FUEL CONSUMPTION TOYOTA

Submitted: Tuesday, Dec 05, 2006 at 17:54

ThreadID: 40086 Views:19591 Replies:6 FollowUps:3

This Thread has been Archived

666toy

Can all those with or have had 60 or 80 series Toyota's with the 3F eng please post there fuel usage both lpg & ulp thanks.............666TOY

Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator Share

Reply By: crewser - Tuesday, Dec 05, 2006 at 19:21

Tuesday, Dec 05, 2006 at 19:21

I`ve owned both 60s & 80s with the 3f don`t have fuel usage figures as it was to painfull to even think about but they were thursty. the 3f in my opinion is way to under powered in the 80s.

AnswerID: 208769

Reply By: Davo_60 (ACT) - Tuesday, Dec 05, 2006 at 19:38

Tuesday, Dec 05, 2006 at 19:38

I have owned a 60 series Sahara Auto. Got about 16-19L/100k on petrol, 20-23L/100k on gas. That is with extractors and 2 1/2 inch system.

AnswerID: 208772

Reply By: Big Woody - Tuesday, Dec 05, 2006 at 20:41

Tuesday, Dec 05, 2006 at 20:41

I had an FJ62 Sahara many years ago and was quite surprised by the reasonable fuel consumption figures when I first brought it. On a highway run at 100km/h I got 12L/100km on several occasions.
Bullsh** I hear you say?

Well it is true but I must add that the car was stock standard with no accessories whatsoever and on original chrome 15x7 rims.
This is where I learned about the weight of accessories, aerodynamics, increasing tyre diameter, and even tread patterns and how each of these can affect fuel consumption.

My figures at the time were all converted to miles per gallon so that is how I will list them here:

Stock standard as purchased on highway - 23.5 mpg
Stock standard around town - 18mpg

Highway figures as things were added (I have only included things that affected fuel consumption):

TJM type 13 steel winch bar - 21mpg
TJM full length steel roof rack - 19mpg
Cibie Super Oscar spotties - 18mpg
15x11 steel mags with 33 x 12 BFG All Terrains - 16mpg
Then fitted 33 x 12 BFG Mud Terrains - 15mpg
Custom Snorkel - 15mpg (failed attempt to regain some economy)
Genie Headers with full 3" Mandrel Bent Exhaust - 15mpg (another failed attempt)
King Springs XHD suspension with 3" lift - 14 mpg
12000 LB Thomas electric winch - 13 mpg

then fitted IMPCO LPG system with 140 litre (110L usable) "Bronco" gas tank under rear.
Also fitted 125 litre Long Ranger petrol tank under belly and Kaymar swing away rear wheel carrier.

Fuel consumption figures on highway after all of this was complete.

Running on petrol - 12mpg
Running on gas - 10mpg

Weight of vehicle with no passengers and full fuel/gas tanks - 3470kg

Would I do it all again???

Of course, boy I miss that truck!!!

Brett

AnswerID: 208789

Reply By: Muzzgit [WA] - Wednesday, Dec 06, 2006 at 00:01

Wednesday, Dec 06, 2006 at 00:01

Yerss. The fuel injected 3F in the 80 series was only a stop gap until the newer 4.5 came on board.

Isn't it funny that every new model of 4WD from both Nissan and Toyota is heavier. Going by this the new cruiser will be quite a hefty bugger.

AnswerID: 208848

Reply By: Robnicko - Wednesday, Dec 06, 2006 at 12:15

Wednesday, Dec 06, 2006 at 12:15

666toy
I have an 80 with the 4.5 and my parents used to have an 80 with the 3f. Both Auto and ULP/LPG. With mine I consistently get about 250kms to half a tank of lpg (48litres). My Dad would never beleive me because his with the 3f would struggle to get 180kms on half a tank of LPG. Ulp is marginally better with both vehicles, mine(4.5) gets a good 280-300 for half a tank while his gets about 220kms for half a tank. Half a tank in the 4.5 80 on petrol is about 47ltr however I beleive the 3f model 80 series had a smaller tank.
Tyre pressures play a big part, especially with long highway trips. I run 34front and 36 rear round town however when going long distance on the highway I run 36-38 front and about 40 rear depending on vehicle load. Ride comfort may suffer when unladen however when loaded up it's fine.
One thing I really noticed is that the overdrive on the 80 with 4.5 kepps engine rpm much lower at 100km. 2100rpm as opposed to about 2800rpm which makes a big difference.

Rob

AnswerID: 208910

Follow Up By: 666toy - Wednesday, Dec 06, 2006 at 20:34

Wednesday, Dec 06, 2006 at 20:34

did your parents 60 series auto have no O/D ? what year was that ?
mines a 86 auto with O/D cruises the same as your 80 series 2100rpm @ 100kph do i have a oddball?....666TOY

FollowupID: 469019

Follow Up By: Robnicko - Thursday, Dec 07, 2006 at 11:06

Thursday, Dec 07, 2006 at 11:06

My parents car was an 80 series 1990 model EFI 3F motor with od but they have since gotten rid of it.

FollowupID: 469133

Reply By: 666toy - Wednesday, Dec 06, 2006 at 20:29

Wednesday, Dec 06, 2006 at 20:29

Thank you everybody for your reply,s .I am trying to work out if mine is being excessive in fuel use or not. This is giving me a good insight. (funny though even though it uses more fuel it is still cheaper to run than my old 1hz diesel )I am debating as to weather putting a v8 pet in this rig or just stick with the old 3f .

AnswerID: 209023

Follow Up By: Big Woody - Wednesday, Dec 06, 2006 at 23:39

Wednesday, Dec 06, 2006 at 23:39

Hi 666toy,

Adding on to my post above I also have converted 2 other 60 series Landcruisers to V8's.
The first one for myself was a bit of a beast with an $11000 351 Cleveland Ford V8 with C6 auto and B&M shifter.
Did a 13.6 second quarter mile on 33" mud tyres.
This one was tuned for power, used more fuel than you could ever imagine and struggled a little with overheating.

The other one we set up for my brother as a daily driver for his wife to run kids around town etc. It too was a 351 Cleveland with a beefed up C4 auto. This one had LPG fitted and was built and tuned for reliability and economy, averaged about 12 mpg and had ongoing overheating issues for the 10 years he had it. Spent thousands on big radiators, thermo fans, modifying shrouds etc and never really did solve it.

Another mate also had a 60 series with Ford V8 and manual gearbox. Had exactly the same overheating issues and gave up after 2 years and sold it.

Has got me baffled when I have had 3 x F100's and 3 X Bronco's and never had an engine overheat under any circumstances even with crappy old radiators and no shroud and yet I could fit the same engine and transmission to a lighter car with an efficient high capacity cooling system and it could boil 5 minutes after start up sometimes. I must say it seemed to be worse on the "black" motors than the older "red" or "blue" motors.

I have seen 2 fairly basic conversions using 350 Chev petrol V8's in 60 series and both had no overheating issues. I don't know what the difference is but if was going to do it all again I would probably fit a later model fuel injected V8 on gas to try and get some sort of fuel economy out of it but if I was fitting an older engine I would go the Chev.

Is the conversion worth doing? It was a bit of fun but fuel was a lot cheaper and I was single with no kids and plenty of spare money. Also I would only do it if you don't mind working on your car regularly as with any after market conversion there will generally be ongoing little issues to deal with.

Would I do it again? - probably not.

Cheers,
Brett

FollowupID: 469084