xD_kidd91

isnt our cars known to be economical as is?
but get some springs and intake and save like 2% on gas consumption

mcbrew

Economical? Well, depending on how you look at it. If you buy the xD here, it is rated at an average 29 MPG. In England, it is sold with a choice of two engines, the gas (petrol) engine is rated at 42.77 MPG and the turbodiesel all-wheel-drive version is rated at 48 MPG. Before anyone asks, I already converted from Imperial to US gallons. Also, their testing method is different than the EPA's method... but you can see that it is a pretty big difference. I can almost bet that the diesel version gets better mileage than their "average" number, based on my experience with diesel cars.

Keep in mind... those numbers are "average", not city (or what the Brits call "Urban")

So that's the kind of fuel economy we could be getting over here if they gave us the option.

draxcaliber

yeah, but how big and powerful are those engines? they are probably 1.3 liter 3 cylinder engines with 20 second 0-60 times.

draxcaliber

hah, i was right!

from wiki
1.3 liter petrol, and a 1.4 liter diesel, but i don't acceleration times yet...

pickledchang

id love to have the turbo diesel with AWD

uskrewed

quoting for truth. With AWD and great mpg who cares about acceleration? But I'd rather have the 1.8L than 1.3L if it came down to FWD and gas.

User 112921

Quick question.. what about if I'm going lets say 45 in 5th and I'm coming to a red light? Should I keep it in 5th till im about to near low mph and throw it in neutral or throw it in neutral asap? My friend heel toes then downshifts to slow down.. just wondering what the best way was

pickledchang

no, you should partially use your brakes with one foot and use the other to throw it into 3rd to help slow you down. when you get down to say 10-15mph, then you can bring it to neutral and use the brakes to come to a stop. if you leave it in fifth, the brakes will be fighting the momentum of the car and the engine wanting to keep it going. if you throw it in neutral right away at 45mph, youll be using your brakes the whole time... and this is why brake pads need to be changed more often on automatics (and people who have no idea what they are doing with a stick).

rangerryda

iTrader: (1)

Brakes are waaay cheaper and easier to replace than a clutch. I go neutral right away but your logic is correct in regards to the mechanics of it.

engifineer

I always wonder why people think extra wear on the clutch is better than extra wear on a set of $30.00 or so brake pads that take a whopping 20 minutes to swap out

If you coast down, however, in gear, you are using nearly no fuel. If you shift to neutral, you are using more fuel (than in coasting down in gear) to keep the car idling. Not that either is going to make a huge difference in fuel usage, but if you are shifting to neutral to "save gas"... you really arent overall.

engifineer

While I wont speak to the girl comments, he is dead on ( as I posted previously) about the timing belt (or chain in the case of a tC) comments.

And if you are jerking the car that hard on a high speed "push" start... aka coasting and then putting it back in gear... then you are doing it 100% wrong. Starting that way at speed should be as smooth as a shift. And as far as the comment of mis-shifting... if you mis-shift doing that you can just as easily mis-shift any other time you are downshifting. But I dont care either way, because I find it completely un-necessary and unsafe to be turning your car off at highway speeds anyway.. I honestly cant see why anyone would do it, but since we are discussing the technical aspects and all....

And I personally dont claim to be a "mechanic". I learned from a young age from my father.. who has been one for about 50 years (so much longer than most of you have been alive ) and from personal experience... a lot of which from driving beaters which we all know will either cost you more at the shop or train you to learn how to keep em running

pickledchang

this is true... however, downshifting correctly will cause no more wear than upshifting. just because you are slowing down with the clutch fully engaged doesnt mean you are putting more wear on it than when you are accelerating with the clutch fully engaged.

holding the clutch 'halfway' to produce a smoother downshift does cause more wear, but if you know your car and how to drive a stick well enough, you know what speeds you can let the clutch out quickly and still have a smooth downshift. my first car was a POS ford escort 5spd that was handed down from the parents. it had over 150,000 miles and never did it need a new clutch. how long a clutch lasts is 99% dependent on how the operator uses it.

rangerryda

iTrader: (1)

Your point is valid also but no clutch use is better than some clutch use in regards to longevity. Just throw it in neutral and use your brakes, that's why God gave us ABS. You won't stop any faster if you are decelerating using the motor. For racing and track use, different ball game. Ultimately, it's your car, do as you please and enjoy your Scion!

mcbrew

Ranger, I don't think anybody is trying to stop faster by downshifting. It does slow the car faster than neutral, but it also uses less fuel. I know, I know... that is arguable, because although the engine uses no fuel in an overrun situation, it also does not roll as far, so some more fuel may be needed to get to the same stopping point... but sometimes engine braking is the 'right' thing to do and sometimes coasting in neutral is the 'right' thing to do.

Of course, engine braking doesn't always involve downshifting. Simply letting your foot off the gas pedal when in gear employs engine braking. So there isn't necessarily any more clutch usage involved.

I've gotten away from the OP's question about pop starting the car... but I just had to stick my 2 cents worth in there.

rangerryda

iTrader: (1)

Yeah, threads hardly stay on topic past page 1 anymore. Nothing you can really do about it, just the nature of the internet. lol

hobojon

Unless you have VSC. No vacuum needed because there is no vacuum booster.

mcbrew

No, cars with VSC still have a vacuum brake booster. What you are thinking of is the Brake Assist, which is mechanical on xD's without VSC and is electronically controlled on xD's with VSC. There is still a vacuum booster on the VSC cars, it just doesn't have the mechanical Brake Assist feature built in, since the VSC valve system performs that function.