Jackaroo Diesel Fuel Consumption

Submitted: Wednesday, Jun 08, 2005 at 23:49
ThreadID: 23703 Views:16429 Replies:11 FollowUps:7
This Thread has been Archived
Can anyone tell me what fuel consumption I could expect from a 99 3.0litre diesel Jackaroo on both city and highway cycles
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Rigor - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 07:39

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 07:39
Hi Diver 2 , I have a 99 TDJack and taking it easy on the highway I can get 10L/100K . that is the best I have achieved but have achieved that consistently.
Driving around town is only a little worse depending on the traffic and stop start of course. Mine is a manual and I was wondering if the auto's get better with higher gearing like the GU's. My economy has dropped off a little over the last couple of tanks and I was wondering if my aircleaner needs renewing , as mentioned earlier my consumption has been very consistent since new . Now at 92,000Ks

Cheers Dave L.
AnswerID: 115002

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 12:29

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 12:29
Could very well be the air cleaner.

Auto's you'll find probally give you better on the highway and worse around town.

As you say better gear ratios in top, however you tend to plant the ol' auto a little harder around town and the stopping and starting is much less efficant with an auto.
FollowupID: 370813

Reply By: Member - Banjo (SA) - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 08:37

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 08:37
Same vehicle and year - 102k on the clock - 10L/100k around the city (all flat) - on the highway WITH my camper trailer (1.2T) its about 12.5 - 13L/100k - cruising at 90kmh. Guess unladen highway would be about 11.5 (not checked - rarely go the highway with no trailer).
AnswerID: 115008

Reply By: D-Jack - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 09:26

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 09:26

WHAT THE ......!!!!!!!

Mate, I have a manual 99 TD with 85000 on the clock. The best I get around town is 12 L/100km, same on highway doing 100km/h or under. That was with the original wrangler APs on, now got cooper ATRs, bit more aggressive so should affect economy.

I drive conservatively, but have got bullbar and 3 x roofracks which are not all that close to the roof line.

When I tow 1 tonne camper on highway sitting on no more than 100 km/h I get 15l/100km pretty consistently (with lugguage rack and packed about 40cm high_

Serviced religiously, 5w30 semi-synthetic oil and tyres on about 36psi.

What the hell are you other guys doing to get 10l/100kms?????


p.s. I'm still impressed with my figures. In a petrol version I would expect 20%more fuel usage, and given high amount of power and torque is still pretty good.

AnswerID: 115017

Follow Up By: Member - Banjo (SA) - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 13:40

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 13:40
I'm not conscious of doing anything special city cycle apart from driving like someone's granny - I'm very light footed when it comes to fuel costs ! On the highway with the camper, I'm still light footed and prefer just to tootle along at 90kph. Re the 10L/100k city cycle- mine is actually 10.5 but I have a bit of hill work in my daily mix - other Jack owners who stay on the flats have reported 10L/100 - adds up, re my figures. IF the motor is breathing freely, and the foot is light, 10L in the city should be achievable - anyway, its not a big deal - the main problem we have is the base price of the fuel at the bloody bowser - a rip-off indeed.
FollowupID: 370822

Follow Up By: Sand Man (SA) - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 18:02

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 18:02

Just as a comparison, same model Jack but a 3.5 petrol/automatic towing a 1.2 ton Camper I get 17l/100k sitting around the 100kph mark.

Get about the same around town (no camper) with a daily hill climb included.

Gee, wish I had an Oiler:-(


I'm diagonally parked in a parallel Universe!

My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

FollowupID: 370854

Follow Up By: Member - Banjo (SA) - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 19:21

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 19:21
Think of the $ you saved at purchase Sandy - I wanted to try the TD because I'd never had one of Rudolph's fuelers, but I paid a premium of a bit over $4 k's on top of the EFI option, from memory. You might still be in front !! Anyway, you've got more power, and if the engine goes phut, it'll be cheaper to fix than the TD most likely.
FollowupID: 370864

Follow Up By: Member - Banjo (SA) - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 19:26

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 19:26
Jezd a thought - with my previous camper in tow, I got 12.7L/100km (accurate) on the highway on long trips @ 100km max - I have two rola low profile racks (quite aerodynamic) but there was nothing loaded up there ! The camper was HD soft floor type - about 1.2 T loaded up I guess - had wide rubber on there. Been using a Unifilter for quite some time now, plus the snorkel.
FollowupID: 370865

Reply By: Rigor - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 12:32

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 12:32
Djack what are we doing ? exactly what you are not is my guess.
not trying to be a smart arse but my 10/100 is with conservative driving ( I am never in a hurry , just ain't worth it anymore) roof racks are crap for economy , I have a bullbar but I would not expect that to impact heavily , revs are the killer for consumption , 2,500 at 100 Klms , anything above that and my consumption goes up dramatically. I also reckon different brands of fuel change things a bit. I actually got down to 9.5/100 for a few tanks just to annoy you , at the same time a mate in Canberra could never better 11.5 for the same vehicle ???
I am about to embark on the biodiesel thing as I am a tight a--- and not happy with fuel costs lately , I believe we are being ripped blind with diesel .
I have recently fitted new tyres (Wrangler ATRs ) standard 245/70 at $187 each a bargain I reckon. got 92Ks out of the original WranglerATs great mileage but ordinary tyre.

