Cruise control

[storming]

Wondering what the pitfuls of retro-fitting cruise control?
Also does anyone know of a guide for installing it?

[outnumbered]

hi
this has been covered before if you do a search you will find the info.
mike

[SUBURBAN KID]

I think its more aggro than its worth mate.
Its not often on our wo(nd)e(r)ful British roads that we've had the chance to use it, for more than a couple of hundred yards that is.

[liuleichan]

Originally Posted by SUBURBAN KID

I think its more aggro than its worth mate.
Its not often on our wo(nd)e(r)ful British roads that we've had the chance to use it, for more than a couple of hundred yards that is.

I use it most days I drive mine. I do mostly motorway miles, though.

[tykey]

I've got CC, but never use it because I can't afford the extra fuel it uses.

If I could take it off, I would, and put it on eBay!!

[liuleichan]

Originally Posted by tykey

I've got CC, but never use it because I can't afford the extra fuel it uses.

Now I get what Clarkson said on that Audi A8 test, and I understand that it's possible to drive more economically than cruise control will manage.

But - in the main, I suspect it's a crock. For most people, driving over a reasonable distance (so motorway) using cruise will likely be more economical - UNLESS you drive like a saint, with an absolute feather foot at all times.

Just because it's possible to drive more ecomomically than cruise control, doesn't make normal driving more economical on the whole - that would be generalising from a specific.

[alv70d1999]

i wonder if cc can be fitted to a 1999 v70d cos the throttle is electronic with no cable and there is a plug for it next to the indicator stalk?

[tykey]

Originally Posted by liuleichan

Now I get what Clarkson said on that Audi A8 test, and I understand that it's possible to drive more economically than cruise control will manage.

But - in the main, I suspect it's a crock. For most people, driving over a reasonable distance (so motorway) using cruise will likely be more economical - UNLESS you drive like a saint, with an absolute feather foot at all times.

Just because it's possible to drive more ecomomically than cruise control, doesn't make normal driving more economical on the whole - that would be generalising from a specific.

You might suspect it's a crock, but in practice it isn't. It isn't difficult to drive a lot more economically without CC, at the expense of about an average 2mph.

The Jeremy Clarkson experience was an extreme example, but most of us don't want to drive at 50mph and get to Edinburgh and back to London on a tank of fuel.
But it's quite a benefit to drive at 68mph to Edinburgh and get back to Leicester rather than Durham on a full tank.

I can easily get an extra 10mpg without driving like a saint, perhaps not a perfect saint anyway.

It's something you have to prove to yourself, if you've a mind to.

[storming]

Also does anyone know of a guide for installing it?

[liuleichan]

Originally Posted by tykey

You might suspect it's a crock, but in practice it isn't. It isn't difficult to drive a lot more economically without CC, at the expense of about an average 2mph.

The Jeremy Clarkson experience was an extreme example, but most of us don't want to drive at 50mph and get to Edinburgh and back to London on a tank of fuel.
But it's quite a benefit to drive at 68mph to Edinburgh and get back to Leicester rather than Durham on a full tank.

I can easily get an extra 10mpg without driving like a saint, perhaps not a perfect saint anyway.

It's something you have to prove to yourself, if you've a mind to.

You can always set cruise 2mph slower...

What happens, though, is that people watch Top Gear, listen to the guff that Clarkson normally spouts, then chant it as gospel, without accepting the limited set of circumstances for which he said his spiel.

I've driven many miles, both with, and without cruise.

Now true enough it can't anticipate some things that drivers can. So for hills and inclines, that may have some marginal cost in terms of economy. And for other aspects, where being under manual throttle control can be better - but then there's no rule that says you can't disengage cruise sooner, and anticipate better.

Some of this comes from trying to stay under cruise when really it's not suited.

The thing you tend to find when not using cruise is that your speed can fluctuate more, and you can find it easier to drive at a faster speed (due to passing traffic) than you'd prefer (say for economy reasons).

Whereas when using cruise you tend to largely stay at the speed you've set - most often highlighted by finding yourself overtaking, then re-overtaking the same muppets about 5 times, because they can't make up their mind what speed they want to drive at - either that, or can't stand being passed by a car they may have overtaken previously.

So there may be some marginal gains by not using it, for hilly areas, or when driving and when better anticpation should be used, but there's the flip-side of behavourism to factor in. That and the fact that many jump on a bandwagon of a throwaway comment, that is only of marginal gains, anyway.