General 1.2 mpg ?

[DannyBoy88]

This don't sound right to me from what I've read about fuel injected or turbo charged engines... Got any evidence to prove this statement?

maybe if you state what you think is wrong with the statement we might get somewhere, what evidence do you think i could supply on that?

go in you car, accelerate to 25 mph then put it in 5th gear, put your instant consumption on and play around, you'll feel what i'm talking about


and to which ever f**kwit claimed coasting is illegal you are wrong in EVERY sense, its only as illegal as engine breaking, not having both hands at 10 and not checking your mirrors , , , which non of are illegal

 

[punto_matt]

Coasting is illegal it is just very unlikely that you would get caught for it.

 

[DannyBoy88]

and to which ever f**kwit claimed coasting is illegal you are wrong in EVERY sense

omg just realised he's a police officer, what world do we live in where the police don't even know the freekin law!!!

 

[DannyBoy88]

Coasting is illegal it is just very unlikely that you would get caught for it.

sorry matt but its not

 

[punto_matt]

It is.

 

[DannyBoy88]

show me

 

[98dizzard]

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070304

http://www.studydriving.com/safety-on-the-road/why-coasting-is-bad/


Upon looking, the Highway code does not specify that coasting is illegal however:

122Coasting. This term describes a vehicle travelling in neutral or with the clutch pressed down. It can reduce driver control because

• engine braking is eliminated
• vehicle speed downhill will increase quickly
• increased use of the footbrake can reduce its effectiveness
• steering response will be affected, particularly on bends and corners
• it may be more difficult to select the appropriate gear when needed

It is cited as reducing driver control. Therefore if an accident occurs and you do not have correct control of the vehicle then you will be to blame, regardless of other factors. Same as if you have an accident for not checking your mirrors when pulling out or changing lanes, or not being able to steer correctly because your hands are not on the wheel correctly. I would guess therefore it is not a specific offence but covered under dangerous driving.

Anyway I have personally checked on a computer connected to the ECU. When coasting, the ECU is injecting fuel, when at revs higher than tickover no fuel is injected if the accelerator is not depressed. Simple carburettor systems which havn't been used in most cars for over 2 decades would cause fuel gains from coasting. Infact all new cars since around 2000 will have computer controlled fuel injection due to legal reasons.

So in summary:
Coasting is dangerous and pointless. Regardless of wether it is illegal or not, there is no reason to do it unless you are driving something that has a carburettor.

 

[DannyBoy88]

the law of the road is covered under the road traffic act 1988

there are only 3 driving offences

Part I
Principal Road Safety Provisions
Driving offences
1Causing death by reckless drivingA person who causes the death of another person by driving a motor vehicle on a road recklessly is guilty of an offence.
2Reckless drivingA person who drives a motor vehicle on a road recklessly is guilty of an offence.
3Careless, and inconsiderate, drivingIf a person drives a motor vehicle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offence.

no judge would accept coasting as an offence under any of the above

no where in the road traffic act does it state that coasting is illegal

true it does give you less control over the vehicle but this is NOT an offence and is NOT illegal

i would also mention that my job as a manager at an RTA specialist solicitors does give me a rather unique opportunity to make comment on the above

you wouldn't tell david beckham how to curl a football now would you

 

[DannyBoy88]

i''d also point out The Highway Code is not law, it comprises a set of instructions about how to comply with various laws, augmented by advice. You cannot break the Highway Code, but by disregarding it's instructions can lead you to breaking the law,so disregarding it's instructions is not by definition illegal.

 

[98dizzard]

i''d also point out The Highway Code is not law, it comprises a set of instructions about how to comply with various laws, augmented by advice. You cannot break the Highway Code, but by disregarding it's instructions can lead you to breaking the law,so disregarding it's instructions is not by definition illegal.

No the highway code is not law, per say. However:
And i quote Part I 38(7)

A failure on the part of a person to observe a provision of the Highway Code shall not of itself render that person liable to criminal proceedings of any kind but any such failure may in any proceedings (whether civil or criminal, and including proceedings for an offence under the Traffic Acts, the [1981 c. 14.] Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981 or sections 18 to 23 of the [1985 c. 67.] Transport Act 1985) be relied upon by any party to the proceedings as tending to establish or negative any liability which is in question in those proceedings.

I think that speaks for its self.

But still, there is no reason that anyone has given for coasting that makes any sense. All it does is make you more likely to have an accident, and be held responsible for the accident.

