Land cruiser fuel efficiency

dodo mommy

I have recently been tipping about in a 06 3 litre lwb land cruiser grand yoke to drive but it loves diesel for example €57 got me 325 km no trailer involved, is this normal or does it need looking at by a mechanic?

alps

dodo mommy wrote: »

I have recently been tipping about in a 06 3 litre lwb land cruiser grand yoke to drive but it loves diesel for example €57 got me 325 km no trailer involved, is this normal or does it need looking at by a mechanic?

You're getting about 22mpg in old money. Doubt if you'll get any better than that..you really would need to own an oil well to be able to afford to run one.

dodo mommy

Can anyone tell me what do lads and ladies find the most economical to run around the farm 4x4 wise?

Irish_peppa

Maybe a silly Question, but would a 3 Litre Diesel Jeep use roughly the same fuel as a 3 Litre Diesel Saloon Car like a 3 Litre Diesel BMW? They would weigh near enough the same albeit different engines

Wildly Boaring

Irish_peppa wrote: »

Maybe a silly Question, but would a 3 Litre Diesel Jeep use roughly the same fuel as a 3 Litre Diesel Saloon Car like a 3 Litre Diesel BMW? They would weigh near enough the same albeit different engines

No
My old 330d did 40mpg a Jeep be under 30 generally.
The drag coefficient of a "jeep" is a disaster.
You're pushing a big square box through the wind.
Oh and the weight. I'd say a jeep be 30 to 50% heavier

Irish_peppa

Wildly Boaring wrote: »

No
My old 330d did 40mpg a Jeep be under 30 generally.
The drag coefficient of a "jeep" is a disaster.
You're pushing a big square box through the wind.
Oh and the weight. I'd say a jeep be 30 to 50% heavier

Ahhhh Yes yes yes I see airodynamics would have a huge effect. That didnt even occur to me:)
Thank you Sir

maidhc

alps wrote: »

You're getting about 22mpg in old money. Doubt if you'll get any better than that..you really would need to own an oil well to be able to afford to run one.

My 03 one does about 30 mpg. About 450miles to the reserve light.

_Brian

Irish_peppa wrote: »

Ahhhh Yes yes yes I see airodynamics would have a huge effect. That didnt even occur to me:)
Thank you Sir

And gearing ratios are completly different giving shorter distances covered for the same fuel by the jeep, but the ability to pull heavier loads.
Weights will be different too.

I’ve seen people claiming the DMax crews are doing 35+ mpg which would be good.

I had a VW Tiguan for a few years, average 40mpg, we have a Ford Juga now and it does 46-48 mpg

Bass Reeves

Really hard to justify LC and similar jeeps. Most lads that have them are only doing minimal milage. With fuel prices likely to rise over the next while and carbon taxes if you are doing higher milage they are not an option.for all lads talk that they are cheap ta maintain you are looking at 40-50/ week difference compared to more efficient crossovers. Add in the fact most are commercials as opposed to cars

I have a RAV4 it is a 2010 jeep rated to pull 2ton. It will do 40 mpg it's a car version and tax is 390/ year. It has 4wd option and so far it covers all bases

yosemitesam1

Get 33mpg with a 3.2l pajero, in 4wd get about 20-25% less.

patsy_mccabe

My SWB Landcruiser was doing 9.45 KM /LT or 26.7 MPG when I worked it out over a 2 year period. I always pay by credt card and always fill to nearest 5LT rather than the € amount. I write the KM from the odometer then on the receipt.
I haven't worked it out though in a few years. Road tax was €333 this year. Commercial insurance circa €450.

I only do about 12,000km per year so total diesel bill circa €1,700 per year. If I was getting 40MPG then bill would be €1,175. But I bought the jeep fairly cheap 12 years ago.

99nsr125

191 LC Commercial
2.8 with AdBlue
Average over 50,000km is

11.4L / 100km

Something like 23mpg

AdBlue is another 10% so effective
21mpg

road_high

Toyota Land Cruiser and similar are the traditional workhouse SUV. So if you're a farmer, builder or small business person using it regularly for towing, some off road use, carrying things and general local business miles they make total sense.
For people doing more typical work commutes, recreational use they are mad given the MPG figures. Easily get double the efficiency and more comfort in a normal car or small type SUV.

patsy_mccabe

You also have to consider depreciation. I reckon mine depreciated €8k in 12 years.

