>>14947063

no

yes, when you're trying to gain momentum rather than sustain it

I wonder this too What if your cruising 25 Mph in 6th gear would it not be better to go to 2nd or 3rd

>>14948135
As long as you REV MATCH REEEeeeeeee

If you would stall in the higher gear.

>>14948135
It would be better, yes. But that's because 25 mph is WAAAAY too low for 6th gear, so the engine would be running at very low RPMs (that's called lugging) which is bad for it. Downshifting to 2nd or 3rd would be much better for the engine, although you would be using more gas because the engine would be running at much higher RPMs than if it were in 6th

>>14947063
How autistic are? Serious question.

Engine is most efficient at peak torque

>>14947063
Yes

>>14949032
No

>>14948135
Fucking up your crankshaft and main bearings is never good.

>>14947063
I've wondered this to. To narrow it down a bit, let's think solely about fuel usage. Ignore all the other terrible things about lugging and knocking for now.

Is there ever a point where using a higher gear will use more fuel than a lower gear at the same speed/acceleration?

Is the answer different for an EFI system compared to a carb?

>>14947063
Yes, but no one here could tell you precisely when

>>14949181
He's right but overall efficiency =/= fuel efficiency.

>>14947063
If your car is turbocharged especially, it becomes a balance. For example, just by definition at lower RPM you use less fuel. If I'm traveling at 35 in 6th I'm using less fuel than if I was in 4th. But I also have a lot less power, meaning that if there is more load placed on the engine (I need to accelerate, going up a hill, driving in gravel or snow, etc) the turbo is more likely to start boosting, which will rape my mileage. So at certain speeds it's better for me to be in a lower gear. However, they're pretty extreme, and I usually just drop a couple gears to do that shit anyway.

>>14948203
absolute bullshit

>>14950208

> TFW factory full boost at 2k

>>14947063
When you're going slower?