Toyota or Nissan - Fuel economy

Submitted: Saturday, Jun 24, 2006 at 21:53
ThreadID: 35239 Views:1772 Replies:7 FollowUps:17
This Thread has been Archived
Toyota or Nissan.

I have an 80 series Landcruiser 92 petrol/Gas. We only get 300 k's out of an 88 ltr tank. (Is this normal or should we be getting more?).

We are thinking about getting a later model 4x4. Can anyone help with the following question?

What has better fuel economy ? A Toyota Landcruiser late 80 or 100 series, petrol or turbo diesel. Or a Nissan Patrol 2003 on petrol or turbo diesel.

Thanks

Franksy
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: DiD 05 Paj - Saturday, Jun 24, 2006 at 22:11

Saturday, Jun 24, 2006 at 22:11
Cant Help you with Cruiser or Patrol but the Desiel Paj gets around 800km around town and 1000km on a trip (90ltr) :)
AnswerID: 180230

Reply By: Member - Nick (Kununurra) - Saturday, Jun 24, 2006 at 22:15

Saturday, Jun 24, 2006 at 22:15
The most economical out of the vehicles listed is the T/D Cruiser,also a great motor and all round package but limited to IFS which is OK for 90% of us.
Both petrol motors are real drinkers,with the Nissan 4.8 just edging out the cruiser 4.5 for most fuel used.
We get around 13.5l/100kms in our 105 series,live axle but non turbo(read slow).
P.S Im talking about real motors,not the 3lt in the Patrol.
AnswerID: 180231

Follow Up By: adamj1300 - Saturday, Jun 24, 2006 at 22:54

Saturday, Jun 24, 2006 at 22:54
The most economical out of the vehicles listed is the T/D Cruiser,also a great motor and all round package but limited to IFS which is OK for 90% of us.
Both petrol motors are real drinkers,with the Nissan 4.8 just edging out the cruiser 4.5 for most fuel used.
We get around 13.5l/100kms in our 105 series,live axle but non turbo(read slow).
P.S Im talking about real motors,not the 3lt in the Patrol.

thats funny seeing as ur talking about real motors the land cruiser N/A 1HZ diesel there not turbod coz they can't hack the turbo to begin with! the heads crack

i will admit 3 lit motor was a dud when it first came out after a bit of tweaking of it it now seems to be ok & it does produce way more power than the 1hz ever will!
0
FollowupID: 436469

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 00:44

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 00:44
"i will admit 3 lit motor was a dud when it first came out after a bit of tweaking of it it now seems to be ok"

Sh.t I hope you arent a car salesman!!!
0
FollowupID: 436479

Follow Up By: Member - Nick (Kununurra) - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 11:34

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 11:34
The 1HZ wasnt designed for a turbo so bolting on something that it wasnt designed for may well cause problems.Saying this there would be thousands of 1HZ's with turbos bolted on without a drama.I know which motor I would rather have out of a 3lt nissan and the tried and proven 1HZ.
0
FollowupID: 436502

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 11:39

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 11:39
Indirect injection Toyota motors can be prone to cracking around the precombustion chambers when turbo'ed due to extra heat in there.
Having said that it only seems to be a problem when putting stupid amounts of boost thru them. I have a 3L hilux turbo'ed, as do many thousands of others- no probs after 30000 k's
0
FollowupID: 436503

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 23:49

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 23:49
>> I know which motor I would rather have out of a 3lt nissan and the tried and proven 1HZ.

Or the TD42, which anyone would have straight up..
0
FollowupID: 436590

Reply By: Phil.Fehlberg - Saturday, Jun 24, 2006 at 23:45

Saturday, Jun 24, 2006 at 23:45
This may answer your question:
Site Link
AnswerID: 180235

Follow Up By: Member - Matt M (ACT) - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 07:24

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 07:24
An interesting read Phil, although I don't know why they insist on using the SUV tag (very American). It brings out the interesting point that, although maintenance costs on older cars can increase, depreciation is one of the major running costs and keeping your 10-15 year old truck going probably still represents a cheaper option than trading up. Of course being able to do a lot of your own maintenance (read, out of warranty period) can also significantly reduce running costs.

As an old and respected motoring organisation, I hold the NRMA in very high regard and so it must be true when they label the Cruiser the 'King of the Bush' ;-)

Matt.
0
FollowupID: 436485

Reply By: Robin - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 07:09

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 07:09
Hi Franksy

Of big wagons consumption goes roughly as follows with diesels typically 30 to 45% better fuel economy than petrols but true running costs are much the same.

4800 Patrol 17-18
V8 cruiser 16-17
4500 cruiser 16-17
4200Patrol & Cruiser 12
3lt Patrol 11

Getting adequate real range and capabiliity is more important to us than.

Fuel use can be highly variable.

Just returned here from central Aussie trip in which all cars did a drive from Melbourne to Port Augusta (1100km 14hours).

We left before traffic, sat on 100kmh , and had organized stops whereas ours mates in latest pajero petrol, had long disorganized stops , sat on 115kmh and took 1/2 hour longer and consumed slightly more fuel than the thirsty 4800 which completed that journey using 14.8 lt/100k`and on 1 tank.

Robin Miller

AnswerID: 180242

Reply By: Member - Bware (Tweed Valley) - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 09:25

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 09:25
Hi Franksy, no one has answered your first question. You should be getting more! Even if you only have 75 useable litres in your tank, you're using 25L/100km. Maybe you're towing the 'Queen Mary' or it's soft sand all the way to work? Your truck is using about 10L too much per 100km. Something definitely wrong there, especially with the gas option.
AnswerID: 180246

Follow Up By: Member - Cruiser (NSW) - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 18:09

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 18:09
I have a TD 80 series at the moment, but my previous vehicle was a duel fuel 80 series and it has 92 useable litres of LPG, and despite having it dyno tuned (at the gas installers) to try and minimise LPG consumption, the very best I could get out of it on gas with careful driving (no towing) was around 400K. (Interestingly, when towing a 900kg camper I only lost about 50K per tank)

This equated to about 22.5 L/100 and at the time that meant about $13 per 100K running cost, which was still cheaper than running on petrol at about 18 L/100 or about $16 per 100K.

