Is BlueCruise More “Fuel-Efficient” than “Manual Driving”

[Jimrpa]

Simple question: I’ve always been told that regular cruise control in internal combustion engine vehicles is more fuel efficient than driving and not using it. Does anyone know if our cars are more energy efficient when using BlueCruise hands free than when driving them without using BlueCruise?

Sponsored

 

[TRP]

Good question..........the answer is probably..."maybe" ?‍ I dunno

what I do know is.......I have done MANY 12+ hour days and It definitely makes those a bit easier

 

[cyeung]

My Mach-E is currently a weekend car, so it will be a while for me to gather any data for you. ?

 

[Tampamike]

It depends …

 

[Deleted member 19354]

Simple question: I’ve always been told that regular cruise control in internal combustion engine vehicles is more fuel efficient than driving and not using it. Does anyone know if our cars are more energy efficient when using BlueCruise hands free than when driving them without using BlueCruise?

I have no scientific data however….


Yes, cruise control can be fuel efficient, especially on highways with consistent speeds. It helps maintain a steady speed, minimizing the need for frequent acceleration and deceleration that can waste fuel. Studies have shown that cruise control can save up to 10% on fuel consumption.

Here's why cruise control can be fuel-efficient:

• Consistent speed:
  Cruise control keeps the vehicle at a set speed, reducing the need for drivers to repeatedly accelerate and decelerate, which can be inefficient.
  
  
• • Optimized fuel consumption:
    By maintaining a steady speed, the engine can operate at its most efficient RPMs, leading to better fuel economy.
    
  • Smooth driving:
    Cruise control helps smooth out driving, reducing the "jerky" driving style that can negatively impact fuel efficiency.
    

However, cruise control may not be as fuel-efficient in all situations:

• • Hill climbing:
    Cruise control might struggle to maintain speed on steep hills, potentially using more fuel to maintain the set speed.
    
  • Stop-and-go traffic:
    In traffic, cruise control may not be suitable, as it requires a consistent speed, which can be difficult to maintain in stop-and-go situations.

 

[JohnFoxeSheets]

I think it all comes down to this: how would you drive without BlueCruise on. If you like to race, weave in and out of traffic, etc., then BC likely would be more efficient. But if you drive steadily, going with the flow of the traffic, then BC is likely to be pretty much the same efficiency wise (assuming you set it to drive at the same speed you would have driven manually).

 

[Jimrpa]

Thanks for all the feedback. Sounds like, if there is an increase in efficiency, it’s not too great.

 

[pghdriver]

My hypothesis is Bluecruise will usually be more efficient than someone randomly driving. But if your goal is to hypermile, it would be possible to manually beat whatever the BC is going to do. For example if you're approaching the crest of a hill and you don't care about slowing down a bit there is a reason to expend energy to maintain speed you'll get back soon going downhill.

 

[RickMachE]

Any cruise control is more efficient than a BAD driver. Most drivers aren't very good. Most drivers don't hold a constant speed.

 

[cafdiniz]

I tend to believe that any computer controlled system is more efficient than a meat bag controlled one. Hence, yes (?).

 

[Tampamike]

Any cruise control is more efficient than a BAD driver. Most drivers aren't very good. Most drivers don't hold a constant speed.

I hate those that won’t hold a speed - you catch them, pass them, then they speed up, tailgate you, pass you then slow down again. You can’t get rid of ‘em sometimes! Then there’s the followers ….

 

[RickMachE]

I hate those that won’t hold a speed - you catch them, pass them, then they speed up, tailgate you, pass you then slow down again. You can’t get rid of ‘em sometimes! Then there’s the followers ….

Agreed. And the speeders, passing at 90 miles an hour, who you know never check their tires, don't know how to handle the vehicle if something happens, ...

 

[Krabbit]

I think so.

 

[Bakahump]

The counter would be because I am less “engaged” during bc I let the car come within 30 yards of a car in front of me who is going 68 instead of 72. I don’t realize until a few seconds/minutes later, check my left and pull into the passing lane. The bc brings me back to 72, I pass go back into the right lane and cruise along a BIT more oblivious then I should be until I find myself going 65 behind someone. So then I pull out to my left speed back up (via bc) and pass.

tldr adaptive cruise (alone or in conjunction with bc) while nice can eat into any potential “consistency” gains from cruise control.

 

[ChasingCoral]

Simple question: I’ve always been told that regular cruise control in internal combustion engine vehicles is more fuel efficient than driving and not using it. Does anyone know if our cars are more energy efficient when using BlueCruise hands free than when driving them without using BlueCruise?

It is unlikely that a person driving manually will be able to match efficiency of the smooth acceleration, regen braking, and lane changes of BlueCruise over the long-haul. We're too impatient and spontaneous. A really smooth driver (think trained chauffeur using Whisper mode) would probably be able to match BlueCruise. I can't see how BlueCruise efficiency would be worse than a human driver.

Sponsored