 

[DannyBoy88]

No the highway code is not law, per say. However:
And i quote Part I 38(7)



I think that speaks for its self.

But still, there is no reason that anyone has given for coasting that makes any sense. All it does is make you more likely to have an accident, and be held responsible for the accident.

it doesn't speak for itself, i don't think you fully understand what that is saying

it is stating they may use the fact that you have not followed the highway code to prove you have committed an offence under one of said Acts

i.e. you have to have committed an offence under the act first, one of the 3

you could drive along and then coast down the road, with a flashing sign saying "i am coasting" get pulled over, and then provide a signed statement to the police saying "i was coasting" you still have NOT committed any offence, and therefore done nothing illegal

you could overtake someone who is turning right in front of you, at the same time someone pulls out in front of the person turning right, you are doing 40+ and so as soon as you have taken over the person turning right you are confronted with the rear end of someone just setting off, , , they can prove that you have been negligent because you have been driving without due care and attention(one of the 3), you should have anticipated someone might pull out

the fact that you should have anticipated this is proven by the highway code as it states you should not overtake at a junction for that exact reason(this is what that statement is getting at), so you would both be at fault for the accident, one for pulling out without knowing it was safe, and one for overtaking at a junction

its the fact that you have caused an accident that is an offence, not what you did to cause it

 

[DannyBoy88]

But still, there is no reason that anyone has given for coasting that makes any sense. All it does is make you more likely to have an accident, and be held responsible for the accident.

there is no reason any more, it used to save fuel in the days before ECU's and the like, now it uses more fuel, so there is no advantage to it

 

[98dizzard]

it doesn't speak for itself, i don't think you fully understand what that is saying

it is stating they may use the fact that you have not followed the highway code to prove you have committed an offence under one of said Acts

i.e. you have to have committed an offence under the act first, one of the 3

you could drive along and then coast down the road, with a flashing sign saying "i am coasting" get pulled over, and then provide a signed statement to the police saying "i was coasting" you still have NOT committed any offence, and therefore done nothing illegal

you could overtake someone who is turning right in front of you, at the same time someone pulls out in front of the person turning right, you are doing 40+ and so as soon as you have taken over the person turning right you are confronted with the rear end of someone just setting off, , , they can prove that you have been negligent because you have been driving without due care and attention(one of the 3), you should have anticipated someone might pull out

the fact that you should have anticipated this is proven by the highway code as it states you should not overtake at a junction for that exact reason(this is what that statement is getting at), so you would both be at fault for the accident, one for pulling out without knowing it was safe, and one for overtaking at a junction

its the fact that you have caused an accident that is an offence, not what you did to cause it

Upon looking, the Highway code does not specify that coasting is illegal

My understanding of the RTA is that if you have an accident while coasting, then you are at fault as you were not correctly in control of your vehicle. Even if you cannot be charged for it, this and the fact it is a dangerous practice makes coasting irresposible and pointless.

 

[Tris Harris]

Who just said that you get taught to do an emergency stop with the clutch in?

your supposed to put it in at the last possible moment!

 

[droylsdendave]

Getting back to the thread title, i have now p/x my 1.4 punto 8v, for 1 of the reasons being mpg not being wot i hoped for. I do 220 miles a week of which 200 were motorway at 70 no more. i was getting 40 mpg, i got 43 mpg when on a trip mainly a roads at 60. Was going to question mpg myself but never got round to posting. Was it me expecting too much? Btw i was getting 40mpg in a 13 year old 406 same conditions.
Many thanks

 

[98dizzard]

i.e. you have to have committed an offence under the act first, one of the 3

In additon to the 3 you have mentioned there are a considerable number of other offences in the RTA, even if they are not under the 3 in the first section. I cannot care enough to list them. they are all in the government document:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880052_en_1

 

[Ulpian]

You should always be in gear.

Emergency stops demand the use of the clutch so that the drag of the engine doesn't impede deceleration.

