Many operators of steamdrive projects will reduce the heat injection rate as the project matures. The major benefit of this practice is to reduce the fuel costs and thus extend the economic life of the project. However, there is little industry consensus on whether the heat cuts should take the form of: (1) mass rate reductions while maintaining the same high steam quality, or (2) steam quality decreases while keeping the same mass rate. Through the use of a commercial three-phase, three-dimensional simulator, the oil recovery schedules obtained when reducing the injected steam mass rate or quality with time were compared under a variety of reservoir and operating conditions. The simulator input was validated for Kern River Field conditions by using the guidelines developed by Johnson, et at. (1989) for four steamflood projects in Kern River. The results indicate that for equivalent heat injection rates, decreasing the steam injection mass rate at a constant high quality will yield more economic oil than reducing the steam quality at a constant mass rate. This conclusion is confirmed by a sensitivity analysis which demonstrates the importance of the gravity drainage/steam zone expansion mechanism in a low-pressure, heavy oil steamflood with gravity segregation. Furthermore, the impact of discontinuous silts and nonuniform initial temperatures within the steamflood zone was studied, indicating again that a decreasing mass rate injection strategy is a superior operating practice.