Date:         Sun, 31 May 2009 21:30:23 -0700
Reply-To:     Robert Fisher <refisher@MCHSI.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Robert Fisher <refisher@MCHSI.COM>
Subject:      Re: Rolling Friction of a Vanagon (not a tire thread)!
In-Reply-To:  <4A235512.6050704@cox.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I think this is John's inner child posting, not his inner aircraft mechanic.
:)

Cya,
Robert

-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
mark drillock
Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 9:12 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Rolling Friction of a Vanagon (not a tire thread)!

Are you planning to factor in added clutch and tranny wear or just only
look at fuel economy while ignoring other costs from various behaviors?

Mark



John Rodgers wrote:
> I have a favorite spot along a certain road, and I like to see just how
> much push momentum will give my 88 GL from a certain hill and at a
> certain speed in certain configurations when I crest that hill. I
> disengage the engine and just let the ol' 88 GL roll to see how far it
> will go.
>
> My question is: Which scenario below will offer the least resistance or
> friction to oppose momentum.
>
> Given:
>
> Scenario #1: At speed, the clutch is depressed, the transmission is
> placed in neutral, then  the clutch pedal is released and remains there
> until roll out is complete
>
> Or;
>
> Scenario #2: At speed,  the engine is disengaged from the tranny by
> simply pushing in the clutch and holding it there until my roll-out is
> completed.
>
> Anyone ever looked at this difference?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Regards,
>
> John Rodgers
> 88 GL Driver
>