Albert Johnson

My previous jeep was a 02 lwb Land cruiser and from memory it would have averaged around 25mpg doing a mixture of long and short runs and trailer work. I'm currently driving an 08 Ford ranger and it seems to do about 30 mpg doing the same workload. Granted I'm not that hard of a driver but I'd put up at least 500km if not more weekly as the jeep is my sole means of transportation.

Yes I spend a fair bit on diesel but apart from chocolate and coke it's my only real luxury. I work with a lad that wouldn't take a present of a jeep and swears by a Volkswagen golf but he'll go for 5 pints every night so it's all relative. I often wonder if the figures quoted by car manufacturers regarding fuel efficiency are correct in the real world. Several people have remarked that there car doesn't do much better than 35mpg in there experience despite the manufacturers quoting 40mpg or more. These would be all cars newer than 10 year old so I have to wonder.

To answer the OP's question I think your LC's fuel efficiency is on the poorer side of what's to be expected but not excessive imo. If there's lots of milage on the clock then there usually thirstier and there's not much you can do about it. I found keeping it serviced helped somewhat but if your happy with the jeep otherwise I think you'll just have to bite the bullet to an extent. Yes there's downsides to jeep ownership but I certainly wouldn't go back to a van/SUV at the present time because the jeep is still probably the best and most versatile tool I own.

The11Duff

You do not buy a Landcruiser because its good on diesel. You buy it because its damn good at what it does. On my fourth one. Would hate the thought of having to buy something else

hildywildy

What mileage is your LC. I have a 2001 LWB with 312,000 miles, and its flying.
I have a 2011 Defender before that and had to sell it to get into farming. I bought the land cruiser as a stop gap and its blown me away, way ,ore comfy than the defender.

patsy_mccabe

I've 116,000 miles (188km) on my 2006 SWB Landcruiser. Rust underneath will finish it, I think though.

Millionaire only not

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

You also have to consider depreciation. I reckon mine depreciated €8k in 12 years.

A man after my own Heart

C0N0R

Did a 2500km round trip at the weekend, averaged 17 mpg. 4.0 litre V6 petrol land cruiser, automatic permanent 4wd. Got out of it after 9 hours straight driving and wasn’t sore or tired at all, serious comfort.

greysides

hildywildy wrote: »

I have a 2001 LWB with 312,000 miles, and its flying.

Snap!

26-28mpg. Traveling with constant medium loading. No trailoring

poor farmer

08 Mercedes ML 320 automatic , never take the 12 x 6 cattle trailer off it €30 125 km
07 caddy van, no towing, € 30 350 km
08 Passat estate, no towing €30 400 km

I think the merc jeep is working out at about 17 miles per gallon

Cavanjack

Is there any difference comfort wise between the Hilux and the cruiser?
I’m currently running an old car for work and kids (I do about 17,000km a year for work) and a 20 year old cruiser for drawing cattle home from marts etc. Think I will bite the bullet on one or the other later in the year and get rid of the car.

Gudstock

C0N0R wrote: »

Did a 2500km round trip at the weekend, averaged 17 mpg. 4.0 litre V6 petrol land cruiser, automatic permanent 4wd. Got out of it after 9 hours straight driving and wasn’t sore or tired at all, serious comfort.

Oz or far east?

yosemitesam1

Jjameson wrote: »

Why do you use 4wd on the road?

If I forget to turn it off or anytime with the trailer

Bleating Lamb

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Really hard to justify LC and similar jeeps. Most lads that have them are only doing minimal milage. With fuel prices likely to rise over the next while and carbon taxes if you are doing higher milage they are not an option.for all lads talk that they are cheap ta maintain you are looking at 40-50/ week difference compared to more efficient crossovers. Add in the fact most are commercials as opposed to cars

I have a RAV4 it is a 2010 jeep rated to pull 2ton. It will do 40 mpg it's a car version and tax is 390/ year. It has 4wd option and so far it covers all bases

How does your RAV4 perform towing a trailer?.....would it be able to pull a trailer out of a field?

Bass Reeves

Bleating Lamb wrote: »

How does your RAV4 perform towing a trailer?.....would it be able to pull a trailer out of a field?

It will depend on the field and time of year but I have done it yes.

Buying any farm machinery is all relative to your need and use of it. However some confuse need with lifestyle choices.If you have a LC or similar and are are drawing a box of cattle every week or more often to or from the mart then it is easy to justify. It is also easy to make a lifestyle choice of doing handy mileage to live with the diesel bill.

