Fuel economy 70 series V8 Cab Chassis

Submitted: Monday, May 28, 2007 at 11:44
ThreadID: 45977 Views:2440 Replies:3 FollowUps:8
This Thread has been Archived
Have to make prompt decision re Cruiser C C but concerned economy might be an issue. Could anyone report on their experience.Thanks for your help
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - Troll 81 (QLD) - Monday, May 28, 2007 at 11:49

Monday, May 28, 2007 at 11:49
From memory most guys get around the 17 mark
AnswerID: 242868

Follow Up By: disco driver - Monday, May 28, 2007 at 13:27

Monday, May 28, 2007 at 13:27
Hi Troll,

"Newer, not Softer" but maybe still as thirsty!

Cheers

Disco
0
FollowupID: 503921

Reply By: Gone Bush (WA) - Monday, May 28, 2007 at 15:27

Monday, May 28, 2007 at 15:27
I think the "17" mentioned in one of the replies is for a V8 petrol cruiser. The cab chassis of course, is diesel. I will have first hand experience fairly soon but the West Australian newspaper did a test of the 4 door wagon (with the V8 diesel) on a run from Perth to Kalgoorlie, running around the goldfields and then back to Perth and they reckon they actually got better than Toyota's stated figures of 11.5 litres per 100km.

I'm glad I ain't too scared to be lazy
- Augustus McCrae (Lonesome Dove)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 242919

Follow Up By: ross - Monday, May 28, 2007 at 16:01

Monday, May 28, 2007 at 16:01
I was a toyota dealer buying parts an overheard a customer saying the same thing.
0
FollowupID: 503961

Follow Up By: ross - Monday, May 28, 2007 at 16:02

Monday, May 28, 2007 at 16:02
I was a toyota dealer buying parts an overheard a customer saying the same thing about his own V8 diesel 79series
0
FollowupID: 503962

Follow Up By: Off-track - Monday, May 28, 2007 at 16:30

Monday, May 28, 2007 at 16:30
Not surprising as most people generally only measure their highway economy which is generally better than the factory stated economy. This is because it is based on combined economy figures from highway and city driving.
0
FollowupID: 503966

Reply By: jeffwa - Monday, May 28, 2007 at 18:41

Monday, May 28, 2007 at 18:41
Still 11/12 L per 100k for the power that it's putting out is bloody good I reckon.
AnswerID: 242953

Follow Up By: shepo - Monday, May 28, 2007 at 19:15

Monday, May 28, 2007 at 19:15
not much power for a 4.5lt v8, 150 kw & 400nm i believe , a few of europeon 4 cylinder 3lt put out more,eg jeep 3 lt 160kw , i was expecting more before they came out. cheers shep
0
FollowupID: 503988

Follow Up By: jeffwa - Monday, May 28, 2007 at 19:17

Monday, May 28, 2007 at 19:17
What I'd give for 400nm! HAHA. They will have kept the workhorses fairly low on power for longivity, plus they have to have a reason to upgrade you to the twin turbo V8 in the high end cruiser range.
0
FollowupID: 503989

Follow Up By: Stu050 - Monday, May 28, 2007 at 19:38

Monday, May 28, 2007 at 19:38
shepo,
That's a 4.5L TURBO V8. Must be downtuned to blazes.
0
FollowupID: 503993

Follow Up By: Member - bill - Tuesday, May 29, 2007 at 17:55

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 at 17:55
i picked up my new gxl 5 seater troopie last friday & i am doing the fuel consumption measurements at the moment, but if it is anything like our last vehicle, it will take about 10,000 kilometres before I will get true indication.
0
FollowupID: 504192

Sponsored Links