Pajero petrol consumption

Submitted: Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 20:43
ThreadID: 34106 Views:25284 Replies:13 FollowUps:7
This Thread has been Archived
Hi all,

I'm currently trying to decide between a new PETROL Pajero or Prado. There are some excelent deals to be had on 3.8L Pajeros at the moment but I have heard they have very poor fuel consumption compared to the 4L Prado. Does anybody have any experience to help guide me in the right direction? I have read all the for & against arguments for both vehicles and either will suit my purpose. It comes down to the best deal. I'm not interested in diesel.


Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: F4Phantom - Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 21:04

Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 21:04
gee wizz the prado aint that good either, we did an overnighter with a new prado and it used 30L/100km (including off road work) . If the pajero uses more I would think about a diesel.
AnswerID: 173845

Reply By: Member - Peter A (VIC) - Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 21:14

Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 21:14
I have a Prado turbo diesal, its great for us, we did have a petrol and it was good as well, I know fuel does cost a lot but we have had seven years of trouble free from our Prados and when you can rely on your vehicles, fuel consumption doesn't matter espiecally when your out in the outback away fom anyhere.
But I know fuel is exspensive but we still go on our trips and enjoy our great country, so whatever you do enjoy the great places we have in this country

Peter a
AnswerID: 173850

Follow Up By: Don from Fitch Fuel Catalyst Australia Pty Ltd - Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 21:22

Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 21:22
HI Guys &Gals,Well I must say things have been very quiet from my point of suggestions,but you ALL know about my product so I suggest that you all read the press release on the site.
Further I have been informed that testing is imminent to begin with the NRMA and AAA,so hang in there and await the result.

Regards BILLS
FollowupID: 429807

Reply By: Member - Doug T (QLD) - Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 21:45

Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 21:45
Regardless of the post I put a few hours ago about Pajero I still reackon they are a fine looker but so is the Toyota , but ... MMmmm I still like diesels even though it is just a bit dearer the economy is better, but it's your dollars and your choice .
gift by Daughter

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 173860

Reply By: pauljohnston - Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 21:51

Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 21:51
Hi, I had a Pajero 3.2td. I know you were asking about the petrol, I have heard they are thirsty. The diesel is a miser, and they go like the clappers, you would think you were driving a petrol. May just be a bit noisier. have a think about the diesel.

AnswerID: 173861

Reply By: Trevor R (QLD) - Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 22:15

Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 22:15

I'll keep an eye on this thread and if no-one has given you clear answers on fuel figures for a petrol Prado 4L by tomorrow, I'll give a mate of mine a call and get back to you. I know he's happy with the his Prado car itself but he doesn't really use it offroad more just towing his boat.
For everyone telling you to think of a diesel can I remind you of what Thomo said

Quote: "I'm not interested in diesel." Thomo1 21/05/2006.

Does this not tell you something, obviuosly means nothing to some.

Regards, Trevor.
AnswerID: 173866

Reply By: Jo and Mark - Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 22:43

Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 22:43
Our Pajero is a 93 V6 3lt petrol. She is brilliant on fuel! I would imagine that that being an older model you would think that the newer models would have even better economy.
We got home a few ours ago from the Imbil Qld gathering, We drove from home to caboolture, from there we went to imbil, all the 4 wding we did, then on the way home stopped at Trevors(who posted above) then back on to home at Browns Plains (southside of Brisbane) all up we did around 750 km (am too lazy to go out into the cold and check the exact lst 2 digits) and are now sitting just under half a tank of fuel left. Dollar wise it cost me $95 to fill the 80Lt tank, ($47.50 for half tank) plus we stuck 15 bucks in the jerry can which gave is around 12 Lt.
so the cost of fuel for that 750km was half a tank plus we chuck in the jerry can fuel in the car tank.
Total cost of fuel for 750km.. 47.50 + 15. = $62.50!

Like I said she is great on fuel and had that 750kms been on everyday running around driving it would have cost me more for constant stop start, idling etc-but even for everyday use she is brilliant.

We get much better fuel economy out of the pajero than what we ever got out of our 97 falcon, also a V6.
AnswerID: 173872

Follow Up By: disco driver - Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 23:20

Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 23:20
Hi Jo & Mark,

Don't think Ford ever put a V6 into the Falcon but I stand to be corrected

FollowupID: 429848

Follow Up By: Jo and Mark - Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 23:50

Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 23:50
Yeh we had a Ford Falcon Futura. 6 cylinder. (or is 'V6" actually different to a '6 cylinder') I thought 6's were all 6's, whatever extra letters they put in front.
FollowupID: 429852

Follow Up By: cloughie - Monday, May 22, 2006 at 10:03

Monday, May 22, 2006 at 10:03
Hi Jo,

Just to set you straight, the letter V in front of of the 6 means the cylinders are in V formation which is greatly different to a Ford where the cylinders are in straight formation.If the letter V is not in front of the number you can safely assume that the engine is straight. The other designations you may come across are W, flat and orbital but these are not as common as straight and V.
FollowupID: 429884

Follow Up By: Jo and Mark - Monday, May 22, 2006 at 10:37

Monday, May 22, 2006 at 10:37
Heck will you look at that!