As Patsy shows it is only costing him a 10/week in extra fuel costs so it easy to live with that figure. It is often hard to get true fuel economy figures off lads regarding LC and Jeeps. There is a big difference between a lad tipping around doing 50-55 miles/hour doing hand mileage and someone travelling 50 miles to work in the morning heading up the motorway at 75MPH. But for some one doing 30K KM (18.75K miles)/year the difference is about 1400 euro between a LC and a RAV or KUGA and nearly 2K of a difference if you were using a car for that mileage

Someone asked about fuel efficiency in car's. At present the better half has a 2015 IX35 it will do 50-55 MPG. Before that she had two diesel Avensis the 20104one did 52mpg and the 2007 one 55mpg. I had a 2012 KUGA belong to work and it did 40mpg, a berlingo that did 50mpg, young lad had a seat Ibiza it also did 50mpg, daughter had a few Yaris's 1L petrol 42-44mpg and there is a 2008 diesel Kia Ceed doing 52mpg I think, I am not driving it so not totally sure. So yes cars are much more on fuel than any jeep.

Rav will carry the small loads when I require it to anything after that I use a haulier

C0N0R

Gudstock wrote: »

Oz or far east?

Close, Middle East

queueeye

dodo mommy wrote: »

I have recently been tipping about in a 06 3 litre lwb land cruiser grand yoke to drive but it loves diesel for example €57 got me 325 km no trailer involved, is this normal or does it need looking at by a mechanic?

Has it been serviced lately? No harm to replace the engine air filter, they’re cheap and easily fitted. Your engine runs on a mixture of air and fuel, if it’s not pulling in enough of air it will increase diesel consumption.

blue5000

To answer OP's question, last tankful with my LC was 24mpg. But the short (rubber) air hose pipe going from the air cleaner to the turbo has just been replaced with the proper one. The one I took off was a diy pipe with a bend in it that restricted the air a bit. So I'm hoping from better mpg next fill.

Weight is an issue with mpg, also the way you drive, as well as trailer work. I don't use mine for long runs that much. Soft tyres can make a difference too. Buying the cheapest per litre diesel might not get you the best mpg either.

There was a filling station near here that closed about two years ago. The rumour was they used Russian oil, I nearly always got 30mpg there.

Hard Knocks

If I wanted a 7seater which would have to pull a 10ft box 2/3 times a month
Would the LC be much harder on fuel than the Discovery / Santa Fe / Sorento?

Bass Reeves

Hard Knocks wrote: »

If I wanted a 7seater which would have to pull a 10ft box 2/3 times a month
Would the LC be much harder on fuel than the Discovery / Santa Fe / Sorento?

Road tax would be an issue as well could be 1k of a difference

dodo mommy

Just found an app their called "fuel up fuel log" it might be of some interest to someone, I don't know how to put link may be someone else can if interested.

Castlekeeper

I've a 07 3.0l hilux, we're on hilly ground so the 2.4l would only be burning clutches and struggling to go in and out of yards. Do about 10k a year on it for school runs and 2nd vehicle work. It's a pleasure to drive and absolutely trouble free. Does just over 30mpg unladen but knock 10 off it pulling a load.
Old 02 land cruiser used to do just under the 30.

Mad_maxx

I drive an 06 landcruiser, have it since spring 2008,never gave a seconds trouble but you don't buy one if low fuel consumption is your priority.

Took a notion a year ago that I'd buy a jeep grand cherokee, liked the look of them and it would mean i could let go of the car, took a drive and found it a very course ride compared to the landcruiser even though it was a 2015.
Kept the landcruiser and the car in the end,
A landcruiser will stay good for twenty five years if minded

Deeply regret not buying a new business class landcruiser exactly two years ago, 58k straight, a two year old is worth that today as the revenue changed the VRT and vat rules so new ones are 75 k now, sales guy wouldn't take my 2006 so I tried to sell it and missed the deadline for a new one before tax changes

K.G.

Just doing the sums on a fella i know.lives 40 miles away from his suckers.has them at home for calving away for.wintering / summer.i said 20 euro a trip for diesel(80 miles is 3.2 gallon s by 4.65x135 euro.if he makes 100 trips(twice a.week) thats 2 k in diesel alone.30 cows and allow for wear and tear on jeep its nearly 100 a cow.god there must be great money in suckers.

Bass Reeves

K.G. wrote: »

Just doing the sums on a fella i know.lives 40 miles away from his suckers.has them at home for calving away for.wintering / summer.i said 20 euro a trip for diesel(80 miles is 3.2 gallon s by 4.65x135 euro.if he makes 100 trips(twice a.week) thats 2 k in diesel alone.30 cows and allow for wear and tear on jeep its nearly 100 a cow.god there must be great money in suckers.