Dave L.
AnswerID: 115053

Follow Up By: D-Jack - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 14:05

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 14:05
I would describe my driving as conservative to moderate - I rarely exceed 3000 rpm in between gear changes (about 20 in 1st, 40 in 2nd, 60 in 3rd) and always sit in 4th gear at 60 km/h. Got a snorkel but consumption didn't change with that. Yeh, I would have though roof racks would account for maybe 1l/km but we are talking a 20% difference between yours an my fuel economy.
Do you have standard or oiled air filter?

I started running 245/75 Cooper ATRs which will only put my speedo out about 3% and so shouldn't affect gearing enough to affect fuel economy.

I would estimate my foot doesnt go down on the accelerator any more than 1/4 way when taking off.

We are talking hundreds of dollars a year extra I am paying than someone else with an identical vehicle. That really SUCKS.

FollowupID: 370825

Reply By: TASPAJ - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 16:07

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 16:07
D-Jack you may find your roof racks affect your fuel consumption more than you think. anyting sticking up on your roof creates a lot of drag. Take those roof racks of and see how it goes. 10lt/100km is good for hwy use. 12lts/100k its fine around town.
AnswerID: 115078

Reply By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 17:27

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 17:27
Man I flog the life outa the surf and get about 12 around town.

It's auto,
It's an older less efficiant 3.0L Diesel than the Jack.
I've got it loaded up with crap (including 50L of water).
I'm running 31".10.5R15 Wrangler MTRs!
I've got Rihno sportz racks (no basket unless we go away)

AnswerID: 115093

Reply By: cmilton54 - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 19:34

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 19:34
Had Jackaroo auto Td done 39ks just traded to 120prado auto Td
have full fiqures from new on mileage. broken down into car only, car and van, van only and car and trailer. best was about 12lts car only, 16-18 with van
Email me if want exell spread sheet on it. Dont know how to link to file
AnswerID: 115109

Follow Up By: cmilton54 - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 19:35

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 19:35
Forgot?? Was 2002 model
FollowupID: 370867

Reply By: diver2 - Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 22:29

Thursday, Jun 09, 2005 at 22:29
Thanks for your input guys. I have a 94 rodeo 2.8 Turbo diesel at the moment and was considering upgrading to the Jackaroo, a much much nicer vehicle to drive. What prompted the query was I read a report of a long term test of this vehicle in the overlander mag which stated a consistent fuel burn of 12.7 litres / 100. The Jackaroo bolts down the road compared to the rodeo, but it returns 9l /100 city, the same on the hwy at 100kph and 10L / 100 at 110kph. Yes I agree the difference in price between diesel and petrol is both significant and annoying. I guess because the Jackaroo is capable of relatively good performance it would appear that how it is driven affects fuel use. The rodeo I drive needs 2800rpm at each gear change and up to 3000rpm if going uphill. Anything less and I fear becoming a victim of road rage! It sounds like conservative city driving will return 10 to 11L / 100 for the Jackaroo
AnswerID: 115139

Reply By: Rigor - Friday, Jun 10, 2005 at 08:14

Friday, Jun 10, 2005 at 08:14
I suppose I am biased Diver2 but I really believe they are a good all round vehicle , yes you can get better and tougher off road vehicles but the Jack is a pretty good compromise. The peak torque in the 3.0 L TD is at 2000 rpm so big revs are not needed to get going and is why I believe the need a taller 5th gear which would give better MPG as well . Good luck with your final decision.
Cheers Dave L.
AnswerID: 115172

Reply By: MR FITCH - Monday, Jun 20, 2005 at 20:15

Monday, Jun 20, 2005 at 20:15
Hi, One day ALL you guys who talk on litres per 100klms will realise just what you put back inyour pocket when you fit FITCH to your car.I drive a 80srs turbo landcruiser and return 1200+ klms on both tanks and it blows very little smoke at start up cold and little in running.So driver two fit a fitch and find out yourself.I have fitted qite a few jackaroos petrol and diesel all with possative results
AnswerID: 116599

Reply By: Turbos - Monday, Jul 04, 2005 at 17:27

Monday, Jul 04, 2005 at 17:27
The best economy I ever got was (2000 td) 11.25/100km on a long trip. Around town I would get 14+L/100km and generally the same on a long trip. The Jacks rev high (like most diesels i guess) above 100km/h and mine used to start sculling hard at above 110. However I have 285x60x17 inch Pirellis, bullbar, rola racks that could affect my odometer etc. My GPS tells me that my speed is spot on though (overall diameter was very similar to standard wheels).
AnswerID: 118796

Sponsored Links