# Fuel Economy on Reverse

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuel-economy-on-reverse/61468>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [April 10, 2001, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuel-economy-on-reverse/61468 "2001-04-10T13:04:31Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 6\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mongrel\_8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@mongrel\_8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mongrel_8)\
**Post date:** [April 10, 2001, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuel-economy-on-reverse/61468/1 "2001-04-10T13:04:31Z")

</div>

Has there ever been studies done to see how fuel economy in reverse compares to fuel economy while going foward?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![honkytonkwillie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3da27b/32.png) [@honkytonkwillie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/honkytonkwillie)\
**Post date:** [April 11, 2001, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuel-economy-on-reverse/61468/2 "2001-04-11T06:08:27Z")

</div>

I doubt you’d find one.

I’d say a reasonable estimate could be had by finding fuel economy going forward using only first gear. When looking at transmission specs., the gear ratios for reverse and first are very close.

First gear won’t get the car going fast enough for wind resistance to become a significant factor.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jbird3000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/aeb1de/32.png) [@jbird3000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jbird3000)\
**Post date:** [April 13, 2001, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuel-economy-on-reverse/61468/3 "2001-04-13T03:12:14Z")

</div>

Well obviously, since forward BURNS gas, reverse would actually fill up your tank. That’s what I do instead of going to the gas station. Just drive around in reverse for a while.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\
**Post date:** [April 13, 2001, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuel-economy-on-reverse/61468/4 "2001-04-13T11:44:33Z")

</div>

I asked an engineer at Chrysler I know about this. After he was done laughing, he said “No.”

Although, you might expect it to be a little less for two reasons - one, because you have the extra idler gear in the reverse chain, you have more drivetrain friction; and two, because the car is not shaped for travelling in reverese, a slight amount more wind resistance (insignificant, as **honkeytonkwillie** correctly stated already).

So my educated guess is slightly worse, but possibly not measureable.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\
**Post date:** [April 13, 2001, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuel-economy-on-reverse/61468/5 "2001-04-13T11:46:20Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Anthracite \*  
> \*\*Although, you might expect it to be a little less for two reasons \*\*

that should read “…a little **more** …”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mongrel\_8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@mongrel\_8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mongrel_8)\
**Post date:** [April 13, 2001, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuel-economy-on-reverse/61468/6 "2001-04-13T14:23:24Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by jbird3000 \*  
> \*\*Well obviously, since forward BURNS gas, reverse would actually fill up your tank. That’s what I do instead of going to the gas station. Just drive around in reverse for a while. \*\*

Thanks for the laugh, I actually just realized the other day that on my truck when I drive in reverse my odometer does go backwards. Looks like I just founf a way to raise the resale value. 😃