He save 5-600/year using a rRAV or Kuga. But he would not be a serious farmer. As well you have failed to factor in extar cost of running jeep for other mileage

Mooooo

What are the autos like in modern landcruisers 4/5 years old? Mileage is relatively low so fuel economy less of an issue here, more maintenance costs really. Tend to keep things till they stop here, car is 13 year old but gets destroyed hauling stuff around

jmreire

dodo mommy wrote: »

I have recently been tipping about in a 06 3 litre lwb land cruiser grand yoke to drive but it loves diesel for example €57 got me 325 km no trailer involved, is this normal or does it need looking at by a mechanic?

12-14 Ltrs per 100 Klms would be average. And that will vary with the kind of driving / towing / terrain etc. But the only real way to find out the fuel, consumption for your LC is to Fiil it up to the brim, and note the mileage / Kilometres , Drive it until it need's refiling. Take the mileage again, subtract the original mileage from the driver mileage. Divide the driven mileage into the Nr of ltrs, and multiply by 100. That will give you the exact fuel consumption.

Mad_maxx

Mooooo wrote: »

What are the autos like in modern landcruisers 4/5 years old? Mileage is relatively low so fuel economy less of an issue here, more maintenance costs really. Tend to keep things till they stop here, car is 13 year old but gets destroyed hauling stuff around

no difference between manual and auto in terms of maintenance , autos are certainly harder on fuel though , i wouldnt drive anything else but an auto but you spend more on juice

jmreire

Mad_maxx wrote: »

no difference between manual and auto in terms of maintenance , autos are certainly harder on fuel though , i wouldnt drive anything else but an auto but you spend more on juice

Nearly all automatic's are harder on fuel then their manual counterpart's. But how do you find it for 4 x 4 work? In bad off road conditions?

Mad_maxx

jmreire wrote: »

Nearly all automatic's are harder on fuel then their manual counterpart's. But how do you find it for 4 x 4 work? In bad off road conditions?

im not farming , i only tow a trailer once in a blue moon but any farmers i speak to who drive automatics find them fine for towing

in my opinion autos are more dangerous in icy conditions , you have no engine breaking in that you cant drop a gear to reduce speed in the way you can with a manual , you have less control which is obviously important if conditions are icy , wouldnt put me off one though

jmreire

Mad_maxx wrote: »

im not farming , i only tow a trailer once in a blue moon but any farmers i speak to who drive automatics find them fine for towing

in my opinion autos are more dangerous in icy conditions , you have no engine breaking in that you cant drop a gear to reduce speed in the way you can with a manual , you have less control which is obviously important if conditions are icy , wouldnt put me off one though

I have driven them in extreme conditions ice , snow, mud etc, and always manuals. As you said, with Automatics,you only have the brake or the accelerator,,and that's not much use when you are coming down or travelling up the side of a frozen mountain. But I wondered how the Automatics would behave in say muddy field's etc. when using 4 wheel drive. For the last 2 years, I have been driving an Automatic myself..and would find it hard to go back to a manual again, and for towing,here in Ireland, they are the best. Streets ahead of manuals

Mooooo

In countries with regular snow and ice most are autos tho, North America esp

jmreire

Mooooo wrote: »

In countries with regular snow and ice most are autos tho, North America esp

Yes, and also they would be very familiar with using snow chain's and carrying snow shovel's etc. Plus snow plow's are a common sight on the roads there ( North America ) and in Canada....friend of mine ex Mountie, drive's emergency vehicles there, including snow ploughs..and for them, harsh winter condition's are completely normal..they are well used to it. But for me personally, and given a choice, in extreme conditions, manuals all day long.

greysides

Do you not have first and second gears on some autos?

jmreire

greysides wrote: »

Do you not have first and second gears on some autos?

You have the equivalent..they are called "Brake Band's or clutches, depending on the make of the transmission".....you can select " Manual Mode" or "Full Automatic". Say you are for example, travelling in a funeral, and have to maintain a set distance with the car in front? The automatic transmission, will be shifting generally "UP" to a higher gear, which means that the car will have tendency to move faster, and it will have to be slowed down using the brakes....but in manual mode, if you select 1st, 2nd , 3rd, 4th or 5th, it will remain in the selected gear. Can also be used travelling downhill for the braking effect, but in automatic mode, this braking effect comes into play too. It is noticeable when the engine rev's up, but the car actually slows down.