So, Franky you are probably using just a bit to much LPG/100k but then again, I suppose it depends on your driving style and whether you are driving in sand or towing and how well tuned your car is.
0
FollowupID: 436534

Follow Up By: 1arm - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 18:57

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 18:57
I have a 2000 4.5 GU Patrol.
Out of 88 lts of gas(120lt) tank I get 300km around town.Wife using it more than I do.
Highway unloaded up to 450 depending on where and weather conditions.
Towing a camper and with a loaded roofrack from perth to canberra and back averaged about 300km per tank.
Evan
0
FollowupID: 436548

Reply By: Dave Thomson - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 15:34

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 15:34
Hi Frank, I can tell you I've had the Patrol 3Lt T/D {01} and it was the best vehicle I've had for towing {1250K coromal} its a real gutsy car and very economical at 7.3 K's per Lt towing and around 10K's a Lt not, however it was the parts on them that drove me away 5 GRAND for a fuel pump is'nt funny its insane,also 7 grand for a turbo,and upwrds of 15 for an engine, no I ended up going back to Toyota although their expensive not a patch on Nissan, I got a Prado 3L T/D {02} and get about the same consumption as the Patrol, some say they need to be serviced every 5,000 K's mines been done by Toyota and they stipulate every 10.000K's 154 so far and no probs, turbo diesel is definately the way to go you just have to work out which size engine suits you , for me the 3Lt is both economical and gutsy enough to do the job,
hope this helps,
Dave
AnswerID: 180269

Reply By: Trevor R (QLD) - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 18:39

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 18:39
N/A 100series cruiser used to get 12.2lt/100km at best.
Current 4.2 turbo Patrol gets 14-15lt/100km at best.

Towing same loads both got about 20lt/100km. Cruiser done it much slower obviously.

Hope this helps. Trevor.
AnswerID: 180291

Follow Up By: djpatrol - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 18:53

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 18:53
Got a 99 4.2TD Patrol Gu and I drive sensible and use 10-11/100 and towing a 20ft 2ton van I get around 15-16/100 so if you dont push hard you will benifit.
0
FollowupID: 436546

Follow Up By: Member - Pezza (QLD) - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 21:40

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 21:40
Have a patroool the same as above and when driving sensibly and at the speed limit ( am a "professional" driver so yes, I know how to drive for best economy) can get 14.7lt/100, (6.8km/lt) at best with 265/75 16 cooper st's. Usually average 14.9lt/100 (6.7km/lt) normal driving.

Avagoodn
Pezza
0
FollowupID: 436571

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 23:52

Sunday, Jun 25, 2006 at 23:52
>> Got a 99 4.2TD Patrol Gu and I drive sensible and use 10-11/100

What is sensible? slipstreaming everything in sight? rolling down hills.???

i remember the poll on the patrol forum, not 1 person got them figures out of 100's of people.

YMMV
0
FollowupID: 436591

Follow Up By: Member - Bware (Tweed Valley) - Monday, Jun 26, 2006 at 00:15

Monday, Jun 26, 2006 at 00:15
Don't be hard on him Truckster, maybe that's on his downhill runs from Syd to Melb!
0
FollowupID: 436592

Follow Up By: djpatrol - Monday, Jun 26, 2006 at 19:30

Monday, Jun 26, 2006 at 19:30
Well all I can say is to you heavy lead footed so called Professional Drivers that hav a good weekend cause I am the one who is laughing HA HA HA cause I am the one that is saving $$$ so hav a good day...
0
FollowupID: 436707

Follow Up By: Member - Pezza (QLD) - Tuesday, Jun 27, 2006 at 10:24

Tuesday, Jun 27, 2006 at 10:24
I just figured out how he's getting those figures fella's, he didn't tell us that he's in cahoots with Bill. S. and has 3 futches fitted in line! Hahahahahaha.

"so called professional driver"
Pezza
:-))
0
FollowupID: 436819

Follow Up By: Trevor R (QLD) - Tuesday, Jun 27, 2006 at 16:29

Tuesday, Jun 27, 2006 at 16:29
You win Pezza, I am ROFLMAO.

I was wondering if dj, got the miles per gallon figures mixed up with lt per 100km figures but the futch explanation wins hands down.

Picking myself up off the floor now. Trevor.

dj, don't get disheartened but you are about the only one getting those fuel figures to my knowledge so good luck to you if you are.
0
FollowupID: 436898

Follow Up By: djpatrol - Tuesday, Jun 27, 2006 at 16:37

Tuesday, Jun 27, 2006 at 16:37
Well read it and WEEP pally I am laughin all the way ha ha so it makes me really happy to know that I must know how to drive these beasts. Yep now I am rollin round the floor ha ha ha.Guess you wont want to know who tuned the beast then.I have the figures always kept a book on fuel since new and its all in there.

dj
0
FollowupID: 436902

Follow Up By: Trevor R (QLD) - Tuesday, Jun 27, 2006 at 17:50

Tuesday, Jun 27, 2006 at 17:50
No sweat dj,

I am reading and having a laugh but you won't find me weeping. As it's a company car with the company paying all fuel I don't give a rats rectum how much mine uses as long as it does the job. But I am enjoying the conversation.
Please don't misinterprit my astonishment for insults as my comments are not insults.

Cheers, Trevor.
0
FollowupID: 436914

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)