 

[DannyBoy88]

My understanding of the RTA is that if you have an accident while coasting, then you are at fault as you were not correctly in control of your vehicle. Even if you cannot be charged for it, this and the fact it is a dangerous practice makes coasting irresposible and pointless.

ok under that understanding, "you are coasting down the road someone pulls out in front of you, you crash into them"
whos at fault?

you for coasting? or them for pulling out?
its them for pulling out

there is a big difference between civil court and criminal

"your driving pissed, someone pulls out in front of you, you crash into them"

there will be two trials, one criminal, one civil

in the criminal you will be prosecuted as it is an offence to drive drunk
"(1)A person who, when driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, is unfit to drive through drink or drugs is guilty of an offence.
(2)Without prejudice to subsection (1) above, a person who, when in charge of a motor vehicle which is on a road or other public place, is unfit to drive through drink or drugs is guilty of an offence."

in the civil court you will win the case, as it wasn't your fault someone pulled out in front of you, if you did everything you could but the braking distance was not avilable it is his fault, and i have run many cases through court where our client was the drunk party, all successful

Who just said that you get taught to do an emergency stop with the clutch in?

your supposed to put it in at the last possible moment!

this is what they teach now tris, this is what i got taught and everyone i know, they don't say both at the same time, but they don't teach to put the clutch in at the last minute, its taught as a "double drop method" as my instructor put it, clutch slightly after the brake

 

[DannyBoy88]

In additon to the 3 you have mentioned there are a considerable number of other offences in the RTA, even if they are not under the 3 in the first section. I cannot care enough to list them. they are all in the government document:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880052_en_1

the 3 are the only driving offences, the rest are in relation to everything else

ps i have a copy of the above RTA Act 1988 you just linked to next to me, i use it daily

 

[98dizzard]

ok under that understanding, "you are coasting down the road someone pulls out in front of you, you crash into them"
whos at fault?

you for coasting? or them for pulling out?
its them for pulling out

there is a big difference between civil court and criminal

"your driving pissed, someone pulls out in front of you, you crash into them"

there will be two trials, one criminal, one civil

in the criminal you will be prosecuted as it is an offence to drive drunk
"(1)A person who, when driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, is unfit to drive through drink or drugs is guilty of an offence.
(2)Without prejudice to subsection (1) above, a person who, when in charge of a motor vehicle which is on a road or other public place, is unfit to drive through drink or drugs is guilty of an offence."

in the civil court you will win the case, as it wasn't your fault someone pulled out in front of you, if you did everything you could but the braking distance was not avilable it is his fault, and i have run many cases through court where our client was the drunk party, all successful

I do not see the point you are now arguing. If an accident occurs and it is proven that you were coasting at the time, and this is determined to be a contributing factor. I.e. the prevailing conditions would have permitted you to avoid the accident, however because you were coasting this impaired your ability to control the vehicle. Then you are at fault for not being in adequate control of the vehicle.

Yes there are 3 offences under the Driving Offences Section. These are general and broad offenses that are open to interpretation and application. The RTA also provides for specific offenses for drivers and other road users such as:
4 Driving, or being in charge, when under influence of drink or drugs

(1) A person who, when driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, is unfit to drive through drink or drugs is guilty of an offence.


Which you have already pointed out in your own arguement.



(4) A person who, without reasonable excuse, fails to provide a specimen of breath when required to do so in pursuance of this section is guilty of an offence.


12 Motor racing on public ways

(1) A person who promotes or takes part in a race or trial of speed between motor vehicles on a public way is guilty of an offence.


21 Prohibition of driving or parking on cycle tracks

(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person who, without lawful authority, drives or parks a motor vehicle wholly or partly on a cycle track is guilty of an offence.


35 Drivers to comply with traffic directions

(1) Where a constable is for the time being engaged in the regulation of traffic in a road, a person driving or propelling a vehicle who neglects or refuses—
(a) to stop the vehicle, or
(b) to make it proceed in, or keep to, a particular line of traffic,
when directed to do so by the constable in the execution of his duty is guilty of an offence

etc....

All offences listed under the RTA, wether under the Driving Offenses section or not, they are all still applicable to drivers who are driving.

However this point is still irrelevant as I am stating that if coasting was a contributing factor in an accident then you are to blame. And if you lost control and caused an accident because of it then surely you would be charged with dangerous or reckless driving, or at least be at fault and liable for the accident. And 'I was trying to save fuel' would not be an adequate defense.

We understand that coasting is not illegal and you have made that point multiple times despite me agreeing to that point. It is however a situation that would limit your abilities to control the car, such as being distracted by occupants, playing with the radio, eating and drinking, driving without your hands on the steering wheel. Yes some of those specifically are illegal, some are not. However, as a driving style coasting provides no benefits and in the event of an accident could make you liable if it was a contributing factor. There is a reason the Highway Code specifies it as reducing the ability to control the vehicle.

I think this discussion has gone far enough, and i think we have both now made our points. I have an early start in the morning so i must bid you farewell for the evening.