Gary -

I agree with David.  I like the cruise control on my '87 Westy, but it will
go to WOT on fairly small hills.  With the digitool, I can see the throttle
switch come on.  That has to cut into the mileage a bit.

When I am not using the cruise control, I can try to anticipate hills by
speeding up, and not have to work the engine quite so hard to make it over
the top.  But - on the long, boring straight stretches, it is well worth it.

I suppose you could try to run several trips over the same terrain, with and
without CC to see what happens, but I don't have the patience!

- Mike Finkbiner
'87 Westy
Moscow, Idaho

 >Date:    Fri, 10 Aug 2001 16:59:47 -0500
 >From:    David Stell <dstell@MMCABLE.COM>
 >Subject: Re: Fuel consumption

 >Gary --

 >First, let me say that I think cruise control is the greatest thing since
 >sliced bread!  I haven't owned a car without it since I don't know when.

 >That said, I do think it's possible that CC can cut mileage on a "low
 >powered" vehicle if the terrain is hilly.   If you would try to be a
"human
 >CC" and maintain speed in hilly terrain in your Vanagon, you'd have to
floor
 >the pedal -- or at least come close -- many times to attempt to keep an
even
 >pace.  Of course, WOT = high fuel consumption.
<SNIP>
 >David Stell
 >Norman, OK

 >> I made an interesting observation and would like to
 >> hear views/opinions from list members.
 >>
<snip>

 >> Having moved from a very fuel efficient Golf to the
 >> After a lot of thinking and some testing this week I
 >> found out why.  When I drive to work on the highway I
 >> use cruise control.

<snip>

 >> I guess the answer is, if you want better fuel
 >> consumption don't use cruise control.
 >>
 >> Has anyone else found this to be true or is it a well
 >> known fact that I have never heard of (being that this
 >> is the first car I have owned that has CC)
 >>
 >> Gary

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp