Wizard1 replied:

Carried out a similar test driving Melbourne to the Gold Coast in my Prado TD, manual. Travelled through Sydney in morning peak hour, then via the Pacific Hwy. Cruise control set 5 km below the limit in 110 zones and on the speed limit in 100 zones (with all the speed cameras you tend not to speed). Still did a couple of stretches at 110 kph. Total distance was 1004 km, still had a third of the subtank left, used 107 litres (10.6 L/100km).

Your figures are very good for a non-turbo Troopie. Perhaps if people adjusted their driving behaviour they may save a few litres and dollars at the pump.

John L G replied:

Steve

I have been driving a stretched 75 series crew cab 92 model for some years and your consumption sounds pretty familiar however it's a pity, and I think a tad selfish, that you couldn't have continued up the coast for another couple of tank fulls to give us more info with higher speeds.

These trucks seem reasonably fuel efficient up to 100kms/hr but anything above that and you would swear you had a hole in the tank. As you so rightly say, they tend to end up full of stuff and must admit to never assessing consumption when empty, but in my experience, it doesn't seem to make much difference once they are rolling and the speed is kept below thye magical 100 click barrier.

I installed a turbo on mine last year and seems to have made no real difference one way or the other to consumption apart from the obvious power difference which transformed the vehicle from a bit of a slug to a much easier drive.

Ciao for now

John G

BenSpoon replied:

I drove to perth for the first time without my roof rack on the long weekend- result was a 15% increase in economy. I used to get 400km with the rack on before low petrol light, without the rack I got 450km.
Cutting down the weight of the car I found made bugger all difference on the highway- it was more speed and aerodynamics.

Rigor replied:

I believe you guys are spot on , 100 KPH is a magical figure where most fourbies turn into a sheet of ply pushed through the air , flat side on. But unfortunately most people are too impatient to even try driving at below 100 for any length of time , must be an age thing I simply don't bother hurrying these days.

Cheers Dave L.

Leroy replied:

At the end of the day you are not going to save that much money. I would rather drive at 100kph in a 100kph zone and not impede traffic than do 90 kph to save a few buck and be involved in an accident because of some impatient d_head wanting to get past you at any cost.

Leroy