Darn "gas guzzling" Prados

Submitted: Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 04:33
ThreadID: 21985 Views:2313 Replies:7 FollowUps:13
This Thread has been Archived
http://finance.news.com.au/story/0,10166,12817661-462,00.html

"PETROL prices could rocket to $1.25 a litre by the end of the year as global oil prices sustain high levels, sparking outrage among motorists and consumer groups.

At that price, owners of the popular Toyota LandCruiser Prado would be forced to part with more than $220 to fill their tank" ....blah blah.

.
.
.

I like how they pick a 4wd with about the biggest tank on the market, but neglects to mention that they get about 11.5 litres/100km and the range you get for your $220. (tongue in cheek about the "gas guzzling" topic).
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - Steve (ACT) - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 05:20

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 05:20
With a son whose just started a bakers apprenticeship, and a bus system that doesn't get him there on time in the morning, so we have to drive him in our Prado, the hip pocket is feeling it with the amount of extra petrol we're using.

But that's nothing compare to my body, it's not as young as it used to be, and getting up that early every morning is going to kill me before the petrol prices do.

Can't wait until his Holden drover is on the road, and he has his L's and he can drive his car in and I'll drive is home and use his petrol instead.

Sandy
AnswerID: 106290

Reply By: Swine Hunter - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 06:58

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 06:58
Hi All,
Does a new Prado hold about 176L of fuel factory?
That's what they are saying if they calculate $220 to fill one at $1.25L
AnswerID: 106293

Follow Up By: Member Eric - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 07:37

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 07:37
somewhere betweem 168 and 176 , yep

not bad considering the 100 series carries 135 lol
0
FollowupID: 363306

Reply By: old-plodder - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 08:11

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 08:11
I was going through my old records and log books.
By my reckoning based on the average wage, $1.00 to $1.20 a litre is about the same as we were paying in the 80s in relation to wages.

Back in the early 70s, I was paying 49c a gallon (4.54l) when I was getting about $45.00 per week in hand as a trainee, and in the mid 80s, it was 42c / litre when I was getting $210.00 a week.

Any one else got some old log books to compare?

PS - my 23 yr old son keeps having a go at me for me saying 'remember when'.
Caught him the other day saying 'remember when' and being nostaligic about driving 5 years ago and having a go at all these young hoons :-). No, I didn't miss my chance.
AnswerID: 106303

Follow Up By: Savvas - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:49

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:49
I don't have logs, but I do whingeing the first time I paid $20 for a full tank in my first car, a 2.8L VB Commodore, somewhere around 1982 I guess. I was clearing about $170/week back then.

Proportionately, fuel cost as a percentage of my weekly income is less. But hey we didn't have mobile phone bills, internet, cable TV, kids school fees, mortgage, etc, etc, etc to pay as well.

We're getting squeezed all sorts of ways ... not just fuel.
0
FollowupID: 363334

Reply By: hl - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 09:55

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 09:55
Hi...
spot on.. It cost 3 times as much to fill as a Falcon and will go 5 times further on a tank.
Cheers
AnswerID: 106321

Reply By: Charcoal RS - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 14:15

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 14:15
Bloody petrol prices,
The new Prados have 180 liter tanks, but what gets me is the fuel economy best I can get is 16l/100km which is alot more than the govt figure
AnswerID: 106353

Follow Up By: GO_OFFROAD - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 21:00

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 21:00
Must be driver I would say, as the V6 prado's on trips with me have been getting better than that sand driving loaded, like in the Simpson last year, where the V6's u7sed 10 lt more than the diesels for the same trip, east west in the Simpson.

On one trip on LCOOL last year a V6 grande even returned 13lt per 100km after doing border track etc sand driving for 4 days.

And of course down here petrol is still 10c a lt cheaper than diesel at the bowser ;-)
0
FollowupID: 363437

Follow Up By: warthog - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 22:22

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 22:22
"the v6's used 10 lt more than the diesels for the same trip" must be the driver i'd say.
From www.dieselforum.org/didyouknow/cleandiesel.html

"Light-duty, diesels such as automobiles, use 20-40% less diesel than similarly sized gasoline engines, depending on the type of vehicle and driving conditions."

"Diesel's superior fuel efficiency is not only a result of compression ignition, but also as a result of diesel fuel's higher energy content. A gallon of diesel contains roughly 11% more energy than a gallon of gasoline."
0
FollowupID: 363460

Follow Up By: GO_OFFROAD - Wednesday, Apr 13, 2005 at 07:05

Wednesday, Apr 13, 2005 at 07:05
Well, believe what you like, Im stating facts, and your quoting a diesel forum.........Some of the V6 owners on the trips mentioned are members here.

