gas pedal. In neutral, I was slowly gaining speed. Even if the engine was using the same amount of fuel in both scenarios, gaining momentum obviously save fuel verses losing momentum. Physics and stuff. As for jake braking, would your Jake brake on this little dip? I wouldn't play the neutral game on any Hill much bigger than this, never mind an actual Jake brake grade.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Feb 18, 2017
  8. PROPANE

    PROPANE Bobtail Member

    49
    25
    Aug 15, 2016
    0
    that might be a worry in a big rig,

    but think of how many times you wouldn't have to push the clutch in, in a car.

    I can literally skip the first 3 gears in a 5 speed just by coasting and using gravity/momentum going down hill. thats 3 times I didnt have to push the clutch in.

    as long as its done right, using the clutch to engage/disengage/change gears/etc, wouldnt be any more wear and tear than if you were disengaging just to downshift or upshift as opposed to disengage the clutch just to coast.
     
  9. PermanentTourist

    PermanentTourist Heavy Load Member

    749
    881
    Nov 9, 2016
    48 states + Canada
    0
    This might be very Blasphemous to say, but I sort of miss the little radar. This owner op truck I just bought doesn't have it. I certainly didn't like that obnoxious beeping, but it was nice knowing how fast people ahead of me were going so I could plan my passing strategies in advance or just leave them alone. And the automatic following cruse would be useful if I could change the gap settings and make it follow closer.

    It was also fun to clock insane Maniacs cutting me off in their Mustangs at 120 mph and write them imaginary tickets.

    Of course mine was actually properly calibrated, as opposed to some other guys whose radar would confuse exit signs for imminent death danger
     
  10. Aradrox

    Aradrox Heavy Load Member

    900
    622
    Jan 21, 2016
    0
    Some engines rpm limiters make it difficult aswell I've had engines I can downshift to 9th at 60 and ones that won't let me rev over 1400 rpm In Neutral
     
  11. Moosetek13

    Moosetek13 Road Train Member

    14,585
    18,184
    Nov 1, 2010
    Burnsville, MN
    0
    The adaptive cruise is nice for when someone is going just a bit slower than me. It will gently back off my speed to keep me at around 300 feet. It is set to 3.5 seconds of following distance.

    And there is a way to override the system. Just click on the engine brake to the lowest setting. That will let you get as close as you want before passing, with no warnings or hard braking by the system.

    I do get collision warnings for overhead signs, quite often.
    But it just beeps.

    The real annoyance is when someone is going a LOT slower in the lane next to me. Full engine brake, with service brakes thrown in as well.
    I've learned to cancel the cruise control when I am approaching that situation.
     
    PermanentTourist Thanks this.
  • Truckers Report Jobs

    Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds

    Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.