I learned something new today!!

Thanks Cloughie!!!

FollowupID: 429893

Reply By: Froilan - Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 23:17

Sunday, May 21, 2006 at 23:17
Hi Thomo1,

I had the older 2002 Pajero NM 3.5L and averaged 13.5 to 14 litres per 100km. Up to 15 - 15.5l when off-road. That was when the truck was stock standard. I replaced the suspension with Tough Dogs (raised by 70mm) and put LT tyres (one-size up) and the consumption suffered. Lucky to get 550km on a full tank.

Currently drive a diesel Prado so consumption is better at around 12.5l/100km. My brother drives the petrol version and it averages 15l/100km.

Hope this helps.
AnswerID: 173878

Reply By: Thomo1 - Monday, May 22, 2006 at 05:24

Monday, May 22, 2006 at 05:24
Thanks for all your replies. Interesting information. I have read that 15L/100km is the best I could expect from a 3.8L Pajero and could be as bad as 23L/100km (around town). Conversely the 4L Prado is supposed to return 11-15L/100km. I had heard that the older 3.5L Pajero was pretty economical, thats why I thought I would check the info about the new motor.
AnswerID: 173888

Follow Up By: Member - MrBitchi (QLD) - Monday, May 22, 2006 at 07:51

Monday, May 22, 2006 at 07:51
Similar sized car, similar weight, bigger engine, can't see how it would have anything but similar fuel consumption.
I believe the Prado has a bigger tank though, so will go further between fills.
If you're concerned about consumption, get the diesel.
FollowupID: 429863

Follow Up By: Scubaroo - Monday, May 22, 2006 at 09:26

Monday, May 22, 2006 at 09:26
Conversely, the worst I've gotten out of the 3.5l auto Pajero is 17L/100km around town. Best is 13L/100km on the Hume. Fitting LT tyres didn't make much difference, haven't raised the suspension.

I would seriously consider the 3.2L DiD Pajero - that was our preferred vehicle but second hand ones were hard to come by when we purchased. How does 9L/100km sound!!!
FollowupID: 429875

Reply By: Thomo1 - Monday, May 22, 2006 at 08:01

Monday, May 22, 2006 at 08:01
My thoughts exactly. I'm no engineer though, so thought there might be somthing I was missing.


AnswerID: 173899

Reply By: Member - Oldplodder (QLD) - Monday, May 22, 2006 at 08:42

Monday, May 22, 2006 at 08:42
From the pajero forum, it seems that consumption varies quite a bit depending on the driver. I guess it would be the same with the Prado. The 3.8l pajero engine is a slightly older design.
Both are heavy cars, and with engines putting out 150kw plus, you want the performance, you put your foot down. And of course, performance comes with more petrol being burned.
Have a friend with a manual 3.5l petrol pajero who gets 11l/100k around the suburbs. Doesn't go more than 1/2 throttle (generally drives on 1/4 throttle), or over 2500 rpm. Goes to 15l/100k real easy around the suburbs when some one else drives using 3000/4000 rpm and putting thier foot down at the lights.

Can't see that much difference in fuel consumption between the pajero and prado that your right foot couldn't make up.
AnswerID: 173907

Reply By: Shawsie (Bris) - Monday, May 22, 2006 at 08:50

Monday, May 22, 2006 at 08:50
My out-laws have just come up from Port Macquarie to Brizzy and he has a new 4lt Petrol Prado. He told me last night he got just over 12lt/100km for the trip up here and was very happy. Hope this helps...
AnswerID: 173911

Reply By: Coolman - Monday, May 22, 2006 at 10:11

Monday, May 22, 2006 at 10:11
If you have a look on the Pajero forum there is a topic on the 3.8l Petrol consumption.

I find it about 17l around town and can get to 23-25 off road.

A lot depends on how you drive it. There is plenty of power if you like to use your right boot but it has a proportional effect on the fuel... Overall I love the power but it is thirsty.
AnswerID: 173926

Reply By: Member - Stan (VIC) - Monday, May 22, 2006 at 10:16

Monday, May 22, 2006 at 10:16
Can't help you with the Pajero figures, but for everything related to new Prados
have a look on or

For the stock standard Petrol Prado GXL expect average fuel consumption
of 15 litres per 100km on 91 unleaded petrol. If you will use 98 octane petrol
the consumption could be as low as 13.5 litres per 100km...

For 4wd low range work or towing camper trailer expect around 18l per 100km.

Mine with all the mods listed under my rig profile currently uses 16.2 Litres per
100km.. on Petrol and 17.5 Litres per 100km on LPG

AnswerID: 173928

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (9)