Cruise control fuel consumption.

[K Dilks]

Short and simple.
Do you get better fuel consumption with or without cruise control engaged?

Seems to me better without.

[Tree]

I reckon I get ever so slightly better but I do have a 37 mile drive to work which is mainly dual carriageway over the South Downs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[geoff]

Not Berlingo but Honda : I get 2 mpg less on motorways and when I drive door to door purely on the buttons ( shouldn't really I suppose ) I get much the same.

[Growler73]

2004 2.0HDi, I get about 4mpg less using cruise control than I do driving normally.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

[Col]

Every hill you come to, cruise will "open the throttle" to maintain the set speed. I have even had it shift down a gear on my automatic Merc when towing to achieve this.
When you drive without cruise, you tend to allow speed to fall off a bit going up hill which you regain when going down the other side, whereas cruise will slavishly try to maintain that speed up hill and down dale (going downhill, my Merc downshifts so engine braking holds the speed back if it exceeds the speed set on cruise)
This is why cruise uses more fuel (unless on a really flat road)

[Luis Rosa]

Every hill you come to, cruise will "open the throttle" to maintain the set speed. I have even had it shift down a gear on my automatic Merc when towing to achieve this.
When you drive without cruise, you tend to allow speed to fall off a bit going up hill which you regain when going down the other side, whereas cruise will slavishly try to maintain that speed up hill and down dale (going downhill, my Merc downshifts so engine braking holds the speed back if it exceeds the speed set on cruise)
This is why cruise uses more fuel (unless on a really flat road)

We can also take advantage of the descents, where accelerating to get to speed is easier and less fuel consuming, and then use the picked up speed for the next hill. The cc does not do this, it only throttles off when going downhill and goes full whack uphil to maintain the speed.

[CourierJim]

Even If CC delivered 10 mpg less than manual driving (which it doesn't), I'd still use it all the time like I do now. I regularly drive from Leeds to Plymouth and back in a day, and my right ankle would be killing me at the end of the journey if I did not have cruise control.

[Col]

Mine's never shifted down while cruising, and I don't think it's clever enough to downshift to engine-brake if it goes too fast. If you're going downhill in 6th gear then it will coast up to whatever speed it would do if you were driving manually in 6th - it doesn't care if you go over, although this almost never happens anyway. You don't get hills steep enough on the sort of roads where you'd normally be cruising.

Mine was a generic reply to cruise and I was referring to my Mercedes which is auto ( My Peugeot Partner is manual and doesn't have cruise) and it sounds like yours is a manual.
You also say you drive on less steep hills.

I regularly tow a heavy trailer from the south coast using M3 and A34 and there are a couple of hills such as Twyford down cutting where my car will go full throttle and downshift to maintain the set speed, then at the top, just as you start to pick up speed down the other side, it downshifts to hold the speed back so you don't get the run up for the next hill. It will then have to throttle up to maintain speed for the next hill. if I look at the MPG, it's truly bad.


If I drive it without CC, I take a bit of a run up and let the speed drop off so I crest the hill at about 50mph and then let the car gather momentum down the other side to get a run up for the next hill towards the A34 turnoff. The difference in mpg is clear if I compare the two.

By keeping a more even throttle and using the stored momentum of the downhill bits to help carry me up the uphill bits I get about a 5mpg overall saving on the full journey (only this much when towing)

If the car is not towing the difference is not so noticable.
With the Berlingo being lighter and more economical to start with, I would think the differences are even less tangiable.
Either way, cruise is a nice option to have

[Tree]

That's probably why I find it more efficient, purely because I'm using it while trundling along the A3 at 60mph on the inside lane. I never tinker with the buttons adjusting the speed except for the pause button when the vehicle in front is driving slower. When it's safe to pull out I'll press pause again to engage CC and overtake. I've only got one steep hill really to overcome over the south downs but I wouldn't say the A3 from Liss to Portsmouth is flat by any margin. My biggest killer on economy is revving up and down on the A32 driving into Gosport as the traffic is always heavy. Last year, Paris to Calais most of the journey was 130km/h (80mph) and apart for slowing down for toll payment it was a constant speed. Average with five up and a full boot in a seven seater in sixth gear returned just over 55 to the gallon. 90% on cruise control.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Luis Rosa]

In Portugal (there you have hills even in the motorway), the cruise control averages almost 1L/100km more than my own driving. From Portugal to Germany and back, 5400km trip, it does not make much difference. Where I notice the most is on my ankle and leg, that make the 2700km stretches much more easily, without pain