But heres a economy run we did afew years ago, which sort of disagree's with the above statement of yours.

http://www.gpsoz.com.au/80Econrun.htm

http://www.lcool.org/trips/double_simpson_2004/fuel.html
0
FollowupID: 363503

Follow Up By: warthog - Wednesday, Apr 13, 2005 at 11:33

Wednesday, Apr 13, 2005 at 11:33
Average fuel economy figures from this web site.
4cyl ulp=17.01 l/100km
4cyl diesel=13.68 l/100km
6cyl ulp=17.61 l/100km
6cyl diesel=16.29 l/100km
The 6cyl result is quite close due to old tech mech injection v electronic controlled fuel injection for the petrols. The unstoppable old mechanical still wins out though.

Some further info from www.isuzu.co.jp
diesel= ratio of heat convrted into into motive power:35-42%
petrol= ratio of heat converted into motive power:25-30%
The energy content of a gallon of gasoline = 114000 btu
The energy content of a gallon of diesel = 128000 btu
0
FollowupID: 363530

Follow Up By: GO_OFFROAD - Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 00:05

Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 00:05
Very good wart hog, but your cutting and pasting technique still doesnt explain why the vehicles get such close economy in the real world????
0
FollowupID: 363629

Follow Up By: warthog - Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 09:18

Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 09:18
That is because in the real world they don't. Have a look at the 4wd monthly tow test between the gruntmeister f250 and diesel troopy and compare them to the earlier issue towing the same trailer with a 4.8 patrol. Don't know what world you're living in but I hope you're happy there.
0
FollowupID: 363654

Follow Up By: GO_OFFROAD - Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 19:18

Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 19:18
So your saying my actaul data collected is incorrect, on all counts, and your magazine articles and net forum cut and pasting is actually correct?

Must say though, with double the servicing, extra purchase price, injector and pump maintenance, and diesel being so much dearer, i havent been able to make a diesel add up cheaper to run than a petrol in the toyota range as yet, over the warranty period, but maybe you could cut and paste some other link which makes this possible where you live?
0
FollowupID: 363756

Follow Up By: warthog - Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 20:20

Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 20:20
In the Toyata range try the 100series diesel std. As far as your "actual data" collected over your undoubtably small sample group, perhaps a v6 prado with its electronicly controlled injection can come close to an older tech diesel if you tape an egg shell to the throttle pedal whilst the diesel owners drive without attention to economy. It's just there is a large body of evidence that disagrees with your assertion re petrol v diesel economy as do the laws of physics. Energy cannot be made or unmade it can only change its form. Diesel engines are more efficient in changing the greater energy content of diesel fuel into motive power. It would appear the market has grasped this hence the higher resale price of diesel v petrol vehicles. If as you say diesel vehicles do not make economic sense the resale values would plummet.
0
FollowupID: 363764

Follow Up By: warthog - Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 20:24

Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 20:24
I do agree you pay a bloody huge premium for the 100 gxl turbo over the v8 and I couldn't swallow that if I was in the market for a lease vehicle. Can't make a turbo diesel sound like a v8 either.
0
FollowupID: 363766

Follow Up By: warthog - Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 21:04

Thursday, Apr 14, 2005 at 21:04
Except of course the 7.3 ltr powerstroke that should slot in nicely when my td42t wears out. In 600000k's time or so.
0
FollowupID: 363773

Reply By: Willem - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 19:29

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 19:29
I fuelled up this week with diesel as we are leaving on our trip on Sunday.

255 lts at $1.20/lt less 5 cents/lt discount for shopping locally. $293 all up. Next fuel up is in Alice Springs and the one after that at Kunawarritji. Hip pocket will have an almighty hole in it soon.

The global fuel price has dropped in the last few days. Wonder if we will see this at the bowser lol
AnswerID: 106406

Follow Up By: Member - Kimberly Kruiser (WA) - Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 22:45

Tuesday, Apr 12, 2005 at 22:45
G'day Willem

$1.35 per litre Kununurra 2weeks ago when I filled up. Probably jump to $1.45 - $1.50 for the tourist season.

Cheers
Wal.
0
FollowupID: 363470

Reply By: Bonz (Vic) - Wednesday, Apr 13, 2005 at 12:10

Wednesday, Apr 13, 2005 at 12:10
I'm back! What peeves me is that the prices have gone up like 20c, so its a gradual increase that we are really talking about here, yes its a bit, on the patrol, thats like $22 extra a tankful, for the value of the travel its not bad I reckon.
.
Time is an illusion produced by the passage of history
.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

AnswerID: 106512

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (14)