Today, Mainetoday.com ran an article comparing the fuel economy of two drivers in the same car, one driving attentativelt and one driving like his only previous driving experience was in need for speed. The author used this informal test to show that you can cut your fuel expenses in half by simply obeying the speed limit.

Right.

Of course driving slowly and not accelerating like an NASCAR driver will help you at the pump, but will it really add 15 mpg? I don't think this experiment shows that at all. There are a few real problems with this informal experiment. The first is that there isn't enough data. You cannot draw any strong conclusions from such a small sample (a 30 mile loop each). Second is that the study used a car with a fairly impressive fuel economy. In a more typical car, the savings are much less dramatic. Third, the epxeriment takes both driving styles to dangerous extremes. Most fast drivers don't drive nearly as poorly as was described in this article. Similarly, no matter how fuel-minded you are, there is really no excuse to draft behind a truck.

I conducted my own little informal trial: two little 15 mile drives through town. I drive a pig of a car, a '92 Buick Roadmaster. On the first loop I drove like the "hormone-pumped teenage boy" that I am. I drove 10mph over the speed limit through most of it. I accelerated as hard as I could without redlining. I averaged 17 mpg. On the way home I drove as economically as I could. I never went above the posted speed limit and eased out of stops. I coasted when I could. I averaged only a marginally better 20 mpg.

I'm certaintly not advocating driving poorly, as driving responsibly make the road safer for everyone, but I am skeptical of the drastic claims made by the authors of "Lead foot vs. Gentle sole".